It's Settled then: Women, We're at War

Don't expect me to be going over every single attack on women's rights, just because I'm writing about modern-day, 21st century, 2012, just-in-the-last-month attacks, which, as you might have noticed, are escalating at such a dizzying pace we can no longer ignore the rumblings of war.

It's ugly and it's all out there. Even Rush Limbaugh's scrubbed transcripts of his diatribes against Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown University student who had the temerity to attempt to testify before certain members of congress about the need for free contraception.  Even Patricia Heaton's deleted tweets about that same student (AKA G-Town Gal).  They're out there.  They're not going away.

No, we're here today to look at the big picture:  How did this latest war of the sexes start?  What was the catalyst?  And what can we do to grind it to a halt now that it's started? 

The obvious answer to question number one is that it's all Obama's fault.  As a part of his health plan (the catalyst), he told insurance companies they would have to offer contraceptive care at no cost to women.  (That would mean, for most, no  co-pay.)  Birth control aids would be free and available everywhere, and since it was mandatory, not to mention laudatory,  not to mention commonsensical and a long time coming, that was supposed to be it.  End of conversation.

Ha!  We wish! .

President Obama's first mistake was that he thought he was taking steps toward helping women more effectively and responsibly manage their reproductive years, when what he was actually doing was antagonizing pissants who have been posing as Manly Men for so long they're not about to be ousted from their comfy zones.

A whole host of Catholic Bishops, pseudo-religious politicians, and paid-to-be-mean pundits jumped on the bandwagon called Control the women by denying birth control, and weren't they surprised when the women they were so itching to suppress wouldn't give in?  A real donnybrook ensued, with everybody weighing in, pro and con, and here we are, in the middle of it all, coming out swinging, and if they want a war, okay, they've got one.

Some highlights:

• The Susan G. Komen Foundation is taken over by a Right Wing zealot who makes it known from Day One that Planned Parenthood can kiss SGK goodbye.  Susan Komen's sister/founder helps figure out a way to do it.  A huge, unprecedented fuss ensues.  Right Wing zealot goes on to greener pastures.  The sister stays and apologizes -- a Pyrrhic victory that nobody feels good about.

•   Long probes up the vagina with cameras on the end used not as medical tools but as instruments of shame-- Zap!  Gone!  Battle won!

• Gooey cold stuff massaged onto a bare belly so a government-issue wand can be waved, not to detect a zygote already determined by other methods to be there, but to establish once and for all that a woman doesn't actually have control over her own body--  Still working on it but we've got them in our sights.

•  Dozens of state legislatures scrambling to make laws against contraception and abortion so harsh Draco the Greek, if he were still alive, would be crying foul-- This one may take a while.

The legal issues, having some semblance of form and substance, are easier to deal with.  There are wise and learned people on our side ready to take them on.  But there's another, uglier issue and it's one we've faced many times before.  It's our old but formidable nemesis: blind, consuming hatred toward people of our gender.

With the rise of the Tea Party and pressure from the Religious Right-to Life-until-It-Actually-Becomes-a-Child, fortified by resident misogynist Rush Limbaugh and hard line Catholic Men in red robes and black robes and pullover sweater vests, the battle to enforce the reproductive rights we've already fought long and hard for is a battle we can't afford to lose.

 The spotlight is on Rush Limbaugh at the moment, but it's Rick Santorum we need to keep an eye on.  He showed his hand when he talked about his reaction to President Kennedy's 1960 speech to the Baptists, where JFK said he would fight hard for the separation of church and state.

Santorum wanted to throw up when he read that.  Why?  Because it's disgusting and unforgivable that  Kennedy had the chance to pave the way for an American Pope and he didn't take it.  Rick will remedy that when he's president.  And guess who will suffer the most under his reign?

The obvious goal is to make sure Rick Santorum never becomes president, but once that threat is gone we'll still be fighting those others working to take us down.  We thought that war was over, but all we really won, we know now, was détente.

Men (and, incredibly, other women) are fighting against those of us who go on believing our reproductive rights are sacrosanct.  Suddenly they're coming out of the woodwork, no longer pretending that Roe v. Wade is all that's keeping us apart.  Now it's about contraception -- a real puzzler, since birth control is the obvious remedy for unwanted pregnancies.

Only women can incubate babies.  It's a fact. If they get knocked up and it's not a good time, the sex police want us to believe they have no one to blame but themselves.  Really?  What other species on the planet punishes the female for being impregnated by a male?  Birth control is a two-way street.  It's irresponsible and gutless to pretend that women did this to themselves, and yet we're hearing it louder and clearer every day.

And why is that?  Because to the people who are coming at us with the same hoary arguments, it's not about the control of birth, it's about the control of sex. That nutty comment by Santorum backer Foster Friess about birth control being as simple as holding an aspirin between our knees?  The admonishment from Rick Santorum that all birth control should be banished because it can only lead to badness?  Rush Limbaugh's crazed, three-day masturbatory fantasy about the reasons women want free birth control?  Sex, sex, and yet again, sex.

It's the same tiresome struggle, but this time we're going to win.  Why?  Because we have a secret weapon.

It's men.  There are more than just a few good ones out there and they're on our side.  They're men who work with us, talk with us, and see us as equals.  They're men who live with us and see our roles as complementary and not competitive or without merit.  They're men who can love unconditionally and have grown so far beyond the ancient need to keep women bound and tethered, they're willing to fight beside us until this war is ended.  Some of them are already at the front lines.

So put that in your pipe and smoke it, you dirty old men of yesterday.  A new day dawns and you've been left behind.  It has to be this way.  It's the way human progress works.

(Cross-posted at Dagblog, where some of the men I most admire hang out.)

What's so Funny about Rush Limbaugh?

 As I write this my sense of humor is intact and waiting as always for something funny to happen.  I can get tickled at the least little thing--adorable babies and clumsy dogs and tripping on sidewalk cracks--and I can howl at even the worst, god-awful jokes.  I can't explain them and I've never been able to repeat them with any kind of comedic skill, but I know funny when I hear it.

I can say without even having to think about it that I've never laughed at a thing Rush Limbaugh has said or done.  I don't get him.  His performances are like those of a mean, out-of-control drunk who thinks everything coming out of his mouth is either hilarious or golden.  He begins every riff quietly, taking his time, pausing, letting his words sink in, and builds to an awesome, wiggly, crazed crescendo.  Oh, my God.  Electrifying to dittoheads and the uninitiated.  Wow!  But to those of us who have been exposed to his antics for decades, they're nothing more than the usual carefully calculated theatrics.  Ho hum.

That's what makes his latest rantings against a Georgetown University law student fighting her college's policies on insuring birth control aids so mystifying.  His initial comments about this young female student were so breathtaking in their vile putridity, the reactions against them were, at last,  refreshingly awesome and swift.  Hundreds of thousands of people protested his words.  Even his usual defenders could be seen slinking away from the ten-foot pole they wouldn't use to touch them.  Yes!  Limbaugh is a pariah!

So did he finally stop and think about what he had said and realize he'd overstepped?  The woman he so viciously word-raped was a young college student and not a politician or a public figure. She was not fair game and she was not a joke.  But no, he didn't.  He was so sure of his base, so sure of the politicians in his thrall, so sure that his advertisers would be too busy counting their money to notice, he came back the next day and the next and attacked this same young woman again.  This time he demanded videos of her sex acts.

His politicians, true to form, gave out some half-hearted hand smacks, reminding us that he's an entertainer, not a Republican spokesman--as if he's only pretending to be one because he'd slept at a Holiday Inn once.

At last count, seven of Rush's sponsors have dropped him, at least for the moment, until all the fuss dies down.  Dozens of petitions are still making the rounds, working to gain enough signatures to pressure all of his backers to leave him helpless and wiggling on his own.  It took all of that for Rush to give an inch and release an odd written statement that, considering who it is from and how rare those things are coming from him, some might take to be an apology.

A Statement from Rush

March 03, 2012

For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week.  In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.
I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress. I personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities. What happened to personal responsibility and accountability? Where do we draw the line? If this is accepted as the norm, what will follow? Will we be debating if taxpayers should pay for new sneakers for all students that are interested in running to keep fit?  In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone's bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a Presidential level.
My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.

"I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke."  Really?  How would you go about attacking someone for three solid days if you DID mean it?

In Rush Limbaugh's 24 years on the air he has apologized six times for the things he's said that backfired.   BuzzFeed has put them all together here.

In 1988 he called Amy Carter "The most unattractive presidential daughter in the history of the country", and "apologized".

In 1992 he called Chelsea Clinton "the White House dog" and "apologized", blaming his crew for confusing him by mixing up pictures of Chelsea and the Clinton's dog.

In 1996 he made fun of Michael J. Fox, saying he either didn't take his medication on purpose or he was faking it when he appeared in a commercial for Claire McCaskill.  In his "apology" he said, "All I'm saying is I've never seen him as he appears in that commercial. . ."

In 2008 he compared then-Senator Obama to Curious George and in his "apology", threatened to fire the caller who brought it up, ha ha, saying he never knew Curious George was--Gosh!--a monkey.

This is not to say that Rush has never said stupid, hateful, racist, misogynistic things before or since.  Oh, he has, and plenty.  That's apparently part of his appeal, God help us.

So think of it.  One of the wealthiest, most famous entertainers in America right now is a stupid, hateful, racist, misogynistic radio personality who broadcasts a show three hours a day, five days a week highlighting his own peculiar, insulting, disrespectful brand of humor.  Millions of seemingly sane listeners adore him and are honored to align themselves with him.

In many dark parts of our nation he is paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to deliver a one-hour speech to friendly packed houses, mirroring the stupid, hateful, racist, misogynistic rantings direct from his incredibly popular radio show.

He is so successful, grown politicians fear him more than they loathe him and cannot bring themselves to denounce a man who, underneath all that bluster, is a weak-kneed coward.

He will not debate or answer to anyone.  His radio callers are screened so no one can ever dispute anything he says.  He won't make public appearances in places where people who disagree with him might be in attendance.  He has never appeared on a program where he might be asked hard questions.  He attacks women and children and the handicapped with impunity and laughs along with his audience at the outraged responses.

He is a monster in the eyes of most normal human beings, and so I ask this question in all seriousness:

What is so goddamned funny about Rush Limbaugh?


(Update, 3/8/12:  Media Matters reports that Limbaugh made disgusting comments about Sandra Fluke 46 times over three days and only apologized for two words.  They're listed here. Over 40 advertisers have retreated from his show. Sen. Carl Levin wants the Armed Forces Network to stop broadcasting Limbaugh's show to the troops.  Rush says it's all good.)

No Surprise: Erin Burnett doesn't get the Wall Street Protesters.

For her CNN "Out Front" debut on Monday, Erin Burnett went to the Occupy Wall Street protesters to see for her corporate-shilling self what the heck all the fuss was about.  She couldn't find a single person who knew why they were protesting.  Imagine that.

"I saw dancing, bongo drums, even a clown.... I asked several protesters what it was that they wanted. Now, they did not know.... They did know what they don't want."

 

This is not new.  I've heard many pundits question whether the people holding the signs have a real agenda or just want to be out there in front of the cameras holding silly signs, dressed in goofy garb, doing the Kumbaya thing. (Yes.  Wherever there's a protest, they'll be there, too.  Bless their hearts.)

 

But the claim is that nobody in that crowd really knows the reasons for the protests.  I guess if you were one who isn't listening, or more likely, refuses to listen, you might not get the message. 

 

This is it in a nutshell, from the Occupy Wall Street website:

 

Occupy Wall Street is [a] leaderless resistance movement with people of many colors, genders and political persuasions. The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%. We are using the revolutionary Arab Spring tactic to achieve our ends and encourage the use of nonviolence to maximize the safety of all participants.

 

I probably won't spend a lot of time watching Erin Burnett's new show, but I've had her number for a while.  If you just look at that angelic face, those deep, darling dimples, you might miss who Erin really is.  

 

 

 

She is a Wall Street groupie who searches, but can only find eensy-teensy, little bitty problems with her chosen pals.  

 

She is about to marry a CitiGroup exec, thereby solidifying her affection for the Street.   

 

She is a supposed reporter who once told the folks on AM Joe to take a larger look at China, who might be as successful as they are because they don't coddle people by paying them when they're unemployed.  (Not in itself true, but she said it ever-so-sweetly, even apologetically, as if she really hated to spoil a perfectly good discussion, but it needed to be said kind of thing, so nobody jumped on it.)

 

And Rush Limbaugh loves her.

If you watch Erin Burnett's "Out Front", you're going to hear what sounds perfectly reasonable, because the person saying it is about as far from a Maria Bartiromo as one can get.  But I'm seeing nothing but love songs to Wall Street already, which is okay as long as CNN isn't promoting it as a family show.

Friday Follies: Miley's tattoos, Limbaugh's NYT joke, and other "news"

I've been thinking for a while now of launching a new feature called "Friday Follies", where each Friday I would post some silly moments of the week past. Just some nonsense to pass the time.  Nothing earth-shaking, just a little fun.

So this morning, when I opened My Google and grabbed a look at the top CNN headline, I decided I shouldn't wait any longer.  Today was the day "Friday Follies" would begin:

• Miley Cyrus Gets Tattoo No. 5  You know, there used to be a time when you could depend on Miley for some real news.

• From Bradblog:  Limbaugh Jokes about NYT Detention until he Learns about Fox Reporters in Hospital.  Okay, there's nothing funny about reporters getting beat up.  Not a thing.  But how about Limbaugh having to eat his words?  That's funny, right?

• "What in hell is this man talking about?"  Chris Matthews has taken to calling Glenn Beck 'nuts'.  No big words, no explanations.  Just 'nuts'.  And then he gets into Frank Gaffney, who might require a word a little stronger than 'nuts'.

• NYC Mayor Bloomberg ♥ Bloomberg.  “I like what I see in the mirror, and I hope everybody here does,” the mayor said. 
•  
• Donald Rumsfeld's new book, "Known and Unknown" came out last week.  Howard Kurtz quotes from it: 

When Rumsfeld was serving as Gerald Ford’s White House chief of staff, he asked his friend Dick Cheney to serve as his top assistant. Cheney “reminded me about a couple of arrests he had had for drinking and driving after he got out of college and was working on power lines in Wyoming.” Rumsfeld briefed the new president. “Do you think this is the guy you need for the job?” Ford asked. Rumsfeld said he did. “Then bring him aboard.” The rest, as they say, is history.

(Okay, that's not funny.)

•    And lastly, I stole this from Mario Piperni (who borrowed it from Daryl Cagle), but I plan to put it back as soon as I'm finished:

This is a shortened version because I only just thought about it this morning, but watch next Friday for another installment of FF.   I'll be on the lookout for the best of the week, and I'll put them here.  If you have any ideas for this, send them on.  It's the least you can do.  (There's a smile in there.)
   

Could we Just have the Damn Tax Day without the Rollicking Tea Party?

I filled out my first tax return when I was 17 years old and still in high school.  My Dad was ready to do it for me, but I wanted to be a grown-up and do it myself.  The entire form was on a cardboard third-sheet and it couldn't have taken more than five minutes to fill out, but when I dropped it into the mailbox I felt like I was no longer a child but was now part of the citizenry.  (It didn't hurt that I was getting a refund, of course, and when that check came, straight from the government, I almost didn't want to cash it.  It was wonderful to behold.)

Every year since that first mid-20th century tax day (then March 15, the Ides of March), I've had occasion to file my income taxes.  For the past 53 years my husband and I have filed jointly.  So yesterday we filled out our 1040, gave the government a whole lot of personal information, signed our real names with the promise that all of the above is true to the best of our knowledge, enclosed a three-figure check and  mailed it in.  Then we went back to doing what we were doing before we did it.  No protests planned, no signs made, no bullhorns, no teabags hanging off of silly hats.  We paid our taxes.  That's what we do when we're Americans and we have incomes.  (Which--I don't have to tell you--is getting harder and harder to say in this country.)

It's what we did even during the odious Bush years, when the thought of where our hard-earned money was going was entirely too painful to even contemplate.  We endured a royal screwing during those eight years--those of us who didn't wear a corporate crown--and still we understood that our nation couldn't survive without our taxes paid.  We paid our taxes even when we knew without a shadow of a doubt that those who could most afford to pay theirs weren't doing it.  We paid, knowing they would never choose to pay, would never have to pay, and would never have to pay for not paying.

(We sent in our census yesterday, too.  It took all of three minutes, 27 seconds to fill it out, and it felt pretty good.  Now we're counted.)

So now that I've done my duty, what do I want for my taxes?  I want BIG, smart, honest, conscientious  government. 

I want a government that saves jobs, protects jobs, creates jobs, and thinks rampant unemployment in the Land of Plenty is a mortal sin.

 I want a government that takes public education seriously and stays awake nights thinking up ways to educate every American child without having to put them at the mercy of the private sector. 

I want a government that thinks safety is pretty damned important, and allows no quarter when it comes to pollution or hazards or human neglect.

I want a government that minds its own business and stays out of wars and remembers who they're here to serve.

I want a government that stands up for the people who voted them into office, and gives their big donors nothing more than the hearty "Thank you" they so heartily deserve.

What I don't want is no government at all.  That's just stupid.

So when I wasn't filling out forms I was snickering at those faux-Yahoos mugging their faces off for the TV cameras, pretending that they're mad as hell and aren't going to take it anymore.  Who are they trying to kid?  They're mad as hell that Obama is president and then the other thing is that they're mad as hell that Obama is president.

There isn't a person in this country who isn't angry about something the government does.  They're the government, for chrissake.  They do some of the dumbest damn things. 

But come on, Baggers, don't pretend you're angry at rising taxes when, in fact, your taxes are LOWER this year.

Don't pretend your concerns are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.  The only thing that would make you happy would be Obama in exile and the liberals traveling behind him in cattle cars.

Don't pretend  that things are worse today than they were under George W. Bush.  Even on the darkest night under the deepest of covers you can't say that without crossing your fingers.

Don't pretend you're Everyman or Everywoman--just folks.  Your heroes are Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann and Mitch McConnell. They HATE just folks.  So how about you ask them what they've done for their country, not what their country has done for them?   And then ask yourselves:   Where am I?  How did I get here?  Who ARE these people?  Why am I dressed this way?  What is this sign I'm holding?  Am I on Candid Camera?

Ramona

(Cross-posted at Talking Points Memo here and at Alternet here)

Robertson, Limbaugh and Why They Matter

 Hour by hour, day by day, we've been watching the devastation that is Haiti.  The plight of that sad, forgotten country is being forced on us in such a way that it is no longer possible to turn away from it, to ignore it, to stop thinking of it as somebody else's problem.  Their most recent crisis was caused by a 7.0 magnitude earthquake, and the horror, almost beyond comprehension, is that tens of thousands of people have died because of it.

But we've known for decades that the Haitian people, even before this natural disaster, were living lives of pure misery.  Remember the Haitian "Boat People"?  They arrived on our shores by the thousands in the 1970s and 80s, before our government finally put a stop to it by sending them back to their homeland, where abject, implacable, unending destitution was what had driven them onto those skimpy boats in the first place.  Many of them died along the way, but that kind of desperation--the kind that most of us could never possibly understand--throws caution to the winds.  There were many of us--I hope there were millions of us--who wrote letters begging our government to at least turn a blind eye to those wretched wanderers staggering toward America.  But bureaucracies prevailed, as they always do, and the struggles of the Boat People to find peace and a helping hand were for nought.  We turned them away.

Now we're going to help.  As a nation, we'll do everything we can to ease the suffering in Haiti.  I know that for a fact, even though I haven't forgotten that as a nation we turned some of these very people away not so long ago.  We're bombarded with the images of the earthquake aftermath and it's hard, seeing the poor suffering victims, not to make the comparisons with our own Hurricane Katrina.  Our reporters, some of the same who covered Katrina, are exhausted and near tears as they describe the horrors they've seen.  They are helpless to do much more than to explain, to make us see, to force us away from our daily routines and bring us along with them into hell. 

We will not let uncaring bureaucracies get in the way this time.   Moments after the reports of the earthquake, the White House went into action and within hours the trucks were beginning to be loaded, the airlifts were in place.  As I write this, three days afterward,  there is a traffic jam on the tarmac at the Port-au-Prince airport as planes filled with volunteers and relief supplies attempt to unload.  The whole world, it seems, finally wants to come to the aid of the Haitians.

As a nation, we're feeling good.  We're where we should be.  We're cheering the aid workers on, we're sending money, we're mobilizing.  For most of us, the fact that the Haitians we're caring about are poor and dark-skinned has no bearing on anything.  And why would it?  But for the past two days we've been sidetracked by the astonishingly pitiless comments of two powerful countrymen who draw enormous audiences and make untold millions from their daily utterances.

Pat Robertson, citing a legend about early Haitians making a pact with the devil to get out from under the French (calling it a "true story"), gave Satan the credit for all of the misery Haiti has had to endure.  He ended by saying, "They need to have and we need to pray for them a great turning to God. . ."

This drew clearly undisguised anger from a Haitian embassador, who probably had better things to do than respond to a so-called cleric who calls a legend about a pact with the devil "a true story":




So then the 700 Club comes back and says it was all about the legend, and we care a lot about the Haitians, who are still--sorry to say--cursed by the devil because they asked for it:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Rush Limbaugh, that great humanitarian, first suggested that President Obama will make hay over this tragedy because. . .something about mutual dark skins.  When that got the expected outrage he so craves, he came back and gloated about tweaking the media.  Then, because his craving for attention hadn't been sated, he used his pulpit to warn people against using the White House website for earthquake relief donations, for fear their money would disappear into Obama's pockets or, worse, the Democrats would be able to get information from their applications.

So why does it matter what these two men say?  It matters because in the Land of Milk and Honey they've amassed unbelievable wealth and power by appealing to the darkest sides of civilized Americanism.

They matter because they've each built entire lucrative industries by consistently proving to be less than we would expect of our fellow Americans.

They matter because, even though they work at eroding the underpinnings of our values while pretending to be at the forefront of everything good and ethical, they gather audiences that most rock stars could only dream about.

Americans by the millions follow their every word, defending them this side of death, spreading far and wide their messages of intolerance and hate.  I wonder how many of their listeners are looking for ways to help the Haitians?  I wonder how many of them see the paradox between what they're hearing and what their hearts are telling them to do?  And if they do, I wonder why they go on doing it?

Ramona

(Cross-posted at Talking Points Memo here)

This is not a Battle, it's a Snit

Open letter to J.B. Poerch, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee:

Yesterday you sent me an email asking me to "join [you] in telling Senate Republicans to go on record and declare their independence from Rush Limbaugh." You asked me to "click here to join the DSCC in demanding that Senate Republicans reject the disgraceful words of Rush Limbaugh and declare their independence from the divisive politics of the past." You even asked me for money to help your cause.

Now, J.B, I don't know you but I'm going to assume you're an okay person. And, considering that our entire country is facing near-devastation at the moment, I'm also reasonably sure you think you have our best interests at heart.

But (come closer now because I only want to say this once), ARE YOU NUTS??

With all that we've had to endure, with all the work that has to be done, this is the cause your committee has chosen as the ultimate threat to our country? Bringing Republican toadies to their knees for saying "All Hail" to Rush Limbaugh?

You say, "For years, Republicans have been taking their marching orders from Limbaugh. In 1994, they named him an honorary member of Congress. Leading national Republicans have called him, "a great leader," "a great American," and "the number one voice for conservatism in our country."

I say, "Yeah? So what else is new?"

You say, "Lately, Limbaugh has grown so powerful that two leading Republicans have had to ask for Rush's forgiveness after they dared to criticize him."

I say, "Did you ever see such a sorry spectacle?"

You say, "Rush Limbaugh is free to say whatever he wants."

I say, "That's America for you."

Then you say, in big bold letters, "But when people like Limbaugh start dictating the behavior of Senate Republicans and begin jeopardizing the future of America; it is time for an intervention."

And I say, "Hogwash".

The behavior of Senate Republicans would be the same with or without Rush. They've always been obstructionist blowhards. Last I looked, Limbaugh never ran for office and has never won an election. He's a radio talk show host and nothing more. Though he styles himself after Joe McCarthy, he'll never get there. He doesn't have that kind of power. He can't write legislation, he can't hold committee hearings, he can't collude with the Army or the FBI, and he can't ruin people's lives.

You say, "Click here to sign the DCSS's petition--which will be sent to Republican leaders--demanding that they reject the disgraceful words of Rush Limbaugh and start working with President Obama on real solutions for the American people."

And I say, "No way." I don't say this because I'm a fan of Rush's. If you knew me at all, you would know I find him just as loathsome as the majority of the country. But here's why I won't sign your petition and I won't send you money:

In your own words: "America can't afford this childish posturing anymore. We are in crisis -- and President Obama needs everyone in Washington -- including Republicans -- to work on constructive solutions to get America moving again."

Exactly. Didn't you read your own words? You're feeding a beast whose middle name is Gluttony. Get off of this moronic bandwagon and use your considerable resources for the real battles ahead.

Now go sit in the corner and think about what you've done. I'll get back to you later.

Ramona

Harsh Realities in a Country gone Mad with Greed

This is one of those stories that will seem so unbelievable, so beyond the pale, so, well, un-American, you might be tempted to either disregard it completely or cast it in a fictional light in order to escape the obvious conclusion: There are horrors perpetrated on human beings in this country that rival those in the worst of the worst of any third-world country.

Everything that happens in this story happens because the ones with the power could not, would not, control their greed. Everything that happened to these people happened because there was nobody looking out for them. The perpetrators knew they were living in an era where laborers were a dime a dozen. If one died off, there were plenty more where they came from. And the best part of their scheme was that, because most of these people were here illegally, nobody would be the wiser. Nobody would care. Least of all, the government.

This is the story of the cruel exploitation of produce pickers, but it didn't happen in the 1930s of Steinbeck's "The Grapes of Wrath" or in the "Harvest of Shame" 1950s-60s, before Cesar Chavez began to organize migrant farm workers. It happened--and is happening--right here, right now, under our watch, in the 21st Century.

In an article published yesterday, Barry Estabrook writes this:
Immokalee is the tomato capital of the United States. Between December and May, as much as 90 percent of the fresh domestic tomatoes we eat come from south Florida, and Immokalee is home to one of the area’s largest communities of farmworkers. According to Douglas Molloy, the chief assistant U.S. attorney based in Fort Myers, Immokalee has another claim to fame: It is “ground zero for modern slavery.”

Working at breakneck speed, you might be able to pick a ton of tomatoes on a good day, netting about $50 at 45 cents per 32-pound basket. But a lot can go wrong.
The beige stucco house at 209 South Seventh Street is remarkable only because it is in better repair than most Immokalee dwellings. For two and a half years, beginning in April 2005, Mariano Lucas Domingo, along with several other men, was held as a slave at that address. At first, the deal must have seemed reasonable. Lucas, a Guatemalan in his thirties, had slipped across the border to make money to send home for the care of an ailing parent. He expected to earn about $200 a week in the fields. Cesar Navarrete, then a 23-year-old illegal immigrant from Mexico, agreed to provide room and board at his family’s home on South Seventh Street and extend credit to cover the periods when there were no tomatoes to pick.

Lucas’s “room” turned out to be the back of a box truck in the junk-strewn yard, shared with two or three other workers. It lacked running water and a toilet, so occupants urinated and defecated in a corner. For that, Navarrete docked Lucas’s pay by $20 a week. According to court papers, he also charged Lucas for two meager meals a day: eggs, beans, rice, tortillas, and, occasionally, some sort of meat. Cold showers from a garden hose in the backyard were $5 each. Everything had a price. Lucas was soon $300 in debt. After a month of ten-hour workdays, he figured he should have paid that debt off.

But when Lucas—slightly built and standing less than five and a half feet tall—inquired about the balance, Navarrete threatened to beat him should he ever try to leave. Instead of providing an accounting, Navarrete took Lucas’s paychecks, cashed them, and randomly doled out pocket money, $20 some weeks, other weeks $50. Over the years, Navarrete and members of his extended family deprived Lucas of $55,000.

Taking a day off was not an option. If Lucas became ill or was too exhausted to work, he was kicked in the head, beaten, and locked in the back of the truck. Other members of Navarrete’s dozen-man crew were slashed with knives, tied to posts, and shackled in chains. On November 18, 2007, Lucas was again locked inside the truck. As dawn broke, he noticed a faint light shining through a hole in the roof. Jumping up, he secured a hand hold and punched himself through. He was free. 


This is not somebody's hysterical hyperbole designed to bring out the Socialist in us. This is journalism at its best, drawn from information obtained through government, union, and other reliable sources. This particular article--this superb piece of investigative journalism--came from. . .are you ready. . .?

. . .Gourmet Magazine.

This has been an on-going public story for a few years now, but despite the best efforts of Douglas Molloy, the CIW (click to read about six other cases of slavery in Florida since 1997), The Campaign for Fair Food, and the Collier County Sheriff's Office, who in the mainstream media has picked up on it and kept it going? Has Fox News reported on it? "Morning Joe"? Charles Gibson? Katie Couric?

I found the story at Common Dreams first, but it's been out there in one form or another for a long time. This is how networking works best. We find these things that the MSM deems Not Worthy of Big Splash and we spread it around until it gains momentum. It's been Blogged and Digged and Facebooked and Tweeted and soon enough the story will be big enough and out there enough so that those Mainstreamers will look foolish if they continue to ignore it.

No, it'll never be big enough to supplant the really big stories--like who's the latest of the Limbaugh kowtowers to have to apologize to their Rightful Wing Leader. (Ed. note: Oh, the mighty--how they have fallen.)

Mark Rodrigues and Rebecca Smith wrote about it more than a month ago in The Huffington Post. They wrote:

In December 2008, federal prosecutors from the Department of Justice wrapped up yet another farm labor slavery case in Florida, a case the Chief Assistant US Attorney called one of Southwest Florida's biggest and ugliest slavery cases ever, according to the Ft. Myers News-Press. When the defendants were indicted a year ago, US Attorney Doug Molloy called the case "slavery, plain and simple."

This latest case in which, according to court documents, workers were chained to poles, locked inside trucks, beaten, and robbed of their pay, was the seventh such case in just over a decade. Indeed, so shameful is Florida's record of farm labor abuse that a federal prosecutor involved in one of the slavery prosecutions told the New Yorker magazine, "What you get with agriculture is a pattern of exploitation that can be understood only as a system of human-rights abuses."

Charlie Crist, Florida's Governor, knows about it. He recieved a petition with thousands of names on it last month, so any day now we should be hearing cries of outrage from the Governor's Mansion over these abuses.

On February 28, 2005, Evelyn Nieves wrote a piece about the organizing of the Immokalee migrant workers called "Florida Tomato Pickers still reap 'Harvest of Shame'." At the very end of the piece, she wrote this:

No one disputes that Immokalee farm workers have been subjected to the most extreme injustice. The coalition has uncovered several slavery rings in Immokalee-area farms. In one case, based on two years of undercover work and investigation by the coalition in 2002, three Florida-based farm bosses were convicted in federal court of slavery, extortion and weapons charges and sentenced to nearly 35 years in prison. They were also ordered to forfeit more than $3 million in assets. The bosses had threatened more than 700 farm workers with death if they tried to leave and assaulted passenger van service drivers who gave rides to farm workers.

In a 2000 case, a farm contractor was convicted of holding more than 30 tomato pickers under armed watch in two trailers in an isolated swamp near Immokalee. When three workers escaped, the employer tracked them down, running one of them down with his car.

The coalition's work uncovering slavery garnered Benitez, of Guerrero, Mexico, and two other workers the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award in 2003. The coalition is working with a federal task force that continues to investigate slavery rings.

Benitez said he hoped publicity for the Taco Bell boycott would help inform more people about the slavery, along with the general conditions of farm workers.

That was four years ago. Four years ago. And today I'm reading about the Immokalee slaves as if it were a brand new story. There has been a breakdown in investigative reporting in this country that is beyond frightening. Were we living in a police state the past eight years? How could this happen?

I'm going to do my best to keep this story going. I hope you will, too. Please use the links above to read the entire story, and then pass it on wherever you can. Let's be Tom Joads. Let's be there:

Tom: I'll be all around in the dark - I'll be everywhere. Wherever you can look - wherever there's a fight, so hungry people can eat, I'll be there. Wherever there's a cop beatin' up a guy, I'll be there. I'll be in the way guys yell when they're mad. I'll be in the way kids laugh when they're hungry and they know supper's ready, and when the people are eatin' the stuff they raise and livin' in the houses they build - I'll be there, too.

This is one horrific example of what unchecked greed does. The victims are human beings, and this is America. This is not how we Americans are supposed to be.


Ramona

Crazy with Fear - CPAC 2009

You know how, when you're witnessing a personal meltdown--when someone you happen to be near finally reaches the breaking point; when everything they've ever held near and dear is suddenly slipping away, and they try desperately to hang on, either with lies or tantrums or tears--how you just can't look away?

As the drama unfolds, if you're not too personally invested, the polite thing to do is just move along. There's not much you can do for them anyway, and, honestly, they don't care what you think. But you're riveted by the spectacle, and--admit it--fascinated by the sheer craziness of it.

Ever since January 20 that's how I've been feeling about the eerily escalating Right Wing meltdown. It's breathtaking to behold. The scope of it is beyond anything I could ever have imagined. Day after day, I awaken to some new evidence that they've not just lost their way, they've lost their minds.

From Limbaugh to O'Reilly to Keyes to Beck to Shelby to Santelli to Jindal to Steele to Bachmann . . .it's been one nutty thing after another, just in the last week alone. (That might be because it was CPAC week. Everybody from Joe the Plumber to 13-year-old Jonathan Krohn had a moment in the sun at the Conservative's main event. )

Here's Joe the Plumber. (It's 6 1/2 minutes of Joe, so be forewarned.) The ALG Network (Americans for Limited Government) had their crew out there full time at the conference, filming speeches, doing interviews, and just generally presenting those Conservatives in their best light. So I have to assume that sabotage wasn't really in the plans when they filmed and then edited Joe's little talk; I have to assume that this is the BEST of Joe:



Along with some of the usual suspects, ALG also interviewed Jerome Corsi, author of "Obama Nation", and all-around odd ball:



At 5:00 today Rush Limbaugh spoke to the rapt convention crowd (Sorry, no video.  He's not on my agenda here) and then, afterward, was the recipient of the "Defender of the Constitution Award".
Honest. (Why am I not laughing out loud? See last paragraph below.)

I spent a few hours today wandering around the virtual halls of CPAC and I'm here to tell you--Alice in Wonderland has nothing on me. Up was down and down was up. In was out and out was in. People said one thing and meant another.

I half expected to see the Cheshire Cat grinning from a limb:

Cheshire Cat: If I were looking for a white rabbit, I'd ask the Mad Hatter.
Alice: The Mad Hatter? Oh, no no no...
Cheshire Cat: Or, you could ask the March Hare, in that direction.
Alice: Oh, thank you. I think I'll see him...
Cheshire Cat: Of course, he's mad, too.
Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
Cheshire Cat: Oh, you can't help that. Most everyone's mad here.
[laughs maniacally; starts to disappear]
Cheshire Cat: You may have noticed that I'm not all there myself.

On Thursday, Bob Cesca wrote a piece for the Huffington Post called "The Wingnut Revolution".

. . . accountability (a "day of reckoning" as President Obama called it) is underway in the form of the president's housing proposal, his healthcare plan and, naturally, the recovery act. At the end of the day, ninety-five percent of Americans will benefit from what amounts to the largest tax cut in American history, along with increased access to affordable healthcare and millions of new jobs.

Though, alas, the super rich will have to pay slightly more in taxes.

Yeah, that's a shame.

So they're gathering in their secret war rooms in the Orange County underground and on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, grinding the tips of their Salvatore Ferragamo Pregiato Moccasins into razor-sharp spears and fashioning their Bentley key fobs into makeshift nunchucks in preparation for a supremely ridiculous rebellion led by a cast of far-right characters more freakish than the acid trip monsters from Yo Gabba Gabba.

It's a great piece, done in usual Cesca style, but when he got to this part I was hooked:  

For the last year or so, Glenn Beck has been attempting to peg Barack Obama and the Democrats as actual communists, and now he's going all out with, quite literally, a red scare segment on his show -- festooning his set with Soviet flag graphics, a "Comrade Update" logo and a Russian language crawl in the lower-third of the screen.

I have no words.  (I did have the red scare clip inserted on this page but it's no longer available.  Too bad.  It was something to behold.)

On that very same Thursday, Paul Jenkins wrote a piece for HuffPo called, "Worst Week Ever: Republicans Unhinged".

He wrote, In just seven days, Republicans have offered up more amusement and fodder for an election campaign than even the most hopeful among us could have expected. What is especially thrilling is that it comes at little expense: Obama is competently in charge, as are, by and large, Democrats elsewhere, and change is happening at a mind-blowing pace. In the long run, yes, there should be concern that having buffoons in opposition is not healthy, but for now let's enjoy the moment.

Oh, enjoy! Yes, let's! They're a laugh-a-minute, that bunch.

Remember how some of us folks were laughing hysterically when we heard the Republicans had chosen George W. Bush as their (mwa-ha-ha!) presidential candidate?

And remember how we cackled when, after weeks of beating the bushes (Bushes) for a best choice, Dick Cheney appointed HIMSELF the vice-presidential candidate?

And remember the hoots and hollers, the LOLs, the LMAO's, when we got wind of that loony idea to attack IRAQ after 9/11 instead of al Queda-harboring Afghanistan?

And remember how we roared over the idea of those absolute fools running for a second term? 

OH, I remember, all right. So I may smirk a little, and I may go so far as to showcase their more memorable loony binges, but laugh out loud? Not on your life.

I laughed at the idea of "preachers" like Pat Robertson or James Dobson or John Hagee pulling so many righteous legs all the way to the bank.

I laughed at the idea of a Rush Limbaugh or an Ann Coulter achieving even a thimbleful of fame and fortune.

I laughed at the idea of Ronald Reagan--a "B" actor if you wanted to be charitable, a dimwit if you wanted to be fair-- running for the highest office in the land. Now look where we are. He's a damned "hero" and we're screwed.

So let me just leave you with this: Tonight they anointed Rush Limbaugh as their fearless leader.

I may think that's odd, but I know better than to think it's funny.

Ramona