Yes, 'the feminist' we had all been waiting for (or at least the One the embarrassing Ms. magazine had been waiting for) really wasn't a feminist, really wasn't a friend of women and really didn't give a damn about women's health, let alone women's rights.
Which is how the Senate got 60 votes for a bill that you would have thought, before yesterday, required a Republican majority to push through.
The new president of NOW, Terry O'Neill, issued a statement yesterday which included, "The National Organization for Women is outraged that Senate leadership would cave in to Sen. Ben Nelson, offering a compromise that amounts to a Stupak-like ban on insurance coverage for abortion care. Right-wing ideologues like Nelson and the Catholic Bishops may not understand this, but abortion is health care. And health care reform is not true reform if it denies women coverage for the full range of reproductive health services. We call on all senators who consider themselves friends of women's rights to reject the Manager's Amendment, and if it remains, to defeat this cruelly over-compromised legislation."
Good for Terry and good for NOW. Good for them for speaking out and good for them for drawing a line in the sand. They say if the amendment isn't pulled from the bill, senators should "defeat this cruelly over-compromised legislation." And they have urged you to, "Take Action NOW: Please call your senators immediately and urge them to oppose the Manager's Amendment in the Senate health care reform bill, which will effectively make abortion coverage unavailable in health insurance exchanges and, ultimately, in private insurance policies as well. If the Manager's Amendment passes, urge your senators to oppose the entire health reform bill."
That's action. We're against the whole bill (due to the fact that it's not universal health care, that it contains nothing to stop the rise in drug prices, that it contains nothing to help the average citizen). We agree with Howard Dean that it needs to be scrapped. But we applaud NOW for speaking out and fighting. Not everyone does that.
As we researched this article, someone asked, "Didn't a certain group of women start a new site?" Yes, they did.
Yes, and it is embarrassing.
It's called Not Under The Bus. Apparently, they failed to grasp that women were tossed under there by Barack in 2008. Poor girls.
Poor, stupid girls.
See, we're zooming in one section of the website.
Not Under The Bus wanted to work with NARAL. The laughable and weak NARAL. NARAL's removed their 'action.' But from the Not Under The Bus tweet:
Emergency @NARAL petition needs your signature by tomorrow to ask Snowe to vote for health reform: http://bit.ly/5pOgnq #underthebus
Please insert your favorite curse word(s) of choice right about now.
And you wonder why women have to struggle for equality? A bill that was questionable, one that everyone knew might include an attack on women's rights. And NARAL is urging people to ask Senator Olympia Snowe to support it. NARAL, before the bill's written, is demanding you 'take action' to drum up support. That's the bill that NARAL is now protesting.
The smart thing, pay attention NARAL, would have been to have waited to see what the measure was before drumming up support for it.
And Not Under The Bus? You disgraceful women have already done enough damage. You're the women of (Democratic) Women's Media Center. The useless trash that wouldn't cover Cynthia McKinney's run for president until you were shamed into in the final days of the campaign -- this despite the fact that every post was on Barack Obama who, unless we're missing something, doesn't have a vagina. You made time to rip apart Sarah Palin -- usually in the most sexist manner. And you pretty much made 2008 all about proving just how little respect women can have for themselves. So maybe right about now you ought to pack it in?
A number of you claim to be for peace but we know we won't see you at the rallies in the new year. No, you could speak out against George W. but cowards like yourselves can't speak out against Barack.
Pack it in, girls, you give women a bad name.
Barack is the reason this happened, the reason women's rights and women's health are now in jeopardy. Barack has been assisted by the useless and self-defeating women of NARAL and Not Under The Bus.
But Barack's assisted by men as well. He's assisted by a toxic left which continues to spit on women. Last week, Joe Canon of Canonfire (if that's spelled wrong, f**k it and f**k him), decided that the thing to post was a nude photo of a woman. Not just any photo, mind you. This one is shot from below which, between the angle and the erect nipples jutting out, go a long way towards defining woman as the other. And who objected. Which of the PUMA websites rushed to delink from Canon? Not a damn one. Not one damn website could delink or even object. They all turned their heads and acted like it didn't happen.
Shameful.
Disgusting.
But men like Joe Canon think they can get away with it. Men like Alexander Cockburn as well. At CounterPunch, what better way to raise money for the website that reposts everything than to sell a calendar and a cheesecake one at that. That's 'liberated.'
*If you're only concerned with one half of the human race.
*If you believe that women and their bodies exist solely for the left males to profit from and off of.
It's disgusting and no one's calling it out.
The same way all the sexism aimed at Hillary Clinton and at Cynthia and at Palin never got called out in 2008. It was 'funny' and you just didn't have a sense of humor -- male or female -- if you weren't laughing.
Funny but the ones who didn't have the sense of humor were the members of the Cult of St. Barack. Or have we all forgotten the attacks on The New Yorker for a parody cover? Have we forgotten the former president of NOW, Kim Gandy, urging that the copies be burned. Book burning. How very.
Time and again, women are disrespected. And the lie is that it's conservatives (men and women) doing it.
That's not to argue that huge numbers of social conservatives don't disrespect women. They do. But the punch that hurts the most is the sucker punch you get from a 'friend.' In that regard, the ones doing the most damage have been and continue to be on the left.
"March with us," they say, "join us."
Left unsaid is that you're there to make their demands and only their demands and if, at any time, you're foolish enough to think that you are, indeed, in this together, just try making a demand for women's equality and watch the howler monkeys screech: IDENTITY POLITICS!
Here's reality and we'll be kind and not name the woman online who should be ashamed of herself because, in her hatred, she jumps onto the "Yeah, it's Identity Politics!" bandwagon, "identity politics" for the left male screaming it means any issue that does not effect the Anglo-White male or the African-American male [straight males in both cases -- or self-loathing closet cases]. So immigrant rights? That's "identity politics." Marriage equality? "Identity politics!" Women's rights? "Identity politics!"
Some have found it strange that the Anglo-White male can support the African-American male. We don't find it strange at all and we have two theories on that. First, racism is an evil and the same Anglo-White male spouting sexist 'jokes' knows he'd be vilified if spouted racist 'jokes.' Second, they worship Black Cock.
That's true of a huge number of Anglo-White males on the left. We're not saying they're gay. We wish they were, they'd stop snapping "Identity politics!" every ten seconds. What we're saying is they wish they were African-American. A large number of them do. In the 50s and early 60s, they were jazz hipsters. In the late 60s, you could find them on campuses trying to carry off a fro (they never carried it off). More recently, you can find them trying to act like African-American rappers. By contrast, check out African-American males of the same period and you'll not see this huge desire on their part to act or be White. It's just a very curious characteristic of a certain number of Anglo-White males on the left.
We don't know what it is about the emasculated Angl0-White male of the left but he's always lusted after the African-American male. We will note that women did not emasculate these men. They emasculated themselves. As for why they emasculated themselves, we'll leave that for someone else to figure out. But the reality is that if they lusted after vaginas the way they do Black Cock, women would be in a lot better position today.
