It doesn't pay to be a woman

It's been another long day ... I'm really tired ... but I have to comment on a recent report in the Wapo.

Have you heard the old saying, "damned if you do, damned if you don't?" That seems to apply to women who do (or don't) ask to be paid what they are worth. Staff writer Shankar Vedantam's report on "Salary, Gender and the Social Cost of Haggling" tells a story some of us have known for a very long time.

It's acceptable for a man to ask for what he wants -- a better position in the company, a raise, etc. -- but when women ask, if they even do, they are viewed in a negative light.

The traditional explanation for the gender differences that Babcock found is that men are simply more aggressive than women, perhaps because of a combination of genetics and upbringing. The solution to gender disparities, this school of thought suggests, is to train women to be more assertive and to ask for more. However, a new set of experiments by Babcock and Hannah Riley Bowles, who studies the psychology of organizations at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, offers an entirely different explanation.

Their study, which was coauthored by Carnegie Mellon researcher Lei Lai, found that men and women get very different responses when they initiate negotiations. Although it may well be true that women often hurt themselves by not trying to negotiate, this study found that women's reluctance was based on an entirely reasonable and accurate view of how they were likely to be treated if they did. Both men and women were more likely to subtly penalize women who asked for more -- the perception was that women who asked for more were "less nice".

My thoughts on this are "no more Ms. Nice" women. It's time for men, and some women, to realize that women pay the same amount at the grocery store, our electric bills are just the same, and we don't get a discount on our rent or mortgage because women -- traditionally -- earn less than men.

Men need to wake up and realize that it's in THEIR best interest to advocate for pay equity for women. When they do, the overall income for their households will go up!

Although differences in starting salaries are usually modest, small differences can have big effects down the road. If a 22-year-old man and a 22-year-old woman are offered $25,000 for their first job, for example, and one of them negotiates the amount up to $30,000, then over the next 28 years, the negotiator would make $361,171 more, assuming they both got 3 percent raises each year. And this is without taking into account the fact that the negotiators don't just get better starting pay; they also win bigger raises over the course of their careers.

Women working full time earn about 77 percent of the salaries of men who hold full time jobs. It is past time for this to change.

See Ted Squirm

The thought that Sen.Ted Stevens might be squirming in his seat right now does make me smile. The Wapo reports:

Agents from the FBI and the Internal Revenue Service raided the Alaska home of Sen. Ted Stevens (R) yesterday as part of a broad federal investigation of political corruption in the state that has also swept up his son and one of his closest financial backers, officials said.

Stevens, the longest-serving Republican senator in history, is under scrutiny from the Justice Department for his ties to an Alaska energy services company, Veco, whose chief executive pleaded guilty in early May to a bribery scheme involving state lawmakers.

There are some wonderful feminist candidates in Alaska that would be a perfect to replace Stevens.

A Preview of Coming Attractions--the First Birder Blogging Conference!

So far, the flock for the First Birder Blogging Conference at the Cape May, NJ, Autumn Weekend (October 26-27-28, 2007) includes:
Mary at Mary's View
Lynne at Hasty Brook
Laura at Somewhere in New Jersey
Susan at Susan Gets Native
Birdchick at Birdchick.com
and me!

This will be my second birding festival, and I'm totally pumped! Join us!

For more info, click here!

How Much Jail Time for Women Who Have Abortions?

For the rest of the story go to Tennessee Guerilla Women.

Who values women voters?

One final comment regarding BlogHer. It's really telling that only two campaigns decided to send representatives to the conference -- the Clinton and Edwards campaigns. Where was Obama, Kucinich, Richardson, Dodd, or Biden -- or for that matter, Giuliani, Romney, McCain, or any of the other Republican candidates?

It is truly a mistake to snub women, and particularly a mistake to snub women who BLOG!

Here are some facts that the candidates might want to keep in mind:

Women’s Voting Facts:

• Women vote in higher numbers than men, and have done so in every election since 1964. In 2000, 7.8 million more women voted than men did. Because of unprecedented voter registration efforts, women may vote in even larger numbers in 2004.

• Women have voted at higher rates than men since 1980. In 2000, 56.2% of registered women voters went to the polls, compared to 53.1% of men voters.

• More women register to vote than men. Some 68.7 million women were registered to vote in 2000 compared to 59.4 million men. Initial reports show the trend will continue in 2004.

Hat's off to the Hillary Clinton and John Edwards campaigns for recognizing the importance and value of reaching out to women voters. And to the rest of the candidates on both sides -- it's your loss!

A New View?

According to the New York Times, ABC is close to signing a deal with comedian's Whoopi Goldberg and Sherri Shepherd to join "The View." The new panelists would fill the roles on the program once held by Rosie O’Donnell and Star Jones.

The Los Angeles Times first reported yesterday that Ms. Goldberg and Ms. Shepherd were in negotiations to take positions on “The View.” An ABC executive, who requested anonymity because the talks were continuing, said yesterday that “people are speculating about those two names” and that the newspaper’s report was “prematurely saying a deal is in its final stages.”

I hope they do sign Whoopi, if for no other reason than to provide a counter to conservative co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck. Hasselbeck better hold on to her chair, because it could be a very bumpy ride!

Chief Justice Falls

Upon hearing the news that Chief Justice John Roberts was taken to the hospital following a fall today, I couldn't help but wonder if his fall knock any sense into him? According to NBC News, the fall was caused by Roberts having a seizure.

Chief Justice John Roberts suffered a seizure at his summer home in Maine on Monday, causing a fall that resulted in minor scrapes, Supreme Court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg said.

He will remain in a hospital in Maine overnight.

Roberts, 52, was taken by ambulance to the Penobscot Bay Medical Center, where he underwent a "thorough neurological evaluation, which revealed no cause for concern," Arberg said in a statement.

In 1993, Roberts had a similar episode while on a golf course.

Roberts is the the youngest chief justice in more than 200 years and the third-youngest ever to assume the office. Under his leadership the Court has taken a sharp turn to the right.

Home Sweet Home

It's an hour and a half flight from Chicago to DC, so why did it take 12 hours to get home? Weather. Yikes!

It was beautiful in Chicago this morning. As I waited for a cab I had a chance to say a few last minute good-byes to some of the other BlogHer women in the lobby. It was a last minute decision to attend this conference, and I'm so glad that I did.

I'm not sure how many people attended the conference, but it was in the hundreds. What did surprise me was the make up of the group. I will admit to my bias, and as a progressive I just assumed most of the women attending were progressives, too. That wasn't the case.

As it turns out, according to co-founder Lisa Stone the BlogHer community is almost evenly divided between women who identify as liberal and women who identify as conservative. The difference was evident at some of the workshops I attended.

I found myself in discussions with some of the women over "political" versus "partisan." Some of the more conservative women didn't want to frame the discussions taking place as "political" -- even though almost all the workshops I attended were part of the political track. I am someone who believes everything is political, and anyone who knows me can attest that I'm not shy about stating it. But, just because something is "political" that doesn't mean the solution has to be "partisan."

Anyone who is a regular reader of Yikes will know that I am critical of both Democrats and Republicans. In certain areas you can hardly tell them apart. In other areas there is a vast difference, which is why I tend to vote for Democrats.

If liberal and conservative women could agree on a particular course of action for an issue, like health care for example, what a powerful force we could be! How much faster would change occur if both sides of the aisle were hearing the same message from their constituents?

Is this possible? Let me know what you think?

Sunday Funnies

BlogHer 2007

The Closing Session at BlogHer 2007

It's the closing session at BlogHer, and the guest speaker is Elizabeth Edwards. She is so compelling, it's really too bad that she isn't the candidate. She's right on point on so many of the social justice issues I care deeply about, reproductive justice and marriage equality. Much further along than her husband.

When asked about what issues she thinks are of importance to women she responded that the issue that seems to come up most often is health care. In her travels she finds that women nationwide believe we need to have universal health care. In order to provide this we will have to raise taxes on individuals who earn $200,000 or more. She said this, recognizing that it's a difficult issue for many of the candidates to embrace.

The first question from the audience is about child care. How can we provide safe and affordable child care for working mothers and fathers. One of the ideas Elizabeth is suggesting is to give tuition credit for individuals who will become child care providers and teachers, who will commit to working in the field for at least two years.

BlogHer co-founder Lisa Stone ask the question: "Is Iraq a woman's issue?"

Elizabeth responded that it certainly is, given that 10% (or more) of the troops in Iraq are women. It is also a woman' issue because it's our sons and daughters, and our husbands and partners who are dying. "If we don't have a direct connection, we need to take it personally when someone else's child is there."

The next question from the audience was about our media, and the way -- and type -- of information we are receiving. Does John Edwards have a position on the Telecommunications Act of 1996? Elizabeth's response is that John would not want Rupert Murdock to be the gate keeper of information and he would work to repeal the TeleCom Act. She said that he also supports Net Neutrality, which drew applause from the audience.

One of the last questions asked was about faith, and how it informs the work she and her husband do. She mentioned that on Monday, she and John will renew their wedding vows. In preparing for the ceremony she looked back at their original vows, which included a commitment to public service. She said she was pleased to be reminded that one of the things that bound them together 30 years ago, is still an important part of their lives today.

As I have mentioned before, I would not hesitate to support Elizabeth Edwards for elected office!

Women and GOTV

The GOTV panel has just stared, talking about how you move people to go vote! In the 2004 election 55% of women voted Democratic and 43% voted Republican, so there is a gender gap.

Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women, just asked how many bloggers had a link to how to register to vote. Only five or six bloggers had done this. She then asked who would do it in 2008, and all hands went up.

People are more likely to register if they are asked to do so by someone they know. They are also more likely to vote, if asked by a trusted friend. The blogging community has the potential to raise that to a whole new level. As women, we can make a difference, and we need to talk with other women to get them involved.

Back in 1992 we called that "the girlfriend vote" -- where one girlfriend would talk with another girlfriend, over a cup of coffee, across the back yard fence, or anywhere that women gather.

Zephyr Teachout is talking about grassroots organizing, and urging people to "use the internet to get offline." Meeting with people, in person, is one of the best ways to make change.

Liza Sabater followed up by saying it's important to have a mailing list, to know the people in your community. Basically that all politics are local.

She is talking about why religious right activists have been so successful, because they are tenacious in contact policy makers until they get what they want! Before blogswarms, these folks used email-swarms, post card-swarms, etc. Progressives need to organize in this same way.

I just shared a story about two wonderful women I met in Pennsylvania back in 2006. These women have an email list of 1,000 names, and they were names of voters who trusted these women to vet the political candidates in their district. What these women created was a true influential voter block. In their community, races were won or lost by as little as 10 votes, so EVERYONE seeking office HAD to meet with these women. This is what needs to be duplicated nationwide.

One of the audience members just spoke about the need for us to consider becoming "transpartisan." Her point is that we need to be true to our issues, and demand that all candidates, regardless of party, embrace these issues.

A representative of Emily's List reminded everyone that 22 years ago Ellen Malcolm brought together a few of her friends, who all met in her basement, for the purpose of electing a woman to the US Senate. That year they raised more than $300,000 dollars and helped elected Barbara Mikulski. In the past election Emily's List raised more than $11 million for pro-choice women candidates.

The discussion continued on the need to connect women to GOTV in 2008. Zephyr suggested that a new group be formed called "spin-sta.com." The room approved!


NOTE: I will add photos later!

BlogHer - Day Two

All the sessions I've attended today are of a political nature. I'm someone who believes that everything is political -- which doesn't mean that everything is, or has to be, partisan. Yesterday I found myself in some interesting conversations with women who want to take politics out of some discussion of issues, but I keep wondering "how can we do that, when most of the issues being discussed have a clear political link?"

The issue of health care, it's political. Someone, or some group of individuals, has decided that as a nation we will not provide universal healthcare. That means there will be no coverage for the working poor and no coverage for people who are not employed.

The Iraq war, how is this NOT a political issue?

The environment, and the whole issue of global warming -- again, how can this not be considered a political issue?

Where I think some of the disconnect comes in is that none of these issues have to be partisan. The problems we face in this country are largely the result of the shortcomings of BOTH major political parties. We need to hold all of them accountable.

BlogHer - Day One

So far the Blog Her conference is terrific. The theme of this years event is "A World of Difference" -- and how true that is. As bloggers we can make a world of difference, and there is also a world of difference among some bloggers -- but I'll talk about that later.

I arrived a bit late, so missed the "speed dating" session -- darn -- but I did attend a workshop titled "Privacy, Exposure, Risk: Can you maintain safer spaces online?" The discussion on Blue Gal's blog prompted me to want to hear what other women had to say.

I was pleased to learn that the overwhelming sentiment was to encourage women to not let fear prevent you from tell your story, or sharing your truth. The panelists acknowledged that there are times when it's prudent to do what you need to do to protect yourself, but that most of the threats that are leveled at women bloggers are just that -- threats. The people who spend there days harassing women, are more than likely too afraid to actually confront someone -- and are likely doing it for the attention. If you don't engage, they lose interest and move on.

What I took away from the session was that we should never let the threat or fear of violence stop us from claiming our power.

It's late ... I'm tired ... so will write more tomorrow.

A Special Message for George W. Bush

... from Holly Near ... and BAC!

Get this widget Share Track details

ps: Follow the link above to purchase this excellent CD!

Bipartisan Support for Impeachment

Check this out on Crooks and Liars!

Bipartisan Impeachment Support As Bush Breaks Disapproval Records

It’s official: President Bush is the most unpopular President for the longest stretch of time in American history. Keith reports on the latest poll findings confirming this sad, sad fact, and conservative Republican & former Reagan Deputy AG Bruce Fein talks about why Bush must be impeached.

Still alive and kicking

It seems like weeks since I posted on my blog, but the absence wasn't intentional. I've just been really busy with the new job and some house projects. I've also been enjoying our relatively mild summer, drinking in the early morning fogs and the bright sunny days. Here are two pics I took of the marsh one recent morning:

9:03 am


9:24 am

The biggest changes have involved our home office situations. Kat's office is now in the crazy uncle house, and mine is now upstairs in what used to be her office. If you remember the crazy uncle house, which was once a chicken coop then was converted (by previous owners) into a two-room "cottage" (imagine putting up drywall in a barn, adding some plywood for subfloor, then covering that subfloor with linoleum from circa 1963). We'd worked on beautifying the outside, and now we've started on the inside. Here's a Before:

That's Em's friend Sarah, wondering what the hell we're thinking, converting this glorious space (painting by Em, stamp-painting by Em and Sarah) into a staid old office. I would show you the After but it's still in progress. I'll only say that you will not believe it! Give me another week or so; Kat and I are working as fast as we can!

This afternoon I looked at the garden and thought, "they've got to see this jungle!" So here are some photos of what the veggie garden looks like now. I won't bore you with the usual pics of little green peppers or yellow baby squash; instead, I'll show you how a little neglect can--er--pile up:

The morning glories and moonflowers, which we planted in the hopes that they'd act as a fence cover, have completely taken over! I don't even know if you can open the gate anymore; it was pretty tough last week, and I've watered since then, so I'm guessing I might need a machete.


A lettuce tree, about four feet tall.

The giant sunflowers. I'm taking this from my eye level; I'm about 5'1". Giant is right!

Somewhere up there in the upper atmosphere, I believe we're getting some flowers! I could hire out a helicopter and do a flyover to make sure, or I could just use the zoom:

I think Em is afraid to even go out there. I saw a zucchini the size of a man's leg out there earlier.

Meanwhile, the tomatoes are doing well, though I'm anxious to eat some of the other varieties besides 'Early Cascade' and the 'Sweet Million' cherry toms. The 'Cascade' are rather small, though they do indeed grow in cascading bunches; their flavor is decent, but I wouldn't choose them again. The 'Beefsteak' and 'First Lady' have a lot of medium to large green fruits on them, and those are the ones I'm dying to sink my teeth into. If I had to live with only one veggie for the rest of my life, I'm sure I'd pick tomatoes--right off the vine.

Photo contest! Can anyone guess what plant this is?
Your hint is that I planted it last year; it's a leftover now. The prize will be the satisfaction of knowing you guessed right.

Birding-wise, not much has happened lately other than the usual yardbirds and stuff. Now that the atlas safe dates are mostly past, Roana and I aren't going birding anymore, and I've been working so hard on the house that I've just been too tired to go out in the evenings, much less super-early on the weekends. Still, I've enjoyed seeing the babies growing up around here, testing their wings and their independence. I'm now starting to anticipate the fall migration and winter's bounty of feeder birds, though I'll admit I'm not quite ready to shovel snow yet....

I had a mama robin who had laid an egg in what might've been a second brood, but the egg--and Mama--disappeared. I hate it when that happens. She had woven some rather long cord into her nest; I'd chopped some smaller pieces for her, but she took the small ones and the long ones:


I began to suspect that her egg had been taken, though, when she didn't come back for a couple of days. Sure enough:


Such a nice sturdy nest, and nothing to show for it. It's not like robins are endangered or anything, but I felt sad for Mama Robin. You know I don't deal well with that whole "circle of life" thing.

Are Republicans creating a dysfunctional Congress?

I recently happened upon a post by digby at Hullabaloo that caught my eye. The title is Obstruct This, and it helps clarify why Democrats can't deliver on what a majority of the people in this country want!

The McClatchy Newspapers report:

This year Senate Republicans are threatening filibusters to block more legislation than ever before, a pattern that's rooted in — and could increase — the pettiness and dysfunction in Congress. [...]

Seven months into the current two-year term, the Senate has held 42 "cloture" votes aimed at shutting off extended debate — filibusters, or sometimes only the threat of one — and moving to up-or-down votes on contested legislation. Under Senate rules that protect a minority's right to debate, these votes require a 60-vote supermajority in the 100-member Senate. [...]
Democrats have trouble mustering 60 votes; they've fallen short 22 times so far this year. That's largely why they haven't been able to deliver on their campaign promises. [...]

Nearly 1 in 6 roll-call votes in the Senate this year have been cloture votes. If this pace of blocking legislation continues, this 110th Congress will be on track to roughly triple the previous record number of cloture votes — 58 each in the two Congresses from 1999-2002, according to the Senate Historical Office.

There you have it! Without at least 60 votes, the Dems are powerless to do the very things a majority of Americans want them to do -- end the war, bring the troops home, fix the healthcare problem ... etc.

By design the Senate is supposed to be a more deliberative body. But that doesn't give Republicans the right to obstruct legislation that is at the heart of why they lost control of Congress in the first place.

There are only two options here: 1) Pressure moderate Republicans to break from their party, or 2) Replace at least 8 Republicans with Democrats in 2008.

I know it's early, but ...

I've got a lot on my plate between now and Friday, which is why I wanted to post tonight that I'm going to be attending the BlogHer conference in Chicago this weekend. I'm really looking forward to it, and I hope that if anyone reading this is planning to be there as well you'll look for me. I'll be the one with "Yikes" on my name tag! (That was for you, Blue Gal.)

There are a couple of reasons I wanted to attend. In my own small way, I do feel connected to the blogosphere, and would like to meet other women bloggers. And also, there are issues I care passionately about -- like the separation of church and state -- that I want to connect with other bloggers about.

As some of you know, my day job is as an activist. I love what I do and plan to keep doing it until I'm too old to do it any longer -- which could be 70, 80 or so in my field! I feel so privileged to get to do this work.

When Karen, from Beautiful Day Rule, was in DC last week I shared with her that one of the best things about living in the DC area -- and being a full time activist -- is that when your leaders do something really stupid, you can go to their place of business and complain! I've protested in front of the White House, Congress, various department buildings, and even the Supreme Court. When you live here, you get to do that ... and it's great!

I want to connect with other bloggers who are working for change. Our government is certainly in need of it, and people are not getting good information from mainstream media. Thank goodness for the blogosphere!

I'm sure I will be posting about other things before I leave, but I didn't want to forget to send a shout out to anyone who might want to try and connect to say hello.

And the winner is ...

It's clear that Sen. Hillary Clinton is the candidate with the best chance at the nomination, and at winning the 2008 election. She's knowledgeable on both domestic and foreign issues and she has the experience necessary to lead.

CNN reports:

Most observers agreed that none of the candidates debating at the Citadel in Charleston, South Carolina, particularly outshined their rivals, doing nothing to challenge Sen. Hillary Clinton's position as the Democratic race's front-runner.

Clinton also turned what some might think a potential weakness in her campaign, into a wonderful applause line.

In vintage Clinton fashion, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-New York, takes a question that exposes a potential weakness in her campaign and turns it into a strength.

When asked, if elected to two terms as president, how she felt about a Clinton or Bush serving 28 straight years in the White House, Sen. Clinton replied, “I think it is a problem that Bush was elected in 2000. I actually thought somebody else was elected in that election,” in an obvious reference to Al Gore who won the popular vote in 2000, but lost in the electoral college to George W. Bush. The answer was interrupted by a flurry of applause from the audience.

Once the applause died down, she added, “I am running on my own merits, but I am very proud of my husband’s record as president of the United States,” which was also a good applause line.

Regardless of what you think of the Senator, her response to this question was priceless.

I truly believe that the 2008 presidential election is the Dems to lose -- and we all know they are capable of doing just that. But quite possibly, even the Dems won't be able to get in their own way if Republicans continue to back the current president and his stand on the war in Iraq.

A second look

I was very disappointed in John Edward when he said that he could not support same-sex marriage. He seems to be fairly good on a number of the issues, but this issue is of importance to me and I had hoped for a better answer from him.

He cleared up some of the concerns with his answer tonight, and let me explain why.

I cut my activists teeth in Florida, during the late 1980's, early 1990's. During that time we had an excellent governor, Lawton Chiles. Chiles received strong support from women's groups, even though it was known that he was personally opposed to abortion. He made a vow to the women in the state that he not impose his personal views on women in Florida, that he would never sign any bill that would take away a woman's right to make this decision for herself. He never did, and he enjoyed strong support from feminist groups.

Edwards said tonight that while he personally cannot embrace "marriage" for same-sex couples, he would not impose his views on everyone. His quote on CNN.com is:

"The honest answer is I don't [support gay marriage]," said Edwards. "But I think it's wrong for me as the president of the United States to use my faith to deny anyone their rights."

It's still not as far as I would like to see him move on this, but it's a good start.

When you have no chance to win

... you can say ANYTHING! Which is exactly what Dennis Kucinich did tonight. He's the Alan Keyes of the Democratic party -- certainly not in his positions on the issues, they couldn't be further apart -- but in the freedom to say whatever the heck he wants. Like Keyes, Kucinich can say what he wants because he knows he has no chance of winning. It gives him a freedom the other candidates (well, except for Mike Gravel) don't have.

The reality is there is a left wing and a right wing in this country -- and then there is a majority in the middle. In order to be elected candidates have to appeal to both their base, and to enough of that mushy middle group to win.

Near the end of the debate the candidates were asked to say what they liked and disliked about the person to their left. Sen. Joe Biden said of Kucinich:

Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware said he appreciated Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, but particularly liked Kucinich's wife.

Kucinich commented that there was no one to the left of him, to which Anderson Cooper replied that CNN couldn't find anyone more left than Kucinich.

Barack Obama breaks rank

... and actually said he supports separation of church and state. He talked about how it was not only good for the "state" but it was also good for "religion," and accounts for why religion is flourishing in this country.

CNN reports:

“I am proud of my Christian faith, and it informs what I do,” Obama said. “And I don’t think that people of any faith background should be prohibited from debating in the public square. But I am a strong believer in the separation of church and state.”

Consultants have told Democratic candidates to not utter the words "separation of church and state." Thank goodness Barack must not have been listening. The subject came up in a YouTube question about whether or not the candidates would protect the interests of non-believes in this country. Obama's response was refreshing!

Good for you, Barack!

The right to protest

There is a long and honored tradition of non-violent civil disobedience in this country. Martin Luther King, Jr. led the civil rights movement in this tradition, and before that Alice Paul and others led the first wave of feminism in the U.S. for women’s suffrage.

NVCD is a Constitutionally protected way to protest the actions of your government. Generally it’s a planned activity. Everyone, including the police, knows it’s going to happen. When I first moved to DC there was an understanding between activists and the Park Police. We would break the law by doing something like protesting in front of the White House, or inside the Capital, without a permit. The police would give you three warnings to leave, and then they would arrest you. You went to Anacostia, where your attorney was waiting for you, you were processed, paid your fine and you were usually on your way within about two hours or so.

Since 9/11 all that has changed. The Park Police will now give you one warning, and will often then begin arresting people within a few minutes. There have even been cases where the police actually surrounded protesters, making it impossible for them to leave, and then arresting them.

Peaceful protest in Washington, DC, almost doesn’t exist any longer.

When you do get a permit, you are often not given one for a well traveled public street with maximum visibility. The last protest I attended where a permit was pulled the protesters were relegated to a parking lot behind one of the Senate office buildings.

I think this is an outrage.

It’s similar to what is happening around the country when the president travels and the Secret Service sets up "free speech zones". Protesters are told they must stage their demonstration blocks away from where the president is scheduled to speak – rendering the protest for all intent and purpose meaningless.

I think Americans would be upset if they truly understood how their right to assemble and to protest is being compromised – even in their nation’s capitol.

Benjamin Franklin once said: "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." They are words to live by today.

Sunday Funnies

Note the FOX on FOX News viewers comment ... it's excellent!

In Memoriam - Tammy Faye Messner

One of the last public statements Tammy Faye Messner made was: "Don't let fear rule your life. Live one day at a time, and never be afraid." On Friday, Tammy Faye, the former televangelist and Christian singer who battled inoperable cancer, died.

CNN's Larry King was asked by the family to make the delayed announcement on Saturday evening. "She died peacefully," King said.

Tammy Faye first rose to prominence as co-host, and wife, of TV televangelist Jim Bakker. Their PTL television ministry was the first and most successful of its kind. So successful that when Jim Bakker's empire began to crumble following allegations of an affair and mismanagement of funds the Rev. Jerry Falwell swooped in to take over the operation for his own gain.

In a documentary of her life, The Eyes of Tammy Faye, Tammy Faye talked about how the couple was tricked out of their ministry by rival televangelist Jerry Falwell.

Falwell, it is claimed, promised help and support, then denounced them, staged a coup, and needlessly forced their ministry into bankruptcy [...] their fall was as spectacular as their rise. It was the biggest scandal of its day, and one of the big crashes of the late 1980s. The Bakkers found themselves crucified in the court of public opinion for their greed and supposed corruption.

The film claims that the accusations that they embezzled money from their ministry were completely false, and that although they lived well, they lived no better than any other televangelists running multi-million dollar ministries.

The documentary presented Tammy Faye as an icon in the gay community. The Washington Post quotes Messner, who said:

"How sad that we as Christians, who are to be the salt of the earth, and we who are supposed to be able to love everyone, are afraid so badly of an AIDS patient that we will not go up and put our arm around them."

The tribute went on to say:

The film's directors, Fenton Bailey and Randy Barbato, spoke of her "over-the-top camp sense that we relate to." She appeared at gay pride festivals nationally and spoke warmly of the support she felt from homosexuals.

In 1996, she co-hosted another TV talk show entitled The Jim J. and Tammy Faye Show, with Jim J. Bullock, an HIV-positive and openly gay actor. The syndicated show ended when Tammy Faye chose to leave after being diagnosed with colon cancer.

Tammy Faye was criticized by evangelicals for co-hosting the program with a gay man. Her response to them was "God doesn't make any junk."

At a book signing for her recent best-seller, I Will Survive... And You Will Too, Tammy Faye made an impassioned plea for all people to grant themselves permission to cast off the things that are holding them back, to forgive themselves and others, to be happy with themselves whoever they are, to persevere in the face of opposition, and to show each other unconditional love.

Excellent advise from a good woman. Tammy Faye's positive attitude will be missed.

______________________________

UPDATE: Tributes to Tammy Faye

How Tammy Faye Changed My Mind
Hooterville

RIP Tammy Faye
Shakesville

Goodbye Tammy Faye
Mock, Paper, Scissors

Shame on Michael Vick

Because it's fun!

Give me a break

Did you know that Hillary Clinton has cleavage? Imagine, a woman with breasts ... go figure! Well, the Washington Post seems to think its a big deal.

There was cleavage on display Wednesday afternoon on C-SPAN2. It belonged to Sen. Hillary Clinton... There wasn't an unseemly amount of cleavage showing, but there it was. Undeniable.

Here is what the National Organization for Women had to say in an email release:

NEWSFLASH: Hillary Clinton has breasts.

And apparently that "news" merits coverage in the Washington Post.

In a Style section cover story on Friday, fashion "reporter" Robin Givhan notes that Hillary Clinton has taken a brazen step for a woman politician by wearing a low neckline. "Showing cleavage," says Givhan, "is a request to be engaged in a particular way. It doesn't necessarily mean that a woman is asking to be objectified, but it does suggest a certain confidence and physical ease."

Shock! Horror! A prominent woman showing confidence and physical ease!

Givhan goes on with her psychobabble: "It means that a woman is content being perceived as a sexual person in addition to being seen as someone who is intelligent, authoritative, witty and whatever else might define her personality. It also means that she feels that all those other characteristics are so apparent and undeniable, that they will not be overshadowed."

This article about the frontrunning candidate for U.S. president caused quite a stir in the NOW office this morning, eliciting reactions ranging from "You've got to be kidding!" to "What century is this?" The piece is definitely outrageous, but it's also hilarious. Absurdly hilarious. And it's an indictment of our society's lingering archaic notions of femininity, assumptions about breasts and sexuality, and fears about powerful women.

It's too bad the Washington Post decided to mimic National Review Online Editor Kathryn Jean Lopez (by definition an "extremist"), who posted about Hillary's cleavage in June 2006 (see photo above).

Time to set your watch back to .... 1950.

Keywords

I'm not sure what this says about me ... or the people who visit this blog ... but here are some of the more common keywords that are bringing people to YIKES!

ann coulter nude ---------------------- this one makes me gag
genarlow wilson video ---------------- yeah, okay
eva gabor nude ----------------------- maybe in her day ...
nude american actresses ------------ okay ...
anne francis nude --------------------- I'm sensing a pattern ...
love 12 year old boys ----------------- now this is just creepy
unhinged lunatic ---------------------- Bush, Cheney, etc.
devastating scissors by women ----- Tengrain ... Ten?? grain??
paper flyers in largo florida ---------- an activist!
nixonland ------------------------------ a freak!
indecision in love commitment ------ r u following me?
nude gina lollobrigida ---------------- okay, but this is getting old
barbara stanwyck nude --------------- really old ...
movies based on mrs mary baker eddy -- ... nude???
rats sinking ship image --------------- Bush, definitely Bush
john kennedy nude -------------------- I'd look ...
american actress nude --------------- come on already!!
tom coburn ----------------------------- not nude
what is offensive? --------------------- Tom Coburn ... nude
how would you define 1943? ---------- is this a trick question?
jill soloway writer ---------------------- obviously intelligent

Anti-family planning politicians are at it again!

Those wacky religious right conservatives in Congress are at it again! This time it's Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN). Hey, I'm from Indiana and I think this guy is crazy! If these extremists don't want women to have abortions doesn't it make sense that you would want women (and men) to have access to birth control?

Congress is only in session for a few more days, and then they will be at home for their August Recess. That is supposed to be a time when they meet with their constituents! Well, don't wait until August ... CALL THEM TONIGHT, and tell them to vote NO on the Pence amendment.

TAKE ACTION NOW

The message below is from Planned Parenthood Federation of America:

The anti-family planning politicians are at it again. Last night, Congressman Mike Pence introduced an amendment that restricts critical family planning funding. We’ve seen family planning funding restrictions before — but this one is different. Rep. Pence’s amendment specifically calls out Planned Parenthood and seeks to ban Planned Parenthood affiliate health centers from receiving family planning funding.

For more than 90 years, Planned Parenthood has helped women, men, and teens prevent unintended pregnancy and plan healthy families. Every year millions of them rely on Planned Parenthood for health care services, education, and information.

Time and time again, anti-family planning politicians put politics ahead of women’s health. It’s time to put a stop to these extremist policies.

Call your member of Congress tonight and ask him or her to VOTE NO on the Pence Amendment to the Labor-HHS spending bill and to speak on the floor against this attack on Planned Parenthood.

Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121

Call your member of Congress tonight and say that it’s time to stand up for women’s health!

Shakes asks, did they airbrush her soul?

Hat tip to Shakes for this. No wonder there are so many young girls with eating disorders. No one can meet this fake standard, and no one should try!

For Senator Vitter it's just another day at the office

The Washington Post reports:

Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) emerged this evening from his week-long self-imposed isolation after admitting his involvement with an escort service facing federal prostitution charges, asking for forgiveness but vowing to continue his work as a senator.

Yep, it was just another day at the office for the conservative Senator.

Vitter finally returned to the Capitol this morning, eight days after fleeing his senatorial duties amid the revelations. Vitter was flanked by the staunchest social conservative in the chamber, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), as the two entered the weekly Senate Republican policy luncheon using a backdoor that rank-and-file members rarely use to enter the stately Mansfield Room.

Inside the GOP lunch, staff was cleared out at one point for Vitter to address his colleagues, a several minute span which was capped with a round of applause. (Audible to reporters outside the room, it was unclear whether the applause was generated by something Vitter said or something someone else said in support of the lawmaker.)

"I think there was a general acceptance of what he said," Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) said, declining any other comment - as most senators did - about Vitter's closed-door statement to his colleagues.

Is anyone surprised?

GOP wheels off the cart?

The Associated Press reports the leading Republican presidential candidate is ... none of the above.

The latest Associated Press-Ipsos poll found that nearly a quarter of Republicans are unwilling to back top-tier hopefuls Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, John McCain or Mitt Romney, and no one candidate has emerged as the clear front-runner among Christian evangelicals. Such dissatisfaction underscores the volatility of the 2008 GOP nomination fight.

Could be good news for the Dems ....

Super Woman ...

Bush hates children

In commenting on the abysmal response of the federal government to hurricane Katrina, Kanya West said George Bush "hates Black people." Well, given what he has stated are his intentions regarding funding for children's heath insurance the same could be said -- George Bush "hates children."

The New York Times reports:

The White House said on Saturday that President Bush would veto a bipartisan plan to expand the Children’s Health Insurance Program, drafted over the last six months by senior members of the Senate Finance Committee.

The vow puts Mr. Bush at odds with the Democratic majority in Congress, with a substantial number of Republican lawmakers and with many governors of both parties, who want to expand the popular program to cover some of the nation’s eight million uninsured children.

Tony Fratto, a White House spokesman, said: “The president’s senior advisers will certainly recommend a veto of this proposal. And there is no question that the president would veto it.”

The program, which insured 7.4 million people at some time in the last year, is set to expire Sept. 30.

So why does the president intend to veto the bill? It can't be because we lack the money to pay for it ... we certainly have no problem finding trillions of dollars for an obscene war. Could it be that Bush is receiving some sort of kick-back from the tobacco industry, who would see increased taxes on cigarettes to help pay for the coverage? Taxing cigarettes seems like and EXCELLENT idea to me. Why not ask people to pay a luxury tax on an item they definitely don't "need."

Or, could it be that the bill failed to include kick-backs to one of the presidents OTHER favorite corporations -- the health insurance industry.

“The proposal would dramatically expand the Children’s Health Insurance Program, adding nonpoor children to the program, and more than doubling the level of spending,” Mr. Fratto said. “This will have the effect of encouraging many to drop private coverage, to go on the government-subsidized program.”

In addition, Mr. Fratto said, the Senate plan does not include any of Mr. Bush’s proposals to change the tax treatment of health insurance, in an effort to make it more affordable for millions of Americans.

God forbid that insurance companies lose even a fraction of the money they gouge from consumers every year. Anyone who believes, as the president seems to, that giving tax breaks to insurance companies will be an incentive for them to reduce the cost of health insurance is living in a dream land! Those greedy bas**** will simply pocket the money.

No Captive audience for smut film

Here's an update on Saturday's post about the Los Angeles-based feminist group OBJECT, and their protest to have graphic billboards depicting the abduction, torture and death of a woman used to promote the movie "Captive" taken down. The movie opened in LA over the weekend, at the same time NOW activists were meeting in Detroit.

Well, it seems there is virtually no audience for "Captive." A quick check of the LATimes.com web site revealed that Captive came in 12th, with weekend box office receipts at a fraction of what other films brought in. The paper's review of the film was even worse.

If you happen to be in LA on Tuesday, stop by OBJECT's Lady Party at The Echoplex, 1154 Glendale Blvd. The fun begins at 8:00 p.m.

Sunday Funnies