Maurice Sendak

From a recently published 2011 interview with Maurice Sendak:

I can’t read the papers anymore. I just feel sorry for Obama. I want him so much to win. I would do anything to help him win. He’s a decent, wonderful man. And these Republican schnooks are so horrible. They’d be comical if they weren’t not funny.

He pretty well captures the anxieties of the Democratic Party for the last 18 months. Thank God it's over. For now.

That's all. Read the whole interview here.

Rosen v. Romney

Disclosure: Not married, not a mom, no kids... but I'm about to talk about all of those things.

The Romney campaign has been using Mrs. Ann Romney as a surrogate for the candidate when talking about women's economic issues. Yesterday, Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen questioned the wisdom behind that tactic, saying that Ann Romney, a stay at home mom who raised five children, "never worked a day in her life."

Oh muh gawd. The shit's still hitting the fan. Congressmen, pundits, and politicos on both sides have rushed to Mrs. Mittens' defense, saying that of course raising those kids was hard work. Anti-feminists see this as a vindication of what the left thinks of them, that we don't value women who decide to stay home with their families. Suddenly the right is talking about "choice" -- the choice that some parents make to not work outside the home. Stop stealing our language, damnit!

Then there's the second part of Hilary's comment that no one is talking about. This part: "[Ann Romney]'s never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing."

While Hilary's first point should have been phrased better, her overall message was clear: Mrs. Romney has never worked in the sense of a salary, benefits, bosses, meetings, "Office Space," get up and go to work kind of job -- the kind of job for which 8.3% of the American population is desperately searching, the kind of job that pays for a mortgage, for a car, for college. Through her husband Mr. Bain Capital, she has been shielded from the devastating realities of the economic recession. It's a legitimate question, then, that she might not be the right person to relate to American women about their economic woes.

No one is saying that Ann Romney didn't work hard while raising her children; of course she worked hard and probably did an amazing job (setting aside the fact that she raised five Republicans -- no one's perfect). But she has never been financially responsible for herself or her family. She was able to choose to stay home with her children. Her family didn't need any additional income she might have contributed had she chosen to work. Regardless of what she chose to do, she had options.

Let's talk about me for a second. If I had a baby tomorrow, I wouldn't have many options. I don't have a husband who makes a bajillion dollars a year to support baby and me. I would continue to go to my job (that pays about this much) and hire someone to watch the kid. Whatever money didn't go to the babysitter would go toward food, rent, clothing, electricity, etc., and definitely not toward a couple of Cadillacs. Staying at home to raise this kid, as much as I might like to, would not be an economic option for me.

That's my what-if scenario. That's the reality of a lot of single parents out there who don't have the luxury of a partner to provide complete financial support. Hell, that's the reality for a lot of two-parent homes who need both incomes to support their families. Having a parent who is able to stay at home and not contribute to the family's income is a luxury. No one is saying that there's anything wrong with a parent staying home. It's just simply not a financial reality for many, many American families.

Hilary Rosen has since apologized to Mrs. Romney. Tomorrow we will all be outraged over something else.

But Mitt Romney will still be using his wife to try to connect with American women. And what his campaign doesn't realize is that women are not going to relate to Ann Romney (and decide we like her husband) simply because she's a woman. The fact that she can give birth does not in any way give her insight into the difficulties facing middle class women these days. She hasn't had to count the days until the next paycheck, face unemployment, or put off buying groceries because rent is due. I bet she's never walked out of a doctor's office because the bill was going to be too high.

So I'm sure Mrs. Romney is a nice person and a great mom, but the Romney campaign needs a new surrogate if they want to appeal to working women.

For more back and forth between the parties, read:
- Hilary Rosen's blog post regarding the whole thing (she says a lot of what I just wrote, but hers is better)
- Ann Romney's response to Rosen's comments

Following up with... not much.

A week and a half ago I posted about some pretty awful statistics concerning African American women in Memphis and breast cancer mortality rates. The numbers alone were distressing: in Memphis, Tenn., African American women diagnosed with breast cancer are more than twice as likely to die of their illness than white women, the highest racial disparity out of the twenty-five largest cities in America.

What really got me mad, though, was the fact that this study was largely ignored by both press and electeds in Tennessee.

I kept waiting to do a follow up to that post, thinking that a non-blogger would pick it up and spread the outrage. Perfect timing, with the healthcare law before the Supreme Court, right? Didn't the whole country just get really pissed off and fired up over breast cancer, like, last month?

Well, it's been almost two weeks since that study was released, and as of this morning, there was still only one Tennessee paper who had reported on it. Aisling Maki of The Daily News in Memphis put out her story last Wednesday, and it was an excellent piece. You should definitely read it.

And of the nearly twenty (twenty!) individuals representing Memphis or parts of it in Nashville and in Washington, Representative Steve Cohen (TN-9) alone stood up for his constituents. On the floor of the House of Representatives, Rep. Cohen referenced the study, saying that the findings were unacceptable.

Watch Rep. Cohen's short speech from last week:

And that's it.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate what the Daily News published and what Rep. Cohen said -- some fine reporting and a welcome display of leadership in Congress. However, were it not for some bloggers far more talented than I am, I don't have much confidence that this study would have received even this much attention.

But really: that's all?

Lost in the mess of who's paying for birth control, and weirdos dressing up like Ben Franklin and yelling about socialism, is the real goal of the Affordable Care Act: to make healthcare affordable for everyone, including those who are least able and most vulnerable. What's happening in Memphis is the product of a broken healthcare system. Instead of lifting up Memphis as a city that needs the Affordable Care Act to save its inhabitants, or making Memphis a success story of affordable healthcare, Tennessee is sweeping Memphis and its women under the rug: our dirty little secret, hidden in the corner of the state.

Do I sound pissed? You're reading that right.

Another "worst of" win for Tennessee

A black woman diagnosed with breast cancer in Memphis, Tennessee, is twice as likely to die as her white counterpart.

This is according to a study (pdf) released this week examining racial disparity in breast cancer mortality rates. Of the twenty-five largest cities in the country, Memphis topped the list with the greatest racial disparity: the ratio of black women to white women who die of breast cancer in Memphis is 2.09. The study was conducted by Sinai Urban Health Institute in Chicago with funding from the Avon Foundation.

The results were published on Wednesday. It's now Friday.

The Washington Post published a story about this study on Wednesday, and DC wasn't even on the list of cities surveyed. The Denver chapter of Susan G. Komen tweeted a link to a Denver Post article, which is how I found out about the study.

You know where this study didn't make news? Tennessee. Not in Memphis, not in Nashville.

And in the legislature: where was the impassioned plea for the leaders of Tennessee to do something about this appalling statistic, yet another layer of a health crisis already plaguing the state's largest city? It didn't happen.

We know what these numbers mean: black women are not getting the same access to cancer treatment that white women are. This is not a genetics problem; it's a care problem, it's an education problem, and it's a socioeconomic problem.

And it's exactly this kind of care inequality that the healthcare reform bill is supposed to alleviate.

The fact that this study has gone unreported and apparently unnoticed in Tennessee has to be a result of two things: laziness and cowardice.

The laziness accusation speaks for itself. Frankly, I expect so little from the Gannett-owned Tennessean that I'm hardly surprised.

It's the blatant cowardice of both the Tennessee press and the Tennessee political leadership that astounds me. Any discussion of this study will inevitably lead to talk of healthcare costs, poverty, and race -- issues that Democrats, including President Obama, are (or should be) dedicated to addressing. But rather than risk the appearance of supporting President Obama or his healthcare bill, Tennessee leaders are willing to ignore the plight of sick, black women in Memphis. On the second anniversary of the signing of the Affordable Care Act, Conservatives are still trying to equate affordable care with socialism, anti-Americanism, and all sorts of bad -isms. Apparently, the few liberals left in Tennessee are simply too scared to set the record straight.

As we've seen in recent months, the Tennessee legislature has taken a decidedly goofy turn. From don't say gay to shariah law to "insidious" UN proposals, Republicans have made Tennessee a running joke, and Democrats cannot and have not done much to stop them. But in this case we're talking about breast cancer. For the second time this year, I'm having to say that breast cancer is not a political issue. Trying to stay off the "worst of" lists should not be a political issue. And yet here we are.
 
I know one more "worst of" list that Tennessee should be on.

Hiatus

I've been away from blogging for a few weeks. To all six of my readers out there, I'm sorry; but I had a minor crisis of purpose. Let me explain.

Another day, another story attack on women's health. Every single day! From Virginia to Texas to Arizona, legislators are hell-bent on scaring, shaming, or taxing women away from their doctors. Republican nut-jobs in Tennessee this week decided to open the books on abortion statistics, providers, and patients in the state (in a stunning display of intelligence, they backed off); and in the same week these defenders of family values welcomed back into the fold a Republican legislator who beat his wife. Beat. His wife. Yeah.

The crush of red state politics on speed has been almost too much to take in. Wait, they're sticking what into where? They're taxing that? What -- why -- huh? -- they think what? -- who are these people?

Faced with the onslaught of anti-women, race-to-the-bottom policies, my speaking and writing patterns had been reduced to some version of the above. Not conducive to eloquent blogging.

I could only write so many blog posts about how angry all of this makes me. As soon as I finished a draft, some new idiocy had come out of another State House. Better writers than I am had said what needed to be said about abortion, contraception, and women's health. I felt that I had nothing of substance to contribute, only more outrage.

So for the past few weeks I sat stewing in front of my computer. Nothing I can do. Adding to the noise isn't helping anything. These crazies don't respect women or their rights and nothing is going to change and it's all going to hell in a hand basket and will someone please get me a glass of wine already?

Then I read a blog post by Lori Day on the Huffington Post called "The Loneliness of Being Female in 2012 America." After reading it, I was able to put a name to how I've been feeling: lonely. It's the feeling of being left out of the conversation, this one being about women's health and access to care. It's deeply personal, and yet the gap between my personal outrage and the reality of law-making seems wider every day. Ms. Day talks about anomie, "describing the moral disconnect one can feel between his or her own personal values, and the values and laws thrust upon the individual by society." What a perfect word for these times.

I know there are a lot of people out there thinking the same things I am. Whenever I read one of their blog posts, I think to myself, "Whew! I'm not alone in thinking that ___ is total bullshit!" It feels like a triumph to have someone agree with you, to read their words and to realize that they have perfectly captured what you've been thinking. Most of all, though, it confirms that we're not alone -- and in the end, that's all we're really looking for, right?

And so I had my first bloggy epiphany. I remembered why I started blogging and why it's important to me that I continue. It's about keeping the conversation going and not letting the other side win by shutting up. It's protecting ourselves and our friends from feeling left out, becoming discouraged and giving up.

So I'm back. Not with anything particularly profound, but profundity is sometimes overrated. For now, it's enough to vent my frustration into the blogosphere and add to that conversation.

I hope that we can connect on some of these issues. From now on, I'll hold up my end.

Crisis over. I will still take that glass of wine, if anyone is offering.

Cowardice

Republicans: you have officially been out-classed by Don Imus.

Don Imus, of "nappy-headed hos" infamy, has condemned, in no uncertain terms, Rush Limbaugh's attacks on Sandra Fluke last week.

Here's an excerpt from Don Imus's on-air denunciation of Rush Limbaugh:

[Rush Limbaugh is] an insincere pig. Pill-popping pinhead... It's disgraceful. He has no guts... Look what I did, and what I did was a lame attempt to be funny. And it was three words and I went and met with these people after I'd been fired. You know you got to look them in the eye, you've got to show guts... He's a punk... Enough of what he said. He's a coward. You can't attack somebody like that.

I love this. One jerk saying to another jerk, "Dude, I know I'm a jerk, but damn -- you're an even bigger jerk."

It's expected that decent people will hit the roof when jerks like Don and Rush start talking filth, but when even the jerks' sensibilities are offended, something is rotten in the state of Discourse.

Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker wrote, "Indeed, [Rush Limbaugh] has united decent people of all stripes and persuasions with his vile remarks about a Georgetown University law student." It's a rare issue that puts President Obama and Senator John McCain on the same page, not to mention Don Imus, but that's exactly what Limbaugh, "the uniter" as Ms. Parker writes, has done. (Please note: decent people, Don Imus, same paragraph -- who knew?)

So with all these people united by a sense of decency in the midst of the increasingly indecent political conversation in this country, why are so few of those people Republicans? There's been a lot of talk of cowardice on the part of Rush Limbaugh, but the real cowardice I see is coming from the GOP.

What if someone attacked your daughter, your mother, your friend, on the air in the most vile language possible to thousands and thousands of listeners? Somehow I don't think you'd comfort your loved one by saying the offender was being "absurd" (Santorum), or that it wasn't "the language I would have used" (Romney), or by saying nothing at all (Gingrich).

Come on! If someone calls your daughter/wife/mother a slut and a prostitute, the reasonable reaction is to hunt that person down and beat them senseless with a frying pan, not to dither over word choice. Everyone knows this.

"Tangled" is a great movie.

But instead of making a grab for the frying pan, the GOP is making a grab for votes. The base of Republican voters now requires GOP politicos to give in to Rush and similarly disgusting bullies in order to win their support. The bad guy wins and the GOP's war on women continues, because no one will stand up and say, "Enough."

I don't know whether I'm more disgusted with GOP legislators who give in to this cowardice or with their supporters who seem to demand it. I'll admit it, I've always said that Conservatives need to get their heads examined -- why else would they be Conservatives? -- but this round of ugliness seems to confirm that admittedly snarky liberal-left position. How else could anyone listen to the hate-speech of Rush Limbaugh and not recoil in disgust?

It really is a sad day when a former shock-jock is setting a standard for decency that a major political party can't live up to. Republicans, get it together: cowardice is not flattering on anyone.

The very sorry Rush Limbaugh

Rush Limbaugh, that infected pimple on the swollen nose of conservative talk-radio, has apologized for attacking someone on his show. Quick, go buy lottery tickets. Check the sky for flying pigs.

After witnessing the early stages of a mass-exodus from his advertisers, earlier today Rush issued your basic "sorry I'm not sorry" official apology for calling Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke, among other things, a slut.

He also called her a prostitute, referred to a former Speaker of the House as "Botox-filled Nancy Pelosi," and implied that Ms. Fluke's parents must be ashamed over their daughter's testimony. These are just the highlights of his tirade on Wednesday. Listen to the whole rant if you want, but remove all breakable items from the area -- you'll want to throw things.

He went on to hurl even more horrible insults at Ms. Fluke in particular and at women in general. Taking a page from Foster Friess' book on birth control, Mr. Enlightenment offered to pay for enough aspirin for all female Georgetown students to keep between their legs. He also said that if the taxpayers are going to supply the birth control, they should be able to watch the consumers of said B.C. have sex. Hell, he'd already called women sluts and prostitutes -- why not make the jump to porn stars?

So by saying, "Sorry for my choice of words, next time I slander a woman's reputation I'll use a more grown-up word for 'promiscuous,'" it's all ok, right? The hatred and vitriol behind his words is all forgiven, as long as he doesn't use the word "slut" again. He's definitely learned his lesson this time, that Rush.

Before I continue with thoughtful analysis, I'm just going to get this out of the way: Rush Limbaugh is trash.

Three wives have already decided that they would rather be alone than live in matrimony with him, and I wouldn't bet on the staying power of Mrs. Rush Limbaugh #4. He's a hateful, drug-addled little man whose mother probably hated him, leaving him to deal with his crippling mommy issues on the radio. A misogynist and a bigot who cashes in on the hate of his similarly socially-stunted listeners, he can probably only get it up (whatever little of it there is) by watching re-runs of Newt Gingrich speeches.

Whew! I needed to get that out.

The point isn't that Rush used specific words to insult Ms. Fluke -- it's that he resorted to this type of ugly name-calling to insult any woman who would dare to stand up for herself. This language is used to put women down, to make them feel small, to make them feel embarrassed and ashamed of taking control of their bodies. This is bullying, plain and simple.

Democrats love to paint Rush as the spokesman for the GOP, and the GOP denies this characterization carefully as it tries not to alienate the base. But listening to the political discourse of recent weeks, I have to believe that Rush speaks for a much larger percentage of conservatives that the GOP establishment would like to admit.

How else does one explain the legislation passed in Virginia last week? The state-required trans-vaginal ultrasound is simply a way for the state to shame women at a time when they are vulnerable. The Virginia legislature has made its message to women clear: If you're stupid enough to be in this situation, you don't deserve our respect.

What about Senator Blunt's thankfully-defeated amendment to allow bosses to determine what courses of treatment are "moral" enough to be paid for? This is what I heard: You don't deserve the right to choose if your choices are not as "moral" as mine.

Or Mitt Romney, the likely GOP presidential nominee and about as mainstream R as one can get, saying this about Rush's attack on women: "I'll just say this, which is, it's not the language I would have used." Again, the message was fine, he just wouldn't have been so crude in his delivery.

The conclusion I have to draw is that Rush says, in more inflammatory and offensive language, what GOP legislators are thinking.

Unfortunately, Rush Limbaugh has the luxury of not having to campaign. No one calls for his resignation when he offends millions; rather, his listeners cheer. He's a kazillionaire with the highest-rated talk show in the country. If some advertisers pull out, big deal. He could buy up all the advertising for his show and not even feel it. I bet that by next Tuesday he'll have walked back this "apology" so far that Ms. Fluke will be a slut again.

Explicit or implicit, these attacks on women are as disgusting as they are pervasive in GOP policies. They serve to demean, to shame, and to silence. That's not acceptable anywhere, anytime, and it's certainly not acceptable in 2012. This is not political correctness gone crazy: this is decency, and that is something to which women are entitled.

And Rush: one final word to you. The amount of sex one is having has no effect on the amount of birth control pills one must take to avoid pregnancy. If you knew anything about female anatomy, you would know that -- you sorry excuse for a man.