I just wanted to address your second post in regard to the positions of Senator Hutchinson, etc. In my very quick search regarding how the Republican Women Senators voted on bills such as the Lily Ledbetter Act or the Matthew Shepherd Hate Crimes Prevention Act (part of HR 2647) ALL of the Republican women supported those bills. So when you put women’s EQUALITY rights on the table, it seems that regardless of party affiliation the women are unified in the Senate. Don’t forget that the Matthew Shepherd Hate Crimes Prevention Act was introduced initially in regard to gay rights. All of the Republican women in the senate still supported it (or a more accurate way for me to say this is that none of the women voted nay; one Pub woman from AK didn’t vote).

It is hard to tell the difference between the votes of the Democratic women and the Republican women in the Senate (at least from looking at these two high profile bills).

The Congress is a different animal altogether and doesn’t seem to fall into a nice non-partisan package. I just have to put in the caveat that I don’t get any of the women in the House right now. I mean the world is topsy turvy when Louise Slaughter (D-NY) votes yes on a bill that denies any kind of abortion access. It doesn’t seem that anyone is thinking, just reacting to partisan playground politics. I want to replace the whole lot of them (and replace them ALL with new women ).

Thus, we all must simultaneously agree and disagree with the current hellth kare being put forth in Congress because Pelosi likes it and Palin doesn’t. (BTW, I call it hellth kare because, like cheez-whiz and cheese, neither health nor care are actual ingredients in the thing.)

I am not going to play this misdirection nonsense where I’m told that merely by refusing to allow a woman to be sexually victimized tha tI’m signing my name on the dotted line on all of her opinions. I do not CARE about a woman’s opinions when she’s being sexually degraded. They are not relevant. We do not stop to nitpick everything the victim ever said or did wrong before condemning the hate speech flying at them.

And no, we don’t do the yes-but thing. (Well, I don’t, and a lot of people here don’t, and it’s about time.) You know, “I’m not saying that any of this should have been done, buuuuuut … ”

The appropriate way to respond to hate speech is with a simple “THAT IS UNACCEPTABLE AND WE WILL PUNISH YOU FOR IT.” Period. No “however” at the end, no comma, no waffling. It’s not acceptable, and the perpetrators will be punished. End of sentence. Any other discussion is for another time.

Janis, the New Agenda stands up for women who’ve been discriminated against, a goal with which I have no argument, but it goes well beyond that. Prominent members of the blog and followers routinely state that nothing can be achieved unless all women unite and vote for women political candidates, regardless of positions. That’s what I’m questioning because some of these positions do a great deal of harm to women and other groups pushed to the margins of our society. I was impressed that Amy Siskind brought up Rick Warren’s ties to this business in Uganda but I really worry about treating him or his beliefs as outliers. They aren’t, they’re pervasive. That’s all I’m saying.

I do have to say, attacking me for making reasoned objections isn’t exactly the way to convert people to your point of view and undermines some of the good work the organization is doing (i.e. your stance on Polanski and Chris Brown).

Do you understand that you are behaving in exactly the same way as the male knuckledraggers who would say, “Not that I think that that should be done to anyone ever, buuuuuuuut was that girl who was gang raped and left for dead drinking?”

Do you get that we can defend a woman against sexist attack before first telling the whole world what’s wrong with her?

Do you get how demanding that that be done is tantamount to saying that she asked for it and some sexual attacks are forgiveable and even justified?

Do you get that you are saying that we can’t hold a man accountable for anything until we hold all women everywhere accountable for everything?

Do you even GET ANY OF THIS?

If I may make a suggestion. Present your argument as “I absolutely agree about Obama and the Democratic Party”.

Then separately hold the other people responsible for condoning these acts. As is it appears that you are trying to excuse Obama by bringing up the other people.

Shouldvevotedforhilary says: Some things are just unforgivable and it’s time everyone joined together and said it’s not okay for Obama to be aligned with these people. I’m with you. But it’s not just Obama. Many of our politicians hold the same kind of socially conservative views as Rick Warren. Rick Warren exists as a national figure because mainstream culture and mainstream politicians embraced him.

M, I’m under no delusions that D stands for women but R doesn’t stand for women either.

I agree. Some things are just unforgivable and it’s time everyone joined together and said it’s not okay for Obama to be aligned with these people. If this were an issue of Hillary Clinton associating herself with known racists people would incessantly attack her. Yet Obama gets away with it. It’s kind of like the saying once a cheater always a cheater… Well once a misogynist always a misogynist. We can’t keep giving Obama free game time and again when he continues to ‘cheat.’

Rick Warren is a monster and the O administration echoed his sentiments on Uganda. It’s disgusting and I think bringing up how Hillary Clinton feels about gay marriage in this context is a bit odd.