• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    r u reddy on Happy Pioneer Day
    tdraicer on We want answers from the pols:…
    katiebird on Word Crimes
    Sweet Sue on Word Crimes
    katiebird on Word Crimes
    Sweet Sue on Word Crimes
    katiebird on Word Crimes
    r u reddy on Obamacare subsidy rules overtu…
    quixote on We want answers from the pols:…
    Sweet Sue on Word Crimes
    Propertius on We want answers from the pols:…
    katiebird on Happy Pioneer Day
    riverdaughter on We want answers from the pols:…
    katiebird on We want answers from the pols:…
    riverdaughter on What’s in my Instapaper…
  • Categories


  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama big pharma Bill Clinton Chris Christie cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos debate Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean Joe Biden John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Keith Olbermann Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare occupy wall street OccupyWallStreet Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    July 2014
    S M T W T F S
    « Jun    
     12345
    6789101112
    13141516171819
    20212223242526
    2728293031  
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • The Beginning of an End of the Trans-Atlantic Alliance
      Ian described the proposed EU sanctions on Russia as “not shabby”, but while they are somewhat more serious sanctions than heretofore it’s only somewhat. The most serious ones are the ones on Russia’s financial institutions. Yes it’ll raise costs but will hurt London and Frankfurt including reputationally. It will also have the effect of encouraging [...] […]
  • Top Posts

Violet’s take on female self-defense mechanisms

She totally wants it.

Violet Socks at Reclusive Leftist comments on Todd Akin’s assertion that womens’ bodies can deal with unwanted intercourse. Akin said, “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down”

Violet speculates on the ideal rape self-defense mechanisms women might have developed:

So, presumably, he thinks that God Himself specifically equipped women with the magical, hitherto unknown superpower ability to “shut that whole thing down” so as not to get pregnant from rape. But why only that? Why didn’t God go further, and give us the superpower ability to, I don’t know, secrete a toxin that would instantly dissolve the human penis that’s being forced into our bodies? Or maybe the superpower ability to cause the owner of said penis to keel over and die? Or even better, perhaps we could have the superpower ability to detect a potential rapist before he even gets started, and then emit a fantastically noxious pheromone that would knock the fucker over and render him senseless.

Funny what you can come up with when you let your imagination and righteous indignation roam without supervision.  Violet’s talents are wasted on a blog.  I’d read any science fiction she wants to write.

I don’t know whether the absence of these built in self-defense mechanisms is more evidence that God doesn’t exist or that rape is evolutionally favorable.  Depressing.

Still, Akin might have saved himself a lot of ridicule and consternation if he had just taken the trouble of reading up on the women who were systematically raped in Bosnia and Sudan in the recent past.  Akin just felt the truthiness in his gut.  Either that or there is no such thing as rape.  All women secretly want it.  That’s why they let their shields down and get knocked up.

What’s really amusing is that Claire McCaskill was trailing this braintrust.  Well, it *would* be funny if there weren’t so few women in Congress and McCaskill wasn’t such a craven Obama fangirl who doesn’t want anyone to know she’s a Democrat.  It makes me feel sorry for Missouri’s children.  They didn’t choose to be raised and educated in Missouri.

Monday: So much going on

Update: So, TPM is trying its hand with a little expectation setting. To TPM, it is unthinkable that Hillary will get a crack at the nomination until 2016. The subtext is, “don’t even think about it, bitches”. Like we’re going to be satisfied with that. Hokay, suit yourself. But don’t expect me to vote for YOUR guy in 2012 just because you think I don’t have anywhere else to go. And if it turns out that you find you need me come late October, I’m just going to tell you to wait until 2016.

Also, Rick Warren is a dick. It now looks like both sides of the aisle are engaging in a lot of black-white thinking on welfare reform without considering that there was a right way to do it that would have been both liberal and not redistributory. Europe does it all over the place. So, you know, I reject arguments from both sides while putting myself firmly in the liberal camp. I can promise you that Hillary would never have Rick Warren at her inauguration.

Nothing good ever comes of a bad seed.
**********************************************
I’m in the local Starbucks (found a bit of serendipitous change in my pocket this am) waiting for my car to be fixed. It’s going to be painful but I can’t get around central NJ without a car, so there’s that.

There’s so much worth commenting on that I’m not quite sure where to start. Let’s start with an answer to Violet Socks’ question, “Why are we hearing so much about Hillary 2016?“. This is related to the question, “Why are we hearing so much about welfare reform?”, although at first, you might have missed the connection. In case you missed it, the NYTimes had a big piece on its frontpage yesterday about how welfare reform has left so many people without any visible means of support. It quotes some former Clinton officials who actually *resigned* over welfare reform. {{rolling eyes}} And while the abandonment of so many families during this little Depression is indeed disgraceful and horrifying, the NYTimes is most definitely slanting this story. Here’s why:

1.) Welfare Reform, or Clinton’s promise to “end welfare as we know it” was about putting people to work. I think I’ve mentioned this before but if you’re a liberal, the last thing you want is to create a permanent underclass of people whose lives are tied up in generational poverty. What the vast majority of welfare recipients really want is a job. Yes, there are people who will never be ready for the workplace. Yes, there will be people who have problems with substance abuse or criminal behavior. We need different solutions for those people and while a job is better for people who have run afoul of the criminal justice system, there are just some poor people who shouldn’t have to work in the same way that some middle class stay at home mothers and rich heiresses don’t have to work. Some poor people may not have the emotional wherewithal to go to work each day. We need to do something about that and help them. But the vast majority of people on welfare want to work. It’s not easy to survive on a measly check each month and it’s no way to raise your kids. Putting people on the road to work is a good thing and if that’s what Clinton meant (and I’m pretty sure that it was) then a liberal should be for it.

2.) Clinton’s plan included housing vouchers, healthcare, childcare, training, all the support mechanisms you needed to put people back to work. The Republicans shot that down. Repeatedly. There are votes on the issue and you can go back and look them up. The Clinton reform bill was generous. The Republican bills were much less so. MUCH less so. Eventually, Clinton signed a bill and it was awful but he was able to soften it in his next term. But liberals seem determined to whack Clinton over this for even bringing the subject up. That’s called denial, my friends. They want to deny that welfare had a problem by trapping people in poverty. If you’re a lefty and you’re still pissed over this, get over it. Being poor forever, even if the government is giving you a check is not a life and expecting people to be grateful to you for that is delusional. In fact, you could have seen Clinton’s Welfare Reform bill as a way to strengthen the social safety net for all of us. I know I would have been delighted if after my severance bennies had run out I would have been able to sign onto a government healthcare program while I worked my way back into the middle class. Yeah, that would have been great. No wonder the Republicans were so agin’ it.

3.) In the present, there’s nothing stopping the federal and state Congresses all around the country from approving a second stimulus package for a giant jobs bill or extending welfare benefits. You could call it “emergency TANF extension” or something suitably mellifluous. We do it for unemployed people all the damn time. I am a lucky recipient of such an extension and I am extremely grateful that it has allowed me to pay my insurance bills, my heating bills, food for my adolescent eating machine. I also paid a shitload of taxes from my severance benefits so, youknow, I don’t feel the least bit guilty about this. Last year after I was laid off I still managed to support a family of four on the taxes I paid. The thing is, Republicans would like it if I wasn’t so calm right now. They would prefer it if I and my other unemployed colleagues were desperate and completely broke. Why? So I would turn on Obama and the Democrats. That’s part of their plan. The only thing that is standing between frantic welfare recipients and stability for them and their children is the fact that Republicans want us to get to the point where we are so angry we will turn on the politicians who may still have a conscience (the jury is stil out on that one.)

I’m no fan of Obama and I have plenty of reasons to vote for someone to the left of the Democratic party so what the Republicans are doing has absolutely no impact on me. I wasn’t going to vote for him under any circumstances and I sure as hell won’t vote for a Republican, whose current behavior is rapidly changing my mind about the existence of supernatural forces of evil. But what would make me change my mind about electing a Democrat to the White House? Well, it would matter a great deal to me if Obama bowed out and Hillary threw her hat in the ring. Yep. I’d vote for that ticket.

And, I suspect, there are a LOT of women who have finally woken up and smelled the coffee and realized that we need a champion for us in government. It sure as hell isn’t coming from NOW, NARAL or Planned Parenthood, who seem scared of their own shadows and afraid to rock Obama’s boat. But if they roll over for Obama and demand almost nothing from him, they’ll be completely useless to women going forward and the attacks on us will start to accelerate. So, really, women’s organizations are worse than useless. What we need is a big, dramatic thing to happen that would say loud and clear that things are about to change in a big way.

Why does it have to be Hillary? Because she is a legitimate player. If her own party hadn’t turned on her in 2008, she’d be president right now and running for her second turn. She’s been our “foreign president” and the world loves her and respects her. Even the State Department seems to be running smoothly and hers was the first department to give gay employees all the rights of their straight colleagues. AND she is unabashedly pro-female. She doesn’t shrink from this. No one has managed to shut her up about it and she’s not afraid to confront congressmen about reproductive rights in the strongest possible terms. I haven’t seen Obama even come *close* to confronting the Republicans on these issues in the way that Hillary has.

So, she’s very popular, capable, committed, competent and women are starting to see that we need her. THAT’S why Pelosi is trying to deflect pro-Hillary sentiment to 2016. You know, it’s utter bullshit to believe that Hillary will run in 2016. She’s not. By then, she really will need to dial it back and retire. And by 2016, the damage will be done to the economy, my generation and women. No matter who makes it to the White House, Obama or Romney, the result is going to be the same. On this reality, the lefties are also closing their eyes and wishing. I’m looking at reality straight in the face and you know, it’s not going to happen, guys. There is no 11 dimensional chess game. And if what I read in Karen Ho’s book is correct, we are teetering on the edge of a true catastrophe. In fact, this is not a game. To be perfectly honest, your best hope of turning things around in all respects, is Hillary.

Which is why the NYTimes rolled out that piece about Welfare Reform. The purpose was to taint the Clinton legacy. Just watch, every time people get a little wistful for the Clintons, welfare reform and banging the drums for war in Iran start to ramp up. It’s so damn predictable I rarely read the papers anymore. And you know WHY these two things keep coming up over and over again? It’s because just like right wingnuts, lefties have buttons that can be pushed and these are the two that the political operatives and wealthy know drive lefties absolutely crazy and cause them to vote against their best interests.

So, there you go, Violet. Pelosi is trying to make people wait for Hillary in a scenario she knows is never going to happen. It’s 2012 for Hillary or never. She’d prefer it was never, for reasons known only to Pelosi. I suspect that Pelosi has been in power for so long that she has lost perspective and doesn’t realize that it’s not all about her. Being a liberal doesn’t mean a damn thing if you can never vote liberal on anything. But it sounds like Pelosi is fighting a losing battle. People around her must be whispering about calling Hillary up from the bench. So, the NYTimes rolls out the welfare reform bill and makes it sound like it was all Bill’s fault. A few years ago they and the Washington Post engaged in a series of “The State Department is being run by HillaryLand” posts, remember those? Yep, we were supposed to overlook all the evidence that she was doing a great job and be suspicious of the fact that she manages the department in a different style than her predecessors.

Too late. She’s good. And she projects confidence and command everywhere she goes as the Hillary texting tumblr shows:

Now, I know that Obama doesn’t lay around on the couch texting. (*I* do that) He’s probably playing golf. But here’s the thing, lefties: there’s nothing you can do or say to make me prefer him to her. Nothing. You can call me a racist, Republican, stupid, uneducated, insane, It. Does. Not. Matter. I want HER and not him. He is not entitled to a second term. He’s a lousy president and under him, women’s rights are eroding at an alarming rate. He’s too close to Wall Street and the culture of “smartness”. I see the future, guys, and you do too. It’s not going to be good. And no matter how much Pelosi protests, I am not going to wait until 2016. What the hell does she think we are? Children? Does she think she can get all parental and say something that will make us wait and that will somehow satisfy us or make our concerns less urgent? Well, it won’t. Get Obama out and put him on some fricking speaking tour. Let *HIM* do fundraising and supporting the Democratic party loyally. Get him and Geithner and all of the rest of his Wall Street crowd out of there and give us a dramatic change. Make the Republicans cower in their holy skivvies. Give us Hillary.

Something’s happening here

While Republicans have backed off their wildly offensive & dangerous plan to redefine rape as “forcible rape”, two recent bills make it clear their frightening disregard for the safety of and respect for women continues.

Here’s Violet, the Reclusive Leftist, discussing the first:

These are the people who want you to die

If you’re a pregnant woman, that is. You’ve probably read about the “Let Women Die” Act currently in the House; the bill would allow hospitals to simply refuse to provide emergency life-saving medical care to a pregnant woman if such care involves aborting the fetus. I was fascinated to see that the bill, which was introduced by Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Andromeda Galaxy), has 100 co-sponsors. One hundred! That’s almost one-fourth of the entire House of Representatives. Here they are:

100 co-sponsors! All but one of the Kansas Representatives (and one a woman!) signed on.   I wonder if there’s a corresponding bill planned that they MUST save the woman if letting her die would kill the fetus?  Probably not.

And today, there is this cheerful piece of news:

Georgia Republican’s bill would reclassify rape victims as ‘accusers’

When is a rape victim legally a victim of rape?

According to a Georgia state representative, the term “victim” should be applied only after the accused has been convicted.

State Rep. Bobby Franklin (R-Marietta) recently introduced a bill mandating that not only victims of rape be re-classified as “accusers,” but victims of stalking, harassment, and family violence should as well.

If passed, the legislation [PDF] would amend state criminal law “in the context of a number of statutes making reference to circumstances where there has not yet been a criminal conviction; to provide for related matters; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.”

Critics said that they feared Franklin’s bill would decrease reports of rape, which is itself already an underreported crime [PDF], according to the California Coalition Against Sexual Assault.

I don’t know what’s behind this apparently sudden volley of aggressively anti-woman legislation.  But, it seems to me that we’d better be watching our legislators very closely.  These bills might be shot down in the next week or two.  But, these guys have an agenda and something tells me we’re just beginning to see it.

As bad as they are, the thing that worries me isn’t so much out-in-the-open bills like these.  What worries me is that the stuff in these bills could be slipped into other — bigger — critically “important” bills.  And actually get passed.

That’s what I’m worried about.  How about you?

Saturday: Women Swiftboating Sarah

Ok, that was funny.  But some of the commentary about Sarah that goes on in workplaces and supermarkets and on TV isn’t funny anymore.

Remember what the meme was back when Hillary was running?  “I don’t have anything against a woman running for president.  Just not *this* woman.”  And now I’m hearing the same thing said about Sarah.  “I don’t have anything against a woman for VP.  But why does she have to be someone like Sarah?”

She’s too:

  • pretty
  • religious
  • Hockey Mommy
  • fertile
  • executive, she needs to be a senator
  • provincial, she needs to see the world
  • confused about the Bush Doctrine (like, who isn’t?)
  • anti-abortion

Look, she’s running for Vice President.  She’s done more on her job than Barack Obama.  But she’s not dumb enough to think she could run for president after only 142 days of experience.

So, according to that list above, what kind of woman would qualify for President or VP?  She’d have to be:

  • not too pretty
  • not overtly religious
  • not a suburban SUV mom
  • not too fertile
  • a senator
  • well travelled
  • confused about nothing
  • pro-choice

She’d have to be someone like…

Nahhh, any woman but her.

Dr. Violet Socks has more on the swiftboating of Sarah by her own gender and why it’s got to stop in When Misogyny Masquerades as Feminism.  In fact, I recommend the Reclusive Leftist for your morning reading list. Let Violet raise your consciousness.

Wake up, Ladies, the media and the guys are siccing you on the women who could actually give you the power you crave.  Stop falling for it.

Monday: Obama Pod People

We last few remnants of the “shrieking band of paranoid holdouts” are now under attack. Remember the NYTimes article from just a few days ago where Claire McCaskill said that the Obama camp would wait a respectful few days so we could get over it and then they would launch another assault? Well, it looks like it’s here.

In the past day, The Confluence, Corrente, Reclusive Leftist, Anglachel and others have seen a number of pod people showing up in the comments. They *say* they are regulars but for some reason, they speak the language of the converted. Ahh, conversion diaries. It takes me back to my DKos days, even before the primary season began. There was no better way to make the recommended list than to claim you were a recovering Republican or Iraq War enthusiast. Well, who doesn’t want to belong? It gives the listener a sense of security. The new person is like US! Love bombing follows, group identities are formed. It even happens here to a certain extent.

But this is forced. It comes from some external source. It takes on our identities but it is not one of us. There’s no emotion. It’s empty.

What is the point exactly? It’s not like we can’t identify these imposters pretty quickly. We know how to read an IP address. Yes, believe it or not, Obamaphiles, there are a few of us Clintonistas who have the nollij. We can reed and rite and doo rithmatik too. It’s amazing how good special ed is these days.

But why go the psychological warfare route? It seems like the lazy way out. Is it more effective to make us feel overwhelmed, helpless in the face of an insurmountable wave of Obamaphilia, to condition us to learned helplessness? “Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated” Why not try to win us over with the force of the policy proposals, committments to our causes, understanding and acknowledgment of the principles we hold dear? Is that just too hard or is it because you don’t want to?

But here’s an even better question? Why bother at all? We’re just little asteroids floating along in the blogoverse, our carbon footprints barely noticeable amidst all of the bigger and more numerous pieces of space debris. The amount of attention now dedicated to bringing us into compliance seems inversely proportional to our importance.

Or is it?

Maybe you guys need us after all.

One more thing: Anglachel has posted several parts of a series this past weekend that are really worth your attention. Check out, The Frontlines of Democracy, Bittersweet Acceptance and Partisan. Highly recommended. Other interesting posts: The Ghost of Violet Socks poses a question in Through the Looking Glass. Why is Obama’s nomination more historic that Hillary’s? (BTW, Violet could use some filthy lucre to keep the server gods appeased. If you have a few bucks, you might want to visit her PayPal link) Lambert at Corrente likens the political system to a pimple in The Village is a Sack of Pus Waiting to Burst. Such an evocative title.

Monday- Aw, jeez

Well, that didn’t last long. The media is it again. This morning’s NY Times has Adam Nagourney and sidekick examining whether Clinton’s campaign troubles are a referendum on her management skills. Hell if I know. She’s only won every big state but 2 (Illinois and Georgia) and every important swing state. The only places that she’s lost significantly is in conservative caucus states and those with high numbers of african-americans. And now that we know that the Dean brothers and Donna Brazile and Kennedy and Kerry have been working diligently to sabotage her, it’s not really surprising that it’s been an uphill struggle, is it?

But the sign of a good campaign is not how easy it is to get the nomination. Heck, if that were the case, Kerry would be running for his second term. No, the sign of a good campaign is whether it is able to adapt to a changing environment. Yes, it was close and it looked dire for awhile there. But apparently Clinton’s got a deep bench and they are figuring things out. Now, it’s Obama on the ropes with this whole MI and FL thing, plus he can’t win the remaining big states not for all the tea in China. I’ll betcha there’s a whole lotta sniping going on at the Obama headquarters now that Samantha Power is gone, Ms. Rice sticks her foot in it and says her boss isn’t ready for primetime and James Carville is chasing operatives around the media with $15 million so that Obama can lose Florida again. Yep, sounds like a real chummy environment as they all start to get twitchy and are surreptitiously typing up their CVs.

Well, we knew the relatively less bad press couldn’t last. Good for us! The more they pile on, the more women, working class and the perpetually dissed rally for her. Go, Adam! Tell us about her botox tomorrow.

In other news, Reclusive Leftist has a delicious post about what is fueling Obamamania. I find it amusing that the pogrom carried out on us Clintonistas resulted in what looks like skim milk at the Big Blog Stores while the cream is now found elsewhere. ;-)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 433 other followers