I had to go look at Tiger Beat on the Potomac (When will I learn to keep the antifreeze jug nearby?):
“First of all, the gender of the justices in the Hobby Lobby majority is totally irrelevant,” Kelly said, pointing out that the justices who ruled in the majority for Roe v. Wade were also men. “Does Ms. Pelosi think those justices were ill-equipped to fairly decide that case? Or is it only when a judge disagrees with Ms. Pelosi that his gender is an issue.”
I think that there is a distinction to be made here, Kelly: when a group of one type of people acts to remove rights from a group of another type of people, then those types of identifiers becomes relevant; for instance, when the bigots stripped gay people of the right to be married in California, their sexual orientation was relevant.
But when one group of people expands rights to another group of people, then identifiers like gender is irrelevant. Do we even mention that LBJ was a white man when he lobbied for and passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
She added, “If Speaker John Boehner made a similar comment about the female Supreme Court justices, Nancy Pelosi would be crying sexism — and that’s what she is guilty of here.”
And when we reach a day where five female SCOTUS Justices (praise Blog! that day will be great!) rule on mens’ contraception, we can talk, but until then this is hypothetical BS.
Look, Kelly is a trained lawyer and allegedly they have some sort of background in rhetoric and logic (or so I’m told), so this is really beneath her; I mean I’m just some dude in Seattle and I can take that argument to the ground. Sometimes she’s as close to a straight shooter on Fox as they get, but this is not one of those times.
Consequence Free Sex (and more grammatically correct consequence-free sex) seems to be Wingnuttia’s new meme dujour. And let me add, that consequence-free sex is what men have enjoyed all along. No wonder they don’t want women to have it: it could mean careers, financial independence, and autonomy.
“[Alison Lundergan Grimes] runs on four things. She runs on some variation of: she’s young, she’s new, is a woman, and she’s not Mitch McConnell. That’s essentially what she’s got, in some form or fashion. And all those are true enough, and all of those, while they’re not substantive, they’re good enough to beat Mitch McConnell. […] The reality is I negate her only competitive advantages. She’s then forced to run against me by talking about issues, by talking about vision, by talking about life experience. And she really has none of the above on any of those fronts. She’s a nice enough person, I’ve met her on several occasions on the campaign trail, seems nice enough, but completely devoid of what it takes for us.
–Senate Candidate from Kentucky Matt Bevin mansplains his advantages over Alison Lundergan Grimes to us.
So Reince, gotta ask again, how’s that rebranding working for ya?
We repeat ourselves: the War on Women is a major front in the larger battle for Theocracy over Democracy. Here is exhibit A:
OK, Pastor Steven Anderson is not a spokesperson (that will get his panties in a twist) for the GOP, but it is the terrible sand kingdom of Arizonastan, and one can certainly assume that his congregation is probably composed of Wingnuts and Teabaggers, so it is like preaching to the choir. So to speak.
Anyway, Anderson, as always, has some sexist claims about The Skirts:
In a sermon posted online this week, the Faithful Word Baptist Church leader explained that contraception was “not something Christians should be practicing,” even though he acknowledged that 99 percent of Christians believed it was acceptable.
Anderson pointed out that God, in the book of Genesis, had made childbearing painful to punish women for their Original Sin, adding that the husband “shall rule over thee.”
The Xristian Xrazies are all about Original Sin. It’s not strictly misogyny, it’s payback.
Or as Edward Gorey put it:
To his clubfooted child said Lord Stipple,
As he poured his post-prandial tipple,
“Your mother’s behaviour
Gave pain to Our Saviour,
And that’s why He made you a cripple.”
Here we go again:
American Enterprise Institute scholar Charles Murray can be heard explaining to an audience at the University of Texas that his views on women had not changed since a 2005 paper, in which he asserted that one or “maybe” two women had played significant roles in the field of philosophy.
When a woman at the event on Tuesday asked Murray if he still believed what he wrote, Murray quipped, “Who do you have in mind?”
Murray argued that in “certain traditions” like literature, women had been at the “peak of accomplishment.” But he said that he could only recall one important female philosopher, “and she was not a significant thinker in the estimation of historians of philosophy.”
“So, yeah, I still stick with that,” he insisted. “Until somebody gives me evidence to the contrary, I’ll stick with that statement.”
Mr. Murray is an advisor to Texastan Gubinor wannabe Greg Abbott who was hand-picked by theocrat secessionist Rick ‘count to 3′ Perry to replace himself while he runs for preznint.
Former CIA and National Security Agency director Michael Hayden suggested Sunday that Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) might have compromised the objectivity of a report on CIA interrogation techniques because she personally wants to change them.
On “Fox News Sunday,” Hayden cited comments Feinstein made last month in which she said declassifying the report would “ensure that an un-American, brutal program of detention and interrogation will never again be considered or permitted.”
Hayden suggested Feinstein feels too strongly about the issue on an “emotional” level.
“That sentence — that motivation for the report — may show deep, emotional feeling on the part of the senator, but I don’t think it leads you to an objective report,” Hayden said.
I dislike Dianne Feinstein, she’s an unrepentant hawk who supported every military weapon program and was unwavering in her support of Chimpy’s Great Adventure.
But there’s one thing I do know about her: she’s tough as nails. There is nothing emotional about her. I suspect that she pushed her kids out of the nest with gusto and relish, and so I doubt very much that her emotions have ever gotten the better of her.
So besides the obvious sexism here—and it doesn’t get much more obvious than this—it makes me wonder what is in this report that
Egghead Hayden really doesn’t want released? That’s a pretty desperate fourth and forty play.
Could it be… torture? Let’s call it by its real name, not some weasel-speak harsh interrogation technique. It was the policy of the United States to torture prisoners of war in off-shore gulags beyond the reach of our own laws. Blam-blam and Chimpy broke every last shred of decency we had in the world’s eyes, and they continue to walk the earth free.
(WaPo via Crooks and Liars)
“Take me through exactly what would have to happen, with a specific example of a man and woman, where a man is being paid less than the woman. Because this law is not just about women — it’s about men and women.”
– Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) asking how the Paycheck Fairness Act will not discriminate against men.
Remember, the GOP claims that women don’t want equal pay and are against having healthcare. They really have their finger on the pulse of American women.
Federal Court Judge Richard Kopf, a George H.W. Bush appointee, has some advice for the wimmins who dress like sluts who appear before him:
1. You can’t win. Men are both pigs and prudes. Get over it.
2. It is not about you. That goes double when you are appearing in front of a jury.
3. Think about the female law clerks. If they are likely to label you, like Jane Curtin, an ignorant slut behind your back, tone it down.
I have some advice for Judge Kopf: apply rule #2 to yourself, buddy.
Because it is never too soon to educate girls that their bodies are objects:
Earlier this month, Haven Middle School administrators notified parents that female students are no longer allowed to wear shorts, leggings, or yoga pants because those articles of clothing might be “too distracting” for their male peers.
And likewise it is never too soon to educate boys on how behaving like boors is acceptable. The message to boys is just as damning: you are animals incapable of controlling yourselves, so have at it.
So, the girls are fighting back:
… That’s sparked a protest among parents and students in the Evanston, Illinois area, who are arguing it’s not girls’ responsibility to accommodate the boys in their classes.
More than 500 students have signed onto a petition protesting the new dress code policy, which they say is sexist because it’s only targeting girls’ clothing. Some female students have chosen to defy the ban and are wearing leggings and yoga pants to school in protest. A poster plastered in Haven Middle School reads, “Are my pants lowering your test scores?”
Why not start now with training boys to be more, well, gentlemanly, and not to objectify girls? Why do the girls have to accomdate the boys? Let’s keep an eye on this one; I suspect the school has a real problem on the PR front now that parents are involved.
Assembly Majority Leader Bill Kramer may resign from his leadership post as soon as Saturday after being accused of sexually harassing at least two women while in Washington, D.C., for a GOP fundraiser.
Now THAT is productivity! Dude was in DC on Wednesday and back by Friday and managed to grope at least two women (though there may be more?), including on the plane!
But what takes it from general boorishness to Performance Art is that he was receiving money from women.