"Only dull people are brilliant at breakfast"
-Oscar Wilde
Brilliant at Breakfast title banner "The liberal soul shall be made fat, and he that watereth, shall be watered also himself."
-- Proverbs 11:25
"...you have a choice: be a fighting liberal or sit quietly. I know what I am, what are you?" -- Steve Gilliard, 1964 - 2007

"For straight up monster-stomping goodness, nothing makes smoke shoot out my ears like Brilliant@Breakfast" -- Tata

"...the best bleacher bum since Pete Axthelm" -- Randy K.

"I came here to chew bubblegum and kick ass. And I'm all out of bubblegum." -- "Rowdy" Roddy Piper (1954-2015), They Live
Tuesday, July 02, 2013

Time to start sending used tampons to the government
Posted by Jill | 6:02 AM
Today's Republican Party is the living embodiment of what happens when you do not provide sex education to children. From the idea that women won't know what a pregnancy is unless an elderly male politician rapes them by proxy with an ultrasound wand to conservative women believing that a rape kit is a kind of uterine Drano, the ignorance is simple human reproduction on the right is simply appalling. The problem is that now their ignorance is extending to the people they represent when they are in government.

Ohio's new anti-abortion law bestows full personhood on a fertilized egg that has not yet implanted. Clearly the Republicans in Ohio's legislature who passed this travesty haven't got a clue about how pregnancy occurs. There is no pregnancy until the egg implants into the uterine wall, because up to half of all fertilized eggs never implant. There are many reasons for this, some of them having to do with the effects of the Pill and the IUD (which would under Ohio law become instruments of murder in a way that a gun, for some reason, is not), and some having to do with just plain nature -- God's will, if you prefer.

Some of the women whose fertilized eggs never implant in the uterus know about it -- because the egg implants in the fallopian tube instead. Ohio's law would have the perhaps unintended effect of making removal of an ectopic pregnancy a crime of murder, even though an ectopic pregnancy can never become a baby. I guess the dirty whore should have kept her legs closed or God wouldn't have punished her with an ectopic pregnancy -- or something; I have no idea how these people's minds work. But most women don't even know that there is a fertilized egg, because it passes out of her with her normal menstrual period.

So there's just one thing to do, ladies of Ohio: Start sending your used tampons and other sanitary products to John Kasich. Tell him that under Ohio law you are simply complying with the law that makes every fertilized egg a person and you want to make sure you do the right thing. You may end up in jail, but you can take comfort in knowing that confession of your crime is good for the soul.

Labels: , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Friday, February 10, 2012

Around the Blogroll and Elsewhere: Special Institutional Pedophile Ring Hates the Ladyparts Edition
Posted by Jill | 7:47 PM
Because I'm too tired to rant tonight:

Dependable Renegade: Hello, establishment of religion.

Mistermix sees this as a win.

So does Grung_E_Gene.

So does Ramona.

Charlie Pierce doesn't.

Amanda is amused.

David Dayen thinks this exposes the bishops for what they are.

Echidne thinks the bishops won.

Violet Socks says Obama's capitulation buys into the "religious freedom" framing and sets him up for more trouble later on. (I'm inclined to agree.)

Susan of Texas takes on Ross Douchebag.

Margaret and Helen...well, it's Margaret and Helen! Of course you care what they think!

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Thursday, February 09, 2012

I've been saying for years that once they get abortion, they're going after birth control
Posted by Jill | 5:51 AM
I remember the days when people were worried that John F. Kennedy would take his marching orders from the pope instead of from the people. Today, a candidate taking his marching orders from the pope would be regarded as a good Republican. The only person in the Republican Party who might be miffed is Grover Norquist, since he thinks Republicans must serve no other master but him.

Somewhere along the line, probably around the time a black man with an odd name managed to cature the White House, right-wing Christians, particularly the candidates who purport to represent them, decided that the "bloody Papists" were OK after all, and that perhaps they could band together to fulfill their most important spiritual obligation: getting back at Eve for eating the apple. Yes, all that stuff about Martin Luther no longer matters, as long as common cause can be made ensuring that all those dirty sluts keep their legs closed and if they don't, are punished with children they don't want. As long as women can be made slaves to their reproductive systems and be dependent on men, even those men who abuse them, where they belong, those little trivialities like the Pope don't matter. And that is why we had evangelical voters going gung-ho for Newt Gingrich, at least until St. Rick the Frothy marched through the Midwest again, reminding the vaginaphobic that HE's the one who walks the walk instead of just talking the talk.

But there's always been political hay to be made in claiming that we're still in ancient Rome and Christians are being thrown to the lions at every turn, except that today, Christian victimization takes the form of not being able to force everyone else to believe and practice as you do. And of course this particular battle between those who for some strange reason have turned a mystic who preached that everyone should be nice to each other and help the poor into a supply-side Capitalist who regularly put women in their place, and the sane among us, is being turned into yet another example of the virtuous and spiritual vs. the unwashed heathen. Ever since the days when John F. Kennedy had to reassure voers that he would not take his marching orders from the pope, these people have likened not getting their own belief system enforced by government to being messacred by the millions.

I don't know what the obsession is that these people have with sex, but they've sure got it in spades. And for some reason, the obsession isn't what white straight males do with their genitalia, it's all about what women and gay men do with theirs. I'd say it's because straight white men aren't doing anything with theirs, except that Rick Santorum has seven kids and always touts his "miscarried" eighth. And yet he's the poster child for Obsession with the Sex Organs of Others.

I've been saying for years that once the right gets abortion, they're going after contraception, because it's all part of the same fear and loathing of women. But they aren't even waiting around for some Presidential Executive Order or reversal of Roe v. Wade; they're going after birth control now. And the only thing standing between us and them is a President who is still laboring under the delusion that you can find common ground with absolutists.

Last week we were relieved to find that contrary to our expectations, President Obama had refused to cave to a bunch of men in Rome and kept the Affordable Care Act's mandate that copay-free contraceptives be part of health insurance plans provided to women, even by religious-owned employers whose primary mission is not religious (such as Catholic hospitals). For a few brief, shining moments, we could actually believe that this president wasn't going to take 51% of the population and throw us under the bus with every other part of the reality-based community. But as the hue and cry has become louder and more shrill by the minute, there are ominous signs that President Part-the-Waters is about to cave one more time, proving once again that Democrats are simply unable, or unwilling, to take a tiny bit of time to frame a sane argument.

So New York Times columnist Gail Collins does it for them them today, in a few well-chosen words even a ten-year-old should be able to understand:
The churches themselves don’t have to provide contraceptive coverage. Neither do organizations that are closely tied to a religion’s doctrinal mission. We are talking about places like hospitals and universities that rely heavily on government money and hire people from outside the faith.

We are arguing about whether women who do not agree with the church position, or who are often not even Catholic, should be denied health care coverage that everyone else gets because their employer has a religious objection to it. If so, what happens if an employer belongs to a religion that forbids certain types of blood transfusions? Or disapproves of any medical intervention to interfere with the working of God on the human body?

Organized religion thrives in this country, so the system we’ve worked out seems to be serving it pretty well. Religions don’t get to force their particular dogma on the larger public. The government, in return, protects the right of every religion to make its case heard.


And David Boies explained it further in The Last Word:



Of course the solution is very simple, then: Let Catholic hospitals refuse to provide contraception coverage. But then they get not one thin dime of government money. And while we're at it, let them create an unsafe environment in which employees are not protected from toxic substances and where children are hired to empty bedpans. And let's see just how long that hospital stays in business. Besides, amidst all the foofarah about "I don't want my tax money paying for things that might allow dirty sluts to get away with it," when do I get to decide what MY tax money will pay for? And I don't want my tax money going to misogynists and bigots.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Saturday, February 04, 2012

Saturday Big Blue Smurf Blogging: What They Said
Posted by Jill | 11:34 AM
Today's honoree: Linda in Las Vegas, for this video (Note: graphic images therein):


Thank you, Linda. We're out here rooting for your full recovery.

(via)

Labels:

Bookmark and Share

Around the Blogroll and Elsewhere: Special Susan Komen Foundation War on Women's Health edition
Posted by Jill | 10:06 AM
If SGK thinks we're all one happy family again because they parsed some words that at first sound conciliatory, they'd better guess again.

Blue Girl: "I'm not the sort of woman to take back an abuser who promises 'never again, oh baby, I promise'....Especially when his bitch sister is still in your house."

David Atkins: "no one should consider giving Komen a single dime until Karen Handel is fired or resigns in disgrace. And even then, the organization needs to answer some very serious questions about why she was hired in the first place, and what their real mission is."

Amanda: This was about values, not money.

Michael Hayne: The media got it wrong.

Violet Socks: "This is about Yoplait and Energizer and all the other pink “Partners for the Cure” raining crap down Nancy Brinker’s phone line."

Charlie Pierce: "...it was really sort of wonderful to watch the women of The Village have to confront the fact that one of their favorite charities had been caught playing footsie with the monied portion of the anti-choice movement in order to defund one of the organizations that those Village women see has vitally important to their own lives, and the lives of their daughters and granddaughters.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Friday, February 03, 2012

Nope, it's not political. Nosirree Bob it isn't. So why is the Komen Foundation also yanking funds for embryonic stem cell research?
Posted by Jill | 5:43 AM
Can we please stop the last vestiges of pretending that the Susan G. Komen Foundation is about saving lives and recognize it for the wingnut cause money launderer that it is?

They can hide behind vague policies about Congressional investigations in regard to Planned Parenthood if they want to (but then where do we get to see them break off their affiliation with Bank of America?), but it seems they've also decided to end their funding of embryonic stem cell research:
In addition to pulling funds from Planned Parenthood for The Susan G. Komen Foundation also decided to stop funding embryonic stem cell research centers making it fully transparent the organization has evolved from non-political non-profit to a partisan advocacy organization.

That means the loss of $3.75 million to the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, $4.5 million to the University of Kansas Medical Center, $1 million to the U.S. National Cancer Institute, $1 million to the Society for Women’s Health Research, and $600,000 to Yale University. That’s a loss of nearly $12 million dollars in research money to eradicate breast cancer this year alone.

This is a new position for the organization which had previously supported all sorts of scientific research targeted at finding a cure for breast cancer and saving women’s lives. It’s new position is that the organization will categorically no longer support any embryonic stem cell research.

Instead of the loud, clumsy announcement Komen made in severing ties with Planned Parenthood, this is a decision they quietly slipped in during November 2011. After all, with this new pro-life branding you would think the Susan G. Komen Foundation would want to crow about it’s policy change since embryonic stem cell research is an issue near and dear to the anti-choice crowd Komen now serves.

Maybe it’s because there won’t be any gory anti-stem cell research ad running during the Super Bowl this Sunday like Randall Terry’s anti-abortion ad. After all, Karen Handel has made it clear she and Terry share an agenda, and the Komen Foundation has under Handel’s watch closely allied itself with Americans United For Life, the zealously anti-choice group that takes credit for pushing Komen directly and through members of Congress, to sever ties with Planned Parenthood.


The more I read about the Susan G. Komen Foundation, the more I come to realize that despite all the pink imagery and the PR about saving women's lives, this foundation and its founder are all about the right-wing war against what they perceive to be the dirty whores -- meaning all women who don't live the way Michelle Duggar does. What many people think is a worthy cause is just another corporation, partnering with other corporations with no regard to their appropriateness towards the stated cause for which Komen professes to stand.

Here is one blogger's experience with Komen Pinkitude:
I hesitated to write on this topic, partly because I had so many blogs turn pink for me in 2010. They did it as a show of support and I appreciated it more than anyone will ever know. However, turning pink in support and following up with virtual and local assistance is not the same thing as the pink-washing that Komen does day in and day out.

I spent a good portion of the last year mortified about the type of cancer I had. I received a pink basket in the hospital (for my original surgery) filled with pink, plastic items that included a poem and a "tiddy" bear. I was supposed to be cheered up by the poem, as it was about another woman and how she received a fabulous new set of breasts. I was also supposed to be thrilled by the junk in the basket. Instead I was mortified. A gift basket of organic fruit would be one thing (and, yes, we did receive those and loved them), but this was just beyond painful. Rubbing the pink-washing in my face once again. The basket just reminded me that because I had this recent blip, I was supposed to become a member of another club. Well, no, thank you.

Please understand that not everything pink disturbs me and I know that many pink ribbons are truly meant as a sign of support. However, Komen is not supportive. Coloring buckets of fried chicken pink is not supportive. Putting pink ribbons on products that we don't need or want is not supportive. In fact, for many of us, it's a reminder of times we'd rather forget. If anything, Komen was extremely unsupportive when I was diagnosed.

Did they come to my house and cook me meals when I was sick? No, but my friends ensured we were had groceries and dinners for months. Did they visit me in the hospital or take care of my kids? No, but my friends and family made sure that happened. Well, what did they do?

They stepped up their efforts to get money from me. It was almost as if my name was on a new high priority list. As though because I had been diagnosed, I suddenly had the ability and desire to give to an organization that, in my opinion, has done little towards their supposed goal. It took three letters from me and three phone calls from Peter to have my name removed from their mailing list.


Over the long haul, this may turn out to be a blessing in disguise, if it gets us talking about, and really looking at, the mega-charities to which so many Americans donate. I used to work for a company that did investment consulting for large nonprofits, and it's astounding the amount of money these groups that send us envelopes filled with greeting cards and address labels and authentic Native American dreamcatchers have to work with. I decided a long time ago that I will not support any organization that sends me swag. I won't succumb to the guilt factor that always accompanies these "gifts", and I also won't support organizations that have this stuff made up to try to guilt people into donating. My donations are small and local. $100 to the ASPCA is just one in a pile of donations that pay for those two-minute-long television ads that plague the airwaves. $100 to one of my local animal organizations pays for inoculations and food. For me to really make a difference, I'm better off donating to charities that serve my local community. It isn't that I don't care about the larger world, it's just that I'd rather make a real difference to ten cats or three people than be just another check.

Here's something else to ponder: If you go over to the Komen Foundation's web site, you have to really search to find "About Susan G. Komen." It's there, but it's in the faint black font at the very top of the page, overshadowed by, among other things, a link to "Shop Komen". Somewhere along the line, the real life of a real woman has been lost a second time.

Labels: , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Thursday, February 02, 2012

Thursday Big Blue Smurf Blogging: What They Said
Posted by Jill | 5:37 AM
Today's honoree: Amanda Marcotte, for her accurate analogy of the anti-choice movement to a medieval witch hunt.

Money quote:
Anyone who thinks breast cancer can be neatly cordoned off from this growing circle of hate for all things women's health care is fooling themselves. That's not how witch hunts work. The fear here is not about fetuses or babies per se, but a deep-set fear of female sexuality. Already anti-choicers have scooped breast cancer under the umbrella "abortion", claiming that abortion causes breast cancer. (It doesn't.)  Komen would rather side with people who see breast cancer as god's judgment on you for having an abortion rather than side with people support comprehensive health care for women.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Tuesday, January 31, 2012

If you've been donating to the Susan G. Komen Foundation, it's time to stop
Posted by Jill | 7:44 PM
I became disenchanted with the Komen Foundation a while ago. I'm quite sure that when Susan Komen's sister decided to memorialize her by creating a foundation to find a cure for breast cancer, she had all good intentions. But the Komen Foundation has become a Frankenstein monster of a nonprofit. Between spending money on lawsuits against other organizations that use the word "cure" and spending only 19% of its budget on actual research (with 37% for "education", 5% for treatment, and 12% for screening, along with 27% for overhead, which presumably includes all those address labels and other swag with which they mutsche you all year long), the Komen Foundation is right up there with the World Wildlife Fund and other major-maga-nonprofits that spend only a fraction of their budgets on their stated mission. But every year, there's the races and the pink M&Ms and the baseball teams wearing pink cleats -- all to make you think of the branding of the Susan G. Komen Foundation.

But in case this isn't enough to make you shut your wallet, perhaps this will be:
The nation’s leading breast-cancer charity, Dallas-based Susan G. Komen for the Cure, is halting its partnerships with Planned Parenthood affiliates — creating a bitter rift, linked to the abortion debate, between two iconic organizations that have assisted millions of women.

The change will mean a cutoff of hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants, mainly for breast exams.

Planned Parenthood says the move results from Komen bowing to pressure from anti-abortion activists. Komen says the key reason is that Planned Parenthood is under investigation in Congress — a probe launched by a conservative Republican who was urged to act by anti-abortion groups.

[snip]

Komen spokeswoman Leslie Aun said the cutoff results from the charity’s newly adopted criteria barring grants to organizations that are under investigation by local, state or federal authorities. According to Komen, this applies to Planned Parenthood because it’s the focus of an inquiry launched by Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., seeking to determine whether public money was improperly spent on abortions.

Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, has depicted Stearns’ probe as politically motivated and said she was dismayed that it had contributed to Komen’s decision to halt the grants to PPFA affiliates.

“It’s hard to understand how an organization with whom we share a mission of saving women’s lives could have bowed to this kind of bullying,” Richards told The Associated Press. “It’s really hurtful.”


But before you start sympathizing with the Komen Foundation, trapped in a policy that's being taken unfair advantage of, consider this: As John Aravosis points out, last hear the the Susan G. Komen Foundation hired Karen Handel, Georgia's anti-Planned Parenthood Secretary of State, to be its Senior Vice President for Public Policy. And now, lo and behold, the Komen Foundation will no longer fund BREAST EXAMS at Planned Parenthood. Yes, you read that right. This foundation that's supposed to be all about breast cancer is doing its part to ensure that low-income women do not have access to the kinds of early detection examinations that could save lives.

Handel is an anti-abortion activist whose election platform was about cutting off Planned Parenthood. Here's what Handel said in 2010 about Planned Parenthood (emphasis mine):
My opponents have recently recycled old attacks against me concerning Fulton County’s funding of some programs through Planned Parenthood. They are doing so without providing any context and continue to omit several key and important facts. First, let me be clear, since I am pro-life, I do not support the mission of Planned Parenthood. During my time as Chairman of Fulton County, there were federal and state pass-through grants that were awarded to Planned Parenthood for breast and cervical cancer screening, as well as a “Healthy Babies Initiative.” The grant was authorized, regulated, administered and distributed through the State of Georgia. Because of the criteria, regulations and parameters of the grant, Planned Parenthood was the only eligible vendor approved to meet the state criteria. Additionally, none of the services in any way involved abortions or abortion-related services. In fact, state and federal law prohibits the use of taxpayer funds for abortions or abortion related services and I strongly support those laws. Since grants like these are from the state I’ll eliminate them as your next Governor.

Yup. The feds made her do it. But now that she's inside an organization that provided money FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH CARE at Planned Parenthood, she's yanked the funding.

So in case you've been donating to the Komen Foundtion, perhaps you'd want to reconsider. CharityWatch gives the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, founded by the late Evelyn Lauder, an A+ rating and the National Breast Cancer Coalition Fund an A rating. Neither of those is looking to de-fund Planned Parenthood or to deny women health care in the name of ideology.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Making having a period a crime
Posted by Jill | 5:40 AM
There are times when I wish Abraham Lincoln had just said "Don't let the door hitcha where the good Lord splitcha."

Mississippi is about to vote on an amendment to its state constitution to bestow personhood on fertilized eggs:
A national effort to put abortion bans into state constitutions is looking for its first victory next month in Mississippi, where voters are being asked to approve an amendment declaring that life begins when a human egg is fertilized.

Supporters hope the so-called personhood initiative will succeed in a Bible Belt state that already has some of the nation's toughest abortion regulations and only a single clinic where the procedures are performed.

The initiative is endorsed by both candidates in a governor's race that's being decided the same day. While Mississippi is the only state with such an amendment on the ballot this fall, efforts are under way to put the question to voters in at least four other states in 2012.

[snip]

"We feel like the docs and the patients are getting caught in the middle of a war between the anti-abortion folks and the pro-choice folks," said Dr. Wayne Slocum of Tupelo, head of the Mississippi section of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, a group that opposes the initiative.


It's one thing to declare that human life begins at implantation of a fertilized egg, since that's when a pregnancy actually begins. That too has its problems, because of the possibility of making miscarriage a criminal, or even capital, offense (something the state of Georgia has already considered).

The American College of Obstetricans and Gynecologists has stated unequivocally that pregnancy does not occur intil a fertilized egg is implanted, and that up to 1/3 to 1/2 of fertilized eggs never implant. These then dissolve and become part of the so-called "products of menstruation."

Of course science and medicine have absolutely no place in the misogynist dogma of the Christofascist Zombie Brigade. What's imiportant is that the evil sluts who won't keep their legs closed must be punished by bearing a child -- and those who harbor that 1/3 to 1/2 of eggs that never implant must be investigated, and perhaps criminally charged, if they have a period.

There's only one way to deal with this, and that is for women of reproductive age to start sending their used sanitary products to the Mississippi statehouse, along with letters asking if legislators of that state plan to examine every woman's menstrual fluid in a futile search for dissolved fertilized eggs....or if they just plan to jail every woman who ever has her period on the grounds that she might have "murdered" a fertilized egg.

Labels: , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Saturday, April 09, 2011

It's only for six months, folks.
Posted by Jill | 7:48 AM
Anyone who thinks we can heave a deep sigh of relief because a budget capitulation by the Democrats deal was made should think again, because this budget only funds the government for six more months, after which it all starts up again.

So Lawrence O'Donnell reading an e-mail about the value of Planned Parenthood the other night is still important:



Lawrence O'Donnell used to be so "reasonable" that he was on Morning Schmoe at least once a week. Now he's practically bursting into tears at what he has to report about what is happening to our country under the bullying of mean-spirited, ugly, greedy, treasonous Republicans and spineless, weak, craven Democrats.

Must be the eight o'clock spot.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Friday, April 08, 2011

Friday Big Blue Smurf Blogging: What They Said
Posted by Jill | 6:05 AM
Today's honoree: Sen. Patty Murray, who shows the weakass, spineless Democrats she works with how you frame an issue:




Money quote:

...there are those in the house who are willing to shut down the government, take people's paychecks away from them, because they want to deny women access to health care in this country.

See, Democrats? It's that simple. Now, are you going to sacrifice cervical cancer screening and mammograms and in many cases, women's primary health care, on the altar of "bipartisanship"?

I'm afraid we already know the answer.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share