|
|
GOP Calling for the Murder of the Left
|
You would think that after incitements to take up arms against Democrats liike Gabby Giffords had such tragic consequences, it would take more than a year for the GOP’s hiatus on violent rhetoric to return. But you would be wrong.
Oklahoma’s first congressional district is represented by John Sullivan, a Republican. A week ago, Rep. Sullivan was riling up a crowd at a town hall meeting, talking about the Democrat’s dislike of Sen. Paul Ryan’s budget. Said the Congressman,
“I yell at them all the time, I grabbed one of them the other day and shook him and I’d love to get them to vote for it — boy I’d love that. You know but other than me going over there with a gun and holding it to their head and maybe killing a couple of them, I don’t think they’re going to listen unless they get beat.”
That’s right. In order to support the GOP agenda, we need to start killing off Democrats.
Again and again I ask, how do rational Republican constituents justify remaining a part of this party? What do they tell themselves that makes it okay that the party that speaks for them continues to call for murder or those who disagree with them? Where are the apologies on behalf of their fellows?
And without those apologies, without those remonstrances, how are the rest of us to believe at all that the GOP is not simply a party of hate, violence, greed, and anger?
What do you think? Click here to leave a comment: Comments (1)
________________________________________
If you like this post please share or vote for it below:
Twitter: Tweet
Stumble:
delicious:
reddit:
Digg:
________________________________________
If you like this blog please subscribe to read updates in a
feed reader (it's free!)
(what is a feed reader? )
or by email!
Thanks! We really appreciate all your support!
________________________________________
Related Posts:
- The GOP and the Youth Vote
- Mitt Romney and the Importance of Voting
- The GOP- Saving You From Your Raging Hormones
- New Hampshire GOP Protecting Wife Beating Husbands- Why?
- Tomorrow is Election Day
February 28, 2012
|
|
Good News for Romney?
|
On Sunday, Gov. Jan Brewer endorsed Mitt Romney for President. Romney has been falling steadily in the polls in both Michigan and Arizona, which vote tonight.
Romney’s campaign has become a disaster. He lost Iowa. He lost Minnesota. Although the Maine GOP initially claimed that he had won, it is increasingly looking as though Ron Paul actually beat Mitt Romney there as well.
While it had been long believed that Mitt Romney was the inevitable choice for the GOP, things have been bleak for the Romney campaign. However, the endorsement of Jan Brewer may go a long way to helping Romney scrape a win in Arizona.
But even if he DOES win Arizona, the tone of the Romney campaign has changed. Santorum is in in the lead, Ron Paul is energized and his supporters are motivated, and Newt Gingrich is still hanging around, waiting until Romney’s perceived lead is completely shattered in order to jump in and grab the contest by the horns.
So this latest endorsement is good news for Romney, but it’s not enough. The only good news that he really needs to hear is that he has won both Michigan and Arizona, and done so handily.
I doubt he’ll be getting that message tonight.
What do you think? Click here to leave a comment: Comments (0)
________________________________________
If you like this post please share or vote for it below:
Twitter: Tweet
Stumble:
delicious:
reddit:
Digg:
________________________________________
If you like this blog please subscribe to read updates in a
feed reader (it's free!)
(what is a feed reader? )
or by email!
Thanks! We really appreciate all your support!
________________________________________
Related Posts:
- Santorum in Michigan
- Mitt Romney’s Dog Problem
- The Mysterious Mitt
- Mitt Romney and Creative Accounting
- Sexism Week, Day Five: Mitt Romney
February 27, 2012
|
|
Santorum in Michigan
|
Tomorrow, voters in Michigan and Arizona will decide who they want to run in the Republican party against President Barack Obama.
And poor Mitt Romney… it doesn’t look like it’s going to be him.
Mitt Romney has spent most of his campaign as the assumed winner. Every few weeks, a “not-Romney” would surge into the lead, only to be revealed to be utterly insane or incapable and to slowly shut the doors on their headquarters. As more and more of the once broad Republican race bowed out, Romney’s inevitability seemed assured.
And then there was Santorum.
Santorum, who’s “Google problem” seemed insurmountable.
A few weeks ago, Rick Santorum surged into what seemed to be the lead. He won three contests in one night, despite that one had no delegates, and another was non-binding. And now he is consistently polling ahead of Romney in Michigan.
Michigan, one of the places that Mitt Romney claims to be “from.” And Michigan, with its base of blue collar Republicans and Christian conservatives, is pretty important to the GOP.
Santorum is even polling ahead of Romney in the national polls.
So are we looking at a Santorum ticket? Perhaps the voters of Michigan will let us know tomorrow which way the wind is blowing.
What do you think? Click here to leave a comment: Comments (0)
________________________________________
If you like this post please share or vote for it below:
Twitter: Tweet
Stumble:
delicious:
reddit:
Digg:
________________________________________
If you like this blog please subscribe to read updates in a
feed reader (it's free!)
(what is a feed reader? )
or by email!
Thanks! We really appreciate all your support!
________________________________________
Related Posts:
- Santorum Surges Through Iowa- New Hampshire Next?
- Slinging More Santorum
- Good News for Romney?
- Can Santorum Take Down Romney?
- Spreading Santorum All Over the Ladies
February 24, 2012
|
|
Be The Change Friday: Spring Cleaning
|
March is right around the corner, and for a lot of us that means it’s time to open the windows, evacuate the winter dust bunnies, and get ready for spring.
This year, take some time in your cleaning process to help make your world a little better.
Instead of toxic chemicals, choose green and renewable cleaning products. It’s amazing how much you can actually clean with a little lemon juice and baking soda. Rather than add toxins to your water and landfills, use products that don’t damage the environment.
Also, as you clean, consider what you can downsize. Is there clothing you can donate to a local shelter? Are there canned goods you can donate to a local food pantry? Do you have any old books you can donate to a local school library? Blankets? Furniture? Shoes?
There are organizations all over the country, eager to accept your donations in order to help others maintain the basic necessities of life. You can use your spring cleaning as an opportunity- start spring off on the best moral, environmental, and charitable foot that you are able.
What do you think? Click here to leave a comment: Comments (0)
________________________________________
If you like this post please share or vote for it below:
Twitter: Tweet
Stumble:
delicious:
reddit:
Digg:
________________________________________
If you like this blog please subscribe to read updates in a
feed reader (it's free!)
(what is a feed reader? )
or by email!
Thanks! We really appreciate all your support!
________________________________________
Related Posts:
- Be The Change Friday- Donate Blood
- Be The Change Friday – Volunteer at a Soup Kitchen
- Be The Change Friday- Your Local Farmers Market
- Be the Change Friday: End of Year Giving
- Be The Change Friday- New Year’s Resolutions
February 23, 2012
|
|
A Victory for GLBT Students in Minnesota
|
Rep. Michele Bachmann’s congressional district has long been known as a GLBT youth disaster area. With a terrifyingly high rate of teen suicide, the Anoka-Hennepin school district has for the last eighteen years implemented a policy known locally as, “no promo homo.” The details of this policy made it impossible for teachers to intervene in the event of bullying when the victim was gay, or perceived to be gay. In fact, one survivor of routine abuse and bullying at school was told by her principal to retort to being called a “fat dyke” by saying, “I can lose the weight, but you’ll always be ugly.” The principal was unable to even use words that described homosexuality or homosexual slurs.
Finally, many suicides and countless events of horrific and institutionalized bullying later, the Anoka-Hennepin school board has finally lifted the policy. They have replaced it with the Respectful Learning Environment-Curriculum policy, which allows teachers to have conscientious discussions with their students in “a balanced and impartial manner.”
While this is a huge victory for the victims of anti-gay bullying in one of Minnesota’s largest school districts, the language of the new policy is still troubling. It implies that by being “pro-LGBT” a teacher might, somehow, be able to turn their students gay. It might allow for the freedom to help students in need, but it is indicative of a prevailing attitude of the same homophobia that led to the disastrous policy eighteen years ago.
This is a huge step for the Anoka-Hennepin school district, but it is not enough. Hopefully it will not be another eighteen years before they learn to accept their LGBT students and faculty without bigotry or bias.
What do you think? Click here to leave a comment: Comments (0)
________________________________________
If you like this post please share or vote for it below:
Twitter: Tweet
Stumble:
delicious:
reddit:
Digg:
________________________________________
If you like this blog please subscribe to read updates in a
feed reader (it's free!)
(what is a feed reader? )
or by email!
Thanks! We really appreciate all your support!
________________________________________
Related Posts:
- Disabled Teen Gang Raped in NY Classroom
- Why the Chicago Teacher Strike SHOULD be Good for Obama… but Isn’t
- In Georgia High School, Prom is Still “Whites Only”
- Be The Change Friday: Say Something
- University of North Carolina Takes Victim Bashing To A Whole New Level
February 22, 2012
|
|
Santorum’s Anti-Woman Agenda
|
Rick Santorum has quite a habit of saying offensive things about women, their health concerns, and their control over their own bodies.
He has stated his position on contraceptives- he’s against them.
His position on abortion is clear, too. He’s for banning it completely, even in the instance of rape. He considers a pregnancy that is the result of a rape to be a “blessing,” a turn-lemons-into-lemonades scenario.
His latest statements are yet more out of touch.
Rick Santorum has expressed his belief that prenatal care should not be required for employee health plans. Why? Because according to Santorum, prenatal care leads to abortions.
That’s right. Rick Santorum thinks that women should have no access to medication to keep them from getting pregnant. No right to terminate a pregnancy, even if they’ve been raped. And no access to the care that would show them if they or their baby’s life were in danger once they DID become pregnant.
In short, he wants women helpless and powerless in their own reproductive life. I imagine “terrified” is also a goal, if women are constantly terrified they might have an easier time holding that aspirin between their knees.
Welcome back to the 19th century, home of Rick Santorum.
What do you think? Click here to leave a comment: Comments (5)
________________________________________
If you like this post please share or vote for it below:
Twitter: Tweet
Stumble:
delicious:
reddit:
Digg:
________________________________________
If you like this blog please subscribe to read updates in a
feed reader (it's free!)
(what is a feed reader? )
or by email!
Thanks! We really appreciate all your support!
________________________________________
Related Posts:
- Santorum’s Words of Wisdom for Victims of Rape
- A Pre-Primary Note on Santorum
- Santorum Surges Through Iowa- New Hampshire Next?
- Rick Santorum’s Top Three Outrageous Positions of the Month
- Spreading Santorum All Over the Ladies
February 21, 2012
|
|
Banning Abortion in Iowa
|
Late last week, while women across the country were up in arms about the outrageous sexism going on in Washington over the issue of contraceptive care, even more drastic anti-woman legislation was being introduced in Iowa.
The Iowa GOP has introduced House File 2298, which is an outright and explicit ban on all abortions.
Be it to save the life of the pregnant woman, the result of a rape, or incest. No exceptions.
And any person who terminates a pregnancy would face up to life in prison.
One thing I can say for the Iowa GOP, at least they’re honest. At least they’re willing to stand up and say, “Women have no right to control their own reproduction, and if they try they’re criminals.”
You almost expect the riders of this bill to include criminal penalties for wives who neglect their “wifely duties.” and exemptions for the definition of “rape” if the man is married to his victim. Or worse, if he marries her after the rape.
Let’s call a spade a spade- the GOP doesn’t think that women have the same right to the control of their bodies that men enjoy. That men consider a right.
While the GOP pushes fetal personhood, it eliminates the personhood of women. As a woman, a pregnant woman, and a mother of girls, I for one am outraged and feel personally assaulted. And if you have a uterus, you should too.
What do you think? Click here to leave a comment: Comments (1)
________________________________________
If you like this post please share or vote for it below:
Twitter: Tweet
Stumble:
delicious:
reddit:
Digg:
________________________________________
If you like this blog please subscribe to read updates in a
feed reader (it's free!)
(what is a feed reader? )
or by email!
Thanks! We really appreciate all your support!
________________________________________
Related Posts:
- Violence Against Women Week: Day Three- Overturning Rape Convictions in California
- You Can’t Rape a Wife- Just Ask the GOP
- Female Legislators Fighting Back
- A “Pardon” in Afghanistan
- In North Carolina- It Takes One to Tango
February 20, 2012
|
|
Personhood in Virginia
|
The Virginia House of Delegates advanced a bill on Valentine’s Day that would define “personhood” as starting at the moment of conception. Which is to say, when a sperm meets an egg.
Sound familiar? It should. This is basically the same legislation that was voted down by Mississippi residents a few months ago. But the GOP anti-woman crusaders just won’t stop.
Unlike ant-choice activists in Mississippi, the Virginia GOP is hoping to accomplish this bit of legislation without letting such a pesky thing as public opinion or majority rule interfere.
This legislation would make most forms of birth control illegal. It would make a miscarriage a potential murder charge. It would, regardless of the intention of the legislators, ban IVF and stem cell research and treatment.
Democrats in the House of Delegates desperately tried to insert a measure into this bill that would allow for at least the continued protection of birth control. The GOP members voted it down.
This is not about who is and who is not a person. This is about the insanely “conservative” GOP actually controlling a woman’s reproductive life.
A uterus is not a governable state. It is a uterus. The government has no business dictating what must or may not occur in one.
What do you think? Click here to leave a comment: Comments (0)
________________________________________
If you like this post please share or vote for it below:
Twitter: Tweet
Stumble:
delicious:
reddit:
Digg:
________________________________________
If you like this blog please subscribe to read updates in a
feed reader (it's free!)
(what is a feed reader? )
or by email!
Thanks! We really appreciate all your support!
________________________________________
Related Posts:
- 2011 and the War on Women- Part Two
- Mississippi Legislators Continue “Personhood” Push
- Birth Control Is Not Murder
- Slavery: Finally in the Past?
- The Worst Affront Yet in the War on Women
February 17, 2012
|
|
Appropriate Witnesses for a Contraception Hearing
|
Yesterday, the House Oversight Committee held a hearing about the requirement by the Obama administration that contraceptive care be covered for employees.
Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi tweeted a photo of the panel of witnesses. Five men. No women. Testifying regarding the need (or, as they see it, lack of need) for contraceptive care.
The ranking Democrat on the committee had tried to include one woman on the panel, but GOP Chairman Issa rejected her, claiming, “As the hearing is not about reproductive rights and contraception but instead about the Administration’s actions as they relate to freedom of religion and conscience, he believes that Ms. Fluke is not an appropriate witness.”
Which meant, of course, that the only “appropriate witnesses” regarding a need for contraceptive care were men. No nuns, no female rabbis or pastors, not one woman of faith in this collection of bishops, rabbis, and priests. Not one person with a uterus.
The women on the panel, Rep. Carolyn Maloney and Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton walked out of the hearing in protest. Rep. Holmes Norton says she will not return, calling Rep. Issa’s chairmanship an “autocratic regime.”
This hearing, and all hearings regarding the issues of women’s health, are a sham unless there is some manner of representation for women. It is as simple as that.
What do you think? Click here to leave a comment: Comments (4)
________________________________________
If you like this post please share or vote for it below:
Twitter: Tweet
Stumble:
delicious:
reddit:
Digg:
________________________________________
If you like this blog please subscribe to read updates in a
feed reader (it's free!)
(what is a feed reader? )
or by email!
Thanks! We really appreciate all your support!
________________________________________
Related Posts:
- Debate 1: Who Won?
- Shutting Down the Government Over Contraceptives
- Banning Abortion in Iowa
- A Birth Control Reality Check
- Rush Limbaugh’s Non Apology
February 16, 2012
|
|
Sexism and the Politics of the Military
|
Recently, presidential hopeful Rick Santorum made some waves with his comments about women in the military. He claimed that the presence of women in the ranks made all servicemen and women less safe, because men would risk their lives in order to protect the women who served with them.
If only this were so. In fact, women in the military are much more likely to be attacked by their comrades in arms, sexually, than to be protected in almost any circumstance.
As more and more commentators blasted Santorum for this insanity, it was no surprise that the folks at Fox News would find a way to make Rick Santorum seem moderate.
Commentator Liz Trotta one-upped the former senator. Trotta derided the decision by the Department of Defense to increase spending on support programs for military women who have been victims of sexual assault. Her argument against increased spending to support the brave women who suffer at the hands of their allegedly protective male counterparts? “What did they expect?”
Apparently, enlisting to serve one’s country puts a woman in the same category of self-victimization as drinking heavily at a party, or walking alone at night.
No victim is ever to blame. Perhaps least of all those who become victims when all they wanted was to defend their country.
What do you think? Click here to leave a comment: Comments (0)
________________________________________
If you like this post please share or vote for it below:
Twitter: Tweet
Stumble:
delicious:
reddit:
Digg:
________________________________________
If you like this blog please subscribe to read updates in a
feed reader (it's free!)
(what is a feed reader? )
or by email!
Thanks! We really appreciate all your support!
________________________________________
Related Posts:
- Can Santorum Take Down Romney?
- Michele Bachmann, President or Prophet?
- Spreading Santorum All Over the Ladies
- A Pre-Primary Note on Santorum
- Santorum’s Words of Wisdom for Victims of Rape
Next Page »



