This idea — which has a lot of liberals excited — would create a Federal public option. But it would also allow any individual state government to decline making the public option available to their citizens.
The hope is that conservative Democrats like Ben Nelson, who oppose a public option, would be willing to vote for this, since it essentially punts the public option decision to state legislatures. (Both Nelson and Lieberman have said this idea is “worth looking at,” which isn’t a commitment, but it is the most positive comment they’ve said about any public option proposal so far). At the same time, more liberal senators would (one hopes) be able to get a reasonably strong public option for their own constituents.
What’s nice about this policy, I think, is that it’s easily adjustable. If the public option turns out to be a disaster, this would make it relatively easy for states to drop it. But if it is in fact successful, then it would be easy for states without it to change their mind.
Of course, the devil is in the details, and this proposal is so new that there aren’t any details to look at yet. And the conservative Democrats may yet decide to oppose it, or water it down to the point of uselessness.
Another idea being floated that’s gaining a lot of interest — and could possibly get some Republican votes — is a two-year tax break to companies that either hire new workers or bump up their part-time workers to full-time. There seems to be a fair amount of economic evidence that this policy could jump-start hiring, so I’m for it.
Getting interested and involved in sports is difficult for women and girls with disabilities because of the limited exposure they get to sports, especially when they are young. Those who become disabled during their adult life, by things like accident or illness, are many times already involved in athletics. When that is the case, they are highly likely to remain active in sports.
Disabled athletes often need to feel empowered in order to get involved in athletics. Nondisabled people learn sports primarily through their families when they are children. Athletes with disabilities, however, often attribute their participation and success to self-motivation and friends. Women athletes who become disabled later in life already have a support system of teachers, coaches, friends, and partners who still encourage them. Disabled athletes with encouraging, supportive parents are often leaders in their sport and community. They believe their success in leadership is a result of good parenting.
…The Media: Sports UnIllustrated Information is scarce when it comes to women with disabilities and even more limited for disabled women in sport. The national news rarely features women athletes who have overcome disability barriers. This lack of attention creates few disabled female athlete role models. Even television commercials that show disabled athletes almost always choose male models.
…
Subjects like sports psychology and sociology largely ignore disability in textbooks and journals. Even women’s studies and women’s athletics can be faulted for poor coverage of disabled female athletes. Women who participate in sport and who are also disabled are rarely mentioned in these two arenas.MORE
The purpose of this research was to permit the voice of women athletes with a disability who participate in elite sport to be heard. By illuminating the issues and experiences of the female athlete, we can begin to reveal her view of reality within sport and the context within which she participates. Research of this nature is the first step in the process of identibing and addressing the inequities and barriers in disability sport facing present and future female athletes.
(WOMENSENEWS)–When people ask wheelchair racer Jean Driscoll, the eight-time champion of the Boston Marathon in the wheelchair division, about the obstacles faced by female athletes with disabilities, she talks about Sharon Hedrick.
In 1984, Hedrick, a wheelchair track competitor, won two gold medals in the inaugural wheelchair exhibition at the Summer Olympic Games in Los Angeles. In doing so, Hedrick also broke the 800-meter women’s wheelchair race record by almost three seconds.
“This wasn’t the Paralympics,” said Driscoll, referring to the competitions for elite athletes with physical disabilities. “This was the real Olympic Games. She was the first female wheelchair athlete to ever win a gold medal. Ever.”
But it wasn’t the record-breaking Hedrick whose picture made it onto the Wheaties cereal box, it was a man: wheelchair racing pioneer George Murray.MORE
Just as the media tends to see people with disabilities as not having the ideal body, it also tends to frame female athletes as “sexually different” (Hall, 1996). With this being said, it is also likely that female athletes who also have a disability face a double bind by being caught in two minorities (Blinde & McCallister, 1999; DePauw & Gavron, 1995). Not only are they excluded because they are female, they are excluded on another level for their disability (Blinde & McCallister, 1999; Hardin & Hardin, 2005).
Several researchers have taken a strong focus on disability sports research; however, these studies are heavily centered on male athletes with disabilities …the purpose of this study was to re-narrate the opinions of women athletes with disabilities in order to understand the interlaced meanings embedded in disability, gender and sexuality (Garland-Thomson, 2002; Hargreaves & McDonald, 2000) in sports media, and to allow women’s attitude and perceptions toward women athletes with disabilities to be heard. In order to acknowledge these perceptions, a cultural feminist approach was considered most useful.MORE
It is a little-known fact that the history of girls and women with disabilities in competitive sport dates back to the early 1900s and has continued to evolve throughout the 20th century. For the most part, this history is somewhat difficult to trace separately from the general history of disability sport, which has been, until recently, nonspecific in terms of gender, race, ethnicity, and type of impairment (DePauw, 1994; DePauw & Gavron, 1995). In much the same way that the history of sport has been written primarily through the eyes of male athletes and their sport experiences, the history of disability sport has also been recorded through the eyes of male athletes with disabilities, or more specifically, through the experiences of white males with spinal cord injuries who used wheelchairs for competition (DePauw & Gavron, 1995).
…
Female Athletes with Disabilities in the Olympic Games. Two women with disabilities have gained significant attention after they competed in the Olympic Games. Liz Hartel (post-polio, Denmark) won a silver medal in dressage at the 1952 Helsinki Olympics. Neroli Fairhall, representing New Zealand, competed in archery from her wheelchair during the 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles.
In addition to these women who participated in full medal Olympic events, male and female athletes with disabilities competed in their first exhibition events at the 1984 Winter Olympics in Sarajevo and the 1984 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles. Exhibition events for the Winter Games (selected Alpine and Nordic events for physically impaired and for blind athletes) and for the Summer Games (1500 m wheelchair for men, 800 m wheelchair for women) continued through 1996. In 1992, Candace Cable (USA) and Connie Hansen (Denmark) became the only two women to compete in every Summer Olympic exhibition in a single year.MORE
Unfortunately its part of a preview foof a journal article , but an interesting snippet nonetheless.
Increasing women’s participation in the Olympic Movement as participants and leaders has been a slow and challenging process. While the number of “events” open to female athletes has increased steadily during the past 30 years, the actual number of female Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games participants and the number of opportunities to medal within those events has yet to equal the number of male participants or medals.
The 2006 Paralympic Winter Games statistics are a good illustration of this discrepancy; while there are nearly an equal number of events open to female athletes, the total number of female Paralympic athletes was 99 of 474 or 20.9%. And, while women’s participation has attempted to “catch up” with small increases in participation numbers, men’s events and participation opportunities have continued to increase, thereby perpetuating and increasing the participation gap. For instance, there were 1,006 women (38.3%) and 1,627 men (61.7%) in the 2006 Olympic Winter Games compared to 886 women (36.9%) and 1,513 men (63.1%) in 2002. Interestingly, the same continued growth of men’s sport and, as a result, the perpetuation of the gender gap has occurred in U.S. high school and college sport in the wake of Title IX’s push for gender equity (BFHSA, 2006; NCAA, 2006).
…
While the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has made significant efforts to play a leadership role in growing women’s participation, it has had limited success in encouraging the International Paralympic Committee (IPC), the 203 National Olympic Committees (NOC) and international winter sport federations (IF) to commit to gender equality. Women are also significantly underrepresented in the IOC and on IF boards of directors, the international governance structures that determine whether women’s sports are offered in Olympic, Paralympic and world championship competition.Click here hit download, and the paper comes up in Adobe
There’s not much that that I can find that has been written about women athletes’ participation in the Extremity Games, but here is an interview with Amy Purdy, wake boarder and Leia Listou, rock climber The Special Olympics suffers from that same problem. (In fact here are a lot of patting on the back articles about various orgs working with the atheletes and not much on the athletes in question.) if any of you know more about them feel free to share.
Women and girls are a growing presence in competitions for disabled athletes.
The new U.S. National Amputee Hockey Team is the latest draw for these talented women, who otherwise would miss the chance to play with other disabled athletes.
LAKE PLACID, N.Y. (WOMENSENEWS)–Competitive ice hockey is so second nature to Heather Ewasiuk and Joanne Lukasik that it’s impossible to tell they are both skating on prosthetic devices as they glide across the rink.
Amputees as well as athletes for most of their lives, Ewasiuk and Lukasik are the first and so far only female members of the startup U.S. National Amputee Hockey Team. Ewasiuk skates on an artificial left foot; Lukasik has prosthetic legs below the knees.
For Ewasiuk, 17, a high school senior in St. Paul, Minn., and Lukasik, 45, a wife and mother from Ortonville, Mich., their memberships on the team are just the latest accomplishments in athletic careers that have emphasized ability and determination over physical limitations. Their yearlong membership on the national amputee team marks the first time either has played officially with other amputees and with men
…
Women are the most active participants in winter Alpine skiing, and American women racers are winning far more medals than their male counterparts–in some cases sweeping the medals in Alpine and other ski events at the Paralympics that just ended in Salt Lake City, said Kathy Celo, operations and program services manager for Disabled Sports USA.
The organization, which supports handicapped athletes, received a $50,000 grant three years ago from the U.S. Olympic Committee that funded training camps, travel and expenses for female disabled athletes.
Disabled women “have really jumped into sports involvement in this past decade,” said Kirk Bauer, executive director of Disabled Sports USA. “Their hesitancy to wear shorts and prostheses in public has been greatly reduced, and they are involved in volleyball, skiing, water skiing, sailing, tennis, cycling, track and field, weightlifting and many other sports.”MORE
Sarah Reinertsen, author of the recently released memoir IN A SINGLE BOUND, lands on magazine covers nationwide this week on one of six different covers for the controversial first-ever “Body Issue” of ESPN THE MAGAZINE. A triathlete who holds the world record for the marathon for above-knee amputee women and was the first female leg-amputee to complete the Ironman World Championship in Kona, Hawaii, Reinertsen is one of 80 athletes to be featured in various states of undress for the magazine, and one of six chosen for the multiple covers. MORE
From total invisibility to being sexified? Uh. Rather mixed reaction to this.
The Best Female Athlete with a Disability ESPY Award, known alternatively as the Outstanding Female Athlete with a Disability ESPY Award, has been presented annually since 2005 to the female, irrespective of nationality or sport contested, adjudged to be the best athlete with a physical disability in a given calendar year. Between 2002 and 2004, the non-gender-specific Best Athlete with a Disability ESPY Award was presented, but the award was bifurcated by gender prior to the selection of the candidates for the 2005 ESPY Awards.
Balloting is undertaken over the Internet by fans from amongst choices selected by the ESPN Select Nominating Committee, and awards are conferred in June to reflect performance and achievement from the twelve months previous to presentation.List of winners
When you walk into the Georgia Peach Oyster Bar in Paulding County, you feel like you’ve walked into a different era.
Behind the pool tables stands a mannequin in a Klu Klux Klan costume, but it’s what’s outside of the Patrick Lanzo’s restaurant that has some people angry.
Lanzo put up a sign that reads “Obama’s plan for health-care: N*&%*r rig it.”
Only he didn’t say “N*&%*r” (to paraphrase Ralphie). He used the racial epithet, the big one, the queen-mother of racial epithets, the “N-dash-dash-dash-dash-dash” word. Spelled out for all to see.
Now, I know what you’re thinking. The guy is willing to use that word on a sign advertising his restaurant. He also has hosted a neo-Nazi rally, and his restaurant’s interior features “a number of racist images in his Georgia Peach Museum bar such as cartoons of Klan members lounging on lynched black men and items disparaging Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.” It also features a mannequin of a Klan member in full regalia. So you’re probably thinking this guy’s a racist. Right?
Wrong! We know he isn’t a racist, because he says so:
Despite the sign, Lanzo said he’s not a racist.
He said he’s just against what he calls a “sub standard healthcare plan,” which he said President Obama is trying to push through.
Well, of course! I mean, obviously, he’s just making a reasoned point on health care reform that just happens to use the ugliest word in the English language to refer to the President of the United States who just happens to be of the ethnic background said word defames. How could you think he was a racist?
Now, vile as Lanzo is, I actually would defend his right to display his racist utterances. It makes him easy to identify as a racist, for one thing. But that’s beside the point. The point is that even this guy claims he isn’t a racist, just like every other teabagger out there. Because opposition to Obama has no racial element. The right keeps saying so, and maybe, if they keep saying it, eventually they’ll even start to believe it.
The ratings aren’t looking good for Dollhouse, which is making me sad. If you’re not sold on the idea of the show this is a great fanmade site. If you want it to stay on air then they’ve got ideas of what you can here
Sorry, for the advertorial in the beginning. I can’t do anything myself you see (except write ridiculously long reviews), and I’d be really annoyed in they didn’t air episode four.
I don’t know if Barack Obama deserves the Nobel Peace Prize quite yet, and I’m actually serious when I say he won it in no small part for simply not being George W. Bush — for seeking to reengage with the world in the sort of way that decent, non-rogue countries do. That said, who cares? What’s fun is that this sets up the sort of massive, overwhelming, out-of-control right-wing freakout that money can’t buy. I mean, what’s the over/under on the first wingnut claiming that the selection of the sitting American president is proof that the Nobel committee hates America? Or the first one to claim that Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize proves he’s a communist? 7 AM? 6? They certainly won’t wait ’til 8, will they? Who will complain that Dubya should have won, for his success in invading foreign countries? Who will congratulate Kenya on their second winner in six years? And how will they tie this to ACORN?
It should be glorious. Even better than when Paul Krugman won the Economics Prize. Start popping the popcorn. Phone the neighbors, wake the kids. This is going to be a good day.
I haven’t paid much attention to the New Jersey governor’s race. Oh, it looks kind of close, and that might be marginally interesting, but the choice for residents of the Garden State appears to be the classic one between the evil of two lessers. Fighting from the blue corner is the incumbent Democrat, Gov. Jon Corzine, who is the kind of stalwart progressive one would expect the former head of Goldman Sachs to be. His challenger in the red corner, Chris Christie, is a former Rove bobo and U.S. Attorney who has the kind of ethics one would expect from a guy with that resumé. It’s a classic battle between the movable object and the resistible force, and while I suppose I’m predisposed to hope the Democrat wins, I certainly wouldn’t be dancing merrily to the polls to pull the lever for four more years of Corzine.
Now, as noted, the race between Corzine and Christie is close, and the campaign has turned relentlessly negative. And Corzine has launched a brand-new add hitting Christie on his driving record. And, unfortunately, something else:
Did you catch it? Maybe not. Frankly, it isn’t surprising if you didn’t; the message is so culturally ingrained that you’ve probably saw similar images a dozen times today. Still, think about what you just saw, and consider the words that the Corzine campaign used in the ad. Need a hint? They said Christie “threw his weight around” to get out of a ticket.
Interesting choice of words, that.
Interesting choice of video, too. Yes, we’re all aware that negative ads try to use unflattering images of opponents. But this was something else — not just a weird picture, but a classic fat-guy image, the guy slowly, awkwardly getting out of the car.
Yes, Jon Corzine has gone after Chris Christie because Chris Christie is fat.
Now, it wasn’t an overt smear. It wasn’t Corzine standing up and saying, “My opponent mainlines chocolate shakes and eats 23 Big Macs a day.” It was a dog-whistle. But it was a pretty freakin’ loud one. And pretty blindingly obvious to anyone not wanting to will away that fact, or excuse the behavior. Heck, the New York Timesclued right in to meaning of the ad, and their description is pretty accurate for those without YouTube:
It is about as subtle as a playground taunt: a television ad for Gov. Jon S. Corzine shows his challenger, Christopher J. Christie, stepping out of an S.U.V. in extreme slow motion, his extra girth moving, just as slowly, in several different directions at once.
In case viewers missed the point, a narrator snidely intones that Mr. Christie “threw his weight around” to avoid getting traffic tickets.
In the ugly New Jersey contest for governor, Mr. Corzine and Mr. Christie have traded all sorts of shots, over mothers and mammograms, loans and lying. But now, Mr. Corzine’s campaign is calling attention to his rival’s corpulence in increasingly overt ways.
Mr. Corzine’s television commercials and Web videos feature unattractive images of Mr. Christie, sometimes shot from the side or backside, highlighting his heft, jowls and double chin.
Meanwhile, Mr. Corzine, 62, is conspicuously running in 5- and 10-kilometer races almost every weekend, as he did last Saturday and Sunday, underscoring his athleticism and readiness for the physical demands of another term — and raising doubts about Mr. Christie’s.
Next, he and a fellow fitness buff, Mayor Cory A. Booker of Newark, will run through the streets of that city together next Tuesday.
Yes, Corzine is super-fit. Why, I hear he might swim in the Yangtze River next week, he’s so fit. Not like that fat Chris Christie, who probably has to use a Segway to go to the bathroom, the fat fatty.
But as much as I want to lampoon this, let’s face it, it probably will work, because it plays on the sort of ingrained stereotypes about fat people that already exist among the electorate:
In a recent survey conducted by Monmouth University, voters were asked to say the first thing that came to mind about Mr. Christie. “Fat” was one of the most frequent responses, said Patrick Murray, the director of the poll, who attributed the results to the Corzine ads.
And in focus group sessions conducted for the governor’s campaign over the summer, voters called attention to Mr. Christie’s size without being prompted, and those who were themselves overweight expressed the same concerns, said a Democrat who was briefed on the sessions.
I’m not surprised. Nobody hates a fat person like a fat person. We can never get away from fat — it’s covering us. If we’re lucky, we at some point stumbled on Shapely Prose and started to figure out that we weren’t horrible people, but even then the sense of personal shame remains, because it’s overwhelming in our society.
Now, some on the left have tried to preempt any complaining about these tactics by noting the old standby that “politics ain’t beanbag.” Big Tent Democrat over at TalkLeft makes the basic argument:
For some wonks, Republicans, who have called Dems, traitors, godless, gay, race baited, lied, stolen and cheated in elections, are to be treated with kid gloves. But NJ Dems don’t play that sh*t. Corzine has ripped the bark off of Chris Christie and now is in position to maybe win this thing. Matt Yglesias thinks the Corzine campaign is too mean and there will be a “backlash.” Yeah, right. The GOP is going to whine about Corzine picking on Christie? Really? Yeah, that’ll work. The good news is I am confident that Corzine’s people know what to do down the stretch – continue to rip Christie a new one right up to election day. The political arena is not for the meek. Look at Creigh Deeds.
Look, politics isn’t for the meek. But that doesn’t mean that anything goes. And it especially doesn’t mean it for Democrats.
In 1988, the Republicans ran an ad hitting Michael Dukakis on his furlough of William Horton, a criminal who while out of jail committed armed robbery, assault, and rape. Not a nice guy, Horton, and the program perhaps could be criticized. That said, you don’t know Horton as William, which was the name he used; you know him as Willie. Why? Because Republicans weren’t concerned about making a point on furlough programs, they were arguing that Dukakis wouldn’t keep African-American criminals from hurting good, God-fearing white folk. And William Horton doesn’t sound as scary as “Willie,” the hypothetical black criminal that GOP consultant Larry McCarthy called “every suburban mother’s greatest fear.”
The ad worked. Why? Because it fit into the GOP narrative. Minorities aren’t true Americans, they’re criminals who want to rape your white daughters and steal jobs from hard-working white American men. Who cares if an ad reinforces that idea? That only benefits the Republicans, only reinforces the Southern Strategy-approved message that all black men, everywhere are criminals, leeching off good white people.
Democrats do not believe in marginalizing people. We do not believe in creating an “us against them” America. When Democrats use appeals to racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or other bigotry to win elections, we undermine the very principles our party is founded on, and do long-term damage to our party in the long run. Every argument that a woman is unqualified because she’s a woman hurts women, and hurts the Democratic message that women and men should be equal. Every argument that an African-American is unqualified hurts African-Americans, and hurts the Democratic message that people of all racial backgrounds should be equal. Every argument against any person’s qualifications simply because of who they are undermine the bedrock principle of civil rights, that one’s genetic code and familial heritage is not a basis for judgment — one’s actions and principles are.
So yes, politics is messy and tough, and by all means, Corzine can pip Christie for any one of a zillion offenses. But when Corzine argues, even obliquely, that Christie’s weight disqualifies him from serving as a governor, he’s saying by that argument that everyone who carries extra weight is ipso facto incompetent. There’s a word for that: bigotry. And Democrats should not countenance it for a second, even if it originates on our own side of the aisle.
Yes, that string of words in the subject line actually means something. Last Drink Bird Head is a charity anthology being put together by master anthologists Ann and Jeff VanderMeer. In their own words,
The purpose of the awards is to celebrate those in the genre community who enrich us with their time, energy, and words, often for causes greater than themselves.
Proceeds from the anthology go to ProLiteracy.org, for the promotion of adult literacy. The anthology’s a limited edition and has a truly star-studded table of contents, so order yours now if you want a copy. But back to the point — who have they nominated for this year’s “Gentle Advocacy” award? Why, it’s one of ABW’s own:
Gentle Advocacy In recognition of individuals willing to enter into blunt discourse about controversial issues…
– K. Tempest Bradford
– Nick Mamatas
– John Scalzi
Throw your hands up for KTB! And cross your fingers so she’ll win.
Seriously, tho’ — 2009 has been TheYearofFail in science fictionland, as seemingly every other week the genre picks up its foot, sprinkles MSG on the toe, then shoves it deep down its own throat sideways. A lot of good people have been stepping up at last to say in unequivocal, loud voices that racism and sexism and homophobia and alllllll the other crap the SF establishment has gotten away with for generations is Not Acceptable. But some people in SFdom seem to think that this pushback is the problem, not the serious problems that caused the pushback in the first place. So it’s nice to see some of the most respected folks in the establishment acknowledging that the pushback is a good and necessary thing, and recognizing the ones who’ve been loudest and bravest.
I’m thrilled to announce that Friends of Lulu has nominatedHereville for two awards! “The Lulu Awards recognizes the the people and projects that helped to open eyes and minds to the amazing comic and cartooning work by and/or about women.”
Hereville was nominated for the Leah Adezio Award For Best Kid-Friendly Work, and Mirka was nominated for Best Female Character.
To vote for Hereville (or for the other nominees — swell folks, all of them!), go to Friends of Lulu and follow the directions there.
* * *
Hey, speaking of Hereville, whatever happened to it? I’m still working on it, believe it or not. Comics are slow!
The graphic novel will be coming out from Abrams in late 2010 (in time for Hanukkah!). I’m just finishing up the second draft of the pencils now, and I’ll begin work on the final art in a bit over a week.
Meanwhile, just to whet people’s appetites, here’s a penciled page from chapter one:
I take back any bad thing I’ve ever said about Sen. Al Franken, DFL-Minn.
Why do I do this? Because in his brief tenure in office, Franken has shown himself to be exactly the kind of senator we need more of — bright, driven, and possessed of a sense of justice. He’s not getting things done by grandstanding or being a comedian; he’s getting things done by writing good legislation and getting it passed.
Take the case of Jamie Leigh Jones. Please.
You probably remember the case of Jamie Leigh Jones, the woman who was raped while working for KBR in Iraq. After reporting the rape, KBR responded to this grievous act by imprisoning her in a shipping container, so that she couldn’t tell anyone. When she finally convinced a guard to give her a cell phone, she managed to get a call to her dad in Texas, who worked with Rep. Ted Poe, R-Tex., to get her home. KBR responded to the actions of its employees by banning cell-phones.
Jones was unable to prosecute her assailants, so she attempted instead to sue KBR. But because her contract provided for arbitration for any workplace disputes, she was unable to; her only route for compensation was arbitration, a process that is a) better used for minor contract disputes, as opposed to cases of rape and false imprisonment, and b) decidedly tilted in favor of employers. She’s made some headway — the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that her case should be handled outside of arbitration — but that’s headway for her, and it’s only come after four years of legal fighting. Any woman — or man — who lives outside the 5th circuit who is similarly treated will have to start from scratch.
On Monday, Franken worked to extend those protections, when he successfully attached an amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would defund contractors “if they restrict their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court.”
Franken’s speech on the floor was spot on:
Theres a lot of horrible in there, but the nut graf (which I ganked from ThinkProgress) is as follows:
The constitution gives everybody the right to due process of law … And today, defense contractors are using fine print in their contracts do deny women like Jamie Leigh Jones their day in court. … The victims of rape and discrimination deserve their day in court [and] Congress plainly has the constitutional power to make that happen.
It would be nice to think that this sensible amendment was simply passed on a voice vote, all members of the Senate opposing the idea that someone who was raped and imprisoned would be prevented from seeking justice. Alas, that was not the case; the amendment passed 68-30, with all Democrats (save Robert Byrd and Arlen Specter, who did not vote) and 10 Republicans voting in favor, and 30 Republicans — 75 percent of the caucus — opposed.
The list of pro-rape Republican senators is as follows: Alexander (R-TN), Barrasso (R-WY), Bond (R-MO), Brownback (R-KS), Bunning (R-KY), Burr (R-NC), Chambliss (R-GA), Coburn (R-OK), Cochran (R-MS), Corker (R-TN), Cornyn (R-TX), Crapo (R-ID), DeMint (R-SC), Ensign (R-NV), Enzi (R-WY), Graham (R-SC), Gregg (R-NH), Inhofe (R-OK), Isakson (R-GA), Johanns (R-NE), Kyl (R-AZ), McCain (R-AZ), McConnell (R-KY), Risch (R-ID), Roberts (R-KS), Sessions (R-AL), Shelby (R-AL), Thune (R-SD), Vitter (R-LA), Wicker (R-MS).
Obviously, the amendment still has to go through conference committee, but one suspects its future is bright; certainly, the House is unlikely to water this down. And for most people, that’s a good thing; justice demands that those who are egregiously wronged are able to sue for redress. Yes, most Senate Republicans may view the idea of allowing lawsuits to be quaint, especially when compared to corporate profits. But most humans recognize what happened to Jamie Leigh Jones to be an unconscionable crime, and there is nothing quaint about making sure it never happens again.
What he was accused of is not only considered rape because she was underage, and not only because he gave her drugs and alcohol to set it up, but also because he did it while she was saying no and telling him to stop.
There’s nothing ambiguous about that.
That is an account of a rape.
And
This plea bargain was set up by the family and their attorneys because they saw no other way to protect this girl from a trial that would take away her anonymity and subject her to an endless media frenzy. They did not set up that plea bargain because they had any doubts about being able to prove her original charges. They set up the plea bargain because they saw a system that could not adequately protect this child, so they felt that they had no other choice but to compromise and settle for something less than justice.
In the way he always does, Jay lays things out incredibly clearly, and absolutely demolishes every single objection from Polanski’s supporters.
Basically, what it comes down to is that Jay Smooth is a badass and Roman Polanski is a jackass.
Oh, sorry, I meant rapist.
Please do not comment unless you accept the basic dignity, equality, and inherent worth of all people
Now, I know what you’re thinking. The guy is willing to use that word on a sign advertising his restaurant. He also has hosted a neo-Nazi rally, 
I don’t know if Barack Obama 
I also think a lot of people genuinely think that a woman can not be strong enough to be president…