jump to navigation

Laughing Sal at Playland 15 July 2008

Posted by marisacat in 2008 Election, Democrats, Inconvenient Voice of the Voter, Lie Down Fall Down Dems.
trackback

laughing sal

Photo from Laughing Squid

Laughing Sal, the San Francisco version, lived at the remnants of an 1890s Playland at the Beach, out at Ocean Beach… A classic wood framed seaside diversion, rather more carnie, probably, by the time I met it, in the 50s. Laughing Sal was displayed in a stand-alone, glass and wood frame case… you dropped in a couple quarters and she rocked and shook with laughter, looming over you…

Frankly, all too reminiscent of politics today………

I have no idea if much of this report at Politico is accurate but there is one part I think is:

Coordination between the Obama campaign and the House and Senate leadership is so weak that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) — who will chair the Democrats’ convention in August — didn’t know of Obama’s decision to move his final-night acceptance speech from the Pepsi Center to Invesco Field until the campaign announced it on a conference call with reporters.

May the oceans rise to greet him.

“…we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth.”

hmmm not quite what I see coming……

**********************

Just saw this at the end of the last thread:

CSTAR

Naomi Klein was interviewed on Democracy Now! today by Amy Goodman. The transcript is here

I am sure most of you are aware or have read her book “Shock Doctrine”, which I read just recently: it’s out in paperback now. The book really proposes an interesting alternative narrative to the neoliberal economic thinking of the last 40-45 years. Much of this narrative begins in Latin America (Brazil, Argentina and especially Chile) and is certainly familiar to most Latin Americans. For the LatinAmerican center-left most of those memories are extremely painful.

However, I think there is a tendency in the american left to ignore that historical period and to view it as somehow disjoint or irrelevant to the politics of an a developed capitalist society. Klein does a very good job in her book of dispelling that view.

Back to the interview: There are lots of interesting things in it. Actually I think the written transcript is better. I particularly thought this exchange interesting:

AMY GOODMAN: Naomi Klein, Obama’s Chicago Boys, who are they?

NAOMI KLEIN: Well, one of them is Obama. Obama spent ten years teaching at the University of Chicago Law School, which is a very conservative law school. You know, I wrote a column recently talking about how conservative Obama’s economic roots are, with his ties to the University of Chicago.

His first response to the mortgage crisis, let’s remember, was he was worried about the government taking action to keep people from being evicted from their homes, because that would create moral hazard. And he was not talking about the big companies, the big mortgage lenders; he was talking about individual low-income people being thrown out of their homes. He was worried about moral hazard. That’s a very University of Chicago take on the situation.

The moral hazard Obama was worried about of course was that people should assume responsibility for their bad economic decisions. That “moral hazard” concept is interesting because it is an essential part of the corporate narrative justifying redistritribution of risk onto the poor.

This definition from WIkipedia is pretty good

Moral hazard is the prospect that a party insulated from risk may behave differently from the way it would behave if it were fully exposed to the risk. Moral hazard arises because an individual or institution does not bear the full consequences of its actions, and therefore has a tendency to act less carefully than it otherwise would, leaving another party to bear some responsibility for the consequences of those actions.

Of course what is missing from the corporate narrative is that the entire financial system reeks of moral hazard in favor of the rich.

** close of comment **

About these ads

Comments»

1. moiv - 15 July 2008

Sorry to be late responding to IB’s question about public comment on HHS’s “birth control=abortion” plot. I ended up tacking myself onto the end of the last thread, so I’ll repost here.

The proposal [text in pdf format] that’s linked by Cristina Page at RH Reality Check is still in the planning stage. It appears that someone inside HHS leaked it to the NYT (and possibly to others). So there’s been no announcement of a formal proposal as yet.

But here’s a link to the public feedback page at HHS.

I dare say that HHS is looking a lot harder for this leaker than the White House did when they were playing the Plame Game.

2. marisacat - 16 July 2008

hmmm the woes from lack of [righteous] regulation… Charlie Rose has Gretchen Morgensen of NYT and Allan Sloan from Fortune… the numbers are terrifying. I have to catch it on the re run tomorrow as my mind drifted.

But Indiymac drained one quarter the reserves of the FDIC… and GM mentioned that, as we hear “too big to be allowed to fail” the message is (of course), regional banks, as the joy spreads, will be allowed to fail. No Shit Shirley…………

Joy joy… hmmm as the oceans miraculously recede and the planet cools. Manna falls from his magical fingertips and we fall to the ground, loving him. Yeah right.

Good Luck, Popcorn futures. At least it is food!

3. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008

They are so pathetic

WASHINGTON (AP) — Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s single impeachment article will get a committee hearing but not on removing President Bush from office.

The House on Tuesday voted 238-180 to send the article of impeachment — for Bush’s reasoning for taking the country to war in Iraq — to the Judiciary Committee, which buried Kucinich’s previous effort.

This time, the panel will open hearings. But House Democrats emphatically said they will not be about Bush’s impeachment, a first step in the Constitution’s process of a removing a president from office.

Instead, the panel will conduct an election-year review — possibly televised — of everything Democrats consider to be Bush’s abuse of power. Kucinich, a Democrat from Ohio, is likely to testify. But so will several scholars and administration critics, Democrats said.

They’re worried that impeachment would look to partisan, but this won’t?!?!

Sorry, bad dream woke me up, then I read this … {shakes head} …. bad dreams either way.

4. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008

No point in even bothering w/ stuff like this anymore: An Open Letter to Rep. John Conyers from the Milwaukee Impeachment Committee

Dear Congressman Conyers:

Writer John Nichols has emphasized that impeachment has a restraining effect on executive abuse of power. Hasn’t our experience—an illegal war, ignored subpoenas, 800 signing statements, and now the threat of military action against Iran–revealed that this administration requires constitutional restraints. Just as you need to consult constitutional experts to inform you on impeachment, so, too, the American people need to be informed by you and to consult with you through the educative process of impeachment. The American people have been deceived via secrecy and manipulated through fear by this self-serving administration. The people have a right to be informed, and with informed consent we can be trusted to make mature healthy decisions.

As Thomas Jefferson said, “I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves,” explained Jefferson, “and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.”

You asked us to poll the members of the House of Representatives. We found that the National Impeachment Network (NIN) lobbying delegation has been meeting with Representatives on impeachment and sees a major shift in the willingness of Representatives to seriously consider impeachment. As an NIN member said, “The reception we’ve received has been positively amazing. Every Representative we’ve met with supports impeachment strongly.”

As Chairman of the Judiciary Committee of the US Congress, it is your unique privilege and present opportunity to secure your place in history by holding impeachment proceedings. You asked, “Has anyone considered that the election of November 4, 2008 could be put in jeopardy by beginning impeachment.” When you look at the history of impeachment, it has usually been followed by success in the next election for the initiating party; for example, the Democrats won big after initiating impeachment against Nixon; and the Republicans, after Truman. What’s more, gaining Democratic control without impeachment would result in an empty victory, culminating in further erosion of Congressional power with an ever more powerful Executive branch.

There are many rivets that hold a plane together, and some can be lost and the plane still flies. There comes a point, however, when the plane cannot function because of the loss of those rivets, perhaps in mid-air, with catastrophic results. Our constitution is the invisible, legal infrastructure of the United States: lose enough rivets and the system collapses. We are afraid we are near or at that tipping point.

As you pointed out in our meeting, other administrations have lied to the American people regarding wars; however, the cumulative actions of this administration have overstepped national and international legal limits to such a degree that THESE ACTIONS must not become a precedent. Their actions NOT ONLY threaten our national security BY DEPLETING OUR RESOURCES AND COMPROMISING OUR ABILITY TO RESPOND MILITARILY WHEN A REAL CRISIS OCCURS, BUT ALSO THEY seriously discredit the American people in the VERY EYES OF THOSE FROM WHOM WE SEEK TO WIN THEIR HEARTS AND MINDS.

On the American home front, we continue to SACRIFICE BASIC GOODS AND SERVICES AS WE worry over CUTTING domestic budgets for education, health, housing, and safe neighborhoods—not to mention our deteriorating infrastructure–as our deficit grows, our dollar weakens, AND THE OIL BARONS TAKE THE AUDACITY OF RAISING OUR GAS PRICES AT THE PUMP! In fact, James Madison warned that in times of war those who encircle the president are enriched. Timely are his words, “War is in fact the true nurse of executive aggrandizement. In war, a physical force is to be created; and it is the executive will, which is to direct it. In war, the public treasuries are to be unlocked; and it is the executive hand which is to dispense them. In war, the honors and emoluments of office are to be multiplied; and it is the executive patronage under which they are to be enjoyed…”

At our July 1 meeting with you in Milwaukee, former Democratic-card-holder, Barb Aho said, “ I am disgusted and I’m not a Democratic party member anymore….I support individuals like Feingold who stand up and have the character to say what they believe…and Feingold’s popularity is amazing in Wisconsin…The Democratic Party is going down because of this weak response….I’ve seen those resolutions and they don’t uphold the resolutions of the party. The resolutions of the party are strong and liberal…and if those politicians supported those resolutions, they would get reelected. And those blue dogs [as you described earlier in our discussion] who won’t stand up are part of the problem, and the rest of you Democrats are being brought down by them.”

It was clear those words resonated with you, Congressman Conyers. And we believe, as Feingold is in Wisconsin, those Democrats who show integrity and character with backbone in their principles, which are founded on their experience, their understanding of history and the advice of experts–will always be supported. Don’t let the fear of 58 blue dogs and the ‘undecided’ drag the rest of you down. Your opportunity here is to allay their fears through the educative power of impeachment proceedings. As Veterans for Peace member Bob Lehmke-Burkhart asserted, you both took an oath to protect and preserve the constitution. We believe you intend to keep your oath and we will do whatever we can to support this endeavor.

The Milwaukee Impeachment Committee

Not going to do any good.

5. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008

Some of the rich, of course, can have no moral hazard because they have no morals.

Hundreds of super-rich American tax cheats have, in effect, turned themselves in to the IRS after a bank computer technician in the tiny European country of Liechtenstein came forward with the names of US citizens who had set up secret accounts there, according to Washington lawyers investigating the scheme.

The bank clerk, Heinrich Kieber, has been branded a thief by the government of Liechtenstein for violating the country’s bank secrecy laws.

He is now in hiding but scheduled to testify to the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations Thursday via a video statement from a secret location, according to Congressional investigators.

Back to bed …

6. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008

Okay, one last laugh:

Obama says New Yorker insulted Muslim Americans

By GLEN JOHNSON
Associated Press Writer

CHICAGO (AP) — Democrat Barack Obama said Tuesday that the New Yorker magazine’s satirical cover depicting him and his wife as flag-burning, fist-bumping radicals doesn’t bother him but that it was an insult to Muslim Americans.

“You know, there are wonderful Muslim Americans all across the country who are doing wonderful things,” the presidential candidate told CNN’s Larry King. “And for this to be used as sort of an insult, or to raise suspicions about me, I think is unfortunate. And it’s not what America’s all about.”

Obama blamed himself for not being forceful enough in challenging some of the rumors about him, including that he is Muslim. Obama is Christian.

RFLMAO. Does he even listen to himself?

7. marisacat - 16 July 2008

Despite all that “post racial” blather, quite the adept at being the victim, a victim, somebody’s victim..

And dogdammit but it is OLD.

8. Intermittent Bystander - 16 July 2008

moiv – thanks for the clarification.
ms_x – thanks for the fruit.
CSTAR – Only water hazards for the rich . . . just to keep things interesting. No need to worry about the average Jack or Jill, when you’re playing at the club.

MCat – it has come to my attention that sauteeing whole garlic cloves in oil before adding popcorn to the pot is not a bad idea at all. Likewise sprinkling brewer’s yeast over the top, when done.

Have a good day, all.

9. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008

brewer’s yeast is yummy on popcorn.

10. Intermittent Bystander - 16 July 2008

In other popcorn news, experts recommend tile board adhesive when constructing festival floats.

OT completely: Big tent hazard – raver blindness. . . .

11. marisacat - 16 July 2008

The Nag hs a piece up, with new polling, on race, the racial divide, and divided perception.

Black and white Americans agree that America is ready to elect a black president, but disagree on almost every other question about race in the poll.

12. CSTAR - 16 July 2008

This articlein the New Yorker a few years back (um, …. we’re still allowed to read the New Yorker, right. Right?) is a useful read on the concept of moral hazard and its use in the health insurance “debate” (such as it is) in the US.

in the past few decades a particular idea has taken hold among prominent American economists which has also been a powerful impediment to the expansion of health insurance. The idea is known as “moral hazard.” Health economists in other Western nations do not share this obsession. Nor do most Americans. But moral hazard has profoundly shaped the way think tanks formulate policy and the way experts argue and the way health insurers structure their plans and the way legislation and regulations have been written.

This statement is true, but I think it is also incomplete. Moral hazard is a narrative construct. It is part of the Milton Friedman/Neoliberal doctrine of individual responsibility, the aim of which is justify a key ingredient part of corporate capitalism in the US (and in other parts of the world, especially the emergent savage capitalism of China). Namely, manipulation of risk and shifting that risk to that part of the population which can least afford it.

Capitalism, if we carefully look at the effects of the neoliberal doctrine in its advanced stages, is ultimately not a system of ownership and pricing of the means of production, but a market in risk and derivatives of risk. In this system, the dominant class is not made up of landowners or owners of businesses, but those who have the connections to manipulate that risk.

13. wu ming - 16 July 2008
14. lucid - 16 July 2008

manipulation of risk and shifting that risk to that part of the population which can least afford it.

I would also add, the population that is least able to defend against risk manipulation. If one looks at say, water privatization, within ‘structural adjustment’ loan deals handed out like candy to the third world, it’s not just that the people can’t afford the risk, it’s that they have no means to prevent that offloading of risk from happening, which makes them easy targets [save electing former poppy farmers as presidents... where they're able].

15. CSTAR - 16 July 2008

# 11. I used to like Brad DeLong’s blog. Unfortunately, he recently seems to have turned into an outlet for the Obama campaign editing out even farly mild criticisms of Obama. Now some of my best friends are Obama supporters, which makes it tricky for me to navigate socially. However, in DeLong’s case, though I don’t think he makes a living out of it(say a la Dkos, TPM) the blog certainly does add to his professional cachet.* When this whole campaign is done and over, he might end up regretting it.

Take for instance his “Death spiral watch” posting in regard to The Nag‘s NY Times article. He makes this comment

I must admit that my breath is stopped by the idea of saying anything about Black-white opinion differences based on a poll with only 300 Blacks in it. That is bizarre statistical malpractice of a high order.

WIthout further information on the methodology, one can’t say anything about whether the sample size is too small.

I think many Obama supporters need to take a slow deep breath and really listen to what Obama is saying and also pay attention to what they’re saying in supporting him. I guess I, along with my wife (who is no Obama supporter either) need to practice that refrain.

* Note d’éclaircissement: I have no personal gripes against anyone using a blog as a means to make a living. So long as it’s all up front.

16. marisacat - 16 July 2008

I don’t pay a lto of attention to polling as I think it is part of chatter. But some of it clearly is going to enter the conversation more intensely… Stuff like Newsweek having Ob up 12 one week then a few weeks later, barely the margin of error (+3) for instance.

One thing i liked about Bornstein who was at LAT now at National Journal, when he wrote on a poll, at least for the online version of LAT, he included everything broken out, full txt of questions, as much information on the sample, information on subgroups.. and so on. As many pages as it took.

NYT has devoted a lot of time to calling out communities by name as racist. I assume Ob makes it thru but it is easy to see what the whine orchestrated by the NYT will be. Racism (of which we have plenty, but any run for the presidency has multiple parts) and the electorate just did nto understand him. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaa.

One reason I want him to win. The whining will be intense. And screwed up. LOL Talk about a ”distraction”.

17. aemd - 16 July 2008

JibJab on the 2008 campaign. Funny and very clever. Picked up link at HuffyPo.

18. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008

15 – Well, the argument that the right makes against sex ed, HPV vacination and easy access to birth control is basically another “moral hazard” argument.

Just as much bullshit, too.

On another interesting tip, found this linked at Boing Boing (yes, I know, snotty elitist dilletantes):

Running for Office: It’s Like A Flamewar with a Forum Troll, but with an Eventual Winner

My name is Sean Tevis [photo]. I’m an Information Architect in Kansas running for State Representative. I’ve decided to “retire” my current State Representative. I’m going to win. This is my story (XKCD homage style) so far.

He’s running against an xtian winger.

19. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008
20. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008

A whole bunch of new stuff up at BAR about Obama, his love of rich white people, corporations and dishonest attacks on black fathers.

21. CSTAR - 16 July 2008

#18 Exactly, sex-ed contraception etc., encourages “risky behavior”, so the right-wing ideology says.

As a matter of fact though, Obama may be just as likely to make a similar argument for some kinds of socially supports on sexual behavior (contaception, access to abortion etc) He his definitely on the side of narrowing risk burdens around the individual as opposed to spreading them over a wider social support.

This is not pandering or flip-flopping on his part. I think he has made it clear from the very beginning that is what he believes, and people who have read him carefully (Paul Krugman among others) have been trying to make that point.

As far as reproductive freedom, and access to it, I think he also going desocialize that, throwing it back into the private sector., e.g., your pastor.

22. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008

21 – exactly, and if people had been listening and reading him more closely, his actions since knocking out Clinton wouldn’t have surprised them.

23. marisacat - 16 July 2008

when Ob said sex was sacred, the jig was up. IMO.
SICK TO DEATH of his lecturing.

24. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008
25. CSTAR - 16 July 2008

#20 Quite a document. BTW, Obama is a Chicago boy alright:

And then there’s the issue of the courts, the big joker the liberals wave when all other arguments seem shaky.

Further down the graf:

There’s no reason to expect anything from him in this area, especially when you factor in all the hedge fund and investor class money he gets and his close University of Chicago Law School and Economics Department connections.

This should give one pause. Or paws.

26. marisacat - 16 July 2008

I still say he will put up a conservative Latina Catholic. For the court I mean.

The Democrats lay down for Roberts (however they voted, it did nto matter) and make a mockery of the Judiciary hearings for Alito. What a joke.

27. CSTAR - 16 July 2008

Feeling daily koshish, I noticed this sentence in a rec’d diary (by one Granny doc)

The finding that 12% of our less gifted citizens still believe that Barack Obama is a Muslim is mind numbing, and clearly, any attempt by the MSM to dispel this Right-wing myth is not touching them. Perhaps it’s time to fight back, hard?

She’s upset at that? For frikin’ crying out loud, 47% of americans believe God created the universe as it now exists, less than 10000 years ago!! I think Gran mama needs to go out and celebrate.

28. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008

The best part of the JibJab is when Obama jumps on a unicorn.

29. marisacat - 16 July 2008

Pink unicorn.

30. Stephanie - 16 July 2008

where is this quote from?
“…we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth.”

thanks

31. marisacat - 16 July 2008

It’s from the speech he gave when he achieved enough Super Delegates to b over the number needed.

If you google the part about the oceans, links will come up.

32. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008

After “best hope on earth” he turned around and a rainbow shot out of his ass.

33. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008

I thought that it had happened several times before: The Wedding Crashers: U.S. Jets Have Bombed Five Ceremonies in Afghanistan

34. lucid - 16 July 2008

After “best hope on earth” he turned around and a rainbow shot out of his ass.

Jibjab should have stuck that in the vid…

35. lucid - 16 July 2008

The Wedding Crashers: U.S. Jets Have Bombed Five Ceremonies in Afghanistan

Well, you know those Muslims and their gay marriages…

36. marisacat - 16 July 2008

oh surely they are arranged marriages between 12 years olds marrying 50 year olds. We MUST bomb. To save the children.

37. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008

my guess is that it is only time that certain males appear in public, and they take the opportunity to kill them, bystanders being acceptable “collateral”.

38. lucid - 16 July 2008

my guess is that it is only time that certain males appear in public, and they take the opportunity to kill them, bystanders being acceptable “collateral”.

Wasn’t there a debate in which Obama suggested just that?

39. marisacat - 16 July 2008

Frankly reading obama, all I see is that we will extend full bore, no dancing around it any more, no playing pattycake with Mushie,, hegemony to Pakistan. Make it another Afghanistan. All in the name of Osama.

40. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008

maybe, I couldn’t watch those debates after a while. wouldn’t surprise me.

41. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008

my first thought after the Columbian rescue of Bettencourt and the American mercs was, “okay, what is the REAL story”. Just a small thing about violating the terms of the Geneva Conventions. A trick no doubt learned from us:

BOGOTÁ: Colombia misused the symbol of the Red Cross in the military rescue of politician Ingrid Betancourt and 14 other hostages, it said Wednesday, admitting a possible violation of the rules of war.

“We regret that this occurred,” President Álvaro Uribe said in a speech following reports that the Red Cross emblem was displayed on a jersey or T-shirt worn by a Colombian intelligence officer who took part in the rescue mission.

Falsely portraying military personnel as Red Cross members is against the Geneva Conventions, as it could put humanitarian workers at risk when they are in war zones.

Uribe has drawn widespread praise for the rescue on July 2 of the French-Colombian Betancourt, three U.S. defense contractors and 11 Colombian hostages held for years by Marxist guerrillas.

Rebel leaders were duped into handing over their most prized hostages in the operation, which highlighted the success of Uribe’s U.S.-backed offensive against the guerrillas.

But the use of the Red Cross symbol takes some of the shine off the mission.

“Parties to the conflict must respect the Red Cross emblem at all times and under all circumstances,” said Yves Heller, a spokesman for the International Committee of the Red Cross in Colombia. “We will continue working in the field in Colombia.”

Don’t worry, though, it wasn’t planned, but just another one of those bad apples:

Uribe said Wednesday that the use of the Red Cross symbol was not part of the government’s original rescue plan.

“One of the officers has admitted that when the helicopter was landing at the start of the operation he saw so many guerrillas that he got nervous. He feared for his life and he pulled out a jersey that had the Red Cross symbol and put it over his vest,” Uribe said.

42. marisacat - 16 July 2008

LOL Oh it was the Che tshirts…. he must have been so inexperienced and frightened to think he also needed an ICRC t shirt. The power of Che will do it.

I certainly heard a fairly high dollar amt pretty quick, think it was 20 million.

43. Madman in the Marketplace - 16 July 2008

of course, it’s only a bonus for the fascist gov’t to make it more dangerous for REAL ICRC workers to go out into the countryside.

44. Stephanie - 16 July 2008

thanks, i read, i googled, i read some more
nice words
but what is the plan for care for the sick (medicare?, single payer?)
good jobs (what’s the plan, personal responsbility?)
and what is the plan “to make” the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; — sounds a little biblical to my Catholic childhood ears (certainly not through coal and nuclear)

and for ending a war (or just moving soldiers from one country to another and leaving the mercenaries as they are)

and what is the plan to restore our image as the last, best hope on earth (as done with FISA?)

oh, geez

45. Madman in the Marketplace - 17 July 2008

The unicorn hasn’t told him yet.

46. NYCO - 17 July 2008

Does anyone here remember a news story (maybe about a year or so ago?) about a Republican Ohio state legislator who proposed that single women without children should be last in line for health benefits?

I’m trying to confirm if this was an actual story, does anyone know?

47. lucid - 17 July 2008

Stephanie… yee of little faith. You must ride the rainbow. Somewhere over the rainbow will you find your heart’s desire!

48. NYCO - 17 July 2008

Interesting article in Inside Higher Ed about women in academe, and why they still aren’t becoming “thought leaders” even though they are present in more fields in greater numbers:

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/07/17/women

I can’t help thinking this dynamic has to apply to women’s involvement in party politics as well. Or the netroots, for that matter. Who’s really doing the scut work, and who’s really reaping the opportunities?

49. marisacat - 17 July 2008

NYCO

Just FYI rings no bells with me.

I can certainly see some hide bound nutter in Ohio or PA or MO or the hard core south pulling that scheisse.

You know after the 2004 Great Loss I watched masses of post election panels on C-Span… all very interesting as many truths got told. Democrats were so shaken (not that they changed anything about themselves, they did not) and at one panel in NYC, forget the venue with Jonathan Alter (who managed in his state of shock to be interesting, for once) and Carole SImpson who used to anchor ABC weekend national news (and was really interesting) a very elderly Jewish woman in the audience spoke up, that her fear in America, primary fears for her, were

– that “Christian” was becoming a demanded identity, and

– women were losing rights to autonomy, and to sexual and reproductive freedom.

There has always been a slam against being unmarried in this country… and it surfaces in so many ways. I have lost track of the times I have been referred to [online] as

Lesbian, as well as
Homophobic

We live in a rough and tumble world, but the criticism of women almost always goes FIRST to sexuality.

Yeah I’d not be surprised if some legislator in Ohio (where Rahm and Bill C broke their necks to get a Ohio RIght to Lifer on the ballot and into the US congress in 2006) decided to blame women for not producing something for the state to harvest.

50. ms_xeno - 17 July 2008

That Carl Davidson guy seems to be the appointed tsk-tsker on several blogs having an unfondness for Obama in common. Saw him on both BAR and SMBIVA yesterday.

Meatless Blabber by any other name, etc… :p Can’t wait to see if he shows up here, too.

51. CSTAR - 17 July 2008

Is everybody going insane? Is Obama giving off some pheromones that are causing really strange behavior? Juan Cole today wrote this today

Clinton and Obama are both policy wonks and people it is clear you could trust an economy to (unlike Bush and McCain, who are all about giveaways to the rich, their own social class). But Clinton and Obama are also hunks, whom men admire for their lithe physicality and over whom women swoon.

Women swoon? Lithe physcality. Read the entire posting in his blog; I don’t think I’m quoting out of context or misinterpreting his remarks.

Am I going insane and am I only imagining that these comments are real? Frankly that would be the more desirable option.

52. marisacat - 17 July 2008

Link to Juan Cole, the entry that CSTAR refers to, just above…………..

Bow wow is all I can say.

53. marisacat - 17 July 2008

nu thred………………..

LINK

…………. 8) …………………..


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 168 other followers

%d bloggers like this: