It's Okay, White People, We Can Admit The Truth.

POSTED BY JHW22

When the Trayvon Martin news became a big social media event, I was on vacation in the beautiful woods of Oklahoma - yes they exist. I went to two Walmarts for groceries and was nervous as hell for my car with the Obama sunrise O sitting out in the parking lot. My hope was no one knew what that was. It was creepy. I was surrounded by hunters and obvious Tea Partiers. I felt like I'd walked into the wrong universe.

I am a white woman, so I guess there was no real way to identify me as an outsider -- although, I do look like Rachel Maddow's twin, so it's possible someone could have assumed I was a lesbian liberal Yankee and I'd have been in trouble. I'm not a lesbian but I am a liberal and was raised in New Hampshire, so I was shaky.

But I was lucky. No one sniffed me out. For that period of time, I felt vulnerable. It was my own brain doing that to me, though. No one else.

I read about Trayvon one of the days on that vacation when I hopped online for a few minutes. My immediate thought was, "I can't read that, it's gonna hurt too much". I knew there was nothing good in a story about a dead, beautiful kid. I couldn't bring myself to know what happened because I don't handle grief so well anymore.

After several losses of loved ones in the last six years, and after becoming a mom, I can't watch movies or read books that even touch on a child's death, a parent's death -- or anything sentimental for that matter.

Then we got home and unpacked and I read. I spent the next two days reading and crying and thinking about Trayvon. Thinking I'd had days where I could choose to avoid the grief. His parents had had weeks of nothing but facing theirs. And I got mad. I got mad at a law that allows police to be lackluster, to take the word of a a living man against the silence of a dead kid. I got mad at the man who stalked a child then claimed self-defense.

And now I am mad at the people who haven't uttered a peep. I am mad at apologists trying to make self-defense apply to one person but not another.

And now I am awake.

For years I have read about black men being imprisoned at higher rates than white men. I have read about more black men being falsely incarcerated and later exonerated, than white men. I have read that more black communities suffer from hunger, lack of safe housing, weaker education, slower police response times, and on and on. I've known the data. I was a Sociology minor. I'm a Democrat. I know all of the data.

But until Trayvon Martin was killed and I had to face the sadness and read and listen, I never woke up to the life. The life that is lived by a person who has lived with a system set against him in ways he never knew. In a way society still whispers in our ears but never wants to address.

I have been accused of being a Becky, or of saying the wrong thing when my intent was clearly something benign. I have been stupid and at times in my life, extremely naive. I imagine most of us have thought or said ignorant or fearful things. But we can't play tit for tat or argue over a person's past statements and deeds in lieu of listening and watching current motivation. We can't treat this time as a moment of race-baiting or PC-idealism. And that being said, we HAVE to talk about the fact that Trayvon Martin was killed because he was black. It's okay to actually say it and not feel like backs need to hunch or defensive retorts need to be spit. It's not anti-white people to say it. We can all acknowledge the truth. We, as white people can say, "I don't like that a kid died because he was black". No spite is needed. There's no need to defend Zimmerman's actions because white people are on trial for perpetuating racism by not ever wanting to admit racism. We don't need to find lame excuses or ways to blame a dead kid. It's okay to admit that the President is not being divisive when he says that if he had a son, "He'd look like Trayvon". We don't need to play stupid and act like that wasn't profound as hell. It's alright, white America, to say, "A kid died because he was black and he matters to me".

The Martin family can't hide from the loss and we can't hide from the truth. We can move forward by admitting we are sad and angry and awake.

And yes, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and every vile white person posting at Fox.com, I'm talking to you.

Must Reads

Bob Cesca: The Most Underrated but Huge Obama Accomplishment

Greg Smith: Why I Am Leaving Goldman Sachs

Christopher Brauchli: Science and Santorum

Robert Reich: The Widening Wealth Divide, and Why We Need a Surtax on the Super Wealthy

Barnett Shale: Study finds no link between oil drilling, gas prices

Eugene Robinson: Trayvon Martin and dangerous times for black men

Jonathan Capehart: Under ‘suspicion’: The killing of Trayvon Martin

President Obama's Weekly Address - March 24, 2012

President Obama Says House Must Pass Bipartisan Transportation Bill



...and while I'm at it, here's last week's weekly address that I failed to post do to very limited to no blogging time. I'll be back in full force by the end of this week.

Ending Subsidies for Big Oil Companies

Keystone Argument Just Got More Interesting

POSTED BY JHW22

As we all know, the GOP has been blaming Obama for killing jobs and the high gas prices, in part by saying his decision (that they pressured him to make) to delay one leg of the Keystone Pipeline. The GOP forced him to delay it then then blamed that delay for the cost of gas. It was predictable.

What wasn't predictable was the conundrum the GOP now faces on the Oklahoma to Texas Gulf branch. In case you weren't aware, we've already had oil coming into America from Canada via the Keystone Pipeline for YEARS. The branch Obama delayed is a pipe that just sends more oil to Oklahoma -- where all the oil is bottle-necked. In fact, the oil has had to be re-routed because the facility couldn't contain it all. Why? Because the oil in Oklahoma can't get to refineries in Texas. Why? Because Texas land-owners in RED counties have blocked the pipeline. Why? Because they don't want the state to take their land so a foreign company can make profits while their land is at risk of pollution.

WAIT! WHAT?

You heard me right. Conservative Republican Libertarians in East Texas Red Counties don't want a corporation to make money off their sacrifice. They want Big Government to stop the very pipeline their own party has used to paint Obama as THE reason for high gas prices. The very people fighting the Texas branch of Keystone are the very people who support the GOP's attempt to force the Keystone Pipeline expansion.

So, if we make sure every American knows that East Texas doesn't want the pipeline and if we make sure every American knows that those landowners are Republican, then we box the GOP into a corner.

So, even though I don't like the pipeline, I sure like this corner and paint can the President presented us with today. Let's paint!

MUST READS

POSTED BY JHW22

I'm filling in for Broadway Carl today so I was ready to post some must reads. But for some reason, I can only bring myself to post this.

Just this.

The Right Not to Know

Another Example of Post Racial America

Yeah... right.

A photograph of a bumper sticker that features racist, anti-Obama language has gone viral on Facebook and other social networks.

The sticker reads "Don't Re-Nig In 2012," in large white type, above smaller text that reads: "Stop repeat offenders. Don't re-elect Obama!"

Other offensive stickers from the company selling this one include a picture of a chimp that reads "Obama 2012."

We've come so far as a post racial society since electing a man of color to the Presidency, haven't we?

Rick's Hispanic Pandering

Not!

My work schedule has prevented me from blogging and it'll be sparse here for the next week or so, but I had to chime on Rick Santorum's trip to Puerto Rico this week.

According to a Spanish translation of the interview posted on El Vocero’s Web site, Santorum responded that “as in any other state, (Puerto Rico) should comply with this and every other federal law -- and that is that English must be the main language.”

Now, not only is Santorum being what can be described as bigoted when it comes to the issue of the English language, but what I take the most offense to is the notion that somewhere in our Constitution, he thinks there is a federal law that states English must be the main language for territories applying for statehood.
In his defense, the Santorum campaign is claiming he was misquoted and didn't say that English should be the "only" language, but that is a lame excuse. The subject shouldn't even have been broached. I'll even take Rick at his word and substitute "only" to "main" or "primary." It's still a dumbass thing to say or think.

A proud cultural heritage and tradition are things Hispanics in general have strong feelings about. For Rick to dismiss a language they've been speaking almost 300 years before the birth of the United States is a callous, insensitive and bigoted thought.

And I say bigoted because a Santorum spokesman said...

“In Puerto Rico, Rick would encourage people to speak English in addition to Spanish because English is the language of opportunity in America,” he added.

The language of opportunity? I disagree, Rick. Opportunity, as far as language is concerned, may come from the advantage of being bilingual or multi-lingual. But to think you have an advantage because you speak English as opposed to multiple languages is, oh I don't know... elitist?

Way to go, immediately alienating the Puerto Rican/Hispanic vote. What a snob!

The Big Gas Lie

Last week, I received an email from House Republicans. I guess I'm on their list, or someone being a wise guy put me on their list. But no matter - I love seeing the latest shit that comes out of their ass and their attempt to pass it as some kind of idea.

The email was hitting all talking points of the most recent attack on President Obama in blaming him for the current gas prices. Here's the chart they included:



Perhaps they should have included a wider timeline range... like this:



You see that big peak in June of 2008 when gas prices were $4.12 per gallon just before that precipitous decline? Can anyone remind me who was President in June of 2008? Oh, right! It was George W. Bush. Was he to blame for to blame for that? No. Just as President Obama isn't to blame for current prices. And the reason for the nose dive to $1.61 by December of 2008, just one month before President Obama took office was the huge recession that we are still recovering from these three and a half years later.

But that doesn't stop the GOP from trying to tie high gas prices to Obama administration policies. Hell, that's all they really have, isn't it? They scream about Keystone XL even though any oil from that project would go on to the global market. We are in our 24th straight month of private sector job growth, unemployment is down to 8.3% from a high of 10% in October of 2009 and more people are now encouraged to enter the job market which is why the unemployment rate remained steady.

So if they can't attack Obama on the economy, and they can't attack the man who gave the go ahead to take out Osama bin Laden as being weak on terrorism, and their attacks on the contraception battle are backfiring, what can they attack him with? Something he can't do much about: the price of a gallon of gas. Even though the fact is that no presidential or congressional policies can do much to affect the cost of gas.

What is driving up the price of gas is global oil prices,  Wall Street speculation, Middle East unrest (I'm looking at you Iran and Israel.)

But that doesn't stop Newt Gingrich's from bellowing that he can give us gas for $2.50 a gallon while we are headed for $10 per gallon at the current rate because of that meddling President Obama. Gingrich is lying. Plain and simple. Not that it matters. Anti-Obama factions will believe what they want to believe. They'll even believe a thrice married, twice adulterer, disgraced former Speaker of the House who was run out of town on ethics violations. But I never claimed those people were smart.

Dumbass Quote of the Day

Mitt Romney just can't stop bragging about his rich friends. First it was his NASCAR owner friends when he visited Daytona and made fun of the Average Joe wearing plastic ponchos, and now it's this:

"Well, you know I’m surprised to hear that Denver’s thinking about [Peyton Manning], they’re -- I don’t want him in our neck of the woods to Miami or to the Jets," Romney said. "But I’ve got a lot of good friends, the owner Miami Dolphins, and the New York Jets — both owners are friends of mine. But let’s keep him away from New England, so Tom Brady has a better chance of picking up a championship."

You know who aren't friends of Jets owner Woody Johnson? Every Jets season ticket holder who had to pay a personal seat license to be eligible to buy tickets. You know, the average fan. Something Mitt Romney knows nothing about.

Tweet of the Day

Must Reads

Greg Sargent: Dems twist knife in birth control fight

Dana Milbank: The GOP’s gasoline alley

Sen. John Kerry: Romney’s wrong-headed assertions about Iran

David Macaray: Rush Limbaugh Is No Joke

Kai Wright: How a Racist Email Reveals the Grand Old Party Has Become a Petty Affair

Jim Wright: The Absurdity of Rush Limbaugh

Limbaugh Defends Joseph Kony Solely To Be Anti-Obama

Some people will do or say anything strictly because it's in opposition to that evil, Socialist, Marxist, anti-colonial Kenyan world view, Manchurian candidate President Barack Obama. How much farther can Rush Limbaugh stick his head up his own ass. This time, Rush defends Ugandan leader of the Lord's Resistance Army, Joseph Kony. If you don't know what the LRA is...

The LRA is a militant group with a syncretic pseudo-Christian extreme religious ideology, known for the atrocities they commit against civilians, including murder, mutilations, rape, and in some accounts even cannibalism.

Directed by Kony, the LRA has earned a reputation for its actions against the people of several countries, including northern Uganda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic, South Sudan, and Sudan. It has abducted and forced an estimated 66,000 children to fight for them, and has forced the internal displacement of over two million people since its rebellion began in 1986.

But because Limbaugh and most of the GOP say and do everything they can to oppose President Obama, then they've got to be against this, right? It has to be some conspiracy to defeat the Christian faith if you go after someone who's "army" is called the Lord's Resistance Army. I mean, it's right there in the name! "Lord" is part of their name, therefore they must be fighting on behalf of God. ...Seriously.



How do you combat this type of idiocy and ignorance?

It reminds me of this Key & Peele comedy clip.



UPDATE: As Rush continued his statements, which aren't in the video, here's what he said:

...So that's a new war, a hundred troops to wipe out Christians in Sudan, Uganda, and -- (interruption) no, I'm not kidding. Jacob Tapper just reported it. Now, are we gonna help the Egyptians wipe out the Christians? Wouldn't you say that we are? I mean the Coptic Christians are being wiped out, but it wasn't just Obama that supported that. The conservative intelligentsia thought it was an outbreak of democracy. Now they've done a 180 on that, but they forgot that they supported it in the first place. Now they're criticizing it.

Lord's Resistance Army objectives. I have them here. "To remove dictatorship and stop the oppression of our people." Now, again Lord's Resistance Army is who Obama sent troops to help nations wipe out. The objectives of the Lord's Resistance Army, what they're trying to accomplish with their military action in these countries is the following: "To remove dictatorship and stop the oppression of our people; to fight for the immediate restoration of the competitive multiparty democracy in Uganda; to see an end to gross violation of human rights and dignity of Ugandans; to ensure the restoration of peace and security in Uganda, to ensure unity, sovereignty, and economic prosperity beneficial to all Ugandans, and to bring to an end the repressive policy of deliberate marginalization of groups of people who may not agree with the LRA ideology." Those are the objectives of the group that we are fighting, or who are being fought and we are joining in the effort to remove them from the battlefield.

Yes, President Obama is defending Muslims and killing Christians. That was what Rush was trying to get across to his ditto heads. And they'll buy it hook, line and sinker because they want to believe it.

President Obama's Weekly Address - March 10, 2012

Investing in a Clean Energy Future

Chris Christie's Bully Syndrome

Now granted, this is an edited video, mostly of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie's response to law student and former Navy SEAL, William Brown. We don't see the possible and probable interruption(s) of Brown. But I really don't need to see a full, unedited version, because here's the thing: this is just another instance in a continuing pattern of Christie being a bully to constituents who attend his town hall meetings, teachers and teachers unions, call into his live, on-air interviews or anywhere else he happens to be speaking in a public forum.

The problem with Chris Christie (as if there were only one) is that he thinks he's Tony Soprano. He's not. He's an elected official, one of only fifty governors in the country. Yet Christie acts like he's a bouncer at the Bada Bing. He thinks he can say anything he wants. He's beloved by his party for being so "blunt." But what would his party say, if President Obama, during a town hall meeting where you know some serious and sometimes awkward questions will be asked, called a former Navy SEAL an idiot? There would be mass outrage of epic proportions.

Maybe Chris Christie is a normal, guy next door. Who knows? But as governor, I don't want the guy next door that you can sit down and have a beer with while he eats all the spare ribs. I want a thoughtful, responsible, intelligent person. He, along with all elected officials, must be held to a higher standard. So sit back, Chris, take the question, take deep breath and answer it as politely as possible, then move on. Despite what you may think, you don't have the power to have somebody whacked.

Visual Aid

POSTED BY JHW22

I'm a visual person. So a few weeks ago I decided I needed a chart that shows how many bills have been introduced to limit women's health care. But it was hard to find all the information to make an accurate chart. I even contacted my friend who is a well-connected Sociology professor on women's issues, and particularly women's reproductive care. But even her contacts couldn't get me information. Why? Because there is so damn much.

Today, I heard that the Guttmacher Institute released a report in January that documents the record number of bills proposed in 2011, across the country, to destroy abortion rights. I like their chart a lot. It's a very dramatic chart. But I still needed to make my own. Granted, theirs is based on facts and mine is based on rage, but you get the point.

Because The Bible Says So...

...that's why.

Via Alan Colmes:

Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK): Well actually the Genesis 8:22 that I use in there is that ‘as long as the earth remains there will be seed time and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, day and night,’ my point is, God’s still up there. The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous.

The arrogance! Outrageous, I tells ya!

...Seriously, you can't make this shit up. Parody is dead. DEAD I TELLS YA!

WHEN DOES THIS SHIT STOP!?!

POSTED BY JHW22

This AZ bill would prevent parents from suing doctors for not telling them about any health conditions of their unborn babies. So, if a baby will have any life-threatening problems, the doctors won't be required to tell the parents prior to birth. Or, the parents don't have any recourse, at the least.

The reason: they don't want parents to choose abortion. SO, you may never consider abortion for a baby with health problems but because the doctor doesn't want to take that chance, you won't know to prepare for a baby's needs once its born. I, for one, would want to have everything lined up the second my child was born. To not be told of a health condition before the child's birth is the most backwards way of practicing health care. The right-wing's ideology is really putting lives at risk. How "pro-life".

And remember, all those transvaginal ultrasounds are meant to give women all the "facts" about her pregnancy. Or so the right-wing says.

My New Policy

POSTED BY JHW22

You know how the House Republicans required some Constitutional statement at the beginning of all new bills? Well, I've decided that from now on, any time a "Christian" wants to talk politics with me, they have to cite a section(s) in the Bible where JESUS (not Paul or Moses or anyone else) is quoted in support of their political stance.

If they want to say poor people are lazy, they have to show me where JESUS said it. Not where Paul wrote a letter to the Thessalonians. And if they can't support their political views with their more important religious views of CHRIST himself, then their principles are compromised and thus not even remotely relevant in a conversation. Not worth my time.

Let's Get This Straight

POSTED BY JHW22

I just hit my limit of hearing jackasses talk about Sandra Fluke's Congressional testimony on contraception and getting it WRONG. Tony Perkins was on Martin Bashir and said that, although he wouldn't want his daughter insulted, his daughter would never go before Congress to talking about "sexual promiscuity".

THAT DID IT! I am about as pissed as I can be.

It's painfully clear Mr. Perkins didn't hear or read Ms. Fluke's testimony or he'd know that the only mention of contraception for sex was about a married couple who couldn't afford birth control any longer. It's painfully clear he takes his cues from Limbaugh and the right-wing talking heads on the value of LYING.
But what REALLY sent me into shaking, screaming, rising blood pressure mode was the next topic of discussion: transvaginal ultrasounds for women seeking access to their legal rights. He said that transvaginal ultrasounds are important for sharing FACTS with women.

Well, I suggest Mr. Perkins begin by educating himself on facts by reading and watching Ms. Fluke's testimony before he goes on air again to distort and further insult Ms. Fluke by making her out to be someone she's not. Yes, Mr. Perkins, facts are important. GET SOME! Perhaps you can help me educate Mr. Perkins by Tweeting him with facts @tperkins

Leader Pelosi, members of Congress, good morning, and thank you for calling this hearing on women's health and for allowing me to testify on behalf of the women who will benefit from the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage regulation.

My name is Sandra Fluke, and I'm a third-year student at Georgetown Law School. I'm also a past president of Georgetown Law Students for Reproductive Justice, or LSRJ. And I'd like to acknowledge my fellow LSRJ members and allies, and all of the student activists with us, and thank them so much for being here today.

We, as Georgetown LSRJ, are here today because we're so grateful that this regulation implements the nonpartisan medical advice of the Institute of Medicine. I attend a Jesuit law school that does not provide contraceptive coverage in its student health plan. And just as we students have faced financial, emotional and medical burdens as a result, employees at religiously affiliated hospitals and institutions and universities across the country have suffered similar burdens. We are all grateful for the new regulation that will meet the critical health care needs of so many women. Simultaneously, the recently announced adjustment addresses any potential conflict with the religious identity of Catholic and Jesuit institutions.

When I look around my campus, I see the faces of the women affected by this lack of contraceptive coverage. And especially in the last week, I have heard more and more of their stories. On a daily basis, I hear from yet another woman from Georgetown or from another school or who works for a religiously affiliated employer, and they tell me that they have suffered financially, emotionally and medically, because of this lack of coverage. And so I'm here today to share their voices, and I want to thank you for allowing them -- them, not me -- to be heard.

Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that's practically an entire summer's salary. Forty percent of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they've struggled financially as a result of this policy.

One told us of how embarrassed and just powerless she felt when she was standing at the pharmacy counter and learned for the first time that contraception was not covered on her insurance, and she had to turn and walk away because she couldn't afford that prescription. Women like her have no choice but to go without contraception.

Just last week, a married female student told me that she had to stop using contraception because she and her husband just couldn't fit it into their budget any more. Women employed in low-wage jobs without contraceptive coverage face this same choice.

And some might respond that contraception is accessible in lots of other ways. Unfortunately, that's just not true. Women's health clinics provide a vital medical service, but, as the Guttmacher Institute has definitively documented, these clinics are unable to meet the crushing demand for these services. Clinics are closing, and women are being forced to go without the medical care they need.

How can Congress consider the Fortenberry, Rubio and Blunt legislation, that would allow even more employers and institutions to refuse contraception coverage, and then respond that the nonprofit clinics should step up to take care of the resulting medical crisis; particularly when so many legislators are attempting to defund those very same clinics?

These denials of contraceptive coverage impact real people. In the worst cases, women who need this medication for other medical reasons suffer very dire consequences. A friend of mine, for example, has polycystic ovarian syndrome, and she has to take prescription birth control to stop cysts from growing on her ovaries. Her prescription is technically covered by Georgetown's insurance, because it's not intended to prevent pregnancy. Unfortunately, under many religious institutions' insurance plans, it wouldn't be. There would be no exception for other medical needs. And under Senator Blunt's amendment, Senator Rubio's bill or Representative Fortenberry's bill, there's no requirement that such an exception be made for these medical needs.

When this exception does exist, these exceptions don't accomplish their well-intended goals, because when you let university administrators or other employers, rather than women and their doctors, dictate whose medical needs are legitimate and whose are not, a woman's health takes a backseat to a bureaucracy focused on policing her body. In 65 percent of the cases at our school, our female students were interrogated by insurance representatives and university medical staff about why they needed prescriptions and whether they were lying about their symptoms. For my friend, and 20 percent of the women in her situation, she never got the insurance company to cover her prescription. Despite verification of her illness from her doctor, her claim was denied repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted birth control to prevent pregnancy. She's gay -- so clearly, polycystic ovarian syndrome was a much more urgent concern than accidental pregnancy for her.

After months of paying over $100 out of pocket, she just couldn't afford her medication anymore, and she had to stop taking it. I learned about all of this when I walked out of a test and got a message from her that, in the middle of the night in her final-exam period, she'd been in the emergency room. She'd been there all night in just terrible, excruciating pain. She wrote to me: "It was so painful I woke up thinking I'd been shot." Without her taking the birth control, a massive cyst the size of a tennis ball had grown on her ovary. She had to have surgery to remove her entire ovary as a result. On the morning I was originally scheduled to give this testimony, she was sitting in a doctor's office trying to cope with the consequences of this medical catastrophe.

Since last year's surgery, she's been experiencing night sweats and awaking and other symptoms of early menopause as a result of the removal of her ovary. She's 32 years old. As she put it: If my body indeed does enter early menopause, no fertility specialist in the world will be able to help me have my own children. I will have no choice at giving my mother her desperately desired grandbabies, simply because the insurance policy -- that I paid for, totally unsubsidized by my school -- wouldn't cover my prescription for birth control when I needed it. Now, in addition to potentially facing the health complications that come with having menopause at such an early age -- increased risk of cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis -- she may never be able to conceive a child.

Some may say that my friend's tragic story is rare. It's not. I wish it were. One woman told us doctors believe she has endometriosis, but that can't be proven without surgery. So the insurance has not been willing to cover her medication, the contraception she needs to treat her endometriosis. Recently, another woman told me that she also has polycystic ovarian syndrome, and she's struggling to pay for her medication and is terrified not to have access to it. Due to the barriers erected by Georgetown's policy, she hasn't been reimbursed for her medication since last August. I sincerely pray that we don't have to wait until she loses an ovary or is diagnosed with cancer before her needs and the needs of all of these women are taken seriously, because this is the message that not requiring coverage of contraception sends: A woman's reproductive health care isn't a necessity, isn't a priority.

One woman told us that she knew birth control wasn't covered on the insurance, and she assumed that that's how Georgetown's insurance handled all of women's reproductive and sexual health care. So when she was raped, she didn't go to the doctor, even to be examined or tested for sexually transmitted infections, because she thought insurance wasn't going to cover something like that, something that was related to a woman's reproductive health.

As one other student put it, this policy communicates to female students that our school doesn't understand our needs. These are not feelings that male fellow students experience, and they're not burdens that male students must shoulder.

In the media lately, some conservative Catholic organizations have been asking, what did we expect when we enrolled at a Catholic school? We can only answer that we expected women to be treated equally, to not have our school create untenable burdens that impede our academic success. We expected that our schools would live up the Jesuit creed of "cura personalis," to care for the whole person by meeting all of our medical needs. We expected that when we told our universities of the problems this policy created for us as students, they would help us. We expected that when 94 percent of students opposed the policy, the university would respect our choices regarding insurance students pay for completely unsubsidized by the university.

We did not expect that women would be told in the national media that we should have gone to school elsewhere and -- even if that meant going to a less prestigious university. We refuse to pick between a quality education and our health, and we resent that in the 21st century anyone thinks it's acceptable to ask us to make this choice simply because we are women.

Many of the women whose stories I've shared today are Catholic women. So ours is not a war against the church. It is a struggle for access to the health care we need. The president of the Association of Jesuit Colleges has shared that Jesuit colleges and universities appreciate the modification to the rule announced recently. Religious concerns are addressed, and women get the health care they need. And I sincerely hope that that is something we can all agree upon.

Thank you very much.

The Notorious D.I.C.K.

Well, where to start? After Rush Limbaugh's non-apology apology for calling Sandra† Fluke a "slut" and a "prostitute," he tried to make excuses for himself for why he used those words, and tried to compare his profession to that of a rapper.

“Talk about a double standard,” Limbaugh said on air Monday, according to Dylan Stableford. “Rappers can say anything they want about women [and] it’s called art. And they win awards.”

Whether you like rap music or not, it's considered an art form because it's something that is created. When has Rush created anything other than a shitstorm of hate? Sorry, Notorious D.I.C.K., you're not a rapper.

And good for Sandra Fluke to reject Limbaugh's non-apology. He said he was sorry for using those words, but I don't remember him saying he was sorry for wanting to see sex tapes of Fluke in return for something he's not paying for, which also seems to be overlooked by those covering this story. In fact, calling her a slut and a prostitute was tame in comparison to the other things he said.

*One more thing: Did anyone notice that last all week, Limbaugh was pronouncing Fluke's name "Fluck" as in rhymes with "Fuck"? Only today has he been pronouncing her name correctly.


(† A previous version of this post mistakenly named Ms. Fluke as Sarah, and has been corrected.)

Rush Still Doesn't Get It

There must have been a major shitstorm in RushWorld after advertisers started pulling their spots from Limbaugh's show because of the crude, misogynist remarks he made toward Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke and her Congressional testimony. His "slut" and "prostitute" remarks were not based in any reality whatsoever. Advertisers let him know by pulling their ads and it looks like he was either scared enough or pressured enough by ClearChannel to actually apologize in a statement.

For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week. In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.

I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress. I personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities. What happened to personal responsibility and accountability? Where do we draw the line? If this is accepted as the norm, what will follow? Will we be debating if taxpayers should pay for new sneakers for all students that are interested in running to keep fit?In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone's bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a Presidential level.

My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.

But of course! Calling someone a slut and a prostitute is the height of humor. Ask and comedian and they'll tell you there's nothing like misogyny to get a crowd rolling in the aisles.

But this website apology only proves that Limbaugh never actually bothered to listen to or read Sandra Fluke's statement, and that he really doesn't understand how contraception works. So I'll try to explain in an attempt to make Rush and any dittohead understand what it is that he's railing about without any grasp of reality.

"I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress."

I think it would be absurd too, Rush, but that's not what they were talking about. If you bothered to educate yourself and actually listen to what they were talking about, you'd know they were speaking not of sex or sexual recreational activity (I know you're disappointed) but of the medical necessity of contraception. What about the woman who needs birth control to regulate her hormones because of endometriosis? What about the woman who suffers from polycystic ovarian syndrome, as Sandra Fluke testified?

"I personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities."

We're not. Georgetown University is a PRIVATE school buying insurance plans from PRIVATE insurance companies on which students PAY premiums, just like anyone else who has an insurance plan. Taxpayers are not paying for this. In fact, the mandate the Obama administration put forth in their compromise which effectively took the church off the hook required the INSURANCE COMPANIES to provide free contraception (i.e. prescription meds, not condoms because it's not about sex) should the religious institutions have a moral dilemma with it.

But since Rush and Co. don't understand how contraception works, this is falling on deaf ears. Some are moronically still insisting that this is about sex and crunching the numbers to calculate how much sex women are having per day depending on their contraception costs.

"...it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone's bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a Presidential level."

Once again, Rush, it's not about nosing into someone's bedroom - and the only reason it reach the Presidential level is because it was you who made it about the private affairs of someone's bedroom even though it isn't about sex. President Obama actually called Ms. Fluke to support her after your misogynist attack. Do we see a pattern here?

"...what will follow? Will we be debating if taxpayers should pay for new sneakers for all students that are interested in running to keep fit?"

Do I even have to go into comparing prescription medication to sneakers?

Rush doesn't understand. Rush will never understand. And the only reason Rush apologized was because he realized his words are hurting his wallet.

Must Reads

HuffPo: Warren Buffett Derides Chris Christie For 'Write A Check And Shut Up' Comment

John Heilemann: The Lost Party

Arthur Delaney: Drug Testing Bill Targets Florida State Workers, Excludes Lawmakers

P. Scott Russell: Rick Santorum On Religious Freedom: What He Has Forgotten Since Law School

Dana Milbank: Mitt Romney’s acceptance speech, in (mostly) his own words

Jim Wright: The Perversity of Extremism Tends Toward The Maximum

Steve Benen: A 'Eh, who cares' style of leadership

Jim Hightower: The Keystone XL Flim-flam

Matt Taibbi: Bank of America In Trouble?

President Obama's Weekly Address - March 3, 2012

Taking Control of Our Energy Future

Seriously, Dude?!

U.S. District Judge Richard F. Cebull, Montana's chief federal judge, sent an e-mail to some old buddies with a joke that implied President Obama was the offspring of his mother and a dog...

The message's subject line was "A Mother's Memory."

The Great Falls Tribune, which obtained the forwarded message, published it in its entirety:

"Normally I don't send or forward a lot of these, but even by my standards, it was a bit touching. I want all of my friends to feel what I felt when I read this. Hope it touches your heart like it did mine.

"A little boy said to his mother; 'Mommy, how come I'm black and you're white?'

"His mother replied, 'Don't even go there Barack! From what I can remember about that party, you're lucky you don't bark!'"

This is a US Federal judge. But hey, it's okay right? We're in a post-racial nation now that we have a black man as president! How can you claim there's ANY racism in this country when we have a black president?!!

Andrew Breitbart Dead at 43

Since I've been working a lot more and blogging less these past couple of months, I didn't have a chance to express my thoughts about Breitbart's death until now. I did have a chance to read Chez Pazienza's well written post although in my opinion he was way too diplomatic. My co-blogger Jennifer tweeted "I'm not going to act like Breitbart over Breitbart. But I don't think he's equivalent to Anthony Shadid so I'd be OK if coverage were less."

For the most part, I agree with them both. But here's the thing: why is it that I should have any compassion for a man whose very existence in public life was nothing but the height of vileness? He walked the earth with the sole purpose of pushing his political ideology not by extolling the virtues on his own party, but by vilifying the opposition though lies and deceit. Why should I "mourn the man and not his deeds"?

He was complicit in destroying ACORN by flat out lying about them. Should the thousands of people who lost their jobs because of his doctored videotape mourn his loss? He set fire to the career of Shirley Sherrod and slandered her name with accusations of racism, then tried to wash his hands of it because he claimed didn't know that the "evidence" against her was edited as well. And I'm supposed to feel some kind of sympathy?

If someone makes their living as a flamethrower then they can't gripe when its turned on them. Live by the cheap shot, die by the cheap shot. In fact, Breitbart himself showed no respect after the passing of Ted Kennedy:

Andrew Breitbart, a Washington Times columnist who oversees Breitbart.com and BigHollywood.com, tapped into the anti-Kennedy vein in the hours after the senator’s death was announced, posting a series of Twitter messages in which he called Kennedy a “villain,” a “duplicitous bastard” and a “prick.”

"I'm more than willing to go off decorum to ensure THIS MAN is not beatified,” Breitbart wrote. “Sorry, he destroyed lives. And he knew it."

Sorry, Breitbart certainly destroyed lives. And he most certainly knew it.

Did I wish him dead? No. But neither am I saddened by his passing. There are still plenty of blowhards to fill the gaps. He won't be missed.

My Son on Those Who Love President Obama & Those Who Don't

POSTED BY JHW22

My son divided his stuffed animals into two groups: those who like President Obama and those who don't and he articulated the differences. Pretty spot-on for a kiddo. We did a few of these because he likes watching them on the computer afterward and I decided not to post the one where he said the ones who don't like President Obama steal his underwear and pants.

Why We Never Get Through

POSTED BY JHW22

So many times I have great discussions with other Democrats and inevitably someone says something to the effect of "Republican women won't stand for that" or "Republican voters are sick of this". But when we step back and think about it, we are applying Democratic values, perceptions and priorities to their thinking.

For example, Democrats were sure that Republican women would be offended by the war on women being waged over the past year by their own party. But why? Why would we think that? Republican women don't think like Democratic women. It's not that they love their kids less or that they are heartless bitches. But, really, Republican women have different views than we do. So why would we expect a Republican woman to see the contraception debate the way a Democratic woman would? We see it as an assault on our rights. They see it as an assault on their rights. But we each have a focus on different sets of rights.

Then take Ron Paul. Democrats were convinced his newsletters would be the end of his campaign. Why? Why would we think that Republicans would see the newsletters the way we see them as opposed to the way Paul sees them? Do we think they'll all of a sudden think like us because it's such a big deal issue? No. Republicans aren't going to drastically change their life experiences and conclusions taken from them just because WE as Democrats are offended by something. There's no sensible basis to expect it. So why do we?

Today Democrats are outraged by Rush Limbaugh and his vile comments about a college girl who stood up for a woman's right to have access to birth control. He implied she is paid for sex, is a slut and apparently he wants to watch sex tapes with her in them. Democrats are appalled for good reason. But here's the deal, I don't know any Republican who listen to Rush who will say "that crossed a line". The people who listen to Rush have crossed that line plenty of times before and don't care. They do not care. So, as offended as I am by this, I wish Democrats would stop pretending we'll get through to a certain voting block by assuming they can possibly see it our way just because we think it's a big fucking deal.

Folks, if these people could see things our way, they'd be Democrats.

Happy February 29th!

Let's Be Blunt

POSTED BY JHW22

What would you do if your boss said he was morally opposed to providing health care plans that cover pregnancy if you are in your second marriage because you were divorced from your first? And then you got pregnant with your new husband. Would you have to quit your job? Find a private policy to cover your health care? Scrape the money together? What if a female business owner thought prostate cancer was something she didn't want to cover in her company-provided plans? What would her male employees do? This Blunt amendment could mean YOU don't get health care coverage through your job. So, where ya gonna get it?

Did Romney Win Michigan?

For the first few hours, the GOP Michigan primary was too close to call. Mitt Romney, who was raised in the state and whose father was a former governor, was neck and neck with Rick Santorum. Then the call was made: Romney was declared the winner of the Michigan primary. But did he really win?

Rick Santorum claimed a partial victory Wednesday when final results showed he and Mitt Romney evenly split Michigan' s 30 delegates, even though Romney got more overall votes in the Republican presidential primary Tuesday.

The latest estimates from CNN showed both candidates with 15 Michigan delegates, while Romney was ahead in the popular vote with 41% to Santorum's 38%.

If you strictly look at the numbers, then yes, Romney won the popular vote and the delegates were split 50/50 because the race was so close in a state in which he should have cleaned up. But in a state in which he should have cleaned up, was this really a win for Mitt Romney? Yeah, I don't think so either.

Davy Jones Dies at 66

HuffPo: The Monkees singer Davy Jones has died at the age of 66, TMZ reports. A rep for Jones revealed that he passed away Wednesday morning after suffering a heart attack.

President Obama's UAW Conference Speech

BOOM! goes the dynamite. Watch and enjoy.

Quote of the Day

“Six months before this thing got going, every Republican I know was saying, ‘We’re gonna win, we’re gonna beat Obama.’ Now even those who’ve endorsed Romney say, ‘My God, what a fucking mess.’”

~Republican strategist Ed Rollins

(Via Bob Cesca)

What A Dick

Here's my governor (unfortunately) with full pomposity on display on Morning Joe clashing with Jonathan Capehart over the issue of gay marriage among other things. Good luck trying to stomach the 20 plus minutes of video.

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

Santorum's College/Religion Dogwhistles Are Wrong

"...62 percent of kids who enter college with some sort of faith commitment leave without it."

~Rick Santorum

That would be completely wrong. But did you actually expect it to be correct?

"...multiple studies have found that the opposite is true — including the one that Santorum has reportedly been referring to.

A study published 2007 in the journal Social Forces — which PBS reports that Santorum’s claim is based on, although his spokesman didn’t respond to TPM’s request for confirmation — finds that Americans who don’t go to college experience a steeper decline in their religiosity than those who do."

I just can't understand Santorum's latest crusade against a college education when studies in fact do show that a college degree does lead to a more successful career. But I suppose it's all part of the Republican attempt to dumb down America. How else would they get votes? And when all else fails, use the indoctrination boogeyman.

"President Obama once said he wants everybody in America to go to college. What a snob. There are good, decent men and women who go out and work hard everyday and put their skills to test that aren't taught by some liberal college professor that [tries] to indoctrinate them."

At least he called him, "President Obama." But it's funny, I don't remember anyone railing against "indoctrination" in our nation's schools until we had a Manchurian Candidate, Kenyan anti-colonialist, illegitimate President. But Santorum goes on.

Pressed by moderator David Gregory whether he encouraged his children to go to college, Santorum said he encouraged them "to get higher education." "In fact, if college is the best place for them, absolutely, but you know what? If going to a trade school and learning to be a carpenter or a plumber or other types of skills or an artist... or musician, all of those things are very important and worthwhile professions that we should not look down our nose at."

Who said anything about looking down our nose at those who don't go to college? And "higher education" is what the President exactly said.

George Stephanopolous: All he said was he wants, quote, "every American to commit to at least one year or more of higher education or career training."

Must Reads

Mike Lux: What Bible Is Santorum Reading?

Steve Benen: Merit badges, cookies, and 'the destruction of traditional American family values'

E.J. Dionne: President Obama as an alien

Dana Milbank: Rick Santorum cries Nazi

Brian Beutler: The Truth About Political Attacks Over High Gas Prices

President Obama's Weekly Address - February 25, 2012

An All-Of-The-Above Approach to American Energy

Mulattos Need Not Apply

What. The. Fuck.

Tuesday, Gordon Warren Epperly filed a lawsuit in Alaska challenging President Obama's inclusion on the 2012 presidential ballot. What's Epperly's beef? Apparently, he feels Negroes and mulattoes can't be president because they aren't really citizens.

I'm speechless.

Cadillac Man

“I love this country. Actually I love this state,” he said in Detroit Friday. “This feels good, being back in Michigan. You know, the trees are the right height. The streets are just right. I like the fact that most of the cars I see are Detroit-made automobiles. I drive a Mustang and a Chevy pickup truck. Ann drives a couple of Cadillacs, actually. And I used to have a Dodge truck, so I used to have all three covered.”

~Mitt Romney

Again with the tree height? What does that even mean?! And what an awesome way to show how much Mitt relates to the Average Joe. Four cars (at least) and two of them are Cadillacs. The other is a sports car. And the other other is a truck. I wonder what the Romney household(s) fuel consumption is?

At least he's not blaming President Obama for the amount of gas money it takes to fill up his Hummer.

Same As It Ever Was

BAGRAM, Afghanistan — Word that NATO personnel had burned an undisclosed number of Korans and were preparing to dispose of many more by incineration set off an angry protest here on Tuesday. NATO officials rushed to apologize publicly and profusely, trying to head off what they feared could be a nationwide outburst of violence as news of the burning was gradually broadcast across the country.

This is why we'll never take the next step as a society of humans. When we realize that for some, this has all become some sick, goddamned crusade in the guise of a "war on terror" the sooner we will all be better for it. How often has religious descrimination and book burning worked? Answer: never.

Cartoon of the Day

Something is Horribly Wrong with Republican Voters

Gallup: Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum are now statistically tied for the lead in Republican registered voters' preferences for the 2012 GOP nomination -- 32% to 30%, respectively.

Wait, I'm wrong. I can't possibly blame GOP voters for these numbers with the disgusting clown car of candidates that I'd have to choose from were I in their shoes. The only thing I can blame them for is the fact that they vote GOP at all. Luckily, I have a brain and don't have to choose between these morons.

Silence Is Golden

Remember when the GOP and Republican talking heads went apeshit when the Obama administration decided to try Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, AKA "The Underwear Bomber" in federal civilian court? Remember when Senate Minority Leader Mitch "The Jowel" McConnell said President Obama was acting “as if [Abdulmutallab] had robbed a convenience store”?

There was a time when the circumstances surrounding Abdulmutallab’s arrest were part of a lengthy national debate about the best way to handle terrorism cases. There were letters, television appearances and press releases calling on the Obama administration to reverse its position and send Abdulmutallab into the military tribunal system due to perceived weaknesses in the civilian court system.

Now that he’s locked up for life, it’s pretty much radio silence. A search for press releases mentioning Abdulmutallab from members of Congress this week turns up just one, from Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), who said the sentence ‘demonstrations that our federal court system is fully capable of bringing terrorist to justice.”

Yeah, they trusted our judicial system so much, they insisted he be sent to a military tribunal. Why do Republicans hate America and its justice system?



*Note: I know Joe Lieberman also insisted on a military tribunal for Abdulmutallab too, but really, let's not delude ourselves for a second that he was ever really a Democrat or even an Independent.

Weighing In On Whitney

Like many people, I was actually a little saddened when I heard about the loss of Whitney Houston, not because I was a huge fan, but because I felt it was a shame that another talent (and she was talented regardless of whether you liked her music or not) had fallen to drug addiction. It really is a shame.

So I thought, okay, we'll get a day of nonstop Whitney coverage with speculation of what happened and how. And I tolerated Day Two of "Whitney Still Dead" news analysis. But I thought it was a little much when I came across "Breaking News" while channel surfing Monday night, with live helicopter coverage of the convoy of vehicles transporting Houston's body from Teterboro Airport to Newark, New Jersey.

And then Jabba the Governor decides to fly flags at half-staff in New Jersey in her honor. Seriously? Was Whitney Houston a former President of the US and I hadn't noticed? Is being known as the "Queen of Pop" considered official royalty in this country and worthy of that honor?

If someone had mentioned Whitney Houston the day before her death, you'd mostly likely think of her as a joke. They'd call her a crack addict, an alcoholic, someone who'd destroyed herself, someone who succumbed to her demons. Those woulds were self-inflicted, yet somehow it seems all of that was forgotten in lieu of some feel good, she-was-so-great story. Yes, what happened was sad and tragic. But can we keep things in perspective?

Must Reads

Brian Beutler: Why The GOP’s Payroll Tax Cut Cave Is An Even Bigger Deal Than You Think

Chez Pazienza: An Open Letter to CNN Regarding Nancy Grace

E.J. Dionne: Romney’s big problem: A missing aura of electability

Eugene Robinson: Drumming up a phony war on religion

Jason Linkins: Mitt Romney Causes CNN Debate Cancellation, Does Something Great For America

Evan McMorris-Santoro: How The GOP Went Back To The 1950s In Just One Day

Paul Krugman: Moochers Against Welfare

President Obama's Weekly Address - February 18, 2012

Continuing to Strengthen American Manufacturing

First they came for...

POSTED BY JHW22

First they came for gay marriages by I am not gay so I did not stand up.

Then they came for abortions but I was not pregnant so I didn't stand up.

Next they came for voter rights but I had a driver's license so I didn't stand up.

Finally they came for birth control and I STOOD UP AND I FOUGHT!

The GOP finally picked the one fight most Americans won't back down from. So I love that we are standing up! I love the men who are standing with us! This is the NEW Year of the Woman and we will elect Democrats who have stood and who will continue to stand for our rights.

Rick Santorum's Billionaire Backer

This is Foster Friess. Foster Freiss is not really a billionaire. Foster Friess is a multi-multi-multi-millionaire. Foster Friess is pouring millions into backing Rick Santorum's run for the Republican nomination for President. Foster Friess thinks all the hoopla over the contraception issue is much ado about nothing because it's "so inexpensive nowadays."

“You know, back in my days, they used Bayer aspirin for contraception. The gals put it between their knees, and it wasn’t that costly.”

That only scratched the surface. If you didn't see the whole interview (I didn't, but do I really need to subject myself to that?), read the highlights at the Politico link.

If Santorum doesn't distance himself from those comments for being crude in the least, and he won't because he need's Freiss' money, you can witness his downfall in the polls within a couple of weeks.

Gary Carter Dies at 57

NY TIMES: Gary Carter, the slugging catcher known as Kid for the sheer joy he took in playing baseball, who entered the Hall of Fame as a Montreal Expo but who most famously helped propel the Mets to their dramatic 1986 World Series championship, died Thursday. He was 57.

The cause was brain cancer, which had been diagnosed last May. Carter had been treated with chemotherapy and radiation, but his daughter Kimmy Bloemers said in mid-January that new tumors had been discovered.

1986 was a magical year for the Mets and for me as a Mets fan. I remember watching Game 6 holding my breath with two outs in the ninth and down two runs, and it was Gary Carter who singled into the outfield to start that improbable comeback.

Such a sad way to go out.

I found the women

POSTED BY JHW22

Earlier, I posted a Planned Parenthood screen grab of the Darrell Issa hearing on "freedom of religion" where only men representing religious leadership were testifying. Many took to the Twittah machine to express outrage that only men were invited to speak about contraception. A friend of mine called Darrell Issa's office to express that frustration, only to be told the hearings were not about "birth control" but were about "religious freedom." I called his office and said that if the hearing is about religious freedom, then there should be women testifying about THEIR religious freedom. I suggested Representative Issa release a public statement explaining why he didn't think women had a say in the first amendment. I suggested that a table full of men talking about religious liberties implies he doesn't think women have any. The staffer told me that these were leaders and that their hierarchy is only men. I asked if there weren't ANY religious institutions that had women in leadership roles and she said, "I guess not." I told her that was incorrect and that there is even a prominent nun who actually sides with the White House plan for contraception coverage. I asked why she wasn't there today. The staffer even thought only Catholics were on the panel, despite there being a Jewish Rabbi.

So, we all freaked for good reason. Only one gender and only one view was represented in a hearing about the FIRST AMENDMENT -- you know, that amendment that allows for multiple views. Of all discussions, this should have had a variety of testimonies. There should have been at least one person on that panel testifying on behalf of the religious freedom of women to choose what to put in their body and to be allowed the same access to rights given to other men and women, despite their boss having a "conscience" problem.

But the second half of the testimony did include two women -- both representing religious university administrations. So, they had women testifying on a "religious freedom" panel and yet, they don't represent members of any religious belief -- they represent universities. Universities that are not legally allowed to deny employment based on a person's faith or "conscience." They are not allowed to force a religious mission, philosophy or doctrine on any employee. Therefore, what these women have to do with another woman's religious freedom to choose to take birth control is beyond me.

What's most troubling is that one of the women who testified is a medical doctor. And she has a problem with birth control.

Folks, we have a serious problem here. Women's rights are being taken away -- prods are being rammed up women's vaginas to forcibly, against her will, influence her not to abort something that looks like a dot on a screen and doesn't have a heart beat. Women are being denied equal access to universal preventative care because of who their boss is. Voter ID laws are limiting how many women can vote. Previously apolitical charities are hiring ideologues to limit Planned Parenthood's impact on women's health. And the Boehner House has spent more time on abortion and Planned Parenthood than creating jobs.

So what are we going to do about it? Are we going to keep getting mad? Are we going to keep fighting this crap? Or are we going to get out the vote and kick these assholes out of office?

Suggestions appreciated in the comments on ways to stand up and create shock and awe!

"Where's Waldo?" or "Where are Women?"

POSTED BY JHW22

Today a hearing is taking place on Capitol Hill regarding contraception coverage in health insurance plans. Planned Parenthood posted this picture of the hearing. Notice the absence of relevant witnesses?