The Rise of Jane Crow

Not since the country experienced the havoc of Plessy v. Ferguson have so many states done so much to actively restrict rights recognized by the Supreme Court under the context  of promoting  imaginary state interests.   A number of laws and constitutional amendments were passed during reconstruction that were meant to right the wrongs done to both free people of color as well as former slaves. Shortly there after, slave state after slave state tried to enact laws to chip away at the constitutional rights of black Americans under the same pretext that states had some compelling  interest.  In a similar action, we now see a variety of laws that imply that the state needs to protect a woman from her presumed bad judgment.

Lawyers argue that this is nothing more than an attempt to find doctrinal loopholes in three court cases.  That would be Roe v. Wade, Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, and Gonazles v. Carhart.  Each of these cases sought to compromise the constitutional rights of women and clearly inject the state into a woman’s right to self-determination.  The latter cases have clearly laid out weirdish pretenses like phantom fetal pain or third term deliveries t mislabelled as abortion that have no connection to science, medicine or fact.

The Carhart case has activated 916 Anti-abortion measures in the first three months of 2011.  Justice Kennedy owes every single American woman a huge apology. The Guttmacher Institute has a succinct list of trends resulting from the nonscientific meanderings of an Opus Dei adherent that feels the need to subject women to all kinds of harassment in order to exercise their constitutional rights just because he can’t keep his personal mythology out of his job duties.

To date, legislators have introduced 916 measures related to reproductive health and rights in the 49 legislatures that have convened their regular sessions. (Louisiana’s legislature will not convene until late April.) By the end of March, seven states had enacted 15 new laws on these issues, including provisions that:

  • expand the pre-abortion waiting period requirement in South Dakota to make it more onerous than that in any other state, by extending the time from 24 hours to 72 hours and requiring women to obtain counseling from a crisis pregnancy center in the interim;
  • expand the abortion counseling requirement in South Dakota to mandate that counseling be provided in-person by the physician who will perform the abortion and that counseling include information published after 1972 on all the risk factors related to abortion complications, even if the data are scientifically flawed;
  • require the health departments in Utah and Virginia to develop new regulations governing abortion clinics;
  • revise the Utah abortion refusal clause to allow any hospital employee to refuse to “participate in any way” in an abortion;
  • limit abortion coverage in all private health plans in Utah, including plans that will be offered in the state’s health exchange; and
  • revise the Mississippi sex education law to require all school districts to provide abstinence-only sex education while permitting discussion of contraception only with prior approval from the state.

In addition to these laws, more than 120 other bills have been approved by at least one chamber of the legislature, and some interesting trends are emerging. As a whole, the proposals introduced this year are more hostile to abortion rights than in the past: 56% of the bills introduced so far this year seek to restrict abortion access, compared with 38% last year. Three topics—insurance coverage of abortion, restriction of abortion after a specific point in gestation and ultrasound requirements—are topping the agenda in several states. At the same time, legislators are proposing little in the way of proactive initiatives aimed at expanding access to reproductive health –related services; this stands in sharp contrast to recent years when a range of initiatives to promote comprehensive sex education, permit expedited STI treatment for patients’ partners and ensure insurance coverage of contraception were adopted. For the moment, at least, supporters of reproductive health and rights are almost uniformly playing defense at the state level.

This is clearly a shocking conspiracy to deprive women of their autonomy and to inject the state directly into the middle of personal medical decisions.  Op-ed columnist Gail Collins puts a human face on these statistics.  She singles out the case of Texas which appears to lead the country in a lemming like march against science, contraception, and the idea that women are capable of making adult, moral decisions without the state giving them lectures, time frames, and measure after measure of harassment. An effort by one state senator to simply ensure that information handed out was medically accurate died in committee.  It’s obvious these folks aren’t interested in facts.  It’s a crusade back to the days when male high priests determined the will of the angry sky god and every one else just had to deal with it. There is no such thing as a lie to outrageous when it’s about a fertilized egg.

Meanwhile, on the House floor, anti-abortion lawmakers were stripping financing for other family-planning programs. Representative Randy Weber successfully moved part of the money into anti-abortion crisis centers for pregnant women.

“There’s been research done. … It actually shows the highest abortion rate is among women actively using contraceptives,” Weber insisted.

“These folks are anti-abortion, anti-contraception and anti-science,” said Representative Mike Villarreal, who tangled with Weber during the debate.

Villarreal has had a rather dark view of the rationality of some of his colleagues ever since he tried to improve the state’s abstinence-only sex education programs by requiring that the information imparted be medically accurate. It died in committee. “The pediatrician on the committee wouldn’t vote for it; he was the swing vote,” Villarreal recalled.

Welcome to the fact-free zone. This week, U.S. Senator John Cornyn gave an interview to Evan Smith of The Texas Tribune in which he claimed that the battle in Congress to defund Planned Parenthood “was really part of a larger fight about spending money we don’t have on things that aren’t essential.”

Remember, Senator Kyle claiming 90% of Planned Parenthood’s business was abortions when number is more like 3%?  That’s just par for the course for the fetus fetishists.  He later backtracked by saying his speech given on the house floor and entered into the record was  “not intended to be a factual statement.”  Well, that’s the problem.  These folks are WAY short of factual statements.  That’s not stopping them from passing laws based on pure fiction. After weeks of Stephen Colbert taking Kyle on via twitter and many news outlets, we still have right wing, Republican politicians completely lacking the facts.  Here’s representative in Florida made yet another misstatement to the press about this today.

PolitiFact says state Rep. Ronald Renuart, R-Ponte Vedra Beach, was wrong when he said Planned Parenthood received more than a third of its income from providing abortions.

The national debate over funding for Planned Parenthood spilled into state politics in a recent House committee debate over a bill to require ultrasounds before having an abortion.

Renuart said, “almost 37 percent of the total income from Planned Parenthood is from abortions. And to me, it sounds like they don’t want to lose business.”

PolitiFact Florida rated the claim false.

Reporter Aaron Sharockman said Renuart is quoting from a Planned Parenthood study, “but he’s leaving out whole chunks of how Planned Parenthood gets its revenues.”

He said a better estimate might be 13 percent, but no one knows for sure because Planned Parenthood doesn’t release that information.

“Renuart’s overstating the number by not including other sources of income, things like private contribution, as well as the federal funding Planned Parenthood receives,” Sharockman said.

Renuart’s statement came during debate over a bill requiring women to get an ultrasound before having an abortion. It is awaiting a vote by the full House. A similar bill is working its way through the Florida Senate.

I think these guys think that some sort of 2 day fully complete mini-me will pop up in each huge projection of the ultrasound. They can’t possibly have even seen an ultrasound let alone know anything about gestational development. You would think that people that are so concerned about keeping government out of everyone’s lives would realize that they and the state are not the best decision makers on a medical procedure.  But no, state lectures are the prescribed way of telling women they couldn’t possibly make a good, moral decision.

At this point, we’re all on the defensive.  It’s obvious that there’s a nest of these vipers in every statehouse in the country and we’ll need to vote them out.  Until then, be prepared for more fiction-based accounts of human development and laws based on them.


Monday Reads

Good Morning!

I’ve almost gotten shy about going out to search for links these days.  Most of the political and economic news is disheartening so I thought I’d try to mix it up today with some good stuff and disheartening stuff.  Hopefully, you can find some things to share with us too.

You may want to start out your day arming yourself with “Five Myths about Planned Parenthood” in case any one in your sphere of influence starts spewing some of the ridiculous memes passed around by the right wing. This was in WAPO over the weekend and was written by Clare Coleman worked for America’s best known provider of family planning and health services.  I liked number five.

Three million patients each year visit Planned Parenthood’s more than 800 health centers in every state, in big cities and small towns. In some areas, Planned Parenthood and the Title X-funded system are the only sexual health providers for hundreds of miles.

We screen people for high blood pressure, anemia and diabetes; we counsel them about smoking cessation and obesity; we connect them to other primary-care providers and social services. The huge response to the attack on family planning and on Planned Parenthood — hundreds of thousands of Americans signing petitions, showing up at rallies, calling Congress – is extraordinary. But it doesn’t surprise me. One in five American women has gone to Planned Parenthood at some point in her life, for respectful, compassionate, quality care. And now those Americans are going to have our back.

I feel like I’ve turned into an IMF groupie by putting up yet another link to them shortly after featuring one of their studies on the dominance of the finance sector, but here I go again.  I do spend time gleaning data from their site so maybe it’s just that I keep bumping into things.  The IMF says we have a Global Job Crisis.

At the end of his magnum opus, The General Theory, Keynes stated the following: “The outstanding faults of the economic society in which we live are its failure to provide for full employment and its arbitrary and inequitable distribution of wealth and incomes”.

Not everyone will agree with the entirety of this statement. But what we have learnt over time is that unemployment and inequality can undermine the very achievements of the market economy, by sowing the seeds of instability. In too many countries, the lack of economic opportunity can lead to unproductive activities, political instability, and even conflict. Just look at how the dangerous cocktail of unemployment and inequality—combined with political tension—is playing out in the Middle East and North Africa.

Because growth beset by social tensions is not conducive to economic and financial stability, the IMF cannot be indifferent to distribution issues. And when I look around today, I am concerned in this regard. For while recovery is here, growth—at least in the advanced economies—is not creating jobs and is not being shared broadly. Many people in many countries are facing a social crisis that is every bit as serious as the financial crisis.

Unemployment is at record levels. The crisis threw 30 million people out of work. And over 200 million people are looking for jobs all across the world today.

The jobs crisis is hitting the young especially hard. And what should have been a brief spell in unemployment is turning into a life sentence, possibly for a whole lost generation.

In too many countries, inequality is at record highs.

As we face these challenges, remember what we have accomplished. Under the umbrella of the G20, policymakers came together to avoid a financial freefall and probably a second Great Depression.

Today, we need a similar full force forward response in ensuring that we get the recovery we need. And that means not only a recovery that is sustainable and balanced among countries, but also one that brings employment and fair distribution.

This is part of a speech given by Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Managing Director, International Monetary Fund. He argues that financial sector reform is central to the problem of getting back on track.  It’s worth reading the entire thing or you can watch the video here.  Occasionally, I remember why I thought it was important to study economics.  This is one of those times.

The so-called “Gang of Six” is still anxious to put social security on the bargaining table. I still can’t figure out why every time some politician wants to talk about the Federal Deficit--in this case Senator Mark Warner–they mistakenly include the stand-alone program.

Including Social Security in the Gang of Six package appears to be a concession by Democrats made in exchange for agreement to raise some revenue by Republicans. But liberals in the Senate and House have made clear they will not stand for any cuts to benefits.

The 2012 budget passed by the House on Friday does not include reforms for Social Security. House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) instead called for a trigger in the budget whereby the president and Congress would have to propose solutions once the Board of Trustees certifies the program is in trouble. Presidet Obama in his 2012 budget and in a speech last week did not lay out plans to reform Social Security.

Warner said the Gang is “very close” to an agreement that includes spending cuts and tax increases such as be eliminating the home mortgage tax deduction.

“We are going to make everybody mad with our approach,” he said.

Warner made clear he is opposed to the House Republican 2012 budget’s reliance on cuts to Medicare—he called it a “massive transfer of responsibility onto our seniors”– but he did not say how the Gang of Six will approach the massive entitlement program.

Please join me as I scream.  How stupid do they think we are?

Ninety-one year old Pete Seeger will be joined by David Amram, 80, and Peter Yarrow, 73 on the stage to inspire young people to be active in political and social justice movements.  Yarrow had just returned from a series of rallies in Wisconsin.

The three artist-activists say they are fired up by recent protests — from Egypt to Wisconsin — and by the enthusiasm of their youthful kin, who will join them onstage.

“I do have the feeling that the kind of energy we felt in the ’60s is in the air now,” Mr. Yarrow said. “That energy seems to be reigniting itself.”

That concert should be a treat.  It’s nice to see these guys seem to never tire of singing songs of justice. It’s important that a new generation hear these truly American songs.  I was interested in reading that many kids and grandkids of these folk singers are now in the family business and may show up on stage with them now and then.

Okay, this is something that kinda surprised me from the WSJ: “Greenspan Steps Up Call to End Bush-Era Tax Cuts”.  I still haven’t figure out why any one thinks he’s still relevant, but oh, well.  At least, he’s on the right side of this one.

Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan is stepping up his call for Congress to let the Bush-era tax cuts lapse.
In an appearance Sunday on ABC’s “Meet the Press,” Mr. Greenspan used his strongest words yet to urge lawmakers to let them expire. The risk of a U.S. debt crisis, he said, is just too big. Mr. Greenspan, who retired from the Federal Reserve in 2006, had endorsed the cuts back in 2001 championed by then-President George W. Bush.

“This crisis is so imminent and so difficult that I think we have to allow the so-called Bush tax cuts all to expire. That is a very big number,” he said, referring to how much the U.S. government could save from letting income taxes go back up to levels last seen under former President Bill Clinton.

Mr. Greenspan was talking about re-imposing the taxes for all Americans. The Treasury has estimated that a permanent extension of all the Bush tax cuts would cost $3.6 trillion over the next decade. Allowing taxes to increase on those in the top income brackets would take the cost to the government down to $2.9 trillion, according to White House estimates.

CBS news has done some data gathering on taxes as part of its Tax Day coverage: Wealthy Americans see drop in federal taxes; High-earning Americans pay less in taxes than in previous years; nearly half of U.S. households will pay no income taxes at all.

The Internal Revenue Service tracks the tax returns with the 400 highest adjusted gross incomes each year. The average income on those returns in 2007, the latest year for IRS data, was nearly $345 million. Their average federal income tax rate was 17 percent, down from 26 percent in 1992.

Over the same period, the average federal income tax rate for all taxpayers declined to 9.3 percent from 9.9 percent.

The top income tax rate is 35 percent, so how can people who make so much pay so little in taxes? The nation’s tax laws are packed with breaks for people at every income level. There are breaks for having children, paying a mortgage, going to college, and even for paying other taxes. Plus, the top rate on capital gains is only 15 percent.

There are so many breaks that 45 percent of U.S. households will pay no federal income tax for 2010, according to estimates by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank.

The sheer volume of credits, deductions and exemptions has both Democrats and Republicans calling for tax laws to be overhauled. House Republicans want to eliminate breaks to pay for lower overall rates, reducing the top tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent. Republicans oppose raising taxes, but they argue that a more efficient tax code would increase economic activity, generating additional tax revenue.

The row of shotguns featured on the first season DVD set of Treme are set to be demolished as blight.

New Orleans is abuzz with the second season of Treme about to start up on HBO.  I have to admit that I have not watched it since I’m still working through my dose of PTS from Katrina and the aftermath. However, for those of you that are fans of the show, you can get it now on DVD and you can get a bit of a taste in what’s in store for you in season two from this story from the TP.  The show evidently ended last season with the city’s evacuation.  That’s something I will NEVER forget.  The show has been great for the city, overall and it’s producers have taken on a lot of causes around here including a fight to save some historic properties featured in the series’ promotions.  Just thought I’d add some insight into what the production brings to the city including its musicians.  Here’s a little drama from Hollywood South.

… production money is being spent daily in New Orleans for locations, for equipment, material, labor and talent. In the first two seasons, for example, about $2 million in music licensing money was paid for the rights to songs by New Orleans artists, alone. Such expenditures — with or without any charity component — are the crux of the real economic relationship between a film company and the community in which it works. It is a straight-up transaction. We come here to shoot a movie. We pay a variety of local vendors, government fees and individuals to do it. And for virtually every other movie shot in Louisiana, that is it — end of story.

Thought I’d end with a treat from Pete Seeger to get you through your coffee:


What’s on your reading and blogging list today?


Yet another Equal Pay Day will pass tomorrow …

and you know the drill … not yet.

If you’re seeing RED, wear RED tomorrow.

  • In 2007, women’s median annual paychecks reflected only 78 cents for every $1.00 earned by men. Specifically for women of color, the gap is even wider: In comparison to men’s dollar, African American women earn only 69 cents and Latinas just 59 cents. 1
  • In 1963, when the Equal Pay Act was passed, full-time working women were paid 59 cents on average for every dollar paid to men. This means it took 44 years for the wage gap to close just 19 cents — a rate of less than half a penny a year. This narrowing of the gap has slowed down over the last six years, with women gaining a mere two cents since 2001. 2
  • Women’s median pay was less than men’s in each and every one of the 20 industries and 25 occupation groups surveyed by the U.S. Census Bureau in 2007.3 Even men working in female-dominated occupations tend to earn more than women working in those same occupations.4
  • According to the Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR), if equal pay for women were instituted immediately, across the board, it would result in an annual $319 billion gain nationally for women and their families (in 2008 dollars). Over her working life, a typical woman could expect to gain a total of $210,000 in additional income if equal pay were the norm (these numbers include part-time workers).5

Religious Extremists in House Hold up Budget over Planned Parenthood Funding

Will Obama and the Democrats Cave to the Xtian Taliban sitting in Congress?

Democratic officials familiar with the negotiations said that proposed restrictions on money for Planned Parenthood remained the chief sticking point, and that attempts to resolve the disagreement through alternatives like allowing a separate floor vote on the issue had not been successful. Democrats said they were told by the Republicans that the votes of anti-abortion social conservatives would be needed to move any budget measure through the House.

From NPR:

But Reid called it a battle over ideology.

“The debate has nothing to do with the number — it has everything to do with women’s health,” he said, referring to funding of Planned Parenthood during a Friday news conference. “That’s the only issue that was left undone when we left the White House last night.”

Jeff Zients of the Office of Management and Budget, who is overseeing preparations for a possible shutdown, said both the economy and public confidence in the federal government could suffer — even if a shutdown only lasted through the weekend.

“When I think about the scale of the number of operations that will be shut down and then would have to be reopened, I think the impact on the economy even for a short period of time could be relatively significant,” Zients told reporters Thursday.

Call your senators and representatives and tell them not to cave to Religious Extremists.

More from Think Progress:

Three Anti-Abortion Republicans Tell House GOP To Drop Planned Parenthood Rider To Avoid Shutdown

While many Republicans are committed to holding up the budget over a social issue, at least three anti-choice Republicans are recognizing the absurdity of such an obstacle. Sens. Pat Toomey (R-PA), Tom Coburn (R-OK) and — surprisingly — Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) have signaled a willingness drop the policy rider to reach an agreement and avoid a shutdown:

Toomey on MSNBC: “I think what we should do is cut spending as much as we can, get the policy changes that we can, but move on, because there are other, bigger battles that we are fighting,” he said yesterday.

Coburn on MSNBC: “And my recommendation to my friends in the House is, you know, it’s highly unlikely that many riders are going to get passed with a Democrat president and a Democrat Senate, so why don’t you take the spending and let’s get on to the budget,” he said Wednesday.

Bachmann on CNN: “I think that we should have a clean bill that makes sure that the paychecks get to the troops on time,” she told CNN’s John King yesterday.


Friday Reads: Fresh Hells brought forth by Republicans

I wish I could really say good morning, but I have to say that I’m getting more discouraged all the time.  It feels like the Republicans are destined to bring on The Handmaid’s Tale future.  There should be no complaining around here about burkhas because it seems we’re being enslaved by the same narrow minds here in this country with the same degree of ignorance and intolerance.  We’ve turned from a nation of scientists, inventors, and pioneers into something completely different.  We better start fighting the ignorance coming from pews and Republican Congressional districts now or everything we have come to know and love about this country will be gone.  One hundred fifty years after the beginning of the Civil War, we now have another war seeking to create slaves rather than free them.

First, a selection of how a few robed men with their own religious jihad have become jurists in favor of dismantling some one of the most central tenets of The Constititution:  The Establishment Clause. Every citizen in this day and age should be able to show the damage done by religionists in this country.  It will be a difficult task, however.

In a decision earlier this week in Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn, the five conservative Justices on the Supreme Court (Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito) carved a large hole out of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Although the issue in the case was subtle, the consequences are not.

The First Amendment prohibits government to make any law “respecting an establishment of religion.” A central concern of the Establishment Clause, in the words of James Madison, was to forbid government “to force a citizen to contribute” even “three pence of his property for the support of” religion. As the Supreme Court recognized more than forty years ago, as a general proposition the Establishment Clause prohibits government from using its “taxing and spending power… to favor one religion over another or to support religion in general.” Thus, the Establishment Clause forbids government to fund churches to enable them to spread their religious beliefs or to award special tax credits to individuals to reimburse them for their contributions to religious organizations.

There is a complication, however. Even though such government programs violate the Establishment Clause, it is not clear whether anyone can legally challenge them. To bring a lawsuit contesting a law’s constitutionality, a plaintiff must have “standing” to sue. To have standing, a plaintiff must have suffered a distinct “injury in fact” as a result of the government action he wants to challenge. Standing is necessary because we want the parties to have a meaningful stake in the outcome of litigation. Otherwise, they might not adequately represent their position, which could result in a waste of judicial resources or, even worse, erroneous decisions.

Why should I have to subsidize some one’s superstitions?  I certainly will get no benefit from it nor will society.

Idaho lawmakers are seeking to force raped women to bring pregnancies to term because it is the will of “The Almighty”. (H/T to BB) That some one’s imaginary friend should hold every one hostage is anathema to me.  We have to ask when the witch burning will begin, when will we return to biblical stoning, and under what conditions will slavery be okay?  This also completely bans induced labor under strict term.  There are no ‘abortions’ in the third trimester.  That’s one of those word games religionists play to confuse the easily confused.  So, what happens if you have a brain dead baby or one that’s dead and the remains go septic?  Do you just sit around and wait for their imaginary friend to do something?  How are all these radical measures coming to pass?  Where are the reasonable people in this country?

The Idaho legislature on Tuesday gave final approval to a measure that would outlaw abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy and subject abortion providers to criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits.

The Senate-backed bill cleared the House in a 54-14 vote and now heads to Governor Butch Otter, who is expected to sign it.

This person actually believes a rapist is the hand of god?  Representative Shannon McMillan needs to go back and figure out that a fertilized egg is in no way a child and that forcing women to hangers and back alleys isn’t going to save lives.

“Is not the child of that rape or incest also a victim?” asked Rep. Shannon McMillan, R-Silverton. “It didn’t ask to be here. It was here under violent circumstances perhaps, but that was through no fault of its own.”[…]

The Idaho bill’s House sponsor, state Rep. Brent Crane, R-Nampa, told legislators that the “hand of the Almighty” was at work. “His ways are higher than our ways,” Crane said. “He has the ability to take difficult, tragic, horrific circumstances and then turn them into wonderful examples.”

It looks like “clerical error” has returned the vote advantage to Right Wing Radical extremist David Prosser to the Supreme Court in Wisconsin.  He’s best known for calling a colleague a bitch.  The assault on women’s rights, worker’s rights,  and ordinary people will continue there.

Nickolaus says the reason for the big change is that data transmitted from the City of Brookfield was imported but that she failed to save those results to the database. Brookfield cast 14,315 votes on April 5 — 10,859 of those votes went to Prosser and 3,456 went to JoAnne Kloppenburg.

Congressional Republicans are trying to blame the budget stalemate and the ensuing bad PR of not paying soldiers in combat on Democrats.  The truth comes out that they are quibbling over funding Planned Parenthood and not the numbers.  It’s really quite shameful.  Maybe the Democrats and Obama are figuring out that these people do not negotiate, they only take hostages.  The Democrats offered to pass a troop funding standalone bill 3 times but were turned down.

Today, House Republicans pushed through their stopgap measure in a 247-181 vote. The bill, H.R. 1363, quickly came under fire for demanding a series of non-budget related policy riders, including an anti-abortion policy restriction banning D.C. from using its own local funds for abortions and anti-environmental restrictions to limit the EPA from regulating green house gas emissions, on top of an extra $12 billion in cuts. “With an eye to protecting themselves politically” from blame, the GOP quickly redefined H.R. 1363 today as the “troop funding bill.

Slate’s Dave Weigel noted that five minutes after the White House declared H.R. 1363 unacceptable, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) slammed President Obama for threatening to veto a bill to “ensure that our troops are paid.” Minutes later, Rep. Tom Latham (R-IA) ripped Democrats for “girding to oppose a ‘troop-funding bill.’” Republican lawmakers quickly picked up the rallying cry. Reps. Mike Pence (R-IN) and Harold Rodgers (R-KY) called it “astonishing” and “inexplicable” that Obama would, as GOP shutdown architect Newt Gingrich put it, use the troops as “bargaining chips for budget negotiations.”

There’s only one problem with this talking point — it’s the opposite of true. Today, the House Democrats tried three times to pass a measure that would ensure the troops received pay. The Republicans overwhelmingly opposed every single “troop-funding” opportunity  …

Nancy Pelosi is now saying there is a war one women and predicts a ‘strong Democrat Response to the recent events. One has to wonder where it was when they sold out on tax cuts that would bring on this situation.  One also has to wonder about where these folks were when they were eviscerating women’s right to have private insurance with abortion riders a year ago too.

“I think you’ll see a strong Democratic ‘no’ on that,” Pelosi said of the funding measure, “and I would hope that the president would veto that bill.”

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), senior Democrat on the House Budget panel, called the Pentagon funding “a cynical ploy to use our troops to try to impose the Republican agenda through the budget process.”

Pelosi agreed, and predicted the attempt to lure Democratic votes won’t work.

“For them to hide behind our troops while they build a future unworthy of the sacrifice of our troops … is a contradiction in terms,” she said. “I believe we’ll have a solid vote against that.”

These are truly trying times.  We have people who do not embrace modernity, science, or reason making policy right now.  They’ve also had time to stack a lot of courts with justices who appear to care more about their religion than The Constitution.  We’re assaulted on all fronts by radicals who seek to redefine this country in theocratic terms and are willing to ruin it to bring about an end to everything that protects the pubic interest and public assets.  The costs will be huge if this stuff succeeds.

Anyway, I can’t read any more of the headlines without wanting to ask Canada for sanctuary.  If you’ve got anything better on your reading or blogging list, please share it.  I just would like to get my assets and my daughters out of here before they’re declared breeders and kidnapped by some infertile white couple in the name of their angry sky god.

Uppity Woman suggests that we join the ACLU and women in the state of Florida and “incorporate” each and every uterus in the country so the Republicans will want to deregulate them and free them from taxes.  Here’s the link to Incorporate My Uterus!  Sigh.

So many religionists, so few lions.

Oh, and if you want to get stirred up, go watch CSPAN and the Stand Up for Women’s Health Rally:

Stand Up for Women’s Health Rally Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America, and more than 20 other organizations will hold a Stand Up for Women’s Health rally at the U.S. Capitol in opposition to proposals in Congress.

From the NYT:

On Thursday, Republicans passed a one-week spending bill — one almost surely destined to fail in the Senate — that featured one of the key provisions they are seeking.

The measure would reinstate a policy, scotched a few years ago by Democrats, that prevented the District of Columbia from using locally generated taxes to provide financial help to poor women for abortions. (The use of federal funds for abortion is already prohibited.) Because this law was on the books for years — passed by Democrats as a rider to unrelated bills — it has perhaps the best chance of surviving in any spending compromise.

Republicans also seek to prohibit payments for abortions overseas — a measure known as the “Mexico City” policy that was overturned by an executive order from Mr. Obama. Another rider seeks to end the United States’ contribution to the United Nations Population Fund, which focuses on reproductive health.

Finally, rather than cut all federal funds for Planned Parenthood, House Republicans would like to take the money given to it and other family planning organizations and give it to state health departments to spread at their discretion.