Required Reading: “GOP: Tax breaks for everyone, except those pregnant teenage rape victims, the dirty whores”


I’m reproducing major portions of Amanda Marcotte’s post because if you are a feminist, you need to read it:

HR3, misleadingly named the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act”, is a perfect storm of everything that’s nasty about the modern, hyper-conservative Republican party.  It’s dishonest, since women who have federal health insurance are already banned from using that money for abortion care.  This bill is actually an attempt to shut down abortion coverage through all private insurance, including employer-provided insurance, which means that it’s beyond even the dreadful Stupak-Pitts amendment/executive order.  Some “small government”.  As Rachel Maddow documented, this bill is just the most egregious example of how the GOP basically hoodwinked the voters.  They ran on “creating jobs”, which they clearly have no intention of doing, since they’re going to be too busy looking for ways to put the screws to everyone they hate, a long list that includes poor people, people who read a lot, gays, and basically all women, but especially the most vulnerable in our society.

Sadly, the mainstream media (outside of a handful of awesome fighters, like Rachel Maddow, Nicholas Kristof, and Bob Herbert) has gotten inured to relentless attacks on women from conservatives, and subsequently fail to properly understand that a bill like this is pure misogyny, with a giant side dose of class warfare.  They’ve failed to cover the nefarious workings of Rep. Chris Smith from New Jersey, who competes regularly in the heavy competition in Congress for the title Biggest Misogynist, and who has made a special pet project out of trying to shut down any foreign aid that would include contraception, and who has accused Secretary Clinton of being a friend to child rapists because she believes child rape victims should get medical care.  But as you’ll see, Chris Smith is actually the worst enemy in Congress a minor victim of rape could have, starting with the fact that he seems to believe they’re lying sluts who need to be punished.

See, HR3 has—like the Hyde Amendment—a provision in it that carves out an exception for rape, incest, and the health/life of the mother. But because anti-choicers like Smith are such ruthless misogynists, they tend to believe the misogynist stereotype that all women, especially those who claim to be ill or victims of crimes, are lying whores until proven otherwise.  Or just lying whores, regardless of the evidence they produce.  And so, to make sure those lying whores don’t get their hands on those delicious, orgasm-inducing uterine scrapings, the bill has language in it that, in essence, assumes that 70% of rape victims weren’t really raped.  The exception is only for “forcible rape”, which is vaguely defined, but in practice tends to mean that anything short of getting your ass beat down means you weren’t “really” raped.  Even if you’re a 13-year-old who was impregnated by a 30-year-old.  Also, if you happen to get pregnant by your abusive, rape-y father on your 18th birthday, you will get no funding to make sure you don’t give birth to your own brother.  Consent is implied if you’re female under these guidelines, and consent to sex with your male relatives is implied the second you turn 18.

Don’t simply stare in speechless disgust.  Get your fingers to work, and talk about this!  Write to your representatives in the House.  Tweet (Marcotte suggets that you tweet against it with the hashtag #dearjohn).

Can we talk about race? On Obama and Tony Porter.


There is a lot that is right about Tony Porter’s “A Call to Men” speech, also a lot that is wrong.  See also the website. What is right is the message.

I like what he says.  I preach what he preaches.  I want my son to hear this.  I want him to memorize every word.  But I’m bothered by the racial undertones.  How do you respond to them?  Did you notice them?  Did they bother you?  Do you know why?  I’m trying to figure out why they bother me.  ESPECIALLY because I like the message.

What creeps me out is that the deliverer, the prophet, is preaching to mostly white women of a certain class.  It’s called “A Call to MEN” and here’s this black guy calling to an audience of mostly white women.  The camera searches and searches for the random dark-skinned women, as though to say—“see!  he appeals to black women!  we can prove it!”   What’s up with that?

Alas, he corresponds in some ways to racist stereotypes that liberals have.  We aren’t a bit surprised to find out that he grew up in the “tenements” of New York City, since, after all….he’s Black, and that’s a romantic image for us Northerners, in a sexy West Side Story way.   But also he’s astute, and right (as in correct, as in just) and he is in fact delivering the truth about gender relations.  He’s a boundary-transgressing animal.  He makes us uncomfortable.

His message about gender may be a truth that has been obvious to  you since you were born, or maybe only after a revelation, in a college film class, for example.  You got a dose of “good news” which meant not “the news that Christ was born,” but rather, “a refreshing dose of rationality in a sea of violently emotional and sometimes frighteningly violent thinking, a.k.a. the Truth, or its closest approximation so far.

News.  He spreads it.  It is good.  But the context in which he dispenses (his seed?) troubles me.  The gender relations of this gender-conscious video bother me, actually, much, much more than its race relations.  I thought I was going to see a rally from a man to men, some kind of masculinist ideology-fest at which men were reinforcing with one another, muscling themselves up in defense against the feminizing threat of wimpy-ness or small-penis-nes.  So I tuned in.  It sounded fun.  But what I got was this quite different animal.

What do you think about it?  Can we talk about race here?  Does the race problem cancel out the feminist message?  Do you think it is important to talk about race and gender at the same time?  I do.

I mean, surely that was one of the greatest things that our president did for the nationwas to talk about race relations (A More Perfect Union), which have been brutal, indecent, and hard to comprehend, in our country since its founding.

The Europeans who landed here, in search of gold and slaves, neither of which they found, slaughtered thousands of natives deliberately, with swords, and by accident, with disease, in the 1500s.  So we Americans were founded in violence, pestilence, and fear.  And greed.  Yes, also in hope, in a search for freedom from interference by other people with whom we don’t agree. But that quite liberal inclination to seek liberty was not strong in the first settlers who got themselves established here–they were much more repressive and intolerant than most Americans learn.  With the goodwives looking on approvingly, the venerable Fathers of Massachusetts burned people at the stake.  They whipped Quaker women naked down the streets; they tarred and feathered; they ostracized; they publicly humiliated.

Not all the European invaders were English or Protestant, of course.  They were far more diverse than most seem to know.  They were Dutch; they were Swedish; they were French; they were Spanish.   They were also Natives of that continent, whose ancestors wandered, we think, from the Bering Strait.  They were Asian but also maybe Russian and Sami, too.  When you start moving back, you realize there is no single blood line, no such thing as a “pure” race; no such thing as race.  No such thing as native.

Our family history is rich and complicated.  But violent.

Here’s the problem: The”democratic spirit,”  the spirit for freedom, seems to have gotten tangled up with the spirit for imprisonment.  It seems to have gotten involved with bizarre theocratic notions of American male supremacy, of Judeo-Christian mythology about Adam and Eve; and religious intolerance. You think we’ve evolved?  Today’s Puritans have no compunction about compelling their fellow citizens to accept major infringements of their civil liberties without a whimper.  These people who use “freedom” like a weapon, a blasphemy, these people who claim to be the “moral majority,” who want to put women back into the kitchen and the kindergarten, these “men’s rights” groups and “white rights” groups, these devils who claim to be angels, …THESE are the people who have mastered the game of self-representation, of marketing, of selling the soul, selling the SELF, self above all, in our country?  These people who want to give the top 2 percent of the population the greatest tax benefit?  How did they sell that one?  Why are still selling it?

We’re the center of capitalism, why has the left let the right control this market?  We live here, too.  We, too, know how to sell the self to get ahead.  We’re just as good, we think, at the game.  Except we’re not.  We’re not making any progress lately.   What is wrong with us?

It’s the age of the internet; yet people are lazy.  They mostly want to be fed.  So.  FEED THEM.  Get the slogans out there; advertise, throw all your creativity into the project.  OUT PERFORM them.  What has gone wrong?  Are we stuck in the 18th century? Don’t we know how to sell knowledge?

Don’t get me wrong.  I admire the President.  It matters that we finally elected a man who defines himself as a Black man.  And he is a great man, a well-educated man, an eloquent man, a philosopher, an intellectual (he’s practically French–he’s our Jefferson!).  He’s thoughtful.  He’s a feminist.  He’s by all accounts enlightened in his views about women, race, class, ethnicity.  He gets an A plus for human rights.  He won the Nobel Prize.

I like him.  But why isn’t he standing up against intolerance and bigotry with greater strength?  What, in fact, is the difference between fundamentalist Christians and fundamentalist Muslims?  None that I can see.

What is good, in Barak and in Tony, is the turn towards the light, the truth.

Too many people seem to think is that the truth is fixed. Therefore. once they find what they think it is, they freeze it in time, and won’t let it move or change with the flow of history and events.  We call these people fundamentalists.

But really the truth is not fixed.  It is continually in flux, like an amoeba or an energy.   It is always changing in response to historical events taking place in a specific environment.  These might be events that have uncertain and potentially cataclysmic, world-altering consequences.   Like, for example, if Ahmadinajhad and his cronies were to get possession of the nuclear bomb and to set it off.  World-altering.  But who would you fear more?  I’m-a-dinner-jacket or Rick Santorum?  Mike Huckabee?  Mitt Romney?  Re-read The Handmaid’s Tale.  Say hello to our possible future.  We have to overcome our unwillingness to embrace the product, to sell “the truth.”  We need positive slogans.

Or do we?  We can’t predict events.  But we can predict the way that we respond to them.  Do we escalate the violence?  Or do we master ourselves?  Could we ever really master ourselves as long as we were trying to dominate an Other? Isn’t this the message and the method?

Republicans wage class warfare for the rich


Meteor Blades, a writer for Daily Kos, has composed such a cogent, brief summary of the current economic situation in the United States, that I want to reproduce it in full:

Recession definitely over for some

by Meteor Blades

Tue Oct 05, 2010 at 07:22:03 AM PDT

As noted in Banana republic last week, the Census Bureau reported that 49.4 percent of all income in 2009 went to Americans in the top 20 percent of the population – those making $100,000 or more a year. The top 5 percent of Americans got 22 percent of total income. On the other hand, people falling below the federal poverty line earned 3.4 percent. The poorest of the poor, those under half the poverty line, have hit record numbers. The rich-poor ratio clocked in for 2009 at 14.5 to 1, a big jump in the continuation of a skewing that makes the U.S. the most unequal in income among the developed democracies.

There are plenty of other grim statistics in the Census reporttoo, except for those folks on the top of the heap. At the Center for American Progress, Michael Linden and Heather Bousheydug into them and found one interesting tidbit. While every income category – rich to poor – took hits during the first year of the Great Recession, in 2009, the upper 5 percent managed to average an increase in their income of $1800, and the upper 20 percent boosted their average income by about half that.

The other quintiles saw their incomes continue to fall.

Median household income continued to slide from 2008 to 2009, falling by $335. In fact, the median household has lost almost $2,200 in annual income since the recession began. That is the largest two-year decline in at least 35 years and amounts to a drop of more than 4 percent.

For people in the bottom quintile, most of whom fall under the federal poverty line, the situation, already bad, worsened for the third year in a row, putting one out of five children into poverty and lowering the already low average income of their parents by another 3.3 percent.

What is the Republican response to this growing income inequality and steadily worsening impoverishment that has put the rich-poor ratio at its worst level in the past 110 years? Dumping the minimum wage for the poor. Cutting taxes for the rich to create jobs overseas. Trashing Medicaid. And putting a $2000 deductible on Medicare.

Sounds like a plan. But be sure not to call it class warfare.

  • ::
  • The tea-party gift that keeps on giving


    In an election season where Democratic strategists are rightly worried about the Democratic base being less energized than its conservative counterpart, the State of Arizona is the gift that will keep on giving.

    So begins Dante Atkins with scathing irony in a recent post on Daily Kos.   It’s a good piece.  You should read it.

    The sick men (and women) who want the middle class to be sick


    What is with these guys? Why are they blocking legislation that would expand health-care coverage to people in the middle class, who are already paying taxes for it, and who need it?  As a new report from the non-partisan Robert Wood Johnson Foundation finds, the health-care crisis in our country hits the working people, the middle class women and men who pay the taxes that keep this country going, harder than anyone else.  According to this report:

    • More middle-class Americans are uninsured.
      Nationwide, the total number of uninsured, middle-class people increased by more than 2 million since 2000, to12.9 million in 2008.
    • The average employee’s costs for health insurance rose, while income fell.
      Nationwide, the average cost an employee paid for a family insurance policy rose 81 percent from 2000 to 2008. During the same period, median household income fell 2.5 percent (adjusted for inflation).
    • Fewer people were offered, eligible for, or accepted insurance coverage through their jobs.
      As costs of health insurance premiums rose, some employers stopped offering coverage benefits to employees, or changed the criteria for employees’ eligibility. While most employers still paid the lion’s share of their employees’ insurance premiums, rising costs have been passed on to workers—with some choosing to drop insurance.

    How many people do YOU know who have lost ground in the health care industry lately?  Just about everyone I know has.  How many people do you know who are miserably stuck in jobs in which they have never flourished, and never will, because they are afraid to lose their health insurance?   Think of how much more productive we would be as a society if people took and stayed in jobs because they liked the jobs, not because they needed health care, or because they know that if they leave, they’ll join the ranks of the unfortunate persons who, often for very trivial reasons, are tagged with “pre-existing conditions,” and who will never be able to afford private insurance? How well, how energetically, how creatively, how industriously, do you think the people who stay in stupid jobs they hate because they’re afraid to lose their employer-sponsored health care, do their jobs?

    And why should employers have to pay?  How much more productive an economy do you think we’d have if small businesses didn’t have to pay health care premiums?  Think of the great county we could be if employers were not hampered in this broken system.

    How can these guys in any kind of conscience, much less good conscience, stand up and block health care to millions of American people?  How can these people call themselves “representatives”?  Who are they representing?  Who are these mythical people they claim do not “want” health care reform?  Who does not need health care?  And how do you think these Republicans, and the few wacko Democrats who have been LYING about what the bill will do (as has been exhaustively demonstrated, the bill will not make federal tax dollars go to fund abortions) live with themselves?  How would you like to go down in history as the guy who was against health?  It’s kind of like going down in history as Hades, or Hitler, or Nero.

    How can anyone be against health?  Why would anyone want to prevent sick people from getting medicine, treatment, and care?  How can these guys insist, which is what they are doing, that Americans who get sick (and that would be all of us, because we all get sick at some time or another), should STAY SICK?  Is this the voice of reason?  Is this the voice of sanity?  In what lunatic cosmos do these people live?  And why aren’t their constituents throwing these anti-health, pro-sickness bums out on their bums?

    How are we supposed to recover from the worst economic depression that we have had in nearly 100 years, and get back to work, when we are sick because these guys don’t want us to have health care?  Why do they want us to be sick?  Don’t they think Americans deserve to have productive, healthy lives?

    And they say they’re the party of fiscal sense?  In what universe does a country full of sick people who have been denied health care constitute a healthy economy?  These guys must be sick–they’ve been thinking out of the wrong end for so long that they’ve gone mad on the gas fumes.