Welcome!
We're progressive, political, controversial, provocative, thought-provoking, entertaining, sometimes comedic, and always extremely interesting and informative. View investigative segments at the side and bottom of this page.
State Department Victim's Family Hotline: 1.888.407.4747
To Donate: 1800salarmy 18004unicef 1800redcross
For those wishing to donate immediately, text "HAITI" to 90999 and a donation of $10 will be given automatically to the Red Cross to help with relief efforts, charged to your cell phone bill. [see complet info at http://blogs.state.gov/index.php/site/entry/disaster_haiti ]
This year I am bound and determined to cut down on the time I spend emailing certain people, writing in this blog, and keeping tabs on politicians. If you notice, I’ve been writing less and less. It’s a full time job keeping up with politicians, “bad ass” corporate criminals, and “the good”, “the bad”, and “the ugly.
Okay, … I’ve given you my New Year’s resolution.
Now don’t take offense at what I’m going to say in this post. Before you say anything, re-read our group’s description. Yeah …. Read it. It says, we’re progressive, political, controversial, thought-provoking, entertaining, sometimes comedic, …
Today’s subject: Let’s talk about profiling potentially violent “sons of bitches”.
If we’re really serious about cracking down on violent crime, (that means everything from sex offenders, to murderers, to terrorists, etc.), why not look at the group most responsible for these crimes. What do all these violent offenders have in common? Think people … think!
If you guessed … those who possess the “Y” chromosome, you were right on the money.
These violent offenders are of every skin color, job description, from every political party, and religion (though I’d seriously watch those Catholic priests and bishops). The only thing that truly unites them is that damn pesky “Y” chromosome. God forbid they have an extra “Y” chromosome.
These are some scary people folks. You never know when one of them might snap or unveil their “hidden” aggressive/violent tendencies and wreak havoc on others.
So what should we do when one of these “Y” chromosome people gets on a plane, or train, or want a job in a school, or want to get married, or want to work for law enforcement, or for that matter want to do anything? I say strip search em, body scan em, investigate em, and turn their entire life upside down.
Can you really trust these “Y” chromosome people to walk amongst us?
I say … cross the street if one of them comes towards you.
If they make one false move, I say … lock them up and throw away the key. Better still, put each and every one of them on some remote, highly guarded island and let them be leery of, and nervous around each other.
Now … I want to be fair. I don’t want us profiling little kids; however, if there’s an age group that bears watching, it’s probably that group between the ages of 10 and 60. Sounds about right, don’t you think? Can’t afford to have those “Y” chromosome kids viciously attacking others on the playground.
Okay, I plead guilty to going ballistic after hearing about the backroom deals that the White House took part in early on. It seems they decided to not really fix the broken healthcare system we have. They decided (or Rahm Emanuel decided) instead to go with a pro-health insurance industry, health insurance (so called reform) package and call it healthcare reform … eventually the healthcare reform label became health insurance reform.
Now that the jig is up and everyone knows about the deals cut by the White House, the White House is saying “you guys have this all wrong”. They claim what the Senate has done is true health (insurance) reform. At least they’re not calling it healthcare reform (or did you guys hear something else?).
The White House caused a firestorm when Gibbs crucified Dr. Dean (former Chairman of the DNC, and the voice of the progressives who has been fighting for real healthcare reform for quite some time); calling Dr. Dean’s criticisms of the Senate bill as insanity or something to that effect.
Then Senator Rockefeller chimed in and holy hell broke loose on the liberal blogosphere; and I was, and still am, extremely angry at the White House.
Where does that leave things today? Who knows. I’m sure the White House will try to “pull a rabbit out of a hat” and come up with something that they think will appease people who are angry at the White House and various members of Congress.
-
You'll also be seeing more and more members of Congress talking about what a great Senate bill they have, and how wonderful it will be for so many people.
The president has said (according to Gibbs) that next year, the president plans to pay less attention to criticism of his handling of things. … okay …
You can read my previous post for links to some informative articles regarding the healthcare debate and backroom deals by the White House.
If I don’t post before Christmas, have a fantastic holiday.
-
PS: Guys I wrote this post this morning, this afternoon I read a post from Drew Westen. I thought I was the only one who felt this way about the president. You ask ... which way? ...
Ben Nelson, the mouth-piece for the sex-scandal ridden Catholic Church has decided (after getting what he wanted) to vote for the (currently) seriously compromised Senate healthcare bill (which is a gift to the publicly traded health insurance industry), while nobody knows what Senator Webb will do.
-
In the meantime, the tea partiers and the progressives are mad as hell at their own parties; and they are in full fighting mode, trying to decide who they will get to run against the traitors in their party come 2010 and 2012.
-
Let's face it, the majority of the Republicans and all but 30 or so Democrats in the Senate are bought and paid for by corporate interests (that includes the Catholic Church).
-
The House Democrats want to keep their majority; however, those representatives better get their act together, cause their progressive base is foaming at the mouth.
-
Truly both the tea partiers and the progressives are fed up with most politicians who appear to be more concerned about their own welfare.
-
One out of 6 Americans live in poverty. The Middle Class is disappearing; 1% of the population control 90% to 95% of the wealth in this country, and that 90-95% group does not include tea partiers or most progressives.
-
The tea partiers blame immigrants, moderate Republicans and the government for their misfortune; while progressives see the banks, corporate executives and lobbyists as the true culprits.
-
One thing is clear, neither group is happy, and both think it's time to clean both houses of Congress.
“It's not enough that Catholic priests and bishops controlled and ruined the lives of many young altar boys; now they want to control the lives and bodies of women.” -
We women come in all shapes and sizes and with different points of view. Some of us are pro-choice and some are pro-life; however, make no mistake, we don’t want men (or anyone for that matter) dictating and trying to control us (or our bodies), or telling us what doctor we can and cannot see, what treatments we can't have, what hospitals we can and cannot go to, and what our health insurance should not cover.
For you women in Congress … word to the wise. Unless you start sticking up for us women, you will find yourself, along with your fellow male members of Congress, without your cushy seats in Congress.
My mother, a Republican who voted for President Obama, prays for the president's safety every day. Her friends, who come from almost every race, religion, and culture, also hold prayers for President Obama, and pray for his safety every day. They wish him well.
-
It is woefully evident however, that there is a Republican far right fringe [esp. the Evangelicals] that does not pray for his safety; they pray for his death, and his liberal [who they call Socialists] supporter’s demise. According to Frank Schaeffer there are probably 22 million individuals who are part of that fringe [“the super conservative Evangelicals”]; and a much smaller minority that would actually carry out their death threats or violence given the right set of circumstances.
That we hear no denunciation of these individuals and groups from moderate, responsible [and supposedly sane] members of the Republican Party is alarming; however, it does not surprise me. These Republicans it would appear, would sell their mother and their soul to cater to what they see is their political base. God help us!
-
Senator George Voinovich [R-OH] has said he does not recognize his own political party; that they have strayed far away from their principles and southerners have hijacked his party. Other Republicans have also expressed similar sentiments; yet, none that I know of, has publicly called for a stop to the threats against the president. This is the party that is seeking to regain power in Washington, and wants to represent us in the International community.
Why are we not hearing a public denunciation of these death threats and violence from the leadership of the mainstream and Evangelical religious community?
Our president welcomes criticism and our support; he does not deserve the venomous language and hatred (racial and otherwise) that is leveled against him.
What must other countries think of us; what must we think of ourselves?
Several posts ago, I wrote “Why are we worried about Afghanistan, when Afghanistan is in our own back yard”. When I wrote it, I didn’t think about this fringe (largely religious) group “who are the American version of the Taliban”. They themselves would be horrified to know that they possess a similarity to the Taliban.
If we don’t publicly and privately denounce these individuals and groups now, we are giving aid and comfort to violent rhetoric; and if violence results, we have aided and abetted it.
Next time you want to criticize the president and his administration, be very careful of your tone and language. If you don’t have constructive and/or helpful criticisms, keep your thoughts to yourself. We don’t want or need inflammatory rhetoric right now.
It also wouldn’t hurt you to email or fax or publicly praise President Obama when he does something you like or are proud of.
It’s 4:50am (est.), and I can’t sleep. Anger, resentment, and fear have gripped my heart; and my heart can't stop racing, and each beat becomes louder and louder.
-
As is my habit when something disturbs me greatly, I have to put pen to paper [key stroke to blog] and release what's gnawing inside me.
- I need you to feel my anger, and understand why I'm upset.
- Last Saturday, we watched every male Republican (but 1 who voted present), and 62 male Democrats, interfere with, and restrict a woman’s freedom and rights. Two women Democrats, and every female Republican, were co-conspirators; and I wonder, if perhaps, there is self loathing in that group.
- I don’t care if you are pro-life or pro-choice. If you did not say no or object to the Stupak-Pitts amendment … you knowingly chose to interfere with, restrict and chip away at a woman’s rights and her freedom. This amendment went beyond the language that was already in the House bill.
-
The Stupak-Pitts amendment, a male written amendment, was another step in the direction to return women to what many men (around the world) see as a woman’s rightful place. That place is for women [and her body] to be subject to a man’s will and whims. If you were not outraged, and/or did not write your representatives, or express your anger in some meaningful way, you aided and abetted those men [and their co-conspirators] who felt entitled, and sought to purposely interfere, restrict, and chip away at a woman’s rights and freedoms.
We women have come too far to allow men such as these, and their co-conspirators, to interfere with our rights and freedoms. Women, your body is your own. No man can possess it our own it. No man [or woman] should be able to pass legislation that will ultimately interfere with your decisions about your body, and interfere with and restrict your choice of, and access to health providers who would care for your body. Men would never willingly allow you to do it to them.
-
You see, ... people come to America from all over the world to celebrate and embrace freedom and choice. They come to America to be free.
Some, who never enjoyed freedom before, kiss the ground when they step on America's soil. They cry out … I’m free … I’m free. Free from ... imprisonment, or domination, or cruelty, or silence, or human rights abuses, or religious persecution; and they feel free to go where they want, or read what they want, or see what they want to see, ... .
Days, or weeks before the House vote on Healthcare, two men started crafting legislation that would have far reaching implications, and impact and further restrict a woman’s freedom. I want you to really think about this. I’ll say it again, … two men … two men crafted [wrote] legislation to interfere with and further restrict a woman’s freedom. *
I don’t know about you, but most psychologically healthy women would never want any man to interfere with and restrict her freedom.
[In the United States] If a woman decided to get up late one morning, that’s her right, and no man can force her to get up early. If she decided not to cook, that’s her right, and no man can force her to cook.
-
If a woman wanted to go to work, that’s her right, and no man can tell her to stay home. If she didn’t want to marry, that’s her right, and no man can tell her that she had to marry. If she wanted to go to school, that’s her right, and no man can tell her she can’t go to school.
For a woman to be paid as much as a man doing the same job, that’s now her right, and no man should be allowed to pay her less.****
If a woman went on a date with a man, and he demanded sex, but she refused, that’s her right, and no man can force himself on her. If some man/men wanted to sell her into slavery**, she has a right to say no, and every man has a duty to come to her aid to prevent her from being sold.
-
If a woman wants an abortion, no man [or woman] can tell her she can't have one. If a woman wants to go to a hospital of her own choosing, no man can tell her she can not go. If a woman wants to see a doctor of her choice, no man can tell her she can not go.
In the United States of America, a woman has the same rights and freedoms as a man. She has a right to liberty; and she has a right to happiness. These are fundamental rights. No man can [legally] take her rights away from her. No man has the right to tell her what to do with her life. No man has a right to touch her if she doesn’t want to be touched. Her body is her own and no man … no man can own her. She and she alone own her body.
It is rare for another woman to form a group or start a movement meant to interfere with her own rights and freedoms as a woman. If there was such a woman, I would think you would agree, that something is wrong with her ... that perhaps she is psychologically damaged in some way.
I want you to think about who is at the forefront of almost every group or movement to restrict or interfere or strip away a woman’s rights and freedoms. ... They are almost always men. They are the Randall Terry’s’; they are the "Men Against Abortion" kind of groups; they are the sex slave traders, the rapists, the men who like to abuse women; they are the men who want to control women; they are the cold blooded killers like Scott Roeder; and now the Ben Nelson's, the Jeff Merkley's, the Orrin Hatch's, the Mike Johanns', and BartStupaks and JoePitts of this world.***
-
None of these men would ever willingly allow another man or woman to own his body. He decides how his body is to be used or abused. He makes the decision about his reproductive organs; and he would never willingly allow anyone to interfere with that decision. These men will move heaven and earth; and they will legislate, demand, and fight for a man’s rights and freedoms. [He yells] "Give me liberty or give me death".
That a woman would not fight with every fiber of her being when a man [or another woman] seeks to restrict, take away or strip away her rights and freedoms is incomprehensible; and one would surmise that a woman who does not fight, has low self esteem, or is mentally challenged, or suffers from some other infirmity.
Comment: What is so unsettling about the Hyde amendment and the Stupak-Pitts amendment is that we are back to where we were when abortion was illegal.
Rich women always had access to abortion services [legal or illegal].
When abortion became legal, all women had access.
With Hyde and Stupak-Pitts, we are now back to where we were before abortion became legal.
This is now about class, control and unequal access; leaving poor women who can least afford to bear children, having less access, and being pushed deeper into poverty.
Hyde and Stupak-Pitts ultimately gets between a patient and her doctor by denying access to a legal procedure if the patient will be receiving federal monies (subsidies).
Hyde and Stupak-Pitts also prevent health insurance companies from providing coverage for a legal procedure if they receive federal subsidies. [The words "restraint" and "free trade" come to mind]
That men are at the forefront, crafting legislation and making it more and more [extremely] difficult for women to have access to a legal procedure, is so much about control of women and very little about pro-life. The fact that these men have female co-conspirators (as do sexual slave traders with their madams) does not negate the fact that these men seek to control and bend women to their will and whims.
There is so much wrong with Hyde and Stupak-Pitts, I can't for the life of me understand why some smart lawyer can't figure a way to get rid of both.
Saturday evening the historic Affordable Healthcare for America Act [H.R.3962] passed in the House Chamber. While the legislation is far from what needs to be done to give all Americans quality, low cost, universal comprehensive healthcare coverage; and does not really revamp our healthcare system and truly lower healthcare costs*, we do congratulate all who voted for H.R.3962; and give a special thanks to Congressman Steny Hoyer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosifor their tireless efforts.
Republicans did everything they possibly could to stop this legislation that will:**
1. Prevent private health insurance companies from discriminating against men, women and children who have a preexisting condition. 2. Prevent private health insurance companies from making women pay more for insurance. 3. Reinstate antitrust laws. 4. Expand health care coverage to the approximately 40 million Americans who are currently uninsured by lowering the cost of health care. 5. Prohibit rescission of health insurance coverage without clear and convincing evidence of fraud. 6. Require the option of extending coverage for children under 27 years of age. 7. Prohibit aggregate dollar lifetime limits on benefits. 8. Require guaranteed availability and renewability of health insurance coverage. 9. Prohibit discrimination based on health status factors. 10. Require parity for mental health benefits 11. Prohibits an essential benefits package from imposing any annual or lifetime limits on coverage.
While last week, approximately 100 [+] Americans died from lack of health insurance (or between 22, 000 and 44,000 annually), and approximately another 98,000 [+] Americans may lose their health insurance in the next two weeks, Senate Republicans and Senator Joe Lieberman were smug, telling news organizations that the historic Healthcare House Bill would never see the light of day in the Senate. Republicans continue to offer no real solutions to our broken healthcare system and no solutions to providing universal health care.
Senate Republicans and Senator Lieberman also vowed to make sure that private health insurance CEOs continue to receive outlandish compensation (while 1 out of 6 Americans live in poverty); and they vowed to make sure that private health insurance companies continue to make great profits while Americans struggle to survive. How? By making sure there is no public option in a Senate Healthcare bill (if there ever will be one).***
- We applaud Congressman Dennis Kucinich for opposing H.R.3962. He is a strong proponent of a single payer system (what many of us wanted); and he refused to compromise.
To be perfectly understood, we do not condone acts of violence against U.S., and we do not condone breaking laws, or agree with people who break the law.
-
-
TED NUGENT EXPOSED! DID EVERYTHING HE COULD NOT TO SERVE IN THE MILITARY
An SIT was sent to the FirstEnergy plant after the March 12, 2010 discovery of cracks in the nozzle on the control drive mechanism, some of which were leaking as workers failed to account for peak temperatures inside the reactor vessel.
WE DON'T ENDORSE ANY INVESTMENT ADVICE, OR ANY THIRD PARTIES. CSC IS ALSO NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY COMPANY/ORGANIZATION MENTIONED ON THIS BLOG (UNLESS SPECIFIED).
Posts
