Month: October 2012

Mitt wants to enable adoption of snowflake babies

by digby

Chris Hayes featured a great conversation this morning on “women’s issues.” I thought the exchange between Father Bill Daley and Rebecca Traister was particularly interesting in that Traistor had to explain to the priest how central are reproductive rights — he seemed to think that some other health care benefits (like free insulin for mothers with diabetic children) would be just as helpful to women as birth control. That difference of perspective is profound.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I am with Hayes on this idea of a litmus test. There a few enough differences between the two parties. But I think we can be assured of one thing: the Republican Party no longer has any room for the pro-choice position. Actually, it’s worse than that. They have done something quite diabolical: according to Mitt Romney’s new ad, pro-choice women should be reassured that Mitt isn’t really a patriarchal throwback because of his generous position that abortion should be allowed in case of rape, incest or the life of the mother. As if that’s the pro-choice position.

The truth is that this modern Republican Party is determined to appoint judges to overturn Roe vs Wade and will restrict women’s rights wherever it is possible to do so. This is what Romney said to reassure his party that he was one of them back in 2008 and I have zero reasons to believe that he or his party have moderated since then. The list of ways in which he will restrict women’s reproductive rights is quite impressive:

It’s true that Democrats have not been the stalwart defenders — and expanders — of women’s rights that we need. But they’re Gloria Steinham’s fondest dream compared to that list of atrocities Mitt proudly articulates. He wanted to create adoption for blastocysts. You just don’t get any more fanatical than that.

As Hayes said, we all vote on variety of issues. But if this one is up there on your list of priorities, there’s really no choice. Sadly, I’m not sure most people are aware of that after all the blurring of lines the Democrats have stupidly done in the past and Mitt Romney’s doing in the present. But that doesn’t change the fact that the two parties do fundamentally differ here.

.

It’s the autonomy, stupid

by digby

It’s funny, but I honestly could not tell at first if this screed about Sandra Fluke came from a lefty or a rightie at first:

Sandra Fluke with her simpering demands and outstretched hands makes me ashamed to call myself a woman, makes me want to sit this Georgetown law student down and tell her the story of Malala Yousafzai.

Sandy has spent so much time this summer and fall drumming up sympathy for her condom crusade that she probably hasn’t heard about this Pakistani woman, really just a child of 14, who was shot in the head last week by an enraged group of Taliban soldiers.

I couldn’t tell where the writer was coming from because I often get slammed from both sides for caring about reproductive choice and other “white liberal (bitch”) causes when women around the world are dying at the hands of Terrorists/American imperialists.

However, as I read further it became clear which direction this attack on Fluke was coming from:

Perhaps Sandra Fluke might … put down her torts-and-contracts books for a few minutes and look into my friend’s beautiful blue eyes, listen to him talk about American promise and opportunity, see his brilliant teenager and reflect on the message she’s been trying to sell us for the past contentious months.

For all of its superficial imperfections, this country loves its women. It gives us ample space to develop interests and skills, respects our right to earn an education, demands that we be treated equally at work and in the sports world, and even legislates creatively so we can do whatever we want with our reproductive parts.

But for Sandy, that wasn’t enough. She and her like-minded friends wanted all of this, plus free birth control. They wanted to make the rest of the country believe that women were being “raped” when they submitted to a legitimate medical procedure. They screamed bloody murder when the highest court of the land said you couldn’t dismember an infant and call that “choice.”

Malala Yousafzai lies in a coma, because she wanted to go to school. Sandra Fluke earns accolades because she wants the government to subsidize her love life.

I think “legislate creatively” is one of the more felicitously obscure terms I’ve heard lately. “Personhood” and “mandatory ultrasounds” is very creative. I’m pretty sure they aren’t designed to help us “do whatever we want with our reproductive parts” however.

As for Malala, it’s just horrifying — one of millions of horrors that befall women all over the world — even, I would argue, to some white, liberal bitches. But the fact is that pitting women against women, saying one side is selfish for caring about reproductive rights while the other is righteously deserving of support because she stands against a more oppressive system/enemy is an old patriarchal game. (And yes, there are plenty of women who perpetuate it too.)

Women are certainly safe from drone attacks in the United States and less likely to be shot by a religious zealot for speaking out politically. But they are still raped and beaten by men in alarming numbers and their bodily autonomy is very much under threat from religious leaders, which means the underlying power differential and lack of full human rights is a spectrum of second class citizenry. The principles apply across the board.

It’s possible to care about many things simultaneously. In fact, it’s a necessity if you care about being a decent human being.

Here’s the latest on Malala. She’s recovering in Britain:

Cards and gifts for Malala cannot be accepted at the hospital and should be sent or delivered to either:

Birmingham Council House
Victoria Square
Birmingham
B1 1BB

or:

‘For Malala’
c/o Pakistan Consulate Birmingham
2-26 Constitution Hill
Hockley
Birmingham
B19 3LY

The Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham Charity (QEHB Charity) has set up an account within the main hospital fund to help Malala. Anyone wishing to visit the message board or help should go to www.uhb.nhs.uk/malala and follow the links.

.

Benghazi Smell Test BS

by digby

Josh Marshall wonders about something I’ve been scratching my head over as well:

One reason the Benghazi controversy has always seemed so bogus to me is that I’ve never bought the core premise, which is that the administration had any clear political reason or advantage to gain by claiming the attack was tied to the video as opposed to a pre-planned assault. (Here’s our look at how Benghazi evolved into a GOP talking point.) In addition to a great number of hacks peddling this idea, some people I respect a great deal seem to credit the idea. But again, it doesn’t add up to me.

I was watching the McLaughlin Report last night while making dinner and Pat Buchanan responded to Eleanor Clift’s similar question by saying they all lied to protect Obama’s reputation as a terrorist killer. That’s the best explanation I’ve heard for why the right is pimping this so-called scandal, but it’s mighty thin in my opinion. Most of the country doesn’t even know where Benghazi is and don’t consider a “terrorist attack” there to be particularly relevant to their lives. To think they would vote for Romney on this basis strikes me as a reach.

On the other hand, it is a perfectly magnificent example of their ongoing power to invoke “the smell test” with the political press and create a controversy out of confusion. It’s always telling when they can’t really tell you what it is they suspect is happening, but it just “looks bad.”

Marshall points to various recent press reports about huge confusion on the ground and today’s David Ignatius scoop which says that the early CIA reports track with what the administration said.

But I keep coming back to this: who gives a damn?

Clearly, the deaths were a tragedy and an investigation should take place. Americans have a right to know exactly what’s going on in Libya. But obsessing over what the administration said in the first days after the attack is the stupidest right-wing manufactured pseudo-scandal I’ve come across in quite some time. And it’s pathetic that the mainstream press is still so willing to chase after these shiny objects.

.

Cornel West with great sanity and perspective for unhappy progressives

by David Atkins

Longtime Administration critic Cornel West has some words for those who plan to stage a “protest” vote against Obama over drones, kill lists, Wall Street policies and like: vote to stop the right-wing takeover in November, then protest the President in February. (Actually, the time to protest is likely in mid-November no matter who wins; I’m not sure Mr. West understands the legislative sequence of Simpson Bowles and the fiscal cliff, but that’s a minor nitpick.)

After the polls swung in Romney’s favor after the first debate, did you reconsider your criticism of President Obama?
We have to prevent a Romney takeover of the White House. No doubt about that. It would be very dangerous in terms of actual lives and actual deaths of the elderly and the poor. Those people who are dependent on various programs would have to deal with the ugly damage of the further redistribution of wealth from the poor and working people to the well off.

Right. But doesn’t criticizing Obama make all that bad stuff you just said more likely to happen?
I’m strategic. We have to tell that truth about a system that’s corrupt—both parties are poisoned by big money and tied to big banks and corporations. Speaking on that is a matter of intellectual integrity. American politics are not a matter of voting your moral conscience—if I voted my moral conscience it would probably be for Jill Stein. But it’s strategic in terms of the actual possibilities and real options available for poor and working people.

So voting for Obama is good strategy given the realities of the world?
A Romney administration would be a catastrophic response to an already catastrophic condition. I still get in a lot of trouble with my left-wing comrades on this—that I would still support Obama winning while continuing to tell the truth about drones dropping bombs on innocent people, which I consider war crimes, about the Wall Street government, about the refusal to close Guantanamo, about [section] 1021 of the National Authorization Act where you can detain citizens without trial or even assassinate citizens based on the decisions of the executive branch. All of those things to me are morally obscene. It’s a matter of telling that truth, strategically. I think we have to ensure that we don’t have a takeover by conservative right-wing or we’re in a world of trouble…

What happens if and when President Obama is re-elected?
Well I hope he wins because Romney is so dangerous. But when he wins, the hard work only intensifies. We’ll still need to critique US foreign policy and the worshiping of Wall Street. Let’s start treating workers the way you treat bankers and have loans available to students the way they’re available to banks at zero percent interest.

Do you think Obama will be different?
There might be a possibility that he starts to tilt towards main street rather than Wall Street, but we’ll see who he chooses to surround himself with. When you choose Geitner and Summers, you’re sending pretty strong signs that this is going to be a Wall Street-friendly government. But we’ll have to see and we’ll keep putting pressure on him. The important thing to recognize is that when he does win, the work begins all over again in terms of pressing for issues that will be critical of the system that he runs.

Cornel West is a pretty smart guy.

(h/t Anne Laurie)

.

What is this kill list you speak of?


by digby

Unbelievable:

Somebody needs to get Debbie a subscription to the New York Times:

She appears to think that story isn’t public for some reason. Or is pretending that it isn’t public. And  her annoyance at the ill-mannered hippie asking her “inappropriate” questions outside the approved 2012 campaign topics is palpable. She looks completely ridiculous.

Via Greenwald who is, unsurprisingly, appalled. He thinks she really has never heard of the kill list.  I suppose that’s possible. Which is even more appalling.

.

Best GOTV video of the cycle

by digby

I cannot tell you how much I revere Congressman John Lewis. He is an American hero, a fine leader and a truly decent human being.

And now there’s this:

Add great sense of humor to the list.

.

Today’s looney GOP candidate comment

by digby

… so far.

Republican Rep. Joe Walsh, running against Democratic challenger Tammy Duckworth in Illinois, told reporters Thursday night that there should be no abortion exception for the “life of the mother” because “with modern technology and science, you can’t find one instance” in which a woman would actually die, according to a radio station. Walsh, of course, is flat wrong.

“There is no such exception as life of the mother, and as far as health of the mother, same thing,” Walsh continued. The comments were first reported by the Illinois radio station WGN.

“There is no such exception as life of the mother, and as far as health of the mother, same thing, with advances in science and technology,” Walsh said, according to the video above.

I realize that Joe Walsh is a clown who says something completely outrageous every other day. And you would think that the RNC would be thrilled to see him out of their hair considering what a nutball he is. But there’s not much they can do about it, even if they want to:

A conservative SuperPAC touting Duckworth rival Joe Walsh is preparing to dump an extra $2.5 million into the heated 8th Congressional District race — on top of $2 million it has already spent, a source familiar with the plan told the Chicago Sun-Times.

The idea is to “bury Duckworth,” the source said.

This turns out to be from a group Walsh once worked for:

A 2009 New York Times article profiled the group saying: “Americans for Limited Government does not specialize in nuance. A recent e-mail message labeled Mr. Obama “the biggest liar of all,” and a piece on Mr. Obama’s enthusiasm for the national volunteer service agency AmeriCorps suggested a parallel with Hitler Youth.”

Mother Jones tracked the money to … the usual suspects:

Americans for Limited Government was co-founded in 1996 by real estate investor Howard Rich, who also serves on the boards of the Cato Institute and the Club for Growth. According to Politico, ALG has been among the recipients of funding from the extensive donor network established by the billionaire industrialists Charles and David Koch. ALG has also employed Sean Noble, according to Politico, who helped to oversee how the Koch donor network’s contributions were spent.

Of course.

Joe Walsh is a blithering idiot, but he’s the Koch brothers’ blithering idiot.

.

Is there anything about Mitt’s financial life that’s above board?

by digby

Does everyone know this? I don’t think so:

When Mitt Romney faced questions on the campaign trail four years ago about investments in firms engaged in embryonic stem cell research, the presidential candidate had a ready explanation — he was unaware because his vast financial portfolio was under the control of an independent trustee. Last week, Romney’s campaign pulled out the same explanation when ABC News sought details about the candidate’s holdings in the Cayman Islands, a notorious offshore tax haven.

“We remind you that Gov. Romney does not choose anything; these are BLIND TRUSTS,” a campaign official wrote in an email.

But government ethics experts and election lawyers told ABC News that Romney’s trust might not be quite as blind as he has long maintained. That’s because Romney placed his quarter-billion dollar family fortune in the hands of his personal lawyer and longtime associate Bradford Malt.

Federal officeholders are required to either fully disclose all their financial holdings and any possible conflicts of interest, or place their holdings in a blind trust. Robert Kelner, a Republican election lawyer in Washington, D.C. with no ties to a current presidential campaign, explained the federal rules governing those blind trusts. “The Office of Government Ethics requires that a financial institution be appointed as the trustee and that the financial institution not be controlled by or have done business with the candidate,” said Kelner. “It would preclude you from hiring your favorite lawyer as the trustee.”

Is there even one thing about Mitt Romney that’s on the up and up? Good lord, from his bogus “retirment” from Bain to his taxes to this, everything he’s ever said about his finances is shady.

.

Meatheads for Brown

by digby

It looks like Scott Brown’s outreach to the meathead demographic has been very successful:

I

n a television advertisement running as recently this week, Sen. Scott Brown’s (R-Mass.) reelection campaign featured a union construction worker whose publicly accessible Facebook page is riddled with insults against Brown’s Democratic challenger Elizabeth Warren and President Barack Obama.

On one post made in August, well before Brown’s ad appeared, the worker, George Patriarca, calls Warren a “DOUCHEBAG.” On another he labels the president a “faggot,” and on a third he says, “there is a Muslim in the White House.”
[…]
Discussing his star turn on his Facebook page, Patriarca says that he “opened up a can of worms” with his union, the Sprinkler Fitters and Apprentices Local Union 550, which supports Warren.

“My intent was not to piss anyone off, but to do my due diligence … and some people got offended,” he writes.

Attempts to reach Patriarca for comment via his Facebook page and through his union got no response. The Brown campaign did not return a request for comment.

Patriarca’s views are available for perusal for anyone with a Facebook account, and from some of his posts, it is clear that he relishes his provocative online persona.

“I attended Brandeis,” he says underneath one photo. “Jew U. Great school. the people, not so much. One thing I learned is that Jews have a persecution complex and they hate themselves. That is why I believe they vote for liberals.”

Scott Brown must be so proud to have such supporters.

His union, by the way, has endorsed Warren. Unlike the corporate authoritarians, they do not suppress and threaten their members from expressing their political views. Of course, here in California, business groups have put a misleading proposition on the ballot trying to stop unions from participating in elections at all. Can’t be too careful.

.

The sniveling plutocrats need to calm down and get a hold of themselves

by digby

Yet another case of the vapors from a member of the oppressed 1%:

Most people think of bigotry only in terms of race, religion, ethnicity and sexual orientation. But at its core, bigotry simply is intolerance – which all too often leads to singling people out for attack based upon their group identity…
As the spending-driven debt crisis grows in America and among the 50 states, we would not accept such vilification toward the poor and elderly who consume taxpayer resources. We certainly would not accept such vilification toward the working class or minorities. So why do we tolerate the vilification of those most successful in America?

Lawd have mercy Miss Mellie, bring out the smellin’ salts — Ashley Wilkes is like to faint dead away!

…I made a conscious decision to no longer accept such prejudice in my life. Whenever someone would begin a joke that was clearly heading toward a racially focused end, I would stop them and say, “Please, I’m not interested in hearing that joke.” It was very uncomfortable at first. But I did it because this was a small thing that could help create a better culture.

Big of him. And he is certainly on the side of the angels on this one. Our history of slavery and apartheid is exactly like raising taxes on capital gains. Can’t we just end this cycle of cruelty once and for all?

Roy Edroso has some typically sage advice:

[T]o people like Tillman, every slight they suffer is the equivalent of the great injustices of history. If you can’t see that, you’re just a wealthist monster.

I advise Tillman to keep his eyes on the prize. Look for small victories. Maybe one day, with the support of some righteous paupers, a one-percenter will break the money line, and get a job at 7-11 or Denny’s. That may turn things around, and over time more and more of them will be able to enjoy the same living conditions, job security, and health care as the rest of us. I certainly look forward to it. The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.

My advice?

.