She did this commercial during her 2008 Green Party presidential campaign. Sadly, she was correct.



 

We've heard similar rhetoric before, but ...

(From The Advocate 4/13/10 - Hat Tip AKA William)

House majority leader Steny Hoyer said Tuesday that the body will likely take up the Employment Non-Discrimination Act this year. According to Congressional Quarterly, Hoyer said the legislation, which would institute a federal ban on job discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, is less controversial now than it has been in the past. The bill, H.R. 3017, currently has 198 cosponsors.

From CQ: “Hoyer said most lawmakers already are on the record on the issue because the House passed similar legislation in 2007 to bar employment discrimination based on sexual preference. ‘So it’s not like this is a new issue for the members,’ said Hoyer, D-Md."

The comments are significant as Congress returns to work this week and political observers look for signals from Democratic leadership regarding what type of legislation the Democratic caucus is willing to engage.

I'm a bit concerned that he didn't also mention gender identity. We need to remind our representatives that including trans people and closing this legal loophole is rather important.

In any case, this isn't a call for relaxation. It's a call to action. There isn't going to be a House vote unless we push for it.

Contact Your Representative!

 

This is a small step forward. Roman Catholics need to do a lot more to stop the rape of their children by their priests, but this is a small step forward. (WHDH-TV 4/13/10)

Reverend James Scahill of St. Michael's Parish in East Longmeadow has been outspoken on the need for accountability among church leaders for a long time.

Now, however, his tough criticism is going straight to the top of the Catholic Church.

Rev. Scahill is demanding greater protection for child sex abuse victims and greater accountability from the Catholic Church Hierarchy.

He says Pope Benedict should step down.

“Anyone that would cover up the abuse of a child or a minor, to me, is guilty of a felony...If it can be established that there was a cover up, then I think they should have the integrity to resign,” Scahill said.

The undemocratic nature of Roman Catholicism created an environment where all sorts of evil have flourished. Obviously, rampant child molestation is the highest profile evil for now, but massive greed, racism, sexism, warmongering, and heterosexism also are consequences of a church whose members have yet to take ownership of it.

 

The rape of boys by Roman Catholic priests is getting plenty of attention. However, the rape of girls by RCC clerics is not getting the news coverage it should. The accusations against Rev. Joseph Palanivel Jeyapaul have been an exception to this pattern. (New York Times 4/5/10)

A Catholic priest who has been criminally charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl in Minnesota six years ago is still working in his home diocese in India despite warnings to the Vatican from an American bishop that the priest continued to pose a risk to children, according to church documents made public on Monday.

The documents show that the American bishop warned the Vatican that the priest was accused of molesting two teenage girls whose trust he gained by promising to discuss their interest in becoming nuns.

The Associated Press has reported that two girls in Spain, 10 and 11, were raped. However, this was buried in a story about the rape of boys, and hasn't gotten picked up much, at least in the US media.

SNAP, Survivor Network of those Abused by Priests, does take the sexual abuse of girls by priests seriously. Here are some examples from their website.

Philadelphia: Priest removed after fondling teenage girl

California: Priest molested 12 year old girl

Ohio: Vatican elevated priest after he abused girl

Chicago: 14 year old girl raped by priest

Although the rape of girls by Roman Catholic priests is quite common, coverage of it is less common and less prominent than the rape of boys in our country. The reflects heterosexism and misogyny. Rapes that are viewed as heterosexual just aren't taken as seriously in our society. A culture that values girls less than boys predictably takes sexual abuse against girls less seriously.

We need to put the spotlight on all rape by priests. By not focusing enough on the rape of girls by the Roman Catholic clergy, we are unintentionally aiding Ratzi and his Vatican toadies in their efforts to cover up these crimes against people with two X chromosomes.

Photo: eürodäna

 

Ms. Maddow found a creative way to ridicule Sen. Coburn's rather childish attack against her. I think she could have an acting career if she wanted it. (Hat Tip for both videos: Genocide for Jesus)

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

Ms. Maddow later took apart Coburn on a more substantive basis.

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

Rachel Maddow is so fabulous. She's almost worth getting cable back.

 

The American public's position on the RCC's child rape scandal is evolving as more information becomes available to them. The Pew Center for the People and the Press have released some data from early April polling confirming this.

Amid new revelations of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church, Pope Benedict XVI’s job ratings for handling the scandal have plummeted. Only about one-in-ten (12%) say the pope has done an excellent (3%) or good job (9%) in addressing the sex abuse scandal; 71% say he has done a poor (44%) or only fair (27%) job.

The pope’s ratings for addressing the continuing scandal have declined sharply since April 2008, shortly after his visit to the United States. At that time, 39% said he had done an excellent or good job in dealing with the abuse scandal, while 48% said he had done only fair or poor.

This certainly represents progress, but it also is a bit disturbing too. If you have followed the story of the Vatican protecting child raping priests, you may be surprised that only 44% if those polled rated Ratzinger's behavior as poor. It's important to understand the factors involved in this.

1) Media Bias:
The wealthy owners of corporate media know that religion keeps people docile and pliable in the overwhelming majority of cases. So, they will slant their coverage to protect and promote religion at almost any opportunity. Also, Ratzi is extremely rightist, even for a RCC pontiff. The corporate media try hard to protect their far right political allies.

2) Demonization of Critics of the Church:
Roman Catholic extremists like the "Catholic League" have tried to demonize people who criticize or even report on the rape of Roman Catholic children as "anti Catholic bigots." They even attack victim groups. This gives some everyday Roman Catholics a rationalization for denial on just how bad things are.

3) The Vatican's Sophisticated Public Relations Campaign:
Ratzi's minions have been effective in reducing criticism by treating this as a series of incidents, ignoring the obvious pattern of behavior within their church. Ratzi has yet to issue a general, global apology because that would contradict the Vatican's carefully constructed narrative. The Vatican also has been aggressive about issuing denials about what they have done, and they have consistently tried to portray themselves as fighting the abuse, rather than covering it up.

4) Naive Views About Clergy Being Especially Moral:
Despite all evidence to the contrary, there is this huge sense in our society that members of the clergy, almost regardless of faith (excepting Islam at the moment), are morally superior to the rest of us. No amount of sex scandals among televangelists, shocking greed and power mongering at megachurches, and child molestation among the RCC clergy seem to change that among so many in our country. Even blatant heterosexism and misogyny by most clergy haven't convinced most queers and women to chuck the silly notion that preachers are more moral.

This false association between religion and perceived morality that causes so much bigotry and discrimination against atheists. It also leaves victims of clerical criminals more vulnerable.



Photo: eürodäna

Illustration: aeneastudio

Everybody's playing this game. So, I thought I would join in. The numbers are meant to be a general, relative weighing of how much the major variables will play in the outcome.

Teabaggers:

They will help GOP voter turnout, but they also will mobilize Democratic voters who find them frightening and reprehensible. Their behavior is excellent fodder for campaign ads that will legitimately frighten independent voters. In the primaries, the teabaggers are also pushing for even more extreme GOP candidates than usual, who will be less electable in the November.

Democrats +2

---

Wealthcare:

The wealthcare legislation will hurt the Democrats in a variety of ways. The secretive way such an important piece of legislation was passed was one of many reasons why the legislation was unpopular. Most Democratic voters wanted single payer, yet the Democratic politicians were too corrupt to even include a public option. Even worse, the more you know about what's actually in the legislation, the more clear it is that it is a rightist, de facto Republican piece of legislation whose overall effect is to take care and money away from the middle class, the poor, and the elderly and give money to the HMOs, the health insurers, and the rich speculators who own stock in them. This will be a bigger problem for the Democrats in 2014 and 2016 when some of the more draconian aspects of the legislation take effect, but it will be a major problem for the Democrats this year. Many Democratic voters will stay home, and some will vote Green. Democrats who are partisan enough to rationalize the wealthcare bill show a lack of enthusiasm for it. Independent voters got the same old shit from the Democrats in terms of process and outcome instead of some actual change. The Goppers get to see legislation they love passed and get to blame the Democrats for it.

+3 GOP

---

Legislative Inaction:

Both parties will try to blame the other. Both parties deserve to be blamed, but the Democrats deserve to be blamed for different reasons than the ones commonly cited by the corporate media. Obama, Reid, and Pelosi did a long, dragged out push for the wealthcare bill to wear down liberal insistence on the public option. They were so obsessed with giving out a huge financial payoff to their contributors in Big Pharma, the HMOs, and the health insurers that they held legislative action on other issues hostage to a pathetically bad piece of GOP style legislation. A lot of otherwise liberal groups in DC went along with this because the Democrats made it clear that they would get nothing on the single issues they were working on until wealthcare passed. Gopper obstructionism was loud, boisterous, and showed a lack of subtlety. Their inability to quietly obstruct while publicly looking like they were trying to work with the Democrats will reduce the mileage they will get out of this issue. The GOP has really squandered much of its advantage here by behaving in such a childish manner. However, when things go wrong in Washington, voters blame incumbents.

+1 GOP

---

The Economy:

This is the big question mark for 2012. The economy is rotten now. If the election were held today, this would put the Democrats in serious trouble. Many voters would still blame Bush for causing the problem, but they would still be dissatisfied with Democratic efforts to fix the problem. However, the overall trends in job losses vs. job growth are very positive. If employment trends continue (admittedly a big if), the voters will see an economy that is getting better with Democrats in charge while it was in a downward spiral under the GOP. The only question then will be how much a positive direction in a still weak economy will be enough to sway voters.

Unknown

---

Overall:

Midterm elections generally are bad for the party in power. Aside from the economy, things look really, really bad for the Democrats. However, the economy probably will change in the next seven months. It looks like the GOP will pick up quite a few seats, but they will have squandered an opportunity to get a 1994 style win by their own obnoxiousness and extremism. To gauge the outcome, look at the unemployment numbers. That's the only major variable in play.

 

Photo: Muffett

Meg Whitman, former CEO of the reprehensible EBay corporation is trying to turn the California governor's race into an auction. (San Jose Mercury 4/5/10)

Whitman, the front-runner for the Republican nomination for governor, will announce today that she contributed $20 million more to her war chest late Monday, the Mercury News has learned.

That means the former eBay chief executive has donated $59 million to her campaign so far, with two months to go before the primary and seven months left before the general election.

The $39 million Whitman donated previously had already set a California political record for self-funding. But her ubiquitous radio and TV ad campaign led to her spending $27.2 million in the first 11 weeks of the year — an average of $358,439 a day. So her campaign kitty had been running on empty.

Whitman has vowed to shell out as much as $150 million in her quest to become California's next governor. The current record for political self-funding is held by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who ponied up $108 million of his own money for his 2009 re-election bid.

When Whitman was CEO of the infamous EBay, the corporation allowed scam artists to keep doing auctions because sellers were the one who paid the fees. Now, she is trying to turn the California governor's race into a sleazy EBay deal.

I'm surprised that she isn't paying for the governorship on the EBay subsidiary, PayPal.

Here in NYC, we have seen what a pathetic excuse for a Mayor Michael Bloomberg is. All he does is cut services and fine the middle class and the poor so he can give city money to his rich friends. He hasn't made a significant contribution to any of the biggest problems facing the city: inadequate public transportation, poverty, AIDS, and the housing shortage. With housing, he has shifted money that was supposed to go to building affordable housing towards subsidizing luxury condos that were going to be built anyway.

Rich people who buy offices use them as their personal playthings, trying to enhance their social standing among their rich peers, screwing over the rest of us in the process.

 

 

One mistake that advocates of healthcare reform made was not to discuss the corruption of HMOs and health insurers and the deadly consequences. We need to educate people on why these corporations need to go.

 

Religious extremists do a lot of evil things. Here's one I didn't know about: missionary dating. Here's a description of it from ExChristian.net.

Missionary dating is a term used in evangelical Christian circles to describe a tactic certain believers use to win new converts.
It involves a believer becoming romantically involved with a nonbeliever, with conversion of the nonbeliever being a priority goal for the believer. A quick Google search of the term returns well over 100,000 hits on the subject. Peruse a sampling of them, and you'll find that the majority of sites addressing the topic are Christian sites discussing why missionary dating is a bad idea... for Christians.

Interestingly enough, I have yet to come across a page or site that has anything to say about the impact of missionary dating on its non-Christian victims. There's plenty out there about the damage missionary dating can do to Christians who do it (it can cause backsliding, violation of one's own convictions, doubts, stress, and so on), but nothing on what it's like for someone on the receiving end. No word or thought anywhere, no suggestion that any Christian has ever paused for a moment to consider how a nonbeliever might feel, or what they might think, when they discover that their loved one has been dating for Jesus.

The post goes on to say how it feels from the perspective of one of the victims of one of these scams, though any thinking person with empathy should be able to figure out how awful it is. I'm trying to figure out if this borders on or surpasses the way emotional abuse is defined in domestic violence educational materials. Either way, there just isn't any excuse for it.

As religion slowly fades out from this society, religious extremists are getting more desperate and vicious in their efforts to preserve their failed faiths. Some of them will stop at nothing, morals and ethics aren't even a consideration to them.

Photo: SanFranAnnie

 

1. Tell Barack Bush You Don't Want Any More Offshore Drilling
Now that Barack Bush has announced that he will open up parts of America's coastline to Big Oil and big oil spills, people need to take action. Sarah Palin may like the idea of "drill, baby drill," but responsible people know that we need to end our habit of drilling for more oil instead of building more trains. A lot of the coverage of this focuses on the danger to the beaches and the tourism industry. Those problems are very real, but we also need to keep a focus on impacts on climate change.

People who care about the environment, unlike our President, are urging that he reverse this shocking and disgusting decision. If you aren't familiar with the issue, the Center for American Progress has ten reasons why the drilling shouldn't happen.

Sign 350.org's Petition!

Sign Firedog Lake's Petition!

Also, you can join the Facebook Group Against the Offshore Drilling. (not affiliated with Firedog Lake)

---

2. Tell the House and Senate to Pressure the World Bank not to Subsidize Global Warming
Friends of the Earth is working on the following campaign:

The World Bank is expected to vote April 8 on whether to approve a $3.75 billion loan to help South African electricity company Eskom build a massive new polluting coal plant. South African civil society groups are demanding clean energy instead and organizing to fight this loan. They've asked for our help.

Congress controls the World Bank's purse strings, which means that your members of Congress have the power to hold the World Bank accountable.

Ask your representative and senators to take a public stand against dirty coal and urge the U.S. to vote “no” on this loan.

Watch the Friends of the Earth Video

Take Action!

---

3. Tell Congress to Block Clearcutting Effort in Alaska Rainforests:
The Wilderness Society and Care2 have a petition against clearcutting in Alaska. The effected rainforests capture a lot of CO2, and the planet can't afford to lose them now.

Legislation currently working its way through Congress could give a single corporation, Sealaska, the green light to log some of the best, oldest and most biologically-rich areas left in Tongass National Forest in Alaska.

The Tongass is one of the last remaining, largely intact temperate rainforests in the world -- home to all five species of salmon, black and brown bears, wolves, whales and rare birds. With more than half of the largest trees clearcut, protecting what is left is of paramount importance.

Sealaska Corporation, which has a history of clearcutting its lands, is seeking ownership of some of the most ecologically and biologically diverse parts of the Tongass National Forest. In fact, the lands targeted by Sealaska have more than ten times the habitat value of other Tongass forest land!

A House hearing is scheduled for March 17th and a Senate Committee could soon decide the fate of the Tongass National Forest. Send a letter to Congress and urge them to protect the Tongass from expanded logging and commercial development.

Their main concern is protecting plant and animal species. My main priority is fighting global warming. Regardless of which is more important to you, the conclusion is the same.

Please Contact Congress!

---

There some big battles on climate change, but there are lots of small ones that need to be fought to. Trying to keep our species from thoroughly trashing this planet is a big job.

Photos: www78

Xa'at