The Political Voices of Women

This is an interesting question. Are you better off than you were eight years ago? Do you know anyone who is? Just wondering. Let me know in comments.

NOW’s President Kim Gandy on Colbert Report.  It is very funny.

Here is a guest post from community member Anita S. Lane.  You can read more from Anita at her blog Unconventional Politics.

[If you would like to be a guest blogger on The Political Voices of Women, just join our community, and start posting.]

Majority of Americans Don’t Want a Bailout and Are Willing to Suffer the Consequences!

Estimates reveal that the proposed $700 billion bailout plan will cost $2,333 for each person in America. For my family that means $13,998. Hec, I’ve got my own debt to pay down.

As it turns out, I’m not alone. Many Americans (about 1/3) are not inclined to support this bailout. Another third will consider voting for the bill only if it’s done right—and I fully understand.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and President Bush assert that if we don’t approve the bailout, and I paraphrase, “all hell will break loose.” And if it does? …

What I and most Americans want to know is whether this plan will serve as a temporary bandaid that just postpones the inevitable, or will it incorporate systemic policy changes that will help prevent a similar crisis in the future?

No New Crisis
Truthfully, many of us in America are pretty fed up and are willing to just let the whole thing burn. Most of us have already been burned. Middle and working class American families have been in a crisis for a while. Between rising gas, food and energy prices, depreciating housing values, layoffs and few raises to offset the cost of living increases, ordinary Americans have been looking for our own bailout plan, and it just doesn’t exist.

Now, the treasury and the President wants each American to dig a little deeper into our own bleak pockets and cough up $2,333 per person to rescue Wall Street—effectively increasing our record high national debt by almost an additional trillion dollars.

Treasury Secretary, I’m sorry to inform you, but we cannot afford a bailout of this magnitude. We simply don’t have it. There has to be another way. Keep thinking…

Debtor Nation
Increasing our current $10 trillion debt by another $700 billion just cannot be sound financial policy. Is it fair that a few folks on Wall Street could so detrimentally impact the masses? No. Should someone be held accountable? Sure, but the bottom line is, if we Americans are willing to take our chances and decide we aren’t willing to bailout Wall Street, then let it be our decision—you know, “we the people?…”

But what if Wall Street crumbles? Well, we’ll just have to take it and make some good ol’ American apple crumble. Americans know how to bounce back. We always do. If our paper house burns down. Little-by-little, we’ll just build it back up again. That’s old-school. That’s the American way. There simply are no short fixes and get-right-quick schemes when it comes to finances.

Sorry, King Paulson.

Here is a guest post from Penny Ronning at The NonSilent Majority.

(If you would like to be a guest blogger on this site, please join our community)

U.S. Marshall escorting James Meredith to class at Ole Miss in 1962

I will be watching tonight’s debate knowing just how historical this event truly is.

Oh and gee, glad to know John McCain has decided to show.

Yes, the economy is in the toilet. It has been for sometime, Senator McCain.

But

Tonight’s debate and the INCREDIBLE significance of where the debate is taking place has been YEARS in the making and has come at a very high price for many Americans.

The acknowledgment of their sacrifices and their challenges should not be postponed one minute longer.

Segregation was and is horrendous. Why should any American have to fight, be humiliated or denied their right to receive an education based upon race [gender, religious beliefs, or sexual orientation]?

This is a terrible, terrible, unbelievably horrendous mark in American history.

I applaud those that stood up to an unfair system and created a path for either themselves and/or others to change the status quo.

Tonight is significant and I shall be watching.

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/sep/14/new-era-takes-root…

Here is a guest post from community member Marcia G. Yerman, who also blogs at The Huffington Post.

[If you would like to be a guest blogger on The Political Voices of Women, just join our community, and start posting.]

New York City – On Sunday, September 21, Women for Obama held a press conference on the steps of City Hall. Arriving early, after navigating the security point guarding the government edifice (referred to by one official as “the house of the people”), I had a chance to interview some of those who had been invited to attend.

In contrast to the narrative that has been promulgated about disgruntled Hillary supporters, the women I conversed with had moved on without trauma. Martha Baker, a consultant on work/family issues, was sporting a button that announced, Hillary Supports Obama, So Do I. “He’s our candidate,” she told me. One of the forces behind the Women For Parity website, which began as “Hillary Voices,” she referenced viewing “the campaigns through a women’s issues prism.”

Carol Greenman, a retired medical administrator and Hillary turned Obama advocate said, “I’m scared to death of another Republican administration.” For her, the major questions were the future of the Supreme Court, and how life would be for her five grandchildren in a country that could be shaped by McCain-Palin ideology.

Grandmothers, ranging in age from 62 – 77, were out in force. Worried about the path that faces the younger generation, members of Grandmothers Against the War and the Granny Peace Brigade were quite vocal about their apprehensions.

Diane Dreyfus, a retired architect and activist (Code Pink) since 2001, was wearing a “We Will Not Be Silent” shirt with Arabic, Hebrew, and English writing. Asked about Sarah Palin she shuddered, “She’s frightening. If she can gut a moose in five seconds, imagine what she can do to health and welfare.”

Actress Kathleen Turner, a featured spokesperson, related to me her commitment to the Obama candidacy. She pronounced her mission as, “Whatever I can do.” Chair of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America Board of Advocates, Turner has testified before Congress on Title X (family planning program), and on the Equity of Prescription Insurance Contraception Coverage Act.

Behind those charged with addressing press and supporters, was a phalanx of women with a set of diverse signs…Nurses for Obama, Latinos for Obama, Put Children First, and Don’t Vote Race – Don’t Vote Gender – Vote Intelligence.

Read more »

Here is a guest post by community member Deb Della Piana from Turn Left.

[If you would like to be a guest blogger on The Political Voices of Women, just join our community, and start posting.]

It’s election season, and I’m not about to let up on the McCain-Palin ticket. If I put these two at the larval stage, I’m giving them too much credit. To show that I’m not just a one-issue voter when it comes to McCain and Palin, the issue of women’s rights will not play into the article (but only this one time). I’ve done that article before, and there are other reasons I’d never vote for this ticket.

We already have people in government who believe they are above the law (one resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue right now) and it looks like McCain would like to add one more. Initially, Sarah Palin said she would cooperate voluntarily with the ongoing abuse of power investigation against her. Suddenly, the Alaska legislators are under pressure to wait until after the election to continue the investigation, and her husband is now going to ignore the subpoena he has received. I wonder if he’s getting pointers from campaign advisor Karl Rove about how best to ignore a subpoena and get away with it. It doesn’t take much in America these days, particularly if you’re an elected official. We’ve lowered the bar here to the point where we should all be doing the limbo.

McCain campaign spokesman Ed O’Callaghan is falsely accusing the supporters of Barack Obama of controlling the investigation. The fact is that the investigation was recommended prior to Palin’s selection by a bi-partisan Legislative Council, the vast majority of whom were Alaska Republicans. There’s no way this investigation should be delayed until after the election. If McCain chose this woman as a running mate with full knowledge of the accusations against her (and he says he knew from the beginning), then let the chips fall where they may.

McCain wants to distract, not inform. If he distracts, you may not learn that his plan is to privatize and cut Social Security approximately one percent per year, along the lines of the proposed Bush plan. Workers who retire ten years after the McCain plan is put in place would see a ten percent reduction in benefits from the very beginning.

Next on the McCain-Palin hit list is the nation’s health care system. Their plan would effectively dismantle the employer-based coverage that protects most American families by converting health care benefits into income on which employees would have to pay taxes. The idea is to force millions of Americans into the non-group market where costs are high and services are limited. Benefits that millions now have would be lost. This is what the Republicans call the ‘free market’ system, much like the one currently bringing down Wall Street at the taxpayers’ expense.

John McCain’s confusion about who’s who in the world continues to embarrass. This from a candidate supposedly superior to Barack Obama in the foreign policy field. When asked if he would commit to a meeting with Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, McCain refused. Apparently, McCain thought Zapatero was a Latin American autocrat. Randy Scheunemann, McCain’s foreign policy advisor, denied it was yet another McCain gaffe, but rather an intentional policy position with regard to Spain. Why would McCain refuse to commit to a meeting with a Democratic NATO ally with 1,000 troops serving in Afghanistan? Either McCain is intent on hiding his confusion from the public or he is upset (as is President Bush) that Spain pulled its troops from Iraq in 2004. Someone should point out to both George Bush and John McCain that there sometimes are repercussions when other nations find they’ve been deliberately lied to.

Read more »

 Here is a guest post from community member Marcia G. Yerman, who also blogs at The Huffington Post.

[If you would like to be a guest blogger on The Political Voices of Women, just join our community, and start posting.]

A “grassroots” letter that will be presented to Sarah Palin by MomsRising is currently on their site, available for signature. To date, 20,000 women’s names have been collected. The question is asked of Palin, “Where do you stand on issues that matter to me?” After extending heartfelt congratulations to the Governor on her path from “PTA to Vice Presidential candidate,” the organization gets down to brass tacks by specifically asking what she and the Republican Party would do for mothers and families.

MomsRising was founded in 2006. It grew out of a book project undertaken by Joan Blade and Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner. Released on Mother’s Day of that year, The Motherhood Manifesto, “explored the struggles of the American family.” It later became a documentary film. Having reached a critical mass with their extensive research data, Blades and Rowe-Finkbeiner decided to mobilize the strength behind mothers’ voices and their concerns.

A non-partisan organization, which works at the state and national level, MomsRising tackles problems that don’t get adequate recognition. Statistics that the public should be aware of are underscored. For example, you may not hear on the campaign trail that 25% of families with children under six live in poverty, single mothers make 60 cents to a man’s dollar, or that 75% of American mothers are in the labor force.

Read more »

Here is a guest post from community member Marcella Peralta Simon.

[If you would like to be a guest blogger on The Political Voices of Women, just join our community, and start posting.]

How did we get into this mess and what sort of neat soundbites can Obama provide in ads and in debates?

Banks were flush with cash from the 90s boom and had to do something with it. They did some risky things with other people’s money and a few individuals made out like bandits while others lost their houses and life savings. The administration (Phil Gramm and co) did not want to interfere with the private sector so they were basically asleep at the switch. Things got so risky that whole companies started to implode, affecting global markets (when the US sneezes, etc.). Now, they want the taxpayers to bail out these banks and buy up their bad debt.

Obama can say under his tax policies, you will pay less for this bailout but under McCain’s proposal, you will pay proportionatly much much more. The people that made this happen and benefitted from this irresponsible excess will not be penalized under such a plan, you will. Also, banks have lobbyists crawling all over to make sure they get the best deal from the government, where are your advocates?

Its a start.

P.S. Nothing made me angrier than to hear Carly F smugly blame the Democratic Congress for this mess, after she lost big money for HP shareholders and walked away with a golden parachute.

Here is a guest post by community member Zatfig Redhead from The Zatfig Redhead’s Blog

(If you would like to be a guest blogger on this site, please join our community)

Barack Obama has just had a particularly good week with the ladies. In fact, it was a noticeably big week for women’s endorsements for the Obama campaign. Can you say “gender gap?” I knew you could. In a week that saw Republican VEEP candidate Sarah Palin’s approval rating drop precipitously, these activities aimed at women voters well timed.

First, a group of women’s organizations — those few that have PACs and thus can endorse without jeopardizing their precious non-profit status — endorsed the junior senator from Illinois. Prominently featured was the still-not-as-happy-as-they-could-be NOW, who joined their shero Hillary Clinton in saying “no way, no how, no McCain.” Other groups included the Feminist Majority with the ever colorful Ellie Smeal, the Business & Professional Women/USA, the National Congress of Black Women, and the National Association of Social Workers. Watch portions of the press event here:

But the real coup de grace in my mind was this week’s Obama endorsement from Lilly Ledbetter. The plaintiff of Ledbetter v. Goodyear fame headlined the Democratic National Convention in Denver, and on September 18 made it official — she’s for Obama, in a big way. Ledbetter made the announcement at a series of events in the critical state of Virginia, and was treated like a rock star by adoring crowds. The New York Times has referred to Ledbetter as “the Democrats secret weapon,” and they may be right.

Take a look at this ad featuring Ledbetter, below, just released this past week — she’s a humble grandmother from Alabama who packs a punch, and women nationwide are cheering her on. Why? Because her experiences are so familiar, so universal to us all, and she’s speaking up and trying to change things for future generations — despite the fact that her own case is closed. Now, the Democratic Senate needs to do the right thing by Ledbetter’s vocal support and national advocacy and pass the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. The House has already passed this critical bill that would right the Supreme Court’s FUBAR handling of the Ledbetter case. However, the legislation is currently stuck in a defacto Senate filibuster on the more pompous, ponderous side of the Hill. But if we can get more Dems elected to the Senate — and inch our way closer to that magic number of 60 — I predict the Ledbetter bill will be one of the first bills signed by an Obama Administration.

Read more »

As reported on US News & World Report, The Huffington Post and Feministe, the Wasilla police department changed their policy under the Sarah Palin mayoral administration to charge rape victims for the cost of their rape kits. Police Chief Charlie Fannon, who replaced the former chief of police when Palin fired him for not supporting her, decided to eliminate rape kits from the budget. Chief Fannon felt that the good people of Wasilla already had too high a tax burden, and forcing rape victims to pay for their own evidence gathering would save the town between $5,000 and $14,000 per year.

Of course, this makes perfect sense if you believe that rape victims asked for it. I mean, if women are going to go out wearing short skirts or tight pants, what do they expect? Or if they go out alone at all. Or if they stay home alone and someone breaks in. Thank goodness Palin hired a person who cares so much about the community.

The upshot of this policy is that the state of Alaska passed a law barring local law enforcement from charging rape victims for their rape kits. How many towns had this policy in place? One. That would be Wasilla, under the “leadership” of Sarah Palin. Who objected to the new law? Chief Charlie Fannon, complaining that the town would need to increase its budget to cover the cost of these routine law enforment procedures. Yes, that Palin sure has women’s best interests in mind.

[Contributor Suzanne Reisman is also at CUSS and other Rants, and BlogHer Feminism and Gender]