veronica_rich (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
veronica_rich) wrote2011-02-01 02:59 pm
veronica_rich) wrote2011-02-01 02:59 pm
sneaky gits
John Boehner's push to redefine rape, as the article notes, isn't about rape at all - it's about restricting access to abortion, with an eye toward eliminating it altogether.
I could say a lot of things about this proposal, about the legislators behind it, about supporters of this backdoor measure. Instead, I'll just make two observations I've noticed about Republicans in power over the last decade, at least:
1. Anytime Republican legislators initiate something that they know will get a lot of media attention and stir up a bunch of uproar, it's usually as a cover for some other legislation they're trying to sneak through that they don't want anyone to notice ("Wag the Dog," anyone? It's not just a fun movie premise; it exists). Hard as it is to believe, the "disguised" legislation is usually worse, and often unrelated. I saw this happen during the war years of the last decade - the Bush administration and the predominantly Republican Congress would introduce one item, then as quickly as they could, throw something else out for people to deal with ... and then a third thing ... and so on and so forth. It's a form of torture designed to wear down opposition. People can generally deal crisis to crisis, but when they overlap, it becomes too much to handle, and they'll turn their attention to one thing and let the rest of the things slide past with little to no notice.
2. That's not to say the "cover" legislation - such as this rape definition thing - isn't also intended to actually go through. The Republicans are a sneaky lot, and while cruel, not stupid: If you're going to create a cover for something, why not design it to also screw as many people as possible? That way, it's not a wasted labor. But if this doesn't go through, they will at least expect that - it's always the disguised legislation that's the most important.
So, in this case - what else are the Republicans doing in Congress that they really don't want us to know about? (None of this is random hatred of Republicans; it's a legitimate observation I've made over several years now, related to my career, that has helped me sort of anticipate what will come next news-wise. I don't know if the Democrats don't do the same thing because (a) they haven't been in power enough to try it yet; (b) they're not clever/mercenary enough to carry it out; or (c) they have higher principles ... which, I kind of doubt this last one, since people are people, and there are Republican voters (and a very few Republican lawmakers) who have principles, so you have to concluded there are Democrats who are also unscrupulous.)
I could say a lot of things about this proposal, about the legislators behind it, about supporters of this backdoor measure. Instead, I'll just make two observations I've noticed about Republicans in power over the last decade, at least:
1. Anytime Republican legislators initiate something that they know will get a lot of media attention and stir up a bunch of uproar, it's usually as a cover for some other legislation they're trying to sneak through that they don't want anyone to notice ("Wag the Dog," anyone? It's not just a fun movie premise; it exists). Hard as it is to believe, the "disguised" legislation is usually worse, and often unrelated. I saw this happen during the war years of the last decade - the Bush administration and the predominantly Republican Congress would introduce one item, then as quickly as they could, throw something else out for people to deal with ... and then a third thing ... and so on and so forth. It's a form of torture designed to wear down opposition. People can generally deal crisis to crisis, but when they overlap, it becomes too much to handle, and they'll turn their attention to one thing and let the rest of the things slide past with little to no notice.
2. That's not to say the "cover" legislation - such as this rape definition thing - isn't also intended to actually go through. The Republicans are a sneaky lot, and while cruel, not stupid: If you're going to create a cover for something, why not design it to also screw as many people as possible? That way, it's not a wasted labor. But if this doesn't go through, they will at least expect that - it's always the disguised legislation that's the most important.
So, in this case - what else are the Republicans doing in Congress that they really don't want us to know about? (None of this is random hatred of Republicans; it's a legitimate observation I've made over several years now, related to my career, that has helped me sort of anticipate what will come next news-wise. I don't know if the Democrats don't do the same thing because (a) they haven't been in power enough to try it yet; (b) they're not clever/mercenary enough to carry it out; or (c) they have higher principles ... which, I kind of doubt this last one, since people are people, and there are Republican voters (and a very few Republican lawmakers) who have principles, so you have to concluded there are Democrats who are also unscrupulous.)
no subject
The most frustrating thing is that no measure will "eliminate" abortion, just make it an underground activity. And since most people have no memory of pre-Roe days (strangely including some people who were around then), the perspective that this is possible is going to be hard to dispel. So as a method of achieving the impossible, sexist men get to set women's rights back a decade or two.
We have abortions because people want them and/or feel compelled to have them. Period. (Aside from occasional medical necessity.) And the self-righteous actually help perpetuate the problem, for as long as they consider pregnancies to be "mistakes" or "sins," then there will be a desire to eliminate the mistake or negate the sin.
no subject
It really does seem that all these proposals have in common the ultimate goal of recreating a disparity between the sexes - and then wedging the difference even wider. Basically, women are being punished for existing, one, and two, for wanting the same freedoms and opportunities as men. Silly wimminz.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Not being rude here, but there are times when I wonder about the USA and the people in it when I see things like this.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
But that's just a guess. :-/
no subject
You are also right about the impact of corporations and the desire for commerical goods and satisfaction. Now, it could just be that I am a liberal European socialist, but there is no way I could live in that sort of society. I made that choice when I decided not to return to the US and practice medicine there.
no subject
no subject
no subject
The hypocrisy among religious leaders is sickening, yet all the little sheep will gladly follow.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject