The post It’s not really about abortion appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>Lady Sybil died at Downton Abbey tonight because two powerful men overruled the doctor who had known her since childhood and the mother whose reasoning powers were not poisoned by the need to be right. Childbirth has always been dangerous and still is for many women. But when men with large egos are given the power to decide who lives and who dies, who suffers and who doesn’t have to, we are all the worse for it. It’s time we faced what is really behind the decades long erosion of women’s reproductive rights.
One of the guests on Bill Moyers’ program this Sunday said that we are living through a time very much like that of 100 years ago when men were afraid of sharing political and social power with women. The most direct way to control women is to control their sexuality.
The issue of abortion rights has never been of much interest to me, but the other night I heard a nun (one of the Nuns on a Bus group) say that anti-abortion activists are not pro-life; they are pro-birth. That makes a huge difference and helps me understand why the same legislators who vote constantly to make it harder to get an abortion are also the ones who vote against increased funding for pre-natal care, infant feeding programs, family leave, subsidized child care, Parents as First Teachers, Nurses for Newborns, and medical services for new moms and their babies.
Now that the anti-women extremists have made it very, very difficult to find an abortion provider, they are going after contraception. So that makes it very clear this is NOT about abortion. It’s about controlling women by controlling their sexuality. The male decision makers in the Catholic Church are steadfast in their dictates and pronouncements about women’s reproductive restrictions, but the lay women and nuns who actually keep the Church running are much less dictatorial about it. Why is that?
I’ve complained for years about using “pro-choice” as a rallying cry. It makes the heartwrenching decision to end a pregnancy seem so trivial. The two women on the Moyers program open up the whole conversation about “reproductive justice” in such a way that makes more sense to me. One thing I know for sure. Men who need to exercise power over women should not be allowed to make any decisions or pass any laws about sex and reproduction.
Watch the video and see what you think.
The post It’s not really about abortion appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>The post President Obama needs some new friends in the White House appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>It’s no longer a surprise that most progressives have come to the conclusion that if President Barack Obama was ever a progressive, he is not one now. Among the suggestions that have been offered for the president is that he reconstitute the inner circle of his staff.
Geithner, Summers, Emanuel, Vilsack, Orszag, individuals who progressives are happy to have seen leave the administration or hoping that they’re shown the way to the door in short order.
Progressives want individuals who have minimal corporate ties, are not conventional politicians, think outside the box, and most importantly, will stand firm on liberal principles. This doesn’t mean that there won’t be compromise, but that when it occurs there is a quid pro quo. No more of the “give-aways” like the public option or continuing tax cuts for the wealthy. If the Republicans and remaining Blue Dogs in the Democratic Party want something from the president, he must insist on getting something of equal or greater value from them. His staff for the first two years of his administration has been of little help in this regard.
So who might be individuals who could offer President Obama sound advice and improve his skills in the game theory of negotiations? I’d like to suggest the following people:
These individuals have a lot in common, most of which are strengths. Collectively there is not enough diversity in the group; there need to be more minorities, women, and younger individuals.
One significant factor that they all have in common is that none of them is currently an elected official. That’s important because President Obama weakened the ranks of Democrats in the Senate by selecting sitting senators to leave their positions to join the Cabinet such as Hillary Clinton and Ken Salizar. This is most significant; think of how the health care discussion and resolution could have gone differently had Hillary Clinton still been in the Senate, particularly after the death of Ted Kennedy. There are plenty of qualified advisors to call upon without drawing down the ranks of progressives in another branch of government.
Most of the individuals in the group are familiar with corporate America, but to our knowledge, none have connections that would put them in a position to suggest public policy that would be for their personal gain. If you’ve seen the movie Inside Job, you can tell how compromised Larry Summers was in the White House. Tim Geithner was a regulator who didn’t regulate; Rahm Emanuel was way too much of an insider’s insider.
So please share with us your thoughts on our suggestions for new staff. You may want to add your own names, feel free to do so in the comment section below. This is a terrific opportunity for us to be positive in carrying out a key item in the Occasional Planet’s orbit: “Progressive viewpoints and creative thinking on issues and events.” Bill Clinton showed that a president can recover in years three and four of his administration; Barack Obama can do so as well, but he will not only need a little help from his friends; he’ll need some new friends.
For a similar perspective on President Obama and his advisors, you can read Robert Reich of Tuesday, December 7, 2010.
The post President Obama needs some new friends in the White House appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>