July 12, 2012
What Stupak Wrought in the Obama Era: Self-Determination for Women Under Siege, by Taylor Marsh


via the Guttmacher Institute

So far this year, states have enacted 39 new restrictions on access to abortion.Although this is significantly lower than the record-breaking 80 restrictions that had been enacted by this point in 2011, it is nonetheless a higher number of restrictions than in any year prior to 2011. Most of the 39 new restrictions have been enacted in states that are generally hostile to abortion. …Fully 55% of U.S. women of reproductive age now live in one of the 26 states considered hostile to abortion rights. – Guttmacher Institute

THE WAR ON WOMEN in the 21st century exploded because of the Stupak-Pitts Amendment, aided and abetted by the first female and Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and Pres. Obama, who needlessly signed an executive order, while also codifying the Hyde Amendment into the Affordability Care Act, making it the first time in history the ultra conservative legislation was in law for all time.

It was an easy layup from there for right-wing religious conservatives across the country. A mini-Stupak wave in 2010 that became a tsunami, the challenges to women’s self-determination rising without any overt court challenges to Roe v. Wade, because those in the so-called women’s movement today are too afraid that Roe could be overturned.

While the right fights to continue moving reproductive health care away from making self-determination for women easier, women’s groups and other allies keep losing through the decision to protect the status quo that keeps receding.

From Think Progress:

Meanwhile, Perry and his Health and Human Services executive commissioner, Thomas Suehs, vowed to create a new, entirely Texas-funded WHP. And Health and Human Services and the Texas Attorney General’s Office made it very clear in a letter to the 5th Circuit judges this week that in their WHP, doctors would be banned from even discussing the existence of abortion with their patients. [Dallas Observer Blogs]

What do women think would happen if Roe v. Wade was overturned by SCOTUS, because of a challenge to what’s happening in the states? It would be a short-lived “victory,” because it would wake up the next generations of women, men too, to what happens when you compromise women’s civil rights, privacy and self-determination to religious conservatives who are against full freedoms and equality for women. Right now the argument over a woman’s right to basic self-determination continues in a hamster wheel of political insanity, while women are stripped of rights already won, state by state.

The fight would at least be real, instead of the current debate that revolves around Democrats being hailed as champions of women’s freedoms, which is certainly true to a point, especiallywhen compared to Republicans, which is the main argument by Democrats to keep women voting for them, but always ends in compromise when compared to the individual equality men enjoy without demand.

Is this really what modern women in the 21st century are going to accept, settle for?

It doesn’t impact me, personally, but I continue to be amazed at the laziness of the feminist argument today that always ends in applause for Democrats, the very political party who enabled Stupak and resulted in the Hyde Amendment being codified in law, with the Affordability Care Act making it a lot harder for women to get emergency abortion surgery if they need it.

I’ll close with some better news, at least as of mid-year 2012, including the Mississippi judge that continues to block the closure of the only abortion clinic in that state. Then there’s this from Guttmacher:

Fourteen of the 19 states that include a line-item for family planning have adopted their state budgets as of July. Despite the continuing sad state of state budgets and the widespread attacks on family planning funding last year, no state has singled out family planning funding for draconian cuts so far this year. Ten states maintained level funding for their family planning programs. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie vetoed a measure that would have restored funding to the state’s program, which was eliminated in 2010. Maine slashed family planning funding by 25%, a cut in line with those taken to other health programs. And surprisingly enough, two states moved to increase funding: Minnesota restored $1 million in funding through the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program, and Virginia increased the 2010 funding level by 23%.

States also seem to be backing away from efforts to defund family planning providers. In 2011, eight states moved to disqualify at least some family planning providers from receipt of state family planning funds; so far this year, only three states have done so. Arizona adopted a measure disqualifying agencies that either provide abortions or that specialize in the provision of family planning services. Kansas and North Carolina disqualified specialized family planning providers from being eligible for state funding; litigation filed shortly after the Kansas provision was adopted has blocked enforcement of the provision, which is identical to one adopted—and enjoined—last year. Aside from the ongoing saga in Texas (see below), no other state has specifically taken aim at Planned Parenthood affiliates by name so far this year.

(Source: taylormarsh.com)

June 18, 2012
Bill Kristol Gives Mitt Romney Some Good Advice, by Taylor Marsh
Sen. Marco Rubio just inched up closer to the veep spot.

graphic via Pocho

Bill Kristol Gives Mitt Romney Some Good Advice, by Taylor Marsh

Sen. Marco Rubio just inched up closer to the veep spot.


graphic via Pocho

(Source: taylormarsh.com)

May 17, 2012
They’re Coming for Pres. Obama, by Taylor Marsh
Republican anti-Obama Jeremiah Wright swift-boating proposal explodes.

They’re Coming for Pres. Obama, by Taylor Marsh

Republican anti-Obama Jeremiah Wright swift-boating proposal explodes.

May 11, 2012
Hillary’s Vogue, by Taylor Marsh

“I feel so relieved to be at the stage I’m at in my life right now. Because you know if I want to wear my glasses I’m wearing my glasses. If I want to wear my hair back I’m pulling my hair back. You know at some point it’s just not something that deserves a lot of time and attention. And if others want to worry about it, I let them do the worrying for a change” – Secretary Hillary Clinton in an interview with CNN Foreign Affairs Correspondent Jill Dougherty

from Fox News

CLINTON’S STYLE QUAKE has shifted the American universe and provided yet another Hillary Effect moment, one that rattled the confines of post-feminism and the concept of raw power among girls. There is no woman on planet earth who could cheerfully, defiantly and unflinchingly remove the stigma of a working woman’s persona from being tied to glam duty more thoroughly.

Here’s the hub of it. Women being able to choose their look, without expectations of false eyelashes and mandatory movie-esque makeup, when sometimes less of all of it is who she is. Rachel Maddow wouldn’t wear Gayle King’s high heels and bright hues, but the style Maddow opts for works for her, same for King.

Drudge began the latest conversation with the “Hillary Au Naturale” headline (seen below), which Fox News and others picked up (see above), launching another salvo in the war on women, this one targeting our looks and age as vulnerabilities. Expectations that because a female doesn’t appear dolled up it’s worthy of headline news instead of a deliberate decision because it suits her.

Teens and twenty-somethings get away with a scrubbed face, but aging shouldn’t relegate us all to chasing the vanity mirror unless we want to.

It follows what Drudge did when Clinton was a presidential candidate, which is covered in my book, with both he and Rush Limbaugh getting the scrutiny they deserve. Flashing back on the event when candidate Clinton was eviscerated on Drudge for a picture showing her natural wrinkles, which comes with age regardless of gender. Progressive new media blogs were also guilty of posting unflattering pictures of Clinton on purpose, but none came close to the Drudge-Rush treatment. As the Kathleen Hall Jamieson of Annenberg Public Policy Center relayed to Bill Moyers in 2007, negative images are purposefully used in politics to make the onlooker feel bad about a politician. However, when it’s done to a woman through highlighting her age it hits our juvenile nation in its solar plexus, though the air it knocks out is that of the woman being targeted, while telling other femmes to stay in the beauty box.

When Rush picked up on the Drudge wrinkle photo back during the ’08 race, he used his signature shrill sexism for the occasion.

Will Americans want to watch a woman get older before their eyes on a daily basis? And that woman, by the way, is not going to want to look like she’s getting older, because it will impact poll numbers. It will impact perceptions.” – Rush Limbaugh (December 2007, source: The Hillary Effect)

“America loses interest in you,” Rush opined.

Today, where Hillary is concerned, nothing could be further from the truth.

Virginia Clinton Kelly, William Jefferson Clinton’s late mother, had moments of pause upon meeting Hillary Rodham, because Mrs. Kelly was a full makeup kind of girl. Hillary wasn’t. She now isn’t again, at least at times.

Just be careful when trying this if you’re plodding up the professional ladder, because we all know how long it took Hillary to ascend and be accepted, what it cost, and people still have expectations. But the Hillary Effect just might make it easier to decide to be different.

That Drudge got creamed this time ’round from all quarters was a thing of beauty to watch. That Clinton gave him the middle finger with a casual smile in an interview while she was on yet another grueling globetrotting tour as America’s chief diplomat was a fitting and long overdue f-you.

We’ve come a long way from ABC’s headline in 2007 asking “Is It Sexist to Discuss Hillary’s Wrinkles?” to articles in the Washington Post defending her, to Jezebel’s Hillary “GIVES ZERO FUCKS” graphic.

But that won’t stop outlets like the UK Daily Mail from doing the misogynistic deep dive on “Make-up free Clinton shows the strain of her busy travel schedule,” complete with pictorial walk-through over the last months and years meant to prove she’s worse for wear.

There’s not one woman who doesn’t know what the “tired” trap means. It means she can’t take the heat, because she looks like she’s melted without makeup. The girl’s not up to it. It’s the ultimate sexist slap driven into our confidence that we can’t matter once we’re beyond youth and motherhood, because of our mind alone. That the way we think isn’t actually a huge part of our beauty, with the confidence to live originally making us hotter with age, because the fact is it does.

The people I’ve talked with who know Secretary Clinton have said she is exhausted and looks forward to a long holiday and rest, which has been reported in every outlet you can name; some supporters puzzled over her relaxed hair and makeup. It’s not for everyone and it shouldn’t have to be. You fly 700,000 miles doing a pressure cooker job and see how you feel about every two to three weeks keeping a short haircut maintained and daily sculpted, highlights regularly, the mask of cosmetics every morning, even when you’ve had little sleep, it’s hot as hell where you are and you couldn’t name where that is without an aide. I’m not saying Clinton can’t name it, but I’ve had jet lag on puny little holiday trips, so I can’t imagine reality with her itinerary.

America is an airbrush nation.

When the first HD TV blasted across the country we all got a look at the infotainment pundits and talking heads who shouldn’t be blamed if they started looking for plastic surgeons, dermatologists, or doctors who practice laser therapy, women in particular.

Look at the films and the few female actresses who continue to work over 40.

It’s a testament to the women in film and television who have stood up and shown what they look like before they get their glamour on. KLG and Hoda did it, Natalie Morales and Meredith Vieira, too. Trendy magazines have done pictorials of actresses without makeup, with People the latest, which included Jessica Paré, who plays Don Draper’s wife on “Mad Men.” Her freckles are fabulous. In the Golden Age of Hollywood that fact would have been hidden on pain of the publicist’s life. A way to an Oscar is also seen through beauties going beastly who are considered brave. Remember Charlize Theron in “Monster”?

But not everyone is a Hollywood actress, let alone the brilliant Hillary Rodham Clinton, who’s seen more pressure come her way on looks than most and finally rejected the reviews outright.

Could yet another part of the glass ceiling have cracked when Hillary “au naturale” hit the headlines this time? Traditional and new media, as well as most of television, minus misogynist central on the traditional right, didn’t just shrug, but said you look good to us, Hillary.

Taking the cue from Secretary Clinton, we backed her up and because of it some of us over 40 or 50 and beyond, took note. A space had been made to breathe. A moment crafted where the most admired American female leader said, whether I have makeup on or not in the middle of a work day “it’s just not something that deserves a lot of time and attention.” Let others worry about the trivial, I’m helping run the world, or my family while juggling a job, or running a small business.

As a girl who chose the pageant system to help pay for college, did the national commercial and Broadway babe thing where talent and looks combined made a difference, then on from there to eventually write about things that matter, all the while trading on talent and face to help get in doors or in a talking head chair to help pitch my points, I’m now at an age where it takes a lot more work for a lot less bang for my MAC buck. Sometimes I enjoy the paint and sometimes not, but I never go public in my work without it.

Let’s hope Hillary cracking the makeup ceiling shatters convention.

I’m never going to forget it and am grateful for it.



Taylor Marsh, a veteran political analyst and former Huffington Post contributor, is the author of The Hillary Effect, available at Barnes and Noble and on Amazon. Her new-media blogwww.taylormarsh.com covers national politics, women and power.

March 13, 2012

Released by Obama’s reelect team.

I’m not sure if they’re using her as foil or having fun at her expense.

They didn’t take her seriously when she had political clout, so tagging her with the extremist right they finally get to take their shot.

If you have thoughts on the web ad here, let me know.

(Source: taylormarsh.com)

March 13, 2012
Rush Limbaugh Hit by Capitalism Through Premiere Barter Ad Suspension, by Taylor Marsh

Rush Limbaugh fled the air on Monday, which I tweeted at the noon hour, because he needed to go to church. By “church” I mean the golf course.

Rush Limbaugh has been officially occupied.

Things have gotten red hot for the radio hit man, with Premiere Networks hearing from enough big corporations that they lowered the boom on Monday. They framed it “as part of Premiere’s overall strategy to update our processes and services to better meet our clients’ needs.”

From Radio-info.com:

In the note to traffic managers, Premiere Networks says the unusual two-week suspension “does not apply to in-program commercials provided by Premiere within any of its live news/talk programming.” But the suspension of the usual requirement related to the barter spots is effective immediately for news/talk stations, for the weeks of March 12 and March 19. …Rush syndicator tells news/talk affiliates not to run its barter spots for 2 wks (h/t Think Progress)

Affiliates run the barter ads and in return they get Rush and his political flame-throwing pals, with the revenue flowing from the top. It’s only a suspension, but it’s an unprecedented humiliation for Rush Limbaugh.

“Civility is censorship.” – Rush Limbaugh

Right now people are saying civility is not censorship and with women leading people are using their power to prove one way that capitalism can actually work.

But from Bill Maher to other comedians, as well as the right-wing rabble themselves, we’re going to continue to hear the cries of “censorship.” The American Spectator published an article titled “The Hush Rush Syndrome.”

Women’s Media Center wants Limbaugh off public airwaves.

This isn’t political. While we disagree with Limbaugh’s politics, what’s at stake is the fallout of a society tolerating toxic, hate-inciting speech. For 20 years, Limbaugh has hidden behind the First Amendment, or else claimed he’s really “doing humor” or “entertainment.” He is indeed constitutionally entitled to his opinions, but he is not constitutionally entitled to the people’s airways. It’s time for the public to take back our broadcast resources. Limbaugh has had decades to fix his show. Now it’s up to us. – FCC should clear Limbaugh from airwaves, by Jane Fonda, Robin Morgan and Gloria Steinem

I am not signing on to the Fonda-Morgan-Steinem letter, though I’m elated that it was written, because it needed to be said. Their letter is also part of the larger package helping all of this to work its purpose.

The sentiments of the VoteVets to “Get Rush Off The American Forces Network” is equally important.

Barter ads for programming will return, but the uproar, which I hope continues, will make it very uncomfortable for Rush and all of the other rabid ranters on radio.

What I want is for the glorious machine that is American capitalism to exact a price for Rush Limbaugh’s hate speech and the insipid vitriolic screeds the entire right-wing frat club parrots, which Rush launched. That’s fitting justice.

It’s not censorship. It’s holding people accountable for what they’re saying by letting them know consumers won’t buy what they’re selling or anything from the corporations helping them do it.

The result is there will be alternative Republican programming breaking through the right-wing filth, which begins with Mike Huckabee, whose “more conversation, less confrontation” foreshadows what’s coming. He’s a much smarter and harder target to hit, but his politics are just as deadly.

The rise of kinder, gentler Republican talk show hosts could multiply giving new GOTV power to the Jeb Bush wing and conservatives like him, as well as straight talking Chris Christie, none of whom could get elected in the 2012 primary, which is why they aren’t running.

We are looking at a passage. We are also looking at an opportunity for the Republican Party, who remains in charge of talk radio, which was their GOTV machine long before Ailes invented Fox News Channel, and I don’t see that changing.

It could also help Mitt Romney in 2012.

Because if Romney can escape the far right wackos who vote in primaries for people like Rick Santorum, with his extremist anti-birth control and religious politicism, as well as Newt Gingrich’s dangerous “big ideas” like ignoring the Supreme Court, he can emerge strong and remake himself.

Making Rush and his band of blow hards untouchable will also give mainstream Republicans, who have been bound and gagged by the rabble on the right and who have taken a fatal blow through the “war on women”, the opportunity to wrestle control back, something they’ve been waiting to do for years.

With gas prices soaring and Pres. Obama’s approval rating souring because of this and the general feel of the economy, Republicans will live to fight smarter another day.

Capitalism has already taken Rush and his band of scary men prisoner for the short-term through Premiere’s actions, which is all that’s needed for the non-threatening conservatives to step into the void, so that David Frum, George Will and Peggy Noonan can write the script for picking up the spoils.

But the real damage for the extreme right led by Rush is that if congressional members aren’t afraid of Limbaugh and his mini-me clan they can step out and take them on or ignore them, something that hasn’t happened in recent memory.

Rush Limbaugh without clout over Republicans in Congress is like Sean Hannity without Fox News Channel.

However, no matter what fills the void, the Rush frat pack being shown for what they are is good for our politics. Surviving this cataclysmic assault on the way they do their jobs won’t change that they’ve been thoroughly humiliated with everyone in politics and beyond watching.

Wingnut radio men will work on and try to save face, with Rush leading the way. It will be enough for them. But for big corporations in the Premiere Network barter club survival’s not enough.

Business as usual with the boys of right-wing hate radio is over.

Sandra Fluke was the tipping point.

We have a scalp and one part of capitalism that works, the consumer side, helped us get it, which is something Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin and the other members of the Premiere Radio Network and Clear Channel universe never thought could happen.

(Source: taylormarsh.com)

March 1, 2012
Andrew Breitbart Dies at 43, by Taylor Marsh

He died way too young and will be remembered for railing at the wind, one of his best performances in this video after CPAC 2012…

February 27, 2012
The Radically Religious Politics of Rick Santorum, by Taylor Marsh

We in the United States, above all, must remember that lesson, for we were founded as a nation of openness to people of all beliefs. And so we must remain. Our very unity has been strengthened by our pluralism. We establish no religion in this country, we command no worship, we mandate no belief, nor will we ever. Church and state are, and must remain, separate. All are free to believe or not believe, all are free to practice a faith or not, and those who believe are free, and should be free, to speak of and act on their belief. – Ronald Reagan, 26 October 1984

If John F. Kennedy had said what Rick Santorum said, highlighted on “This Week”, Kennedy wouldn’t have been elected president.

From today on “This Week”:

STEPHANOPOULOS: You have also spoken out about the issue of religion in politics, and early in the campaign, you talked about John F. Kennedy’s famous speech to the Baptist ministers in Houston back in 1960. Here is what you had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SANTORUM: Earlier (ph) in my political career, I had the opportunity to read the speech, and I almost threw up. You should read the speech.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STEPHANOPOULOS: That speech has been read, as you know, by millions of Americans. Its themes were echoed in part by Mitt Romney in the last campaign. Why did it make you throw up?

SANTORUM: Because the first line, first substantive line in the speech says, “I believe in America where the separation of church and state is absolute.” I don’t believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute. The idea that the church can have no influence or no involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country.

First question is, who’s going to define “the church”?

As we found out recently, the Catholic Church and other conservative religious Americans, including Democrats, don’t believe the First Amendment protects individuals equally as it does “the church.”

That’s a very negative modern day development for free-thinking individuals.

It gives you an idea of just how far right we’ve gone since 1960.

But even as Reagan spoke the words he did above, it was Ronald Reagan himself who emboldened religious conservatives after what they saw as defeats in Griswold and Roe v. Wade, which is why Rep. Henry Hyde struck back with the Hyde Amendment before the Reagan era.

Democrats have contorted themselves to try to prove their righteous worth, as seen by religious conservative standards, which Pres. Obama validated when he codified the Hyde Amendment into the Affordability Care Act. Before Obama, it had simply been part of the budget, voted on yearly; with help from Speaker Pelosi, Democrats changed that.

When the political self-loathing class of Democrats comes up against attacks by self-righteousness Republicans, that’s when we get wild statements by elite cable yakkers like Joe Scarborough, because no one ever holds them accountable. It’s nothing to suggest, as Scarborough did, that mandating female deacons in the Southern Baptist church is the equivalent of Obama’s contraceptive mandate, because as Santorum, Gingrich and Romney have all charged, Obama is attacking religious freedom itself. The implication and framing of the argument against Obama’s policy is what’s important, right? Why argue the facts and the false statements being used to tip the truth on its head?

In fact, Pres. Obama is upholding religious freedom, not government intervention as Scarborough falsely claimed, but as Reagan himself said, as did John F. Kennedy, that no American is required to choose any religion and I would add, be second to the interests of any.

It’s fitting religious conservatives would miss the beauty of the First Amendment swinging both ways.

Rick Santorum is the embodiment of George W. Bush’s calamitous “crusade” language made manifest in political flesh. He is the polar opposite of Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and any number of the other French loving American founders.

Notes on the State of VirginiaQuery XVII

[…] By our own act of assembly of 1705, c. 30, if a person brought up in the Christian religion denies the being of a God, or the Trinity, or asserts there are more gods than one, or denies the Christian religion to be true, or the scriptures to be of divine authority, he is punishable on the first offence by incapacity to hold any office or employment ecclesiastic al, civil, or military; on the second by disability to sue, to take any gift or legacy, to be guardian, executor, or administrator, and by three years’ imprisonment without bail. A father’s right to the custody of his own children being founded in law on his right of guardianship, this being taken away, they may of course be severed from him, and put by the authority of a court into more orthodox hands. This is a summary view of that religious slavery under which a people have been willing to remain, who have lavished their lives and fortunes for the establishment of their civil freedom. The error(1) seems not sufficiently eradicated, that the operations of the mind, as well as the acts of the body, are subject to the coercion of the laws. But our rulers can have no authority over such natural rights, only as we have submitted to them. The rights of conscience we never submitted, we could not submit. We are answerable for them to our God. The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. If it be said, his testimony in a court of justice cannot be relied on, reject it then, and be the stigma on him. Constraint may make him worse. by making him a hypocrite, but it will never make him a truer man. It may fix him obstinately in his errors, but will not cure them. Reason and free inquiry are the only effectual agents against error. Give a loose to them, they will support the true religion by bringing every false one to their tribunal, to the test of their investigation. They are the natural enemies of error, and of error only. Had not the Roman government permitted free inquiry, Christianity could never have been introduced. Had not free inquiry been indulged at the era of the Reformation, the corruptions of

—(1) Furneaux passim.—

Christianity could not have been purged away. If it be restrained now, the, present corruptions will be protected, and new ones encouraged . Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now. Thus in France the emetic was once forbidden as a medicine, and the potato as an article of food. Government is just as infallible, too, when it fixes systems in physics. Galileo was sent to the Inquisition for affirming that the earth was a sphere; the government had declared it to be as flat as a trencher, and Galileo was obliged to abjure his error. This error, however, at length prevailed, the earth became a globe, and Descartes declared it was whirled round its axis by a vortex. The government in which he lived was wise enough to see that this was no question of civil jurisdiction, or we should all have been involved by authority in vortices. In fact, the vortices have been exploded, and the Newtonian principle of gravitation is now more firmly established, on the basis of reason, than it would be were the government to step in, and to make it an article of necessary faith. Reason and experiment have been indulged, and error has fled before them. It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself. Subject opinion to coercion: whom will you make your inquisitors? Fallible men; men governed by bad passions, by private as well as public reasons. And why subject it to coercion? To produce uniformity. But is uniformity of opinion desirable? No more than of face and stature. […]

February 21, 2012
Jeremiah Wright, Baptizing the Dead, and Aspirin Between Her Legs, by Taylor Marsh

Ironically, Lawless noted, all the attention to contraception at the moment may end up boosting the overall public standing of the 2010 health care law. Free preventive health care, whether it’s a cancer screening or the pill, may well become as popular as provisions like allowing young adults to stay on their parents’ health plans until age 26. – 2012: The year of ‘birth control moms’?

Religious conservatives, their right-wing supporters and their Republican allies have finally overstepped and what played out last week was proof. The Susan G. Komen catastrophe, starring right-wing ideologue Karen Handel, now seems like foreshadowing.

The Tea Party was the germination, which inspired the Koch Bros, Dick Armey and an explosion of political opportunists, beginning with Rush, Sean and the wingnut radio bunch, leaching on to the energy. Well-funded and stoked on anger, Republicans harnessed that energy, but couldn’t control it, including in Congress.

Because of the 2010 political malpractice by the Democratic Party, state legislatures turned Republican in record numbers, unleashing a wave of anti-women’s freedom campaigns that culminated most recently in Virginia.

Representing a crescendo of events over months that turned into years, in walks Pres. Obama with his free contraceptive mandate and we were off to the First Amendment races, which has tripped up every religious conservative, no matter the party, and right-wing Republicans, as well as moderately perceived advocates, in droves.

The Catholic Church is telling women we shouldn’t use birth control.

Religious conservatives are holding hearings on the issue without a single female witness.

Joe Scarborough compared Obama’s mandate to a federal mandate for female deacons to be ordained in Southern Baptists churches. Even after challenged by his co-host Mika Brzezinski, he dug in; when I challenged him in a column Scarborough unraveled.

Republicans like Joe Scarborough and religious conservatives, represented so well by Rick Santorum, who is now caterwauling about Obama’s policies aren’t based on the Bible, are entitled to their own ideological beliefs and opinions. They are not entitled to their own facts. If Mika Brzezinski’s opinion was valued equally to Scarborough’s the discussion might have ended differently.

Rick Santorum is bellyaching because of a media double-standard he sees regarding his Super PAC sugar daddy versus Jeremiah Wright.

Pres. Obama can be called a “secret Muslim,” be forced to give a speech on race and religion, but Mitt Romney’s Mormonism can’t be discussed and his spokesperson gets away with stonewalling the press on a subject Romney himself opened up, baptismal of the dead, euphemistically called “proxy baptism”.

People are aware that the Mormon Church and Romney benefactor Frank VanderSloot poured massive funding into the Proposition 8 fiasco in California that was just overturned? How many know the heavy hand of billionaire Frank VanderSloot and the threats he uses to silence critics?

From an important investigative piece by Glenn Greenwald:

Most of those who have been successfully bullied out of their free speech rights are reluctant to talk about what happened for fear of further retribution. But now, VanderSloot may have picked the wrong person to bully.

Jody May-Chang is an independent journalist and an LGBT spokesperson in Boise. By coincidence, she was one of the local reporters who interviewed me last weekend when I spoke to the annual Bill of Rights dinner of the ACLU in Idaho. At the end of the interview, she mentioned to me the series of threats issued to local LGBT journalists and bloggers by VanderSloot. Unbeknownst to May-Chang at the time, she, too, had been targeted for the crime of speaking critically of the Idaho CEO.

What are we saying if we let the traditional media and cable news-tainment show hosts purposefully ignore important facts even when challenged? Or we refuse to question religious institutions and individuals who are flexing their power across the political spectrum in ways that make Jerry Falwell’s dreams seem modest?

If we’re not going to ask questions after a politician says something that would lead any curious person to probe further, then what’s the point of the modern day religious test?

If we don’t want specifics and an honest conversation about religion, are we saying we don’t care what your religion is as long as you believe in God?

Nothing impacts public policy across this country where women are concerned greater than the interference of religious institutions in public policy matters. We’ve also found that religious institutions have taken for granted the ignorance of politicians and the public. Through the exercise of watching the shock when women like myself and many others challenge them that the First Amendment swings both ways, we’ve found religious conservatives, our cable talking heads and the media don’t think that’s important.

Religious conservatism also interferes with our diplomacy, the use of soft power and the focus on women’s roles, which Secy. Clinton has brought to the forefront through women’s empowerment being at the heart of stabilizing developing nations. As I’ve written innumerable times, it’s another aspect of the Hillary Effect.

But as long as we’re cherry-picking religious questions, is a Jewish president out because he’s not a Christian or because of the offensive notion of possible duel loyalties?

All we need to know is the person is god-fearing, right?

Oh, and not a Muslim.

Sean Hannity still brings up Jeremiah Wright when talking about Barack Obama. Following right-wing radio talking points, Rick Santorum did it this week.

Rick Santorum’s bag man thinks it’s funny to play Old Coot and say women are just too emotional about birth control. Take an aspirin, honey, preferably between your knees.

Religious conservatives like Virginia’s Gov. Bob McDonnell and Republicans across this country, state by state, have decided it’s a good idea to assault a woman with a transvaginal probe when she’s in crisis.

Everyone’s faith is a little bit kooky to an unbeliever. Watch Bill Maher’s “Religulous”, now available online free to see, and you’ll be challenged. I’m sure many people would find my meditation, backed by an Episcopalian and Christian foundation, not only non-traditional but blasphemous for the way I see Jesus Christ after a lifetime of contemplation.

It’s pretty clear after the latest argument on contraception that we could not do any worse with an atheist in the Oval Office.

That won’t happen in America, because religious conservatives and the institutions that back them control the political and legislative processes, as well as the politicians who win electionsand the media who reports on it all.

That’s the system Pres. Obama and his administration challenged with the contraceptive mandate, which is no doubt bolstered by polling proving the majority of women in this country stand behind him.

Religious conservatives and their allies in the media and news-tainment shows know they’ve lost the biggest battle of all due to a constitutional carve-out that was as ingenious to create as it was to proffer. It’s clear they don’t intend to go down quietly.

Liked posts on Tumblr: More liked posts »