MOMocrats™

Time for us to step up and get Nancy Pelosi's back

Were it not for Nancy Pelosi, we would not have the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act right now. She just about broke her back carrying it over the finish line. 

As Democrats struggle to reposition themselves effectively for the 112th Congress, the remaining BlueDogs are jockeying for the heart, soul, and voice of the Democratic Party. Heath Shuler, a freshman BlueDog from North Carolina has already said he will challenge her if she runs for minority leader. I've got news for Rep. Shuler: She IS running, and she IS going to be our Minority Leader in the 112th Congress. 

Now is not the time for Democrats to splinter into factions. Lest you think otherwise, the extreme right wing of the Republican party believes they have a mandate to undo every bit of progress we've fought so hard for over the past six years, and they're already taking aim at the Senate in 2012, not to mention the Presidency. It's time to get Speaker Pelosi's back, and support her bid to speak for Democrats in the next Congress. 

Please send Nancy Pelosi a note of appreciation, and let her know you support her.

Elton Gallegly (CA-24) supports students! The ones he likes, anyway.

If one wish were granted to me in this midterm election, it would be that Elton Gallegly be retired permanently to his little Simi Valley oasis with the high gates he built at campaign donors' expense to keep the riff-raff out. This is no secret to anyone who knows me -- I loathe Republicans who claim to represent my interests but won't take the time to hear what they are. I really loathe Republicans who represent big, wide, diverse districts with lots of working-class, taxpaying people in them but pander only to military, elderly and wealthy constituents. I loathe Republicans who reward special donors with million-dollar-plus earmarks. Gallegly does all of these.

But really, what I found in his campaign disclosures last night sent me into orbit. It seems that Gallegly's campaign made some donations to local schools in the area. Wasn't that nice? Only, the schools who received donations are in the more affluent areas of the district. Okay, let me say it straight. The schools who received donations are the ones with student populations which are mainly white. They also happen to be in the more affluent areas. 

It's one thing to ignore a constituent and repeatedly duck her questions about things you'd rather not answer, like why he thinks it would be perfectly fine for my son to be denied access to health insurance because of a pre-existing condition. It's entirely another to pull out the checkbook and write checks to school booster programs selectively, which is exactly what the man did, out of campaign funds. 

Here's a map of our district:

It's a big district. Lots of cities in that district. Other than the coastal strip, which is Lois Capps' district, Gallegly represents this whole thing. Take note of the various city names on that map. Ours isn't even on it, but we're included, as I'll explain in a minute. Here is a record of donations made during the third quarter from the Elton Gallegly campaign to some, but not all, local high school athletic booster clubs:

• Camarillo High: $300
• Newbury Park High School: $500
• Thousand Oaks High School: $300
• Moorpark High School: $300
• Oaks Christian High School: $600

As the parent of a high school junior, I can't tell you how angry this makes me. My daughter attends a high school in the general vicinity of El Rio on that map. She could go to Camarillo High but she loves her school. It's part of the same district, but the demographics are very different. Her school is quite diverse, with the majority of students coming from Hispanic backgrounds. We live in an agricultural area and the school is smack-dab in the middle of it, so those kids might be working in adjacent fields before and after school while still making good grades and managing to be good citizens. (Yes, that's right. The vast majority are citizens.)

CNN, sexism and the detestable James O'Keefe

In case you've forgotten (and I truly wish I could), James O'Keefe is that odious little Breitbart protégé with a penchant for setting up people, organizations and the general public with false narratives staged in advance. His latest borders on an effort to sexually harass and possibly assault a CNN reporter, of all things.

Abbie Boudreau is an attractive, young CNN reporter who had an assignment: To report on the young conservative 'movement'. I have an issue with their framing and focus, but that's a topic for another post.

James O'Keefe hatched a plan to "punk" Boudreau with props like strawberries, dildoes Viagra and stamina pills. Here's a one-paragraph description of the "plan":

Instead, I've decided to have a little fun. Instead of giving her a serious interview, I'm going to punk CNN. Abbie has been trying to seduce me to use me, in order to spin a lie about me. So, I'm going to seduce her, on camera, to use her for a video. This bubble-headed-bleach-blonde who comes on at five will get a taste of her own medicine, she'll get seduced on camera and you'll get to see the awkwardness and the aftermath.

My first thought after reading this plan was that James O'Keefe has some strange reading material. I shudder to think what his video consumption is. But deeper than that -- far deeper -- is his cynical, ugly attitude about women. This is a guy who strikes me as someone who doesn't have the first clue about what women are really about, and certainly has no respect for them. In the 80's he would have been the lounge lizard hitting on every woman in the room while harboring fantasies about taking three of them home at once. He's someone who has no problem lying to anyone and everyone who challenges him.

He's the date rapist type you're glad you never encountered when you were single.

Does Dana Loesch think or is she just a Luntzian robotron?

I am not a feminist. I am a woman who has assumed I have the same right as anyone else to choose my own course, make my own future, and do so on equal footing with men. I believe the government exists to serve citizens, not to act as an authoritarian axe or discriminate against one class of citizens over another.  I really don't care if moms stay at home or work. I've done both, both have advantages and disadvantages., and I'm not out to overturn patriarchy. I actually like men.(see note below) I'm married to one. I get along well with them. Those who act like idiots don't get any attention from me.

I respect those liberal women who call themselves feminists but personally resist 'isms' in general as a personal matter.

Now that you know a little about my perspective...

I debated about whether to take on the latest turd Dana Loesch dropped on SFExaminer.com in the form of an op-ed column or ignore her. Other than being the latest Ann Coulter wannabe, she hasn't said much original for the past year or so. (Yes, I snark. It serves as a reminder not to take her too seriously.)

The Sarah Palins, Michele Bachmanns, and other members of the "feminist right" can always be counted on to echo the newest Luntz talking points through the echo chamber. Now that Betsy McCaughey, Pamela Geller and Dr. Laura have been thoroughly discredited, they just pick up some other woman looking for her five minutes of fame and hackery. Dana is the newest candidate. Not the first and she won't be the last.

Do conservative women -- especially intelligent ones (yes, they do exist) -- ever wonder why the party faithful finds the dumbest, most extreme groupies to deliver their message? Republican cynicism at its best -- pay lip service to women's equality but find the ones dumber than a rock to deliver it. Bachmann, Foxx, Palin, Angle....need I say more?

At any rate, this little litany of smashes against "liberal women" is classic Luntz/Rove framing, and deserves a thorough debunking.

Let's begin with her assertions about Avastin, a drug originally developed to treat colon cancer.

This past month, liberal feminists made more hay made over Palin's "mama grizzlies" talk than the matter of the Food and Drug Administration jerking Avastin off the market. Avastin is a drug used to treat late-stage breast cancer and has been shown to extend the life of some breast cancer patients by five months, but was deemed "cost-prohibitive" by the government.

Not so much. This is one of the high dangers of fast-tracking cancer drug approvals before the clinical trials really prove their efficacy. (It's a big word, Dana. Look it up.) The FDA didn't "jerk Avastin off the market" in order to leave late-stage breast cancer patients adrift without a lifeline, even if Dana Loesch says so. The FDA pulled Avastin because it was ineffective against late-stage breast cancer. Out of three clinical trials, it was only reported as effective on one patient. One. single. patient. And that was in the first trial.The second trials, conducted with more controls, yielded no positive results.

As a conservative woman, you'd think Dana Loesch would appreciate this: Avastin costs $50,000/year. Is it really conservative to spend $50,000 for an ineffective treatment? Really?

Moving on to her litany of complaints about "liberal feminists"...

Operation Iraqi Freedom is Over, or, What Makes The Right Mad is That We're Winning

August 18, 2010: combat troop withdrawal from Iraq began ahead of schedule. There are now 50,000 soldiers left behind in Iraq to oversee general security. By winning, I don't mean we won this war. I mean it's a victory for those who opposed the war that we elected a new president who did what he promised.

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

I'm still dazed that the cause that burned so fiercely in me for the past seven years--fury that inspired me to become a political blogger, rage that pushed me out into the streets along with hundreds of thousands of other people despite news organs slavishly devoted to pushing Bush's message, a white hot resolve that kept me fired up to elect a president who would respect rule of law and reject the Bush doctrine--now has suddenly come to an anti-climactic end.

Millions mobilized around the world to protest this unjust war.

Now it ends not with a bang, but a whimper.

A few words from the amateur left, if you please

I could rant about how stupid I think Robert Gibbs was to actually say what many think, but I'm not going to. Since I'm not a member of the professional left now or ever, it didn't apply to me. Let them fight the battle.

So I won't rant about Gibbs. But I want to say what drives me crazy. See that over there ? --> -->

Look at the headlines. Michelle Obama on a skewer, despondent Dems, dumbass ethics charges aimed at Maxine Waters and real ones aimed at Charlie Rangel, and the never, ever, ever ending drumbeat about how midterms are terrible, awful, just miserable for Democrats.

I call bullshit. I'm tired of hearing about how depressed the little Dems are, or how Elizabeth Warren MUST BE NOMINATED OR ELSE THE SKY WILL FALL. (BTW, I'm an Elizabeth Warren fan but my goodness -- she is not the sun and the moon and everything in between either!). I'm tired of hearing how the White House has screwed liberals. Screwed? Really?

Back when I was contemplating the end of my first marriage, I saw a therapist mostly because I was afraid of what divorce would do to our son. She shared a profound truth with me then, and it's stayed with me since. Here it is, for all of you:

No matter what you do or who you are, you'll screw it up somehow.

 She was absolutely right. For all the sound and fury, the only thing Barack Obama can count on is this: No matter what, he will piss someone off. The only question then becomes how to piss the fewest off and still get the job done.

Take the public option, for example. It remains the holy grail of grudges among the professional left. Nary a day goes by that I don't read something from someone using that as an example of what a failure he's been. Never mind that the public option, as crafted by this Congress, covered almost no one and was more of a gift to insurers than Americans. Never mind all that, because in the minds of the professional left, it is an example of the White House betrayal of those who elected him.

Never mind that it was Congress who sent it to him that way, it's still his fault.

Where Do We Go from Here? Baby, You Can Drive My Car.

This post by Karoli is the first of the MOMocrats series, Where Do We Go from Here? about the lessons of the Deepwater Horizon oil disaster in the Gulf.

As I write this, I'm watching the oil industry undergo the requisite drilling grilling by appropriately outraged Congressional Democrats and laughably sympathetic Congressional Republicans. Thoughts race through my mind, criss-crossing the dialogue. As industry executives flatly declare that all is being done which can be done, thoughts fly.  "Do these people live in the real world? Do they understand what has happened here? Are they so wanton, so craven, that they can shrug off what they have done?"

Do they understand that we are close to turning the Gulf of Mexico into a dead zone? Do they? REALLY?

If they did, you'd think no one would be trying to lift the President's six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling.

If they did, you'd think they'd hammer down that moratorium and forbid any more fracking and cracking of the delicate sea surface until they figured this out.

If they did, they'd be scrambling to make investments in something other than oil.

Coming this week: The Texas Social Studies Standards Showdown

Image via Wikipedia

On May 19th, the Texas Board of Education will meet to approve the final Social Studies curriculum and textbook changes that caused such a stir back in March. Since that meeting, even more changes have been proposed which, if adopted, promise to rewrite history for Texas schoolchildren to the conservative narrative. Uber-winger Don McLeroy's proposals:

• Undermine the doctrine of separation of church and state. McLeroy wants to substitute an unintelligible standard asking students to "contrast the Founders' intent relative to the wording of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause, with the popular term 'Separation of church and state.'"
• Attacking social programs. McLeroy proposes children "discuss alternatives to long-term entitlements such as Social Security and Medicare" as a solution to the current ratio of workers to retirees. This is a particularly odious theme, given that the ratio will be entirely different by the time these children are at the peak of their careers.
• Skew focus toward conservatives. McLeroy's logic is this:

  "This is relevant to assessing the policies of the various ideologies that have shaped where we are as Americans," said McLeroy, who has joined with other members of his board bloc to put a more conservative slant on the social studies standards. For example, high school students will have to learn specifically about leading conservative groups from the 1980s and 1990s in U.S. history, but not about identified liberal or minority rights groups.

• Removal of all references to the terms "justice" and "equality".

Oklahoma legislature votes to screw women

Imagine this scenario:

Your 15-year old daughter is running through the park when she's overpowered, yanked into the bushes and forcibly raped at knifepoint. She escapes with cuts, bruises, and a nasty case of PTSD, but being a good parent, you have the rape kit done, police report filed, and then take her home and set up the appointments to deal with the aftermath.

A few weeks later, she misses her period and has a positive pregnancy test. There's no doubt in her mind or yours that an abortion is the only option that makes sense. You schedule the appointment, and take her in for the procedure. She changes into the thin paper gown, the doctor comes in for a moment, and tells her to relax, it'll just be a moment for the ultrasound tech to come in for the required transvaginal ultrasound.

Say what? It's a D&C, not a well mother checkup. What the hell is going on here? Oh, wait. I forgot to add this part: You live in Oklahoma, and in Oklahoma, some of the most misogynistic, mean-spirited, man-birthed abortion laws have just been passed by the Oklahoma State Senate.

The Oklahoma Senate approved several bills Monday that opponents say would make it more difficult or uncomfortable for women to get abortions, including one that would require women seeking the procedures early in their pregnancies to undergo an invasive form of ultrasound.

The five bills, some of which will go to Gov. Brad Henry for consideration and others which will return to the House, were overwhelmingly approved by the Republican-controlled Senate. If given final approval, the bills would give Oklahoma some of the most restrictive laws of any state, an abortion rights group says.

One of the laws headed to the governor would require doctors to use a vaginal probe in cases where it would provide a clearer picture of the fetus than a regular ultrasound. Doctors have said this is usually the case early in pregnancies, when most abortions are done.

We just had a 15-month debate about health care reform. Part of that debate was all about letting doctors be doctors because we all know that a government takeover of health care is a BAD BAD THING. In fact, it was US Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) who argued longest and hardest about how terrible it would be to have government "get between you and your doctor", right?

In the land of tea and whine-fests where conservatives live, it's only a bad thing when Democrats think of it. When Republicans decide that a more-expensive, invasive vaginal probe is something that will "provide as much information as possible" before they have the procedure, costs be damned.

I won't even address the sinister psychology of their stupid law. They'd spend a zillion dollars to marginalize women and prevent one abortion even if the kid starved in the street afterward, because Lord knows they hate entitlements of all kinds, especially in Oklahoma, where 20% of kids live in poverty.

But wait, there's more:

The other abortion measures would require women to complete a lengthy questionnaire before receiving an abortion, mandate certain signs be posted in an abortion clinics and prevent so-called "wrongful-life" lawsuits in cases where a parent might argue that a child with birth defects or other problems would have been better off aborted. Another bill would prohibit state insurance exchanges, created under the new federal health care law, from covering abortions.

And still more:

Another bill would require a woman seeking an abortion and her doctor to complete a 38-question form that asks, among other things, the woman's age, race, education, number of previous pregnancies and reason for seeking an abortion.

So, in Oklahoma, an old geezer with 18 kids and three wives can roll into the doctor's office and get a Viagra prescription, but a woman who has been raped or abused, or who has just exercised her Constitutional right to choice under the laws of this nation cannot receive medical treatment without a 38-question form invading her privacy, humiliation and judgment in the form of "mandatory signs", and an expensive vaginal probe?

Alrighty then. Got it. My advice would be to get the hell out of Oklahoma and don't look back if it were my daughter. That, and start making contributions to organizations like NARAL who will stand and fight in court to turn these idiotic, hateful laws back for good.

Oklahoma, Utah, Kansas, and other states contemplating laws that clearly discriminate against women know they discriminate. They want them to be challenged and they want a chance to re-litigate Roe v. Wade in the hopes of overturning it altogether with a Supreme Court more...conservative.

I hope President Obama chooses his Supreme Court nominee with these battles in mind. It's clear they're throwing whatever they can at the wall to see what sticks. Let's hope none of it does.

Happy Tax Day!

 No, really. Happy Tax Day!

We at MOMocrats get as annoyed as any normal person by the tedious piles of tax paperwork we have to fill out each year to do our social duty. (I mean, seriously: we're a bunch of writers. We have to fill out the Schedule C.) And of course, there are some government programs we are disappointed to see our tax dollars going toward.

But as patriotic Americans, we're also genuinely proud to know that we help pay for many of the public sector agencies and government programs that make this country a better place to live, and so we're happy, on this tax day, to reflect on all the good the hard earned cash we're parting with can accomplish.

Here are some of the things MOMocrats writers actually like paying taxes for:

Julie: I am happy to pay taxes because I know it helps fund schools and I do believe that solid, well-rounded education is a cornerstone of a great culture.

I am happy to pay taxes because I know it helps fund CHIP, and knowing that kids get needed health care is crucial to me.