Yesterday I was listening to Democracy Now with my 81 year old friend, a long-time progressive activist. She about blew a gasket when she heard Jim Wallis explain why Obama came out so strongly in favor of expanding Bush's faith-based initiatives and also discussed his support for efforts to reduce abortions.

"We should reduce the number of abortions"
"Abortion should be safe, legal and rare"
"Teens in Gloucester made a responsible decision when they decided to keep their babies"
"Nobody likes abortion"

The Right has done it again. True, they’ve not yet achieved everything they want legislatively; abortion is still legal and available – in some places under some circumstances (although they have been appallingly successful at whittling away at both availability and legality). But, they have successfully changed the discourse – and the moral climate -- even within much of the pro-choice community.

Thirty years ago abortion was seen as a positive advancement – medically, socially, and religiously...

Hello. This is my first diary here, and I'm sorry that I'm about to piss everyone off, but I feel like no one is saying this, and it is important for people who want Obama to win in November to take this into consideration.

  This is my first diary, so please be forgiving of any errors I may make. (I am highly impressed by the quality of the writing on this site in general, so I feel I bit intimidated to post anything).
This morning, I was watching the new McCain ad on CNN, you know, the one where he says he going to create jobs, make more and cheaper energy sources, fix health care, hold corporate CEO's accountable, fix the mortgage crisis and create millions of new jobs (mind you, this is a thirty-second spot---straight talk?!).
    Well, the thing that has been catching my eye in the ad was at the end where he is in a factory and he is shaking the hand of a black woman.  As a woman of color, I expressed how implausible it is that she is actually a McCain supporter.  I thought to myself, "I bet she's totally for Obama".  I felt I could tell by her expression (as you can see, I tend to practice amateur psychology on everyone I see in these ads, especially political ads).  
    Then today, it jumped out at me, the prominent visible Obama logo on the woman's clothing---She is wearing at Obama t-shirt!

Here is the ad.

The logo is most visible at 0:26.

Today I peeked in my local online rag to find William Kristol busy attacking the MoveOn ad which featured a woman and her baby. Kristol, the neocon who manages a spot on the New York Times editorial pages and appearances on cable news, keeps himself busy these days mostly shilling for John McCain and the Republican party.  The former Bush speechwriter's "I am so smart" chatter is loaded with big neon flagwaving and blithe references -- Jon Stewart has a lot of fun with him. One suspects dog-eared talking points rather than authentic thought with Kristol. But is easier that way I suppose.

I'm working on my other site on a list of instances in the mainstream media when people lobbed an insult at Barack Obama insinuating that he's a pansy, sissy, gay, effete, effeminate, girly.... I've found a lot so far, which is great, and a lot of people have helped me out with links, so thanks to them.

The point of making this list was to document the media narrative that Obama, and, by extension, Democratic men are unfit for office because they don't wear codpieces and talk tough, or do whatever the going stereotype for real manly men is. It's important to note that it's a narrative, not a few isolated instances of a couple of jerks on TV calling him a "pussy." It's a concerted effort.

The narrative does a pretty good job of pushing the country further to the right, and I'll get into that more after the jump. But, really, I'm also just tired of people using "fag" and "that's so gay" as insults, even if they think they're clever.

In the 1970’s the nation struggled with the concept and the reality of women athletes.  As women entered sports in greater numbers, particularly after the enactment of Title IX, they didn’t find open doors and welcoming facilities.  Nowhere was this more evident than in the world of rowing.  This diary, as part of the feminisms series, is dedicated to the first US National Women’s Rowing Team in 1975.  I’ll introduce you to their challenges on and off the water, to the hallmark Yale strip-in protest, and talk a little about the ripple effects still being felt today.

Last fall I wrote a diary about my experiences learning to row.  I fell in love with rowing for three reasons: rowing on the ocean into the sunrise or the sunset is a total feast for the senses; rowing is a total body workout and I learned that I enjoy feeling physically strong; and rowing brings a camaraderie between the women in the boat who are all working together toward the same goal.   This spring I read a book by Daniel Boyne, The Red Rose Crew, about the 1975 National Team.  I became fascinated with their story and with the gifts they bestowed on rowing, women, and the world.

Rev. Jim Wallis may be spoiling for a fight on reducing abortion, but he's picking on the wrong side of the political spectrum.

Originally posted at RHRealityCheck.org - Information, News and Analysis for Reproductive Health and Justice.

There are some medical issues in life that are relative no brainers, right?

Men get diseases of the prostate gland, women do not.

Women get diseases of the ovaries, men do not.

There are also huge, huge disparities between men and women in healthcare.

• Nearly 30 percent of females are racial/ethnic minorities.1
• Black women have higher death rates than whites due to heart disease, cancer, and stroke. Hispanic, Asian and Pacific Islander (API), and American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) women have lower death rates due to these conditions
• Black and Hispanic women are more likely to report that they are in fair or poor overall health or that they have diabetes.2
• Women are more likely than men to report having arthritis, asthma, autoimmune diseases, and depression.
• Poor or near poor women are more likely than high income women to report fair or poor overall health; and more likely to report having anxiety or depression, arthritis, asthma, diabetes, hypertension, obesity, and osteoporosis.

These were from: AHRQ 2004 National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Reports

More after the break

California has now become the second American state to affirm that two men or two women can marry. Yet some organizations are planning to challenge this decision by referendum, and most of them cite as an explanation for their hostility verses in Leviticus 18 and 19, condemning a "male lying with a male as with a woman."

Is that the whole story -- or does the Bible look forward to its own transformation? Does
the Bible call on the human race to "grow up" into a new maturity, with a new sexual ethic?

I stumbled across this great website with tons of information for women considering voting for John McSame.  I can't believe the McCain campaign didn't reserve this domain name.

http://www.womenforjohnmccain.com/

McCain Does Not Get It That Americans Say Country Off Course

copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert.  BeThink.org

The consensus is this election year is like no other.  It is more dynamic than those in the past.  The times they are a changing.  Indeed, there is much to substantiate this proclamation.

In yesterday's post on a case of an ambulance driver's "moral refusal" of taking a woman in severe pain to a women's clinic, a frequent criticism came up: "But wouldn't the EMT get in trouble if she died?  Surely they could revoke his license?"

This, sadly, can no longer be assumed.  In at least one state--Mississippi--the scenario of an EMT conducting a "moral refusal", the woman dying as a result, and the EMT getting off scot free is an unfortunate possibility.

Even worse, Mississippi's law is now considered a model "moral refusal" statute--as we'll see below.

What does John McCain’s voting record, and what do his public statements, suggest about his views on women and families? It’s a pretty lengthy, damning, and devastating list...

I saw Darksyde's diary about McCain on women earlier.  I had read all those things before, but I was struck by the power of everything together.  I had been meaning to put together a viral email for awhile concerning McCain on women and I think it's time.  The facts are there and devestating.  Unlike whisper campaigns against Obama that rely on lies and innuendo everthing below is true.  Please let me know if anything below is not factual.  Let it be noted that I did copy from Darksyde because I liked the wording and I didn't think it would be a problem.  Also, should everthing be cited or is it more powerful as is?  Please copy and paste the email below and send it to everyone you know.  It's time to let the country know about John McCain.     This could really have a huge impact this November.  Let's do something and get this information out there.  I myself have titled the email "John McCain on Women".  Suggestions welcome.

Today on The View, future first lady Michelle Obama guest-hosted the show. Below are all the video segments from the show. The often criticized but always confident and well spoken Michelle did a good job on the show.

She was asked a lot of tough questions but seemed to handle them with grace under fire (much like her husband). Anyways, I'm just going to share the videos below and allow others to weigh in with their own thoughts and opinions:

In Part 2 of the miniseries which we began yesterday, we discuss how "moral refusal" clauses are increasingly going far beyond just doctors and pharmacists, and are now extending to the most basic thing we associate with healthcare--the trip in the ambulance to have emergency surgery.

Yes, you're reading this right--dominionist ambulance drivers are now refusing to take people to women's clinics just because the woman needs a medically necessary abortion.

And at the end of the post--because I never like to just bring bad news without discussing ways to fix what's broken--I present some possible solutions to the problem of "moral refusal".

You walk into a pharmacy and pass the pain relievers, deodorants, and shampoos.  But when you get to the spot where the condoms normally are shelved, there's nothing.  And don't even think about asking to fill a prescription for birth control pills -- you'll get turned away and frowned upon in no time.

Where are you?  A "pro-life" pharmacy.

A story in yesterday's Washington Post chronicles the growing movement of "pro-life" pharmacies -- pharmacies that choose not to stock condoms and not to fill prescriptions for  the "morning-after" pill, birth control pills and other standard varieties of contraception.  The pharmacists and owners of these stores claim that they have the right to not stock products that they find objectionable, and that using standard contraception is tantamount to having an abortion.  According to the article,