...can people now be corporations? Because I'd love to have an effective tax rate of less than zero.
Wednesday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by Shaxco, makers of Deeky's Cat-Proof Tie Racks.
Recommended Reading:
New Black Woman: [TW for sexual violence and body policing] General Admits "Virginity Checks" Done on Egyptian Women
Renee: What's in a Name?
Arturo: Race + Comics: DC Promises a 'More Diverse' Do-Over on Infinite Earths
Meowser: Goats Are My Heroes; Or, How What I Don't Know Keeps Biting Me
Andy: Cain, Palin See Big Gains in GOP Presidential Polling in Iowa
Resistance: Meet Ernestine Shepherd
Phil: Hey, I Published a Recipe
Leave your links and recommendations in comments...
Republican Logic
Obviously the best way to stop all those welfare hand-outs making people rich across the country is to punish the people who need a social safety net the most:
Saying it is "unfair for Florida taxpayers to subsidize drug addiction," Gov. Rick Scott on Tuesday signed legislation requiring adults applying for welfare assistance to undergo drug screening.Shaming is not an incentive. It's a disincentive, and it's a totally ineffective one, at that.
"It's the right thing for taxpayers," Scott said after signing the measure. "It's the right thing for citizens of this state that need public assistance. We don't want to waste tax dollars. And also, we want to give people an incentive to not use drugs."
Under the law, which takes effect on July 1, the Florida Department of Children and Family Services will be required to conduct the drug tests on adults applying to the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. The aid recipients would be responsible for the cost of the screening, which they would recoup in their assistance if they qualify. Those who fail the required drug testing may designate another individual to receive the benefits on behalf of their children.Oh, good. That definitely sounds like a fool-proof system that will never be abused by people who take advantage of addicts at the expense of their children.
Shortly after the bill was signed, five Democrats from the state's congressional delegation issued a joint statement attacking the legislation, one calling it "downright unconstitutional."Excellent points. Btw, Reps. Alcee Hastings and Corrine Brown are both members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who no doubt are keenly aware of the implicit and effective racism in this bullshit legislation, in a state in which 38% of black children and 25% of Latin@ children live in poverty (versus 12% of white children).
"Governor Scott's new drug testing law is not only an affront to families in need and detrimental to our nation's ongoing economic recovery, it is downright unconstitutional," said Rep. Alcee Hastings. "If Governor Scott wants to drug test recipients of TANF benefits, where does he draw the line? Are families receiving Medicaid, state emergency relief, or educational grants and loans next?"
Rep. Corrine Brown said the tests "represent an extreme and illegal invasion of personal privacy."
"Indeed, investigating people when there is probable cause to suspect they are abusing drugs is one thing," Brown said in the joint statement. "But these tests amount to strip searching our state's most vulnerable residents merely because they rely on the government for financial support during these difficult economic times."
So what is it that could have convinced Governor Scott to break with the Republican Party's unwavering support of privacy and civil liberties (lulz) in order to sign legislation which is anathema to every professed tenet of personal liberty (lulz) his party espouses?
Controversy over the measure was heightened by Scott's past association with a company he co-founded that operates walk-in urgent care clinics in Florida and counts drug screening among the services it provides.Oh. Right.
Number of the Day
39%: The percentage of the world's wealth held by the top 1% of households, according to a study published this week.
The number of millionaire households across the globe increased 12 percent in 2010, according to The Boston Consulting Group report, increasing millionaires' share of wealth from 37 percent in 2009.Good thing there's no chance of implementing economic policies that would begin to address that inequity in this country!
Despite being at the epicenter of the global financial meltdown, the United States had by far the most millionaires last year, with 5,220 millionaire households, and increase of 1.3 percent from the previous year.
Japan was second with 1,530 and China third with 1,110.
The Weiner Thread
[Trigger warning for sexual harassment.]
So, I've been following this story about Rep. Anthony Weiner allegedly tweeting a picture of his (?) erect penis in his underwear to a 21-year-old college student in Seattle, a story first published by Andrew Breitbart's "Big Government" website, which, as noted by Raw Story, has "had serious credibility issues in the past." Weiner asserts that his Twitter account was hacked: "The wiener gags never get old."
I have no idea whether the story is true, although I will flatly admit that I hope it isn't. I'll also add that it doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense to me that a sophisticated and high-profile Twitter user like Weiner would use the medium to send out pictures of his schlong.
Anyway, here's a thread for discussion. Other links that may be of interest: This blogger asserts the photo was faked. The statement from Gennette Cordova, the recipient of the photo from Weiner's Twitter account, is here. And TPM's got a write-up of Weiner's media strategy.
Two Facts
1. When I wrote passionate criticisms of a Republican president who was at turns hostile or indifferent toward reproductive rights, I was a principled feminist progressive whose contempt was regarded as understandable, expected, and admired.
2. When I write passionate criticisms of a Democratic president who is at turns hostile or indifferent toward reproductive rights, I am a stupid ingrate who takes things too personally and whose contempt is regarded as exasperating, inappropriate, and unhelpful.
[Related Reading.]
Question of the Day
What word or phrase did you misunderstand as a child or even as an adult?
We've done this one before, but I was reminded this morning by Shaker Mary Moylan that, when I was a kid, I thought the idiom "going to hell in a hand basket" was "going to hell in a ham basket." I wondered for years WTF a ham basket was.
We're Thinking...Beige
According to Rolling Stone, Fox News chief Roger Ailes is so afraid of "those gays" that he made sure his corner office had extra security features to protect himself.
Barricading himself behind a massive mahogany desk, Ailes insisted on having "bombproof glass" installed in the windows - even going so far as to personally inspect samples of high-tech plexiglass, as though he were picking out new carpet. Looking down on the street below, he expressed his fears to Cooper, the editor he had tasked with up-armoring his office. "They'll be down there protesting," Ailes said. "Those gays."What is he so afraid of; that a band of gay terrorists are going to sneak into the place and redecorate it?
HT to TPM.
Cross-posted from Bark Bark Woof Woof.
Film Corner!
Know what's even worse than an insufferable dudebro comedy that objectifies women and treats having sex with them as a trophy for being a Nice Guy…? An insufferable Christian dudebro comedy that objectifies women and treats having sex with them as a trophy for being a Nice Guy. With what appears to be a budget of five bucks.
This, Shakers, is a real thing in the world:
It's all a big party set to "You Can't Hurry Love" as our protagonist, Jack, high-fives his office mates at CubicleCorp, and says, while lounging in his desk chair looking self-satisfied, "Do you realize what I've achieved?" Onscreen text informs us: "Jack saved himself for marriage." Back to the montage of Jack fist-bumping and dancing with his coworkers, because that's obviously something coworkers do. He says, in voiceover, "Only three percent of Americans have accomplished what I've done."
What—don't you and your coworkers keep tabs on what percentage of Americans do and do not have sex before marriage? You and your coworkers are so weird. They've got Excel spreadsheets for that shit at CubicleCorp. True fact.
Jack's sassy female coworker—who, because this is a Christian dudebro comedy for affluent white people, obviously cannot be black or gay and thus is the white conservative Christian equivalent: a white woman who is middle-aged and thus axiomatically meant to be read as unattractive and thus unfuckable—peeks around the border of her cubicle to quip, "And three percent of accountants haven't even kissed a girl!" I guess this is what passes for a "joke" among abstinence-promoting white conservative Christians.
Onscreen text informs us Jack "can't wait for the wedding night." He looks at himself in his dresser mirror and says, in what I think is supposed to be a movie voiceover voice, "He remains a virgin no longer." And then does some other dumb shit, like makes muscles at himself and recreates an iconic scene from The Karate Kid substituting "clothes on, clothes off" for "wax on, wax off." He also sings "Let's get biblical!" to the tune of Olivia Newton-John's 80's
Hey, makers of Christian cinema—you realize that inserting allusions to heathen films and songs in your pictures might make people seek out those films and songs, or remember them, and realize that they are SO MUCH BETTER, right? (P.S. Awesomely current references.) Anyway.
Onscreen text: "But on his wedding day…" This is followed by a scene of Jack being left at the altar. Onscreen text: "Jack is going to play…" Jack watches his bride depart with another dude, possibly one who isn't treating her virginity like a door prize, and says to his friend to the sound of a deflating erection, "I'm not going to do it tonight, am I?" Onscreen text: "The Waiting Game."
That is the game Jack is playing, and it is also the name of this shitty, shitty film.
Some more things happen. Jack—who is a GREAT ACTOR, by the way—goes all rebel sex fiend and complains to his friend, "I'm so frustrated. You know, I'm just going to do what I want to do anyway. It's not like it's going to wind up on the front page of the newspaper." But wait! Noted sex scandalist Ted Haggard is at the next table! He leans over and says, "Hey, buddy—I wouldn't do that if I were you." HA HA! Way to make lemonade out of snorting meth off a lemon's ass, Reverend Cameo.
Jack tells his friend about a series of terrible dates while they play Wii. Obviously he cannot fall in love with a woman who has hairy toes, or sings off-key, or doesn't act Christian in the One Right Way to Be Christian, of which Jack is the arbiter no doy. WHY WON'T GOD SEND HIM A PERFECT WOMAN TO FUCK?! DOESN'T HE DESERVE AT LEAST THAT—A PHYSICALLY PERFECT WOMAN TO BE HIS WIFE FOR ALL ETERNITY?! GOD!!!
Are you there, God? It's me, Jack.
Hang on a second! Jack bumps into a girl he knew from school. She is also a great actor, FYI. Montage of Jack falling for her and trying to make out with her, while she remains totally oblivious. Not like her attention matters: God has matchmade this perfect match for Jack, to reward him for not having sex with any other ladies, so her will is obviously totes irrelevant.
Montage of stupid garbage scenes, set to some barfy Christian music.
Also some awesome jokes, like two dudes hugging, and HEY YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAVE YOUR WII CONTROLLER AROUND SO WILDLY IF YOU'RE PLAYING CHESS! Jack, you scamp.
Onscreen text: "Abstinence never felt so good. TheWaitingGameMovie.com." Sure.
[Commenting Guidelines: Please refrain from making comments that treat being sexually active as "normal," or, conversely, being sexual abstinent for any reason as "abnormal." The topic of the post is not individual choices or orientations regarding sexuality. On-topic discussion for this post is how a specific flavor of Christianity, and, by extension, this film, treats women's virginity as (literally) God's gift to men who remain "virtuous" by practicing abstinence until marriage. Also on-topic: How much ass this movie sucks. H/T to Deeks.]
Update on Manal al-Sharif and #women2drive
by Shaker Moderator Aphra_Behn
[Trigger warning for misogyny, religious oppression, violence.]
Last week, I wrote about Manal al-Sharif, the Saudi IT specialist who was jailed for driving herself, and then uploading the video to YouTube. (You can watch a CNN story about the case here.
I'm very happy to report that, following a petition to King Abdullah, she has been freed and reunited with her 5 year-old son. She has signed a pledge to abandon the driving campaign, a pledge that, according to friend and fellow activist Wajeha al-Huwaider, was almost certainly a condition of release. Ms. al-Huwaider noted: "I am sure they told her we shouldn't continue with this issue. They told me that and the message was clear to me. I am sure for her it was even stronger."
It's unclear what will happen with the women#2drive campaign. Ms al-Huwaider said the fight will continue, "but in different ways." It's clear the issue isn't going away anytime soon, and it's also clear how laughably false the early reports were that Ms. al-Sharif had broken down in prison, repented of driving, and stated: "I advise girls of my generation to rally behind our leadership and Ulema. They know better than us about our condition. " And if you believe that, I have this awesome bridge to sell you. (Not surprisingly, her lawyer refuted the account.)
According to blogger Aseen Usmani, other, equally false rumors swirled around the country as Ms. al-Sharif waited in prison:
Many of those opposing women driving claim that it is a Zionist/Western/ Iranian/Shia conspiracy to disrupt Saudi society and corrupt the morals and honour of Saudi women. It is also said that any woman who speaks out for lifting the ban is not a pure Saudi but rather a woman who is nontribal or an immigrant, because "no pure Saudi woman wants to drive."
It speaks to how serious the problem is when the opposition simply cannot conceive that that many Saudi women have independently become frustrated at being unable to drive themselves. It speaks to how deep the prejudice runs when it is easier to believe in a foreign conspiracy than in mothers who want to take their children to the hospital, professionals who want to drive themselves to work, and students who want to transport themselves to university. It speaks to male leaders who are profoundly out of touch with the realities of women's lives when a cleric propses that women share breastmilk with their drivers (and co-workers) as a "solution" to the problem of women being alone with an unrelated man. (Breastfeeding children has long conveyed a familial relation in Islam, allowing men to interact with the milk-mother as if she were a close female relative.) Such suggestions aren't mainstream, for obvious reasons, but as the fabulous blogger Saudiwoman points out, the fact that this is even a topic of debate speaks volumes about the way that male clerics are not paying attention to women's realities:
The whole issue just shows how clueless men are. All this back and forth between sheikhs and not one bothers to ask a woman if it is logical, let alone possible to breastfeed a grown man five fulfilling breastmilk meals. As I’m writing this, I’m cringing at just the thought of it... Breastfeeding a baby is hard work and it takes a toll to be able to produce enough for a one year old, I can't even imagine how much a thirty year old would need. Women do not produce breastmilk on demand.
(I highly recommend her entire blog. Her reporting and analysis have been absolutely invaluable as an English-language source for Ms. Al-Sharif's case.)
Additionally, the reaction of some conservative religious leaders to the issue of women driving continues to be very negative. According to news reports, prominent cleric Abdel-Rahman al-Barak has said that women who drive in defiance of the ban are "opening (the doors) of evil." He elaborated: "they will die, God willing, and will not enjoy this." (More background on al-Barak and his resistance to change can be found here.) Although he is not a government official, he is described as a highly influential leader of the most conservative clerics, whose support the government needs. Of course, there are other clerics in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia who disagree , and women may legally drive throughout the rest of the Muslim world. It remains to be seen if Saudi conservatives will continue to win this argument, as they have for decades, or if times really are changing.
I don't pretend any expertise in Saudi politics, but those who do suggest that this is a potentially volatile period in which the Saudi government is actively working to counter the regional revolutions which are undoing the old alliance of "moderate" Arab states, and threatening to strengthen the position of Iran. What does this mean for #Women2drive?
Pessimistically, it could mean the end of the campaign. More optimistically, it could also mean that the government will seek a face-saving way to implement women's driving, if it were seen to strengthen the country internally. Writing an editorial in the Arab News, Ms. Tala Al-Hejilan makes this point, stressing that, while Saudis are not threatening mass protests, the legalization of women's driving would lead to a more peaceful and productive society. It would, she notes, lessen the number of foreigners (supporting a campaign for Saudization) by reducing the number of foreign drivers in the country, would help families save money, and increase the productivity of Saudi workplaces.
However things go, Ms. al-Sharif's official statement (English translation thanks to Zaki Safar) upon release was clearly designed to be non-inflammatory. While she may have personally abandoned the cause, she nowhere states that women driving is undesirable:
Concerning the topic of women's driving, I will leave it up to our Leader in whose discretion I entirely trust, to weigh the pros and cons and reach a decision that will take into consideration the best interests of the People, while also being pleasing to Allah, and in line with Divine Law.
Again, I'm not an expert, but it strikes me this is not an abandonment of her cause, but merely a politic relocation of it within a conservative discourse emphasizing respect for authority. Ms. al-Sharif also answers her critics, stating:
…never in my life had I been anything beside a Muslim, Saudi woman who aspires to remain in God's good graces and to safeguard the reputation of our beloved country....I was stunned to learn of the accusations hurled at my religious and moral beliefs especially that they originated from individuals I least expected to go down that route. I held my breath for those speaking in the name of religion and others-May Allah guide them rightly-to do me some justice, and that if I had done wrong to blame me only accordingly and fairly, without defaming my faith, creed, and moral system. For at the end of the day I'm everyone's sister and daughter. Yet how could they wound their sister and daughter with such charges?
Positioning herself as a sister and daughter, and specifying that she is not a foreign agent nor a non-Muslim woman, seem to me very carefully chosen words that emphasize this campaign is truly coming from the ground up.
For her actions, Ms. al-Sharif could have lost custody of her son, her job, and her freedom. For her own safety and the good of the cause, it seems that she will now choose to take the back seat (so to speak) in the #women2drive campaign. It's not clear what will happen next, but it is clear, from Facebook and Twitter, that Saudi women are not giving up on driving anytime soon. I've been reading women's accounts of learning to drive, right now, and it's clear that some, at least, are hoping for rapid action. I frankly admire the courage and enthusiasm these women express in the face of so much criticism and danger. One commenter in a pro-driving Facebook group even suggested a motto for the campaign: "Yalla (Let's go!)... drive!"
Yalla, indeed.
Note: While I was writing, this went up. It's pretty much the most recent English-language roundup of media relating to the case, including a subtitled version of Ms. al-Sharif's original video. Definitely give it a look if you're interested in this case.
It's Raining Letters!
Dear Donna Rose,
"Disciplined structure"?!?
What the hell?
We should talk. Or perhaps not.
Katie
Via
Quote of the Day
[Trigger warning for Islamophobia.]
"If you oppose Muslims, well, what is said? Well, you're a bigot, right? Terrible bigotry. I wonder what were people who opposed the Nazis. Were they bigots?"—Pat Robertson, professional dipfuck.
Who, by the way, would be the first person to scream bloody hell if someone implied that all Christians are an ideological monolith.
Because he doesn't want to get lumped in with heretics who ordain women or accept gay people, no doy.
I Write Letters
[Trigger warning for violence.]
Dear President Obama:
Today marks two years since Dr. George Tiller, a reproductive rights advocate and one of the precious few physicians in the country who performed lifesaving late-term abortions, was murdered at his church.
The day after his murder, I wrote you a letter, begging you to "stop relying on dangerously dishonest rhetoric about abortion, its supporters, and its opponents," and to stop drawing an equivalency between the pro-choice and "pro-life" positions, as if both sides have an equally valid point, and as if activists who defend reproductive rights and activists who seek to subvert them are somehow two sides of the same coin.
Since that time, the Republican Party has, on both the state and federal levels, endeavored to undermine access to abortion, to contraception, and even to woman-centered healthcare providers. More than 500 pieces of anti-choice legislation have been introduced across the nation so far this year, at least one in every single state legislature. More than half of the state legislatures are considering restrictions on private health insurance plans to disallow them from paying for abortions. At least one state legislator has suggested that women should have to bear the cost of a separate insurance policy in case of needing an abortion in the event of being raped.
All of this has been done under the auspices of "valuing life," despite the fact that forcing a woman to carry to term an unwanted or unviable pregnancy against her will is the opposite of a respect for life, if the definition of "life" is to have any meaning at all.
Last week, a man was arrested in Madison with a plan "to lay out abortionists because they are killing babies." That didn't happen in a void. That happened in a political climate in which it is considered an acceptable position to value a blastocyst over a living, breathing, sentient, existent human being.
It happened in a country in which every state legislature, and the national Congress, are trying to find ways to limit access to abortion—and in which the ostensibly pro-choice president remains silent on that matter. Except, of course, when he's bragging about ceding ground to anti-choicers to pass legislation, while insisting it's "not an abortion bill."
It happened in a country in which we are expected to trade everything away, including our civil liberties, in exchange for protection from the existential threat of nebulous foreign terrorists, but in which one of the most brazen, unapologetic terrorist campaigns in America, its co-ordination and orchestration frequently done right out in the open—at meetings, on websites, in email alerts—and potentially affecting the lives of more than half the population, is ignored by one party and mainstreamed as a central plank of its party platform by the other.
Mr. President, the vicious murder of Dr. Tiller was an act of terrorism committed by a terrorist. It should have been a wake-up call to this nation, and to you, to acknowledge the ugly reality that the anti-choice movement is a serious domestic threat.
Instead, the anti-choice movement has gained momentum with the unilateral support of the Republican Party, turning what was once a radical fringe movement into nothing less than state-sponsored terrorism, in defense of an inherently violent ideology.
And in response to this onslaught of violently misogynist activity by people who seek to rob people with uteri of their agency, their bodily autonomy, their right of self-determination, their access to a legal medical procedure, their ability to do that most basic of life management in the modern world—control their reproduction—your party has been all but silent.
You, Mr. President, have been silent.
Two years ago, I told you I was crying because I was sad and scared and angry. Today, sir, I cry because you have allowed Dr. Tiller's murder to happen in vain.
With colossal contempt,
Melissa McEwan
An Open Letter to Secretary Clinton
[Trigger warning for homophobia and violence]
Madame Secretary,
As you are undoubtedly aware, on Saturday, May 28, Moscow police stood idly by as protesters attacked participants in Moscow's pride parade. Following the attack, [TW] police arrested several victims of the attack, including at least two Americans.
Just prior to the parade, Russian authorities revoked parade organizers' permit. Irrespective of the veracity rumors of police officers' participation in the beatings, this last minute withdrawal clearly set the stage for this year's parade to become the scene of violence, as has been the case in past years.
While I know you're busy, I ask you to indulge a personal tangent.
Ten years ago this March, my partner and I went on our first date. We spent a week traveling throughout Estonia and Latvia (how this came to be our first date is a somewhat longer story). It was truly a magical experience, and we both cherish our memories of holding each other close while we explored Riga's streets as winter sighed its last gasp.
Over the past ten years, our lives have changed. Seemingly ages ago, I came out as a transsexual woman. My partner and I are a very happy openly queer couple. We can't go back to Riga. We fear that even in flusher times, we won't be able to show our daughter the countryside from whence her ancestors fled war and poverty for life in the United States.
All that has changed in the last ten years is that my family no longer fits the narrow image that reactionary forces are willing to accept. This, and this alone, is enough to expose us to the threat of state-sanctioned violence.
Latvia is very proudly not Russia, and this is not about tourism.
There are people throughout Russia and throughout the world who are living in fear because of their governments' distaste of their gender or sexuality. Some of these people are American citizens, such as those beaten and arrested this past weekend.
I understand the importance and delicacy of America's relationship with the Russian government. However, I also understand the importance of our relationship with the Russian people-- all of them.
I ask you to condemn the Russian government for its hateful, violent actions, and to reaffirm the United States' commitment to human rights.
Yours,
Kate Forbes
Syracuse, NY
[Crossposted]
Of the People, By the People, For the People...
Obama to name former CEO Bryson as Commerce secretary. Of course he will.
President Barack Obama will name former Edison International chief executive John Bryson on Tuesday to be the new U.S. Commerce secretary, filling an important trade job with a seasoned businessman.Bryson, who also sits on the board of Boeing, will replace Gary Locke, who is replacing Jon Huntsman as ambassador to China.
"Mr. Bryson will play a key role as a member of the president's economic team, bringing decades of knowledge and experience in the public and private sectors, and will provide valuable ideas and initiatives to strengthen America's competitiveness around the world," a White House official said.Have I mentioned lately that I'm sooooo glad we elected a Democrat to the White House...?
"Mr. Bryson will continue the (Commerce) Department's mission to drive U.S. competitiveness in the global marketplace, strengthen the international economic position of the United States and facilitate global trade by opening up new markets for U.S. goods and services."
Bryson's appointment continues a White House trend of nominating senior business executives to top government posts.
You know, once upon a time, the government of this nation, irrespective of which party was in charge, considered there to be valuable expertise in other areas besides Corporate America.
