Sex Fantasy Open Thread

Do I make you hot?

Here’s you chance to tell the world what would really float your boat.

We’re probably gonna offend a few people anyway, but let’s not push the envelope too far.  Here are the rules:

1. Naughty, not nasty

2. Don’t say anything you’ll regret.

3.  Don’t get us sued

As an advisory, the last time I told my favorite fantasy this is what happened:

Friday Happy Hour tidbits…

You may already know, but Iceland rocks!

The world’s first openly gay leader is poised to take power in Iceland with the appointment of a lesbian former flight attendant as Prime Minister following the mass-resignation of the country’s government.

Johanna Sigurdardottir, 66, is to become interim leader until new elections are held in May following the fall of the administration of Geir Haarde amid huge public protests about the country’s economic crisis.

Repubs are gearing up, Michael Steele becomes first black RNC chairman:

WASHINGTON – Michael Steele was elected Republican National Committee chairman on Friday, defeating the incumbent party chief and three other challengers over six rounds of voting to become the first black to lead the GOP. The former Maryland lieutenant governor takes over a beleaguered GOP as Republicans seek to rebound from back-to-back defeats in national elections that gave Democrats control of Congress and the White House.

While the oil barons continue to pillage the masses…..

HOUSTON – Exxon Mobil Corp. on Friday reported a profit of $45.2 billion for 2008, breaking its own record for a U.S. company, even as its fourth-quarter earnings fell 33 percent from a year ago.

The previous record for annual profit was $40.6 billion, which the world’s largest publicly traded oil company set in 2007.

……Reagan’s ghost is haunting the US:

WASHINGTON – Battered by layoffs, debts and dread of worse to come, shoppers clutched ever tighter to their wallets in the final three months of 2008 and thrust the economy into its worst downhill slide in a quarter-century. Americans cut spending on everything from cars to computers, and it’s only getting worse so far in the new year.

All told, the economy staggered backward at a 3.8 percent pace at the end of last year, the government said Friday. And the tailspin could well accelerate in the current quarter to a rate of 5 percent or more as the recession churns into a second year and consumers and businesses buckle under a relentless crush of negative forces.

Whenever there’s a bunch of stress or I need to wind down after a bad week, King Bob Marley always does the trick.

Don’t let them fool ya, we got a mind of own!

Get your Rum & Cokes and join the Open Thread!

UPDATE: To my fellow Conflucians who’ve donated via Liberalcrat, I had a problem with PayPal verifying my account, but it’s ok as of today.   This will definitely help in my laid-off-single-mom-dom.  May the Universe quadruplify your generosity and kindness!

UPDATE 2:

Taggles and MadamaB highly recommend watching this from Marcy Kaptur:

Someone has a brain

Get ready to see the under carriage of a bus upclose and personal, Senator Ben Nelson (D)

on edit:

Rachel Maddow is halfway under right now:

Ledbetter Act without the Paycheck Fairness Act = A nice car without wheels

Dearest Conflucians,  our great MadamaB left a comment in DakiniKat’s Madelin Laundries post yesterday:

madamab, on January 29th, 2009 at 5:26 pm Said:

Kat – Amazingly, Senate Democrats gave away the Paycheck Fairness Act in order to get the Lilly Ledbetter Act. Can you believe this sh*t? And no one is talking about it.

Link

Everything he does, you have to ask “what’s the catch?”

Some in Obama-lala-land (I will not link, but you know the cult sites) are claiming that we should just STFU and be happy that Obama is throwing us a bone with the Ledbetter Act – actually, they make it out to be Christmas, Hanukkah and New Year’s all rolled up into one.

But there’s a problem.  Here an excerpt pointing out the differences between the two:

Rather, the Court held that when an employer issues paychecks pursuant to a pay system that is facially nondiscriminatory and neutrally applied, the mere fact that such paychecks may give present effect to past discrimination occurring outside the charging period is insufficient to restart the statute of limitations.  The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act expressly overturns this decision and provides that every paycheck continues a distinct discriminatory practice. Such a rule virtually eliminates the statute of limitations on some pay discrimination claims. Indeed, current employees – and even retirees who still receive pay or benefits – could conceivably file lawsuits based on discriminatory practices that occurred decades earlier, provided such plaintiffs could link their claims to compensation received within the statute of limitations. The Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would apply to pay discrimination claims brought under Title VII, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act.

The Paycheck Fairness Act, which amends the Equal Pay Act, also targets unequal pay practices through a number of provisions.

• The bill increases the potential damages for EPA claims by allowing the recovery of unlimited compensatory and punitive damages.
• It eliminates a key affirmative defense. Employers currently can defend EPA claims by proving they based their compensation decisions on “any factor other than sex.” The Paycheck Fairness Act replaces this defense with the “bona fide factor other than sex” defense, which only applies if the employer demonstrates the decision-making factor: (a) is not based upon or derived from a sex-based differential in compensation; (b) is job-related with respect to the position in question; and (c) is consistent with business necessity. But, this defense would not apply if the employee establishes the employer refused to adopt an alternative employment practice serving the same business purpose that would not create a pay differential.

• The bill prohibits employers from retaliating against employees who discuss their compensation with co-workers.
• It expressly permits class actions wherein similarly situated employees who do not wish to participate in the action would have to “opt out” of the action. This is an expansion because employees must presently “opt in” to collective actions under the EPA.

I’m no labor attorney, nor a politician, nor a law scholar (paging Heidi Li Feldman!), just a laid-off Juanita Lunchbucket who wants equal pay for equal work so I can earn my arroz and habichuelas just like the guy/gal in my same position and experience.

Help me understand this if I’m wrong:  the Paycheck Fairness Act enforces and strengthens unequal pay claims while the Ledbetter Act just buys the claimant more time.  Is that right? If that’s the case, it’s a another bamboozle by the Bamboozler -in-Chief.

Here’s what the NYT says (again, h/t MadamaB):

After signing the corrective measure, Mr. Obama ought to press Congress to continue the fight for equal pay for equal work by passing a second bill — the Paycheck Fairness Act — that would further strengthen current laws against gender-based wage discrimination. Among other things, this bill, which Mr. Obama co-sponsored while in the Senate, would make stronger remedies available under the existing Equal Pay Act; ensure that courts require employers to show that wage disparities are job-related, not sex-based, and consistent with business needs; and protect employees who discuss salary information from retaliation.

These changes may not please some business interests. But women still make, on average, only 78 cents for every dollar earned by men for performing substantially the same work. To narrow that yawning wage gap, tighter rules are plainly in order.

The House, to its credit, passed both bills. But Democratic leaders in the Senate peeled off the Paycheck Fairness Act after determining that pairing the two measures could jeopardize the chamber’s approval of the more familiar Ledbetter bill.

The new president can play a useful role in helping to rally Senate Democrats not to rest on their Ledbetter laurels and to persuade Republicans to come on board. In the House, only three Republicans voted in favor of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. In the Senate, five did. By now, Republican opposition to civil rights and pay equity is not surprising. That makes it all the sadder.

(ACK!!!!!!!  Here they go again with the damn blame shifting?  Obama doesn’t NEED Republican support, he has Congress & House!)

And without the Paycheck Fairness Act, Ledbetter Act is just garnish, IMHO. It’s like being sold a car without wheels.   Ledbetter allows 180 day extension on every paycheck that was allegedly discriminated due to pay, but without the Paycheck Fairness Act, women have no increased protection against wage discrimination – and it will make it harder for women to sue an employer who is discriminating.

UPDATE for the PUMA paparazzi stalkers: If Obama co-endorsed the Paycheck Fairness act as a senator, what’s stopping him from signing it into law – from forcing the Senate to vote on behalf of the Paycheck Fairness Act like Obama did to House Democrats when he ordered them to drop the Family Planning Provision?:

Democratic Leaders Likely To Remove Family Planning Provision From Economic Stimulus Proposal

President Obama has asked House Democrats to cut a provision of their economic stimulus proposal that would give states more flexibility to expand Medicaid coverage of family planning services, the AP/Austin American-Statesman reports. According to the AP/American-Statesman, several Democratic officials said that House leaders likely would abandon the provision at Obama’s request, which was made “at a time when the administration is courting Republican critics of the legislation.” A final decision is expected on Tuesday, when Obama is scheduled to meet separately with House and Senate Republicans.

Why sell us a car without the wheels?  What good is it?

And if we don’t fight for the whole enchilada,  healthcare, equal pay, equal rights, voter rights, civil rights, etc.,  we’ll be fed kibbles and bits worth sold to us  as Equality filet mignon.

Equality is not something you can fragment into pieces.  Either we have equal rights, or we don’t.  And guess what?  WE DON’T.

If women want any rights more than they’s got, why don’t they just take them, and not be talking about it.

Sojourner Truth

Friday: “I’m shocked that there’s gambling going on in here”

Obama is asking his Wall Street buddies to ease up on the bonuses this year.  It’s unseeemly.  By the way, what is it with the pictures of Obama and his administration that annoys me so much?  Is it that he’s always surrounded by men?  There is a significant concentration of testosterone in the White House that may be reaching toxic levels.  Remember how Bill Clinton promised an administration that looked like America- and then delivered on that promise?  Ahh, those were the days.  But I digress.

So, in the picture, he’s sitting with his legs spread like he’s practicing for some cheerleader split, junk dangling over the edge of the chair.  I’m sorry but he just looks stupid.  And Joe Biden is on his left, Tim Geithner on his left.  Tim Geithner, you may recall is the guy who has a problem with Sheila Bair, the head of the FDIC, preseumably because Bair has ideas in her pretty little head.  You know, ideas like getting investor who own tranches to be realistic about their returns and putting a HOLC like entity together to get homeowners to pay their mortgages?  Silly stuff like that.  Geithner probably thinks, “I’m sure glad you could never be my wife” whenever Bair opens her mouth.

These braintrusts think it is “shameful” that Wall Street bankers rewarded themselves using our money.  But they are wagging their fingers:

Should Mr. Obama have to go to Congress to seek more money for the bailout fund to avert the failure of more banks, he would most likely encounter opposition within both parties and demands for tighter restrictions on pay for executives of institutions that receive government assistance.

Mr. Geithner has already signaled a willingness to impose stricter compensation limits as part of a revamped approach to dealing with the banking crisis, but with his strong words on Thursday, Mr. Obama seemed intent on reassuring Congress and the public that he would step up the pressure on bankers before granting them additional assistance.

Well, that’s telling them. They will get a sternly worded letter saying, “Don’t do it again or Congress will have to regulate you.”  I’ll bet that put the fear of Gawd into them.  The bankers are going to have to court some more Blue Dog Democrats to make sure that doesn’t happen.

Change!™  Ain’t it grand?