Goddess Praise
- "Dear Echidne, I read your blog all the time! I love it."
- Katha Pollitt, the Nation
- 2005 Koufax Award Winner: Most Deserving of Wider Recognition
- Yes, you read it right. I won.
- DONATE: FEED THE GODDESS!
Links
- A Blog Around the Clock
- Adventus
- Agitprop
- Alas, A Blog
- Alternet
- The American Street
- And Another Thing
- Angry Black Bitch
- Baghdad Burning
- Best of Both Worlds
- Bitch. Ph.D.
- blackfeminism.org
- Blog Sisters
- Blue and White
- Bouphonia
- Broadsheet
- Bush v Choice
- Conservatives for American Values
- Crooks and Liars
- Daddy Dialectic
- Dependable Renegade
- Devil's Dictionary Defiled
- Diary of an Anxious Black Woman
- Donna's Place
- Eschaton
- eteraz.org
- Ezra Klein
- Fact-esque, A Reality-Based Blog
- Faux Real Tho!
- the f-word
- Feminist Blogs
- Feminist Campus
- Feminist Law Professors
- Feministe
- Feministing.com
- First Draft
- Frogblog
- Fuming Mucker
- TheGarance.com
- Girlistic.com
- GOTV
- Graphic Truth
- Heavens to Mergatroyd
- Hecate
- The Heretik
- Huffington Post
- Hullabaloo (Digby)
- I Blame The Patriarchy
- Informed Comment
- James Wolcott
- Jesus' General
- Katha Pollitt Dot Com
- Kathryn Cramer
- La Chola
- Laura, 11D
- Lance Mannion
- Lawyers, Guns and Money
- The Left Coaster
- The Liberal Avenger
- Liberal Oasis
- Liberty Street
- Mad Melancholic Feminista
- Majikthise
- Matthew Yglesias
- Maya's Granny
- Multi Medium
- Net Politik
- The Next HurraH
- News From the Front - Fair And Balanced
- No Capital
- Nothing New Under the Sun
- Nyarlathoteps' Miscellany
- Oh No A Woc PhD
- olvlzl
- One Good Thing
- Orcinus
- Our Word
- Pam's House Blend
- Pandagon
- Paralysis of the Mind
- Pen-Elayne on the Web
- Pensito Review
- pesky'apostrophe
- Pharyngula
- Pinko Feminist Hellcat
- Preemptive Karma
- Prometheus6
- Pseudo-Adrienne's Liberal-Feminist Bias
- Raw Story
- The Reaction
- Rebel Dad
- RH Reality Check
- Rising Hegemon
- Roger Ailes
- Rox Populi
- The Rude Pundit
- Science and Politics
- scribblingwoman
- Shakespeare's Sister
- Shrillblog
- Sivacracy.Net
- skippy the bush kangaroo
- slacktivist
- Sour Duck
- Spiiderweb
- Spocko's Brain
- Steve Bates
- Stone Court
- Suburban Guerrilla
- TalkLeft
- TAPPED
- TBogg
- Think Progress
- Unclaimed Territory - By Glenn Greenwald
- The Vanity Press
- Welcome to the Sideshow (Avedon)
- What She Said
- Where in Washington, D.C...
- Zuky
- DONATE: FEED THE GODDESS!
The Liberal Coalition
Archives
- 11/01/2003 - 12/01/2003
- 12/01/2003 - 01/01/2004
- 01/01/2004 - 02/01/2004
- 02/01/2004 - 03/01/2004
- 03/01/2004 - 04/01/2004
- 04/01/2004 - 05/01/2004
- 05/01/2004 - 06/01/2004
- 06/01/2004 - 07/01/2004
- 07/01/2004 - 08/01/2004
- 08/01/2004 - 09/01/2004
- 09/01/2004 - 10/01/2004
- 10/01/2004 - 11/01/2004
- 11/01/2004 - 12/01/2004
- 12/01/2004 - 01/01/2005
- 01/01/2005 - 02/01/2005
- 02/01/2005 - 03/01/2005
- 03/01/2005 - 04/01/2005
- 04/01/2005 - 05/01/2005
- 05/01/2005 - 06/01/2005
- 06/01/2005 - 07/01/2005
- 07/01/2005 - 08/01/2005
- 08/01/2005 - 09/01/2005
- 09/01/2005 - 10/01/2005
- 10/01/2005 - 11/01/2005
- 11/01/2005 - 12/01/2005
- 12/01/2005 - 01/01/2006
- 01/01/2006 - 02/01/2006
- 02/01/2006 - 03/01/2006
- 03/01/2006 - 04/01/2006
- 04/01/2006 - 05/01/2006
- 05/01/2006 - 06/01/2006
- 06/01/2006 - 07/01/2006
- 07/01/2006 - 08/01/2006
- 08/01/2006 - 09/01/2006
- 09/01/2006 - 10/01/2006
- 10/01/2006 - 11/01/2006
- 11/01/2006 - 12/01/2006
- 12/01/2006 - 01/01/2007
- 01/01/2007 - 02/01/2007
- 02/01/2007 - 03/01/2007
- 03/01/2007 - 04/01/2007
- 04/01/2007 - 05/01/2007
- 05/01/2007 - 06/01/2007
- 06/01/2007 - 07/01/2007
- 07/01/2007 - 08/01/2007
- 08/01/2007 - 09/01/2007
- 09/01/2007 - 10/01/2007
- 10/01/2007 - 11/01/2007
- 11/01/2007 - 12/01/2007
- 12/01/2007 - 01/01/2008
- 01/01/2008 - 02/01/2008
- 02/01/2008 - 03/01/2008
- 03/01/2008 - 04/01/2008
- 04/01/2008 - 05/01/2008
- 05/01/2008 - 06/01/2008
- 06/01/2008 - 07/01/2008
- 07/01/2008 - 08/01/2008
- 08/01/2008 - 09/01/2008
- 09/01/2008 - 10/01/2008
- 10/01/2008 - 11/01/2008
- 11/01/2008 - 12/01/2008
- 12/01/2008 - 01/01/2009
- 01/01/2009 - 02/01/2009
- 02/01/2009 - 03/01/2009
- 03/01/2009 - 04/01/2009
- 04/01/2009 - 05/01/2009
- 05/01/2009 - 06/01/2009
- 06/01/2009 - 07/01/2009
- 07/01/2009 - 08/01/2009
Powered by
RSSify at WCC
ATOM Feed
OPINIONS OF ECHIDNE OF THE SNAKES, A MINOR GREEK GODDESS. She can be reached at: ECHIDNE-OF-THE-SNAKES.COM
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
Why Does Amnesty International Hate America?
George Bush finds Amnesty International's recent report absurd:
It sounds like someone trying to translate something political to a class of five-year olds, doesn't it? But only two years ago Donald Rumsfeld thought highly of the Amnesty International's reports on Iraq:
It's all about expediency, of course, but it would be fun to ask the administration why Amnesty International nails it when it comes to Iraq but is totally absurd when it comes to Guantanamo Bay. Soon Amnesty International will be called part of the international terrorist network, I suppose. Unless it digs up something useful in Iran. |
Deep Throat
The Watergate source whose identity has so far not been widely known:
I don't really like the handle and I have no idea if Felt's claim is true. It probably is. I only want someone to do the same thing for us today. Say, concerning the 2004 elections. ---- Via Attaturk on Eschaton. |
Today's Action Alert
Today's Action comes from NOW: ************************************************************* The National Organization for Women proudly salutes the introduction of the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2005. Introduced in the House on Thursday, May 26, this is the first legislation to explicitly include transgender individuals in civil rights law. The bill is designed to help protect against bias crimes based on gender identity, sexual orientation, gender and disability and also adds gender and gender identity to the Hate Crimes Statistics Act. *** The chief sponsors of the House bill are Representatives John Conyers Jr., D-Mich., Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, Barney Frank, D-Mass., Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., Christopher Shays, R-Conn., and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis. NOW applauds this bipartisan effort as a further step toward eradicating injustice in our society. *** "This legislation will have a huge legal and educational impact as we work together to stop the attacks in our society against the LGBT community," Vives said. "We will be working with our champions in the Senate and expect them to introduce a similar bill with equally broad inclusion for gender identity. With the passage of this legislation, we can take down these and other barriers of discrimination and achieve our goal of full inclusion—for all people—in our society." **************************************************** Write to your representative and urge her or him to vote for this legislation. Thanks for taking today's action. |
Why Women Won't Compete
According to the great expert, John Tierney, of the once-respectable New York Times:
Yes, I was expecting the evo-psychos to rear their ugly heads any time soon after the last Tierney column on women. Note how far into the quote you have to read before you come to the these little words:
It's a theory, my friends, and one that we cannot prove or disprove, really. There are no archeological remains that could help us here, no paleoanthological findings, nothing. Your guess is as good as mine. Or probably better, given that I'm just an amateur and not a hi-faluting evolutionary psychologist. But let me just point out that the traditional way of looking at the sexual selection in this genre assumes that the competition is over when a sperm has been deposited. It completely skips the nine months that follow and the years that take before the fertilized egg has become an equally fertile human adult. The assumption is that none of this long time period involves any competition whatsoever, at least not by the women. But that's all it is: an assumption. And an assumption that makes women look like they don't compete. Besides, the arguments presented above are circular. The men that women might have had quick flings with must have "presumably" been with men who have good genes and such men must have been good Scrabble players or something. Maybe the women had their little flings with guys who had big soulful eyes and who were good at listening when you moaned and complained about the thug you were usually saddled with? Maybe these guys had gentle fingers and nimble tongues and knew a better way of cooking mammoth? Who knows what the prehistoric women thought. Note also how Tierney discounts the idea that we might have inculcated anti-competitive values in women by the way girls are traditionally brought up (by likening discrimination to a simple leveling of the playing field), and he doesn't even question the assumption that all Scrabble players had the same opportunities to dedicate time and money to this one hobby. Tierney could have looked at competitions of other types, too, such as the pie-baking ones or the ones for the best roses or whatever, and I bet that he would have found very little support for his theory. I'm a believer in evolution in general because I can see the evidence for it. When it comes to evolutionary psychology I'm a lot more cynical, and the main reason is the near-total absence of clear evidence for the most misogynistic arguments possible. It seems to me that most evo-psychos attempt to explain the status quo as impossible to change and in that sense they all have wingnut (caveman?) axes to hone. Never mind that the society has changed drastically over centuries, evo-psychos always stress its unchanging nature. The wingnuts have two major approaches to the "Woman Question". One is the use of fundamentalist religion to subjugate women. The other one is pseudoscience* of various types, from Freudianism to this crap. Be forewarned. ---- *By pseudoscience I mean theories which look scientific but which don't lend themselves to proper scientific testing. |
Unfair Advantages in Sports
Amanda at Pandagon has an interesting post on the question whether women have unfair advantages in some sports such as certain kinds of car racing:
Amanda notes that Gordon modified his comments later on. But the interesting dilemma remains: Should we equalize people by weight to make sports fairer? Or by upper body strength? Or by innate speed? Nope, let's not go there, I bet I hear you mutter. Though we already do this in many sports such as boxing, wrestling and weight lifting where weight determines the class one competes in, we tend not to do this where the unfair advantage favors those who have traditionally done well in the sport, and that is mostly men. The Danica Patrick case is interesting because it's the opposite of this usual case and in some ways a test case for spotting possible sexism. I would think that jockeys are also worried about the influx of women into their sport as weight is important for jockeys and women are, on average, lighter. After sparring against partners twice as heavy as I am I tend to favor the idea of weight categories. It was fun to beat someone that big but my back didn't agree in the long run. It would have been completely adequate to wipe the floor with guys my size... Mostly just kidding. |
Monday, May 30, 2005
Garden Blogging, Part II
|
For Memorial Day
Two poems, one from WWI, one from WWII, with very different messages. First Wilfred Owen:
And for a very different view, the poem written by John Gillespie Maggee who was killed in action at the age of 19 while serving with the Royal Canadian Air Force. He wrote this poem some days before his death:
|
Sunday, May 29, 2005
David Brooks on the Class Struggle
According to David Brooks, if Karl Marx came back from the realm of the dead he'd yell and scream about the American class struggle, not that David Brooks believes in a class struggle (he believes in the OT god). But in any case, Marx would point out that it's the educated elite that holds the power in the U.S. now, the educated elite which has destroyed the concept of family (read: patriarchal family) and it's the educated elite which runs this country now. And, ta-ram-pam-pam! This educated elite consists of us latte-sipping-ivory-tower liberals! Yes, even though the wingnuts are in power everywhere you look, the real power is held by people like Echidne of the snakes! So Brooks is right: there is a problem with class mobility in this country. And then he's horribly wrong: class is about money, not about the lefty values by some of those who are educated. He even admits as much in his column:
It's the moneyed class that does this, David, not the educated class, though the two overlap. Check what you say yourself in this quote: the families of the students entering Harvard are wealthy, on average. The wealth was there first, David. Brooks is trying to make a right-wing populist case here: Let's get rid of the educated liberals and the system will be fairer! Indeed, he appears to advocate getting rid of education as a way to make the system fairer. History doesn't support David in this assertion, and in any case the educated liberals are not in power right now. The wingnuts are, David, and you're their poster child for being educated and wingnut. |
Bad Uses of Statistics
John Tierney gives us examples to ponder over in his latest NYT column (the one that should be Katha Pollitt's if there was any justice on this earth). The column is about how peaceful the world really is today, compared to past centuries:
Can you spot the statistical mistakes here? There are at least two: first, it's incorrect to calculate the probability of dying in a war by including in the base all the people who lived in areas with no wars, and that's what Tierney's two percent figure uses. He then compares this to the findings from one archeological dig from one place. There's no way of knowing how representative that dig is of the general time and place. The second one is the whole last paragraph which compares oranges to sausages in so many ways that I'm exhausted in just trying to list them. So I won't. Tierney's column is correct in one sense, though. The world has become safer for many individuals over time, and one of the main reasons for that is something Tierney doesn't mention: the effect liberal and progressive ideas have had on social justice, education and opportunities for all. |
Emily Dickinson
On the question what we should know and how the media should tell it? Tell all the Truth but tell it slant - Success in Circuit lies Too bright for our infirm delight The Truth's superb surprise As Lightning to the Children eased With explanation kind The Truth must dazzle gradually Or every man be blind - |
Saturday, May 28, 2005
On Fear
I had one of those nights when all my troubles seemed to suddenly rear up and loom enormous in the horizon. There are so many of them that I can't squeeze through into the rest of my life. This happens when I have overdozed on news of a certain kind, in this case the stories about the coming avian flu pandemic. Several blogs had reader comments on the bird flu and the chance that it might hit home (wherever home might be), and what was most noticeable about some of the comments was the fear people feel and the need to know what to do. What to do? Should we stock medications, food, water? Should we avoid all other breathing creatures? Should we die now so that we won't have to go through this fear again? Terrorism threats have the same effect on us. The effect is to make us panic and to act in unwise ways, such as cornering the market on duct tape. All this is understandable and human; we need to feel some amount of control over our destinies and perfect passivity doesn't feel like control. Yet the things that we could do are either ineffective or unethical, on the whole. Some of those things make us look greedy and uncaring and even vicious; hoarding antibiotics when others need them now would be one of those. But I can still understand all this, this human mess of fear and the desire to overcome it. Most of these types of fear are illogical in the probability sense. You, my dear reader, are more likely to die because you didn't use a seat belt or because you smoked or drank or ate the wrong things than in the hands of a terrorist or in the grips of the avian flu. But these other kinds of killers get us one by one, almost invisibly, and besides, we are used to being killed by them. Avian flu or SARS or terrorists are new threats, unknown threats and it is this that frightens us as much as their suddenness. But mainly, I believe, we fear them because they make us feel so passive, so "out-of-control". Hence the out-of-control reactions. Fear of flying has similar roots. Who cares if cars are less safe than planes; at least in a car you feel in control, even if you're doing backseat driving. Now combine the fear of flying with the fear of terrorism and a smidgen of avian flu fear and what do you get? I don't really even want to think about that one. None of this aims to belittle the importance of preparing for a possible bird flu pandemic. It would be criminal not to prepare for it, but the job belongs to the health care systems of the affected countries, not to individuals who have been given no official advice. Still, we will never beat all the diseases that nature throws into our face and we will not get out of here alive. In one sense we are indeed totally at the mercy of external events, totally passive, flotsam and jetsam being tossed here and there by the sinister forces of nature. But nature gives us all the good things, too, and if we are careful and clever (and lucky) we can surf her waves without getting caught in the first big one. At a minimum, we can focus on worrying about those things which we can affect rather than tearing our minds apart with all those what-ifs. So that's what I did last night, worried about the things I can affect, and stayed wide awake until dawn. I have to work a little bit more on the ending to this story. |
In Memoriam
Friday, May 27, 2005
Friday Embroidery Blogging
|
Billmon's Take On Laura Bush's Visit
It's a good one. He builds up a story by using nothing but snippets from various newspaper stories and one quote from his own archives, this one:
That's it, the plan in a wingnutshell, and the reason why I don't get very excited when Laura Bush gives speeches on women's rights in the Middle East. She's probably quite sincere, but she has no power to make any of these things real. And at home women's rights count only as a device for getting the wingnut masses really outraged. To fight against those rights. What's worse, linking women's rights with the rest of the empire's agenda is bad news for women in the Middle East. Even suggesting that equality might be a good thing will make you look like a pro-Bush colonizer. Feminism is now just another arm of the American Empire, and the date when women in those countries will have equal rights has thereby been postponed by a few millennia. Or so I think. |
Ahnuld and the Pothole
California governor Arnold Schwartzenegger has been filling potholes as part of his campaign to improve transportation in his state. Too bad that the pothole he filled had been dug up beforehand so that there would be one to fill:
Well, that's how it's done in the movies, so it's not Arnold's fault, really. Though there is the question whether taxpayers have to pay for the digging of the pothole as well as its filling. The governor's communication director argues that this event is not paid from the state funds, but
That last sentence is so good it deserves to be repeated:
Heh. |
Oh Why, Oh Why, O....
Did I ever leave Ohio? Not that I've ever lived in Ohio, but it sounds like a fun place. First all the trouble with organizing and monitoring an election and now this coin collection fiasco. It seems that Ohio's Bureau of Workers' Compensation has invested in rare coins as a way to hedge its investments in stocks and bonds. Sadly, though not perhaps inexplicably, some of the coins have gone a-missing, about ten million dollars worth. And the culprit appears to be:
I know that this is all old news and has been widely discussed in the lefty blogosphere. But the sum of ten million dollars is new and makes even a goddess perk up her ears. I have an excellent collection of U.S. quarters, the new ones. Could I interest some other state government in it, what do you think? If not that, then what about genuine goddess toenail clippings? |
Thursday, May 26, 2005
Women in the Military - Take Three and Wrap
For the time being, anyway. Those who don't want women anywhere near the frontlines lost this one, mostly because we don't have enought cannon fodder to begin with:
But, as the article I quote notes, we still have the "don't ask, don't tell" inanity operating. |
Lethargy
Can you help me with this: Are the politics really boring right now, slow and sloppy like cold oat meal porridge? Or is it me who needs to take a break from all the ranting and raving? I keep cruising the net and looking in all the usual places and get no rise whatsoever in my body temperature. That rise is necessary fuel for writing about the issues. It could be just the weather. Being rained on nonstop for a week does something to the very bones which is not pleasant. And to the bricks in my front porch. I had someone come soliciting yesterday and when I opened the door Hank snuck through between my legs, in order to slobber the solicitor with dog kisses. But the solicitor, being deathly scared of dogs, leapt backwards and landed on the bottom steps of my front stairs. Which promptly gave way. Now I have a big pile of rain-sodden bricks where there used to be some neat steps. I should go out and put some big warning signs up but I'm too lethargic for even that. A possible lawsuit when the next solicitor trips and falls would at least spice up my life a bit. The last and most frightening explanation for my political lethargy is that I have just gotten so used to the deaths in Iraq and the outrages in the U.S. Congress that I need a stronger and stronger fix to get going. Please tell me it ain't so. |
Weird
This is weird:
And by weird I mean the behavior of Judge Bradford. Just imagine this: replace "Wiccan" with "fundamentalist Christian" and see how the whole thing would read. Sounds like another activist judge to me. |
It's That Time Again!
The time to notice, with great astonishment, how few women there are as opinion columnists in major newspapers, including the New York Times. When the astonishment has abated a little, it's time to ponder the possible reasons for this drought of female voices and to conclude that the reasons they are unfathomable. And then it's time to gently point out that maybe there just aren't enough good female writers (though there's no glass ceiling against them any longer, no, and though evo-psychos argue that women are better at writing than men). Then, finally, it's time to set the topic aside until it's needed again because of low readership figures at some near future date. That sounds bitter, doesn't it? Well, I've only been a blogger for eighteen months or so, and during this time I've gone through four waves of this crap. Hence the bitterness. Also because Mr. Tierney was hired by the Times and he's no great writer. Neither is Bobo Brooks. But there are some truly great female political writers out there: Katha Pollitt, Molly Ivins, Barbara Ehrenreich, yet none of them are deemed good enough for the Times. My explanation for the lack of women's voices in the media is that those who have the power to decide on these things regard being a woman similar to being a bespectacled libertarian from SE Maine. In other words, "women" are seen as a specific subgroup of possible voices, on par with minor political groupings. One of those "women" is then plenty for the New York Times, or any other self-respecting major media outlet. But in reality women are the majority, of course, and doing what these guys are doing is just plain silly. It's tokenism. It's equally silly to hire women as interpreters of the great womandom, and that's the other way this game is being played: A woman is hired to write, but only on what women think, or to interpret this weird feminine species for the rest of us normal beings. In both variations of the game, women lose; in the first because how many bespectacled libertarians from SE Maine do you really want to read, and in the second because a few interpreters of the tribe is plenty. So I'm bitter. In a just system it would be me pontificating on the opinion pages of the Times. Or at least it wouldn't be Bobo and Tierney. |
Today's Action Alert
Someone at Atrios suggested that we let the editor at the Washington Post know what we think of today's editorial: ************************** 'American Gulag' Thursday, May 26, 2005; Page A26 IT'S ALWAYS SAD when a solid, trustworthy institution loses its bearings and joins in the partisan fracas that nowadays passes for political discourse. It's particularly sad when the institution is Amnesty International, which for more than 40 years has been a tough, single-minded defender of political prisoners around the world and a scourge of left- and right-wing dictators alike. True, Amnesty continues to keep track of the world's political prisoners, as it has always done, and its reports remain a vital source of human rights information. But lately the organization has tended to save its most vitriolic condemnations not for the world's dictators but for the United States. That vitriol reached a new level this week when, at a news conference held to mark the publication of Amnesty's annual report, the organization's secretary general, Irene Khan, called the U.S. detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the "gulag of our times." In her written introduction to the report, Ms. Khan also mentioned only two countries at length: Sudan and the United States, the "unrivalled political, military and economic hyper-power," which "thumbs its nose at the rule of law and human rights." Like Amnesty, we, too, have written extensively about U.S. prisoner abuse at Guantanamo Bay, in Afghanistan and in Iraq. We have done so not only because the phenomenon is disturbing in its own right but also because it gives undemocratic regimes around the world an excuse to justify their own use of torture and indefinite detention and because it damages the U.S. government's ability to promote human rights. But we draw the line at the use of the word "gulag" or at the implication that the United States has somehow become the modern equivalent of Stalin's Soviet Union. Guantanamo Bay is an ad hoc creation, designed to contain captured enemy combatants in wartime. Abuses there -- including new evidence of desecrating the Koran -- have been investigated and discussed by the FBI, the press and, to a still limited extent, the military. The Soviet gulag, by contrast, was a massive forced labor complex consisting of thousands of concentration camps and hundreds of exile villages through which more than 20 million people passed during Stalin's lifetime and whose existence was not acknowledged until after his death. Its modern equivalent is not Guantanamo Bay, but the prisons of Cuba, where Amnesty itself says a new generation of prisoners of conscience reside; or the labor camps of North Korea, which were set up on Stalinist lines; or China's laogai , the true size of which isn't even known; or, until recently, the prisons of Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Worrying about the use of a word may seem like mere semantics, but it is not. Turning a report on prisoner detention into another excuse for Bush-bashing or America-bashing undermines Amnesty's legitimate criticisms of U.S. policies and weakens the force of its investigations of prison systems in closed societies. It also gives the administration another excuse to dismiss valid objections to its policies as "hysterical." ********************************* Write and tell the Post that they're 100% wrong. Editorial Policy Letters must be exclusive to The Washington Post, and must include the writer's home address and home and business telephone numbers. (Letters via regular mail should also be signed.) Because of space limitations, those published are subject to abridgment. Although we are unable to acknowledge those letters we cannot publish, we appreciate the interest and value the views of those who take the time to send us their comments. Letters Via E-Mail Send e-mail letters to letters@washpost.com. Do not send attachments; they will not be read. Regular Mail Letters should sent to: Letters to the Editor The Washington Post 1150 15th Street Northwest Washington, DC 20071 |
Wednesday, May 25, 2005
Priscilla Owen
The Owen confirmation is part of the whole filibuster deal. Too bad, as Owen surely is an extraordinarily wingnutty judge:
Owen is going to sit on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, which is already a most wingnutty court. So in some ways Owen can't wreak as much havoc as she'd like to. She's simply adding her conservative stamp to many others there. But she's being placed with a view towards a future Supreme Court nomination, I fear. And so are the two other wingnut judges that are being given an up-and-down vote. I've been looking very hard for examples of a nominee which would be extraordinary enough to allow filibustering if these three are just garden variety wingnuts. Attila the Hun? Nah. |
More on Embryo Adoptions
I recently wrote on this blog that the U.S. government gives out grant money to organizations who are willing to do community awareness on embryo adoption, i.e., the implantation of extra embryos from fertility clinics. The pro-life movement has a problem with the whole fertility clinic phenomenom. On the one hand, here are these firms doing exactly what the pro-lifers want: creating babies. On the other hand, the process of creating these babies leaves many leftover embryos. Because the pro-life movement defines life as beginning when the sperm and the ovum meet (or, as one male writer on the topic describes it, when the sperm "pierces" the ovum) the leftover embryos constitute pre-born children to the pro-lifers, though pre-born children which happen to be frozen. One organization offering embryo adoptions, Nightlight Christian Adoptions, actually calls them snowflakes. The organization's website has this advertisement:
The website is an odd mixture pro-life statements and others which come across as describing the embryos as building material for future babies. I'm disturbed by this. Are all these embryos pre-born babies as this part says:
Or are they really seen as just embryos as this parts suggests:
This sounds like moral relativism and is not in accordance with proper pro-life sentiments. Embryos should be shipped in units of one, to guarantee maximum chance of life for each embryo. Anything short of this is disrespectful towards the pre-born babies. The costs of these embryo adoptions are borne by the adopting families and come to about seven thousand dollars and up. A 2001 article in the National Review Online about the Snowflakes Program I describe here has a fetching headline:
The statistics given in the article suggest, though, that less than one in ten of these frozen little Americans were successfully converted into the kinds of Americans the pro-lifers don't care about: post-born ones. The hope offered is only partial, it seems. |
Blackwell's Madrasa
The writer Jeff Horwitz went to school to learn how to make campuses havens for wingnuts and then wrote an article about it for the Salon. What's interesting about the school he chose is that it's the same one Jeff Gannon went to in order to learn how to get a White House press pass without having any journalistic training or experience. The school, called the Leadership Institute, is run by Morton Blackwell, better known as the wingnut who made those Purple Heart Band-Aids that conservatives then used to mock John Kerry. Blackwell is not a kind and gentle soul, and his latest project is to make sure young Americans leave college more conservative than they enter it. And what does Blackwell's school teach the young activists? Here is an example:
Blackwell also gives the students some deeper advice:
Thus, the campus is taken back into wingnuttia, book by book, computer by computer, building by building, right? Well, what really matters in all this is money. The conservative organizations are top-down and shower the students they find with enormous resources. The liberal/progressive organizations are bottom-up and give the students very little help. If this will not change campuses may indeed be added to the realm of wingnuttia. Are you reading, Democratic party? |
Tuesday, May 24, 2005
More on the Filibuster Compromise
Dwight Meredith on the Wampum picks out the crucial question in determining whether the deal is any good for the Democrats: Who is the least extreme nominee for whom a filibuster has been determined to be justified? And we don't know the answer to this, which means that we don't really know what the deal means until we see what happens with the next three nominees. |
Today's Action Alert
Today's Action comes from NRDC. ************************* The House version of the Defense Authorization bill could include language exempting the Defense Department from key environmental statutes. Urge your representative to vote against these dangerous and unnecessary exemptions. Here's a sample letter: Dear Representative: I urge you to vote to reject the Department of Defense's request for exemptions from public health and environmental laws. Specifically, please do not exempt the Pentagon from the Clean Air Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) or the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) during consideration of the Defense Authorization bill. The president already has the authority to waive these laws for national security reasons. But the Defense Department has yet to request any waiver, and has made no case to Congress for blanket waivers that could endanger public health. In the end, our military families who live in and around bases would suffer the most. Local communities also would be adversely affected as they are left to foot the bill for cleanup or deal with permanent blight. Again, I urge you to protect America's military families and other communities and uphold our environmental laws. Please vote "No" on language that would exempt the Pentagon from these important public health statues. Sincerely, ************************************ Thanks for taking today's action. |
Echidne's Advice Column
I took a vacation yesterday from blogging by going down into the dark cave I call my basement and spending some time there with my inner washerwoman and a mountain of laundry. Then I shoveled all last winter's doghair and snake scales into one big pile and threw it over my neighbor's fence. There! Life is now so much sweeter as well as containing more clothes. Vacations from politics are also a must. Else one starts growling at the other shoppers in the supermarket or begins to hoard weaponry in the back of the station wagon. Most people in the three-dimensional space we call reality are pretty nice, and not at all interested in politics. It's easy to forget these truths when one spends as much time in wingnuttia as I do. For these reasons, my unsolicited advice today is to make sure that you visit apolitical life once in a while. Doing laundry isn't a bad idea, either. |
Monday, May 23, 2005
The Filibuster Deal
A deal was produced tonight and we were deprived of the fun of watching an all-out attack by the wingnuts. You can read about the deal at Kos. He also has some interesting responses to the deal, including one from Dr. Dobson, the "you-have-a-friend-in-wingnuts" guy. The burning question is whether this deal is a good thing for the Democrats, and the answer is whatever you believe. The wingnuts are not happy with it but this doesn't necessarily mean that our side somehow won. The wingnuts have not been happy with anything since the Inquisition was disbanded. But their anger is a sign that things could have gone even worse for the Democrats. On the other hand, one could argue that the Democrats caved in, once again, and that this is not what the country needs. On balance, I believe that it could have been worse, but I'm no more optimistic about the future than I was this morning. |
More Polling News
Bush is still doing very poorly, in fact, he might win the lowest ratings of any president ever if he goes on the same way. Only 33% of those questioned in a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll like his Social Security proposal, and only 40% think that he's doing a good job domestically. Slightly over one half of all the respondents approve Bush's war on terrorism, probably because there has been no recent attack on the U.S. ground. It's fair to say that this presidency is not liked. Neither is this Congress, not the Republicans or the Democrats in it, but this is fairly encouraging:
The more I hear on these issues the less I understand the 2004 election results. Unless voters decided that self-flagellation is what this country needs next. Alternative explanations are wrapped in heavy tinfoil in my basement. |
My Farewell Letter to the Wingnut Right
Well, it isn't mine, and it isn't to the wingnut right. It's by a Men's Rights Activist called Keith Thompson, and he's saying goodbye to us simpering liberals. In a newspaper, just to make sure that we see what we are losing. Keith's lament is very touching. It brought my muse Erecto out and he (drunk as usual) wanted to write a farewell letter, too. So here the two are: side by side. Or some snippets of them; to print all of the moaning and crying would be too boring for you, my dear readers. Keith:
Erecto:
Keith:
Erecto:
Keith:
Erecto:
You get the idea? Maybe Keith's lament is more polished, but then Erecto was drunk and it took me only about thirty minutes to type mine in. I bet Keith had months of agony before he finished penning his. Now I'm going to lean back and wait for the book offers to flood my e-mail addy. |
Sunday, May 22, 2005
Some Graduate
This item is a few days old but it's still worth noticing:
(Bolds mine.) If it doesn't show it's ok. Another traditional value? ---- Via frogthefirst of Between the Lakes. |
A Fun Science Site
This one is a nice place to spend some time looking at stuff. If you, too, happen to sit at home while it's raining outside. --- Via Sanna Emilin |
Saturday, May 21, 2005
Echidne's Saturday Sermon
Not really. More of a rant on sermons, probably, caused by this article in the New York Times about how the evangelical Christians are planning to take the Ivy League back to Christ from its current "pre-Christian" state. What struck me most about this article was the focus on the idea that Jesus wants his followers to be wealthy and successful in earthy goods:
It's annoying. I know that human beings have always rewritten religion to go with what they wish to do anyway (whether it is slaughtering their opponents or making money or having lots of sex), but the Bible is one of the holy books which is pretty clear on the incompatibility of wealth and faith. Remember the eye of the needle and whatever was meant to go through it (some sources say a camel, some say a rope, but both are equally unlikely to make it)? And all the times that Jesus told rich men to give up their wealth? And how those who own two shirts or tunics should give one up? Are these literalist believers, I wonder, and if so, how do they reconcile all this re-interpreting with literalism? The idea that Christ wants you to be rich seems to be very popular these days. Many of the new megachurches thrive on this idea, and no wonder, as it makes religion rather painless. But isn't religion supposed to be something more than a way to whitewash your own greed? Something more than the chance to feel superior to all those heathens who Are Not Like Us? Isn't religion supposed to stretch our thinking and our limits in deeper ways than by suggesting that it would be a good thing to have more money? The idea that God marks out the saved ones on earth by making them successful is not new, of course. Calvinism endorses this, for example. But Jesus did not. Read what He actually said if you don't believe me. |
My Usual Saturday Yada Yada...
Check out the American Street for more political blogging by yours truly, as well as others much more interesting. Or go out and have a good time. As long as you always come back here... |
Embryo Adoption Public Awareness Grants
I kid you not. Money is available for organizations (not individuals) who are prepared to educate the public about adopting embryos:
Sigh. I would think that there are lots of already existing children who need help from this government. ---- Props to Bassett. |
Combined Dog and Garden Blogging
Saturday Garden Blogging
I shouldn't blog on gardens on a political blog. But notice the little title on the top? This blog is about my opinions, and today I have opinions on the garden. On roots, specifically, and in the metaphoric sense. When I bought the Snakepit Inc. its environs were pretty bare. There was grass, tamped down with weedkillers, and a derelict doghouse. There was also a pile of construction rubble, and from this rubble shot up one solitary leaf, daffodil-like. I dug the plant up and fed it for a few years and now I have dark purple irises smelling of cinnamon all over the place. All from that solitary leaf. I'm not sure what type these irises are. They are evergreen which narrows the possibilities down a lot, but then most evergreen irises shouldn't thrive in my climate. Because I don't know what to call these irises I think of them as my Ancestor Irises. Something that the spirits of the house gave me. They also gave me peonies. Peonies are famous for living long lives, and there was one in my back yard, hidden by that derelict doghouse. It's one of those old-fashioned types which smell of hand-cream, and I have made it multiply over the years. But even the peony did nothing for quite a few years after its rescue. I fed it and I fed it and nothing happened. Until suddenly one spring the air outside smelled of hand-cream and all you could see for yards were those incredibly sexy, blowsy peony flowers. The moral of the story, if there needs to be one: Sometimes grassroots take time to grow before they erupt in a wonderful rebellion of color, scent and, dare we hope, sanity? |
Friday, May 20, 2005
Who Needs Newsweek Errors?
WARNING: Graphic detail follows. Or maybe all of the so-called liberal media is making this stuff up. That would be the wingnut conclusion. But here is New York Times:
I can't comment on any of this. Not even the political gaming that might have taken place about the Newsweek-debacle and the Saddam-in-underpants-furor right when this was coming out. It's all too sickening. |
The Female Orgasm Under the Microscope
One of the most e-mailed New York Times stories is about the possible uselessness of the female orgasm. The article discusses the arguments of Elizabeth Lloyd that all twenty evolutionary theories about the female orgasm are wrong, that the most likely explanation for the female orgasm is that it has no evolutionary function whatsoever:
Hmmm. Do men have like six or eight vestigial nipples? Maybe it's a goddess thing, but my orgasms come in multiples. The whole article is an interesting glimpse into the weird world of academic arguing, the way one is supposed to sweep aside the opposing theory with a few well-placed words and so on. But let me just point out that if a small sample size was used in a study which appeared to support one theory over the others, criticizing the study for the small sample size is correct, but this criticism doesn't prove that the theory is wrong. It just tells us that we should redo the study with a bigger sample size. What interests me more about this article than all its (unprovable) hypotheses is the way it will be used in sexual politics. Just notice these comments by Dr. Lloyd:
Yes. But what consequences? I can think of quite a few, and most of them will not be pleasant for women. - In any case, Dr. Lloyd hasn't gotten the evolutionary story straight by just giving a different hypothesis. For that to happen we need to see much stronger proof. I hate being under the microscope. Don't you? Especially when one expert tells us that female orgasms might be evaporating over time:
Yes, while fighting off the ravenous rapists or whatever this development would do to all men who want sex. I understand that amateurs aren't supposed to comment on scientific stuff, but surely there is a very good and simple reason for the enjoyment of sex, whether by men or by women. It makes the whole process of procreation much easier and less expensive in the use of resources. Dr. Lloyd accepts as much in stating that the clitoris serves a specific evolutionary function. But the clitoris is kinda related to orgasms, and also to an area behind it in the vaginal channel. But what do I know? |
Friday Embroidery Blogging
|
Another Action Alert
This is from FAIR and concerns the relative invisibility of the Downing Street Memo in the U.S. media:
|
Friday Dog Blogging -Courtesy of Helga Fremlin
Santorum and Hitler
I detest Santorum. He's like the worm that destroys the apples even when they look good on the outside. So I should feel happy that he has finally gone too far and called the Democrats nazis:
Except of course he hasn't gone too far. Nothing will be too far with this lot. And that he criticized Senator Byrd for using Nazi imagery earlier this spring makes no difference:
No, what all this shows is just the harvest from the movement Newt Gingrich started in the early 1990's, when he decided that the political opponents of his ideas should be labeled as the enemy, when he started using war imagery in his political speeches and when the wingnuts started memorizing the best ways to insult Democrats. For a long time the Gingrich-created wingnuts were the only ones acting like this, but finally something gave on our side, and we started using the same imagery. Probably because acting sane and courteous got you steamrolled in a second. And now both sides are being regarded as equally extreme. This is not true. The voices on the left which are extreme are indeed on the fringes. The extreme voices on the right are in the very center of power. There really isn't anything one could call a moderate Republican any more, in the sense of true moderation. The moderates are powerless, regarded as fringe elements themselves. I knew all this was going to happen when I first heard of the wingnut term "culture wars". Once you set off on this path of hatred only one outcome is possible. The one where everybody calls everybody else nazis. |
Thursday, May 19, 2005
Media Troubles in Wingnuttia, Too
Though this is all pretty iffy stuff. But it looks like the popularity of Fox News is declining:
The reason for saying this is iffy is that other cable news aren't doing that well, either. Maybe people are just tired of the incessant politicking? Though CNN's ratings have stabilized in the last month and Fox's keep on falling. Dare one hope that Americans are learning? Nah. James Wolcott gives us a funny story about the National Review Online (NRO), the web-version of the wingnut newspaper. The NRO was having a fund-raiser:
Then the thermometer was removed and the publisher thanked for contributions while acknowledging that they fell a bit short of the mark, which seems to have been $100,000. None of this is definite, but it's interesting. Especially when one remembers that the wingnut Washington Times never makes any money. And when one remembers how the mantra of the right is that we should let the markets decide what survives. |
Today's Action Alert
Today's action alert comes from the Campaign for America's Wilderness: ![]() The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote this week to prohibit taxpayer dollars from being wasted on new logging roads in the Tongass National Forest. Contact your representative today and tell them to VOTE YES on the Chabot/Andrews Tongass Subsidy amendment. Call your representative today 202-224-3121.. Last June, by a strong bi-partisan majority, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Chabot/Andrews amendment to eliminate taxpayer subsidies for logging road construction in the Tongass. However, the provision was eventually dropped from the bill in conference. This year, Representatives Steve Chabot (R - OH) and Robert Andrews (D - NJ) are taking the lead again to end fiscally irresponsible spending by reintroducing their amendment to the annual Interior Appropriations bill. At a time when the government is running huge budget deficits, the Forest Service wasted $48 million taxpayer dollars last year to subsidize the timber industry's clearcutting of America's Rainforest. If the Congress continues its proposed logging schedule in the Tongass, over the next decade America's taxpayers could expect losses totaling over $1.2 billion—a hefty price tag for clearcutting America's Rainforest. If the President and Congress are serious about cutting government waste, the subsidy to the logging industry in Alaska is a good place to start. It should not be the responsibility of American taxpayers to foot the bill to clearcut America's Rainforest. American taxpayers deserve better and so does America's Rainforest Thank you, Mike Matz Executive Director Campaign for America's Wilderness |
Women in the Military - Take Two
I posted about the U.S. House of Representatives committee which was going to propose a ban on women in all combat support and service units in the army. Well, the committee has now retreated on this idea, largely due to resistance from Pentagon and the fact that
The Republicans in the committee got their revenge, though, for the new resolution covers not only the Army but all military forces. Specifically:
Ironic, isn't it, that the original 1994 law was designed to expand opportunities for women in the military and to prevent positions that were open to them from being closed? In the new post-realistic era the same law will be used to limit women's opportunities. The ban on women in ground combat is an essential part of the wingnut philosophy, though what the wingnuts really want is to have no women in the military at all. It's against their gender roles. Expect more steps in this direction if the circumstances allow. Right now, the circumstances are more likely to get all of us into the military, though. |
Wednesday, May 18, 2005
Homeland Security News
A House bill under consideration would change the way the color-coded terror alert system is used:
The alert system has not been an unqualified success, to put it in the mildest possible terms, and I'm not the only person who has noticed how the alerts seemed to occur right before the presidential election last November, and not much at other times. It could be that the terrorists were plotting to get Bush for another four years, of course. He's been good for their enrollment figures. But Tom Ridge said something different recently:
Fine. But wasn't it his agency that was supposed to be responsible for raising the terror alert? If it wasn't Ridge, then who was it? I'd like to know who is responsible for the psychological suffering unnecessary terror alerts caused, for the extra security costs they caused and for the "sky-is-falling" mentality which has been increasing in this country due to false alarms. |
Self-Promotion
I got a mention on Air America a couple of days ago, or rather, one of my posts on Atrios did. And yesterday the same post was mentioned in the Salon.
Thanks are due to Riesz for giving me the tip. And yes, I do hate self-promotion but I don't have the money to hire someone else to do it for me... |
Self-Obsessed Ruminations on Blogging
My recent stint at Atrios's blog made me think about political blogging, its objectives, the ways it's done and the different types of political blogs that exist. By these types I don't mean the wingnut blogs and the sane ones but rather a division of blogs into those which hunt the latest news items, preferably shocking ones, those which discuss in detail a particular item of news, those which are columnists and/or humorists and those which arouse the right emotions in the readers and the commenters. All these categories overlap, of course (reality is never as simple as the wingnuts, say, believe), but most blogs seem to specialize in one or two of these tasks. The readers pick the blogs they like best and then frequent those, and in doing so they reveal something about what they value in political commentary and dialogue. All this has several consequences to the writers of blogs: one can't just change the tone overnight and expect approval, one can't guest blog on another blog as one would at home unless the two are of the same type, and the manner in which ones blog is classified will depend on the classifier's ideas about what constitutes politics. I've mentioned before that much political commentary on the blogs is gossip, or it would be called gossip if it was carried out by "old wives". But it's called political commentary because it's done by political bloggers. There's nothing wrong about gossip; it's fun and it often tells us useful things, too, but it would be nice if we all could see gossip when it happens, especially because sometimes the gossip is equated with political commentary, and this totally omits blogs which apply political science principles to wider events or which see politics in our daily lives. You know, like quite a few feminist blogs. Then there is the length issue. Some readers like to read long posts, most, I suspect, don't, but the ways one condenses a post have an impact on its message and on the tone of the message. Doing it is more an art than a science, and so is the whole question of the tone of the blog. Anger is not a bad thing in politics, especially righteous anger, but recently I've started feeling that we unleash anger which is then just circling around in the empty space above our heads. The anger needs to be directed into useful channels of activity, but this is hard to do from a blog unattached to any official political organs. The action alerts that I get from Hecate, the goddess of the cross-roads, help a little in this, but I'd like to find a better way. Unfocused anger is also destructive in the long-run, even when it arises from righteous causes. The glory of the blogs, for me at least, is that I can ruminate on these issues right here! And nobody can take my paycheck away for that or get me fired! Still, blogs are not only for their writers but all those who read them, and if the process becomes a monologue something is lost. Even I like to hear comments from others, and I'm an uppity goddess! Well, this is very self-obsessed as I mentioned in the title, and if you are still reading you probably know that I like to go on and on and analyze things to shreds. So posting on Eschaton was quite a stretch in some ways (in many ways, really, as it's a wonderful place and I was awe-inspired by both Atrios and my fellow guest bloggers), because the tone there is to prepare a short and telling information bomb for the discussion that will then happen. The experience was very good for me. But I'm not going to condense everything on this blog, because, as I said, I like to go on and on. |
From Houston, With Love
Very Silly
This story is:
It's so silly that it might as well be the banner of our era. The former Republican official, one James Tobin, argues that Democrats would be the victims of the crime that he is charged with and hence shouldn't be on the jury. His logic would also imply that Republicans couldn't be included because they would be the ones who benefited from the alleged crime. So that would only leave the Independents, but only if they didn't plan to vote for either of the two main parties. Or people who never participate in anything whatsoever. But these folks would refuse jury duty, probably. A nice try, Mr. Tobin. Not. |
Tuesday, May 17, 2005
The Interesting Part of the Poll
"The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press" conducted a few days ago, tells us all sorts of things about the opinions people hold on issues such as the president's overall job rating (low, at 43%), the Social Security debacle, DeLay's possible ethics violations and so on. But the most interesting part of the survey is that most people just don't care, don't follow the news and don't know what their opinion might be:
This is useful to keep in mind next time when we wonder how people can vote for the idiots: most of this stuff that I love never makes a dent in the awareness of the average person. I suspect the real numbers following the news are even lower as we all tend to state we are more informed than we actually are. |
On Journalistic Duties
Will Bunch has a good post on this topic on his blog, Attytood. I posted a clip of it on Eschaton, but I want to discuss it in greater depth here. Bunch says this early on in his post:
This is the gist of it: who does the media serve? All other answers follow from the answer to that question. My idealistic hope is that the media is to serve truth first, to the extent that truth can be defined and discussed. This requires that many different voices are being heard and that journalists are properly trained in the ways of reporting and gathering evidence. But a different (though not necessarily a contradictory) answer might be that the media are to serve the people, and this is the answer that Bunch pursues. How will the people be best served? Is it through a media that is timid and conciliatory towards the government or through a media that is aggressive and cynical? Clearly, the latter is on the whole more likely to unearth government scandals than the former, though the media could function well with some of both types of journalists as well as those in the middle. These musings are always relevant, but especially today. The media has become so commercialized that its existence is more dependent on the pursuit of stories with enough shock value than on anything that "the people" might need to know. At the same time, the politics of reporting have become more polarized, the public's trust in the media has evaporated and we have a government which plays the media as it wishes. So what we learn and hear is that a bride has run away, that Michael Jackson is in court, that Newsweek wrote a story which it couldn't substantiate about what happened in Guantanamo Bay. What we don't learn or hear is the significance of the Downing Street Memo, the earlier evidence on desecration of the Koran, from other sources than the one Newsweek used. We don't even learn or hear the deeper message in the runaway bride stories or the Michael Jackson stories: about fundamentalist marriages, about the enormous wedding industry, about pedophilia in high places. It is not enough. Adding blogs to the stew is not enough. Getting news from foreign sources is not enough, though it helps. I'm not sure what would suffice, but talking about the current problems is the first necessary step. |
Today's Action Alert
Today's Action comes from the Democratic Party: Please join a conference call briefing with Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid this Wednesday, May 18, at 11:45 a.m. Eastern time (8:45 a.m. Pacific). http://www.democrats.org/briefingcall Senator Reid will give us the latest on our strategy, the status of Republicans ready to abandon GOP Leader Bill Frist's sinking ship, and what we can do to help. He'll also take your questions. Make a list of those hard kwestuns you've been dying to ask and call in! Thanks for taking Today's Action. |
The Politics of Women's Health
If the implications weren't so frightening studying the politics of women's health would be fun, in a slightly sinister way. First there is the whole school of thought which equates women's health with gynecological and obstetrical health; as if women were walking containers for their wombs only. Then there are all those little articles finding weaknesses specific to women, and these articles are grabbed eagerly by the anti-feminists (to prove that nature or god didn't mean women to work/play sports/study/be equal). It is as if these people find it impossible to fathom a world in which the sexes can differ in a few of their biological needs yet be treated equally. Weakness is also traditionally associated with femininity, at least if by "traditionally" we mean since the Victorian era. Women are supposed to be weak, and perhaps this is why we all eagerly snatch the studies that proves them so. At the same time, women's specific needs have not been well addressed in the past, and feminists also demand special attention to them. This is understandable, but can be used in the political arena for something that is not good for women. Or men, come to that. Just think how prostate cancer awareness is only now rising. Surely part of the reason is that men are not supposed to complain about illness, are not supposed to fall victim to something, are not supposed to need help. The gender roles sometimes hurt all of us. A recent study on the effects of alcoholism argues that women suffer from negative brain effects earlier than men and after less consumption. I haven't had time to look at the study itself, but I did see an anti-feminist rant about its findings. The gist of these is that feminism is to blame for women's alcoholism, because it has made women think that they can do anything men can do. Which is a really stupid argument but not that different from many others I've read about the horrible consequences of feminism. Feminism does horrible things to women: it makes them convinced that they can stand peeing up and see what happens then! Disaster, that's what happens then. But the high point of the anti-feminist's rant is surely this:
Well, no, Mother Nature is no feminist. After all, women live considerably longer than men on average in all the Western countries. But this is a fact conveniently forgotten in the politics of women health. |
Monday, May 16, 2005
Stripped of Their Pensions!
A slightly different way of protesting the United Airlines loss of pensions by several current and past flight attendants:
You go, girls! A nice reversal you have accomplished there, of so many things! ---- Via dancinfool. |
Science in the new Post-Realistic Era
In Kansas, the creationists are trying to redefine science to allow for explanations that don't rely on natural phenomena:
I'm all for it, because my efforts on this are systematic and continuous! Therefore, I'm a scientist and what I say is science and should be in all school textbooks. In other science news, Mother Jones reports that Exxon-Mobil is funding groups which are willing to criticize reports about global warming:
Note the little bit about Exxon-Mobil having funded religious groups on this issue. It seems that they would agree with the creationists on the need to redefine science or at least on how to pursue it. Wow, I'll never pass the new science tests! |
A News Summary with a Feminist Flavor
The Newsweek story controls the discussion this morning. It will be used by Karl Rove to hammer down the last few heads standing proud of the media, the few who are still trying to criticize the administration. See Arthur Silber's blog for a good discussion of the actual issues. In better news, Kuwait is going to let women vote and run for political offices, though not this year:
Yes! A study on gender equality finds that the Scandinavian women do best. Maybe it's because the Viking raids got rid of all the aggression and desire for hierarchies? Let's hope my theory is wrong, because that would be bad news for the rest of the world's women, at least in terms of how long they have to wait and what needs to happen first. Kidding, just kidding. But in any case:
That no country has managed to close the gap entirely is not surprising. The reverse system has operated for thousands of years, and it is overly optimistic to assume that its effects will be wholly gone in a little more than one generation. |
Anti-American Riots and the Koran Desecration Question
You are probably aware that several Muslim countries have anti-American riots right now. The immediate cause is supposedly a small story that appeared in Newsweek about the Koran being flushed down the toilet in Guantanamo Bay. Desecrating the Koran is a crime punishable by death in some Muslim countries, and the possibility that something of the sort took place in a prison run by Americans is a very good match to use to light the big jihad fire. But now we learn that Newsweek got it wrong, that perhaps there was no such desecration in the first place:
Did they or didn't they? And will we ever know for certain? There are two possible explanations of what happened here, and only one is that the Newsweek got its facts wrong. In any case, whether the news is true or not will not make much difference in the Middle East, according to some observers. The anti-American sentiment is strong enough to ignite riots on its own. But it's still true that the U.S. administration must take some blame for events of this sort. Abu Ghraib did happen, and stories about using fake menstrual blood to upset Muslim believers were there before the Koran desecration story. At the same time, I think that killing people for destroying a book is a good example of what is wrong with literalist religions in general. And so is the idea that there is something so filthy about women and their sexuality that menstrual blood could be used as a method of torture. Did I already mention today how I feel caged between two religious fronts here? |
Sunday, May 15, 2005
On Limits
Much of life is learning about limits, points at which you get stuck, points beyond which you can't go or points beyond which the hell breaks loose. Many of these are physical limits, like learning that throwing 240 pound guys on the mat when you weigh 120 pounds will break your back over time, or mental limits, like learning that nine different blog posts on three different blogs in one Saturday makes a goddess resemble the corpse of an insect and makes her fall asleep for the next twenty hours and so on. But other limits are societal, determined by outsiders, and you learn what they are by seeing what happens to others who violate the rules, or if you're really unlucky you learn by being the violator yourself. Authoritarian societies have more limits and more punishments for violating them, but all societies have some, and many of them are hidden ones, to be found only by breaching the point. The reason I'm a feminist is that there are more of these hidden limits for women, on the whole, and the punishments for violating them are more severe if the woman does the violating. But I can also see the other kinds of limits, and I get mad at all of them unless there are good reasons for the limits to exist and unless the limits are set fairly for all of us. Then there are the overall limits. Like the point at which all sane Americans will rise up and say that this administration has finally gone too far. I keep hoping that we have reached that limit, but, alas, I have so far been wrong. That's one reason for the rant below, and the other one is the dead-insect thingy. But I wake up optimistic most mornings. The sun rises and one day so will the American people. |
For A Liberal Sunday
Saturday, May 14, 2005
A Rant
Here we go: A place to scream, to kick holes in the wall, to tear out any hair you might have left and to spit at pictures of the powers-at-be. In other words: Echidne's Rant Room. These are some of my hatefullest things: That this country is run by a man who was selected, then possibly elected; who doesn't read, who doesn't know history, who cannot speak English or any other language, come to that; who takes pride in his intellectual laziness and his lack of diplomacy, who pads his crotch as much as he pads his lies; who thinks pleadings of mercy from someone to be executed are funny, who seems to completely lack the empathy button in that square box on his back, who thinks the square box might be a hot line to god, who doesn't think much at all; who reads the Pet Goat with glazed-over eyes when the country is attacked and who then bravely goes to the site of the attack several days later, who is not even informed when the country might have been attacked again because he was biking in an area where biking is forbidden and who wants the Commander of the Armed Troups to be informed about any fucking thing? That this man made up a reason to go to war, that thousands of people then died, that this man might even now be plotting to invade yet more countries, and all the time bin Laden is free as a bird. That a minority, a small group of fundamentalist wingnuts, have grabbed the power in this country and are telling me to live according to their inane interpretation of morals and ethics, that they are allowed to get away with this by others who are supposed to be saner, that we all are supposed to respect the fact that these wingnuts are religious, respect it, even when they plot to lock me up in a kitchen all silent and submissive, respect it, even when they urge for the overthrow of the U.S. Constitution, just keep on respecting, yessir, to accept that this earth was created a few thousand years ago, to accept that Adam and Eve were chased out of paradise by dinosaurs, that they then had children who busily had enough incest to create all of us though of course women were created to be permanently guilty for the snake thing and gays should not exist and so on. But fucking respect! And the Islamic fanatics, those stalwart thinkers of the ninth century, who want what their Christian fundamentalist brethren do, only in much more extreme and painful forms, including the killing of women who are no longer viewed as stainless flags of family honor. And the fact that I and so many others are stranded between these two armies: the Bush one and the one of the bin Laden types, and nobody has asked us if we like to be in the middle, because neither of these armies fucking cares. That the corporate powers to be are funding the Bush administration in exchange for getting the best picks of all the lucrative projects that can be made up, picking the bones clean in places of suffering, that the corporate powers are in bed with the extreme clerics, that the corporate powers are using this government to guarantee that the American workers will be poorer, will work longer hours and will have less protection against illness and old age. That to even say this causes accusations of fucking communism. That this is the end of an era, the era of enlightenment, that we are sliding into the new dark ages where reality is whatever the government tells us, where everything is relative (and this from the party who tells us that our values are relative!), where facts are no weightier than opinions and where wingnut opinions are facts even if they fucking aren't. That this is an era where the press is meek as lambs and much of the clergy ravenous as hyenas, an era where the uneducated and ignorant decide what is education and knowledge, an era where the only choice we seem to have is between bread and circus on the one hand and bread and church on the other. And not much fucking bread either way. |
Saturday Dog Blogging
|
A Reminder, Again
I post Saturdays on the American Street, and today also on the Eschaton. So far the topics include the anti-American riots in Muslim countries, Fred Phelps (these two on the American Street) and Wal-Mart (on Eschaton). What I really want to write is a totally rude, swearwords-filled obscene rant against this U.S. administration and the fundamentalists all over this poor ball of mud we call the earth. Maybe I will, too. |
Friday, May 13, 2005
Resolutions
Most of us think of resolutions as something you make for the New Year and promptly forget about. Not so the Southern Baptists. They make resolutions in their summer gettogethers and they never forget them. Neither do we, because most of them are so hilarious or insulting that it's just not possible to forget. In the past the Southern Baptists have resolved that women should gracefully submit to the manly godliness or godly manliness that is their husbands, and that women cannot be called for ministry. If they think so they should have their hearing checked, because the Southern Baptist god only talks to men that way. This year's resolutions are still a secret, but one which has been proposed is an anti-gay resolution:
If this proposal goes through does it mean that the Southern Baptists approve of bullying? To be quite honest, I wouldn't be surprised if they quite liked the idea of bullying, in secret, of course. |
Friday Embroidery Blogging
|
A Nice Picture for Friday
Air Force Academy News
The Air Force Academy sounds like a scary place. First we heard all about the sexual harassment the curriculum seems to contain, now we hear that not only are Jewish cadets treated badly but also all those who are not born-again Christians. Poor Echidne. She'd be eaten up there in no time at all, if she wasn't an all-powerful pagan goddess. The most recent incident is the possible firing of a chaplain who was only born once:
The Academy denies her claims. But it is true that a recent Yale Divinity School survey of the campus found the atmosphere reeking of born-againness:
But of course it makes sense if you are an evangelical yourself, and believe that the country, including its armed forces, should reflect your beliefs. Natch. Do you think the born-agains are also born-again virgins? |
How Will We Be Remembered?
I don't know, but one thing is certain: Future history books will contain this text:
This is a description of a memo about a high-level meeting held on July 23, 2002, and it has caused Tony Blair some problems, because it shows that the supposed causes for the Iraq war were all manufactured. But to George Bush, the instigator of the war? Not so much. Americans are more interested in runaway brides and Michael Jackson. Or so the American media seems to think. But now eighty-nine Democratic members of the U.S. Congress have sent president Bush a letter asking what his explanation for the contents of the memo might be. Will we get an answer? Add the sound of crickets here. |
Thursday, May 12, 2005
Faith-Based Facts
Feministing tells us that the wingnut policy of allowing pharmacists to refuse to dispense prescriptions that don't agree with their values has had a paradoxical effect:
The logic of this case is...faith-based, I guess. Also by Feministing, a school which invited an inspirational wingnut speaker to speak to its graduating class got more than they bargained for. Tina Marie Holewinski warned the teens about the dangers of drinking, drugs and premarital sex, but according to Tom Wells, the father of one of these teens, she also told them
When asked to clarify her position, Holewinski replied:
Now you know. Holewinski's ideas about what constitutes information are fascinating. But I agree with her about the recycling of virginity. I've been reborn a virgin more times than I can recall. |
Deep Thought for the Day
This is from a Guardian article about a new fashion for religious diet books.
Sinful, we are sinful. Even eating is a sin. |
Today's Action Alert
Today's Action comes from Barbara Boxer: 1. Call Lincoln Chafee's Senate office at (202) 224-2921 and log your opposition to John Bolton. Thanks for taking today's action. |
Doctor Hager and Women
W. David Hager is a physician. He's also on the advisory panel of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and an outspoken evangelical wingnut. Now he has decided to take the credit for the failure of Plan B, which would have allowed over-the-counter sales of the so-called morning-after contraceptive pill. The story is unusual, because the FDA has a habit of following the recommendations of its advisory panel, yet it decided to go against the panel's advice in this particular case. Hager explains this as follows:
A cunning little plot, isn't it? Pretending to go all scientific on us while all the time meaning for the godly side to win. The wingnuts like Dr. Hager don't like Plan B because it might encourage unsafe sexual behavior. Thus, it comes as a teeny surprise that Dr. Hager himself has been accused of unsafe sexual behavior. His ex-wife, Linda Carruth Davis, has this to say about Dr. Hager:
Can this possibly be true? One thing we goddesses know is that ex-spouses usually have a rather sour opinion of each other. Well, it's good to be sceptical, but in this case other witnesses seem to support Ms. Carruth Davis's claims:
Now I'm totally confused. Does Dr. Hager love women like Jesus did, as he argues? You know, like a good, all-knowing patriarch does. Or does he love women in a rather different sense of the word, one that might raise the hair of some of his ob-gyn patients? Janice Shaw Crouse of the Concerned Women of America (of whom I have blogged before) has no such doubts. Dr. Hager is a wingnut and that's good enough for her:
Be still, my beating heart, be still. |
This Is Not A Blog Post
Welcome to "this is not a blog post", a truly amateurish and bumbling pouring-out of the heart. And whatever brains I have left. I have been doing real blogging for a few days now, on Eschaton, and I have worked very hard. Not that it shows much in the results, because I condense them into a little pill, suitable for being shot out of an air rifle. But goddess the amount of research that goes into that! I have a totally different level of respect for all real journalists and bloggers now. Awe, in fact. Now I also know pretty much everything that is going on in American politics, and believe me, it ain't pretty. There are mules involved and group sex and who knows what else! Someone should write a book on wingnut sex. It would be a best seller, even among the wingnuts, though they must know most of it already. Part of my time has been spent in the outer reaches of the marshland that some call the right blogosphere. Where the wingnuts have their own little blogs and stuff. I don my hazmat suit and big wading boots and a butterfly net and go hunting there. But it's hard work, hard work for a kindly and sensitive goddess. Afterwards I need to shower several times and then weep into my nectar mug. - I have learned that the one thing all wingnuts share is their dislike of feminists, by the way. Some of them worship the Southern Baptist god, some worship the evolutionary psychologists, some worship nothing but their own private parts and many worship money. But they all hate and fear me and women like me. Which should make me feel powerful. But I'm already powerful, being of the divine type, and there is something very sad about people who have decided that most of their problems would be solved if another type of people would just agree to go on their knees (and yes, interpret that as you may). Just like there is something very sad about all people who find simple certainties the solution to life's traumas, because simple certainties are like free lunches: they don't exist. Ok. Where was I? Free lunches don't exist. And neither do free blogs, really. Someone must do the research and writing on every blog that gets regularly renewed, and my hat goes up to all of those who do this invisible toiling. Or my hat would go up if I wore one. Bloggers deserve some praise in these days when it's fashionable to discuss the deplorable lack of professional standards and ethics in the blogosphere. Regard this post as my salute to all the amateurish and unethical bloggers out there, even the wingnut ones. |
Wednesday, May 11, 2005
No Women in Army Support Units?
The wingnuts don't like women in the military, not even in support units. So it comes as no surprise that:
A woman soldier is an impossibility in the wingnut worldview. Never mind that
|
Some Lead with That Cereal?
Do you like lead? One myth says that it was the lead in the aquiducts which dulled the ancient Romans so that their empire fell. Lead is a useful metal for many things, but it's not exactly healthful for human beings. Small children, in particular, tend to suffer serious health problems if they ingest lead. This can happen in buildings which contain old paint as lead was a routine additive in paint before 1978. When the paint deteriorates particles fall off and look like something interesting to taste for toddlers. Smaller particles enter the air and can be breathed in. All this is exacerbated when the building undergoes renovations. The health harm from lead is a serious problem:
But removing lead paint is also very expensive. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is concerned about the high costs of treating lead paint. It's thinking that regulations might not be the best way to go about this. Maybe education and voluntary activity would be better!
That is about the vilest proposal I've heard from this administration for some time. Voluntary standards will lead to more children with developmental retardation, but someone, somewhere will save money. Gah. And consider this: Children who most suffer from lead paint exposure are poor children whose families live in old buildings which are not well cared for. Don't these children matter to the pro-family administration? Or consider this: The administration that so eagerly hounds women whose behavior may damage their fetuses during pregnancy thinks that voluntary agreements are enough when something threatens 1.4 million children per year. Because it's not the mothers who are at fault here? |
Tuesday, May 10, 2005
On Christian Media
I'm sure that you have heard your fair share about the so-called liberal media in this country. If it weren't for the Fox News (and a few other networks better left unnamed), all the news would be delivered to us in pink-tinted commie packages, right? What you might not know (given that you are reading this blog) is that this country also has a Christian media, one with religious-right values and a selective take on the news of the day. True, it is not yet a large proportion of the total media industry, but it is a rapidly growing one. The Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN), which produces Pat Robertson's 700 Club, is only one of many Christian television and radio networks:
An intriguing thought, this: that Christians can choose to receive nothing but Christian news. We are slowly moving towards a system where Republicans will only accept Republican news and Democrats only Democratic news. So why not have religious news broadcasts to groups who are especially religious? The logical conclusion to this trend is frightening: a nation where no values are shared, where nobody can communicate with the members of groups who think differently and where nobody agrees on what is actually happening. Trends like home schooling could exacerbate this outcome. But of course these Christian news providers are not truly separate from the Republican news producers. The Christian media is right-wing and evangelical. What this means for the bias in the news it chooses to cover is obvious:
It's possible to conclude that the Christian media is a subsection of the conservative media, one which focuses more on religiosity but no less on the conservative talking-points. What makes this combination tricky is the holy flavor it imparts to purely secular political concepts. How will a Christian consumer of biased news interpret them? As just opinions, or as divine messages? We shouldn't be surprised by any of this, given that president Bush himself views the world in the starkly simple terms of good and evil. Still, there is something exceedingly creepy about this description of a Christian lobbying trip:
|
Men's Rights Movement
Amanda at Pandagon has written a five-part series on the men's rights movement. (You can access it by going to the last part which gives the earlier links.) She deserves accolades for putting all this information together in one place. Her series should be required reading for all who are interested in feminism. Amanda also links back to Ampersand's work on the same issues, especially his careful discussions of the incidence-of-rape studies. Another piece that should be added to the basic libraries of feminists. Edited to add: I'm busy right now, but later on I want to write more about this topic. Some of the claims this movement makes are valid, others are, as Amanda points out, just a demand to have male dominance regarded as equality. |
Poor Big Pharma!
The pharmaceutical industry has had such a hard time, what with the Vioxx scandal and such. So it comes as a relief to learn that the government is helping these suffering firms out by giving them a tiny tax cut. It goes like this:
I'm very glad to learn this, because now we are obviously going to find the prices of drugs drop by a significant amount. Aren't we? |
Monday, May 09, 2005
The Dangers of Cohabitation
Did you know that cohabitation between unmarried couples is still illegal in seven states? North Carolina is one of them and is having its law challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU):
What I found interesting about the case is this argument for keeping the law on the books:
Bill Brooks confuses causality and correlation here. This is commonly done by the right-wingers, because they don't like "living in sin". Why would cohabitation raise the odds of later divorce? It makes no sense. If anything, living together before marriage should make divorce less likely, because fewer unsuitable marriages will be made in the first place. No, the correlation between cohabiting and divorce is much more likely to reflect the fact that the people who are opposed to cohabitation are also opposed to divorce, even when the marriage makes them miserable. |
Meanwhile, in Boston
White supremacists from Arkansas decided to travel to Boston to see the sights. Also to do a little protesting outside Faneuil Hall while Holocaust survivors were inside commemorating the liberation of Nazi concentration camps. Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (of the Olympic fame) expressed his disgust at these visitors:
And the people of Boston were unamused, too. In fact, they had a bit of tussle with the white supremacists. Most of us would agree that the behavior of the supremacists was atrocious. But if the current trend in media "fairness and balance" continues, we will soon see them interviewed as "the other point of view" in any discussion of the Holocaust. This is the logical outcome of the view of the media's task as simply reporting what people say. |
On Stoning
Docferg in my comments linked to a story about in Afghanistan. It is a familiar one, in many ways, though that doesn't mean it isn't a horrible one. The story is about a married woman being caught in a sexual relationship with an unmarried man and what happened next: she was killed, possibly by stoning, and he was whipped. These punishments are based on the shariah law. What seemed different about this story to me was its point of view: it is written from the angle of those who did the killing. The reader is invited to identify with the murdered woman's father and mother and the other villagers, and it is indeed possible to see why they would have chosen to murder the adulteress in a rather amateurish, hesitant way, while all the time grieving over the necessity of doing so. I may be unfair to the writer of the article who is also trying to show how mores are changing in Afghanistan, how some doubts about the process have entered, how officials were contacted before the village decided to mete justice in the traditional manner. But what struck me most was how the story made me not identify with the stoning victim. These stories usually have that effect. What is the point of this post? Perhaps the importance of questioning the point of view of any piece of news, especially those articles which appear unusually balanced and neutral. |
Guest Blogging
Atrios of Eschaton has decided to go gallivanting and Avedon Carol and Attaturk are taking care of his blog. I'm minding them. Well, not really. I'm the last guy in the bullpen (if such a masculine simile is allowed), the one that everybody hopes will not be needed in the game. So this subbing should have no impact on my own blog, with the possible exception of some cross-posting. It's quite an honor to be in the Eschaton bullpen (cowpen?), but the experience is also frightening. Imagine some stranger turning up at your bedroom door, insisting that for the next nine days he or she will be your partner. You look around and your lovey-dovey is nowhere to be found! That's probably how it feels for many of Eschaton readers. Luckily, both Avedon and Attaturk are really good. And if we are really lucky they will blog the whole game. |
Sunday, May 08, 2005
Pope Ratzo in Action
Pope Benedict XVI has been busy with some spring cleaning. Out with the old and in with the new! And in particular, out with the old moldy liberals.
Reese is what one might call a moderate liberal. He also seems to have committed the sin of covering both sides of an argument as well as some sensitive topics. I was ready for something like this, anyway. More purges will no doubt follow. |
Feeding Time
This filibuster debacle is going to be fun to watch (if you ignore what's at stake):
Yes, it is feeding time. Our dear Dobson wants to be reimbursed for the wingnuts' votes. His belly is growling. That's probably why he sounds so grumpy in that quote. Dobson's dilemma is that he really has nowhere to go if the corporate wing of the Republican party refuses to do his bidding. But then the corporate wing depends on the fundamentalist base to stay in power, which might mean that Dobson will get his dinner soon. Though, on the other hand, if the wingnuts get the judiciary they want why would they bother to vote at all in 2006? See why I think it might be fun to watch? Always assuming that it happened in some other reality where real people didn't suffer because of people like Dobson. |
And Remember Mother Earth, Too
Saturday, May 07, 2005
Happy Mothers' Day!
Time to celebrate all the mothers, right? Well, the Office of the Surgeon General has slightly different ideas about what is suitable for this weekend. Richard D. Carmona believes that this is a very good opportunity to remind mothers of their Holy Duties! You know, to tell mothers how it is their responsibility and obligation to make sure that the fetus and then the baby is going to be healthy. What else could the Mothers' Day possibly be for than a little extra space and time for adding to what some call the mothering guilt? Dr. Carmona gives the mothers of America this:
So now you know one possible speech topic for Sunday. You could even make up a game about these rules, just to find out if there are any unfortunate mothers who didn't know at least one of them or who may have even (horror of horrors!) violated one of them! It should make the party a lot more interesting. Now, why couldn't Dr. Carmona publicize this list some other time of they year? Why couldn't he talk about the health issues of mothers and how to help mothers in general? And what on earth will he talk about on Fathers' Day... And do you know how he ends this diatribe? He says:
Is this man for real? ---- Via Ann Chuckling. |
Ssssaturday!
I have written a long post in praise of secularism on the American Street. Go there and tell how to think about the topic better. Of course, only if you are interested in saving the world. Maybe I shouldn't write that a post is long? It could be a damper. What if we pretend that I said it was a very short post with lots of sexy pictures, too? Or that at least it is mostly waffle? Choices, choices. |
Friday, May 06, 2005
Friday Embroidery Blogging
|
Today's Action Alert
Today's Action is based on an email from the DNC: Can you imagine what Republicans would say if a liberal went on national television and said that conservative judges are a greater threat than terrorism? Or that Clarence Thomas was a Commie? Or that 9-11 was no big deal? They would be (as my old boss Bill Clinton used to say), "squealing like a pig stuck under a gate." But when Pat Robertson spouts this nonsense, what do we hear from his fellow Republicans? Thundering silence. What's worse, Sen. George Allen of Virginia, Robertson's home state, apparently thinks now is a good time to deliver the commencement address to the ultraconservative graduate school Robertson founded. Allen should know better. He should be repudiating Robertson and his hate speech, just as John McCain did in the 2000 GOP primaries. Then again, we saw what the far right did to McCain when he had the guts to take them on. So Allen is headed to Robertson's graduation cookout. I guess that’s just the sort of payback Robertson expects after saying Allen "would make a tremendous president" on national TV and giving the maximum allowable contribution to Allen’s most recent campaign. When George Allen lends legitimacy to Robertson's offensive rhetoric and Bill Frist joins the Family Research Council's "Democrats hate God" telecast, it just proves how far Senate Republicans will go to pander to the right wing fringe. Contact Senator Allen and ask him not to speak at Robertson's graduation. Thanks for taking today's action! |
Friday Dog Blogging
Thursday, May 05, 2005
WOW!
Driplets
Is that a word? If it isn't I declare ownership of it. Driplets are these multiple things that ooze out when I try to write something serious that takes effort and stewing and time. They are trivialities or significant mantras or both. Here are a few that have been buzzing around my head today: -What is nucular? Is it the opposite of secular? Like in the "nucular option"? -Who let out the "air" from Tony Bl***? -What is "a woman's woman" like? Does she even exist? There is something called "a man's man", like a higher type of a man. Isn't there? Isn't there? |
Fair and Balanced Reporting by Echidne
It is time for me to stop being a lefty propagandist and to adopt the mature approach of the mainstream media to events in this world. For instance, the way to address ethics violations is to show that both sides are equally guilty. So here I go: First, John Kerry paid parking tickets and Red Sox tickets from his campaign funds! The scoundrel! Here are the details:
Aren't you glad that we didn't elect this unethical man to run our country? Second, the Republicans do it, too, of course:
See? It all balances out. |
Masculinity in Jesusland
For one thing, you can't donate sperm if you are a gay man. Who knows where that penis has been:
Might this all be a fear of gayness being inheritable? Hmmh? Our dear Reverend James Dobson (who is going to be the head mullah when we get theocracy set up properly here) doesn't believe in inheritability here, which is a little shocking to me. He thinks that boys need to be made into heterosexual men by showing what an achievement masculinity is! (Femininity, on the other hand, requires only a lot of submission training). This is how you bring up a son:
So cute, isn't it? I'm learning so much about Jesusland today. It's making me a teeny bit worried. |
Meanwhile, in Jesusland
This is a quick runthrough of the most recent Southern Baptist -type developments in Jesusland. First, Wiccans can't read invocations at the meetings of a Virginia county:
Indeed. What else can we possibly need than the god of the Old Testament, the blood-thirsty, jealous and punishing one? Read more about this by Amanda on Pandagon where I got it from. Second, David Brooks has wet dreams about the evangelicals:
The wet dreams explanation is my attempt to be polite, for otherwise I should point out that Brooks is lying and stuff. Third, the wingnut women have their own website (via World O'Crap) in which they can spout all artistic. Here is a lovely little poem for Mother's Day:
Wow! I have to retire from the business of bad poetry. I have been so beaten! |
Weary of War?
According to the recent USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll Americans are growing weary of the Iraq war. I'm growing weary of the growing weary of the Americans. If you get my meaning. In any case, now fifty-seven percent of those questioned say that the war wasn't worth it. Wasn't worth what? And still forty-one percent think that it was worth it, whatever the "worth it" might be. What is it that these people think we are doing in Iraq? Spreading freedom and democracy to the dark continent? Securing oil for our SUVs? Punishing the Iraqis for what the Saudis did to us on 9/11 2001? Making a flytrap in our neighbor's yard so that the flies (or terrorists) end up there and get killed there (together with lots of the neighbors) instead of bothering us at home? Yes, I am growing weary of all of this. I'd love to go to sleep for a few centuries and then wake up to read all about this era in the historical records. But then I just might wake up in Gilead and find that reading is illegal for us womenfolk. |
Wednesday, May 04, 2005
Sinuses
It's no accident that sinuses start with "sin". What do we need them for, anyway? Mine seem to think that it's to produce the most vivid red and green grouting material. I don't recall ever before having a sinus infection in May, feeling dizzy and showing red welts on the arms, wanting to sleep for twenty-four hour spans and so on. Maybe this is one of those signs that the universe is finally revolting against the Bush Reich? Like locusts and earthquakes. Add to that congested goddesses. This one is going to see the quacks tomorrow. The only reason I'm mentioning this (other than for the totally pure motive of whining) is to explain why my writing might seem a bit porridgey and smelly for a while: it is sharing the space with those red-and-green clumps. |
A Shocker?
Is Pohl another activist judge? Heh:
I think the judge was right. The whole thing smells of a protection scheme for the higher-ups. |
A Group Picture of the Wingnuts
![]() They were demonstrating against what they view as the liberal media. It's nice to see all of them, isn't it? |
What We Didn't Know
About all these wars. Well, we did know, perhaps. At least some of us. Bush attacking Iraq after bin Laden attacked the U.S. was nonsensical from day one, unless one assumed that the plan to invade Iraq had been in the works for a very long time indeed. Which it had, of course, as we now know from the newly revealed documents that are hurting poodle Blair in the U.K.. Bush cannot be touched by any of this, it seems. This is because he has a funny wife, and must therefore not be a monster, after all. But the British are not so easily distracted by funny wives or runaway brides:
Then there is the U.S. case of Pat Tillman:
But we didn't know! Nobody knew anything of importance, not Bush, not Rumsfed, not those in authority at Abu Ghraib. Look over there! A runaway bride! Mmm, yes. Much more interesting than the total extent of today's carnage in Iraq. It's the post-reality era, gals and guys! |
Tuesday, May 03, 2005
John Tierney
![]() John Tierney inherited William Safire's column in the New York Times. Safire is a wingnut and so is Tierney, of course. It's an old and important tradition of liberal tolerance to give all the best column space in the Times to right-wingers who can't write. In fact, it looks like this tradition is slowly turning into giving almost all the column space to wingnuts. That way the liberals look truly unbiased and fair. What could possibly be fairer than rolling over, baring your stomach and directing the attacker's teeth to the largest vein? Or this is how I first saw the hiring of John Tierney. He's a clone of the babbling David Brooks. Neither can write. Both think that their task in the world is to push the arrogant faces of the coastal liberal elites into the backsides of what they call the real America or the red states. You know, where the people who matter live. Both Brooks and Tierney act like tour guides on some safari, full of poorly disguised contempt towards the tourists who have hired them, making up stuff as the tour progresses and leading the group to all sorts of dead-ends. But then it occurred to me that maybe this is really a cunning plot! Maybe the Times is carefully hand-picking clumsy wingnut writers with nothing interesting to say to keep its readers angry and liberal! Nah. |
A Stolen Quote
I nicked this one from SWR in the Eschaton comments. It's just so perfect for describing the differences in the way the U.S. and the British media treat the leaders of the respective countries:
|
The Lefty Feminist Echidne
I was linked to on Slate:
It's naturally proper for my divine opinions to gain wider readership (assuming someone reads the Slate), but my reaction to being defined as a lefty feminist was very odd. I had to go out and walk in the woods to think about it for a while and to ask the trees for some advice. This lefty feminist Echidne of the Snakes is some other goddess, someone on the barricades with one breast showing, someone quoting from Mao's Little Red Book. Or so it seemed to me. You see, I am normal. I have the right opinions on everything which means that I must be in the center and others are too right or too left. Likewise, to be defined as a feminist implies that others are not so. I refuse to think that very many people support unequal opportunities for or worth of men and women, though of course I know that this is the optimistic view. Still, the impression I get from the quote above is that my being a feminist is somehow marking me as an oddball. It could be that I'm just oversensitive and read too much into it all. But it's the lefty bit that really troubled me. I have never even voted for a socialist candidate in any elections! I advocate a mixed economy! I like the idea of laws that protect workers and ban discrimination, but I have never argued for any banning of capitalist activities. Yes, I am indeed a lefty in the United States, but what does this say about the way we define the political dimensions? Attila the Hun is seen to be middle-of-the-road, that's what it says. None of this is of any interest to anyone but me. Except that it shows how self-definition is not the same thing as societal definitions. It's the societal definitions that determine how others react to us, and usually certain groups have much more power in naming than others. The political correctness debacle was all about the right to name and the content of the labels that are given. The powerful won it by using ridicule (some of it earned) and the fear of hierarchies turned upside-down. Thus, they still have the right to name, not those on the lower ladders of the hierarchy. The hegemony is not as total as it once was, and the blogosphere is a good example of the variations now possible. Many of us call the extreme right wingnuts, for example, at least among each other. As they are in power this is kind of exhilarating, cheeky and even a little dangerous. But the term has no mainstream relevance. On the other hand, the originally quite neutral term "liberal" is widely viewed as one of the worst things a politician in the U.S. can be called. This shows how strong the power of naming can be. |
A Contest
This is something I had in my mailbox: Hello, Today marks the beginning of Chastity Awareness Week in Pennsylvania and NARAL Pro-Choice America has an activity for your readers to keep their minds sparkling clean. President Bush has recently asked Congress to provide more funding for his abstinence-only until marriage programs. Despite the fact that study after study has shown that these very programs are ineffective and even harmful for our kids, Bush has decided to yet again offer us the latest in medieval birth control: Chastity! What's in these "abstinence-only until marriage" curricula? Slogans like: * Pet Your Dog, Not Your Date! * Don't Be a Louse, Wait For Your Spouse! * Would you want a cookie that someone had already taken a bite out of? These slogans might be out-of-date but that hasn't stopped President Bush from providing federal funding – your tax dollars – to buy them to teach our kids. I do hope you will participate in this contest - your chastity may very well be at stake! To enter, please send an email to GiveUsRealChoices@gmail.com. We will announce the contest winner on May 7th. Sincerely, Amelia Field GiveUsRealChoices.org |
Today's Action Alert
Today's Action comes from NARAL: Next week, May 2-6, Members of Congress are high-tailing it out of Washington for a late spring recess. Will your senators join Tom DeLay for a "non-lobbyist-funded" trip to an exotic destination? Or will they actually come back to your state to meet with you - their constituents? Maybe we're old-fashioned, but we believe that our elected officials should go back to their home states to meet with voters one-on-one. It seems that this group of senators disagrees. During last month's congressional recess we couldn't track many of them down - forget about locating a public town hall meeting! Perhaps these "missing in action" senators didn't want to be questioned on issues like the nuclear option. We're hearing that Sen. Frist could launch the nuclear option as soon as the Senate returns from recess, making next week even more important for activists to speak out. The nuclear option would effectively eliminate the filibuster and end pro-choice senators' chances for blocking Bush's anti-choice nominees. The good news is that the vast majority of Americans stand with us - a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that 66 percent of Americans oppose changing Senate rules. This recess, don't let senators play hide and seek while President Bush and Sen. Frist have the future of the Supreme Court in their crosshairs! Track down your senators! * Let your senators know you're keeping an eye on them next week - and that you want them to talk with voters about the nuclear option. * Visit your senators during the recess next week. Check your local newspaper or visit your senators' websites for dates and times of town hall meetings. Or call your senators' offices at 202.224.3121 to schedule a personal appointment with your senators for you and your pro-choice friends. * If you can't catch up with your senators, get creative and have fun! Get your friends to write a brief, personal note opposing the nuclear option, then deliver your notes to the senators' office nearest you with a bag of atomic fire ball candy. Thanks for taking today's action. |
Monday, May 02, 2005
IOKIYAR
It's Ok If You Are Republican. Even possibly advocating the overturning of the American Constitution. Pat Robertson just did this, too. This one radical extremist cleric is taking over my blog. Help! Someone in the government, someone in the media, someone sane anywhere in the world, help! Notice that this lunatic is a lunatic and cut off his preferential treatment to all good media perks. No, Americans are not that fringey. No, you are not going to lose your cushy livelihood if you point out that he is raving mad:
Note that Article 6. of the Constitution explicitly bans any kind of religious test for judges. But even if Robertson didn't mean to literally require that candidates should not be Muslims, his argument makes no sense. Remember that we are right now in the big wingnut push to have more religious judges in the Supreme Court? Well, wouldn't fundamentalist Muslim judges be just the sort of people Robertson is looking for? People of the book, interpreting things strictly on religious grounds and so on? Gah. All he wants is a Robertsonian Gilead where everybody thinks just like Pat. Which is a world where nobody thinks at all. ---- Via Americablog. |
Another Reason to Emigrate...
The Reverend Pat Robertson:
Is there something like Godwin's Law about whoever first mentions Al Qaeda in a net conversation? If there is, it wouldn't apply to truly lunatic cases like this extreme radical cleric. Funny how he can't see that he has more in common with bin Laden's ideas than those of most any ordinary American. |
A Garden of A Sort
My garden was of air. Do not come so near. The children cannot hear the arrival of the fear. You are a bee, you sting. I never learned to sing. The children cannot flee the stinging of the bee. My garden was of air. Yet I could not leave. The children cannot bear the adulthood of grief. I never named this thing. I never learned to sing. The children cannot tell their garden is a hell. |
Fairer and Balanceder....The New PBS
The New York Times reports about the man behind the curtain at the new and improved Public Broadcasting Service, one Mr. Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, the chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Mr. Tomlinson wants to make the PBS fairer and more balanced. I agree with him. It would be nice to have the same number of liberal and lefty interviewees as those from the wingnut side. But this is not where Mr. Tomlinson sees problems. Rather, he thinks the PBS is a vile left-wing plot, the beating heart of the so-called liberal media, the oppressor of all things right and wingnutty, and he wants to stop this horrible state of affairs. Which he can handily do. He is in power. So what does Mr. Tomlinson plan? Here is a hint:
The article I quote from is full of references to people who no longer work for the PBS. I think that Mr. Tomlinson is doing some spring cleaning... You might be interested in learning that the board of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting has only three non-Republican members out of a total nine. Why is this seen as fairly balanced? But of course it is. Mr. Tomlinson's idea of balance is to get rid of voices like Bill Moyers' and to make sure that no anti-government investigative journalism will be performed in the future. And this clarifies his views even further:
It's funeral time for PBS. Every program will now be toothcombed for liberal nits, except for the wholly wingnut programs which will be assumed to be fair and balanced by their very nature. Tomlinson will pay for secret studies to see if Sesame Street advocates homosexuality or contains too little praying and so on. And people like bow-tie Tucker Carlson and the Wall Street capitalists will roam around freely. The New York Times article doesn't say this, of course. It is oh-so-polite and advocates a wait-and-see attitude in the hope that the wingnuts will be friendly and fair and balanced. But we all know what will really happen. The Fox news are not enough for the wingnuts, Scarborough Country does not suffice. No, what is needed is a totally wingnut media without a single breathing hole left for those of us who actually think. Of course, the PBS has never been especially left-wing. Only extreme wingnuts think so. But it has covered controversial issues and it has offered more thoughtful coverage than the average corporate-controlled newsmill. I think that all this will now be in the past. Limbaugh will be so pleased. |
Sunday, May 01, 2005
Spring is Coming!
|
From the Barricades
Did you know that you are a survivor of the abortion holocaust? This is the language of some pro-lifers. Imagine us as embryos: darting about, fleeing the evil abortionist or whatever, somehow miraculously surviving to the point after which pro-lifers no longer care about us: the birth. Pro-lifers seem to view women as aquaria: some empty, but with water that must be kept clear for future fishes, some with fish already in them and some all dry and dusty, no longer useful at all. A thirteen-year old in state custody in Florida is one of those aquaria with fish. She is more than thirteen weeks pregnant. She got pregnant after running away from the state home. The girl herself wants an abortion and her state-appointed custodian was helping her to get one until higher powers-that-be decided to intervene. The pro-life plot is to keep the case in court until abortion is too late. Giving birth is considerably more dangerous for a girl of this age than getting an abortion, but the case isn't about her, of course; it's about the rights of the fetus. Even though this can be clothed as a desire to properly punish the girl and whoever she had sex with:
The argument that this girl is too immature to make a decision about abortion is an odd one. She is supposedly mature enough to give birth and possibly to mother a child. And in court she sounded pretty mature to me:
and
Writing about this case makes me feel nauseous. This thirteen-year old child should be protected, should be allowed to have a childhood, should never have been in a situation where she got pregnant in the first place. We didn't care enough about her until she got pregnant. Then some of us care an enormous amount about her uterus but not at all about the rest of her. --- Second link originally from Feministing. |
Quote of the Day
This is a verry interesting one, by Laura Bush at the White House correspondents' annual dinner on Saturday:
A joke, of course. What else could it possibly be? |















