Haley Barbour: Koran Burning
Keep your goals to yourself
Christine O'Donnell's Views On Sex And Porn Take Social Conservatism To The Extreme
Sid Meier's Civilisation V
Alwar Balasubramaniam: Art of Substance and Absence
Vanessa de Mata/Ben Harper: Boa Sorte/Good Luck
The Sotomayor hearings are a sham - by Rob Kall

There is zero chance that she will not be approved. There are zero reasons for her not to be approved.

The Republican Majority is using it to build cred with its dwinding racist base, in the process showing off how sexist, ignorant, hypocritical and intolerant they can be.

But what really makes the hearings a sham is the mainstream media's broadcasting this showing of Right wing abuses of a Latina woman.

We don't need to see them doing it. They don't deserve to be given the attention.

For an example of hypocrisy, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse nailed the conservatives putting on a show grilling Sotomayor.

For all the talk of "modesty" and "restraint," the right wing Justices of the Court have a striking record of ignoring precedent, overturning congressional statutes, limiting constitutional protections, and discovering new constitutional rights: the infamous Ledbetter decision, for instance; the Louisville and Seattle integration cases, for example; the first limitation on Roe v. Wade that outright disregards the woman's health and safety; and the DC Heller decision, discovering a constitutional right to own guns that the Court had not previously noticed in 220 years. Over and over, news reporting discusses "fundamental changes in the law" wrought by the Roberts Court's right wing flank. The Roberts Court has not lived up to the promises of modesty or humility made when President Bush nominated Justices Roberts and Alito.

 

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C told Sotomayor, "Unless you have a complete meltdown, you're going to get confirmed."

I can't imagine him saying that to a man. 

I've long felt that a key battle conservatives have been fighting is against the feminine archetype. This manifests itself in many ways, including sexist, even misogynist language.

Let's hope that as the media enables this right wing attack-fest, where senators are getting incredible opportunities to show off their anti-abortion, pro-gun positions, that the media will also show, in the instant replays, just what neanderthals these white males are.

Rob Kall is executive editor, publisher and site architect of OpEdNews.com


Comments

Please log in to leave a comment.
You need to have been a member for 24 hours and validated your email before leaving a comment.
 
Resist or Become Serfs - From Chris Hedges
8 apr  |  America is devolving into a third-world nation. And if we do not immediately halt our elite's rapacious looting of the public treasury we
will be left with trillions in debts, which can never be repaid, and idespread human misery which we will be helpless to ameliorate. Our anemic democracy will be replaced with a robust national police state. The elite will withdraw into heavily guarded gated communities where they will have access to security, goods and services that cannot be afforded by the rest of us. Tens of millions of people, brutally controlled, will live in perpetual poverty. This is the inevitable result of unchecked corporate capitalism. The stimulus and bailout plans are not about saving us. They are about saving them. We can resist, which means street protests, disruptions of the system and demonstrations, or become serfs.

We have been in a steady economic decline for decades. The Canadian Political philosopher John Ralston Saul detailed this decline in his 1992
book "Voltaire's Bastards: The Dictatorship of Reason in the West." David Cay Johnston exposed the mirage and rot of American capitalism in "Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense (and Stick You With the Bill)," and David C. Korten, in "When Corporations Rule the World" and "Agenda for a New Economy," laid out corporate malfeasance and abuse. But our universities and mass media, entranced by power and naively believing that global capitalism was an unstoppable force of nature, rarely asked the right questions or gave a prominent voice to those who did. Our elites hid their incompetence and loss of control behind an arrogant facade of specialized jargon and obscure economic theories.

The lies employed to camouflage the economic decline are legion. President Ronald Reagan included 1.5 million U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine service personnel with the civilian work force to magically reduce the nation's unemployment rate by 2 percent. President Bill Clinton decided that those who had given up looking for work, or those who wanted full-time jobs but could only find part-time employment, were no longer to be counted as unemployed. This trick disappeared some 5 million unemployed from the official unemployment rolls. If you work more than 21 hours a week-most low-wage workers at places like Wal-Mart average 28 hours a week-you are counted as employed, although your real wages put you below the poverty line. Our actual unemployment rate, when you include those who have stopped looking for work and those who can only find part-time jobs, is not 8.5 percent but 15 percent. A sixth of the country is now effectively unemployed. And we are shedding jobs at a faster rate than in the months after the 1929 crash.


Via Information Clearing House
 . . read more
Once Again, The Race Card - From Christopher Hitchens
1 feb  |  How can one equal Bill Clinton for thuggery and opportunism when it comes to the so-called “race card”? And where does one even start with the breathtaking nastiness of his own conduct, and that of his supporters, in the last week... Many liberals do not like it now that they see similar two-faced Clinton tactics being employed against Obama, who is “one of their own.” And many of the most prominent and eloquent U.S. black columnists — Bob Herbert, Colbert King, Eugene Robinson — are also acting shocked. It’s a bit late.

Bob Herbert shocked even me by quoting Andrew Young, who said that his pal Clinton was “every bit as black as Barack” because he’d screwed more black chicks. How is Hillary Clinton, or Chelsea Clinton, supposed to feel on hearing that little endorsement? One gets the impression, though, at least from the wife, that anything is OK as long as it works, or even has a chance of working.

Say what you will about Sen. Obama (and I say that he’s got much more charisma than guts), he is miles above this sort of squalor and has decent manners. Say what you will about the Clintons, you cannot acquit them of having played the race card several times in both directions and of having done so in the most vulgar and unscrupulous fashion. Anyone who thinks that this equals “change” is a fool, and an easily fooled fool at that.  . . read more

Was the Hottest 100 Of All Time sexist? asks Triple J’s Hack - by Lauredhel
15 jul  | 

A couple of weeks ago, guest Hoyden Orlando asked why Triple J’s first draft of a “potted history of music” failed to showcase significant numbers of women. (The history has since been edited.)

The “Hottest 100 Of All Time” has since aired, and audiences have been shocked to find that only two songs in the top 100 – two! – were sung by women. Only six female-fronted songs made it into the second batch of 100, so it wasn’t as though the men just edged women out in the final vote – women are just overwhelmingly absent. This sort of discrepancy doesn’t happen by accident; we can quibble about the locus of the problem till we’re blue in the face, but it’s a clear sign of entrenched, largely-invisible sexism in action. Quibbling about the locus is pointless because the locus is everywhere. This is the Matrix.

TripleJ afternoon talkback show Hack today called for a bit of feedback on the testostofest finale. It was great to hear people phoning in making intelligent and feminist observations – women and men both.

A couple of folks stood out as particularly unhelpful, of course, too. One bloke phoned in talking about how women just can’t sing with the same emotion as men can, which was an eyeroll moment. And JJJ presenter Zan Rowe was flailingly defensive, taking the “It’s not us, it’s you!” approach and saying over and over and over again that it was “democratic” and not Triple J’s fault, instead of engaging with the issue in a substantive way or taking responsibility for a plan of action.

The show can be downloaded (it will be up for a week) at the Hack site.

Originally posted at Hoyden About Town.

 . . read more
Bombing for Peace is like Fucking for Virginity
7 aug  |  While Julian Assange skips from country to country and rumours circulate that he is only one step away from assasination, the information bazzar that he has created is allowing a different approach to combating warmongers.
By Simon Moore
 . . read more
Has Hillary Been Victim of Media Sexism?
3 jun  |  Barack Obama may have won the race, but no woman has ever gotten as close as Hillary Clinton to breaching the ultimate glass ceiling. Many of Hillary's supporters are angry at the 'gender bias' blocking her path to success. . . read more
Sarah Palin Turns Pro - From Paul Begala
6 jul  | 

I wish Hunter S. Thompson had lived to see this.

As Hunter said, "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." Sarah Palin makes Mark Foley, the congressman who sent filthy emails to pages look almost normal. She makes David Vitter, the senator who was hanging out with hookers, look almost boring. She makes Larry Craig, caught hitting on a cop in a men's room, look almost stable. She makes John Ensign, the senator who was having an affair with a staffer, look almost humdrum (and compared to the rest of the GOP whack-jobs, he is). And she makes Mark Sanford, the governor with the Latin lover, look positively predictable.

It was an almost impossible mission, but in resigning from office with 17 months to go in her first term, Sarah Palin has made herself the bull goose loony of the GOP.

Let's stipulate that if there is some heretofore unknown personal, medical or family crisis, this was the right move. But Gov. Palin didn't say anything like that. Her statement was incoherent, bizarre and juvenile. The text, as posted on Gov. Palin's official website (here), uses 2,549 words and 18 exclamation points. Lincoln freed the slaves with 719 words and nary an exclamation; Mr. Jefferson declared our independence in 1,322 words and, again, no exclamation points. Nixon resigned the presidency in 1,796 words -- still no exclamation points. Gov. Palin capitalized words at random - whole words, like "TO," "HELP," and "AND," and the first letter of "Troops."

Gov. Palin's official announcement that she is resigning as chief executive of the great state of Alaska had all the depth and gravitas of a 13-year-old's review of the Jonas Brothers' album on Facebook. She even quoted her parents' refrigerator magnet. (Note to self: if one of my kids becomes governor, throw away the refrigerator magnet that says: "Murray's Oyster Bar: We Shuck Em, You Suck Em!") She put her son's name in quotations marks. Why? Who knows. She writes, "I promised efficiencies and effectiveness!?" Was she exclaiming or questioning? I get it: both! And I don't even know what to make of a sentence that reads:

*((Gotta put First Things First))*

Ponder the fact that Rupert Murdoch's Harper Collins publishing house is paying this, umm, writer $11 million for a book. Ponder that and say a prayer for Ms. Palin's editor.

I'm no latter-day Strunk & White, just a guy who was struck by Palin's spectacularly rambling and infantile prose. It bespeaks a rambling and infantile mind. But perhaps not. Perhaps this is all a ruse. Perhaps Gov. Palin wants us to believe she's an intellectual featherweight who is slightly shallower than an actor on High School Musical. Maybe she's trying to throw us off the trail.

Naah. A lot of people thought that about George W. Bush. He couldn't be so block-headed, they said. He couldn't be as childish and churlish as he came off. Oh yes he could. And so, too, might Ms. Palin be as vapid and puerile as her inane statement suggests.

We will know. In the fullness of time (and I predict, not much time) we will know. Again and again in her statement, Gov. Palin returned to the nettlesome ethics inquiries that have been visited upon her since she signed on to be John McCain's running mate. No doubt they are annoying. But does anyone believe that's why she's resigning? No, there's more to this story. And Ms. Palin's resignation only increases the chances that we will all know the rest of the story soon. Or, as she might put it:

We will all KNOW the "rest of the Story" *((SOON!))*

[via Huffington Post]

 . . read more
What to Do About Wall Street - By RALPH NADER
4 feb  |  Soon after the passage in 1999 of the Clinton-Rubin-Summers-P. Graham deregulation of the financial industry, I boarded a US Air flight to Boston and discovered none other than then-Secretary of the Treasury Lawrence Summers a few seats away. He was speaking loudly and constantly on his cell phone. When the plane took off he invited me to sit by him and talk.

After reviewing the contents of this Citibank-friendly new law called the Financial Modernization Act, I asked him: "Do you think the big banks have too much power"?

He paused for a few seconds and replied: "Not Yet." Intrigued by his two word answer, I noted the rejection of modest pro-consumer provisions, adding that now that the banks had had their round, wasn't it time for the consumers to have their own round soon?

He allowed that such an expectation was not unreasonable and that he was willing to meet with some seasoned consumer advocates and go over such an agenda. We sent him an agenda, and met with Mr. Summers and his staff. Unfortunately, neither his boss, Bill Clinton, nor the Congress were in any mood to revisit this heavily lobbied federal deregulation law and reconsider the blocked consumer rights.

The rest is unfolding, tragic history. The law abolished the Glass-Steagall Act which separated commercial banking from investment banking. This opened the floodgates for unwise mergers, acquisitions and other unregulated risky financial instruments. Laced with limitless greed, casino capitalism ran wild, tanking economies here and abroad.

One champion of this market fundamentalism was Alan Greenspan, then chairman of the Federal Reserve. Last October before a House Committee, Greenspan admitted he was mistaken and expressed astonishment at how corporations could not even safeguard their own self-interest from going over steep speculative cliffs.

Greenspan and Summers were deemed "brilliant" by the press and most of Congress. Summers' predecessor at Treasury, Robert Rubin, was also a charter member of the Oracles--those larger-than-life men who just knew that the unfettered market and giant financial conglomerates would be the one-stop shopping mart consumers were assumed to be craving.

Now the world knows that these men belong to the "oops oligarchy" that bails itself out while it lets the companies collapse into the handcuffed arms of Uncle Sam and bridled taxpayers who have to pay for unconditional megabailouts. Instead of the Wall Street crooks being convicted and imprisoned, they have fled the jurisdiction with their self-determined compensation. Corporate crime pays, while pensions and mutual fund savings evaporate.

Now comes the next stage of the Washington rescue effort in a variety of stimulus packages which every vendor group imaginable wants a piece of these days. When trillions are offered, many come running.

As the public focus is on how much, when and where all this money should be spent, there are very serious consequences to be foreseen and forestalled. First, consider how much more concentrated corporate power is occurring. Forced or willing mergers, acquisitions and panic takeovers of big banks by bigger banks along with bankruptcies of companies further reduce what is left of quality competition for consumer benefit.

Remember the anti-trust laws. Obama needs to be their champion. The fallout from the Wall Street binge is likely to lead to a country run by an even smaller handful of monopolistic global goliaths.

In the stampede for stimulus legislation, there is a foreboding feeling on Capitol Hill that there is no proposal on the table to pay for it other than by the children and grandchildren. Just the opposite is raining down on them. Everybody including the private equity gamblers, Las Vegas casinos and Hollywood studios along with the banks and auto companies are looking for tax breaks.

So with the economy deteriorating and taxes being cut, where is the enormous money coming from? From borrowing and from printing money. So look out for big time inflation and decline in the dollar?s value vis-à-vis other currencies.

In all the hundreds of pages of stimulus bills, there is nothing that would facilitate the banding together of consumers and investors into strong advocacy groups. We have long proposed Financial Consumer Associations, privately and voluntarily funded through inserts in the monthly statements of financial firms.

If this bailout-stimulus-Wall Street funny money waste, fraud and abuse sounds confusing, that is because it is. A brand new paperback "Why Wall Street Can't Be Fixed and How to Replace It: Agenda For a New Economy" by long-time corporate critic, David C. Korten will explain some of the wheeling and dealing.

You don't have to agree with all or many of Korten?s nostrums. Just read Part II: the Case For Eliminating Wall Street. He considers three central questions:

First, do Wall Street Institutions do anything so vital for the national interest that they justify trillions of dollars to save them from the consequences of their own excess?

Second, is it possible that the whole Wall Street edifice is built on an illusion of phantom wealth that carries deadly economic, social, and environmental consequences for the larger society?

Third, are there other ways to provide needed financial services with greater results and at lesser cost?

Ralph Nader is an American attorney, author, lecturer, political activist, and perennial candidate for presidency as an independent candidate. . . read more

Tell Me I'm Overreacting by Fuck Politeness
20 nov  | 

So, any of you lurkers wrinkling your nose or rolling your eyes at my objection to the ad depicting a young "HAWT CHICK" with the tagline "Organ donation is probably your only chance to get inside her" is over-reaction? That it's "just an ad", that guys don't really think like that? That it's just fun and games?

Well, go read this. 

  • One third of boys believe "it's not a big deal to hit a girl".
  • One in seven thought "it's OK to make a girl have sex with you if she was flirting".
  • 350,000 girls aged between 12 and 20 – one in seven – had experienced sexual assault or rape.
  • Almost one third of girls in Year 10 had experienced unwanted sex.

While I don't know the details of how the study was conducted, it found that one in seven boys thought it was ok to foce a girl to have sex if she'd been flirting.

The ads aren't produced in a vacuum. I'm not going to spend forever pondering chicken and egg, suffice to say there are connections. You have teenage boys exposed to violence towards women in their home, boys having attitudes like this, you have advertising that plays into it, you have a culture of disrespect for women...and the result? That one in four women will be raped, women will be held responsible for ‘preventing' themselves being raped, as if the onus is on us, men will do jackshit, and society will continue to perpetuate disrespectful shit about women and not take rape seriously.

Go on, tell me I don't have a sense of humour, I dare you.

 . . read more
Hobbits, Firing Squad and Lobster Tails prove too much for the public's constitution
18 jun  |  I am not entirely sure what is too wrong with someone choosing the process of their execution. Moving beyond the death penalty and its position in society, why is there such an international furore about the fact that a man decided to have himself executed by firing squad?- by Stephen Myles . . read more
Repeal of the "Global Gag Rule" - From Judith Faucette
2 feb  |  On January 23rd, one day after the thirty-sixth anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the case that legalized abortion in the United States, President Obama rescinded the "global gag rule." Also known as the Mexico City policy, this regulation put a restriction on U.S. government funding to international organizations and American NGOs working abroad based on their abortion-related policies. Organizations that provided abortion-related services or lobbied foreign governments in hopes of easing restrictive abortion policies were ineligible for funding under the rule.

This regulation has been tossed back and forth between presidents since Regan created it in 1984. Bill Clinton rescinded the rule on the twentieth anniversary of Roe v. Wade in 1993, and George W. Bush reinstated it immediately after taking office exactly eight years later. Obama promised to rescind the rule during the campaign, and made many women's rights activists nervous when he did not do so on January 22nd. However, the decision to rescind the rule a day later was not without reason - Obama explained that his intention was to respect pro-lifers who see the 22nd as a "day of grief," and while issuing a strong statement on his intention to protect a woman's right to choose and his commitment to women's rights in general, he did not want to mix a change in family planning policy up in the emotions of the day.

So far, Obama's record on women's rights as President is something of a mixed bag. In addition to rescinding the global gag rule, he also signaled his intent to restore funding to the U.N. Population Fund. President Bush has not spent any of the money authorized for the fund over the past eight years, due to his belief that the fund indirectly supports Chinese coercive abortion policies. However, Congress continues to authorize spending for the fund, which operates in 140 countries around the world and provides reproductive health services, education, and other services. In addition to trying to prevent sexually transmitted diseases including HIV and reduce poverty through family planning, the fund has programs aimed at reducing maternal mortality and closing the gender gap in education.

Obama also signed the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which takes away the 180-day time limit on women's differential pay claims. McCain notoriously referred to the act as a "trial lawyer's dream" in justifying his opposition during the campaign, but those in support of the act have pointed out that it can be very difficult to pull together a case in 180 days. The clock starts ticking when the employer makes the decision to pay a woman less than her male counterpart, and women may not be aware of the discrimination right away or be able to get information quickly.

On the other hand, once again showing his desire to keep the Christian right in the political picture and not alienate those across the aisle, Obama convinced House Democrats to drop a provision in the stimulus package that would provide $200 million for education and contraception. This was a politically hot topic, with conservatives decrying the inclusion of "condoms" in a stimulus package and liberals pointing out the financial benefits to the country in the long run in preventing unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. Despite resistance from his base, Obama chose to advocate dropping the provision to avoid ruffling political feathers.

Only time will tell whether President Obama can support women in the long run despite his political goals of maintaining bipartisan support, including the support of those opposed to family planning, sex education, and abortion. Some other policies that he may choose to rescind include a last-minute Health and Human Services "conscience" rule that allows health care providers at every stage to refuse to provide services including birth control for religious or moral reasons and a bevy of funding policies that require abstinence-only education, objection to sex work (even in countries where it is legal), and other moral tangents in order for domestic and international organizations to receive funds. Often, these provisions apply to funding that has a broad reach, extending to poverty reduction and increasing opportunities for women in developing nations. There is also a lack of logical correlation in many cases between the funding restrictions and their goal, for example in the case of AIDS in Africa where many infections are transmitted within marriage, making abstinence-only education pointless. Another action Obama might support is repeal of the Hyde Amendment, a law that bars federal Medicaid funding for abortion except in cases where the woman's life is in danger or she is a victim of rape or incest.

In my experience working for nine months on policies related to financial access to abortion, I learned that lack of access to abortion, and to other family planning services, can be dangerous to the woman and expensive for the state. Women on Medicaid, for example, may induce abortion in an unsafe environment because they do not qualify for coverage under the Hyde Amendment and cannot afford to support another child. This can lead to permanent damage or death, as well as costing the state much more than the cost of an abortion. Pregnancy is also very expensive for the state, as is the cost of supporting a woman who has more children than she can afford.
These are also not always "elective" abortions. Women can be faced with a very difficult choice when the fetus has an abnormality that will make it unlikely to survive or ever be a healthy child. Women whose health is endangered by the pregnancy also may not have access to a safe abortion if their state does not choose to provide Medicaid funding.

The same issues come up in the context of the global gag rule - women in developing countries, especially, may turn to unsafe abortions if their state does not allow or fund abortion. By taking away funding from organizations that help these women, the policy not only made it more likely that women would turn to unsafe funding because underfunded clinics could not help them, but also made unwanted pregnancies more likely because organizations could not afford to provide contraceptives and other reproductive health care services. In areas where AIDS runs rampant, contraception and education programs are absolutely crucial, and have nothing to do with abortion, but funding could be cut off from these programs if the same organization was involved with abortion services.

These issues are not only moral - they concern the health, safety, and lives of women. Family planning services can reduce poverty and the gender gap. They can also decrease maternal mortality rates, increase female education, and make pregnancies safer. For these reasons, I hope that Obama will continue to support reconsideration of these policies and a legal framework that empowers women in the U.S. and around the world.

Judith Faucette is a JGRJ Student Writer. JGRJ is University of Iowa College of Law's forum for editors & student writers of The Journal of Gender, Race & Justice to express their personal views concerning topical issues.
 . . read more
blogs   100words
 
By Sean Maguire

In comparison to other passages from Joseph Heller's Catch-22 it isn't often quoted, but it should be.

The haunting and beautifully simple piece reads:

'Man was matter, that was Snowden's secret. Drop him out a window and he'll fall. Set fire to him and he'll burn. Bury him and he'll rot, like other kinds of garbage. The spirit gone, man is garbage. That was Snowden's secret. Ripeness was all'.

The passage takes place after the protagonist Yossarian watches young Snowden die in the back of his plane. The event is repeatedly told throughout the novel always teasing at this great revelation that Yossarian had experienced- the revelation that 'man was matter'.

Not special, not a product of a breath of divinity but matter like everything else. 

After being in a potentially fatal car accident last week this line has been constantly coming back to me. I remember waking up just after the accident in a hospital with a doctor telling me I was having a cat-scan to check if I had brain damage.

Man was matter, and the centre of man (the mind) was also matter. We might generally conceive of the mind as somehow separate to the body- a floating you that is intangible and neverending, but in one fell swoop it can be brought back to what it really is: a fragile and spongy bit of tissue that can be destroyed in the stupidest and swiftest of seconds.