How to handle the Right — "join" them

I'm going to make a fun point and a serious point with this one.

The fun point

The story — a couple of dozen "Tea Party" activists held a rally in Manhattan on Thursday to "stand up to Occupy Wall Street extremists".

(I put "Tea Party" in quotes because the rally was organized by Americans for Prosperity, the operative arm of the Koch Bros. God knows who believes what in that outfit.)

The rally was foiled by Occupyers, however — who playfully joined in. The Guardian:

A conservative rally billed as an opportunity to "stand up to Occupy Wall Street extremists" fell flat on Thursday when it was co-opted by members of Occupy Wall Street.

Supporters of Americans for Prosperity, a Tea Party-esque group [-esque indeed] funded by the billionaire Koch brothers, gathered at the Rockefeller Center in midtown Manhattan to demonstrate against both Occupy Wall Street and President Obama.

But almost half of the sparse crowd were Occupy Wall Street protesters, smartly dressed and bearing signs parodying Americans for Prosperity's ultra-conservative message.

"My sign says: 'I'm dreaming of a white president, just like the ones we used to have,'" said Stan Williams, a labour organiser and member of the Occupy movement.

It must have been a lot of fun putting that together. Other signs included "I hate libraries" and "'Every man for himself.' –Jesus".

There are also several interesting videos in the article; it's worth a visit.

The serious point

Now my serious point. This is so under-appreciated as a technique. Not only is it non-violent, it's effective.

I'll give you three examples — one that should have happened, and two that still could.

■ Should have happened — When all those rightwingers open-carried guns to Democratic events, the only effective response was to do the same at their events. Mirror mirror.

But not dressed as leftwing counter-narrative gun-types. To do this right, you go as a rightwing gun-job — read your NRA bible, bone up on all your rightwing rights, and profess exactly what the guys at the Dem rallies profess.

Just be them, like in the story above. Be a Second-Amendment American to the bone. Chew tobacco if you think that helps. Spit.

Instantly two things will happen: (1) You'll strip all the political context from the act, and everyone who sees you will see how stupid (and dangerous) the act itself is. That will happen on camera, by the way, since you've timed this to get the same news coverage everyone like you is getting.

And (2) the rightwing Blackwater cop-jobs will jump you like nobody's business. You'll spout off about your rightwing rights, and your rightwing bro's and sisters will shuck those rights right out of you — also on camera. (Be sure to cover your face, and don't forget your lines.)

How perfect is that? The right doesn't stand by that stuff; they just pretend to. Here's a perfect chance to make them show it. Believe me, they will, eagerly. You might even get a lawsuit out of it.

So that's one perfect opportunity that we missed. But file it, folks. This can be done anytime the time is ripe.

■ Still can happen — We're drowning in conscience objections from the right, challenges in court, the whole nine yards. Even my alma mater is soiling itself.

To respond, don't use words; use deeds. You have a conscience too, right? Sure you do; what real American doesn't? So use it.

Go get a job at ... oh, Chic-fil-A would be nice ... then start using your conscience to object. You don't have to object to gays. Object to ... chicken. You'll serve anything on the menu, but not the chicken, because your religion worships birds.

You'll serve anything else — fries are good, and anyone who likes the tasty sides can have all of them they want. You'll serve the breakfast sausage with both hands. Just not the bird. Make sure there's a camera handy when the boss objects to your objections.

I'm making this up, and you can probably do better. Opportunities for this kind of fun are endless.

Your model is the pharmacist who won't dole out birth control and Plan B.

Your advantage? Anyplace that honors one conscience objection honors all conscience objection — it's the dirty secret of conscience objection. All conscience is individual. Again, just strip politics from the act, and go with it. Be sure someone with a camera is handy.

Honors class project — Get a job at a pharmacy that has already supported someone who conscience-objects to vagina products (BC, Plan B, IUDs), and turn the tables. Refuse to dole out ... Viagra would make sense. Or asthma drugs. Or corn plasters, if there's a prescription version. You pick.

Then when the boss comes to see what the fuss is about, stand by your conscience and demand he defend it as well. After all, he defended the other guy's.

Put him on the spot and make sure there's a camera around. Just remember to play your role completely — be sincere, have a conscience, and object on that basis. If there's follow-up (and if you're good, there will be), stay in character.

You're not making a point; the point is making itself through you.

■ Your November dissertation — Want a real one you can do in two months? If you live in a state where wingers are challenging black and brown voters, you can Mirror-Mirror them at white polling places.

Don't go outside the script. Just find out what they're doing — word for word if need be — and do that. Make sure that the cameras covering the dust-up at black and brown polling places are covering yours.

This works if you mirror them and don't push further. Do that, get the press, and your diploma awaits. You've arrived. If this RW stuff is happening your state, and ten groups (say) on our side play the Mirror Game, I guarantee you a solid 15 minutes of fame. If not more.

Bottom line

The point of all of this is to strip the Right of its ability to make the ridiculous make sense — but only in the context of their presumed specialness. You do it by playing Mirror-Mirror without the context, then let the world play "who's the fool?".

A Hindu refusing to serve beef at a restaurant would be fired and laughed out of town. But a vagina-cop drug dispenser at a pharmacy makes sense?

Not after you're done doing the same. This is how you tar their act with your own (kind of the way the right tarred impeachment using Clinton; there will never be another one).

And to go back to my first point — this really is fun. There are plenty of worse ways to make a point. Effective tactics can also be a blast.

GP

To follow or send links: @Gaius_Publius
  Read the rest of this post...

Romney campaigner Pat Robertson tells man to beat his wife

Mitt Romney spent Saturday campaigning with religious right extremist Pat Robertson.  Romney was using Robertson to "prove" that he's a "real" Christian.

Which is ironic, since most would question Robertson's claim to speak for Christianity.  (It also makes you wonder what Mitt Romney thinks a real Christian is - if he thinks Pat Robertson is God's messenger.)  Here's Mitt and Pat together at an event this weekend.




Yesterday, fresh off of campaigning with Mitt Romney just 48 hours before, Pat Robertson told a caller to his TV show to beat his wife. Via Right Wing Watch:

For example, today on the 700 Club’s “Bring It On” segment where viewers ask Robertson questions, one man wondered how he should go about repairing his marriage with a wife who “insults” him and once tried to attack him.

“Well, you could become a Muslim and you could beat her,” Robertson responded. “This man’s got to stand up to her and he can’t let her get away with this stuff,” Robertson continued, “I don’t think we condone wife-beating these days but something has got to be done.”

He later said the woman is a “rebellious child” and pondered if she has psychological problems. Robertson told the viewer that since he “can’t divorce her according to the Scripture, so I say: move to Saudi Arabia.”

Robertson's network has now censored the broadcast, but fortunately Right Wing Watch got it first:



It's not clearly if Mitt Romney is just as confused about Christianity as Robertson, or whether he's simply pandering to extremists again, in a desperate effort to save his floundering presidential run.

Either way, it's time for Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan to issue a statement about wife-beating. Are they for it or against it? Read the rest of this post...

Racist assault against black CNN camerawoman at GOP convention

Via MIJE:

Carroll, who agreed to be named for the first time, said she does not want her situation to be used for political advantage. "This situation could happen to me at the Democratic convention or standing on the street corner. Racism is a global issue," she said by telephone from Tampa.

Unlikely. The Republicans routinely bash the media, portray them as just as commie pinko as they portray the Democrats. She was assaulted the same reason media have been assaulted at other GOP election events - and the same reason that government officials are the target of violence in this country - because Republicans feed the hatred of the media and our government.

Carroll said no one took the names of the attendees who threw peanuts at her Tuesday on the convention floor and told her, "This is what we feed animals." She alerted fellow camera operators, producers and CNN security. The head of the delegation — she was not certain of the state — told her the perpetrators must have been alternates, not delegates.

Nice of the GOP not to take the incident seriously.

But Carroll, 34, said that as an Alabama native, she was not surprised. "This is Florida, and I'm from the Deep South," she said. "You come to places like this, you can count the black people on your hand. They see us doing things they don't think I should do."

Carroll noted of the Republican convention, "There are not that many black women there."

Bingo. Read the rest of this post...

GOP Senate candidate from PA says pregnancy from rape is just like having kid of out wedlock

GOP candidate for US Senate from Pennsylvania, Tom Smith, compares pregnancy resulting from rape and having a baby out of wedlock. He says that getting pregnant from being raped is "similar" to getting pregnant from being raped. And his daughter had a child out of wedlock, and he dealt with it, so women who get raped can deal with having their kids too, cuz his daughter dealt with it.

Just wow. And there's video,

Read the rest of this post...

Swing state female voters: Romney "out of step" on women's health issues

It's difficult to imagine why any woman would want to vote for a Republican these days. There will be a price to pay in November for their war on women. The Hill:

The survey, conducted by Hart Research Associates, lends credence to Democrats' argument that the presumptive GOP presidential nominee is on the wrong end of a steep gender gap, largely because of his opposition to abortion rights and his positions on issues such as contraception.

By a 20-point margin, women surveyed in the Planned Parenthood Action Fund poll said Romney is "out of step" on women's issues. That number increased as women heard "specific information about Romney's on-the-record statements about women's preventive and reproductive health," the Hart polling memo says.

After hearing those descriptions, 64 percent of respondents said Romney is out of step.

Read the rest of this post...

GOP is a party of WASPs led by 70-year-old impotent white guys

More on the Ryan-Akin plan for women, plus a bonus point about the hostile takeover of the Republican Party.

Mike Papantonio, co-host of Ring of Fire Radio, gets what Rachel Maddow gets, that the Ryan-Akin understanding of the female body is either cynical and dishonest or dreadfully "dumb."

But he gets something more — there's a lot that's purely personal in the war on woman, especially when it's coming from power-crazed, wealthy, hyper-entitled males who now need Viagra and Cialis to "look good" for the ladies.

Think about that in human terms — power-crazed and impotent, the white-shoes Cialis crowd. Among people for whom power is a fetish, this is deeply shameful. That must be driving them nuts.

This explains the leaders, as Papantonio points out below (starting 2:00 in the clip). Now add "stupid" (Papantonio says "dumbed-down") and you see why their high-level water-boys, the Todd Akins of the party, act and sound like they do. It's stupid doing the bidding of the impotent.

The Paul Ryan part starts at 5:00. Be sure not to miss (at 7:20 and following) Papantonio's claim that it was the "ten billionaires" who decided that "Paul Ryan should be the VP," not the rest of the party.

I've heard Papantonio make this claim before — that the Koch crowd forced Paul Ryan on Romney when all the party regulars wanted someone who could actually help them win. I'll have more on that point below.

Watch the clip; it's both an excellent analysis and a righteous rant.



Back to that point about the billionaire takeover of the Republican Party. You're watching history, folks. Papantonio said it one way on his Ring of Fire radio show (sorry, no public link, but the show was this one if you're a subscriber).

Mike goes less far than I do. This is entirely my own:

• The Koch-like billionaires are running a coup on the Republican Party, taking control away from party regulars. "Tea Party"–branded politicians are their heavily financed foot soldiers.
  
  Yes, there are Tea Party citizens in the world, with actual tea-bag beliefs.
  
  But "Tea Party" politicians are a Koch Bros Joint, running a hostile takeover against the Boehners and McConnells, the Romneys and McCains.
  
  No party regular who just "wants to win the next election" will have a place in the new Republican Party. They have to serve daddy first, the party second.

In other words, "Daddy" has plans. Those "ten billionaires" are playing the long game, not the short one.

Why did the Koch crowd not care that they lost the Senate in 2010 by running Sharon Angle and Christine O'Donnell? Why do they not care what Paul Ryan does to Mitt Romney's chances this year?

Because for now, the government isn't the prize. The Republican Party is. It sure looks like they're taking it step by step, consolidating each territory first before invading the next.

They'll take the government (Bob Rubin, watch out; your Midwest billionaire brothers are acing you out of the game). But not quite yet; they're getting their pieces in place, their ducks in a row.

This is exactly like their recent takeover of the already-slavish Cato Institute. The illusion of independence is meaningless to them — they now want direct control.

Which means they're preparing for a bigger move down the road. Trust me.

As to their "Tea Party" soldiers — these men are not just operatives; they're cruel human beings. Hate-the-ladies cruel. Alan Simpson cruel.

As operatives, they feel strong and effective, so long as they do daddy's bidding. As humans though, they're an angry, powerless lot. An irony on both fronts if you think about it.

GP

To follow or send links: @Gaius_Publius Read the rest of this post...

Federal appeals court to let Texas cut off Planned Parenthood funding

The Republican war on women continues.

A federal appeals court ruled late Tuesday that Texas can cut off funding for Planned Parenthood clinics that provide health services to low-income women before a trial over a new law that bans state money from going to organizations tied to abortion providers.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans lifted a federal judge's temporary injunction that called for the funding to continue pending an October trial on Planned Parenthood's challenge to the law.

State officials sought to cut off funding to Planned Parenthood clinics that provide family planning and health services to poor women as part of the Texas Women's Health Program after the state's Republican-led Legislature passed a law banning funds to organizations linked to abortion providers. No state money goes to pay for abortions.

Read the rest of this post...

Onion: "Republicans Condemn Akin's Comments As Blemish On Party's Otherwise Spotless Women's Rights Record"

Hysterical from the Onion. It's short and good, no excerpt really possible, just go read it and smile. Read the rest of this post...

Rachel Maddow on "legitimate rape"—What Todd Akin's statement says about GOP orthodoxy

This is The Rachel Maddow Show at its best.

Look beyond the fact that MSNBC is a one-eyed giant that finds only Republican fault. There is Republican fault to find, and Maddow has found a doozy. The analysis below is brilliant.

Consider the seed. The ostensible seed is Missouri [corrected] GOP Senate candidate Todd Akin's remarkable statement (my emphasis):

First of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.

But this is not about that statement; it's about what that statement means. This segment has a different seed and a different bottom line.

Her bottom line determines her structure. She therefore starts in 1980 with the Leon Holmes' own remarkable statement, then steps to Stephen Freind in 1988, to Henry Aldridge (what a name) in 1995, and then to Fay ("God's Little Shield") Boozman in 1998.

The seed isn't the offense to women in Todd Akin's statement, it's modern right-wing orthodoxy. You can't understand "legitimate rape" and its implications without that backward look.

Watch; and as you do, try to anticipate her bottom line. (Click here to open large in a new tab.)



Do you see it now? A nice catch by Maddow and an unexpected, brilliant bottom line for the Todd Akin news event. It's not about that comment; it's about what that comment means.

Akin's comment means that modern right-wing voters and the low-end politicians (like Akin) who carry water for the smarter, more powerful Bigs (do you really think Rove believes this crap?) — those people think exactly like the witch-hunters of the 17th century.

In the 1600s, judges determined if a witch was guilty by subjecting her to "trial by drowning" (my phrase; actually "ordeal by cold water"). Basically, you tie the "witch" up and throw her in the river.

If she floats, she isn't a witch. If she drowns, she is a witch and needed drowning anyway. The proof is also the punishment. How convenient. [See also Update below.]

In this century, they're testing for modern witches who engage in "illegitimate" rape — witches who secretly wanted it.

Call it "trial by baby" — if the "witch" wasn't asking for it, she can't have gotten pregnant. As Maddow says, "by definition" if she got pregnant, she "cooperated" and lost the protection of "God's Little Shield".

And just like in 1600s (where these people apparently still live), the "proof" is also the punishment. If you didn't have "God's Little Shield" you got what you deserved — "God's Little Lemonade."

How convenient.

Right-wing orthodoxy: These people, enablers of the right-wing Bigs, are truly crazy. And non-crazy Bigs like Rove are using them to the hilt. Like with the climate, folks, this trajectory too has an end-point.

Update: I'm reminded that some versions of "ordeal by cold water" reversed the guilty indicator (see here and also here). True enough; still, I like my metaphor and they did often test-drown the "guilty." (Thanks always to commenters for corrections and factual adjustments.)

GP

To follow or send links: @Gaius_Publius
  Read the rest of this post...

2012 to be a record year for women running for Congress

These numbers should be improving every year until we reach a 50/50 ratio in both houses of Congress. There's no reason why the number of women should be as low as it is today.

More on the big year for women at the Huffington Post:

Women currently hold 73 of the 435 seats in the House of Representatives. Four states -- Delaware, Iowa, Mississippi and Vermont -- have never had a woman serving in their congressional delegation.

"Research shows that women leaders introduce more bills, bring more resources home to their districts and advocate for new issues on the legislative agenda," said Mary Hughes, founder of the 2012 Project, in a statement.

Already in this election cycle, 294 women have filed to run for House seats, with four more expected to do so, breaking the previous record set in 2010 of 262 women.

There are also a record number of Democratic women running for Senate seats in the 2012 elections.

Read the rest of this post...

France adds more women in government, still below 50%

One of the great failures of the François Mitterrand government was the failure to promote women and non-white candidates. To his credit, Nicholas Sarkozy did a considerably better job than previous governments and promoted a number of women within his team including current IMF chief Christine Lagarde. You can agree or disagree with policy choices, but that was a big step.

The new François Hollande government has appointed women to half of his cabinet, though some have argued that the number is much lower for the top level cabinet positions. Following the parliamentary elections, women now comprise 27% of the parliament, 37% for the socialists. The new parliament includes yet another LePen, the 22 year old niece of the former far right presidential candidate Jean Marie LePen. (Sarkozy's UMP delivered only 14% in the recent elections.)

It's certainly progress, but again, this is still well below the 50% target.

The result lifts France from 69th to 34th in the world for the proportion of female MPs, according to the Inter-Parliamentary Union, an international organisation of parliaments. Britain now lies joint 55th.

éjane Sénac, a specialist in gender equality at Sciences-Po and the National Centre for Scientific Research, said there was still no egalité in the French executive. "With 73% of MPs still men, this result has confirmed that parity is a problem that needs to be dealt with. If there had not been the 'pink wave' with the Socialists winning so many seats, we wouldn't even have 27% women," she said.

Sénac called on Hollande to bar political parties from receiving public funds unless they implemented a policy of equality.

It should be noted that despite the modern women's movement having origins in the US, the US is sadly ranked number 78, far behind France and the UK for women in government. The House stands at 17% and the Senate 17% for women representatives. We need to do a lot better than this. How can we expect Washington to properly govern all Americans when the numbers are this far off? This needs to become a higher priority for both political parties. Read the rest of this post...

Super PAC donations dominated by men

The percentage is just about the same as the number of women in Congress and in CEO positions. Across the board, these numbers need to change. CBS News:

The bulk of the cash being funneled to super PACs -- groups independent from political campaigns that can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money -- comes from a select few wealthy Americans. One look at the list of donors bankrolling these groups makes one thing clear: This new element of American politics is overwhelmingly dominated by men. As women continue to strive for better representation in politics, the introduction of super PACs has opened up a powerful new means of political speech that has so far been employed mostly by men.

According to the nonpartisan research group the Center for Responsive Politics, as of May 21, about 20 percent of donations to outside groups like super PACs in this election cycle have come from women (among the donations that could be broken down by gender). In dollars, that amounts to $31,165,706 -- however, that includes $15,000,000 in donations from just one person, Miriam Adelson. Adelson's husband, casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, is best known in this campaign season for single-handedly keeping Newt Gingrich's Republican primary bid alive with his super PAC donations.

Read the rest of this post...

GOP spokesman: "Let’s hurl some acid" at female Democratic senators

The GOP war on women continues. What kind of a sicko proposes this kind of violence against women? Why does Jay Townsend, a campaign spokesman for Republican Rep. Nan Hayworth (NY-19), still have a job this morning?

Townsend's comments (which have since been removed) were posted Thursday on a local Facebook discussion forum for New York's 19th congressional district. Townsend was responding to comments made by a commenter named "Tom" during an online debate over gas prices. Townsend wrote:

"Listen to Tom. What a little bee he has in his bonnet. Buzz Buzz. My question today … when is Tommy boy going to weigh in on all the Lilly Ledbetter hypocrites who claim to be fighting the War on Women? Let's hurl some acid at those female democratic Senators who won't abide the mandates they want to impose on the private sector."

Read the rest of this post...

Catholic Bishops now bullying Girl Scouts over religious orthodoxy

All you need to know:

• The Catholic Bishops are once more acting like a Republican GOTV organization in an election year.
  
  
• The Catholic Bishops defend the boy-abusers but put their nuns (average age, 74) into receivership.
  
  
• Many Scout groups are organized in parish schools, which gives the Bishops some leverage.

It's the old old story — homophobic, misogynistic, often-closeted men acting out a hatred of women, at taxpayer expense.

The sad Catholic tale, from Yahoo News (my emphasis):

[T]he Girl Scouts of the USA are now facing their highest-level challenge yet: An official inquiry by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

At issue are concerns about program materials that some Catholics find offensive, as well as assertions that the Scouts associate with other groups espousing stances that conflict with church teaching. The Scouts, who have numerous parish-sponsored troops, deny many of the claims and defend their alliances.

The inquiry coincides with the Scouts' 100th anniversary celebrations and follows a chain of other controversies.

I cut out Yahoo's church-justifying intro phrase; feel free to click and read it for yourself. But if you do, ask yourself if that phrase, coming first, doesn't lay down some ground cover for the Bishops. (How to read the press, folks; it's not that hard.)

Note that organization — U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. This isn't all bishops, but a conservative-captured and highly influential "professional association" akin to the AMA. Capturing these organizations, then propagandizing through them, is how conservatives work. The phrase for this is "cadre coup".

The writer cycles through the Bishop's complaints — some new, some old, some non-existent (Girl Scouts have never partnered with the evil Planned Parenthood, for example). And the organization says it will modify some of its material to conform to the Catholic Bishop's narrow orthodoxy (though their phrasing is different, something about "easing apprehensions").

Still, that may not be enough:

"I know we're a big part of the culture wars," said the Girl Scouts' spokeswoman, Michelle Tompkins. "People use our good name to advance their own agenda." "For us, there's an overarching sadness to it," Tompkins added. "We're just trying to further girls' leadership."

With the bishops now getting involved, the stakes are high. The Girl Scouts estimate that one-fourth of their 2.3 million youth members are Catholic, and any significant exodus would be a blow given that membership already is down from a peak of more than 3 million several decades ago.

Did I say "may" not be enough? Make that "will" not be enough. These are take-no-prisoners conservatives, and there's blood in the air. The Girl Scouts have given an inch; bad move in my estimation. Again, these are guys who put their nuns (average age, 74) into receivership.

Digby has more.

My solution is simple, by the way. Tax them. Then they can electioneer all they want without the free ride on my dime.

GP

To follow or send links: @Gaius_Publius
  Read the rest of this post...

Are Americans in the Vatican – including disgraced Cardinal Law – behind the Nuns Crackdown?

As Joe reported here, the Vatican has opened a new front on the war against women with a crackdown of the largest and most influential organization of nuns in the U.S., the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR).

From Joe's story, quoting the NY Times (please click to get the full picture):

The Vatican has appointed an American bishop to rein in the largest and most influential group of Catholic nuns in the United States, saying that an investigation found that the group had “serious doctrinal problems.”

The Vatican’s assessment, issued on Wednesday, said that members of the group, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, had challenged church teaching on homosexuality and the male-only priesthood, and promoted “radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith.”

The sisters were also reprimanded for making public statements that “disagree with or challenge the bishops, who are the church’s authentic teachers of faith and morals.” ... Word of the Vatican’s action took the group completely by surprise, Sister Sanders said.

That's the background. Now comes news of who's running this Vatican operation — a bunch of American priests, possibly including disgraced Boston Cardinal Bernard Law (my emphasis and [bracketed notes]):

When the Vatican last month announced a doctrinal crackdown on the leadership organization representing most of the 57,000 nuns in the U.S. [see above], the sisters said they were “stunned” by the move. Many American Catholics, meanwhile, were angry at what they saw as Rome bullying women whose lives of service have endeared them to the public. ...

[I]t turns out that conservative American churchmen living in Rome—including disgraced former Boston Cardinal Bernard Law—were key players in pushing the hostile takeover of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, or LCWR, which they have long viewed with suspicion for emphasizing social justice work over loyalty to the hierarchy and issues like abortion and gay marriage.

Vatican observers in Rome and church sources in the U.S. say Law was “the person in Rome most forcefully supporting” the LCWR investigation, as Rome correspondent Robert Mickens wrote in The Tablet, a London-based Catholic weekly. Law was the “prime instigator,” in the words of one American churchman, of the investigation that began in 2009 and ended in 2011. The actual crackdown was only launched in April.

Also named in the story are Cardinal Raymond Burke, former archbishop of St. Louis; Cardinal William Levada, a former archbishop of San Francisco; and Cardinal James Stafford, a former Denver archbishop.

Conservatives all. Levada has Ratzinger's old job as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "the Vatican’s powerful doctrinal watchdog."

At issue is not just the fact that Bernard Law and Raymond Burke were given "asylum" in Rome after being driven out of the U.S. in the wake of the child abuse scandal. It's that the Vatican dragged its feet to protect its priests while putting its female community into receivership:

“American Catholics have not forgotten how long it took bishops to wake up to the sexual-abuse crisis they created. And now they see that the Vatican took just three years to determine that it had no other option but to put 80 percent of U.S. nuns — whose average age is 74 — into receivership, an effort led in part by Cardinal Bernard Law,” Grant Gallicho, an associate editor of Commonweal, a liberal Catholic periodical, wrote on the magazine’s blog.

The average age of nuns in the U.S. is ... 74 years old? Man, do these guys owe them.

Is it safe to say that, like all troglodytes, these males hate women? Is it safe to say that if this weren't a "church," most of these types would be serving time for sexual abuse of minors in prisons around the world? I would say Yes on all counts.

The good news? There really are good Catholics — Catholics who are also actually good — Fr. Daniel Berrigan types, who live and breathe under the Bush-like dictatorship of the conservatives who control their organization.

What do you call a religious leader who loves power more than doing right? Not-religious.

GP

(To follow on Twitter or to send links: @Gaius_Publius)
  Read the rest of this post...

Romney spokesman made sexist and homophobic remarks about Mrs. Obama, Hillary Clinton

Would you expect anything less from the Republican nominee?

Interesting that we haven't heard boo from Mitt or Ann Romney.  You'll recall two weeks ago they were more than happy to talk non-stop about how they felt Democratic consultant Hilary Rosen had shown disrespect to women.  But when the Romney campaign's own spokesman - and mind you, Hilary Rosen doesn't even work for the Obama campaign, this guy does work for Romney - is found to have tried to cover up a series of sexist and homophobic comments about First Lady Michelle Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, and the wife of Romney's remaining serious (well, somewhat serious) opponent in the GOP primary, you don't hear boo from Mr. or Mrs. Romney.

Wonder why that is?  Maybe Mitt and Ann Romney don't care about women at all. We'll find out if they keep this spokesman on staff. Read the rest of this post...

Vatican opens new front in its war on women with attack on American nuns

While the GOP continues its war on women, the Vatican, which has been in the forefront of that war for centuries, has set its sights on American nuns. Their "sin"? Among other things, not being sufficiently anti-gay. From the NY Times:

The Vatican has appointed an American bishop to rein in the largest and most influential group of Catholic nuns in the United States, saying that an investigation found that the group had “serious doctrinal problems.” 

The Vatican’s assessment, issued on Wednesday, said that members of the group, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, had challenged church teaching on homosexuality and the male-only priesthood, and promoted “radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith.”

The sisters were also reprimanded for making public statements that “disagree with or challenge the bishops, who are the church’s authentic teachers of faith and morals.”  During the debate over the health care overhaul in 2010, American bishops came out in opposition to the health plan, but dozens of sisters, many of whom belong to the Leadership Conference, signed a statement supporting it — support that provided crucial cover for the Obama administration in the battle over health care.

The nuns weren't expecting this broadside from the men who run the church:

Word of the Vatican’s action took the group completely by surprise, Sister Sanders said. She said that the group’s leaders were in Rome on Wednesday for what they thought was a routine annual visit to the Vatican when they were informed of the outcome of the investigation, which began in 2008. 

“I’m stunned,” said Sister Simone Campbell, executive director of Network, a Catholic social justice lobby founded by sisters. Her group was also cited in the Vatican document, along with the Leadership Conference, for focusing its work too much on poverty and economic injustice, while keeping “silent” on abortion and same-sex marriage.

And, to complete the homophobic circle, the Archbishop of Seattle, J. Peter Sartain, who is leading the jihad against the nuns, is also leading the effort to repeal Washington State's new marriage equality law. But, this past weekend, a number of parishes rejected the Archbishop's edict to collect signatures for an anti-marriage referendum. In fact, via Igor Volsky at Think Progress, we learned that one Catholic priest got a standing ovation from his parishioners by announcing he wouldn't participate in the effort to gather signatures for an anti-marriage petition. Read the rest of this post...

Ledbetter slams Romney for his uncertainty about helping women get equal pay for equal work

We wouldn't want the government helping women get equal pay for equal work. From Laura Bassett at HuffPo:

Lilly Ledbetter, the woman who famously sued her employer after discovering she was being paid less than her male colleagues and who inspired the first piece of legislation President Barack Obama signed upon entering office, fired back against likely GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney after he declined to say whether he would have signed the bill into law.

"It took me more than 20 years to get an answer for the injustices that I suffered as an unfairly paid worker, so I know what it's like to wait for justice. I know what it's like to fight for justice. But Mitt Romney told me and millions of other women that he couldn't commit to fighting with us or for us," Ledbetter told reporters Wednesday.

In 1998, Ledbetter sued her employer, Goodyear Tire and Rubber, for paying her significantly less over the course of her career than her less experienced male colleagues who were doing similar work. The Supreme Court ultimately sided against Ledbetter because she had waited 6 years to file suit, far exceeding the 180-day statute of limitations.

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act extends that window, giving women more time in which to sue their employers for wage discrimination.

Read the rest of this post...

Hate group tries to claim credit for Komen debacle

The officially-designed religious right hate group, American Family Association, is now oddly (or typically) claiming credit for the failure of two Susan G. Komen events to pull in the support they previously expected. Here is AFA's latest email alert:

Nationwide, women are choosing to no longer support Komen and its partnership with Planned Parenthood.

A March 25 Komen race in Southern Arizona was short 7,267 participants of their goal of 11,000. The event also failed to meet their fundraising goal of $700,000 by over $100,000.

Another race in Indianapolis scheduled for next week is also expected to be at least 10,000 short of last year's 37,500 participants.

There's that.  Or maybe people are leaving Komen in droves specifically BECAUSE of what it did to Planned Parenthood. I don't know anyone progressive who would ever give another dime to Susan G. Komen after the Planned Parenthood debacle. So, gee, perhaps that's why their fundraising and turnout is suffering.

AFA is good at trying to claim victory from the jaws of the defeat. Probably because they're just not that good at this game. Hell, Joe and I beat them a few years ago when they got Ford Motor Company to stop advertising in gay publications. After we blew the issue up here on the blog, forcing other gay groups to finally get involved, Ford caved. AFA was ticked at us. I know they were, because someone inside subsequently defected and told me about the meetings.

So it's understandable why AFA feels the need to claim credit when it's not clear that any is due.  Otherwise, they'd have nothing to say. Read the rest of this post...

Does Romney agree with Ted Nugent that Hillary Clinton is a "c*nt" and a "two-bit wh*re"?

Romney wooed Ted Nugent. Romney and his son Tagg publicly talked about how excited they were that Ted Nugent was endorsing Romney. Every hour we find out something even more despicable about Ted Nugent. What is Mitt Romney doing? From the Violence Policy Center:

[I]n a July 1994 interview in Westworld Newspaper, Nugent called Hillary Clinton a "toxic c--t," adding, "This bitch is nothing but a two-bit whore for Fidel Castro."

Read the rest of this post...