Crack of Dawn Tuesday Open Thread: Did They or Didn’t They?

Luntz gingrich

Good Morning Early Birds!!

I’ll have a Tuesday Reads post up a little later on, but here’s something to get you started.

Remember when we learned about what some Republican leaders were doing on the night of President Obama’s Inauguration in 2009? They met at a dinner organized by Frank Luntz in which they planned how they would thwart Obama’s agenda by obstructing every single initiative he brought forward. Robert Draper revealed it in his book on the U.S. House of Representatives, Do Not Ask What Good We Do.

From The Daily Beast:

On the night of Barack Obama’s inauguration, Republican leaders met in a private dining room at an expensive Washington, D.C., steakhouse to plot their comeback. It was a mix of congressmen and senators with three others added to diversify the gathering of white men. Pollster Frank Luntz, right-wing journalist Fred Barnes, and former speaker (and soon-to-be former presidential candidate) Newt Gingrich. Gingrich gave the opening remarks and gave tactical advice throughout, including a suggestion for Republicans to target the tax problems of New York Democrat Charlie Rangel. At the end of the night, Gingrich proclaimed, “You will remember this day. You’ll remember this as the day the seeds of 2012 were sown.”

Fortunately, Gingrich was wrong about that. Now Jason Horowitz of the Washington Post reports that Luntz tried to get the old gang together again last night.

Luntz is apparently trying to get some of the band back together, according to the office of Sen. Ronald H. Johnson (R-Wis.). This year’s strategy session will not be held in one of the private salons of the Caucus Room, much to the chagrin of Cristina Cravedi, the restaurant’s special-events coordinator, who said all the attention to the last banquet “was good for business.” Luntz, along with former Mississippi governor Haley Barbour (R) and power lawyer Tom Boggs, is an investor in the Caucus Room.

On Sunday, a few minutes after chatting with Obama confidant David Axelrod at Cafe Milano, Luntz declined to confirm or deny this year’s dinner. But he claimed that the depiction of his dinner four years ago was inaccurate. “There was never a conversation about how to make Obama look bad; that was never part of it,” he said…

Texas Rep. Pete Sessions hinted that such a meeting might happen.

Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Tex.), who attended the last dinner (“The first question was, ‘Are you going to accept the fate that falls your way? No!’ ”), said that he again planned to dine with Cantor and Jim Jordan, a conservative Ohio representative who was forced to apologize for lobbying colleagues to oppose House Speaker John A. Boehner’s debt plan. “There will be another one of those and it will be equally expressive,” he said of the dinner. (Asked whether he meant the Luntz dinner, he said, “I’m not going to spill those beans. I’m going to let you call Frank.”)

Others who attended last year’s dinner said they’d be meeting in smaller groups.

“We’ll find some Mexican restaurant somewhere,” said Coburn, who plans to discuss the debt limit with his friends, GOP Sens. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia and Richard Burr of North Carolina). Others are legally barred from breaking bread (“The crazy ethics rules will keep me from meeting with any members,” said Republican former senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina, who now heads up the Heritage Foundation. “We’ll just stay away for now.”

Did they or didn’t they? What is their plan this time? What enterprising reporter will get the lowdown on the meeting?

Remember, this is an open thread!


Haterz gotta Hate

slide_275971_2007530_splash

One of the most amazing things about the US is its peaceful change after major elections.  It’s probably the time we should be most proud. We quietly transfer governance after we elect our officials.  It’s amazing to watch all of this even when you’re in the position of having to watch an elected official that you did not support.  Today’s inauguration really reflected and celebrated the diversity of today’s USA.  It’s weird how some people can’t even relax long enough to realize the country does so many things well.  Instead of embracing our exceptionalism, well, haterz gotta hate.

There were a number of sour looks (that’s Boehner’s wife with that look on behind the first couple), sour grapes, and sour comments coming from the sour loser contingent today.  There were many inspiring words in the President’s inauguration speech about giving every one the American Dream and the promise of equality.  Guess not every one likes that idea.sour puss scalia

“I’ll probably stay away from twitter today-dont want to hear about this sad day for America + hear sheeple fawning over Obama- sickens me,” tweets AmericanAllegiance.

Free Republic posters feel maybe a little nauseous. One poster writes, “Make sure your TV is on. After all, ALL HAIL OUR KING, OUR GOD KING, KING OBAMA!” Others say they’re saving money by missing out. Another says: “By not turning my TV on today at all, I will probably save a LOT on my electric bill. I figure, at Least $.08. Every little bit helps.” A third thinks they’re the silent majority: “Wonder how the networks will fake the ratings on this fiasco….”

Wonder how Paul Ryan liked his personal take-down in the speech?  Ryan even got the Bronx cheer on the way to the ceremony.

President Obama took direct aim in his inaugural address at the Randian rhetoric that animates the politics of Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and his conservative followers in the House and around the country, arguing that the United States is “not a nation of takers.”

For Ryan, the country is divided between “takers” and “makers.” He generally puts the number of the former at around a third, with the remainder in the producing category. The dichotomy has been a regular part of his rhetorical repertoire for years, and was elevated during the presidential campaign as Ryan sought the vice presidency.

Ryan argues that social insurance programs that are central to Western welfare states sap the citizenry of ambition. Obama took direct aim at that contention on Monday. “The commitments we make to each other — through Medicare, and Medicaid, and Social Security — these things do not sap our initiative; they strengthen us. They do not make us a nation of takers; they free us to take the risks that make this country great,” he said.

One of the most ludicrous tweets came from Ari Fleischer.  Here’s Paul Begala’s response to it.

Paul Begala@PaulBegala

You’re an expert In Persian respiration? MT“@AriFleischer: When Reagan sworn in, Iran got scared. Pres Obama sworn in today, Iran yawned.”

Today we celebrated two big US holidays.   Never waste an opportunity to distort when you’re one of the disgruntled losers.

“MLK is rolling over in his grave, as the biggest racist in U.S. history gets sworn in on his birthday & using his bible,” tweeted Tom O’Halloran, who has almost 441,000 followers.

“WHT IRONY THT MOST RACIST, DIVISIVE, ANTI-USA &ANTI-CHRISTIAN VALUES PREZ WD B INAUGcantorURATED (barf)ON MLK DAY-WHOS LIKELY ROLLING N HIS GRAVE!,” tweeted Victoria O’Kane, whose Twitter bio says she’s a “Christian, mother, wife, conservative patriot, author, poet, artist, account executive, humor fan” and has 7,300 followers. The debate over what MLK is doing in his grave rages on Twitter.

Wow.

Oh, and we learned that Eric Cantor is visibly unappreciative of poetry and blessings in Spanish.  It’s just too bad we all can’t stop and consider what a wonder we have in a constitutionally-based change of government even when it’s not  total change.  After all, consider Syria, Libya and Egypt and their fight for liberation from dictators in the age of modern weapons.  Peaceful transitions should leave us breathless and feeling blessed.


Monday Reads

T1587384_05Good Morning!Today is the day we remember Martin Luther King and it’s the day for the formal inauguration ceremony for President Barack Obama.

John Nichols–writing at The Nation–believes that “This President Can—and Must—Claim a Mandate to Govern“.

With his second inauguration, Barack Obama will become the first president since Dwight Eisenhower to renew his tenure after having won more than 51 percent of the vote in two consecutive elections.

More importantly, in a political sense, he will be the first Democrat since Franklin Delano Roosevelt to have won mandates from the majority of the American people in two consecutive elections.

This is the perspective that Americans should bring to the inaugural festivities. We should expect a great deal from Barack Obama. Despite four years of battering by Fox and Limbaugh and the Tea Party and Mitch McConnell, he has been re-elected with a higher percentage of the popular vote than John Kennedy in 1960, Richard Nixon in 1968, Jimmy Carter in 1976, Ronald Reagan in 1980, Bill Clinton in 1992 or 1996 or George Bush in 2000 or 2004.

Obama’s mandate extends beyond himself.  His party has increased its Senate majority and Democrats earned 1.4 million more votes in House races than Republicans. Gerrymandering and money kept Republican control of the House, but that opposition party is in such disarray that the president really does have an opening to make something of his mandate.

Obama must seize that opportunity as an essential part of making the case for bold executive orders and a bold legislative agenda that will bring not just the hope but the change he promised in what now seems like a very distant 2008 campaign. The president has in the transition period since the 2012 election displayed a willingness to push harder, to go bigger, and it has yielded significant progress not just on gun-safety issues but in the long struggle against the Republican austerity agenda that makes a diety of deregulating away consumer and environmental protections, tearing the social safety net and cutting taxes for wealthy campaign donors.

To consolidate that progress, and to assure that his second term will be as visionary and activist as his 2012 campaign promised, Obama must, like FDR, use every opportunity to give voice to the agenda- not just in his inaugural address but in his February 12 (Lincoln’s Birthday) State of the Union address.

120419_obama_newspapers_ap_605

Many things have become political footballs these days.  The bodies, abuse, and rape of women.  The idea that taxpayer money should be used to support religious indoctrination or profiting from educating our children.  Even Science, so much at the center of a lot things we were proud of in the 20th century,has become political.  Are there any dangers in this? Dr. Puneet Opal presents his case at The Atlantic.

Over the past few years, and particularly in the past few months, there seems to be a growing gulf between U.S Republicans and science. Indeed, by some polls only 6 percent of scientists are Republican, and in the recent U.S. Presidential election, 68 science Nobel Prize winners endorsed the Democratic nominee Barack Obama over the Republican candidate Mitt Romney.

As a scientist myself, this provokes the question: What are the reasons for this apparent tilt?

Some of this unease might be because of the feeling that the Republicans might cut federal science spending. The notion is certainly not helped by news-making rhetoric of some Republicans against evolution in favor of creationism; unsubstantiated claims that immunization aimed at preventing future cervical cancer cause mental retardation in young girls; and unscientific views of how the female body can prevent pregnancies under conditions of rape.

These comments might represent heartfelt beliefs of the leaders in question; however, some might simply be statements designed to placate the anti-science sections of their base, as part of the political calculus.

A recent opinion in the leading science journal Nature, written by Daniel Sarewitz, a co-director of the Consortium for Science Policy and Outcomes at Arizona State University, suggests that this polarization of scientists away from the Republicans is bad news. Surprisingly — as he tells it — most of the bad news is the potential impact on scientists. Why? Because scientists, he believes — once perceived by Republicans to be a Democratic interest group — will lose bipartisan support for federal science funding. In other words, they will be threatened with funding cuts. Moreover, when they attempt to give their expert knowledge for policy decisions, conservatives will choose to ignore the evidence, claiming a liberal bias.

The comments of Sarewitz might be considered paranoid thinking on the part of a policy wonk, but he backs up his statement by suggesting a precedent: the social sciences, he feels, have already received this treatment at the hands of conservatives in government by making pointed fingers at their funding. Therefore he says that a sufficient number of scientists must be seen to also support Republicans for the sake of being bipartisan. To be fair to Republicans, no politician has actually targeted science funding in this vindictive manner. But this assessment only goes to show how science is quickly becoming a political football.

I would argue that this sort of thinking might well be bad for scientists, but is simply dangerous for the country. As professionals, scientists should not be put into a subservient place by politicians and ideologues. They should never be felt that their advice might well be attached to carrots or sticks.

Democratic Economists outnumber Republicans by 2.5 to 1.  No wonder many Republicans home school their children and use specious textbooks.

The President was sworn in quietly on Sunday on the day mandated by the Constitution.

With only his family beside him, Barack Hussein Obama was sworn into office for a second term on Sunday in advance of Monday’s public pomp, facing a bitterly divided government at home and persistent threats abroad that inhibit his effort to redefine America’s use of power.

It was a brief and intimate moment in the White House, held because of a quirk of the calendar that placed the constitutionally mandated start of the new term on a Sunday.

But the low-key event seemed to capture tempered expectations after four years of economic troubles and near-constant partisan confrontation. And it presaged a formal inauguration on Monday that will be less of a spectacle than the first one, when the nation’s first black president embodied hope and change for many Americans at a time of financial struggle and war.

For Monday’s festivities, with the traditional parade, balls and not least the re-enacted swearing-in outside the Capitol, there will be fewer parties and fewer people swarming the National Mall; organizers expect less than half the 1.8 million people who flocked to the city last time.

Once the parties end, Mr. Obama’s second-term challenges are formidable, not least given his ambitious priorities of addressing the national debt, illegal immigration and gun violence.

The economy, while recovering steadily, remains fragile. The unemployment rate is as high as it was in January 2009, though it is down from the 10 percent peak reached late that year, and there is no consensus with Republicans about additional stimulus measures — or virtually anything else.

And as the terrorist attack in Algeria last week illustrated, Mr. Obama continues to confront threats around the globe, both from state actors like Iran and North Korea and from Qaeda-inspired extremists seeking to exploit power vacuums in the Mideast and across Africa and Asia.

It’s been 50 years since Dr. Martin Luther King delivered his “I’ve Got a Dream” Speech. 

The speech he delivered the next day — Aug. 28, 1963 — rocked the nation, as King challenged America to live up to the ideas of justice and equality it professed to cherish.

Fifty years later, the “I Have A Dream” speech is still widely regarded as the most powerful and significant speech of the 20th Century.

As the nation celebrates King’s birthday today, the speech itself is being remembered and celebrated in Detroit — which got the first glimpse of the speech — and across the nation.

King speechwriter Clarence B. Jones, who was one of those advisers on the speech, will be the featured speaker at a program today in Ann Arbor and two programs open to the public in Detroit on Tuesday.

Jones, scholar in residence at the Martin Luther King Jr. Research & Education Institute at Stanford University, helped draft parts of the speech and was on stage with King when he delivered it in Washington.

Jones believes the riveting crescendo of the speech was God-given.

He said he remembers gospel singer Mahalia Jackson, also on stage, telling King, “Tell them about the dream, Martin. Tell them about the dream,” said Jones during a recent telephone conversation. “He pushed the written text aside and started speaking from the heart. It was like he had become possessed, like someone had taken over his body. It was electrifying.”

It wasn’t just what he was saying, but the powerful delivery that stirred the nation’s moral conscience, Jones said.

“The speech tapped into the very core values of who we were supposed to be as a country,” Jones said. “He was speaking prophetically about what America could be if it lived out the principles of the Declaration of Independence. Everybody who heard it, black or white, segregationists or integrationists, everybody knew he was speaking the truth.”

It’s hard to think about what life was like for those black Americans living in the Jim Crow South before the work of people like Dr. King and Miss Rosa Parks.  Here’s Dr King Speaking about the Bus Boycott in Selma in 1955.  You can find a collection of historical videos on the struggle for racial equality here.

It’s good that we have a day to reflect on all of those things–both good and bad–that make up American History.  Have a wonderful holiday!

kingin selma


Dear Holy Hand Grenade … keep us safe from your acolytes

Ted+Nugent+ted_the_hunterThere’s nothing quite like a gun appreciation day to make you realize that many of the people around you are nutters. The same folks that want to regulate every thing that goes on in women’s vaginas and health clinics are out proving the need for “well regulated militia” part of that second amendment by acting out their guns obsessions.  Josh Holland highlights some of the lessons that will be lost on the gun fetishists but that we’ve noted this weekend..

So we had this..

 A person who was loading a gun outside of the Indy 1500 Gun and Knife Show at the State Fairgrounds was accidentally shot when his gun discharged Saturday afternoon.

The man, identified as Emory L. Cozee, 54, was walking back to his car… loading his .45 caliber semi-automatic and accidentally shot himself in the hand…

And this

An accidental shooting at a northeast Ohio gun show has left one man with injuries in his arm and leg, according to police.

The shooting happened Saturday afternoon in Medina at the county gun show being held at the Medina County Community Center (on Medina Fair Grounds).

Medina police Chief Pat Berarducci said a gun dealer was checking out a semi-automatic handgun he had just bought when he accidentally pulled the trigger.

Investigators believe the round hit the floor and struck a man standing nearby in the leg and arm.

And this

A retired sheriff’s deputy and two bystanders were hurt when gunfire erupted at a large gun show at North Carolina’s state fairgrounds on Saturday — a shooting that officials and witnesses are calling accidental.

A 12-gauge shotgun discharged while its owner removed it from its case at a security checkpoint at the entrance to the Dixie Gun and Knife Show, fairgrounds Police Chief Joel Keith said Saturday.

The punch-line for that last one is that the gun show will now be a gun-free zone. “By Saturday evening,  the event’s website clearly stipulated: ‘No personal firearms are to be brought into the show.'”

The-Holy-Hand-Grenade-monty-python-and-the-holy-grail-590945_1008_566If it were only gun owning morons shooting off their hands, we could be amused and bemused and some what embrace the irony of it all.

Unfortunately, we also had this.

Sheriff’s investigators combed through what one called a “horrific” crime scene Sunday after the shooting deaths of five people, three of them children, outside Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Each of victims had been shot multiple times, Bernalillo County sheriff’s Lt. Sid Covington, and one of the weapons used was what he described as an assault rifle. Bernalillo County Sheriff Dan Houston said a 15-year-old boy, who “may be a family member,” has been charged with two counts of murder and three counts of child abuse resulting in death.

“Initially responding deputies entered the home and found the five deceased inside the residence, so obviously it was a very gruesome scene,” Covington told reporters. There was no indication of a motive so far, he said.

“I’ve never seen a scene quite like this,” he added.

Investigators did not released the names of the victims Sunday afternoon, saying the process of formally identifying the remains was still going on. But they said the dead included a man, a woman and three grade-school-age children — two girls and a boy.

But, never fear!  Rick Santorum was on ABC this morning sorting it all.

Santorum advised Congressional Republicans to stand their ground against Obama’s gun proposals.

“I think we should stick to our guns,” Santorum said.

Santorum clashed with former Democratic Governor of Michigan Jennifer Granholm, who supports Obama’s efforts and also was on our roundtable.

“Deer don’t wear armor. Why do you need an armor- piercing bullet?” Granholm said.

“But criminals could…having the ability to defend yourself is something that is a right in our country,” Santorum responded.

Santorum, chairman of Patriot Voices — a group that promotes conservative issues — also tweaked the president for what he argued was a lack of action to address the “glorification of violence” in film and TV.

“Not one thing the president did dealt with Hollywood and gun violence and video games and all the glorification of violence,” Santorum said. “Why do you need to protect Hollywood?”

Yes, yes yes,  EVERY country in the world with access to violent movies and video games has the same horrible high rate of gun violence that we do  … oh, wait.  They don’t do they?    With folks like this proving our points, they really need to get another schtick.

Source: http://gunsafereview.net/best-vehicle-gun-safes-holster-mounts/


Abortion Rights: The Constitutional Right Under Assault by Christofascists

All over the world, control, abuse, and forced servitude of women and children are major issues.  The United States is no exception as radical Guttmacher_state_lawschristian groups attempt to deny women access to health, education, and selfhood.  Roe v. Wade turns 40 and the assault on the Right to Abortion and to an autonomous self–separate from state and religious interference–has never been more threatened.  Roe is being regulated into oblivion in many states where arcane religious views take precedent over the rule of law and the Constitution.  Indeed, many of these folks believe a pregnant woman’s body belongs to the state or to any male they deem relevant.

A new study shows hundreds of women in the United States have been arrested, forced to undergo unwanted medical procedures, and locked up in jails or psychiatric institutions because they were pregnant. National Advocates for Pregnant Women found 413 cases when pregnant women were deprived of their physical liberty between 1973, when Roe v. Wade was decided, and 2005. At least 250 more interventions have taken place since then. In one case, a court ordered a critically ill woman in Washington, D.C., to undergo a C-section against her will. Neither she nor the baby survived. In another case, a judge in Ohio kept a woman imprisoned to prevent her from having an abortion. We’re joined by Lynn Paltrow, founder and executive director of the National Advocates for Pregnant Women. “We’ve had cases where lawyers have been appointed for a fetus before the woman herself, who’s been locked up, ever gets a lawyer,” Paltrow says. “[We’ve had] cases where they’ve ordered a procedure over women’s religious objections, and one court said, pregnant women of course have a right to religious freedom — unless it interferes with what we believe is best for the fetus or embryo.” The new study comes on the eve of the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision on the right to abortion — a right that has been under siege ever since.

While outraged and outrageous men take to the street with military style assault rifles to assert their right to bear arms, women seeking to exercise their right to abortion face harassment and worse.

Since state law requires the Alabama Women’s Center to list the days when abortion procedures might be performed, anti-abortion protesters are able to plan their harassment for days when the women visiting the clinic are likely to be seeking an abortion. The protesters are now monitored by local police officers, and clinic escorts will park women’s cars for them so they can slip into the back door of the clinic to avoid confrontations.

Pamela Watters, one of the women’s health advocates who helps organize clinic escorts, told the Alabama press what the volunteers have been up against since they started escorting women in October:

This week, pro-life protestor Joyce Fecteau, 70, was arrested for assault based on an incident alleged to have happened the week of Christmas. A pro-choice protestor told police that Fecteau sprayed her in the face with what Fecteau says is holy water.

Fecteau told The Huntsville Times that she was spritzing holy water to cleanse the air of smoke from a pro-choicer’s sage smudge, and that the pro-choice protestor walked into the spray. […]

Pro-choice marchers recalled a particularly painful event last month when a woman whose baby had died en utero was coming to the clinic to have it removed. In an awful coincidence, that was the day, Watters said, when the pro-life demonstrators collected a children’s choir on the sidewalk to sing “Happy Birthday Dead Baby” to anyone driving in.

“Will had to physically restrain the father,” Watters said, nodding to one of the men marching in a pro-choice jacket. “And by the time she walked through them, she was an emotional wreck.”

Even though Roe has guaranteed women’s constitutional right to an abortion for nearly 40 years, the case study in Alabama highlights the anti-choice activity that works to undermine legal abortion services at the state level. Alabama already places some of the nation’s most stringent restrictions on women who seek abortions. Women are required to receive counseling intended to talk them out of terminating their pregnancy, undergo a 24 hour waiting period, and take a mandatory ultrasound. Late term abortions are not permitted, and insurance plans in the state’s health exchange won’t cover abortion services. Nonetheless, anti-abortion activists aren’t satisfied — they also want to physically and emotionally intimidate the women coming and going from women’s health clinics.

The last two nights of TRMS have had segments dedicated to showing the appalling actions taken by religious radicals in this country to stop women from exercising their constitutional right to abortion.  The show focused on Mississippi’s outrageous crusade to close its last abortion clinic as well as showing the struggle of activists to re-open the murdered Dr. Tiller’s clinic in Wichita, Kansas.

The last two nights of MSNBC’s The Rachel Maddow Show featured segments on how abortion rights are under attack in 4 states (Arkansas, Mississippi, North Dakota, and South Dakota), both by anti-choice zealots and GOP Governors (Bryant [MS], Dalrymple [ND], Daugaard [SD]) and their legislatures, as part of the War On Women playbook to drastically curtail and/or end abortion rights and to defund Planned Parenthood, to name a few.

The right has made a series of attempts for the last two years at restricting access to family planning, women’s health, and abortion services.  Most of this has come with insane comments.  This reactionary drivle religious crusade against our secular and constitutionally formed governments comes from the usual suspects. Most of these are men paid to shout “fire” in crowded restaurants when a waiter lights a candle.  Rush Limbaugh–the loudest of these misogynists–incited his listeners to violence last week. This commentary is by Amanda Marcotte at TRS.

But recently, anti-choicers have grown a bit tired of  pretending that this is about “life” and instead tipping their hand more frequently to the fact that this is about punishing women for being sexual beings. The war on contraception makes it hard to pretend you care about fetuses, even though they do try to tie it back to that as often as possible with flimsy excuses, like pretending that cutting off family planning subsidies won’t lead to more abortions. So it makes sense that, in this environment, Rush Limbaugh would go ahead and put violence against women seeking abortion—which had previously been a no-no amongsts antis to talk about—on the table.

“You know how to stop abortion? Require that each one occur with a gun.”

While most of us think of Limbaugh as an ass clown who should never be taken seriously, for the far right that creates the pool for potential anti-abortion terrorists to come from, this guy is a god. And if not to them directly, to the people around him, so these ideas will trickle out. The far right’s discourse is structured along a “how far can we go?” kind of framework, and they’re constantly looking to each other for “permission” to take it to the next level. Well, now Limbaugh has given them that permission. Killing women seeking abortion has been put on the table.

And boy how he put it on the table! It’s hard not to picture what “abortion by gun” would look like: A sort of rape by gun followed by the violent murder of the woman. It’s taking the subtext of gun nuttery—and how nuts feel that guns give them symbolic phallic power—and making it straight up text. That’s not subtly giving permission, but practically an invitation.

Rick Santorum is perhaps one of the most verbal advocates of theocratic takeover of our laws.  He’s at it again.  Like most of these freaks, he believes that keeping children safe from public education and college is the primary way to keep them indoctrinated into his fact-denying reality.  Of course, he believes taxpayers should support the brainwashing of children by religious zealots in home-based and church-based christian-style madrassas.

Rick Santorum said the nation’s colleges are promoting a “sea of antagonism toward Christianity” and “indoctrinating” its youth with ideals that support gay marriage, abortion and pornography.

Santorum called in to Tony Perkins’ “Washington Watch” on Tuesday to talk about the 40th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade ruling. The conversation dealt not only with abortion but also included other “symptoms” that have changed the nation.

Perkins spoke broadly, saying pro-choice Americans represent a troubled country that doesn’t choose life, meaning “That is to follow the principals, the teachings, the instructions of God … You see that as you’ve been in Washington, D.C. There is a rejection of this idea of truth, and that there is a foundation or morality, which needs to be upheld.”

Santorum agreed, adding that less young people devote themselves to Christianity. “If you look at the popular culture and what comes out of Hollywood, if you go to our schools and particularly our colleges and universities, they are indoctrinated in a sea of relativism and a sea of antagonism towards Christianity.”

“Abortion is a symptom. Marriage is a symptom. Pornography [is a symptom],” he continued. “All of these are symptoms to the fundamental issue that we’ve gotten away from the truth and the ‘Truth-Giver.'”

Amanda Marcotte rightly identifies that  the push for creationism and science-denying, extreme versions of christianity is all about control of women and children.  Men want women and children to be mere extensions of themselves.

On this blog, a lot of time is spent investigating patriarchal attitudes about women’s roles, and how in a patriarchy women are expected to be a servant class to cater to men and not people in their own right. In this system, children face a similar kind of oppression. As women are believed to be the servants of men, children are believed to be extensions of the father, and to display utter fealty to his way of thinking so he can demonstrate his power to other men. That’s why conservatives are so hostile to public education. The children are to believe what Daddy believes, no matter how silly Daddy’s beliefs, and if that requires censoring the truth and going out of your way to hide it from children, so be it. The rights of children to have an education will always bend in this worldview to the rights of the conservative Christian father to control the brain space of his kids.

That’s why conservatives are so dogged in trying to find ways to get into the schools and replace biology with creationism. It’s a symbolic battle for them. Winning it is achieving a symbolic demonstration of their belief that the father’s right to brainwash his child trumps the child’s right to an education.

Let’s not forget that 2011 and 2012 saw an incredible number of states pass laws attempting to deny women their constitutional right to reproductive health and abortions.  Many are working their way to the courts now.  We can only hope that Fat Tony’s seat on SCOTUS is the first one President Obama gets to fill in his second term.

Reproductive health and rights was once again the subject of extensive debate in state capitols in 2012. Over the course of the year, 42 states and the District of Columbia enacted 122 provisions related to reproductive health and rights. One-third of these new provisions, 43 in 19 states, sought to restrict access to abortion services. Although this is a sharp decrease from the record-breaking 92 abortion restrictions enacted in 2011, it is the second highest annual number of new abortion restrictions.

While we celebrate 40 years of our constitutional right to have an abortion, we should not forget that there are many zealots out there that will not rest until they force their religious convictions on every woman in this country.