jump to navigation

Gerri Santoro and The Laws of Men (graphic photo) 18 April 2007

Posted by marisacat in Abortion Rights, SCOTUS, Sex / Reproductive Health, WAR!.

[this is a reprint from 3 February 2006; I originally posted at mediagirl] 

 In 2004, at the one million one hundred thousand strong march in DC for Reproductive Rights were three women with a common enough family story of abortion (two in fact), pre Roe. Where their story was uncommon is the police photo of their sister, mother and grandmother, which had been publicised by Ms Magazine in 1973, as part of an article on abortion, rights and Roe.

Leona Gordon, 74, of Westmoreland, N.H., said she remembers when all abortions were illegal. She recalls what she went through in 1964, with five kids and a bad marriage, to get one. And she recalls what it was like, a few weeks later, to claim the body of her sister, Gerri Santoro, who died after one.

“Oh, here I go,” she said, beginning to weep, as she said she does most nights.

Gerri Santoro was one of her younger sisters, bubbly and trusting, the mother of two girls by a man who abused her and them. They separated, Santoro had a relationship with another man and became pregnant. When she was more than six months along, her husband contacted her: He was returning to her Coventry, Conn., home in hopes of reconciling.

Let’s back up for a bit, when Gerri Santoro separated from her husband, he had moved her and the children to California, the following is recollection of one of her daughters, text drawn from a 1995 documentary on Gerri:

Our first trip out from Connecticut, we had a station wagon and my sister and I would sleep in the back and we’d wake up in the middle of the night and the stars would be out all over the place and my mom would be driving along, still, just driving along. It was, it was fun, it was fun. She made a long, horrible trip, fun.
I vaguely remember her dancing in front, it must have been American Bandstand or something, in the living room with us. She had a green dress, I remember that.

She went out to a New Year’s Eve party or something with this, to me, it still seems like the shimmering emerald green dress and it was tight and beautiful.

This, from Gerri’s sister Leona:

Trying to be objective, it’s pretty difficult when it’s your kid sister. But I think while she was out there, she probably was beaten as many times or as much as she was when they lived in Connecticut. And from the sounds of her letters, she was
very unhappy.

Again, from one of her daughters:

All kids want to believe that everything’s OK. But I think
we saw enough, both my sister and I, to know that it wasn’t really fun for
mommy. You know, it was just a game that daddy played and he liked it, but she didn’t like it. And he did hurt her.

And so, as much as we wanted to deny it, when she was leaving, it wasn’t like we questioned what was happening. We just kind of went along with it. We came home from school, and the car was packed. There was no playing, there was no phone calls, no saying good-bye to daddy, no saying good-bye to friends. It was in the car and we’re going on vacation, we’re going back to Connecticut.

From her closest childhood friend, Gerri had used the device of talking about a “friend” who found herself pregnant, until her friend saw thru it:

[A]ugust, that’s when Sam was coming in. No wonder she had to have the abortion cause of Sam coming, that’s about when the baby was due. She knew better. She knew it would kill you, she knew. But she was desperate. Sam would have taken the girls. I mean, back in those days, she would have never saw them again. But that’s how desperate she was. Because Sam was coming back in August.

I don’t think an hour went by and the two detectives came to the house and they wanted a name. And I remember one guy saying, one detective saying, she have many boy friends. And I said, she wasn’t that type of person, and she wasn’t. I mean, you know, there was only one name I could give and that was Clyde.

In desperation, Gerri and her lover had gone to a motel to induce an abortion, things went horribly wrong, Clyde panicked and left her to die alone.


I would feel better to think it was sudden and that she didn’t have to lay there and be alone. But I don’t believe that’s what happened.

I believe she had some time to think. Because the way the rags were in her hands, you know what I mean, this was a woman who wasn’t just sitting about and suddenly collapsed.

This was a woman who was in the throws of dying and was doing what she could to stop bleeding and stop, you know. From that picture, that’s what it looks like.

Gerri Santoro’s deadly induced abortion was pre Roe and she was pre Griswold as well, the forerunner that found for privacy rights for married couples to buy and use birth control.


I happened to see Henry Hyde (R-IL) today on the floor of the House. Hyde was the first public, elected, standard bearer in the chipping away, the war on poor women and federal funds used for abortion, barely three years post Roe. I am sure he was at the National Prayer Breakfast Thursday morning.

The media, the Democrats (and a Judiciary Committee that failed, full court press, in front of us), right along with the Republicans, enjoy saying that Roe has been challenged and up held 38 times… That Justice Kennedy is likely the new soft center on the SC.

However if you have read moiv’s excellent diaries and Bayprairie’s invaluable weekly Reproductive Rights, Week in Review, you know this is fiction.

And if you are frightened for your future and the future of your children, you know talk of Kennedy being a new center, is just sleepy time talk. The elected leaders want us sleepy, mesmerised in fact.

Significantly, according to Alan Guttmacher Institute* only 13% of counties in the US have an abortion provider. Mississippi, the cut throat eye of the storm that is the Bible belt, has one clinic.

Back alley and self induced abortion is occurring:

“Most commonly, they ingest a whole bottle of quinine pills, with castor oil…we try to get them to the ER before their cardiac rhythm is interrupted…Sometimes they douche with very caustic products like bleach. We had a patient, a teen, who burned herself so badly with bleach that we could’t even examine her, her vaginal tissue was so painful….?

Our local hospital tells me they see 12-20 patients per year, who have already self-induced or had illegal abortions. Some make it, some don’t. They are underage or poor women mostly, and a few daughters of pro-life families…”

Canada approached over throwing their abortion ban in a different way from America, a crusading OB-GYN exploded the patriarchal system, defying the laws and enduring prison and trials.

A Viennese Jew, a holocaust survivor of Auschwitz, Dr Morgentaler’s crusade led, as of 1988, to there being no laws regulating abortion in Canada, it is between women and their doctors. Further, the Canadian rates of abortion run lower than America, year after year.

Women, given a chance, will care properly for themselves. Over and over, the patriarchal, theocratic societies (ours is that, more firmly entrenched everyday), in their perversity, refuse to trust (much less like) women.

Recently, William Saletan has published a NYT opinion piece (no link available, I will look for a cache or reprint somewhere).

Joyce Arthur, founder of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (ARCC) answered him by letter. With permission, I use part of that letter, to honor Gerri Santoro, her daughters, sisters and grand daughter.

I believe Gerri’s heart beat, a woman’s, a mother’s rising from the grave – the existence of that police photograph – says, trust women and leave it to them.

But it’s essential to realize that women don’t generally decide to have abortions because they think abortion is morally ok, or because it’s their political right, or because they think the fetus is a meaningless blob of tissue. When it comes to abortion, the politics is separate from the personal.

Almost all women who have abortions do so because, essentially, they recognize the necessity of being good mothers, and that having a child (or another child) right now will undermine the welfare of themselves and their existing or future families. That is the true morality behind the abortion decision – the biological imperative to be a good mother – as well as the fundamental need to control one’s own body and life (which is not an abstract right, but a sociobiological instinct).

Abortion is inextricably intertwined with pregnancy and motherhood – that is, good mothers will have both babies and abortions. They do so the world over, they always have, and they always will. Half of all women in the world will have at least one abortion in their lifetimes. The abortion experience is part of who we are as women, a fundamental element of our life experience, the means we use to optimize the survival of our families and ourselves.

Therefore, labelling abortion as bad is being judgmental against women’s very essence. It denigrates our humanity. You are labelling women’s behaviour as bad, when in fact it’s just women being women. When you say abortion is bad, you’re literally saying that women are bad.

But not only is there nothing wrong with abortion, I assert that both childbirth and abortion represent what is most wonderful about women – our ability to give life and sustain life, and the freedom to control the circumstances under which it can best be done. Abortion liberates all of us, improves our lives enormously, and ensures our future survival. Abortion represents human power, freedom, and dignity – no other animal can control its fertility to the extent that humans can, and this allows us to control our destiny and shape the world around us. That ability to “play God,” as it were, defines what it means to be human and elevates us above the animals.

Your premise that abortion is bad and should be reduced, lacks vision and fails to address the core issue. Which is – the American people do not trust or respect women as equal players in society, entitled and empowered to make their own decisions around their sexuality, ethics, and lives. The bottom line is, if women were respected and trusted as equals, abortion would hardly be an issue at all.

*note the graph at the link for AGI, w/r/t timing of abortion, 9 out of 10 are first trimester. At greatest risk, not surprising, for a delay, is teenagers and those without funds.


[this is a repost, I originally posted 3 February 2006 at mediagirl] 


1. missdevore - 18 April 2007

this is the wow place today. I’m just catching up….loved xicanpwr’s write-up, and immediately blogdrooled her, without czeching to ascertain gender. correct me if I’m wrong. don’t wanna be no sexist female.

thanks again for a den–will try to figger out that amazon pay thang, and tip when the tax refund come back.

2. missdevore - 18 April 2007

goddessdammit–I can’t believe msoc capitulated again–whoops– I guess she still sees kos as “the biggest game in town” and who would jeopardize big game like some silly viper–i was almost on the verge of sending her an email from “the dead” when I saw she posted a most appropriate use of the word “fuck” in her diary title. (note to self: consider how well-considered Mcat’s cynicsm is):

Satan Edited This Title
by Maryscott OConnor
Wed Apr 18, 2007 at 12:19:49 PM PDT

Crossposted from MY LEFT WING

[I’ve deleted several insults I directed at Markos — unnecessary and pointless, though I stand by my assertion that the orginal title, “You Fuck, You Die” was necessary AND had a point. ]

I’ve also reconsidered my previous statements to the effect that this owuld be my last diary at Daily Kos. If Markos wants me out of here, he can ban me. I’ll be goddamned if I ban MYSELF.”

do I detect a note of “blogroll of the banned” envy? worse than penis envy, I hear.

3. printing » Gerri Santoro and The Laws of Men (graphic photo) - 18 April 2007

[…] Rick Rockwell wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptWhere their story was uncommon is the police photo of their sister, mother and grandmother, which had been publicised by Ms Magazine in 1973, as part of an article on abortion, rights and Roe. Leona Gordon, 74, of Westmoreland, NH, … […]

4. Sabrina Ballerina - 18 April 2007

Well, Miss D, it is becoming fashionable to say you were banned from DK. The best and the brightest of online politics have been banned or simply left. The place is so boring – for real dialogue you have to go to blogs like this where there are not stupid ratings or blogmaids wagging their fingers at anyone who has an original thought.

I can’t believe Matt banned Colleen! They really, really cannot take real women who are not afraid to stand up for their rights and who refuse to back down when they know they are right. Their solution is to try to make them disappear. That is why I laughed yesterday when someone pointed to the female FPers as proof he does not hate women. Lol! well, so long as they’re willing to do as he wants and help him get rid of inconvenient women like SuperVixen. Lol, she was way too much for the wimpy men of dk to handle!

Marisacat, Gerri Santora’s daughter posted on Democratic Underground on her mother’s anniversary about a year ago. I’m trying to remember but I think she was trying to come to terms with what happened to her mother. She was overwhelmed by the welcome she received, airc. That was the first time I heard her story.

5. ms_xeno - 18 April 2007

Chee. Finally had a chance to read colleen’s exchange in full w/Bowers. Feh. The proverbial ship of fools.

XP’s recent Kos piece was also very good, though prolonged Photoshopping is making me squint at everything right now to avoid seeing double or triple.

Again, sorry for the misread/misspeak in the last thread, Mcat.

6. Sabrina Ballerina - 18 April 2007

Damn, should be ‘Gerri Santoro’ –

I really don’t understand why msoc does that, first take a stand, then back down. Especially since the use of the word ‘fuck’ in a diary title is dealt with in a very arbitrary fashion. Eg, last I looked, the ‘What the Fuck is your Problem’ diaries have continued with no problem.

7. missdevore - 18 April 2007

ms_xeno–I blogdrooled you (Remainder Bin) under “Artists and other Irregulars” at Je blague–hope you do not object.

8. ms_xeno - 18 April 2007

Miss D, that’s really nice of ya’. I still don’t have a blogdrool but I was serious about having tons of annual seeds. If you want some in the mail, you know what to do…

9. Sabrina Ballerina - 18 April 2007

Hi ms x – I meant to tell you I loved your artwork – when do we get our viper tee-shirts? 🙂

Finally, some good news:

FBI Raids Rep. Doolittle’s Home

The FBI searched the Virginia home of Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.) last Friday in its investigation into the ties of the congressman and his wife, Julie, to disgraced former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, according to law enforcement and other Congressional and K Street sources.

Doolittle has been under fire for paying his wife’s company, Sierra Dominion, a 15 percent commission on all contributions that the company raised for Doolittle’s campaign committee and leadership PAC. Her only other clients were Abramoff’s former firm, Greenberg Traurig; Abramoff’s former restaurant Signatures; and the Korea-U.S. Exchange Council, which Ed Buckham, a former chief of staff to ex-Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), created.

The Justice Department previously subpoenaed Julie Doolittle’s files.

Doolittle also received contributions from indicted defense contractor Brent Wilkes and his associates, and investigators are probing whether those contributions are linked to any official action Doolittle took to help Wilkes’s company obtain millions of dollars in government earmarks.

This is why they fired Carol Lam, but she got the Wilkes indictment in before she left. Good for her –

Such greedy bastards, all of them. I am so sick of the corruption –

10. missdevore - 18 April 2007


of course I know what to do. pick up “The Bad Seed Catalogue” (remember the movie!) and dial X.

kidding. and we have some collage talk to do. like a cyber “let’s do lunch!”

11. wu ming - 18 April 2007

oh, ms_xeno,

about the last thread’s subthread on third parties:

i was not intending to make a universal case against your actions in particular or third parties in general, so much as making a remark on what i’ve seen of them locally. and it certainly wasn’t intended to put down any local activism, in whatever vessel.

it’s just that back when i was disgusted with the national dems, and checked out the local greens (to say nothing of the local libertarians), i found them to be less impressive than the local dems (actually, most meaningful politics out here takes place within the dem primary, between moderate and progressive factions). i don’t know anything about portland politics, and was not intending to claim so.

12. missdevore - 18 April 2007

mo meta men speak out on abortion at dk:

” I’m not worried about today’s abortion ruling
by james richardson
Wed Apr 18, 2007 at 08:04:07 PM PDT

I’m not worried about today’s abortion ruling. Yes, I know I should be, that I’m supposed to be. I’ve read every elaboration, every review and every warning of things to come I could find. Am I concerned? Sure. But worried? Not really, and here’s why.

* james richardson’s diary :: ::

I’m not worried because it took the pro-lifers 30 years to acheive just this one step. At that rate by the time Roe has been completely reversed human beings won’t even need bodies anymore.

I’m not worried because the next President of the United States is going to be a Democrat and the next Supreme Court nominee is going to be a liberal. All this, and probably a Democratic majority in Congress too.”

ok james, maybe you won’t need your body anymore in your cheery imagined future. there are women who want to remain in possesion of their own bodies, now and in the future.

james, I am getting the sense you are going to steal one of Luscious Vagina’s inflatables from him. if the drama that ensued after his faux outing is any indicator, I cannot imagine the faux cuckhold diary.

13. ms_xeno - 18 April 2007

wu ming, this is clearly my big day to be a lamebrain and then apologize to everyone. I really did appreciate you talking about local politics. Only I was a little crushed to hear about your Mayor because I always think of the CA Greens as having it much more together than the ones up here. Paterson, the guy I did a little stuff for, doesn’t even live here anymore, which was a big disappointment to me. 😦 He was big on progressive taxation to fund local services and got snubbed by the media for it and treated by the local affluent progs as though he had the plague. Really ticked me off.

Meanwhile, our own non-Party mayor, who ran such a promising campaign in ’04 (taking small donations and the like) is busy trying to wrest power from the City Council with the help of the Portland Business Alliance– a bunch of local Babbitts. Arrgh. 😦

I need a giant hot chocolate. With a slug of rum. Everyone place your orders now.

14. colleen - 18 April 2007

I can’t believe Matt banned Colleen!

I don’t know that he banned me. I can log in but cannot comment or rate. I’m kind of amused to have this happen on a completely male blog when the discussion is about my most basic civil rights and dead women. So much for self styled ‘progressives’

15. colleen - 18 April 2007

I’m not worried because it took the pro-lifers 30 years to acheive just this one step. At that rate by the time Roe has been completely reversed human beings won’t even need bodies anymore.

Ooops, someones been watching the sci-fi channel too much.

I’m sure everyone feels so safe and warm with geniuses like this analysing the political scene. Note his grasp of complexities and nuance. It’s like listening to Robert Novak talk about the female orgasm.

16. Madman in the Marketplace - 18 April 2007

I tossed something up on the Democrat’s feeble response, and their enabling of this day. I also posted in it a picture from Ms. Santoro’s daughter’s journal. The link is here.

I don’t have the heart to catch up on all the threads tonight, or read any of the internets. Too much tragedy, too much horror and it’s only going to get worse. I’m dreading this coming campaign. Might as well take a bath in municipal waste … though that would be more sanitary.

17. marisacat - 18 April 2007


maybe you can write for the fp at BMT. The duo there is a huntin’.

I laughed OUT LOUD when I read that.

Madman has a great post up at LSF

and I have the roll call for the 2003 S 3 bill…

Count the god damned fucking Democrats… from Reid to Daschle to Leahy to Bayh to Lincoln to Johnson … 17 of them

I remembered tonight that I posted (comment) at Dkos that I wrote to all 17 due to 4 being in leadership. And the bill being so horrific.

I was pretty much laughed at.. or got the comment equivalent of a stare.

And remember, majority Dem senate approved Clarence. ELEVEN crossed the asile.

Edwards tied it immediately 08 today. They sell out women and minorities and then sell them they can be brought back in.

What a shame. Probably will work in 08 too.

18. Madman in the Marketplace - 18 April 2007

wow, that guy is a fucking idiot.

19. Miss Devore - 18 April 2007

colleen-they’re so cold. first you can’t comment. then you can’t rate. next thang–you’re on another blogroll of the banned!

of course–it depends on the highly individualized policies of the site. maybe you will get a warning letter to sign to acknowledge your sins, before you can walk among the blessed again. mebbe you will be declared dead. mebbe you can never participate at the site, though will be referred to, incessantly.

maybe you will have to settle for silver next to Mcat’s gold medal.

but it will all be ok. because you are among the VAGs.

20. wu ming - 18 April 2007

no need to apologize, although the hot chocolate with rum sounds like a good idea, now that you think of it. the mayor was really a local pol who happened to be a GP member, not really a rising star in any sense. got elected on the local issue of preservation of one neighborhood’s gravel alleyways, didn’t want the city to pave them for whatever reason. most city politics are notoriously belly-button-centric anyways.

the bay area and north coast GP is more together, from what i’ve heard.

i really hope you eventually end up with a mayor that deals with your fascist police department, though. i would love to live up there, but that thought of those cops gives me pause, watching those vids. i suppose it’s the same in most cities, they are all prepping to put down massive urban riots, it seems.

keep fighting the bastards.

21. Miss Devore - 18 April 2007

“It’s like listening to Robert Novak talk about the female orgasm.”

one of the best comments ever made.

22. moiv - 18 April 2007

Sweet baby james is about as clued in as the rest of them. Standing on a pile of women, a reverse image of Lynndie at Abu Ghraib, to get his drivel its moment in the spotlight.

So few people know what the ban actually says (thanks, Mcat, for posting the text in full) that it’s no wonder they fail to see the actual import of the ruling. It’s virtually certain that few understand the ban better than the sponsors of the original 1996 version.

Six staunchly anti-choice U.S. Congressmen including Henry Hyde, Charles Canady and James Sensenbrenner said in a letter dated March 18, 1996 on an earlier version of the bill: “H.R. 1833 does not ban ‘D&X’ or ‘Brain Suction’ abortions…the ban would have the effect of prohibiting any abortion [that meets our definition]…no matter what the abortionist decides to call his particular technique.”

As I commented at LSF, that seems pretty clear to me, though perhaps that’s because I’m not a lawyer.

Much is being made of the language in the ruling that says violation of the law depends upon the doctor’s intention. IOW, if the doctor intends to perform a D&E, but a live fetus just happens to slip out by accident, there’s no violation.

That theoretical tripe about how many PBA’s can dance on the head of a hemostat completely ignores the fact that abortions aren’t performed in the chambers of Supreme Court justices, or in the TV studios of talking head sophists, but in clinics and hospitals.

Where the hell are the doctors who are supposed to take a chance on criminal conviction if a jury decides to believe the “pro-life” scrub nurse instead? And where are those doctors going to be practicing? What hospital would allow any staff physician to risk the hospital’s own liability? I’m already hearing feedback from longtime providers of abortion care in parts of the country much more liberal than mine. And they’re saying “no way, no how.”

Meanwhile, all the faux-legalist philosphers continue to have a fine time blowing smoke, in between taking deep drags on their crack pipes.

Will this ruling effectively end safe, professional abortion care tomorrow? No. But it is a rock-solid precedent for further encroachment at the state level, the place where access to abortion care is truly shut down.

Anyone who believes otherwise need only look to Mississippi, the Dakotas or Alabama—where new state regulations for accreditation of abortion-providing doctors make it practically impossible for any doctor to qualify.

What this decision does do is establish the principle that legislatures may ban any specific procedure that they—not the medical establishment—might deem “never necessary.” And that’s not just a slippery slope, but the beginning of an avalanche.

I might sleep better tonight if somebody would kindly shoot that opinion full of holes for me.

23. missdevore - 18 April 2007

speaking of sleep…..I must slither off, even if the rest of the cool guyVAGs haven’t show up.

and yes, that means Tuston, the paine & BHHM, to mention a few.

24. Sabrina Ballerina - 18 April 2007

Lol, it is a great comment Miss D.

Ms x, hot chocolate and rum, it’s cold here, I’ll have one –

As if there wasn’t enough bad news today, I just read that the Dems have caved again on Iraq. I can’t get the link to work, (will try again later) but now they are ‘compromising’ with the deadline. They are going to make it ‘ADVISORY’!! Wtf! They have a president whose poll numbers barely register, a corrupt administration toppling one by one, Rep. Congressmen in jail, and being raided by the FBI and they need to compromise??

I can’t wait to see what they have to say on DK about this latest capitulation!

Let me guess – ‘this is good politics – the people do not want Dems to be like Bush, unwilling to negotiate or to listen to anyone. This is now Bush’s war. He can end it and when he doesn’t, that will be good for us’ …….

I give up – well, I already gave up on Dems doing anything to stop this war or to stop throwing money at Bush and his cronies. They all want this war – they have NO conscience – the carnage increases while they dither trying to have it both ways, make the people think they are doing something, while keeping their war going. They truly do believe we are stupid.

25. marisacat - 18 April 2007

LOL ONe of the VichyMyDD boyz shook a fist at the DC Dems today about the Democratic collapse over Iraq.

LOL I saw it as I was there to read colleen’s comments.

I guess that is a baby fist with a blue bow on it.

The last three grafs are hilarious.

So let me be very frank. Progressive activists hate it when Democrats talk to the Washington Post about weakening the Iraq bill. It is not ok to keep floating the idea that weakening the bill makes sense. It is not ok to play around with the loyalty of the antiwar progressives who backed you.

The Democratic base does not fully trust the leadership yet. After literally decades of broken promises, the leadership hasn’t earned its stripes yet. They cannot play around with the single most important issue to the base and to the country like it’s a cavalier and trivial matter.

Stop it. Don’t sell us out. Follow the polls. Do what the majority of the country wants, which is to oppose a President everyone hates. It’s pretty simple, and there is literally no reason policy-wise or politically to do anything else.


26. Tuston - 18 April 2007

Now I feel guilty, having failed to manifest in a timely fashion…ah well perhaps manana is another day.

In any case, I suggest we all continue to spark em”:

While smoking marijuana is never good for the lungs, the active ingredient in pot may help fight lung cancer, new research shows.

Harvard University researchers have found that, in both laboratory and mouse studies, delta-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) cuts tumor growth in half in common lung cancer while impeding the cancer’s ability to spread.

The compound “seems to have a suppressive effect on certain lines of cancer cells,” explained Dr. Len Horovitz, a pulmonary specialist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City.


27. liberalcatnip - 18 April 2007

Way too much to catch up on. Re MSOC v kos, it’s pretty damn obvious that hits are more important than anything else to him. Less hits = lower ad prices.

Title (55+ / 1-)

Recommended by:
Devilstower, clonecone, Hunter, RobertInWisconsin, MissLaura, Steven R, shayera, TeresaInPa, rhubarb, DTH, terminal3, guy123, Plutonium Page, Ahianne, perro amarillo, DaveV, anotherCt Dem, Miss Blue, MadEye, kitebro, Iberian, David Boyle, Boris Godunov, xoRfl, cato, tabbycat in tenn, cartwrightdale, Mikecan1978, vcmvo2, 3goldens, pattyp, Elise, newfie, Morrigan, lgmcp, Major Danby, Nightprowlkitty, kraant, rgdurst, CSI Bentonville, ormondotvos, nowheredesign, Dreaming of Better Days, Darrell J Gahm, Joelarama, GoldnI, nhcollegedem, FresnoKossack, Cronesense, LV Pol Girl, gloriana, malharden, Chacounne, Kronos Blue, Rippen Kitten
Trollrated by:
Maryscott OConnor

Here is the message I sent MSOC regarding the title:

You want your site blocked at government sites, libraries, military bases, and schools, that’s your prerogative. I have made a decision to not let that happen with Daily Kos. I’ve asked nicely that people refrain from profanity in titles, saying I don’t care if it’s used in the body of posts. But you have changed back efforts at evading the censorship filters. Please be respectful of the site’s rules. I don’t think it’s too much to ask. kos

If she wants to play the martyr, that’s her prerogative. I don’t think our request was unreasonable.

by kos on Wed Apr 18, 2007 at 02:58:53 PM PDT

He didn’t make any kind of “decision” to ban profanity in titles. Maybe he doesn’t even know what’s in his FAQ: “profanity in titles is strongly discouraged.”

And hunter had to chime in, being the condescending twit that he is:

So fine, now let’s call it a rule, and start banning people for it, since it’s clear that asking nicely for months doesn’t do squat, and asking not-nicely for months doesn’t do squat, and banning people like they’re all four year old children is the only possible thing we ever do that does do anything. One thing I’ve learned with this crowd is that any tiny expressed nuance in any argument is taken as a twenty foot wide gaping hole with a hand-engraved invitation for everyone to come drive their trucks through it — and cheer themselves for their inspirational bravery while doing it. So fine, lesson learned. No damn nuance.

by Hunter on Wed Apr 18, 2007 at 04:00:27 PM PDT

Bullying on parade. “You want something to cry about? I’ll give you something to cry about!”

28. Sabrina Ballerina - 18 April 2007

I just read that thread – what a bunch of wimps. No wonder we cannot get anything done if the DP thinks that the BBB represent the majority of the American people. What a bunch of wimps they are. Not a single person in that thread has any fighting spirit.

Colleen, take it as a compliment if you are banned from that site. What a useless bunch of suck-ups. I have to laugh at what Stoller probably thinks is an expression of outrage as the war rages on. He says – grrrr That’ll show them!

‘Nite, Miss D –

29. Madman in the Marketplace - 18 April 2007

anybody who trusts the Donk leadership is a fucking idiot.

goodnight everybody.

30. Sabrina Ballerina - 18 April 2007

Sorry, I’m so mad I’m repeating myself! It’s going to be up to the rest of us to let these Democrats know what will happen in 2008 if they cave in one more time. Stoller doesn’t get it. He thinks Dems want to end the war, but the big, bad Republicans won’t let them. What naive jerks they are. They just can’t figure out what’s going on after all that’s happened!

Calling my Rep and Senators tomorrow – not that it will do any good to call Clinton or Schumer, but I feel like yelling at someone and it may as well be them.

31. liberalcatnip - 18 April 2007

colleen-they’re so cold. first you can’t comment. then you can’t rate. next thang–you’re on another blogroll of the banned!

That’s exactly what happened to me at BT except that I hadn’t even commented there for I don’t know how long. Then MOB got paranoid because I’m a VAG oops “paparrazi” (whom soj said would be shot if they ended up on his doorstep). First my ability to rate and comment was gone and apparently now my password has been changed without my knowledge (hadn’t bothered to check til tonite).

Poor Booman. As if anything I ever wrote over there was anything close to being a bannable offense like, say, Militarytracy’s frequent crazed meltdowns (she was “suspended” temporarily from commenting after telling super to fuck off and die) or soj’s threat to shoot people (what was all of that oh so recently about blog threats/paranoid rants of school shooters etc etc? soj still enjoys BT’s “privileges”. No big deal) But it’s the scary, mean people here that he really has to worry about.

A trip down memory lane:

The Lord Will Smite

by BooMan
Sat Jul 22nd, 2006 at 11:03:51 PM EST

Forgive me for this but Alan Dershowitz’s children should be hit by a 5000 lb. bomb made by an American military-industrial corporation, sold to Israel, and misfired into his home. Then he can talk to me. I will offer my sincere condolences. Then we will get drunk and talk about relative culpability. I’m sorry Alan. You’re scum. Among the people in history that would gladly bitch-slap you are Jesus, Buddha, Zoroaster, Socrates, Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Jr., John Lewis, Nelson Mendala, Bishop Tutu, Pope John Paul II, and me. We’d all like to smack you for being a prick.

See? Threats of violence – perfectly acceptable.

Strong opinions – bannable.

That’s just the way the boyz operate, colleen.

32. ms_xeno - 18 April 2007

Ugh. wu ming, don’t get me started on the police. 😦 As a new parent you’d probably want to pass on all the school-related blood-letting in these parts, too. >:

33. Tuston - 18 April 2007

I love how Boo Man elevates himself to the level of Zoroaster, Socrates and Pope John Paul II.

Over inflated? nah…

34. Kevin Lynch - 18 April 2007

Sorry for not showing up on time. The picture of Gerri Santoro has affected me deeply. I am particularly ashamed of the boyfriend who left her to die alone. How do they sleep? I can’t. The whole situation is absurd. Why do they want to kill women? What stupid fear of sexuality drives people to do bullshit things like this? It’s more than I want to bear right now.

it’s a nation of bellowing angry bastards, and I’m sick to my stomach


35. bayprairie - 18 April 2007

don’t know that he banned me. I can log in but cannot comment or rate. I’m kind of amused to have this happen on a completely male blog when the discussion is about my most basic civil rights and dead women.

that’s banned in scoop.

as far as the boyos and their ilk giving a shit about women’s reproductive rights, it’s pretty obvious to me it’s not high on the BBB “progressive nutroots” list. and why should it be? myDD is all about priviledged, well-off anglo males playing political chess games, isn’t it? if their lover, or daughter, wants an abortion, they’ll just fly them overseas.

what about the poor women in mississippi though? matt stoler’s concern can be glimpsed in his banning tonight. its just an inconvenient issue they appear to haven’t even bothered to understand.

36. Sabrina Ballerina - 18 April 2007

Correction, Colleen ‘strong opinions from WOMEN!’

God, that Hunter is a first-class jerk. So tough behind his computer screen! He sounds so like all the Rightwingers I encountered when I first went online.

He does project a lot:

One thing I’ve learned with this crowd is that any tiny expressed nuance in any argument is taken as a twenty foot wide gaping hole with a hand-engraved invitation for everyone to come drive their trucks through it — and cheer themselves for their inspirational bravery while doing it. So fine, lesson learned. No damn nuance.

Ooohh, everybody’s quaking in their boots! What a tough guy he is. Yeah, we’re all immature twits like him, trying to get around the rulzz and giggling about it when we succeed. As I said, he projects a lot.

I remember his complete meltdown in one of Opol’s diaries, yelling about banning then too. He and DHinMi! They acted like two lunatics. They went crazy because someone dared post a liberal pov.

This is how they view the members of that site ‘this crowd’. In their delusionary state they think they are above everyone else. Their disrespect for people will eventually do them in. It’s probably the primary reason why their ratings are sinking.

And btw, I checked that filter kos is talking about a while ago and entered a few different blogs. Democraticunderground got through and they are not shy about using profanity, but Daily Kos did not. Maybe some real Liberals operate the filter system – that would be a hoot.

37. liberalcatnip - 18 April 2007

Almost all women who have abortions do so because, essentially, they recognize the necessity of being good mothers, and that having a child (or another child) right now will undermine the welfare of themselves and their existing or future families. That is the true morality behind the abortion decision – the biological imperative to be a good mother – as well as the fundamental need to control one’s own body and life (which is not an abstract right, but a sociobiological instinct).

Amen to that.

38. liberalcatnip - 18 April 2007

but it will all be ok. because you are among the VAGs.

The BEGONEd. (yet another good name for a band)

39. liberalcatnip - 18 April 2007

McCain: Why yes indeed, I’m deliberately setting myself up to the most most obtuse presidential candidate ever. Someone of Bush’s stature must be found to replace him, obviously:

In a speech Wednesday to a crowd of 400, McCain was unequivocal in support of the right to bear arms.

“I do not believe we should tamper with the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States,” he said. A woman shouted that George Washington’s troops used muskets, not automatic weapons.

“I hope that we can find better ways of identifying people such as this sick young man so that we can prevent them from not only taking action with guns but with knives or with anything else that will harm their fellow citizens,” McCain said.

McCain reiterated that later with reporters.

“I strongly support the Second Amendment and I believe the Second Amendment ought to be preserved — which means no gun control,” McCain said.

Yay guns! Arm the babies! Kill more people in Iraq and Afghanistan! Yay!

40. D. Throat - 19 April 2007

its just an inconvenient issue they appear to haven’t even bothered to understand.

They REFUSE to understand…Bowers called Lieberman a GENIOUS for neutering the filibuster… now Stoller is blaming an unelected NGO… they are all creeps. Poor McJoan and Elise were sent out on aisle cleanup duty… because MSOC’s diary was edited by Kos then deleted…. other wise as Elise rightly said ” I have nothing to say”

Take that jackass Booman… he had the majority of real feminists take refuge on his blog… now today the fucking idiot is pretending he hasn’t a clue what the issue is…

What is the most disingenious about Booshit is that he makes it seem that only women can possbly understand women’s issues… because God knows that Booshit never had any strong pro choice voices on his blog… lying twat.

Open Thread

by BooMan
Wed Apr 18th, 2007 at 08:41:54 PM EST

Steven and I have been looking for a female front-pager for Booman Tribune for over a year. We haven’t been able to find anyone that meets all of the requirements and, at the same time, will agree to post here. And the requirements are not that easy to meet…you have to be prolific, you have to be outstanding, and you have to have some kind of political affinity with this community. Today is a day when I really feel the consequences of our failure.

Maybe he should hire Elise., Ablington..or Nightprowlkitty… real feminismsists.

41. liberalcatnip - 19 April 2007

(last comment from me tonite)

Hunter is on a rampage:

Enough. (4+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
livosh1, Bouwerie Boy, zemblan, Runs With Scissors

I’m tired of cleaning up your sockpuppets. If banning you for the dozenth time or so time doesn’t work, I’m going to start banning your friends who apparently keep encouraging you to do this.

I’m serious, I’m tired of you screwing around with everyone on this site and thinking it’s OK or just some living room game. The entirety of the Israel-Palestine conflict is NOT going to be fought in miniature and by proxy on Daily Kos, and certainly not by continually banned members, and if that means that this entire subject becomes off limits merely because of an unending stream of constant sockpuppets, then maybe that’s just what needs to happen.

I’m not going to keep cleaning up after you. Your entire side of the argument is in danger of being removed en masse because of you and several other constant sockpuppets who apparently dedicated your lives to feuling it. The next time I remove you, I may very well remove some of the people who consistently recommend your posts too, and you can debate with them on your own damn site as to whether or not it was a bright idea for you to keep coming here.

by Hunter on Wed Apr 18, 2007 at 01:13:49 PM PDT

Got a problem with sockpuppets? Just ban one side of the I/P debate – the “P” side, predictably. Problem solved.

Is it time for yet another GBCW diary by Hunter?

Rage, retreat, rage, retreat. Lather, rinse, repeat. Pretty constant pattern for the usual suspects over there, except for DHinMI who is just a rageaholic all the time.

42. Sabrina Ballerina - 19 April 2007

Great, so McCain doesn’t want to tamper with the 2nd Amendment – I haven’t heard him complain about Bush tampering with the rest of the Constitution. If I had been there I would have asked him how felt about that.

That MSOC diary is a riot. They are out in force, like little kids itching for a fight. And, Marisacat and hrh were even invoked:

The biggest favor anyone could do is ignore this bs
and it would stop. This whole situation has gotten worse than the hrh hatefest. Yesterday would be too soon as far as I am concerned for MSOC to be banned. She has demonstrated in every way for the last year that she wants nothing more than to try to tear Markos down while he totally leaves her alone.

In fact, MSOC has become Marisicat. They both are filled with the same negative, hateful, nasty self and other directed hatred. Does Fox need another dustup to report in the left blogesphere? MSOC johnny on the spot to help with the Fox ratings as long as she can pat herself on the back and pretend she did something that mattered.


WWYTR? “Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into a friend” MLK

by PaintyKat on Wed Apr 18, 2007 at 09:56:29 PM PDT

Irony really is dead on dk. PaintyKat spews hatred at msoc (the post is much longer, filled with hateful diatribe) even ‘gasp’ comparing her to the ‘nasty’ Marisacat and hrh! But check out her sigline! Rotfl!


And then there’s this:

Just a quick point, Hunter, (8+ / 0-)

Recommended by:Catrina, eugene, Buckeye BattleCry, Carnacki, DMiller, kraant, I, bricoleur

I’ve been posting here quite regularly for almost a year and a half and just now, reading your comment, is the very first time I have ever heard that the FPers’ were changing recommended diaries titles that were using profanity.

Perhaps being a little more upfront about your policies, perhaps using full disclosure, would help keep these dustups to a minimum. The FAQ’s, up to an hour ago, clearly do not state that this is policy, to refrain from using profanity in diary titles. The FAQ’s state that it is suggested that profanity not be used. I understand the reasoning behind that suggestion.

What I don’t understand is how it can be both a suggestion and a rule, but only for some and not for others.

Just a thought. I’m somewhat troubled by some of what I see going on here lately, including your other comment that you are about to ban anyone that rec’s a pro-Palestinian diary. I stay out of most of the I/P diaries, but I find it incredibly troubling that you are appointing yourself the censor of this blog and its content.

I hope that is not the case.

“No one can terrorize a whole nation, unless we are all his accomplices.” Edward R. Murrow

by Pager on Wed Apr 18, 2007 at 04:11:16 PM PDT

Pager doesn’t realize that they manipulate that site all the time. Being up front is what they will never be –

43. D. Throat - 19 April 2007


44. Sabrina Ballerina - 19 April 2007

Just saw your post, Catnip. I had already posted pager’s comment re the Palestinian bannings. Hunter should stay away from the computer, the guy is way too thin-skinned for the Internet. But yes, he will toss out Palestinian supporters only, using the ‘sock-puppet’ excuse. Presumably he’s talking to someone who is supportive of basic human rights, and who is willing to fight for that. Which is why he keeps getting banned.

DK does not want to touch the I/P issue, cowards all of them. Liberals or Progressives they are not and like the pathetic party they work for, they dare not even give the appearance of not supporting the extreme, radical Israeli faction. Human rights be damned!

45. lucidculture - 19 April 2007

Haven’t read the thread yet, getting back from a gig… wrote a random poem that really like…

Random Poem

Kinda sums up the last few days somehow…

slithering into sleep vipes… I’m sure you can appreciate that.


46. D. Throat - 19 April 2007

Now would be a good time for some of the strong female voices in this community to speak up and help me understand all the issues related to this decision. [Now??? fuck you Boo] I am a staunch defender of a woman’s right to choose, and I have always considered the partial-birth abortion issue to be a phony issue. But I am neither a lawyer nor an expert on reproductive issues. Whether you want to leave a comment, or do a diary with more comprehensive treatments, please weigh in and help me understand what this decision really means and what consequences it will have.

Who does Boo think he is kidding?

Abortion is morally wrong

I don’t think (4.00 / 3)
you can dismiss the moral issue quite as easily as saying it is none of anyone’s business.

What Roe essentially says is that the state has an interest in protecting unborn babies (whether embryos, fetuses, or blastocysts). Balanced against that is a presumed right to privacy that each individual is granted by the constitution.

Roe basically makes a semi-arbitrary, semi-scientific sliding scale of when those two rights have priority.

Now, Roe doesn’t talk about it, but it comes down to this. In the first trimester many pregnancies are lost and no procedure is even needed. By the second trimester a lost baby is much rarer and will also require a procedure. By the third trimester, babies may be viable outside the womb.

From a purely enforcement point of view, there is no way to enforce a prohibition on abortion in the first trimester without creating a police state. Therefore Roe says the right to privacy is only supreme in the first trimester.

Thus, arguing from the case, you could say that it is none of anyone’s business in the first trimester, but it is someone’s business after.

If your mother had aborted you the day before you were born, I doubt too many people would judge that as none of anyone’s business.

So, the problem is moral and practical.

However, my biggest problem with Tom’s argument applies equally to his appeal to veganism. Birth control and the presumption of female choice makes no sense in Africa, or most of the Muslim world. Starving Somalians will be unimpressed to appeals to veganism. These moral judgments are the luxuries of an affluent society.

And our society is still not uniformly affluent enough to make those moral judgments fair even here.

Visit the Booman Tribune ActBlue page
by BooMan on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 12:27:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

The biggest argument is (4.00 / 6)
that Tom Kertes posted the same diary at Kos and at nearly 300 posts never showed his face once.

I don’t want to bother to state what that makes this, ah, excercise, but anyone intelligent can figure it out.
by Marisacat (Marisacat@aol.com) on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 02:31:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: booman you are wrong (4.00 / 4)
Birth control and the presumption of female choice makes no sense in Africa, or most of the Muslim world.

Booman, that is patently untrue. Where do you get this stuff, from Rush Limbaugh?

A women’s reproductive system and how it works has been of importance to all women from all societies since the dawn of woman.

Women from every culture since time began have looked to control their own bodies. Women been trying to stop unwanted pregnancies but like many things to do with physicality until recently, it was not discussed openly. Women did this alone and as society evolved they began to network with each other for help. It was also difficult to discuss openly because when a woman chooses not to have a baby she takes control of the situation and men have always wanted control of everything, including women. Sadly, they still do and I for one will not sit by idly while others try to do this to them.

Unwanted pregnancies are as old as woman and man themselves, we have not invented this, it’s always been there and always will be. What arrogance to think it’s only recent and affluent societies who experience basic human nature.
by wilfred on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 12:55:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think you completely (4.00 / 2)
inverted the meaning of my post.

So, I will spell it out.

On order to pass moral judgment on a women for getting pregnant, there has to be a presumption that the woman had some choice in the matter.

First she has to be free to accept or reject sexual intercourse. A woman does not have the right to accept or reject sexual intercourse in much of Africa and much of the Muslim world, because she is either dependent on a man for survival, or because the law says that her husband has the right to have sex whenever he pleases, or because the laws are weak and not enforced.

Second, there is a presumption that a woman can overcome pressures or her own desires by using contraception. But contraception is not readily available everywhere, it is not foolproof, and it there are strong taboos against using it in many places.

Tom’s post makes a modicum of sense in a society where women can support themselves, there are strong laws that are enforced that protect her from submitting to unwanted sex, and birth control is readily available. But it makes no sense in Africa, where none of those things are true.

Therefore, it is a moral position that is only possible in an affluent society with equal right.

And even then, if fails to note that contraception is not foolproof, that coerced sex often takes place in dependent relationships, etc.

Visit the Booman Tribune ActBlue page
by BooMan on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 01:56:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]


I think (none / 1)
his argument is weak, and I don’t know why he didn’t participate in the comments.

However, the fact that he sees abortion as morally questionable, and wrong in many instances, is his opinion to have.

Remember that he doesn’t want to criminalize it, but to help make it unnecessary.

If we wanted to we could give every 10 year old girl the implant birth control. And she could remove the implants at such a time that she wished to have children.

Everyone once in a while the implants would fail, and some provision would have to be made for that.

Yet, under such a system we could begin to say that a woman’s pregnancy is her responsibility alone.

I say this not to advocate for a policy of forced temporary sterilization, but to point out that you would have to go that route to even begin to hold women to Tom’s standard of morality.

Visit the Booman Tribune ActBlue page
by BooMan on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 02:17:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I see your point (none / 0)
but you’re still wrong.

My nephew was a fetus that was born at six and half months. He had brain-bleeding, was in an incubator for weeks, and now is a fully normal kid with no obvious learning disabilities.

You simply can’t say he isn’t/wasn’t a person the moment before he was born, or now.

As you know, I am a very strong supporter of Roe, but I don’t dismiss the issue of abortion as none of anyone’s business. That’s wishful thinking.

You can’t make the moral quandary go away with a sweep of the hand.

For me, I don’t try to resolve the issue morally. I don’t think it can be done. Instead, I have resolved the issue pragmatically. There is no way to enforce a prohibition on first trimester abortions that won’t require a police state level of intrusion into the woman/doctor relationship. Furthermore, these types of laws discourage doctors from getting the training they need to deal with the death of a fetus, or the need to abort a baby with severe/fatal abnormalities, or to perform abortions to save the life/fertility of the mother, or in cases of rape/incest.

It’s bad policy. It hurts women’s health and access to adequate medical care. It hurts their ability to pay for that medical care.

Just as Roe says, the right to privacy trumps the interest of the state in protecting unborn babies through the full first trimester. But by the third trimester, the state’s interest can trump the privacy interest.

To abort a baby that can live outside the womb is a totally different thing. Surely you can see that. I would not support that unless there was a medical reason for either the baby or the mother. But surely not as a just a choice.

So, once again, this issue is complicated, morally troubling, and impossible to reach a consensus on.

I think the current law is just about right in terms of what is legal. But we should be doing more to help women avoid unwanted pregnancies, increase the level of pre-natal care, improve our adoption procedures, improve access to qualified doctors who can perform abortions, improve education about birth control and STD’s, etc.

Visit the Booman Tribune ActBlue page
by BooMan on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 03:26:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

again, yes I can (4.00 / 4)
Your brother/sister defined your nephew as a person by doing what was needed to bring him into this world. Their choice. THEY MADE HIM A “PERSON.”

Other parents would have made other choices, and they have every right to do so.

So, once again, this issue is complicated, morally troubling, and impossible to reach a consensus on.

Which is why this ISN’T a question for the state. The general boundaries reached by RvW are as close as we’re ever going to get to a consensus. What diaries like this one does is give cover to the idea that there is more of a consensus than there is, which is the same reason I HATE the Clinton formulation of “safe, legal and rare.” Safe and legal is enough. It’s up to individual women and their doctors to decide how rare it is. I agree w/ your last paragraph, but dishonest faux screeds like this diary help empower people who will make those goals HARDER to reach, not easier. This site is being used to push the 95/10 Initiative, a campaign which will actually erode women’s health care access, not improve it, by enshrining terrible Jane Crow laws like:

Require Adoption Referral Information
Require pregnancy centers and women’s health centers that provide pregnancy counseling and that receive federal funding to provide adoption referral information.

Women’s Right to Know
Any women’s health center or clinic that provides pregnancy counseling or abortion services must provide accurate information on abortion and the adverse side effects to a woman’s health. Patients do not have to accept the materials if they do not want them.

“Whenever a Voice of Moderation addresses liberals, its sole purpose is to stomp out any real sign of life.” – James Wolcott
by Madman in the Marketplace on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 03:40:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Then (none / 0)
let’s leave this diarist aside, and focus on the issue as we see it.

Visit the Booman Tribune ActBlue page
by BooMan on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 04:06:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Then (4.00 / 4)
but what is being done with this diary IS an important issue.

There is a foul push coming from the national party to accept groups like Democrats for Life as legitimate partners in the party, and this diary is an attempt to help “sell” that idea. We’re being played by politicians pushing an agenda that is bad for our country, bad for our base and especially bad for women in general.

The motives behind screeds like this matter.

“Whenever a Voice of Moderation addresses liberals, its sole purpose is to stomp out any real sign of life.” – James Wolcott
by Madman in the Marketplace on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 04:45:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Fine (none / 1)
the motives matter. But there is a difference between opposing Tom’s views and seeing him as some nefarious mole. Prove it.

Secondly, I don’t believe it is a good idea to reject anyone who feels abortion is morally wrong but doesn’t support criminalization.

If they support criminalization, then yes, get lost. But that is not Tom’s position.

Do you reject people that think the death penalty is okay in certain circumstances, or, conversely, that it is never acceptable?

People have different views on important moral questions. I disagree with Tom’s argument, but I have no interest in pushing him out of the party, or off this website just because he holds his opinions.

If you can prove to me that he doesn’t really hold his opinions but is just being paid to make his arguments, then I’ll agree he is a troll. For now, I think we’ve had a good debate here, which is what I want. At DailyKos everyone would have been flamed and down-rated. Here we had a mostly civil debate.

Visit the Booman Tribune ActBlue page
by BooMan on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 04:55:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

all I have (none / 1)
is circumstantial indications (which I highlighted in the earlier comment) and his posting history.

I don’t think this is the same as the death penalty question. Asserting that the state has the right to impede the freedom of a citizen when they’ve done nothing wrong is indefensible. That is what the anti-woman activists are trying to do. If a person has a moral objection to abortion, but feels it should be legal, what is to be gained by pushing their opinion on immorality? I think most wars are indefensible, but I respect soldiers. I don’t look at them and say, “hey, I support you, but you’re a baby killer. Not that there is anything wrong with that.”

I think this has been a good discussion. I’m glad that you and Susan built and hold this place together. However, just please remember that, even though you’re not a party activist, this is an increasingly important site, and you will be getting more and more pressure to help move the party’s message. I can’t prove it, but I’m convinced this diary is one such attempt.

Thanks for listening to my lectures.

“Whenever a Voice of Moderation addresses liberals, its sole purpose is to stomp out any real sign of life.” – James Wolcott
by Madman in the Marketplace on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 05:05:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not a party activist? (none / 1)
I don’t know where you get that.

I may not work FOR the party in the sense that they pay me, but I am a party activist and have been for at least 5 years.

This site is a Democratic site. I just don’t have a policy of exluding non-Democrats or enforcing orthodoxy. And I don’t want people disrespected for holding heretical views.

You LSF folks are indeed fighters. And you are great debaters. I love having you here. But, you have to respect my desire to show respect. If Tom were spouting off Hannity talking points I would savage him myself, but he’s not. His argument has some flaws, but it also has food for thought.

Debating him educates us just as much as his message peddling pushes an agenda we don’t agree with.

Madman, my rules are the reason this thread didn’t devolve into flamethrowing, despite several instigative posts. Where are the down ratings? See any?

There are benefits to my approach.

Visit the Booman Tribune ActBlue page
by BooMan on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 06:02:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

indeed (none / 0)
and I appreciate it the tone here. Very much. I’m just afraid that posts like this one will derail it.

“Whenever a Voice of Moderation addresses liberals, its sole purpose is to stomp out any real sign of life.” – James Wolcott
by Madman in the Marketplace on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 07:32:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

WTF???? (4.00 / 2)
But by the third trimester, the state’s interest can trump the privacy interest.

Oh please do not bring up the partial birth abortion strawman…

The only third term abortions are when the mother life is in danger or the child is non viable

Boo I am really disappointed… do you really believe that women CHOOSE to have abortions in the 7 , 8 and 9th month???

Let’s beat the Republicans by by electing our own… Republicans.
by Parker on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 03:41:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

actually Parker (4.00 / 2)
Roe does use that language … that there is a sliding scale of state interest, which becomes more and more compelling as the pregnancy advances. That’s what made the “partial birth” spin so deadly: it uses the framework within Roe to push the idea that the state can insert itself into women’s decisions more aggressively than had been accepted up to that point when that horrible bill was signed into law.

“Whenever a Voice of Moderation addresses liberals, its sole purpose is to stomp out any real sign of life.” – James Wolcott
by Madman in the Marketplace on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 04:48:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I didn’t mention (none / 0)
partial-birth abortion.

I said that the according to Roe, the state’s interest in protecting unborn babies, or whatever you want to call them, can be asserted over an presumption of privacy. That’s what Roe says.

So, even under the law, the right to choose is not absolute. And, I agree with that.

Parker, all I’m doing is pointing out that there is a moral issue involved that is more complicated than saying ‘it is none of your business’. Roe doesn’t say that. Roe says, effectively, that the state’s interest doesn’t trump the privacy interest until the third trimester, and it is squishy on the second trimester, effectively allowing for some regulation by the state.

So, if that is the law, the law says it IS the state’s interest, but that interest is not absolute. It says women have a right to privacy, but that right is not absolute.

I’m just critiquing Madman’s argument as overly simplistic. In the end, I think we agree on what the law and policy should be, or nearly so.

Visit the Booman Tribune ActBlue page
by BooMan on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 04:00:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I didn’t mention (none / 0)
partial-birth abortion ARE late term abortions

It says women have a right to privacy, but that right is not absolute.

No one here said it was absolute

Let’s beat the Republicans by by electing our own… Republicans.
by Parker on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 04:16:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not the point (none / 0)
the point is that the law says the state has an interest. Sometimes that interest is not sufficient to allow the state to regulate, and other times it is. That’s the law.

Therefore, under the law, you can’t say ‘it’s none of anyone’s business’. You can only say, ‘your interest is not sufficient to overwhelm the woman’s interest’.

Again, this is how the law is currently constructed.

Now, in the arguments for Roe, Roe insisted her right was absolute until birth. That was rejected. Some people agree with her position, and Madman seems to be approaching that position.

But, I don’t agree with it. Does that mean I oppose partial-birth abortion? No. Under Roe the states have the right to outlaw abortion in the third trimester unless there are certain circumstances. Partial-birth abortions for mere choice don’t happen, and never have (except in illegal circumstances). There are always some attendent circumstances, like the health of the mother, or severe retardation or birth defects, or some disease.

So, there was never a need for a law prohibiting partial-birth abortion, and I view it as nothing but a faux-issue, and a wedge.

Visit the Booman Tribune ActBlue page
by BooMan on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 04:32:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

A little off point … (none / 1)
..but could you please stop saying “partial birth abortion”? “Late term abortion” isn’t correct either, and while it’s not as egregiously awful as “PBA,” it still carries deceptive connotations of abortion performed near full term — which is why the antis like it almost as much as “PBA.” Abortion performed beyond the second trimester simply is called “late abortion.”

And while we all know what we “think we mean” by those terms, they aren’t synonyms, either. The “PBA” Ban makes no reference at all to the length of pregnancy, indeed criminalizing many pre-viability procedures. And anti-choice factions frequently use “late term abortion” to refer to any abortion performed after the second trimester.

Getting down off the soapbox now. 😉

We can help the Lilith Fund provide equal access for the women of Texas
by moiv on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 05:59:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Whoa Diane (none / 0)
there is a world of difference between believing in a soul (an idea that has no currency in neuroscience, and almost no credibility in the philosophy of science) and being indifferent to the value of life.

In fact, not believing in a soul makes killing somone a much bigger transgression. After all, if you are truly snuffing out someone’s existence then you are more responsible than if you are only sending them to a better place.

Visit the Booman Tribune ActBlue page
by BooMan on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 08:56:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Whoa Diane (none / 0)
there is a world of difference between believing in a soul (an idea that has no currency in neuroscience, and almost no credibility in the philosophy of science) and being indifferent to the value of life.

In fact, not believing in a soul makes killing somone a much bigger transgression. After all, if you are truly snuffing out someone’s existence then you are more responsible than if you are only sending them to a better place.

Visit the Booman Tribune ActBlue page
by BooMan on Tue Aug 23rd, 2005 at 08:56:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

47. Madman in the Marketplace - 19 April 2007

So, I didn’t surf much yesterday, but this morning I find this obit of Kurt Vonnegut on Faux “News”. It has got to be one of the most disrespectful, distorted, slanted and dishonest things I’ve ever seen.

48. Madman in the Marketplace - 19 April 2007

there is a gun zealot on CNN this morning arguing for more guns, arguing against Rep McCarthy’s bill to update the background check system in this country (including making sure that being committed for mental illness, like the VT shooter was) makes its way into the national gun database.

Some Americans scare the shit out of me.

49. Madman in the Marketplace - 19 April 2007

LOL … Marisacat is the Gorgon of the kosoverse. Look upon her words and be turned to stone!

50. missdevore - 19 April 2007

morning to the VAGosphere.

I had strange dreams filled with mice, dogs, and finallly, an elephant that was walking a tightwire, which was accidentally charged, making the elephant fall (this was inside a house) , and when it got up, start heading for the front door. quick thinker that I am, I shouted to make sure the elephant didn’t get out the door, and in fact ran to shut the door.

maybe this is a prophetic dream about abu gonzales testimony today.

if it turns out that way, can I get a prize?

51. marisacat - 19 April 2007

Thanks for all of that DT (sorry you were in Moderation, the number of lines in the comment did it)…

Yes I remember Tom Kertes, quite the operative. Previously Liberation Learning. And I remember that diary.

Oh yes Martin is so kind to womyns. And no women in the US are trapped as they are in Africa. Not a one. And thus Kertes, an asshole, may lecture on morality. From a simple and rather base belief in gawd.

AND What WOULD we do without poor Africa to colonise, use, starve, plunder, foist disease and wars upon and make assessments about in order to lecture to American women. Where would we be…

Luvved that comparison.

He sounds a lot like Roberts in the oral argument to this ruling, back in October. Very desirous of inserting himself between women as patients and their doctor.

Invasive, in a word.

52. marisacat - 19 April 2007

Anyway it is a waste of time to discuss Roe, since ’92 we live under Casey (whose son must run for Gov of PA, as a containment application!) and the rule of “undue burden”. Nothing has ever been found to be an undue burden. Carhart, an abortion doc, was on the news last night. For years, he has filed immediately against any legislation, bill etc that does not admit for health of the mother.

Over now.

To deny women and their doctors a medical procedure is not an “undue burden”.

To consider the health of the mother to be as nothing, is deadly.

And the Democrats are THRILLED. They will sell this as they sold the SC for two decades. They will sell this as they sold Social Security for decades tho many would sell it out as fast as Republcans.

Edwards IMMEDIATELY tied this in his public statement to the presidency. And I don’t believe either Edwards or Obama in their public statements. (posted in the previous thread).

The Democrats are licking their chops. Drooling grease from their lips..

And one woman assured Martin last night that anyone can write on mere “issues”. And she sure does not, she said, watch those silly womyns channels.

Love it… abortion issues, life and death, are like Lifetime Channel.

When Kertes, an operative, posted that incredibly offensive diary (he did a series as I recall, LOL), i suggested that moiv and Kertes have a point counterpoint on Martin’s Holy FP.

You can bet he did not go for that one.

53. supervixen - 19 April 2007

Hello all you Vipers! I have a pack of relatives infesting, um, I mean visiting our place this week so I haven’t had time to comment on the recent events. Just thought I’d go over to MyDD (never been there before) and back up Colleen in her “kicking against the pricks”:

Re: In Honor of the the Dead Women to Come (none / 0)

“Catholic Democrat”? “Vatican controlled”?

Woh, don’t know where the Catholic stuff came from (Reid is Mormon and Emmanuel is Jewish), but whatever. Also, don’t attack Matt and claim he hasn’t done much. He was one of Lieberman’s biggest critics when the guy tried to make it harder for women to get abortions (making them drive a few more hours), and has been extremely supportive of the pro-choice movement, merely believing that the current single issue groups have not done nearly enough in recent times. Also, I’m gonnna call troll here, because when you do nothing but bash liberals, even saying the Democratic Party doesn’t represent women, it is difficult for me to take your seriously.

by JewishJake on Wed Apr 18, 2007 at 07:54:46 PM EST
[ Parent | Reply to This | none123 ]

[new] Re: In Honor of the the Dead Women to Come (none / 0)

Um, she was talking about the Supreme Court.

There are 5 Catholics on the Court, two Jews, an Episcopalian, and a Protestant.

The decision was 5-4, with the Catholics in the majority and the rest in the minority.

Coincidence? I think not.

In case you hadn’t noticed, the Catholic Church is the biggest enemy of womens’ reproductive rights (and women’s rights in general) and doesn’t hesitate to pull political strings.

by hrh on Thu Apr 19, 2007 at 09:55:14 AM EST

54. colleen - 19 April 2007

SV, Thanks. I could not reply to the guy with reading comprehension problems and Matt didn’t have the stones to admit he had banned me (I assume for mentioning his friend Markos’s anti-choice stance )

If, in reply to this, you could tell Latts

American Catholics, after all, aren’t generally fanatical, and statistically use birth control & abort at about the same rates as the rest of the population.

that the problem lies with the hierarchy, not the laity and the laity do not make policy. Besides, women have no say at all in the formation of the political and moral stances of the RCC. And the hierarchy are fanatical as are the 5 Catholic SCOTUS justices.

Of course you might be banned yourself for being ‘anti-Catholic’ but it’s the plain and indisputable truth.

55. marisacat - 19 April 2007

I also read your first comment colleen. You clearly called Matt, MATT.

You referred to Markos farther down… but you addressed him as Matt.

Wee boyz.


BTW, there is a shrink on ABC saying Don’t blame the school… blame NBK.

That will get us a long way.

Now he says it is like the Palestinian children who make themselves into icons.

Whooo EE.

Sorry, INVOLUNTARY committ by a magistrate is a long way from going for help, yourself.

56. wilfred - 19 April 2007

Wednesday was yet another reminder than women, gays and minorities still ride in the back of the bus in America.

And just reading Hunter’s tripe at Dkos reminds me of why i’m not there anymore. That and the fact that DH abused his former FP status by taking away my rating ability because i gave him a well-deserved zero and then banned me with Hunter’s help.

Sick little fucks.

57. marisacat - 19 April 2007

Madman popped me this last evening. Gerri’s daughter’s home page at DU.

58. Miss Devore - 19 April 2007

{waves to svix}

overheard on the radio as I was heading out–some interviews with bay area obstetricians et. al. about the new ruling. some saying they will not change because the law has.(doctors who will be criminalized) other’s a bit snarkier–saying sometimes when you are in the middle of surgery it is difficult to stop and call a lawyer to ask if what you are doing is legal.

goddess, I hate the enormous ignorance of some, and the astonishing arrogance of others.and all the other moralizing morons who so wanted to keep Terry Schiavo alive, but who will, without hesitation condemn a healthy mother to death, in their fetus fetish frenzy. well, boxer & feinstein are not pleased, but I’ll have to see what they plan to do other than expressing displeasure.

59. supervixen - 19 April 2007

So let him ban me for telling the truth. What else is new…

the problem lies with the hierarchy, not the laity and the laity do not make policy.

I have a problem with a lot of the laity, too – the ones who believe the hierarchy’s tripe and go along with it.

If they didn’t go along with the hierarchy they might as well turn Protestant. Let them all be UUs.

60. marisacat - 19 April 2007

DiFI will grab TV time and do nothing. And I don’t think Barbara will do a lot, either.

It is part of the hideous injection of religion (and not anything real, but what I call The Power Grid of Religion) into medicine, science and privacy.

I don’t see Democrats doing a damned thing but use it for elections.

Remember Edwards and his big bold statement yesterday, has a big Catholic as his camp manager (the poltiical manager I mean) Bonior.

Dems in their beds snoozing and ordering take out. Same as always.

Or LOL banning colleen and calling for a wymyns division FPer…

61. marisacat - 19 April 2007

The laity keep forking over their children to the church. By now it is just ritual sexual sacrifice. Too much is known.

62. marisacat - 19 April 2007

…women, gays and minorities still ride in the back of the bus in America. – wilfred

Oh wilfred. You must be wrong. Just read a piece in the BAR, Bay Area Reporter. They want you. And yours. Really.

They are releasing Gay Lists of Donors.

LOL I say early days in the primary battles. The ditching comes later.

The race for the Democratic presidential nomination has an unusual feature this time around:

A battle of the gay lists. And, early campaign finance reports released this week suggest another battle is brewing for gay dollars.

In the battle for dollars inside heavily gay neighborhoods, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-New York) appears to be faring best overall, especially in Boston, Los Angeles, New York, and South Beach. But Illinois Senator Barack Obama leads in heavily gay neighborhoods in San Francisco and Washington, D.C.

In nine Zip code areas with well-known heavily gay neighborhoods in six cities, including San Francisco’s Castro District,

Clinton took in 51 percent of contributions made to the top three Democrats, according to first quarter financial reports made available by the Federal Elections Commission this week.

Obama raked in 39 percent, and former North Carolina Senator John Edwards 10 percent. (This initial examination looked at the records of only the top three polling candidates in each party. Among Republicans, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani led with 61 percent, followed by former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney with 26 percent and Arizona Senator John McCain with 13 percent.)

You don’t feel all that Democratic luv? No?

63. Miss Devore - 19 April 2007

you mean senator gone insane? (from raw story):

“Speaking at Murrells Inlet VFW Hall in South Carolina, McCain was asked when he thought that the US Military might “send an air mail message to Tehran.”

“McCain began his answer by changing the words to a popular Beach Boys song,” the Georgetown Times reports.

“‘Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran,’ he sang to the tune of Barbara Ann,” the paper notes.”

64. aemd - 19 April 2007

“Remember Edwards and his big bold statement yesterday”

And his non-vote, along with those other presidential wannabes Kerry and Biden, on the 2003 law. He sure as hell didn’t take a stand then. Didn’t want any of those nasty women’s rights staining his never-ending campaign for CIC. The guy was useless as a Senator. What a mess.

65. marisacat - 19 April 2007

WASHINGTON – April 18, 2007 —

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., took no position on two of the hottest social issues in America today — guns and abortion — in a week when those subjects were brought before the public in quite compelling ways.

Asked about this morning’s historic and unprecedented decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold a state ban on an abortion procedure, Pelosi — longtime backer of abortion rights — said, “This is an issue I need to review.” Reid immediately changed the subject to the prevention of unwanted pregnancies. “That’s what it brings to my mind,” Reid said.

Two days after the slaughter of 32 innocents on the campus of Virginia Tech by a shooter with two handguns, Pelosi demurred on whether Congress was in any mood to examine gun control laws.

“The mood in Congress is one of mourning, sadness and the inadequacy of our words” to help the bereaved, Pelosi said.

Welcome to the Democratic Party 2.0. After years in the political wilderness — President Bush in the White House, Republican majorities in the House and Senate — Democrats are wary of engaging in hot-button social issues such as the “3 G’s” — guns, God and gays. [snip snap]

Jake Tapper, ABC

Just give us your cash and then your vote and STFU, stuff a pie in your mouth and then STFU again.

66. marisacat - 19 April 2007



this is who did not vote when S 3 came up on the senate floor (roll call is linked above):

Biden (D-DE)

Edwards (D-NC)

Kerry (D-MA)

67. aemd - 19 April 2007

LOL. Let’s not forget good ole “Give those sluts Hell” Harry. You’d think ole spine of iron there would jump at the chance to defend his “yea” vote instead of changing the subject.

68. marisacat - 19 April 2007

And the Clintons say jack shit about Bill’s veto back in 97 or 98 (forget which) of the earlier bill from congress… One of the few good things he did (its a short list).

And the thing is they know better, they KNOW what is happening now. Hillary’s own OB-GYN [when they lived] in AR is one of the most out there (verbally) abortion docs.

His name slips my mind at the moment. WIll see if I can resuscitate the name. His comments on abortion are priceless. (thanks to moiv)


Here he is, Harrison.. an interview with him, Martin Bashir of ABC.

69. marisacat - 19 April 2007

LAT via SJ Nercury News, here is a snip

Court uses its `voice’

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, speaking for the court, said the government may not forbid abortion outright, but it “may use its voice and its regulatory authority” to dissuade women from ending pregnancies. The ban on “partial-birth abortions” will “encourage some women to carry the infant to full term, thus reducing the absolute number of late-term abortions,” he added.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Alito joined Kennedy’s opinion. In a separate statement, Thomas and Scalia said again they would vote to overrule Roe vs. Wade entirely.

The decision is likely to throw the abortion issue into the campaign for the White House. Two of the court’s strongest supporters of the right to abortion also are its oldest justices: John Paul Stevens will be 87 on Friday, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg is 74. Whoever wins the 2008 presidential election might get the chance to nominate one or more new justices.

Ginsburg, the court’s only woman, called Wednesday’s decision “alarming.”

It “cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this court,” she said.

Democrats are thrilled.


Another tid bit from the LAT piece:

But that alone is not enough to void the law, Kennedy concluded. There are other safe methods of performing these abortions, he said, and doctors are not entitled to “unfettered choice in the course of their medical practice.”

Quite a few of the articles I hve read, tho clearly a minority, state that anti abortion language made it into the decision.

Yeah the conservative movement is so on the edge of th collapse. The biggest lie the Blahgs tell.

And if a Dem wins in 08, the conservative movement will be fine. A DLCer in the WH (all three are) what could be better.

70. D. Throat - 19 April 2007

World Bank may target family planning
Repeated absence of references to birth control in internal reports alarms women’s health advocates.

By Nicole Gaouette, Times Staff Writer
April 19, 2007

WASHINGTON — Under beleaguered President Paul D. Wolfowitz, the World Bank may be scaling back its long-standing support for family planning, which many countries consider essential to women’s health and the fight against AIDS.

In an internal e-mail, the bank’s team leader for Madagascar indicated that one of two managing directors appointed by Wolfowitz ordered the removal of all references to family planning from a document laying out strategy for the African nation. And a draft of the bank’s long-term health program strategy overseen by the same official makes almost no mention of family planning, suggesting a wider rollback may be underway.

The World Bank has traditionally championed birth control and other methods of family planning as a key strategy to improve women’s health and economic status.

The controversy has raised worries among some bank officials and health advocates that the Bush administration’s conservative stance on family planning issues may be seeping into the institution.

The managing director, Juan Jose Daboub, denied he was making substantial changes to the bank’s policy or that he demanded deletions to the Madagascar report. Daboub, a Roman Catholic with ties to a conservative Salvadoran political party, questioned staff outrage directed at him.

“To me this sounds like a storm in a glass of water,” he said in a recent interview. “There is no reason understandable for this.”

Bank staff members dispute Daboub’s claim that he made no changes to the Madagascar report. “It’s a blatant lie,” said one staffer who has seen the document. Like other internal critics, the employee requested anonymity because he said he feared for his job.

A copy of the report obtained by the Los Angeles Times shows repeated deletions of references to family planning and contraception.

Women’s health advocates said the situation was worrisome. “There’s mismanagement there,” said Carmen Barroso, a regional director for the International Planned Parenthood Federation. “Wolfowitz appointed a guy in a very high position who felt free to censor in line with his personal beliefs. I think that’s good grounds for sacking.

The controversy has added fuel to anger at the bank over Wolfowitz’s management style and his involvement in two unusual and large pay raises given to his girlfriend, Shaha Ali Riza, a bank employee on loan to the State Department.

Wolfowitz’s problems have been compounded by revelations that Defense Department officials told one of their contractors to hire Riza for a short-term contract while Wolfowitz was the deputy Defense secretary. The Pentagon announced Wednesday that it was looking into the matter.

These issues will be on the table as the bank’s board of directors meets today to debate Wolfowitz’s future.

The board reportedly met Tuesday to discuss changes made to a draft document that lays out a long-term “Strategy for Health, Nutrition and Population Results.” These papers, periodically revised, set bank policy and shape funding.

Overseen by Daboub’s office, a draft version raised alarms among some staff members because it contained only one reference to family planning, and that was to a past project.

The current policy paper refers to family planning at least 23 times, repeatedly identifying it as a fundamental tool for tackling poverty and disease.

Scaling back family planning funding “would have a tremendous impact because the World Bank is a major lender in the health sector, particularly in the poorest countries,” said Bea Edwards, international director at the nonprofit Government Accountability Project.

The bank lends to private organizations such as the Gates Foundation as well as the United Nations Capital Development Fund.

The Bush administration has imposed its beliefs about family planning and abortion on other international organizations.

It has cut funding for U.N. agencies that promote family planning, forbidden any group it funds to discuss abortion and pushed abstinence programs.

Bank staff members say the Madagascar plan has been finalized and worry that other country plans may be altered as well.

Daboub said he would send at least 11 country reports, including Benin, Chad and Cameroon, to the board before December. “I respect the freedom of our partner countries to decide” on family planning, he wrote in an e-mail to colleagues meant to quell their anger.

Daboub said he did not ask that family planning be struck from the Madagascar report. “It is not true,” he said.

Yet internal e-mails obtained by the Government Accountability Project appear to indicate otherwise. Referring to Daboub as the “MD,” an acronym for his title as managing director, Madagascar country program coordinator Lilia Burunciuc wrote to colleagues on March 8, 2007: “One of the requests received from the MD was to take out all references to family planning. We did that.”

Burunciuc added that this is “a potential problem for us” because Madagascar had made a “strong request for help” on family planning in the document, which serves as a three- to four-year plan for the goals a country wants to achieve with the bank’s help.

Madagascar identified improved family planning as one of its national commitments.

Yet a copy of the report includes edits and deletions, which a bank staffer said were made by Daboub’s office, showing that specific targets to boost contraceptive use were cut and broader aims were rewritten.

In one graphic, the words “improved quality of health services to ensure easy access, affordability and reliability” were inserted in place of “improved access and provision of contraceptives.”

71. supervixen - 19 April 2007

This makes me physically ill:

Once, in English class, the teacher had the students read aloud, and when it was Cho’s turn, he just looked down in silence, Davids recalled. Finally, after the teacher threatened him with an F for participation, Cho started to read in a strange, deep voice that sounded “like he had something in his mouth,” Davids said.

“As soon as he started reading, the whole class started laughing and pointing and saying, `Go back to China,'” Davids said.

Maybe if the other “normal” kids hadn’t been such FUCKING ASSHOLE BULLIES, the dead VA Tech students would be alive today.

72. marisacat - 19 April 2007

well it has come out he was subjected to bullying, I guess in Chantilly VA where they lived and he went to school before Centerville.

Think bullying has been an issue in several of the school killings. And whatever at home, as well.

73. supervixen - 19 April 2007

Thanks for the link to the interview with William Harrison, MCat. I hadn’t seen it before.

“She looked at me and she began to cry. She said, ‘Oh, God doctor, I was hoping that it was cancer.’ I didn’t tell this story for years and years, because every time I tell it, I cry,” he said.


If only men could get pregnant… etc.

74. marisacat - 19 April 2007

If only they gave a damn, but most don’t. Lotta drippy personalisation around from some, tho. To pass muster.

it gets old.

75. D. Throat - 19 April 2007

I think that it is revolting but not surprising that the Boyz used the Imus ploy to cover the weak piddling support of women.

Imus blames Snoop Dog for making him call the Rutgers women’s basketball team “Nappy Headed Hos”… and now the Boyz are blaming an unelected NGO for their own support of the Democrats refusing to not filibuster.… it was a GENIOUS political manuever sayz Bowers.

The day that Snoop Dog has presidential candidates announce their bid for election on one of his songs… then I will see the connect. Until the day NARAL gets to vote on who gets to sit on the Supreme Court… I will lay the blame fairly and squarely on the putrid little weaklings called Democrats.

With friends like this it would be better for the 60% of Democrats (WOMEN) to transfer to the GOP and put our own candidates in office…. at the very least an influx of women into the GOP will garantee toning down the rhetoric… that the Democrats are so willing to follow blindly.

As it stands women are worse off the more they support Democrats… thridf party will not work… perhaps a bipartisan approach is necessary … the way it stands now… Democrats are too busy digging womens graves to even fight back.

Same shit… cowardly white men with shrivelled raisinets.

76. brinn - 19 April 2007

re: #12 — hey Miss D — just to set the record straight, james *richardson* is not the James who posts at mobettametta — James Benjamin has his own blog as well, called The Left End of The Dial.

I agree with everything everyone has said about james richardson’s words, but just wanted to set the record straight.

77. bayprairie - 19 April 2007

“‘Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran,’ he sang to the tune of Barbara Ann,” the paper notes.”

my god. has that man completely lost his mind? talk about a window into a soul that needs to be slammed, and then nailed, and shades drawn.

78. marisacat - 19 April 2007

Oh but he is one of our ………………….


GREAT MEN. A loyal and patriotic American.

He can’t be insane. Why that would make him like …………………. CHO.

And that cannot cannot be.

79. missdevore - 19 April 2007

brinn–I didn’t mean to imply association with Mo Betta Meta. I said mo meta men. but I understand your confusion.


80. marisacat - 19 April 2007

Dahlia Lithwick on Kennedy and his majority opinion.

He spent five FIVE pages on the procedure.

81. D. Throat - 19 April 2007

This is disgusting…

Three days after roughly 25 female students from a Marrero high school were turned away from their senior prom because adult chaperones said their dresses violated the Jefferson Parish public school system’s policy, district officials are trying to soothe the continuing uproar and said Monday there’s a chance the system might review its rules governing attire.

Most of the girls were turned away because of an excessive display of cleavage, though the policy also bans clothing that is “tight-fitting” or “see-through.”

The school system’s announcements did little to squelch public outcry, though, as parents of students who were turned away continue to clamor for various concessions, including a formal apology and reimbursement for money spent on tickets and various other expenses. Several parents also said they are in talks with attorneys.

“It’s got me dumbfounded,” said Wayne Melerine, whose daughter, Miranda, was not allowed into the event. “I don’t want to see this happen to another kid. Her dress was not inappropriate.”

Melerine said his family spent about $1,000 on prom-related expenses and wants the school district to pay him back.

“An apology is not enough,” he said, lamenting his daughter’s absence from a high school rite-of-passage. “This is something that is going to be stuck in her memory for the rest of her life.” 

The fracas began Saturday night when a Higgins teacher, Judy Gardner, along with other school officials, prevented some couples from entering the prom because of various dress code infractions.

The upset students quickly phoned parents, many of whom rushed to the scene to defend their children.

Parents also said that girls with bigger chests have a harder time complying with the dress code.

“There are some breasts you can’t hide in a dress,” said parent Laura Fayette. “You can’t discriminate against a big-breasted woman.”

Fayette’s son could not get into the prom because his date was one of the girls whose dress did not meet with educators’ approval. Fayette said she picked out the gown for the girl and saw nothing wrong with the outfit.

“I think it was very appropriate for a prom” she said. “It wasn’t a revealing dress in any way.”

Wayne Melerine’s daughter, Miranda, asked bluntly, “What do they want us to do, buy a turtleneck dress?”

Meanwhile, some parents objected to the school system rejecting gowns they themselves had already approved at home for their children.

“We loved (the dress),” said Andrial George, whose daughter was kept out of the prom. “If we thought it was provocative, we would not have let her out of the door.

Check out the dresses…

82. D. Throat - 19 April 2007
83. bayprairie - 19 April 2007

Thanks for the link to the interview with William Harrison, MCat. I hadn’t seen it before.

dr. bill, he seems a fine man based on what i know about him. and that holds true for many of the providers who i have learned a bit about. dr warren hern comes easily to mind also. fine examples of american professionals who care, and who understand. and who make sense when they speak on these issues.

but there aren’t very many of them. and none of them are getting any younger.

lets face it. american politicans are worthless pieces of shit. it’s time to quit acting like any of them are anything else other than pieces of shit. all of them. why give 99% shit the benefit of the doubt because 1% might not be? we need to rework the way we treat, and talk to, our politicans. fawning over them, daily kos style is WHY WE KEEP GET FUCKED! out of all americans in the world politicians have the least right to make medical decisions for women. its madness. and yet all of the republican party and approx 2/5ths of the democrats have decided they know better about terminating a pregnancy utilizing a specific procedure than the doctors do. and to further worsen matters in law the procedure is bait and switch-named with a “dobsonesque ill-defined” procedure that the fundies have gamed so that down the road it can cover who exactly knows what?

“Sometimes the pregnancy is a threat to the life of the woman,” said Dr. Warren Hern, who runs the Boulder Abortion Clinic in Colorado. He recalled a case of a patient who suffered from uncontrollable high blood pressure because her fetus had a chromosomal defect. “I wound up doing her abortion in the hospital at 3 a.m. because if I didn’t she’d be dead by daybreak.” A D&X procedure was the only viable option, he said.

dr hearn said the procedure was the only available option. some politicians say its not. so the choice is clear. we can believe the physicians and trust their professional judgment in this matter. or we can buy into such harry reid and his donk/rethug buddies offering 95/10 vanity ultrasounds.

84. supervixen - 19 April 2007

bayprairie: my god. has that man completely lost his mind? talk about a window into a soul that needs to be slammed, and then nailed, and shades drawn.

My sentiments exactly.

I had the same thought about the guy who spouted “In 30 years we’ll no longer need bodies”.

85. supervixen - 19 April 2007

DThroat: this is outrageous! There’s nothing wrong with ANY of those dresses. In fact most of them look like 1930s/40s retro.


86. marisacat - 19 April 2007

well from moiv’s postings Dr Hern tried to reach the pro life Dem when he was running for Gov in CO, to no avail, met with him personally iirc.

And Hern also wrote to Howard directly about prospecting for pro life candidates, when you don’t have to, but generally as well. Seems to me thsi was all a year or 18 months ago…

IIRC what moiv said, no answer from Howard.

But many many women are going to vote for Hillary + WHomever, and will be told over and over they will fight to protect…

something or other.

Myself I think the Dem party will only cement much of what has happened under the R and do window dressing.

They want the extensions of power that Bush knew he could obtain. The Dems just did not have courage.

87. marisacat - 19 April 2007

The dresses are fine. Modest even.

88. marisacat - 19 April 2007

Dennis Perrin of REd State Son has a new loc at http://dennisperrin.blogspot.com

and, in a mimic of Harper’s Index, he has Perrin’s Spandex with this tidbit (no liquids in the mouth):




Percentage of liberal bloggers who would actually eat shit if the Democratic Party asked them to for the sake of winning elections:


Dennis, one quibble: TOO LOW A NUMBER.

89. brinn - 19 April 2007

ah, thanks, MissD, sorry for the confusion, its been a long week….

90. colleen - 19 April 2007

Dennis, one quibble: TOO LOW A NUMBER.

Exactly. 42 is the number who would eat shit without being asked.

91. marisacat - 19 April 2007

oh that is so true colleen. They’d volunteer. And bring their mother, wife and baby daughter.


92. marisacat - 19 April 2007

New Thread


hmmm BBC is showing imagery and spoken words from the Cho tape, different from what I have seen splayed across media here… AND WIth a much better analysis of the likely psychological skew AND a good exposition of how Jesus fixated (more film of his refernces to Jesus and crucifixion than i have seen) he was.

Pity America jsut got sensationalism. Then again, eh.

93. marisacat - 19 April 2007

Breaking News from ABCNEWS.com:



94. liberalcatnip - 19 April 2007

Cut off family planning money, toss the young gals who dare to wear nice dresses, sentence a few women to die because they or their fetus are ill.

We haven’t come a long way baby.

95. liberalcatnip - 19 April 2007

correction: sentence more than a few women to die…

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: