A Very Serious, Thoughtful Argument That Has Never Been Made in Such Detail or With Such Care
By Jeff Fecke | July 8, 2008
According to Jonah Goldberg, our nation’s first African-American major party nominee is the slaveholder of liberal fascism:
There’s a weird irony at work when Sen. Barack Obama, the black presidential candidate who will allegedly scrub the stain of racism from the nation, vows to run afoul of the constitutional amendment that abolished slavery.
For those who don’t remember, the 13th Amendment says: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime … shall exist within the United States.”
Oh noes! Barack Obama plans to reinstitute slavery?
In his speech on national service Wednesday at the University of Colorado, Obama promised that as president he would “set a goal for all American middle and high school students to perform 50 hours of service a year, and for all college students to perform 100 hours of service a year.”
He would see that these goals are met by, among other things, attaching strings to federal education dollars. If you don’t make the kids report for duty, he’s essentially telling schools and college kids, you’ll lose money you can’t afford to lose. In short, he’ll make service compulsory by merely compelling schools to make it compulsory.
Wha–? Did Jonah Goldberg just make the argument that adding a curriculum requirement for colleges and schools is tantamount to slavery? Really? I mean, by that logic, isn’t compulsory education itself slavery? Does this make No Child Left Behind the Dred Scott decision of the 21st century? And if so, does that mean the anti-choicers have to stop using it as a dog-whistle?
Read the rest of this entry »
Topics: Barack Obama, Education, Race | 8 Comments »
Have You Gone Berserk? Can’t You See That Man is a Ni..
By Jeff Fecke | July 7, 2008
What does Chris Matthews need to do to get fired?
Up next: They’re the working-class white voters Hillary Clinton won and Barack didn’t. Can Obama now win over the regular folks, white folks, against John McCain? We’ll ask the strategists. You’re watching Hardball.
Sweet Jesus, yadda yadda.
Seriously, Matthews has been racist and sexist throughout the campaign, depending on whose ox he was trying to gore. This isn’t even the first time he’s made the connection that regular folks == white folks. Non-white folks? Not regular, evidently. Not “real Americans.”
It’s depressing that a jackass like this would continue to have a job. I’ve given up on his hardcore misogyny costing him his job, and frankly, I’m not optimistic about racism doing him in. It’s “just Matthews,” he’s “just like that,” and besides, the news media also thinks regular folks have white skin.
Topics: Barack Obama, Media, Race | No Comments »
Men Are So Honest! So Thoroughly Square!
By Jeff Fecke | July 6, 2008
In the musical My Fair Lady, Professor Henry Higgins at one point laments, “Why can’t a woman be more like a man?” One wouldn’t think that Higgins, a chauvinist through and through, would have wished for the one thing that would destroy Western civilization, causing wingnuts to go berserk and start posting in allcaps. But that is precisely what has happened, according to some guy calling himself “The Stranger,” who has discovered what we all feared: Women are the New Men.
Now, I don’t know what that means, but given that The Stranger is posting at Modern Conservative, you know it’s going to be insane.
Turn on the TV these days and what you see mostly are strident, angry women. In your face, particularly if it’s the face of a male. Sarcastically putting the males in their places. Lately, and increasingly, punching the lights out of the men when its called for and sometimes when its not - just to let the men know who the bosses are these days: WOMEN: THE NEW MEN!!!
AAAAH! IT’S ALLCAPS! That means this must be bad!
Read the rest of this entry »
Topics: Feminism | 4 Comments »
Awesome!
By Jeff Fecke | July 5, 2008
Kathryn Jean Lopez — that’s KLo to you — comes up with the most half-baked idea since Liberal Fascism: A Very Serious, Thoughtful, Argument that has Never Been Made in Such Detail or With Such Care:
A totally crazy Saturday-morning thought: Wouldn’t George W. Bush make an awesome high-school government teacher? Wouldn’t it be something if his post-presidential life would up being that kind of post-service service? How’s that for a model? Who needs Harvard visiting chairs and high-end lectures? How about Crawford High? (Or wherever?) Reach out and touch the young before they are jaded, or break them of the cynicism pop culture and possibly their parents have passed down to them.
That is a totally crazy idea! But not in the way KLo means. First off, no, George W. Bush would not make an awesome high-school government teacher. Awesome teachers teach you how to think, not what to think. I envision Bush giving any critique of conservatism an F, or even a G, because that’s not the truth. Bush would be the awful, petulant, my-way-or-the-highway teacher that everyone hates. And of course, this is all predicated on the notion that Bush would ever choose to teach, and I can tell you — not at the salaries teachers get.
Still, this got me to thinking: what kind of other awesome jobs could Dubya do after leaving office? So here are a few totally crazy Saturday-night thoughts:
- Wouldn’t George W. Bush make an awesome Fox News analyst? Wouldn’t it be something if his post-presidential life wound up with him trying to communicate for a living? It worked for Rove! Who needs high-end lectures? Just criticize the Democrat Party right from the official house organ of the party! Reach out and touch viewers before they are jaded, or break them of the cynicism pop culture and has passed down to them.
- Wouldn’t George W. Bush make an awesome infantryman? Wouldn’t it be something if his post-presidential life would up being that kind of post-service service? I mean, sure, he skipped out on his military duties before, but he said he envies our soldiers in Afghanistan. Who needs appointments to the board of directors of Exxon Mobil? How about he serves in Fallujah? (Or wherever?) Reach out and kill Iraqis first-hand or break them of their will to live.
- Wouldn’t George W. Bush make an awesome doctor? Wouldn’t it be something if his post-presidential life wound up with him trying to save lives, instead of take them? Maybe he can intern with Frist! Who needs coke-fueld parties at the Crawford “ranch?” Maybe he could be a heart transplant specialist! Wouldn’t it be cool if you went in for your heart transplant, and there was George Bush, telling you, “All right, we’re gonna start sewing at the Albuquerque valve, and we’re not going to stop until we achieve victory over this heart.”
- Wouldn’t George W. Bush make an awesome caterer? Wouldn’t it be something if his post-presidential life involved him catering for the rich and famous? How’s that for awesome? Who needs large stacks of cash passed under the table from Halliburton? I can see it now, people dying of food poisoning, and Bush saying, “No, we’ve committed to using rat poison as a garnish, and we’re gonna see this through to the end.”
- Wouldn’t George W. Bush make an awesome president? Oh, wait, he tried that — the answer is “no.”
So fun, isn’t it? Feel free to play along in comments.
(Via Phila)
Topics: Bush Administration | 2 Comments »
Birth as a Feminist Act (Responsorial)
By Jeff Fecke | July 5, 2008
Over at LG&M, bean opines on the notion of birth qua birth as a feminist act:
In an age where c-sections are being labeled “pre-existing conditions” and the cesarean rate continues to rise (not necessarily at women’s election), it seems to me that we have lost the feminist angle on labor and delivery. It is something only a woman can do. It is how life is created and sustained. It reveals women’s sheer strength and endurance.
Certainly vaginal birth at all - nevermind in a birthing center or at home -it is not available for all women, and we should be (and I am) thankful that cesareans and other interventions exist when vaginal labor would put the woman’s or child’s health at risk. But absent those risks, it seems worth highlighting that giving birth in a woman-centered, midwife-assisted environment is a feminist act. It is feminist in that it focuses on women’s unique ability; and in that it enables strength within a couple and family by allowing the woman’s partner to be an active part of the labor by supporting her both emotionally and physically (holding her legs, providing support while she squats).
First of all, let me say that I agree — birth can be a very feminist act. It is a testament to the strength of women that our species has not died out from sheer unwillingness to endure the rigor and pain of pregnancy and childbirth.
But I believe that is true no matter the nature of delivery. And I believe that because my daughter entered the world in the complete oppositite of the midwife-assisted environment — and yet I found that to be no less a feminist experience than any other experience I’ve ever had.
My ex-wife endured 42 weeks of pregnancy. My daughter had not arrived eleven days after the due date, and we went into the hospital for her to be induced into labor. Now, my ex had chosen a hospital as the setting for labor and delivery early on. Her paramount concern was not whether she felt warm and fuzzy about the birth experience, it was that she and our daughter had good medical assistance steps away, rather than an ambulance ride away.
It wasn’t an easy delivery. My ex dilated to about 2 immediately, and then stayed there for hours. Eventually, our OB/Gyn, Susan Torkelson, did an ultrasound and figured out why: my daughter, in her infinite wisdom, had turned herself sideways, jamming herself into the birth canal in such a way that she wasn’t coming out. Dr. Torkelson set up for a ceasarean section, one I did not ultimately witness, because the spinal block they attempted on my ex actually paralyzed her diaphragm, forcing the anesthesiologist to sedate and intubate her while Dr. Torkelson performed what had become emergency surgery. I was brought in after my daughter was delivered, while my ex was still sedated.
“That’s not a fun story,” you say, and it wasn’t. And yet in thinking back on it, I think it was a truly feminist moment, in the sense that it involved three strong women. My ex-wife had a miserable pregnancy for nine months plus two weeks, sick throughout the process, and chose to eschew even some remedies she was allowed because she was convinced she was strong enough to handle it — and she was. The surgeon wielding the scalpel was a woman, a Dartmouth-educated doctor who cared for my ex and my daughter with aplomb throughout the pregnancy. And the child born was my daughter, who is the daughter of two feminists, and who is already showing signs that she will be one when she grows up, too.
Moreover, the delivery was what my ex-wife wanted, how she wanted to deliver our child into the world. It was what she was most comfortable with, and while it wasn’t fun, she was happier with doctors she trusted and medical equipment standing by than she would have been with a doula. My ex-wife was fully aware and educated about her choices, and this was her choice. And given that both she and my daughter are today happy, healthy, and alive, I know she made the right one.
That doesn’t mean my ex’s choice is right for everyone, or that those who choose differently are somehow wrong. But it brings me to that word that we keep using: choice. What was feminist about my ex-wife’s birthing experience was that she made her choices with eyes open, and made them for the reasons she believed in. What is ultimately feminist about birthing options is that options exist, that women can research and learn and choose for themselves what they want to do. Birth is one of the most amazing processes there is, and one of the most difficult, and always women-centered. But birth predated feminism by a billion years. It is the option, the choice to give birth on one’s own terms that makes it a feminist experience. It is the choice, not the method of delivery, that has meaning.
Topics: Potpourri | 1 Comment »
Barack Obama: I Didn’t Say What I Said
By Jeff Fecke | July 5, 2008
Well, I guess it’s something:
Sen. Barack Obama clarified his position today on mental-health exceptions to late-term abortions, saying he supports such exceptions and that comments he made during a recent magazine interview shouldn’t be interpreted as opposing them.
Well, of course not! Who could interpret, “Now, I don’t think that “mental distress” qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term,” as saying that mental-health exceptions shouldn’t exist? It’s like we were reading English or something!
At any rate, Obama goes on to clarify his position: Read the rest of this entry »
Topics: Abortion, Barack Obama | 7 Comments »
Saturday Night Python
By Jeff Fecke | July 5, 2008
Topics: Potpourri | No Comments »
Friday Not Random Ten
By Jeff Fecke | July 4, 2008
We’re baptized in these waters and in each other’s blood
1. “Independence Day,” Ani DiFranco
2. “This Land is Your Land,” Woody Guthrie
3. “Born in the USA,” Bruce Springsteen
4. “American Skin (41 Shots),” Bruce Springsteen
5. “Convict Colony,” Saul Williams
6. “Fight the Power,” Public Enemy
7. “To the Teeth,” Ani DiFranco
8. “The Star Spangled Banner,” Jimmi Hendrix
9. “The Stars and Stripes Forever,” John Phillip Souza
10. “Freedom,” Rage Against the Machine
Read the rest of this entry »
Topics: Friday Random Tens | No Comments »
Sigh
By Jeff Fecke | July 4, 2008
So Obama went and said third-trimester abortions shouldn’t have legal protection yesterday, and the response has been immediate. I mean, the major progressive blogs have all been….
Well at least the feminist blogs have all been…
Oh, hey, here’s a highly-trafficked blog who noticed!
Obama’s stated model for Supreme Court justices (Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer), pro-lifers should not expect that Obama will actually appoint any Supreme Court justice who would find any law that restricted abortion in any way to be Constitutional. In other words, there’s still literally no reason that any thinking pro-lifer should *vote* for Barack Obama.
But that doesn’t mean that Obama should not be lauded for rejecting the extremism and the fanaticism of the worst elements of the Democratic base like NARAL, Emily’s List, and Planned Parenthood. It is good to know that whatever Barack personally feels about abortion, he has recognized that certain extremist groups with their extraordinarily liberal positions do not deserve to be part of the national conversation, and for that Obama deserves to be praised. Hillary Clinton, for one, would never have done anything like this. Her husband vetoed the Partial Birth Abortion Act twice and by all accounts Hillary treated the Emily’s Listers and NARAL extremists like they were important and respectable people. Barack Obama knows better. Good for him.
Yes, Barack, you’ve won an “attaboy” from RedState! You must be so proud. Please note that they’re not planning to vote for you. Also, please note that the NARAL extremists (*cough*) and the Emily’s Listers were.
Topics: Abortion, Barack Obama | 7 Comments »
The Worst Song Ever Recorded
By Jeff Fecke | July 4, 2008
Today is Independence Day, the day Americans celebrate our independence from the dastardly British. Imagine what kind of nation we’d be if we hadn’t seceded from the UK 232 years ago today? Why, we’d be some sort of crazy crown protectorate, like Canada, with the free health care and the hockey playing and the Tories who are somewhat to the left of the Democrats. I know, it doesn’t sound like there’s a downside, but we’d also say “aboot,” spell color with a u, and have to deal with the royal family on a semi-regular basis. I think for those reasons alone we’re glad we left the crown.
Still, while we rightly celebrate our independence from having to care about the royals (I mean, can you imagine if a royal died tragically, and all the networks went to 24-7 coverage? That would be nuts), there are still things about our country that are deep and troubling stains on our national soul, developments that have hurt our nation to its very core, continuing decisions to cling to failed policies that only damage our nation further. I refer, of course, to the continuing presence of Lee Greenwood’s “Proud to Be An American” in our national discourse. Read the rest of this entry »
Topics: Potpourri | 2 Comments »
God Damn it, Barack
By Jeff Fecke | July 3, 2008
This is not cool, man. Not cool:
Strang: Based on emails we received, another issue of deep importance to our readers is a candidate’s stance on abortion. We largely know your platform, but there seems to be some real confusion about your position on third-trimester and partial-birth abortions. Can you clarify your stance for us?
Obama: I absolutely can, so please don’t believe the emails. I have repeatedly said that I think it’s entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother. Now, I don’t think that “mental distress” qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term. Otherwise, as long as there is such a medical exception in place, I think we can prohibit late-term abortions.
Now, that would be uncontroversial except for the damn fact that mental distress has been an integral part of “life and health” since day one. If you eliminate mental health exceptions for abortion, you eliminate abortion.
There’s no getting around it: this is a pro-life position. Now, I’ve defended you, Barack, from an awful lot of people who claimed you weren’t pro-feminist. I’ve chided you when you needed chiding, but I’ve pointed to your ardently pro-choice record as proof that at least on some level, you got it.
But this quote has me wishing I’d voted for Clinton back in February. Because had this quote come out in January, I sure as hell wouldn’t have voted for you. I think you need to clarify this damn quick, and by “clarify,” I mean “explain that you were a goddamn fucking moron who completely blew the question.” Otherwise, it’s going to be hard for me to understand why a feminist should support you. It’s not like you’re giving much reason. And while I’ll probably still vote for you (hell, what’s my choice? Angry McCranky?), I won’t work for you, and I won’t shed a tear for you should you lose in November.
Topics: Abortion, Barack Obama | 6 Comments »
You Called Down the Thunder? Well Now You Got It!
By Jeff Fecke | July 3, 2008
Resident MRA apologist John Dias pokes Twisty Faster. This will all end in tears.
Topics: Potpourri | 4 Comments »
Heh
By Jeff Fecke | July 3, 2008
Bush Tours America To Survey Damage Caused By His Disastrous Presidency
Topics: Bush Administration, Incompetence | No Comments »
CONSERVATIVE BLOGGER/ACTIVIST EVIDENTLY UNAWARE HOW TITLES WORK; MOST LONGER THAN POSTS (PART 74)
By Jeff Fecke | July 2, 2008
May I interject? I may? Great! Mikey, just for future reference, you don’t have to put your entire story in the headline of your posts. There’s this thing called “the story” in which you actually can write more stuff! Granted, most of your readers are conservatives and thus can’t be bothered to read beyond the title, but still, most titles are less than 214 words long. Having run-on titles in ALLCAPS that are longer than the actual story they’re attached to…well, it’s just amateurish, to be frank. And now that the Paulsen campaign’s paying you to blog hired to you “consult” or whatever, I figure you probably want to look like a professional.Always glad to help!
Your pal,
Jeff Fecke
Topics: MDE | No Comments »
Take ‘Em Bring!
By Jeff Fecke | July 2, 2008
And the depressing thing is that we reelected that moron.
Topics: Iraq | No Comments »