Arizona Eclectic

... the single payer advocates, who settled for the promise of a floor vote on the Weiner amendment, only to see that amendment withdrawn in a deal to avoid… the Stupak amendment, only to see that amendment not withdrawn and ultimately given a floor vote and be adopted.

To the Catholic Church raping a girl is something to be frowned on, and possibly punished (unless of course the rape was performed by a priest, in which case a transfer and silence may be the most likely result).

But should a nine year old girl abort a pregnancy that resulted from a rape, a pregnancy that may very well kill her, well that is really, really, really evil and the Catholic Church must show its displeasure and GOD's WILL by excomunicating the cretins who allowed this abortion to happen.

The Catholic GOD can forgive the rape of children (as not a few priests themselves have been known to indulge themselves in these activities) but not an abortion by the raped child (after all priests, who are only men, cannot have abortions as they are incapable of becoming pregnant so they are safe from ever wanting or needing an abortion themselves).

I suppose that that means that the Catholic GOD has plans for rapes, rapists and any resulting pregnancies caused thereby. But plans and compassion for the victims of these rapes does not enter into the Catholic GOD's thinking? Otherwise why would the Catholic God show more mercy and understanding to the rapist than the victim? Could it be because only men represent the Catholic GOD? Very narrow minded men, at that.

(Link: Hullabaloo)

Today's QUOTES:

... Real justice doesn’t allow someone with vast resources to ‘freely’ use them while the opposition has no such resources. Any judge that pretends they are administering justice in such an unequal match is a fraud. A real justice system would make certain that the resources brought to bear in legal cases were the same.
--Real Freedom is Dependent on Equality by Anthony McCarthy, ECHIDNE OF THE SNAKES

From McClatchy by By Yonat Shimron, Raleigh News & Observer

Learning to swim: For Muslim women in U.S., it's not easy

Culture and religion are intricately entwined. Most women in the US have much more independence, opportunities and freedom than was allowed when I was growing up.

Expect the Christian fundamentalists to use the quasi cultural/religious 'modesty' of Muslim women as a propaganda tactic against women's independence in the United States. Christian, Moslem and Mormon fundamentalists will gang up to impose their shared desire to strip women of all rights and enforce their control over women's bodies and behavior just as we have already witnessed the combined efforts of the ultra right Christian and Mormon fundamentalists combine to lie and scheme to defeat Proposition 8 in California.

As for the segregated bathhouse, well, all precedents seem harmless in the beginning ...

This all makes me uneasy. I'd be much more comfortable if these differences in dress and behavior were attributed to culture and diverse cultures respected in all reasonable aspects. When religion gets involved then the first step is for the minority religion to demand its right to their own specific version of their cultural preferences (which of course come from their own version or God). All fine and good. But once those have been accepted the next step is to suggest, then demand, that everyone else should follow their rules, because, you know, their rules are the right ones, obviously. Their god said so.

How do we keep them in the 'live and let live' stage? The US Constitution was supposed to help with that. But with everyone ignoring it lately it has not counted for much.

Today's QUOTES:

This development was hailed as a breakthrough by behavioral psychologists studying learned helplessness, who look forward to analyzing Pelosi's recent diet and other environmental influences to see if a similar shift in thinking can be provoked in Senate majority leader Harry Reid.
--After 2 Years, Nancy Pelosi Realizes Democrats Have a Majority in the House by Swopa, firedoglake.com

Reid and Pelosi are representing the Republican minority view quite well. Complete mission fail from Democratic leadership, once again.
--Gaza Attacks Roil Iraq — Where’s The “Debate”? by Jane Hamsher, firedoglake.com

Well we're losing one divider in Georgie-boy Bush and picking up a new national divider in Rickie -- the anti Christ-- Warren.

Suggesting that equating gays to pedophiles and incest is hate speech is itself hate speech according to Rick Warren.

If Obama really did select Warren to be inclusive he made a major blunder. If he picked Warren hoping to get support from Warren's fleeced chicks, I doubt it will work out well. If he picked Warren to show some of his former supporters that he doesn't give a hoot, he did well.

... though, perhaps, not in the 'image management' format that he most likely would have preferred.

One Way Street

Saddleback Site Removes Anti-Gay Statements, Warren Lies to Congregation.

Mike Rogers Takes Reverend Eugene Rivers to Charm School

Mike Rogers makes mincemeat out of Warren defender's argument on Hardball

Victory? You betcha!

Good grief. These 'scarves' are obviously part of their attire. Forget about the religious indoctrination that forces women to hide themselves, there is nothing wrong about these scarves. I can see where the outfits that hide an entire person except for her eyes could be a concern when security is an issue, but other than that who cares. The only people who could possibly care are the ones who buy into having parts of themselves hidden from public view (and we all do to varying degrees) and those who find it a handy excuse to abuse, bully, intimidate and discriminate.

A judge gave a woman 10 days in jail because she refused to take off her scarf because of her religion.

Hall said Valentine, an insurance underwriter, told the bailiff that she had been in courtrooms before with the scarf on and that removing it would be a religious violation. When she turned to leave and uttered an expletive, Hall said a bailiff handcuffed her and took her before the judge.

[Link: Does anyone else see the irony here?]

Notice something peculiar about all this? The woman was leaving when the bailiff decided to detain her (is that the same as arrest?). Then the judge sentenced her to 10 days for contempt. How dare she attempt to enter the court attired in a manner that gave them the ability to vent their prejudices and then turn to leave when told she couldn't enter. First they insist on being the deciders of what she can wear on her head in the courtroom and then when she decides to leave rather than remove the scarf they objected to they jail her anyway.

Eight years of Bush has eliminated even the pretense of justice in the US.

Today's QUOTES:

Doesn't that look objective and scientific to you: 'the study of gender or sex differences'? I can see the men (and women! there must be a few women!) in their white coats in laboratories all over the country, sincerely and earnestly staring into test tubes or the desperate eyes of monkeys in cages, all studying gender differences without any preconceptions, without any bias. Just a pure-as(s)-snow scientific inquiry into why biology is destiny, but only for women. ...
--Penis Envy by echidne, ECHIDNE OF THE SNAKES

... Indeed, had Obama answered the question affirmatively, he would have broken with a powerful, 40-year-old political tradition that requires government representatives to endorse strictly prohibitionist, punitive drug policies despite mounting evidence of their inefficacy in order to avoid appearing “soft on crime.” [AE: Wouldn't want that kind of CHANGE, would we?]
--Calls for Drug Law Reform Top Obama Transition Website at change.gov by Amy Long, The ACLU's Blog of Rights

... Update below ...

Big surprise! What did you really think Obama was? A just, fair, enlightened man? He's a calculating politician who apparently enjoys kicking those who helped make his election possible in the teeth. Kinda like Bush enjoyed seeing (and hearing) the shoe thrower, Iraqi Journalist Al-Zeidi, beaten to a pulp.

I guess Obama plans to have the gay-hating, woman-hating, dark skin-hating, Christ-ignoring 'Christian' evangelists work for his re-election four years from now.

ADDED: There is a difference between Bush and Obama. Several really as Obama is not a murderer and torturer, yet. The difference that I was thinking of was that Bush never forgot who his real constituency was. It was the obscenely rich. Apparently Obama wants his constituency to be other than they currently are.
----------------------------------

... Update ...

Religion versus religiosity
Choosing somebody like Warren is an insult not only to political progressives, but to religious believers (and especially politically progressive religious believers). It trivializes religious belief -- which I would bet even most of Warren's biggest fans will recognize as well, thus eliminating any supposed political advantage to be gained from this nauseating little exercise in pseudo-ecumenical posturing.

I wish Obama to succeed as President, but I very much wish him to get a negative slap to his image for playing this disgusting game (and specially for using that Bush-like smirk as he spouted his silliness to our faces).

... the sunshine-state Republicans have nominated an unrepentant torturer as their candidate for Congress. They view his readiness to torture an innocent Iraqi not as a source of shame, but as his prime qualification for office. This is American conservatism in the dying days of Bush – and it points out the direction that Sarah Palin would like to take it in 2012.

-------------
It's the unspeakable solution to "the unsolved riddle of social justice." It's the unmentionable "ultimate solution" to the problem of full employment. It's the unutterable "preliminary condition without which all further attempts at improvement and emancipation must prove abortive."

-------------
Our alien visitor finds all this extremely fascinating. It just pointed to me how this approach is in direct conflict with the fact that 50.7% of all Americans are female. Mostly earthlings think that having one woman on a committee or a couple of women in a movie or television show is plenty! A movie which reflects that 50.7% frequency from real life is at risk for being labeled a chick flick, something for women only. A movie with 100% male cast has a fairly good chance of being seen as mainstream unless it's about porn.

-------------
Curious stuff. Now for the odd paradox of extreme visibility/invisibility: Because women are still often seen as Others, one or two representatives from that group both suffice AND draw our attention! This means that most women are invisible as people, but that the women in the public eye are extremely visible as spoonfuls of that amorphous substance called womanhood.

-------------
... In other words, it was the very embodiment of Glorious Beltway "bipartisan" foreign policy tribunals -- numerous hard-core, right-wing ideologues sprinkled with a couple of like-minded right-wing Democrats and a neutral establishment technocrat or two, all endorsing a pre-ordained, flagrantly extremist, war-loving policy which is then deemed "the harmonious mainstream Center" which no Serious Person opposes.

There's some interesting comments to Anthony McCarthy's defense of Speaker Pelosi that I linked to yesterday. Like this one:

Not buying it, Anthony. I'm not anti-Pelosi -- she has some accomplishments as speaker, and that alone is distinctive -- but she's been active, not passive, in endorsing the Bush/Cheney push for dictatorship.

She worked for the decimation of the 4th amendment in the FISA case, and the secrecy of the telecom records. She took the lead in insisting that no impeachment hearings of any kind could be held, and took the lead again in declaring that the Democrats should not hold Bush officials in contempt when they ignored subpeonas. She eagerly led condemnation resolutions against MoveOn.

And there were LOTS of alternatives to the recent bailout. Economists were filling blogs and opinion pages with a variety of ideas -- some compatible to each other, some conflicting but in interesting ways -- that to me made a lot of sense (and I have an economics degree). Nancy Pelosi pushed for a bailout directed at the richest and most morally liable, a bailout to be conducted by a 5-person unelected oligarchy, only minimally supervised (and supervised entirely by wealthy establishment figures).

None of that was forced on her. I don't know whether her positive achievements could have been greater, but her negative achievements have, to me, been far greater. I don't feel a need to forgive them.
Brian B. | 10.04.08 - 7:30 pm | #

The problem I have with what McCarthy and Echidne are saying (or what I'm hearing) is that they seem to be saying that Pelosi is OK since she couldn't have done anything other than what she has done; like fully cooperating with the dismantling of the Constitution, the transfer of massive funds to the corrupt and the hiding of 'truths' from the citizens of this country. That she didn't try to do her job is just the wrong perspective, our perspective. Her job was to do what our betters said she could do. Is that sexism or defeatism?

If, on the other hand, she actually tried to do her job then she should tell us about it so that we know what's going on.

Don't vote for McCain and Palin becomes a non-issue! Vote for McCain and all bets are off.

That right can only be taken from us by force, deception, indoctrination, betrayal.

The right to bear children, for them, against the grain of a society that does not want them or their children to exist at all, may be as important as the right to reject bearing them.

Judging sex difference from points of masculine vs feminine 'lights' (The Way S/he Moves, by Rachel Zelkowitz, Science NOW Daily News, 9 September 2008).

Researchers often study these kinds of signals using something called a point-light figure, a collection of dots arranged in a human form. The figure is supposed to convey minimal information, but simple manipulations--broadening the dots on the shoulder region or narrowing dots that represent the waist--can make figures seem more masculine or more feminine.

There seems to be a profusion of 'science' studies making amazingly silly assumptions about behavioral sex differences from remarkably biased testing that seems to satisfy male assumptions about female thoughts, behaviors and motivations.

Take a look at Olivera "Olja" Finn's life, and you can tick off the actions women are supposed to avoid if they want to advance in science. Get married fresh out of high school. Check. Interrupt your education for your husband's sake. Check. Allow his career to take precedence over yours. Check. Have children before you have a job and give birth at what seem like inopportune times, such as shortly before you start graduate school. Check.

Overall, the researchers found "no gender difference" in scores among children in grades two through 11. Among students with the highest test scores, the team did find that white boys outnumbered white girls by about two to one. Among Asians, however, that result was nearly reversed. Hyde says that suggests that cultural and social factors, not gender alone, influence how well students perform on tests.

Unrelated to the boy-girl-who's-the-stupidest issue:

The study's most disturbing finding, the authors say, is that neither boys nor girls get many tough math questions on state tests now required to measure a school district's progress under the 2002 federal No Child Left Behind law. Using a four-level rating scale, with level one being easiest, the authors said that they found no challenging level-three or -four questions on most state tests. The authors worry that means that teachers may start dropping harder math from their curriculums, because "more teachers are gearing their instruction to the test."

The beginning of a very sad post at Gorgon Poisons.

MEN SHOULD NEVER, EVER, EVER BE LEFT ALONE WITH CHILDREN. I repeat MEN ARE DANGEROUS. REALLY FUCKING DANGEROUS. DO NOT LEAVE MEN WITH CHILDREN.

MEN

ARE

****DANGEROUS****

Well in Missouri the Missouri State Medical Association, The Missouri Association of Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons, Missouri Academy of Family Physicians, and the St. Louis Metropolitan Medical Society filed a suit claiming they were their patients 'representatives.' Their woman patients, of course. Isn't that a given?

After the bill, which dealt with numerous health issues as well as including the midwifery provision, was passed and signed into law by the Governor, the Missouri State Medical Association, The Missouri Association of Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons, Missouri Academy of Family Physicians, and the St. Louis Metropolitan Medical Society filed suit to invalidate the section that would allow legal midwifery practice in the state. The lower court invalidated the statute, but an appeal was filed by the State of Missouri along with Friends of Missouri Midwives, the Missouri Midwives Association, and other parties.

The medical associations seeking to invalidate the law had claimed standing for the challenge by arguing that physicians may be subject to disciplinary actions if they cooperate with midwives, and that they should be allowed to challenge the law on behalf of patients as their representatives. The Court disagreed on both of these matters and indicated that the groups had no standing to challenge the Constitutionality of the law. They therefore reversed the lower court decision, allowing the law legalizing midwifery in Missouri to stand.

Bet Missouri isn't the only place where physicians think they should rule women's lives.

... non-defensive intervention overseas is a fully bipartisan criminal enterprise ...

... preached freedom while he practiced Guantanamo ...

... over the years there have been dozens of reporters whose newspaper careers ended (or dead-ended) because of excessively accurate reporting ... [via The Sideshow]

... Indeed, it’s the modern pundit’s most basic skill: Even when her facts are wrong, she still knows how to interpret them: ...

Clinton's campaign ripped open a hole in our culture and forced us to look inside. And what we found was a simmering cauldron of crude, sophomoric sexism and ugly misogyny that a lot of us knew existed but didn't realize was still so socially acceptable that it could be broadcast on national television and garner nary a complaint from anybody but a few internet scolds like me. It was eye-opening, to say the least.

It's not difficult to understand why our media stars are so dismissive of the crimes committed by the Bush administration. It's because, with very few exceptions, they've endorsed and defended those crimes. ...

[...] The same stars of the Liberal Media who paralyzed the country for two years with their fixation on Bill Clinton's sex scandal -- and who relentlessly insisted that he be forced from office -- have spent the last seven years calmly telling us that there is no reason to get all excited or upset by what the administration has been doing. As the administration repeatedly broke multiple laws and degraded every last realm of our political culture, most of our Broder-led media class remained nice and "calm and quiet." Of course they don't believe there should be any consequences for the crimes that have been committed by this administration because, as complicit enablers in all of it, those crimes are also their own.

... all this still makes MSNBC as unreliable as it was in the run up to the war. As Chotiner points out, since their friendly Democratic bias seems to stem from an idiosyncratic, personal basis, they are not behaving with any more journalistic integrity than they ever were, it's just that their corruption is benefiting our side this time.

I have always been one of those who felt that the country would be better off if we just had a news media that did its job. I didn't want our "own" network, so much as I wanted a functioning press corps. ...

We've made our views very clear about freedom of the press. We hate it. That's why we block access to the press, withhold documents from the press, pay reporters to pimp our programs, script press conferences and all that other shit we do. Hell, everybody, look at Helen Thomas. She's Queen Free Speech, and I treat her like a urinal, for Christ's Sake. And since we're bringing our American values to Iraq... it only seems right that their whore press looks like our whore press.

But I don't think this book release would be getting the kind of attention it has if McClellan didn't include some choice words for the media. ...

[...] ... everyone else knew their place. But yesterday, discussing the book, Jessica Yellin went off the reservation and told the truth about the media conduct during the war - and the corporate pressure.

[...] I'm sure that this is a one-day story, and the press will consider the matter concluded, in their favor, and move on. But people know this in their bones. The coverage did nothing to enlighten and only to heighten the frenzy over invasion. This was William Randolph Hearst getting his Spanish-American War all over again, and these blowhards can't come to terms with it because their whole world would come crashing down. They were puppets, enthusiastic puppets for an imperialist agenda. And they have to live with that forever.

It seems to me that if we had a female version of Chris Matthews, say, Christine Matthews, with the same history but with the proper reversals we'd never hear the end of what a male-bashing feminazi she is. But somehow the fact that Chris Matthews has a severe problem in viewing women as human beings, in viewing therefore the majority of human beings as human beings -- well -- that's just a small unfortunate quirk in an otherwise honorable and gentle man.

A day after the birthday of Malcolm X, we're reminded that to this day, even Dr. King isn't allowed to be angry. Well, I ask the Commission: what the hell did they think the Civil Rights Movement was borne of? It never ceases to amaze me how frightened this country can be of an angry Black man. Even when he's made of clay.

... Brian Kilmeade argues that this GI Bill is different from the WWII-era one because these troops volunteered, and therefore don’t deserve the same benefits.

Accordingly, the million dollar question is whose definition of McCain wins out. ...

Today, waste disposal firms spread more than half of the 7 million tons of organic and inorganic toxins on American farms as “fertilizer.”

So while Matthews certainly deserves credit for upending such a duplicitous political narrative, it's not enough for him to bask in this all-too-rare instance and then allow a roster of other guests - most notably, bigger fish in the pond than Kevin James - to reappear on his show and push similar false frames without recourse.

Matthews can't have it both ways: he can't claim to be "tough" while only stomping on the occasional lightweight.

And to see Borger and Brazile—sitting there trying to have a rational discussion after he says the things that he does is just as ludicrous. Borger’s retort is to say that a lot of voters don’t feel that way and Donna mildly says Alex has a problem with her. I mean, really. What does he have to do to offend them?

... Shades of the 1910 Mexican Revolution in which many times the citizens of El Paso Texas had to take cover from the flying bullets while differing Mexican Armies fought it out amongst themselves on “the other side”.

... The United States is home to a mere five percent of the world’s total population, and 25 percent of the world’s incarcerated population: 2.3 million people, most of whom are incarcerated for nonviolent offenses. ...

I could take this to mean that indeed there is no crisis in civil-military relations, that the "professionals" will do whatever it is that a new president will want to do and that ultimately the military will salute and follow orders as the Constitution intends. Instead, though, I get the stinking feeling that the attitude, though it is unspoken and would be denied by these ultimately partisan competitors, is that what the president wants is ultimately secondary to what the national security professionals think is reasonable and doable. There is a crisis: God help the new president

... Do you happen to notice, say, that we never read someone writing that maybe boys just self-select away from education? Maybe they are not just interested in staying at school or in going to college? I don't recall ever reading a single article like that. Nope, all the articles I've read about the topic have as their goal a greater success rate for boys. Boys must be educated! Nobody suggests that they might choose not be educated and that we should honor that free and democratic choice.

But when it comes to girls and science, the story immediately changes. Perhaps it's girls themselves who choose not to become scientists? Perhaps that's Just How Things Are?

Reading the Spring/Summer 2008 catalog for Footwise (footwise.com; also birkenstockexpress.com) I ran across the this description for the Granada model:

You'll enjoy the casual look of these slip-on sandals. Featuring two straps, with cute cutouts, the Granada is perfect for toddling around town. Suede insert. Contoured cork/latex footbed. EVA sole. Resoleable. For Women.

Well, wouldn't you just know it -- of course, women must just luv to toddle on those cute sandles.

Toddle, verb
1 the child toddled toward him totter, teeter, wobble, falter, waddle, stumble.
2 informal : I toddled down to the quay amble, wander, meander, stroll, saunter; informal mosey, toodle, tootle, putter.

The first definition is the one that comes to mind when I hear the word toddle. But definition two is not much better. Stroll would have been a better choice. Can you imagine the writer suggesting that men should toddle around town on their cute sandals?

This is what footwise.com says about the Granada:

A lacy cutout pattern on the double straps gives this style a dressier look. Two adjustable buckles give you a custom fit and the contoured cork footbed provides great arch support for all-day comfort. Lightweight and flexible EVA soles provide a cushioned walk. Resoleable.

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Monday, March 9, 2009

Friday, January 2, 2009

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Tuesday, December 23, 2008

Saturday, December 20, 2008

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Thursday, November 6, 2008

Sunday, October 5, 2008

Thursday, October 2, 2008

Sunday, September 21, 2008

Tuesday, September 9, 2008

Friday, August 15, 2008

Friday, July 25, 2008

Sunday, July 20, 2008

Friday, June 27, 2008

Sunday, June 15, 2008

Friday, May 30, 2008

Monday, May 26, 2008

Wednesday, May 14, 2008

John McCain, Arizona Senator

Jon Kyl, Arizona's other Senator