Elections | Economic Crisis | Jobs | TSA | Limbaugh | Fun Stuff
Follow @americablog
Tuesday, January 18, 2005
Late night open thread
I think Republicans are genetically inferior. Does that make me a bad man? Discuss amongst yourselves.
Read the rest of this post...
Larry Summers, Prez of Harvard, in trouble over comments about women
While all are invited to comment, I'm particularly interested in hearing what the women have to say. Was this really that offensive what he said?
I'm really curious what folks think, because I'm not sure. Read the rest of this post...
Summers declined to provide a tape or transcript of his remarks, but he did describe comments to the Globe similar to what participants recalled.I only ask because I thought there was research about women's brains vs. men's brains, women being left-brained or whatever it was (i.e., more creative), versus men being right-brained (i.e., more technical or something). This raises an interesting question - or does it? Namely, is it ever okay to suggest that the differences in the sexes actually goes so deep as to suggest that each sex may have an advantage over the other in certain areas? I mean, it's not sexist to suggest that men are genetically predisposed to being stronger than women (I think I'm safe on that one). So where do such comparisons cross the line, and does Summers cross it?
"It's possible I made some reference to innate differences," he said. He said people "would prefer to believe" that the differences in performance between the sexes are due to social factors, "but these are things that need to be studied."
He also cited as an example one of his daughters, who as a child was given two trucks in an effort at gender-neutral upbringing. Yet he said she named them "daddy truck" and "baby truck," as if they were dolls.
I'm really curious what folks think, because I'm not sure. Read the rest of this post...
We [heart] Senator Boxer, Part II
Now there's video of her beating the crap out of Condi.
Read the rest of this post...
We [heart] Senator Boxer
Here's the transcript of her taking on Condi today. LOVE that woman. If she were a man, I'd marry her. Well, in Massachusetts.
Read the rest of this post...
If the DNC picks a conservative head, it's all over
UPDATE: I've received some email about Martin Frost and did some more research. He had a pretty good voting record on a number of liberal issues, including gay rights and reproductive rights for women, and that's good. I still remain concerned about a guy who ran for re-election by touting his closeness to President Bush and hiding the fact he was a Democrat. Sure, maybe that's how Dems get elected in Texas (maybe), but it's not the kind of thinking we need for the national party. Heads need to roll in Washington. We need new thinking and new blood, not someone who's proud of his love of George Bush.
---------------
The DNC is, by all reports, in quite some danger of picking an establishment candidate as the next party chair. Why? Because they're freaked out that Howard Dean actually has a chance at becoming the next head of the party, and the old-time do-nothing Red-state-loving Republican wing of the Democrat party can't fathom the possibility of our party finally being headed by someone who actually embraces the ideals and policy that the party stands for. The top candidate for the Dean-haters? Martin Frost, a Texan who ran for election on the platform that he was a friend of Bush AND he refuses to mention that he was a Democrat in his TV ads or on his campaign signs.
I will be writing more on this shortly, but I want to know what you folks think of us all pledging NOW that we won't give a dime to the Democratic party if they pick a new party chair who reflects the ideals and the guts (or lack thereof) of old-time Democrats?
I'm serious about this. They are getting very close to screwing us all over. This party has not had the catharsis it needed after the election. Where was the discussion of what went wrong? The REAL discussion? Nowhere. The party is moving ahead like all is well. The progressive nonprofits, were they to blame? No discussion. The DNC and the DLC? No discussion. John Kerry? No discussion. People like Martin Frost who are afraid to admit they're Democrats and who feel the need to publicly suck up to George Bush? No discussion.
The same thing happened 4 years ago when Al Gore - all the talk about the party figuring out what went wrong, it all ended in nothing being discussed and nothing being changed. We need a revolution in this party. The old consultants, the party leaders, the leaders in Congress, the heads of the liberal non-proits, ALL of them need to justify their paychecks or get out of town. There's a new and empowered generation of Democrats out here, and we're mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.
The party elects Martin Frost or some similar clone as party head, and it's all over. And before someone in a closed room tells us we have nowhere to go even if they do pick someone who isn't a reformer, think about how it's going to effect we if we don't give you a dime of money or one scintilla of support over the next 4 years, not to mention bashing you every step of the way. Yeah, we'll vote for the Democratic candidate next time (maybe), but you see how successful you are when we boycott all your fundraising and publicly malign you. Read the rest of this post...
---------------
The DNC is, by all reports, in quite some danger of picking an establishment candidate as the next party chair. Why? Because they're freaked out that Howard Dean actually has a chance at becoming the next head of the party, and the old-time do-nothing Red-state-loving Republican wing of the Democrat party can't fathom the possibility of our party finally being headed by someone who actually embraces the ideals and policy that the party stands for. The top candidate for the Dean-haters? Martin Frost, a Texan who ran for election on the platform that he was a friend of Bush AND he refuses to mention that he was a Democrat in his TV ads or on his campaign signs.
I will be writing more on this shortly, but I want to know what you folks think of us all pledging NOW that we won't give a dime to the Democratic party if they pick a new party chair who reflects the ideals and the guts (or lack thereof) of old-time Democrats?
I'm serious about this. They are getting very close to screwing us all over. This party has not had the catharsis it needed after the election. Where was the discussion of what went wrong? The REAL discussion? Nowhere. The party is moving ahead like all is well. The progressive nonprofits, were they to blame? No discussion. The DNC and the DLC? No discussion. John Kerry? No discussion. People like Martin Frost who are afraid to admit they're Democrats and who feel the need to publicly suck up to George Bush? No discussion.
The same thing happened 4 years ago when Al Gore - all the talk about the party figuring out what went wrong, it all ended in nothing being discussed and nothing being changed. We need a revolution in this party. The old consultants, the party leaders, the leaders in Congress, the heads of the liberal non-proits, ALL of them need to justify their paychecks or get out of town. There's a new and empowered generation of Democrats out here, and we're mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.
The party elects Martin Frost or some similar clone as party head, and it's all over. And before someone in a closed room tells us we have nowhere to go even if they do pick someone who isn't a reformer, think about how it's going to effect we if we don't give you a dime of money or one scintilla of support over the next 4 years, not to mention bashing you every step of the way. Yeah, we'll vote for the Democratic candidate next time (maybe), but you see how successful you are when we boycott all your fundraising and publicly malign you. Read the rest of this post...
Why does George Bush love wife beaters?
Leave it to the AP to screw up the title of the story. In fact, the article makes clear that the law would vitiate hetero domestic violence complaints as well.
CLEVELAND - Some attorneys are attempting to use Ohio's new gay marriage amendment to defend unmarried clients against domestic violence charges.Now wife-beating is a family value. Read the rest of this post...
The constitutional amendment, which took effect on Dec. 1, denies legal status to unmarried couples.
In at least two cases last week, the Cuyahoga County public defender's office has asked a judge to dismiss domestic-violence charges against unmarried defendants, arguing that the charges violate the amendment by affording marriage-like legal status to unmarried victims who live with the people accused of attacking them...
Defending hetero marriage
Sounds like they've got bigger worries than you and me. Check out the spam I just got:
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 14:06:35 -0400Read the rest of this post...
From: "Patsy E. Olson"
Subject: Meet your match
To: winorth@erols.com
4 unfaithful wives have been matched for you in your area:
1: Danielle, 132 lbs, 5'5, 36c, 11 miles away, available Jan 17-19th
2: Sarah, 123 lbs, 5'6, 36d, 25 miles away, available Jan 19-24th
3: Samantha, 121 lbs, 5'9, 34b, 9 miles away, available Jan 18-20th
4: Samantha, 130 lbs, 5'8, 36c, 12 miles away, available Jan 19-24th
All 4 women are waiting to speak with you live & have photos here.
Webcam's are available for all 4.
If you have found a lady or not to be paired up then continue here.
State of Mississippi links MLK and Robert E. Lee
Yeah, they've matured since segregation. My ass.
Read the rest of this post...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)