Nancy Reagan Praises President Obama

The wife of President Ronald Reagan, the political icon of the leaderless republican party, heaps praise on President Obama for lifting restrictions on stem cell research:

[...]

“I’m very grateful that President Obama has lifted the restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research,” she wrote in a statement released shortly after Obama reversed the Bush administration limits. “These new rules will now make it possible for scientists to move forward. I urge researchers to make use of the opportunities that are available to them and to do all they can to fulfill the promise that stem cell research offers."

Nancy Reagan has been an outspoken advocate of stem cell research — and scientists hope that the research could someday lead to a cure for Alzheimer’s disease, which afflicted her late husband, Ronald Reagan.

...

Reagan continued, “Countless people, suffering from many different diseases, stand to benefit from the answers stem cell research can provide. We owe it to ourselves and to our children to do everything in our power to find cures for these diseases — and soon. As I’ve said before, time is short, and life is precious.

Will those on the right who are opposed to stem cell research throw Nancy Reagan under the bus?

Criminals Of Wall Street

When a guy who calls himself The Easter Bunny walks into a CEO's office and told him his company was being targeted by a financial media cartel in bed with the Russian and Italian mob, who are part of the biggest fraud in the history of the country, the CEO initially dismisses him as a crackpot conspiracy theorist.

But then the Easter Bunny makes predictions--his company would begin to be traded on foreign exchanges without his permission, easier for short-selling of phantom (non-existent) stock. Smears would be published by the financial community, lowering the value of his stock. The SEC would begin a bogus investigation into his firm and a crooked lawyer would bribe witnesses to file a class-action lawsuit which would further depress his stocks. All of this so a small cabal of hedge-fund managers could profit by short-selling, or betting that his stocks would fall, as they surely would given this full-court press, led by the press of the financial community.

The CEO later admitted that no matter how crazy a theory is, when they make predictions that come true, they tend to have some credibility.

And come true they did. Read the whole sordid story here.

Two things become abundantly clear; this is precisely why us political bloggers, both on the right and left, continually rail against the corporate media--and I will never look at Jim Cramer of CNBC--or indeed that entire network--the same.

h/t dday at Hullabaloo

The Gloves Come Off On The Abortion Debate

Women's rights are a cornerstone to progressive's so imagine my surprise the stunning silence from Oklahoma progressive bloggers in support of the Freedom Of Choice Act. Perhaps they are intimidated by paste eaters like Red Tater and Fried Green Onions with their bellicose rants. For those who are interested I will repost in its entirety the best "Why I'm Pro-Choice" post ever written, by Jill over at Feministe.

I am pro-choice because I believe women’s lives matter. I am pro-choice because I think women themselves are the best people to decide when and if they get pregnant, give birth, and raise children. I am pro-choice because I believe that the right to control your own reproduction is a fundamental right, and is protected both under our Constitution and basic human rights ideals — and I believe that fundamental right includes the right to prevent pregnancy, the right to get pregnant, the right to carry a pregnancy to term, and the right to terminate a pregnancy. I am pro-choice because I believe that if we outlaw a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy, there is no legal argument against forcing a woman to terminate a pregnancy, or disallowing certain people from reproducing. I am pro-choice because I do not believe that anyone should be subject totalitarian laws which impose unwanted occupations on certain classes of people. I am pro-choice because I don’t believe that women should be legally compelled to maintain another life at the expense of her own wishes, her body, her health, or even her life. I am pro-choice because I don’t believe that women’s bodies should be used against our will. I am pro-choice because I believe that compulsory pregnancy and childbirth is immoral, cruel, and flies in the face of basic notions of freedom, liberty, and human rights. I am pro-choice because I believe that forcing women to carry pregnancies against their will is involuntary servitude. I am pro-choice because I believe that children should be wanted, their entrances into the world joyous occasions — that they should never be considered punishment. I am pro-choice because I want women to be physically and emotionally healthy. I am pro-choice because I don’t believe that pregnancy should be a punishment (or, as anti-choicers say, a “consequence”) of sex. I am pro-choice because I realize that my rights to birth control, to have children, to make my own decisions, to be a fully autonomous human being all hinge on my very basic ability to decide when and if I reproduce.

I am pro-choice because I trust women.

I am pro-choice because reproductive rights are far more than abortion, and because I want to see us live in a true culture of life — one where men, women and children are truly valued, and where pregnancy doesn’t turn a woman into a second-class citizen.

I am pro-choice because those who attack abortion rights don’t plan on stopping there — they’re also going after contraception, science and even sex itself. And they’ve got a whole lot of political capital.

I am pro-choice because I see what places look like when “pro-life” policies are the rule of law. I see it again and again and again.

I am pro-choice because I see what places look like when abortion is safe, legal and available, contraception is accessible, and sex is considered natural, normal, and something we should take responsibility for, not be ashamed of.

I am pro-choice because “pro-life” policies kill and maim women. I am pro-choice because abortion rates are no higher in countries where abortion is legal than in countries where it is outlawed — but countries where abortion is legal see lower maternal mortality rates, lower infant mortality rates, greater economic prosperity, and greater gender equality.

I am pro-choice because women who live in the developing world account for 95 percent of the world’s illegal abortions, and I believe that access to safe health care should not be contingent on where you happened to be born. I am pro-choice because the countries with the lowest abortion rates — Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland — have liberal abortion laws, good health care, comprehensive sex education, and accessible and affordable contraception.

I am pro-choice because many countries where abortion is illegal or highly restricted have significantly higher abortion rates than we have in the United States, and astronomically higher rates than we see in Western Europe. Some of those countries include Brazil, Chile, Bangladesh, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Egypt, Mexico, Nigeria, Peru, and the Philippines.

I am pro-choice because of the number of women hospitalized after unsafe illegal abortions in these countries:
Bangladesh: 71,800
Brazil: 288,700
Chile: 31,900
Colombia: 57,700
Dominican Republic: 16,500
Egypt: 216,000
Mexico: 106,500
Nigeria: 142,200
Peru: 54,200
The Philippines: 80,100

I am pro-choice because 80,000 women die every year from complications from illegal abortion, and hundreds of thousands more are injured.

I am pro-choice because the risk of dying from abortion is far higher in countries where abortion is illegal than where it’s legal.

I am pro-choice because illegal abortion is the cause of 25% of all maternal deaths in Latin America, 12% in Asia, and 13% in sub-Saharan Africa.

I am pro-choice because I will not go back.

I am pro-choice because if Roe is overturned, abortion will be illegal in many states. Even with Roe in place, states like Georgia are considering legislation which would impose life in prison or the death penalty as punishment for women who have abortions and doctors who perform the procedures.

I am pro-choice because I don’t believe we should criminalize women and doctors for exercising reproductive freedom.

I am pro-choice because seeing the impact of abortion rights on a country’s prosperity, gender equality and overall well-being is apparent simply by looking at a map.

I am pro-choice because it’s the pro-choice movement that has advocated for policies which actually decrease the need for abortion, and which make it easier for women to have children: comprehensive sexual health education, affordable and accessible contraception (including emergency contraception), pre-natal and well-baby care, social support for pregnant women and women with children, affordable child care, fair pay for working women, supporting pregnant girls, and gender equality. Comparatively, the “pro-life” movement* has no interest in actually lowering the abortion rate; their ultimate goal is sexual control of women, evidenced by their opposition to contraception and their belief that there is only one singular way to live: abstain from sex until heterosexual marriage, and then have as many children as God gives you.

I am pro-choice because I see the positive impact that the pro-choice movement has had in the United States. Women go to college at the same rates as men. We can define ourselves as something other than mothers, or as mothers and something else. Poverty has been cut in half since Roe gave women the right to control their own reproduction. Men can be nurturing too, and are expected to take part in raising their children. Families can be planned. Men have greater choices in their occupations since they aren’t required to be the sole bread-winner. More people have access to education. Women have more power to escape abusive relationships or bad jobs. Parents of both sexes spend more time with their kids than ever before.

I am pro-choice because I care about children — and according to the Children’s Defense Fund, 100% of the worst legislators for children in this country are pro-life.

I am pro-choice because I believe that my body is mine. I want women, girls, men, and children to be healthy, valued, and cared for. I want families to be healthy.
I want to live in a country that values the lives and well-being of all of its citizens.

I am pro-choice because it is life-affirming. I am pro-choice because it is fundamentally just. I am pro-choice because to be anything else is to devalue and harm women, children, families, and my country.

I am pro-choice because my life is worth something.

Happy Roe day.

*By which I mean the fanatical leaders of anti-choice organizations, not the individual people who identify as “pro-life” to mean that they dislike abortion and want to see the abortion rate decreased, but also support common-sense policies like sex education and contraception.

See, posters like Red and FGO feel their judgement is superior to that of women. This is the very definition of sexism and in opposition to progressive principles. Let them have their hate speech and vile ideology--they are ruined and wholly beyond reason. The debate lies with those in the middle and we must not yield the floor to these fanatics.

Red S. Tater Nut And Slut Diatribe

Local Oklahoma blogger and alleged human being, Red S. Tater has revealed himself to be a misogynistic knuckle dragger. This wholly sexist individual demands women be treated as property of the state, completely stripped of the right of self-determination. In Red's world, clearly women are sluts, and men like Red are powerless, and therefore not responsible for being victims to women's wanton desires:

[...]
Are women being forced to get pregnant against their wishes?
Are women being denied contraception?
What about the fact that if "needed" women can even get FREE contraception?
Or is pregnancy an airborne virus that women "get" infected with by attending sporting events where a lot of men are located?
[...]

Wow. Red deceives himself by eliminating any male responsibility in the sexual act. In Red's world, deception begins upon erection, no man can expect to think with two heads simultaneously. Unbelievable.

Leaderless Hivemind Republicans Left Witless And Scrambling

As President Obama throws an entire nation on his shoulder to wrench it out of the ditch of neglect and despair, the creators of the ditch try to decide whether to help push, aim for Obama's hamstring, or merely circle like buzzards from the distance.

Newt, the creator of the language to deride Democrats, calls Rush irrational for wishing Obama to fail.

You’re irrational if you don’t want the new president to succeed because if he doesn’t succeed, the country doesn’t succeed.

Rush may be somewhat perplexed since he merely used the language of Newt to define the Democratic party...

Contrasting Words

Often we search hard for words to define our opponents. Sometimes we are hesitant to use contrast. Remember that creating a difference helps you. These are powerful words that can create a clear and easily understood contrast. Apply these to the opponent, their record, proposals and their party.

abuse of power anti- (issue): flag, family, child, jobs betray bizarre bosses bureaucracy cheat coercion "compassion" is not enough collapse(ing) consequences corrupt corruption criminal rights crisis cynicism decay deeper destroy destructive devour disgrace endanger excuses failure (fail) greed hypocrisy ideological impose incompetent insecure insensitive

intolerant liberal lie limit(s) machine mandate(s) obsolete pathetic patronage permissive attitude pessimistic punish (poor ...) radical red tape self-serving selfish sensationalists shallow shame sick spend(ing) stagnation status quo steal taxes they/them threaten traitors unionized urgent (cy) waste welfare

to create a $400 million empire of dittoheads. Rush's political muscle is questionable, though. Recall how he declared John McCain to be "insufficiently conservative" to be the Republican nominee, yet McCain won in spite of Rush's claim. What cannot be doubted is the loyalty Rush has from his listeners. Political figures who gainsay him are inundated with hateful emails and are driven to apologize shortly thereafter.

Meanwhile the top republican in the House of Representatives, John Boehner, is calling for all things, a spending freeze. Right now, the government is the only one spending and John Boehner wants it to stop. That's like trying to smother a fire with dry grass. Even right-wing hack and self-proclaimed moderate Bobo Brooks thinks that idea is insane.

Go All In

Recently the head of the republican party, Rush Limbaugh, proclaimed his desire for the President of The United States to fail in his efforts to save the economy. Where is the Senate Resolution condemning Rush's desire to turn our nation into The Feudal States of America? The precedent was set when the Senate voted to condemn MoveOn.org's ad entitled "General Betrayus." The non-binding resolution passed 75-25, forcing many Democrats to publicly refute the left-wing organization.

Rush has said many outrageous things in his career as a vile-merchant. His hoping America falls into a Great depression should headline the list of condemnations debated on the Senate floor, and each and every republican, the ones that are left anyway, should be forced to declare on the record if they agree with Rush's opinions. Does the republican party represent the small ceramic dog in the back window of Rush's slimedozer, head bobbing dutifully up and down, or are they capable of independent thought?

On the one hand, they would face the ire of the majority of Americans. On the other, they face the wrath of Rush's 20 million flying monkeys.

Make a resolution. It would be a great moment in popcorn history.

In Support Of The Freedom Of Choice Act

It seems a few Oklahoma bloggers are opposed to this legislation. Steve, over at the Otter Limits, and Dave at Oklahoma lefty are uncomfortable with a bunch of unregulated vaginae running around, and get patted on the head by Red Stater, a hard right-wing wackjob lightweight.

Steve put up a post titled "What The Heck Is FOCA?" and concluded the federal government were stripping away states rights, will be in the business of "promoting" abortions (I can't seem to find the ad budget on this) and "taxpayers should not be forced to fund something we do not believe in."

His conclusions were not validated by any source material whatsoever. Here is some information about FOCA from NARAL, the national pro-choice lobby.

If Steve and Dave and Red are opposed to abortion they have the right to choose not to get one. As far as "states rights" issues, since Roe v. Wade was decided, over 500 anti-choice laws (aka "coat-hanger laws) have been passed since 1995. Seems some women have more reproductive rights than others. I pay taxes everyday for things I do not believe in. A million dead in Iraq comes to mind. This is why we have elections.

We have always had abortion on demand. Sometimes it's legal and sometimes it's not. The law has no affect on how many abortions are performed, but illegal ones kill a lot more women. To oppose this legislation will not slow the number of abortions, it will only kill more women.

Doesn't seem to be very pro-lifey to me.

Called Ugly By Frogs

Beneficiaries of billions in bailouts should not be wagging fingers and whining about irresponsible behavior by people who believed in financial consultants, especially if you are a financial consultant. I speak of course about Rick Santelli, or Sick Rantelli as he should be called, after his rant on CNBC recently. His wild-eyed financial wizard l'il buddy Jim Cramer is even worse.

Both confuse vehemence with competence in the hopes no one requests a margin call. As a homeowner and the proud owner of a 201(k), I, like many Americans have skin in this fight. No matter how loud you screech and catterwaul about "irresponsible homeowners", lenders who make loans that cannot be repaid are guilty of bad risk management.

Where is your ire for the AIG executives, Citigroup conspirators and Lehman Brothers swells who brought us this financial disaster? CNBC is without merit as anything close to wise in these financial times, or any other. As a complete failure, you are not overmatched by AIG, Citi, or even Lehman Brothers. CNBC is the "Fox News" for least informed viewers. If your main complaint is irresponsible people making bad decisions, perhaps they were just taking advice from CNBC.

It is as though CNBC is unaware we now have recording devices.

Pathetic

I question the sanity of those who idolize a degenerate junky who has been divorced three times and travels to countries with rampant underage prostitution with a satchel full of dick dope. Of course I'm talking about the head of the republican party, Rush Limbaugh. Poor dumb bastards.

The Rest Of The Story

It doesn't rain or snow in the oilfield, it just gets muddy.

I've tripped pipe during ice storms, icicles showering the floor when the pipe hit the slips.

We did not stop.

Rigged down, moved and rigged up in blinding rainstorms.

We did not stop.

Watched lightning strike the derrick three times while rebuilding a tail pump.

We did not stop.

Dug ditches around the rig in 110 degree sweltering heat.

We did not stop.

Tripped 47 times trying to fish out wayward collars.

We did not stop.

And yet every day, a little after noon, the oilfield came to a halt.

It was time for Paul Harvey.

We lost him on Saturday.

A doff of the hardhat to you, good sir.

No joy in the oilfields today.