The War on Contraception and the Rise of Serfdom in America

Since Rick Santorum, or as they call him Mr. Frothy in much of the left-leaning blogosphere, was quoted as saying that the states should have the right to outlaw contraception (a clever way of saying that it ought to be outlawed without coming out and saying it directly), I've been thinking a lot about the general state of affairs in these United States. It's the 21st century to be sure, but the neoCons seem intent on taking us back to the dark ages, not only by outlawing contraception, and ostensibly abortion, but by having a population of serfs utterly dependent upon the Corporatocracy for every little morsel of their genetically engineered food.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that poverty and children are intertwined on the same thread. In fact, as we speak more children are slipping into poverty because our economy is in the toilet.

Who is hardest hit by this poverty? Minorities of course.

"Minorities were hit hardest. Blacks experienced the highest poverty rate, at 27 percent, up from 25 percent in 2009, and Hispanics rose to 26 percent from 25 percent. For whites, 9.9 percent lived in poverty, up from 9.4 percent in 2009."

So what does the religious right do to try to alleviate this poverty? Do they push family planning and the use of contraception to prevent unwanted pregnancy and therefore abortion? No, they plan to protest abortion at the Democratic National Convention in Charolotte. They insist that abortion is causing a "black genocide".

I read that and thought, 'What a bunch of bullshit.' Isn't that just what the poor need? More mouths to feed? In fact, the African American population in this country has grown over the last ten years and is projected to grow further over the next forty years according to the US census bureau. I know, I know, since when do I expect religious fundamentalists with an agenda to actually tell the truth. Genocide is a loaded word. It's very definition means the utter destruction of a population based on a trait. Well, as you can see from the census data, that ain't happening.

In fact, this sort of thing pisses me off, a lot. It implies that black women aren't fit to make their own decisions regarding their own bodies and their own lives. They need someone to tell them what to do, in this case religious conservatives and a (Caucasian and male dominated) big brother government. Because minorities, especially female minorities, can't be trusted to make decisions.

Black anti-abortion activists depict this phenomenon in dire terms — “genocide” and “holocaust,” for example. But often the women getting the abortions say they act in the interests of children they already have.

“It wasn’t a hard decision for me to make, because I knew where I wanted to go in my life — I’ve never regretted it,” said Kimberly Mathias, 28, an African-American single mother from Missouri.
She had an abortion at 19, when she already raising a 2-year-old son.

“It wasn’t hard to realize I didn’t want another child at that time,” Mathias said. “I was trying to take care of the one I had, and going to college and working at the same time.”

She was able to graduate, now has an insurance job, and — still a single mother — has a 3-year-old son as well as her first-born, now 11.

Women who have abortions for non-medical reasons do so for one of three reasons. Either (1) they already have too many children to care for and can't afford another one, or (2) they aren't ready to have a child because they are still in school but would like children later, or (3) they don't ever want children. Why do these religious fascists think they have a right to tell women that they must carry a pregnancy to term no matter their current state of affairs, no matter if they just simply don't want children? Where do they get off? Let's turn this back on them. I don't ever want children and I don't think anyone should have children either so therefore I'm going to legislate no more children ever! Ridiculous right? Yeah, about as ridiculous as their reasoning, or rather lack thereof.

The argument against abortion breaks down into two camps. The religious wingnuts who think that if they allow others (not themselves mind you because these laws don't apply to them) to have abortions then some imaginary sky god will be angry at them. And the other camp? The Corporatocracy of course. I imagine it hasn't escaped their notice that outlawing abortion, and especially contraception, would increase poverty in this country. And an increase in poverty is good for the rich and good for big business. Outlawing contraception and abortion would essentially assure that most women, and by extension their children, would live in poverty and never be able to get themselves out of it. If you think this is bullshit, read this study. I for one didn't need to read that study. I've seen the vicious cycle of poverty with my own eyes.

What better way for the Corporatocracy to have a steady stream of poor workers than to outlaw contraception? Workers who would be willing to work for minimum wage, if the minimum wage even lasts that long. Poverty is a trap, and one incredibly difficult to get out of. We speak of choices. Those born into poverty had no choice in the matter and the Corporate-christo-fascists don't want them to have one either, as it serves the Corporate jackals to have a serf class at their beck and call.

Chris Hedges: The Election March of the Trolls

I saw Chris Hedges this morning on Book TV and when he was asked if he was following the election coverage in Iowa, he said no. He said he didn't want to fill his head with such bullshit, well not in so many words but that's the gist of it. He called it "The Election March of the Trolls." An apt name for it methinks.

This is pretty much the conclusion that I came to a while ago. It's all bullshit, every friggin' bit of it. I think that's a reason why so many people whose blogs I used to read have stopped blogging. It's why I barely bother to write about any of this crap any more. It's all nonsense. Nothing important is said, and when something important is said, it's obfuscated by a bunch of other bullshit.

Hey kids, make sure you strap yourselves in, keep your arms and legs inside the vehicle at all times. The road to tyranny is a bit bumpy. Let's hope someone decides on a detour before it's too late. I don't like that particular vacation destination. I prefer the French Pyrenees by far.

"Those who would sacrifice liberty for a little bit of temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin

Mark Sanford: Another One Bites the Dust

And here we have, in a mere one week, another shamed Republican presidential 2012 hopeful. Laid low by the strict moral view espoused by their twisted interpretation of ancient manuscripts, they fail to see the irony that is their life. While insisting that everyone else live up to a certain moral, they themselves fail the proverbial hypocrite test, of failing to practice what one preaches.

Personally, I don't give a damn if he had an affair with someone. IMHO, that's between him and his wife. The problem is, these politicians scream for morality, and then when they don't practice what they preach, it's because they're "just human." Well yes, they are just human, which is why they fuck up. So why can't that be a lesson to politicians, that we're not interested in your morality. Just do your damned job of representing the people, and don't worry about how I live my life and I won't worry about how you live yours. So long as no laws are broken, who cares? Instead, I'm sure Mr. Ensign and Mr. Sanford are blaming Satan, the scapegoat for everything, for their failings. That's the problem with religions like Christianity. They promote the belief that one is not responsible for their actions, that bad things are done by the devil (or by people influenced by the devil) and that if they only put aside their reason, that Jesus will make it all better by a simple thought in their head that he's a god and came to earth to save them, like some kind of superhero.

The 2012 election is going to be interesting. When your most likable (as in likable by those who have no thoughts in their head) is a dumb bitch from Alaska, you have problems. You see, the GOP has been the party of anti-intellectualism for the last three plus decades, and the lack of viable candidates that have half a thought in their head, shows us that this strategy has finally come home to roost for them. So not only do they now have a bunch of followers who are unthinking hypocrites, the core of their leadership is made up of much the same.

I take it the Iranians are tired of Theocracy

Elections were held in Iran yesterday. Anyone who dares think for a moment that they were anything like fair is living in a fantasy world. It's a dictatorship run by a bunch of priests. To paraphrase Stalin, "It isn't who votes or how that is important, what is important is who counts the votes and how."

So of course the elections aren't fair. They don't have a free press, or any sort of oversight over what their government does. And if you've seen the pictures, some people are obviously pretty fed up with it. I dare say, a whole lot of Iranians are pissed. People are the same everywhere and tend to want the same things. The Iranian people want to be free to live without interference from their government, without fear of being "disappeared" in the middle of the night, without fear of being executed as a traitor for merely speaking their mind. These are the same things that everyone wants. Very few want to live in a theocratic dictatorship. The ones who wind up doing so, do so against their will and tolerate it out of fear. Out of fear of punishment from "god" and/or fear of what the earthly leaders of their country might do to them. The only people who want to live in such a place, are those who are in power, who benefit from it, the dictator and maybe his close comrades.

The question of where this civil unrest will lead depends on whether or not the Iranians who are so furious, are willing to die to free themselves. That's what it boils down to. If they're not willing to go to jail, if they're not willing to risk being tortured and killed, if they just go home, then they will continue to live in a theocracy. Because what they face if they refuse to go home and shut up, is death. It also depends on how cohesive the movement is. The Revolutionary Guard has said it will put down any uprising, and indeed I hope that Mousavi goes somewhere safe because he's in grave danger. The government will probably accuse him of fostering this whole thing and we know where that kind of stuff leads in situations like this.

It's really too bad that Iran's government is so backwards. I've always been fascinated by the place. One of the greatest empires in history was there, the Persian Empire. I love archaeology and would love to see Persepolis. I think it would be a great place to visit, but I'm not likely to set foot there so long as things remain the way they are. I'm sure the people are lovely, but I don't go for theocracies.

Same shit, different day.

What's Good for the Goose: Minnesota Election Fiasco

So, the election in Minnesota isn't such as big of a fiasco as the 2000 election in which the Supreme Court appointed G.W. Bush to the Presidency of the United States, but it is a fiasco nevertheless on a smaller scale. As you well know, if you've read my prior posts, I'm on Conservative Republican mailing lists. It makes for amusing reading, most of the time. Tonight I get a letter from Orrin Hatch and John Cornyn (my Senator as a matter of fact), pleading with me to donate to the National Republic Senatorial Committee (like hell) for the support of Norm Coleman in the contested election in Minnesota. Now, perhaps that in and of itself isn't so crazy. What is crazy is what Orrin Hatch and John Cornyn, or whoever wrote this for the two of them, says:

"...Unbelievably, the very basic right to have a legal vote counted and ballot weighted evenly against another is under assault in Minnesota.

Norm was ahead on Election Day, he was ahead when the canvassing concluded, and then, instead of recounting votes, different standards were applied to ballots with some counting twice and non-existent ballots being added to the count.

To make matters worse, a three-judge panel issued rulings inconsistent with previous standards resulting in the disenfranchisement of more than 4,000 Minnesotans...

Just the other day, former Congressman Vin Weber wrote in the Star Tribune, "The decision by Norm Coleman to appeal the ruling by the three-judge panel in the U.S. Senate election contest ought to be viewed as a courageous step in the long-term interests of all Minnesotans.

"While political analysts, Democratic stalwarts, Al Franken and a bored popular media want to call an end to what has become the longest election contest in Minnesota history, it should be noted that Coleman's courage and conviction will serve him well whatever the final outcome.

"Let's be clear. The issues here are not about expediency. That's not how Minnesotans view civic life. On the contrary, Minnesota is the place where we value the legitimacy of our elections and the equal opportunity of all citizens to cast a legal ballot and have it counted."

I couldn't agree more. I know I speak for my colleagues when I say we remain completely and wholly committed to supporting Senator Coleman in his effort to achieve fairness in the election contest in Minnesota. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Senator Orrin Hatch
Vice Chairman
National Republican Senatorial Committee

Really? Not about expediency? Everyone should have an equal opportunity to cast a legal ballot and have it counted? Really? What about all those blacks in Florida? You remember, the hanging chads in 2000. The Supreme Court making the decision to crown G.W. Bush dictator... I mean President. Surely Orrin Hatch must have agreed in 2000 that Al Gore had the right to challenge the results in court and a fair recount. Right? That's not what you told CNN...

Wolf Blitzer asks Orrin Hatch if it's fair to move the deadline from 5pm to 9pm so they can finish counting the ballots by hand. Orrin responds, "I'm not sure that it is under the circumstances, because we're now -- remember, this was all supposed to be certified by the 14th."

What was that about expediency? Or is that only when it favors your candidate?

"I think when a court gives an order, then you abide by the order," when asked by Blitzer about extending the recount beyond what the court had approved of.

Really? But you just said now the court shouldn't decide, you're decrying the fact that three judges made a decision you didn't like. What a bloody hypocrite.

You see the thing is, and I'm not in Minnesota so I haven't been following this very closely, so correct me if I'm wrong, but they did a recount, and Al Franken came out three hundred and some odd votes ahead. The Republicans are just mad they lost and accusing the election commission and the court of fraud, doesn't make you look very good. It doesn't matter if the man was ahead on election night, he wasn't ahead by very much. It was a close race, but in the end, it looks like Al Franken has more votes. Do the honorable thing and give a concession speech.

BTW, what is it with these Al's having so many problem with elections?