Friday November 13th 2009

Friday November 13th 2009

bernie imagesHour One: "Brunch With Bernie" Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) spends the hour with Thom discussing the issues and answering listener questions www.sanders.senate.gov

Hour Three: Mathrew Hoh on Afghanistan www.rethinkafghanistan.com

Comments

DRichards (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#1

Re; Holy Cow, Look at the dress she was wearing.

A monthly essay written and published by Robert M. Price author of
The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man and The Reason Driven Life.

Visit Web site at http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com

Rape Session

I recall doing a double-take as I walked through the meeting room block in the Montclair State College Student Center and beheld a poster for an upcoming Women’s Center event. The topic was rape and how to protect oneself. And at the bottom, in the block letters typical for these machine-produced posters was the phrase, in large letters: RAP SESSION TO FOLLOW. Oh no, I thought! How long is it going to be before some wag neatly fills in the space with an official-looking “E”? Only a day or so later I was passing that way again, and what did I see this time? You guessed it. “Rape Session to Follow.” Well, they were asking for it.

But are rape victims “asking for it”? Feminists never let such an opinion go unchallenged, for it seems a revolting instance of “blaming the victim.” It is supposed to be merely one more disgusting example of the age-old Judeo-Christian depiction of poor naïve men, innocent as the driven snow, seduced by wily women and their beguiling charms. Surely, it is argued, women have the right to dress as they please. It’s the problem of the men to keep themselves under control. And if they don’t, it is their fault pure and simple! Book him, Dano.

But this way of characterizing the problem seems to me inadequate. And it is not because I blame women as witches and bitches. No, forgive me, guys, but in most ways I should judge women superior to men. Ashley Montague was right. No, the problem is that feminists are, on this issue, overestimating men, trusting them too much! Or perhaps one ought to say women are underestimating the bestial nature of males. I mean, look at the Middle East. Why are women held captive in those Iron Maidens, the burkas and chadors? You only know there’s a female inside because men don’t wear these garments—these tents. Men make women wear them in order to protect them from the casual lust of other men, whom, and whose lusts, they know all too well. They know it does not take much to enflame their kind with dangerous, aggressive passion. Men don’t require women to hide in these shapeless garbage bags to nullify their siren-like power to provoke otherwise innocent males. Hell no! They make them wear them so as to prevent lustful creatures like themselves from seeing the fetching contours of the female. I am saying that males have a heavy dose of the sexual predator in them, stemming from the old days when their apish ancestors used to sneak up on any available female bending over at the watering hole.

Some years ago there was actually debate in New York City over whether to make it legal for women to go topless on the subway! If you don’t think this move would have raised the rape rate, you are not living in the real world. A man thus aroused to violent action would still be guilty (and I mean real guilty: I want these bastards executed.). But you could not maintain that the half-naked gal had not made herself into an “attractive nuisance.” That would take oblivious naiveté on the same scale as Obama wanting to negotiate with Islamo-Fascists in Iran.

And it is nearly as naïve to think it takes anything as blatant as public nudity to get sexual predators going.

Some rape victims, I am proposing, have endangered themselves by underestimating the degree to which males have evolved past being chimps in pants. I am, I guess, “blaming” women for giving men too much of a break! Thinking too highly of them! “Gee, officer, if I’d realized it was a bull, I wouldn’t have waved that red flag!” Come on, women, take a second look at these guys, but “dress for success,” succeeding in not leaving yourselves open to the loathsome attentions of Neanderthals.

So says Zarathustra.

Mark (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#2

(Wasn't that previous post posted on Thursday's comment page?)

CNN is reporting s poll which claims that by a margin of 48 to 44 percent, Americans at this point in time will support Republicans over Democrats. Knowing how weak-kneed Democrats are, they will interpret this as meaning that Americans don’t like the policies they are trying to push. The problem is the Democrats have not “pushed” much of anything, spending more time bickering among themselves that actually getting things done. That is what is frustrating Americans—that Democrats are like a ship without a rudder. Obama can be blamed for some of this, but it is mainly the fault of Congressional Democrats. It is not that they have done too much—it is that they have done too little. Democrats in Congress must begin acting as if Blue Dogs are de facto Republicans, and develop other strategies to pass needed reforms, like budget reconciliation.

Mark (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#3

The execution of the DC sniper, which covered practically the entire front page of the Tacoma News-Tribune all of places (either it was a really slow news day, or the paper’s editors thought it serve as a “warning” to the city’s gangs), and the haste in which it went through legal process, makes me think of another case of a serial killer with a much different outcome, and served as a highly questionable springboard for the political career of an ex-law enforcement officer.

In November of 2001, police arrested Gary Ridgway, the so-called “Green River Killer,” accused of killing 48 women, mainly prostitutes, drug addicts and others living on the fringes. Ridgway was allowed to plead guilty in 2003 to avoid a date with the chair, apparently because of the circumstantial nature of much of the evidence against him, and because he “promised” to assist police in locating missing bodies (not very helpfully, as it turned out). King County Sheriff Dave Reichert was acclaimed for the apprehension of Ridgway, and although most people viewed him as an empty suit, he rode his law and order “credentials” to a seat in Congress as a Republican.

Yet there were things about this case that disturbed me, beyond the fact that Ridgway was never obliged to confront the verdict of a jury. The killings began in 1982; in 1983, police had a suspect: Gary Ridgway. In 1984 he was given a polygraph test, and later samples of hair and saliva. Yet police failed to track his movements and chose to follow pointless leads on other “suspects.” Reichert was the chief detective in conducting this investigation. It wasn’t until 2001 that DNA evidence tied Ridgway to some of the victims. After he was arrested, Ridgway claimed that he continued his killing spree until 1998—15 years after he was first identified as a suspect. It testifies to either incompetence or the failure to take seriously his status as a suspect by the police—and Reichert in particular—that Ridgway felt no pressure to end his killings; perhaps he was too much the average white Joe to the police. At least three dozen more women lost their lives because of this failure. And voters overlooked this fact when they rewarded Reichert with a House seat.

I wrote to a columnist for the now defunct Seattle Post-Intelligencer about some of the doubts I had about the case; he responded by saying he had considered mentioning these points, but thought it would not be “appropriate,” since he had recalled how “anguished” Reichert was in failing to apprehend the killer—who he had in his grasp one year after the killings began.

Mark (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#4

In other news, it appears that CNN's "Mr. Independent," Lou Dobbs, is taking his "commitment" to outrageous overstatement and bigoted misrepresentation of the facts elsewhere. Fox News, perhaps? Wolf Blitzer, meanwhile, seems utterly flabbergasted that there might be two heroes in the Fort Hood massacre instead of one; the white woman might have to share the glory with a black man. Frankly, it's rather pathetic that the "real" drama in the massacre is who will be determined the "greater" hero.

Wildcat (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#5

http://i823.photobucket.com/albums/zz157/KSUW4E/MedicareForAll04.jpg

Send an application to Medicare to your Congressmen and to the President!

Step 1: Download and print out the Application Form. (The above link!)
Step 2: Fill out *all* fields.
Step 3: Use the extra space below the statement to add your own comments, share your own stories, or just share your thoughts about the recipient's stance on this issue.
Step 4: Address the envelope to your Senator's or Representative's *home* office (to avoid delays that occur when sending mail to Washington), or the White House.
Step 5: Stuff the envelope, apply first class postage, and mail!
Step 6: PASS THIS ON!

Wildcat

Boris31 (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#6

FREE LUNCH AT THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION

I thought this online article made an important point in a cute and direct manner.
http://www.campusprogress.org/features/345/free-markets-and-free-sandwic...

Mugsy (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#7

Question for Bernie:

I am seeing healthcare reform mirroring the disaster in Massachusetts with everyone forced into private insurance and the government plan used as a dumping ground for the uninsurable (resulting in NO PUBLIC COMPETITION for the insurance companies.to force costs down.)

The idea behind "the public option" is to drive costs down by forcing private insurance to compete with a low-cost public plan. But if the only people that can join that plan are the people they don't want, and everyone else is forced to buy private insurance, how is that supposed to drive costs down?

Aren't we simply duplicating the MA plan that we already know doesn't work? And how does the Democratic MAJORITY allow the Conservative MINORITY to dictate what the final bill looks like?

mstaggerlee (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#8

Yes, Mark, that same post from DRichards WAS on yesterday's page, but nobody responded to it. I was kinda troubled by it myself, but had a busy day & couldn't get my thoughts in that regard in order, so I let it slide.

Somehow, DR, I manage to appreciate numerous women for their outer beauty every day, and while my thoughts may occasionally stray towards what's behind that plunging neckline, or under that short skirt, I've never gone as far as an inappropriate comment (that she could hear, anyway), let alone considering assault.

Does that make ME weird??

mstaggerlee (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#9

@ Wildcat & Boris31 -

2 VERY kewl posts! Thanx!

mstaggerlee (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#10

@ Mark -

Regarding the rest of your 1st post - It is widely understood that given a choice between a Republican, and a Democrat who acts (how much did I want to write "smells" there?!) like a Republican, most people will choose the Republican.

mstaggerlee (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#11

Careful, there, Senator - Worker ownership of the means of production??!! Sounds kinda Marxist,don't it?

But seriously, folks, I love the idea ... and I ALMOST work at such a place.

The four men who founded the company I work for now all used to work together at another company. Over the course of about 5 years (during the Reagan administration) the company that they worked for was bought and sold 4 separate times. Each transfer caused considerable turmoil in their lives - management shakeups, layoffs, etc. At various times, each of these 4 guys was supervised by one of the other 3. A couple were out of work for a while, then re-hired at reduced compensation.

Back in 1986, when they heard about a FIFTH buyout, they'd all had enough. All were considerably experienced, they saw market needs, and had product ideas to fill those perceived needs. So they pooled their funds, took out 2nd mortgages or whatever loans they could get, and founded this company.

I wouldn't exactly call this workplace a democracy (we are no, and likely never will be, unionized), but the 3 surviving owners treat their employees at all levels with respect. Yes, we had a layoff, and a couple of temporary hours reductions over the past couple of years, but those employees who remain here were recently given 5 additional paid days off each year. We all get a reasonable amount of inpurt regarding how our jobs are done, and where we fit into the company structure. All in all, it ain't a bad place to work.

What'll happen when these 3 men are ready to retire? Your guess is as good as mine, but with any luck, I'll retire before any of them.

Scott M. (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#12

I heard one person today bring up the idea of taking away the tax exempt status of some religions. This dovetails with a thought I had earlier today.

If we have diplomatic relations with Vatican City and Vatican City is considered an entirely separate country, doesn't that make the biships and priests and occupying force?? Following that line of reasoning shouldn't the congressmen who negotiated with the Catholic bishops over the Stupak amendment be considered traitors and Quislings (sp?)?

I say it's time to throw the bishops and priests out of the country.

ReaganRules (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#13

Today is another hour with the SOCIALIST Senator Bernie Sanders. Hartmann will continue to be his lap dog for the hour and not challenge him on 1 thing he says, as always.

Hartman and the Socialist will use the term right-wingers at least 10 times...........watch.

DDay (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#14

@Mark & mstaggerlee,

Re: The public preference of Repubs vs. Dems in polls

It seems to me that for most independents and a sizable portion of the citizenry ideology isn't very important. What often matters more is authenticity. People have a sixth sense about it. It often trumps all other issues or traits when people go into the voting booth. Some extremely talented politicians are able to project a persona which inspires people to invest in them what they want to see. Both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama have this gift. The problems begin after we elect them and begin to see how they govern. All too often we find out that they aren't quite what we wanted to believe they were. Seeming to be authentic can get you elected. Being truly authentic is pretty rare now days. I think the jury is still out on Obama.

DDay (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#15

Reagan was an authentic dolt.

mstaggerlee (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#16

@DDay -

So was Dubya.

Apparently, so IS ReaganRules. :D

Quark (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#17

My husband used to refer to Reagan as President "Feeb" from the first year of his presidency, chiefly because his pronouncements seemed so dim-witted. Eight years later, we found out that Reagan actually did have Alzheimer's.

Unfortunately, Reagan was a puppet. People who actually lived through that period will remember how DISLIKED he was for his policies and his ideology. It has only been within the last decade or so that history has been rewritten by right-wing ideologues and others who needed to make a Republican hero out of him.

He will always be "Ronnie Ray-gun" to me.

Quark (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#18

"Feeb", short for "Feeble"

loretta (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#19

President Obama is an authentic realist who has inherited a disaster, and he is using everything in his power to make things right. I find it interesting how he backs up a little when he wants us to fight harder to help him do what he needs to do. He is having to learn how to navigate congress while at the same time masterfully guide the progressive voice like wind in his sails to get us all where we need to go, before it's too late.

nora (not verified) 4 years 49 weeks ago
#20

The Red List of the world's endangered species...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/datablog/2009/oct/23/endangered-sp...

We don't need to continue/recreate a manufacturing culture based on petroleum/coal. We must rather thake advantage of the ONE positive thing about increased CO2 levels -- and that is, plants like them. We must go along with this, or rather follow its lead and create PLANT-BASED economies. Cap and trade, like one caller said last week, is nothing but indulgences for sins. It was a ridiculous notion for the Catholics and is a goofy idea now (and serves only those who can finesse it, such as the biggest companies/corporations.

The more I hear about it, the more it looks like a shell game. And JUST WHAT does cap and trade do to arrest further environmental degradation and loss of species? Only reforestation to habitable landscape can do that, and THAT is what is needed to take advantage of the huge success CO2 can bring the plant world. What is wrong with those in charge who cannot see this obvious link? REFORESTION must be the first priority (and it will create lots of jobs).

The notion that we can continue to live our plastic, lights on day or night, drive around in autos anytime, buy energy-intensive toys and gadgets lifestyle is absurd. The word 'modern' no longer describes that old, filthy, wasteful, destructive lifestyle. The word 'modern' must come to describe something thoroughly new, plant-based, sustainable, zero pollution, and resulting in simplified lives.

Time to Rethink the War on Terror

Thom plus logo

When Eric Holder eventually steps down as Attorney General, he will leave behind a complicated legacy, some of it tragic, like his decision not to prosecute Wall Street after the financial crisis, and his all-out war on whistleblowers like Edward Snowden.

From Unequal Protection, 2nd Edition:
"Hartmann combines a remarkable piece of historical research with a brilliant literary style to tell the grand story of corporate corruption and its consequences for society with the force and readability of a great novel."
David C. Korten, author of When Corporations Rule the World and Agenda for A New Economy
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Thom Hartmann seeks out interesting subjects from such disparate outposts of curiosity that you have to wonder whether or not he uncovered them or they selected him."
Leonardo DiCaprio, actor, producer, and environmental activist
From Screwed:
"I think many of us recognize that for all but the wealthiest, life in America is getting increasingly hard. Screwed explores why, showing how this is no accidental process, but rather the product of conscious political choices, choices we can change with enough courage and commitment. Like all of Thom’s great work, it helps show us the way forward."
Paul Loeb, author of Soul of a Citizen and The Impossible Will Take a Little While