sophiaserpentia: (Default)
Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon, feminist blogger, has chosen to resign from the presidential campaign of John Edwards after being embattled (by certain right-wing zealots) for several weeks. The final straw, in the eyes of the Catholic League's head, Bill Donohue, was this comment in her review of the movie Children of Men:

The Christian version of the virgin birth is generally interpreted as super-patriarchal, where god is viewed as so powerful he can impregnate without befouling himself by touching a woman, and women are nothing but vessels.

This apparently qualifies as a "vulgar" and "intolerant" anti-Christian comment. To say that critique is intolerant shows an utter misunderstanding of the concept of intolerance, which seems, from the perspective of people like Bill Donohue, to mean, "any act or utterance which offends our oh-so-delicate sensibilities."

The right has tirelessly labored to misappropriate the idea of intolerance, so that people think it refers not to efforts to counter structural power imbalance in our society, but to improve the niceness of language. By focusing on language they hope to take the focus off of actual oppression.

There is absolutely no measure whatsoever by which Christians are oppressed in this country. Keep that in mind. Christians run this country; they utterly dominate the public discourse, the cultural institutions, the laws, the mores, the standards of decency. Isolated instances of anti-Christian discrimination (which do occur) do not constitute institutional or state-sponsored oppression, exploitation, or disenfranchisement of Christians.

So, in order to accomplish the seemingly impossible task of misappropriating the idea of intolerance, they have to make people think that saying mean things (or things you claim are mean) in your blog is the equivalent of a pogrom, or a gay-bashing, or a clinic-bombing.  It is insulting to anyone who is working to end real intolerance in the face of violence and numerous other obstacles.

All that said, i also happen to think Amanda is absolutely right about the Christian idea of the virgin birth.

The gospels' authors must have felt some pressure to distance themselves from Pagans, who depicted divine impregnation of mortal women in a sexual way. In fact, Mary herself had to have been immaculately conceived, so that she would not bear the stain of Adam's sin -- because, apparently, sex itself befouls and stains your soul.

Amanda's comment about women only being a vessel applies too, because this was a widely-held belief about pregnancy in the ancient world: women were only a vessel through which men brought children into existence. This desire to cut women out of the picture is the very essence of misogyny. This view is most obvious in the account of the Gospel of John, whose author claimed that Jesus existed long before Mary did, making Mary's womb nothing more than a tunnel through which he passed into this world.
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
Barack Obama 1.85
John Edwards 1.67
Bill Richardson 0.48
Hillary Clinton 0.29
Evan Bayh 0.04
Christopher Dodd 0.04
Joe Biden -0.37
Tom Vilsack -0.42

It's not a big surprise to me that Barack Obama came out on top of my little straw poll. There's a wide variance of opinion on Hillary Clinton (see the standard deviation chart posted below) and she may in the long run be seen by politicos as having too much baggage. But, if she runs she could do worse than to pick Obama as her running mate. Obama might be seen as too inexperienced to have a shot at the head of a ticket, but as the running mate might calm a lot of leftys. My early money is on Clinton/Obama as the Democratic ticket in 2008.

The only person who has a shot at spoiling this, at this stage, is John Edwards. People have good feelings left over from the clean race he ran in 2004.

Richardson, Bayh, and Dodd have a strong presence on the national political scene, solid partisan records, and no heavy baggage. Any one of them, with good organization and funding, could make ripples in this race.

John Kerry is a total variable, but he'd have a real uphill climb at this point.

And Tom Vilsack... who the heck is Tom Vilsack? Governor of Iowa, could make a strong showing in the first caucus and then quickly flare out and disappear. He is a moderate who has carefully avoided making policy statements on various things (like abortion) and i don't expect that the liberal base will take to him.


John McCain -1.75
Mike Huckabee -2.00
Sam Brownback -2.22
Rudy Giuliani -2.54
Mitt Romney -3.28
Newt Gingrich -4.43
Bill Frist -4.48

Leftists don't know what to make of John McCain. Sometimes he sounds like one of the few voices of sanity and honesty remaining on the right. Sometimes he has a weird gleam in his eye and sounds like a scary fascist. Then there's that picture of him hugging George W. Bush that made the hair on the back of my neck stand up straight. He looked like he'd rather have someone drilling on his teeth. He doesn't like to be told what to do, and that appeals to a lot of people.

2008 is his last chance to run for president. In 2012 he will be too old, and indeed, many people will say he's too old now. He has a lot of strong mojo and i suspect the Republican nomination is his to lose.

He's very conservative and i suspect that he'd look for a moderate to even out his ticket. So my early money is on McCain/Giuliani as the Republican ticket for 2008. These are two of the few Republicans walking around today not tainted by bad feelings towards the Bush Administration or the outgoing Congress.

People don't know Brownback, Huckabee or Romney yet, but once they do, they will turn away. These are the kind of standard-issue Christian conservatives people are sick and tired of. Of these three Romney has the most realistic shot out of the starting gate, but he's a Mormon, and i think in the end the Christian right is just not going to swing that way. Huckabee could run a surprisingly strong race, though; he has a solid reputation as a good executive.

standard deviations )
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
Wait, let me see if i got this straight... the scandal surrounding John Murtha is that, 26 years ago, an undercover FBI agent offered him a $50,000 bribe and he didn't take it? Oh, and he's known for winning pork-barrel money for his district. The cad! A member of Congress, exchanging votes for pork-barrel, oh what have we come to!

We simply can't have people of this caliber as congressional leadership. There's no proper scandal material there at all, though the mass media are doing the best they can with the meager material they've been given. What are the Dems thinking?
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
The following are Democrats and Republicans who have affirmed (or not denied) that they are considering a presidential run in 2008. (Sorry, Duncan Hunter, there wasn't room for you.) How enthusiastically could you see yourself voting for:

long poll )
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
At the moment the Democratic candidates have leads in the two remaining contested Senate races -- Virginia and Montana. If this holds, then the Democrats have won control of both houses of Congress. But the margins are razor thin and recounts are certain.

I have mixed feelings about the election results.

A part of my mind still cheers at the sight of many blue states, and the thought of Bush as a lame-duck with no political capital is a happy one. I'm heartened that perhaps people around the world will look at the election results and think slightly less ugly thoughts about Americans.

But the votes on various referenda indicate that the country has not turned liberal overnight. Virginia, in particular, has added a particularly odious amendment to its constitution which not only bans gay marriage and gay civil unions but bars even private contracts between individuals to approximate some of the rights of marriage. Previously in American history only slaves (and children, and maybe Indians) have been restricted on the types of contracts they can enter into. Virginia has given the world a brand new type of Apartheid. Way to go, intrepid heterosexuals of Virginia! That sucking sound you will soon hear is the exodus of large corporations with non-discrimination policies packing up and moving to Maryland, DC, and North Carolina, along with their queer employees.

Also, i want to see what the Democrats are actually going to do. Will they reverse the Approval of Torture and Revocation of Habeas Corpus Act of 2006? Will they do anything about Bush's program of illegal warrantless wiretapping? Will they investigate Halliburton's corrupt war profiteering? Will they really let the wall be built on the border with Mexico? I am holding off on my excitement about the election results until i see some real action on these things.

I'm happy to see that the abortion ban did not pass in South Dakota. I'm somewhat heartened that the people of Arizona voted against homophobic bigotry, though i maintain that it is unethical for a society to vote on the civil rights of a minority. I'm disappointed by Michigan's rejection of affirmative action.

ETA: When i read that President Bush invited Nancy Pelosi and second-ranked house Democrat Steny Hoyer to lunch at the White House, my first thought was, "Don't go! It's a trap!"
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
It's long, but Matt Taibbi's "Time to Go! Inside the Worst Congress Ever", published by Rolling Stone, is one of the most engaging and informative pieces i've read yet on the stunning failure which is the 109th Congress.

"I remember one incident very clearly - I think it was 2001," says Winslow Wheeler, who served for twenty-two years as a Republican staffer in the Senate. "I was working for [New Mexico Republican] Pete Domenici at the time. We were in a Budget Committee hearing and the Democrats were debating what the final result would be. And my boss gets up and he says, 'Why are you saying this? You're not even going to be in the room when the decisions are made.' Just said it right out in the open."

... Last year, [House Judiciary Committee chair James] Sensenbrenner became apoplectic when Democrats who wanted to hold a hearing on the Patriot Act invoked a little-known rule that required him to let them have one.

"Naturally, he scheduled it for something like 9 a.m. on a Friday when Congress wasn't in session, hoping that no one would show," recalls a Democratic staffer who attended the hearing. "But we got a pretty good turnout anyway."

Sensenbrenner kept trying to gavel the hearing to a close, but Democrats again pointed to the rules, which said they had a certain amount of time to examine their witnesses. When they refused to stop the proceedings, the chairman did something unprecedented: He simply picked up his gavel and walked out.

"He was like a kid at the playground," the staffer says. And just in case anyone missed the point, Sensenbrenner shut off the lights and cut the microphones on his way out of the room.

... Anyone who wants to get a feel for the kinds of beasts that have been roaming the grounds of the congressional zoo in the past six years need only look at the deranged, handwritten letter that convicted bribe-taker and GOP ex-congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham recently sent from prison to Marcus Stern, the reporter who helped bust him. In it, Cunningham - who was convicted last year of taking $2.4 million in cash, rugs, furniture and jewelry from a defense contractor called MZM - bitches out Stern in the broken, half-literate penmanship of a six-year-old put in time-out.

"Each time you print it hurts my family And now I have lost them Along with Everything I have worked for during my 64 years of life," Cunningham wrote. "I am human not an Animal to keep whiping [sic]. I made some decissions [sic] Ill be sorry for the rest of my life."

The amazing thing about Cunningham's letter is not his utter lack of remorse, or his insistence on blaming defense contractor Mitchell Wade for ratting him out ("90% of what has happed [sic] is Wade," he writes), but his frantic, almost epic battle with the English language. It is clear that the same Congress that put a drooling child-chaser like Mark Foley in charge of a House caucus on child exploitation also named Cunningham, a man who can barely write his own name in the ground with a stick, to a similarly appropriate position. Ladies and gentlemen, we give you the former chairman of the House Subcommittee on Human Intelligence Analysis and Counterintelligence:

"As truth will come out and you will find out how liablest [sic] you have & will be. Not once did you list the positives. Education Man of the Year ... hospital funding, jobs, Hiway [sic] funding, border security, Megans law my bill, Tuna Dolfin [sic] my bill ... and every time you wanted an expert on the wars who did you call. No Marcus you write About how I died."

How liablest you have & will be? What the fuck does that even mean? This guy sat on the Appropriations Committee for years - no wonder Congress couldn't pass any spending bills!
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
Something tells me Kinky Friedman's career in politics is pretty much over.

Earlier this month, Friedman referred to Hurricane Katrina evacuees in Houston, most of whom are black, as "crackheads and thugs." He later criticized ethnic politicking by saying, "I don't eat tamales in the barrio, I don't eat fried chicken in the ghetto and I don't eat bagels with the Jews."

Then a television interview from a year ago resurfaced in which Friedman was asked what to do about sexual predators. He said: "Throw them in prison and throw away the key and make them listen to a Negro talking to himself."

from NAACP seeks apology from Kinky Friedman
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
In the interview with Tom Ashbrook i discussed on Wednesday, Pat Buchanan claimed that he was describing a historical pattern whereby nations have been infiltrated, culturally weakened, and finally destroyed, by large influxes of immigrants who are not assimilated into the existing culture. To 'prove' that he wasn't being racist, he cited two examples of this which had been perpetrated by Caucasians: Texas and Kosovo.

In the 1820s and 1830s, a relatively empty portion of Mexico called Tejas was settled by a community of Americans ("Texians") who retained their identity as Americans rather than immigrant Mexicans. Tensions ensued and in 1836 the Texians declared independence and, after a successful war against the Mexican president, proclaimed the Republic of Texas.

Some argue that something similar has happened in Kosovo, which during the Yugoslav regime saw its ethnic proportions change drastically in just a few decades. Perhaps a better example would have been northern Ireland.

This argument does not apply to the United States, though. Historically, immigrant populations have retained their identities and yet still become American citizens, and have given us noted contributers to our culture and history. This is because the United States was not created on the basis of a defining ethnic or religious identity.

(Well, other than exclusion of Indians, but if the US was true to its principles we would negate that exclusion.)

... As i was saying, in principle the government of the United States draws its power and authority from the consent of the governed. Which means that the US is not run by "rulers" but by civil servants - people whose purpose is not to tell us how to live our lives but to facilitate our needs.

Put another way, it is not the place of the United States government to tell people what language to speak, what religion to practice, what lifestyles to lead. The United States is a nation of laws, not a nation defined by ethnicity, religion, or culture.

That means that whoever lives here and makes up the citizenry defines what it means to be American. If in 50 years the majority of American citizens speak Spanish, this will not destroy the United States, because the nation of laws will adapt to the cultural shift, just as it has adapted to numerous cultural shifts in the past.

In actuality, we started out pretty far from that ideal and still have a long ways to go, but it is a good ideal and, furthermore, it is the way of the future. It is the only way to have a fair and just multicultural society, and the multinational corporations, the UN, and many NGOs operate on similar principles. They could not succeed otherwise.

The reactionaries whose agenda means pushing every white person into mandatory heterosexual marriage and mandatory child-rearing are hereby exposed as counter to the essence of America. Their vision is of an empire populated by white Christians, not a land of opportunity.
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
Vernon Robinson is a Republican challenging incumbent Democrat Brad Miller for North Carolina's 13th House District. There is little doubt that Miller will win re-election, but the contest between them is possibly the ugliest Congressional race going.

The smear began shortly after Robinson won the primary, when he sent out a campaign letter drawing attention to the fact that Miller and his wife are childless. Brad Miller and his wife Esther Hall have subsequently been questioned publically about their sexual orientation, and have been forced to explain that they are childless because of Esther's endometriosis and hysterectomy.

Radio and video ads have since come out accusing Miller of wanting to hold a 'fiesta' for illegal aliens and gleefully supporing a "Homosexual Importation Act" [sic].

Warning, you may feel an intense need to scrub your eyes and ears after viewing this.

Thanks to [livejournal.com profile] pamscoffee for the heads-up.
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
Seven years ago, Connecticut's three-term senator Joe Lieberman was the Democratic candidate for Vice President of the United States -- a pretty exalted position for anyone within the ranks of a political party.

Yesterday he lost the Democratic primary to a political newcomer. The largest issue: Lieberman's support for the war in Iraq.

Now he is planning to run as an independent -- which makes you wonder if he ever felt any loyalty to the Democratic party. With any luck, his presence in the race will split the conservative vote more than the liberal vote, but unfortunately i doubt it; with him in the race, the seat will probably go Republican.
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
Geez, the Big Dig disaster has already become a major political football. Why am i surprised? I should not be. Romney is running for president in 2008, so he's concerned that this not be a stain on his record, and if possible is going to turn it into something he can campaign on.

OTOH, i think i trust him more than the Turnpike Authority chair.

Gov. Mitt Romney put plans in place to seize control of inspections in the Big Dig tunnel system where falling ceiling panels fatally crushed a woman, saying an independent assessment was necessary to restore public trust.

Romney was expected to sign an emergency bill Friday morning, passed overwhelmingly by the Legislature late Thursday, that would also give him ultimate say on when the tunnels reopen, instead of the Turnpike Authority chairman.

from Gov. Romney seeks control of Big Dig probe
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
from my inbox:

Last month, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) testified before a House Homeland Security subcommittee to spotlight $1.4 billion fraudulent waste of Emergency Assistance Funds (EAF) to Hurricane Katrina victims. The unprecedented level of Federal Emergency Management Agency fraud was blared over television newscasts and emblazoned on newspaper headlines: "FEMA funds paid for a sex change."

However, the National Transgender Advocacy Coalition (NTAC) is now publicly calling the media and authorities on this claim, demanding proof that this occurred and calling the press on this claim "fabricated" and "fraudulent." In reviewing both House subcommittee testimony and the GAO report that uncovered the fraud there was no reference of a sex change, nor any surgery of any type being paid for by FEMA funds.

"It appears [the sex change] story was prime red meat for conservatives looking to turn attention away from the President, and onto Katrina victims and FEMA," said NTAC President Vanessa Edwards Foster. "It also appears there's no veracity to the story that EAF funds were used for gender reassignment surgery. These press claims are what's fraudulent."

... When questioned about the story, the GAO's Office of Public Affairs stated "there was no reference to that allegation because we cannot confirm it."

"The press reported on fabricated claims of sex changes paid with FEMA funds, but no media ever mentioned $2,000 paid to a Christian Broadcast Network from EAF payments," Foster of NTAC commented. The GAO report listed $2,000 paid to Colorado-based LeSEA Broadcasting Network.

... "There's an inherent media bias in this story," NTAC's Foster continued. "If you have transsexuals having sex changes it's great press - even if it is uncorroborated! But a confirmed report of emergency victims' funds paid to a faith-based broadcaster is deemed not press-worthy." While acknowledging many Americans have no problem with faith-based groups receiving money, she noted that they would likely not be keen on funds intended for needy victims in an emergency being given instead to a broadcast group to spread the gospel.

"I smell a rat behind the fabrication of this news report. It's very Karl Rove," Foster commented. "It uses an unwitting transgender community to bludgeon Hurricane Katrina victims." She called the uncorroborated claim in the press "despicable."
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
Someone in [livejournal.com profile] worldofwarcraft posted this morning about a dream in which President Bush makes a PR appearance in one of the high-level sections of the game, pulling mobs like a newb and nearly causing a wipe.

A significant portion of the population plays online computer games like World of Warcraft -- and it seems likely that this portion will grow even larger. If the online gaming population continues to explode, how soon do you think it will be that politicians will actually feel compelled to make PR appearances in gaming universes of this sort? Or will the growth in the gaming population level off before it reaches that point?
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
Karl Rove will not be indicted in the Plame leak case.

Essentially, what has come out in the last few months is that the so-called "leaking" of Plame Wilson's status as an undercover CIA agent was actually a selective de-classifying and release of sensitive information in a way engineered to look like a leak. The signs point to President Bush, who has the legal authority to do such a thing. Therefore the release of this information was not a crime. A despicable and spiteful machiavellian trick, but not a crime.

Though it was not a crime, it was done in such a way as to make it look like one. At the time, Bush himself fostered the impression of it as a crime by vowing to fire anyone found responsible. A prosecutor was appointed to investigate it as though it was a crime.

That the prosecution shifted gears away from holding someone responsible for the leak, to holding Scooter Libby responsible for obstructing the investigation, should have been our first clue. Libby was caught in a lie, hence the indictment of him.

We can surmise that Rove was not caught in a lie, and since the release of information itself turned out to be not a crime, there was more or less nothing Fitzgerald could really do.

Of course, the American public should ask itself what it says about the Administration that it would do such a thing to discredit a dissident. The whole maneuver invites all sorts of questions, too. Certain critics of the Administration have wondered, for example, whether the real target of the "leak" was Plame Wilson herself, and not her husband. In case you are unaware, Plame Wilson's work for the CIA involved learning what she could about Iran's nuclear aspirations. The leak destroyed her efforts and left us more or less in the dark regarding Iran's nuclear program. It's not entirely clear why the White House would do such a thing, but there's lots of room for speculation.
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
I went to the Youth Pride rally on Saturday. The rally was originally to be held at the Boston Common, but was held indoors at the Castle on Arlington Street instead due to the torrential downpour.

Despite the rain, they paraded. After watching them line up and file out the door, with banners and raincoats and plastic ponchos, i gathered my stuff and left The Network's table. On the way down Arlington Street to the T i saw the parade coming: a duck boat and about 2 blocks worth of mostly teenagers. So i stood, while getting soaked (my umbrella was irrelevant) and watched as they passed by, chanting,

"What do we want?"
"Safe schools!"
"When do we want them?"
"Now!"

Safe schools. That's the big gay agenda: "Don't harass or beat up gay kids, please. It would be nice if you didn't kick us out of our homes, too."

The parade is affiliated with the Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth. It came under attack last week because the governor, under pressure from homophobes because he's running for President, freaked out because his name appears on the letterhead the commission used when sending out a letter about the parade.

Gee, it's a governor's commission, created by a Republican governor in 1988 to address the astronomical rates of suicide and depression among gay and lesbian teenagers. Governor's commissions tend to have the current governor's name on the letterhead. Imagine that.

The Article 8 Alliance has the gall to say that they are "standing up for children." Attempting to silence teenagers and prevent them from expressing who they are, attacking efforts aimed at making their homes and schools safer, this is their idea of standing up for children? In future generations, people will think of groups like this the same way we now think of the Ku Klux Klan.
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
A new poll says Bush's approval rating is down to 29%. Thing is, he's been losing support among the people who have been his ardent supporters for five years... because he and Congress are not rabidly conservative enough for them.

The GOP has been getting ahead in recent years by whipping its base into a frenzy, playing the fear card, the race card, the homophobia card, the "War on Christmas" card and all that other manipulative happy horsesh*t. Well, now it's worked too well, and right wingers are even more extreme in their hatred-liciousness than politicians have the stomach for. They don't have the stomach to write homophobic prejudice into the US Constitution, to make 11 million people into felons simply because they weren't born here, or to really truly turn women into forcible walking fetus incubators (well, i think they do honestly support the last point, but no politician can actually afford the massive loss of votes they would suffer if it comes to pass).
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
If you click no other link today, you absolutely must (or at least should) go here and watch the video (in three parts) of Stephen Colbert speaking truthiness to power directly at the White House Correspondents' Dinner.

This took real nerve.

Edit. And in case you were wondering how much the mainstream media kisses up to the administration, see what it has to say about Stephen Colbert's performance. Look for a while; you will be lucky to find it even mentioned. Bloggers at the Huffington Post have been writing about the MSM's total whitewash of Colbert's speech here and here.

Edit-edit. This video might be difficult to watch, but in case you're inclined to feel sorry for President Bush after watching this, keep in mind that it was at this event last year that Bush lampooned the non-existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq by going around the room and looking under tables for them.
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
If you blinked, you missed it: defendants in an espionage case alleged on Friday that the source of their leak was Condoleezza Rice, and therefore their possession and use of information about an "unspecified Middle Eastern nation" was not illegal.

This is why, when Bush was held to his promise to fire anyone in his administration found to be responsible for a leak, he amended his comments to a promise to fire anyone who committed a crime when leaking sensitive information. People as highly ranking as himself or Secretary Rice can unilaterally (and, it would seem, selectively) declassify information -- therefore it is not a crime.
sophiaserpentia: (Default)
For six months, things have been quiet regarding the Plame Affair. Now, suddenly, they are bright hot. President Bush himself was implicated in Scooter Libby's testimony as a source authorizing leaks of classified information.

Profile

sophiaserpentia: (Default)
sophiaserpentia

December 2021

S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930 31 

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 9th, 2025 10:55 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios