It is finally dawning on some women that a Republican in the White House backed by GOP control of Congress would set back women's rights by more than 50 years, perhaps even to a time when women lost their jobs after World War II in favor of returning GIs. This time our veterans are coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan to a still dismal labor scene. I can just hear Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney vying to be the first to proclaim Marabel Morgan was right, a woman's place is in the home, not the office or factory and, heaven to Betsy, for sure not on the construction site or in a police or fireman’s uniform. They should be home baking cookies and meat loaves, not writing legal briefs or news stories.
The NY Times reported Saturday women are squeamish about the prospects of Republican control of their reproductive rights (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/11/us/politics/centrist-women-tell-of-disenchantment-with-gop.html?_r=1). Excuse me, but were they Sleeping Beauties during the last 18 months when newly elected Republican state governors and legislators rolled back social, educational, health, welfare and labor laws? What did they expect people like Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, Santorum and Romney to do if elected? Hadn't they been listening to Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann and the other right wing crazies tell us they preferred a country of the past?
This sudden awakening by Republican and independent women really ticks me off. Had they rallied before to the reality of a conservative mindset on social and cultural issues, perhaps we wouldn't have been subjected to the spectacle of candidates trying to out-Neanderthal each other. Perhaps we wouldn't have tolerated during the debates applause for the death penalty, calls to let a sick person without health insurance die, and the Dark Ages idea that higher education is for snobs.
Seriously. I know Obama has lots of faults. But seriously, how can any thinking person truly consider voting for candidates with so radical a view of our future that they would take us back to our past and beyond?
Showing posts with label Michele Bachmann. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michele Bachmann. Show all posts
Monday, March 12, 2012
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
Storms, Political and Not
My sister Lee finally has hit the big time. Well, almost the big time. She’s had a tropical storm named after her. Not quite hurricane status, but nothing to sneer at.
Except, Tropical Storm Lee dumped more than 10 inches of rain on Louisiana. Guess where my sister’s oldest child, Ari, and his fiance, Elizabeth, live? If you guessed Louisiana, specifically New Orleans, you win a kewpie doll.
Angry Kittens: Leonard Harris died last week. He was 81. For those who don’t remember or just simply are not aware, Leonard Harris was a movie and Broadway critic for New York’s WCBS-TV in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Almost always Gilda agreed with his critiques. In fact, she was so enamored of him she chose to name one of the two kittens she brought home while in nursing school in his honor. The other she named after her favorite NY Knicks basketball player, Walt Frazier.
Gilda had never had a pet she could interact with while growing up, a frog not being a very touchy-feely type of pet. The frog must have felt the same as one day he took a stroll off her fourth floor bedroom windowsill. Splat!
Gilda wanted the kittens to keep her company while I worked evenings as a reporter for the New Haven Register. When I returned the first night they were home, Gilda couldn’t contain her distress. She was so relieved as I would be able to protect her from those “angry” kittens. They were growling so insistently she had locked them up in the bathroom hours earlier.
After liberating Walter and Leonard, I asked Gilda if the sound they made resembled a soft guttural trill. Yes, she exclaimed. That, I told her, was what is known as purring, a sound felines make when they are happy and contented.
Several months later it was time to neuter Walter and Leonard. When I asked the veterinarian how the boys tolerated the procedure he informed me Walter and Leonard were in fact females! We thought about changing their names to Walterina and Leona, but resisted the impulse. They never complained.
Spellcheck: Gilda and I have Apple iTouches, a device similar to an iPhone in everything but telephoning ability and a need for Wi-Fi access to communicate via the Internet. When I type notes or emails I notice the iTouch self-corrects what it considers typos. It’s a provocation that can cause much embarrassment if not caught by the writer. Whole Web sites are dedicated to comical mistakes that have been sent out by unaware users.
The unauthorized, unwanted changes are not unique to iTouches, but I did notice something the other day that stopped me in my tracks—when I type iPad, iPhone or iPod, the iTouch recognizes the nouns and leaves them untouched. But when I type in “iTouch,” it changes the spelling to touch. How strange the device doesn’t recognize its own name. How strange Apple did not include its own name recognition in the iTouch software.
Oh My God: I can’t believe it, but I agree with Dick Cheney.
Last week the former vice president said of Sarah Palin’s possible White House run, “I’ve never gotten around the question of her having left the governorship of Alaska midterm. I don’t, I’ve never heard that adequately explained.”
Palin and her Palinistas say she left office after two and a half years because ethics probes would have prevented her from effectively governing. Okay, but does she believe as president she’d be immune to ethics investigations? Hasn’t she heard of Iran-Contra during the Reagan years, or Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky during the Clinton administration?
How doubly sad, first about Palin’s lack of knowledge, and second about my being in agreement with Cheney. What’s next? Will Rick Perry look presidential to me?
Phoning It In: Last week we received a letter from CREDO mobile with an unusual marketing message. Addressing us as “Dear Fellow Progressive,” the letter from president Michael Kieschnick asked, “How far would you go to avoid ‘President Bachmann’ becoming a reality? Would you leave your phone company if it supported Michele Bachmann?”
It noted both AT&T and Verizon Wireless have donated to Bachmann, $386,000 and $35,500, respectively.
CREDO claims to be “America’s only progressive phone company, we fight the right wing.” It says each year it gives “a percentage of all charges—at no cost to you—to progressive non profits (such as ACLU, Planned Parenthood, Democracy Now and Doctors Without Borders).”
Along with other incentives, a tempting proposal indeed. But not one I’m willing to endorse, at least for now. I’m not ready to vet all my service providers and purchases to see if they conform to my politics. Given that most companies and their leaders lean to the right, I’d wind up with few options.
One left-leaning executive trying to influence the political climate is Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz. He’s now asking business leaders to withhold campaign contributions from all office seekers until “a transparent, comprehensive, bipartisan debt-and-finance package is reached that honestly, and fairly, sets America on a path to long-term financial health and security.” This message is a refinement of his initial one three weeks ago when he implied withholding money just from incumbents.
Except, Tropical Storm Lee dumped more than 10 inches of rain on Louisiana. Guess where my sister’s oldest child, Ari, and his fiance, Elizabeth, live? If you guessed Louisiana, specifically New Orleans, you win a kewpie doll.
Angry Kittens: Leonard Harris died last week. He was 81. For those who don’t remember or just simply are not aware, Leonard Harris was a movie and Broadway critic for New York’s WCBS-TV in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Almost always Gilda agreed with his critiques. In fact, she was so enamored of him she chose to name one of the two kittens she brought home while in nursing school in his honor. The other she named after her favorite NY Knicks basketball player, Walt Frazier.
Gilda had never had a pet she could interact with while growing up, a frog not being a very touchy-feely type of pet. The frog must have felt the same as one day he took a stroll off her fourth floor bedroom windowsill. Splat!
Gilda wanted the kittens to keep her company while I worked evenings as a reporter for the New Haven Register. When I returned the first night they were home, Gilda couldn’t contain her distress. She was so relieved as I would be able to protect her from those “angry” kittens. They were growling so insistently she had locked them up in the bathroom hours earlier.
After liberating Walter and Leonard, I asked Gilda if the sound they made resembled a soft guttural trill. Yes, she exclaimed. That, I told her, was what is known as purring, a sound felines make when they are happy and contented.
Several months later it was time to neuter Walter and Leonard. When I asked the veterinarian how the boys tolerated the procedure he informed me Walter and Leonard were in fact females! We thought about changing their names to Walterina and Leona, but resisted the impulse. They never complained.
Spellcheck: Gilda and I have Apple iTouches, a device similar to an iPhone in everything but telephoning ability and a need for Wi-Fi access to communicate via the Internet. When I type notes or emails I notice the iTouch self-corrects what it considers typos. It’s a provocation that can cause much embarrassment if not caught by the writer. Whole Web sites are dedicated to comical mistakes that have been sent out by unaware users.
The unauthorized, unwanted changes are not unique to iTouches, but I did notice something the other day that stopped me in my tracks—when I type iPad, iPhone or iPod, the iTouch recognizes the nouns and leaves them untouched. But when I type in “iTouch,” it changes the spelling to touch. How strange the device doesn’t recognize its own name. How strange Apple did not include its own name recognition in the iTouch software.
Oh My God: I can’t believe it, but I agree with Dick Cheney.
Last week the former vice president said of Sarah Palin’s possible White House run, “I’ve never gotten around the question of her having left the governorship of Alaska midterm. I don’t, I’ve never heard that adequately explained.”
Palin and her Palinistas say she left office after two and a half years because ethics probes would have prevented her from effectively governing. Okay, but does she believe as president she’d be immune to ethics investigations? Hasn’t she heard of Iran-Contra during the Reagan years, or Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky during the Clinton administration?
How doubly sad, first about Palin’s lack of knowledge, and second about my being in agreement with Cheney. What’s next? Will Rick Perry look presidential to me?
Phoning It In: Last week we received a letter from CREDO mobile with an unusual marketing message. Addressing us as “Dear Fellow Progressive,” the letter from president Michael Kieschnick asked, “How far would you go to avoid ‘President Bachmann’ becoming a reality? Would you leave your phone company if it supported Michele Bachmann?”
It noted both AT&T and Verizon Wireless have donated to Bachmann, $386,000 and $35,500, respectively.
CREDO claims to be “America’s only progressive phone company, we fight the right wing.” It says each year it gives “a percentage of all charges—at no cost to you—to progressive non profits (such as ACLU, Planned Parenthood, Democracy Now and Doctors Without Borders).”
Along with other incentives, a tempting proposal indeed. But not one I’m willing to endorse, at least for now. I’m not ready to vet all my service providers and purchases to see if they conform to my politics. Given that most companies and their leaders lean to the right, I’d wind up with few options.
One left-leaning executive trying to influence the political climate is Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz. He’s now asking business leaders to withhold campaign contributions from all office seekers until “a transparent, comprehensive, bipartisan debt-and-finance package is reached that honestly, and fairly, sets America on a path to long-term financial health and security.” This message is a refinement of his initial one three weeks ago when he implied withholding money just from incumbents.
Sunday, September 4, 2011
Passing Hail Mary
With the clock ticking down the final seconds of a close game, a trailing football team often resorts to a last-ditch scoring effort. The quarterback fades back and lofts toward the end zone a long, arcing “Hail Mary” pass, so named because it will take an answered prayer to succeed in overturning a seemingly inevitable loss.
With his address to the nation in front of a joint session of Congress Thursday night, Barack Obama is about to launch a Hail Mary pass, aptly timed to coincide with the opening night of the new National Football League season after a spring and half-summer of labor-management unrest and ultimate compromise.
Unlike the owners and players who worked out a deal to get the games going again, there is no realistic partner to work with Obama. Despite vague language from some Republicans about the need to stimulate the economy to jumpstart more hirings, anyone who believes the president and the GOP/Tea Party will reach a fair, equitable and non-acrimonious settlement also believes the Cincinnati Bengals will hoist the Lombardi Trophy at the conclusion of the next Super Bowl.
Obama’s ratings are lower than a quarterback who throws more interceptions than completions, who fumbles the snap before he can hand off to a running back. Even a rookie presidential candidate, the nationally untested governor of Texas, Rick Perry, beats Obama in a head to head contest, 44% to 41%, according to a new Rasmussen poll.
The president’s Thursday night speech will define his intentions over the next 14 months. He will either involuntarily concede his impotence by tossing out an often repeated and unaccepted pitch for bi-partisan compromise, or he will morph into a chief executive with backbone by staking out an irreversible battle plan to rekindle the passion of those who supported him in 2008.
He has shown an inability to connect with Republicans. So why bother extending an olive branch. They’d only reject it. How often must he be humiliated? When push comes to shove, they’ll corner Obama and the Democrats into accepting their cuts, their budget, on their terms, which means no tax increases for the wealthy, continued loopholes for the rich and corporations, no viable plan to energize job growth except by reducing or eliminating consumer and environmental protections.
If Obama recognizes, at long last, the GOP prevent defense, he can perhaps salvage his re-election drive by forcefully decoding the X’s and O’s that differentiate the Republican agenda from his own. He shouldn’t be afraid to use tables, charts and graphs (a la Ross Perot and even Michele Bachmann) to illustrate how under Republican stewardship the nation’s working and middle classes suffered while the rich benefited, and how more of the same could be expected should they succeed in the next election.
Don’t think for a moment a measured tone in the well of the Congress will accrue civility and points from the opposition. Obama can and must use this forum to get the attention of Congress and the American people that he intends to fight for the welfare of the country as a whole, not for an elite, special interest minority.
He needs to convincingly detail how supporting GM and Chrysler when they were bankrupt saved the American automobile industry, how millions of jobs were saved, from the small shop that supplies new car mats to the huge plant that makes car batteries. He needs to push for jobs to rebuild infrastructure, for teachers to educate future generations.
Republicans already label him a deficit spender. He needs to reassuringly explain why short term debt is necessary to rebuild an economy shattered by two wars started by a Republican president, by that president’s profligate Medicare drug reimbursement plan, by that president’s eight year reign of terror on government oversight of the financial markets that led to the current woes on Wall Street and around the world.
Does he have it in him? Does he have the arm to reach the end zone? Hail Mary passes seldom work, but when they do they can be a game changer, turning a loser into a winner. Obama has nothing to lose by playing offense. Indeed, it’s his only hope of reaching the end zone—securing four more years in a residence paid for by The American taxpayer.
With his address to the nation in front of a joint session of Congress Thursday night, Barack Obama is about to launch a Hail Mary pass, aptly timed to coincide with the opening night of the new National Football League season after a spring and half-summer of labor-management unrest and ultimate compromise.
Unlike the owners and players who worked out a deal to get the games going again, there is no realistic partner to work with Obama. Despite vague language from some Republicans about the need to stimulate the economy to jumpstart more hirings, anyone who believes the president and the GOP/Tea Party will reach a fair, equitable and non-acrimonious settlement also believes the Cincinnati Bengals will hoist the Lombardi Trophy at the conclusion of the next Super Bowl.
Obama’s ratings are lower than a quarterback who throws more interceptions than completions, who fumbles the snap before he can hand off to a running back. Even a rookie presidential candidate, the nationally untested governor of Texas, Rick Perry, beats Obama in a head to head contest, 44% to 41%, according to a new Rasmussen poll.
The president’s Thursday night speech will define his intentions over the next 14 months. He will either involuntarily concede his impotence by tossing out an often repeated and unaccepted pitch for bi-partisan compromise, or he will morph into a chief executive with backbone by staking out an irreversible battle plan to rekindle the passion of those who supported him in 2008.
He has shown an inability to connect with Republicans. So why bother extending an olive branch. They’d only reject it. How often must he be humiliated? When push comes to shove, they’ll corner Obama and the Democrats into accepting their cuts, their budget, on their terms, which means no tax increases for the wealthy, continued loopholes for the rich and corporations, no viable plan to energize job growth except by reducing or eliminating consumer and environmental protections.
If Obama recognizes, at long last, the GOP prevent defense, he can perhaps salvage his re-election drive by forcefully decoding the X’s and O’s that differentiate the Republican agenda from his own. He shouldn’t be afraid to use tables, charts and graphs (a la Ross Perot and even Michele Bachmann) to illustrate how under Republican stewardship the nation’s working and middle classes suffered while the rich benefited, and how more of the same could be expected should they succeed in the next election.
Don’t think for a moment a measured tone in the well of the Congress will accrue civility and points from the opposition. Obama can and must use this forum to get the attention of Congress and the American people that he intends to fight for the welfare of the country as a whole, not for an elite, special interest minority.
He needs to convincingly detail how supporting GM and Chrysler when they were bankrupt saved the American automobile industry, how millions of jobs were saved, from the small shop that supplies new car mats to the huge plant that makes car batteries. He needs to push for jobs to rebuild infrastructure, for teachers to educate future generations.
Republicans already label him a deficit spender. He needs to reassuringly explain why short term debt is necessary to rebuild an economy shattered by two wars started by a Republican president, by that president’s profligate Medicare drug reimbursement plan, by that president’s eight year reign of terror on government oversight of the financial markets that led to the current woes on Wall Street and around the world.
Does he have it in him? Does he have the arm to reach the end zone? Hail Mary passes seldom work, but when they do they can be a game changer, turning a loser into a winner. Obama has nothing to lose by playing offense. Indeed, it’s his only hope of reaching the end zone—securing four more years in a residence paid for by The American taxpayer.
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
The Bin Laden of U.S. Politics
Sarah Palin is the Osama bin Laden of U.S. politics. She’d blow up much of the government we know if given a chance, all in a quest to restore America to its original state, much like Osama wanted to turn the Muslim world back in time, to an era when it was dominant.
Americans wonder with more than a little trepidation if the popular Arab spring uprisings in Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Yemen et al will result in democracy or in a different version of tyranny, one tinged with Islamic fervor and intolerance. Our eyes seem to focus on the uncertainty overseas while unable to visualize that populism at home has its dangers, as well. Palin and Tea party members are intolerant of any principled position that doesn’t adhere to their vision of America. Too often they resort to ridicule and aspersion to de-legitimize their opponents, ignoring the foundation reasons why America has become vulnerable, economically and militarily. Most of those reasons developed from 2001 to 2009, during the Bush presidency.
Osama bin Laden got lucky when the Twin Towers collapsed, but his real strength was manipulating the media. For 10 years we waited with our hearts in our throats for his next electronic message. He commanded attention, though not a military response during the Bush years. Similarly, Sara Palin has the media wrapped and warped around her finger. The media desperately want a “story line” for the 2012 election, now that President Obama has seemingly cleared up doubts among all but ignorant, intolerant non-believers that he’s Hawaiian-born.
Trump proved to be a chump. Daniels’ on-off-on-again wife would have sent the press into a frenzy trying to dredge up details. Alas, Indiana Mitch chose family stability and privacy over national exposure. Huckabee (and his wife) learned it’s a lot comfier spreading the gospel of conservatism when handsomely paid to do so. For all his alleged credentials, Gingrich showed no more political savvy than a newt. He did perform a public service, however, enunciating the tyranny of the right’s attempt to socially engineer Medicare and showing the world what happens to a politician who dares deviate from party dogma. So much for the GOP being a party of ideas worth debating.
The media needs Sarah Palin to spice up a bland Republican primary season. Palin needs the media to keep her standing as America’s picture of lost innocence. Her poll numbers among all voters are paltry. Her reality show failed to secure a second season. She does, however, talk in sound bites, and for that the media is eternally grateful. She’s also the best looking GOP pol out there (sorry Mitt).
If she could only talk sense. It might be au courant to tweet, but the public deserves leaders who can think beyond 140 characters. 140 characters lets you get off some nifty one-liners; governing, however, requires nuance and complex programs. Of course, Palin decided governing the great state of Alaska was too limiting a challenge, so her bona fides as a leader working within the system are not especially developed. Her Fox News gig has netted her big bucks, but she has failed to put forward a creditable platform.
Yes, she wants to put America back to work. She wants a strong military. She wants to rein in spending. But what does it all mean? Would she have allowed GM and Chrysler to go under? Would she have sent troops to Libya? Would she have had the foresight to send backup helicopters on the Seal Team 6 mission to get bin Laden? Does she believe the economic stimulus plan prevented a worse disaster? Does she believe government has a responsibility to patrol the workplace to ensure workers do not toil in unsafe conditions? Does she believe the government has a responsibility to ensure the safety of our food and water? Does she believe corporations would act humanely if there were no government inspector looking over their shoulders? Does she believe we were better off in the Happy Days time when women mostly stayed home raising children?
It’s almost impossible to say. She refuses to talk to the media except if they are hand-picked and part of the Fox-wing conspiracy. Yet reporters and editors chase her more doggedly than Bush pursued bin Laden. Palin is a weapon of mass media destruction. Instead of focusing on issues, the media points klieg lights on her. I’m no fan of Michele Bachmann, but at least she has a record we can scrutinize (and shake our heads at).
Americans wonder with more than a little trepidation if the popular Arab spring uprisings in Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Yemen et al will result in democracy or in a different version of tyranny, one tinged with Islamic fervor and intolerance. Our eyes seem to focus on the uncertainty overseas while unable to visualize that populism at home has its dangers, as well. Palin and Tea party members are intolerant of any principled position that doesn’t adhere to their vision of America. Too often they resort to ridicule and aspersion to de-legitimize their opponents, ignoring the foundation reasons why America has become vulnerable, economically and militarily. Most of those reasons developed from 2001 to 2009, during the Bush presidency.
Osama bin Laden got lucky when the Twin Towers collapsed, but his real strength was manipulating the media. For 10 years we waited with our hearts in our throats for his next electronic message. He commanded attention, though not a military response during the Bush years. Similarly, Sara Palin has the media wrapped and warped around her finger. The media desperately want a “story line” for the 2012 election, now that President Obama has seemingly cleared up doubts among all but ignorant, intolerant non-believers that he’s Hawaiian-born.
Trump proved to be a chump. Daniels’ on-off-on-again wife would have sent the press into a frenzy trying to dredge up details. Alas, Indiana Mitch chose family stability and privacy over national exposure. Huckabee (and his wife) learned it’s a lot comfier spreading the gospel of conservatism when handsomely paid to do so. For all his alleged credentials, Gingrich showed no more political savvy than a newt. He did perform a public service, however, enunciating the tyranny of the right’s attempt to socially engineer Medicare and showing the world what happens to a politician who dares deviate from party dogma. So much for the GOP being a party of ideas worth debating.
The media needs Sarah Palin to spice up a bland Republican primary season. Palin needs the media to keep her standing as America’s picture of lost innocence. Her poll numbers among all voters are paltry. Her reality show failed to secure a second season. She does, however, talk in sound bites, and for that the media is eternally grateful. She’s also the best looking GOP pol out there (sorry Mitt).
If she could only talk sense. It might be au courant to tweet, but the public deserves leaders who can think beyond 140 characters. 140 characters lets you get off some nifty one-liners; governing, however, requires nuance and complex programs. Of course, Palin decided governing the great state of Alaska was too limiting a challenge, so her bona fides as a leader working within the system are not especially developed. Her Fox News gig has netted her big bucks, but she has failed to put forward a creditable platform.
Yes, she wants to put America back to work. She wants a strong military. She wants to rein in spending. But what does it all mean? Would she have allowed GM and Chrysler to go under? Would she have sent troops to Libya? Would she have had the foresight to send backup helicopters on the Seal Team 6 mission to get bin Laden? Does she believe the economic stimulus plan prevented a worse disaster? Does she believe government has a responsibility to patrol the workplace to ensure workers do not toil in unsafe conditions? Does she believe the government has a responsibility to ensure the safety of our food and water? Does she believe corporations would act humanely if there were no government inspector looking over their shoulders? Does she believe we were better off in the Happy Days time when women mostly stayed home raising children?
It’s almost impossible to say. She refuses to talk to the media except if they are hand-picked and part of the Fox-wing conspiracy. Yet reporters and editors chase her more doggedly than Bush pursued bin Laden. Palin is a weapon of mass media destruction. Instead of focusing on issues, the media points klieg lights on her. I’m no fan of Michele Bachmann, but at least she has a record we can scrutinize (and shake our heads at).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
