Fitz!

roots!

Margaret Sanger!

The NY Daily News infuriated me yesterday and today with their pro-Liebherman editorials, so I wrote them a letter:

Editorial Wed - http://www.nydailynews.com/new.....4377c.html

Editorial Thur - http://www.nydailynews.com/new.....4592c.html

HERE IS MY LETTER:

To the Editors of the NY Daily News:

What is the matter with you? In your pro-Lieberman editorial you called Ned Lamont’s supporters “lunatics” and “zealots” simply because we support Ned Lamont against Joe Lieberman for US Senator.

Apparently the NY Daily News is no better than Lieberman himself, who also scampers away from real debate about the Iraq War, by calling us “lunatics”, “zealots”, and part of the “abandon-Iraq crowd.” Powerful rhetoric, zero logic.

Well, for your information, we “anti-war zealots” are now 58% of the US population (1) - now that everything we “lunatics” warned about has tragically come to pass in this dreadful war. And I am not sure how you calculated (in Wednesday’s pro-Lieberman editorial) that 33% of Connecticut Democratic Party delegates are a “small minority of Lamont activists.” Please tell me, how exactly is 33% a small minority?

Perhaps next you should editorialize that all of us “anti-war zealots” are unpatirotic for disagreeing with the President on the Iraq War. After all, that is what Lieberman did 6 months ago when he said” “It’s time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be the commander in chief for three more critical years and that in matters of war we undermine the president’s credibility at our nation’s peril.” (2) That statement, more so than his support for the Iraq War, insulted not only me but democracy itself.

Sincerely,
Tobias Jackson
Brooklyn, NY

Notes:
1 - ABC News / Wash Post poll, June 22 - June 25, 2006
2 - NYTimes, December 9, 2006

Althouse is a complete dolt. Her hand is twisted and deformed from her continuous pearl-clutching…

Barbara Boxer’s Pac for change is asking:

Who’s Your Next Choice?

for her support for their senate run. Ned Lamont is not on the list, but I think it would be fun to send emails demanding he be on the list, and that she support the winner of the primary in CT.

poll page

email: info@pacforachange.com

I thought Dilation and Curettage were standard procedure for a woman coming into a hospital emergency after a rape.

What is the relevance of a ‘plan b’ pill at this point ?

Not trying to get flamed, just asking.

Approximately 25,000 pregnancies per year result from rape or incest according to Lackoff at one of the YearlyKos panels. That’s about 70 per day.

Surely some of these occur in Connecticut.

Women become pregnant as a result of rape more often than is assumed, I think. Is Joe aware of these figures.

She can read, but similar to many in the current SCAB (Supreme Court Appointed Bush) Administartion, they don’t care about facts… it is only their own personal convictions and opinions that matter, and to hell with the rest of us… Literally.

Althouse is suggesting, nay, stating clearly that YK was so shocking (what? The whacko liberal fringe? The Vegas food? The lack of cocktail weenies? The complete unwillingness to knuckle under to centerist poll-and-focus-group reading consultants?) that Boxer fled—excuse me, especially conspicuous(ly) fled—from the progressive blogsphere’s position? (Convoluted sentence of the week award)

What a tool.

I worked in a hospital emergency ward for about 10 years, and do know that pharmaceutical abortions, (according to one of the obstetrics docs) are basically massive dose contraceptives.

Sophist at 7 — my understanding is that it is no longer standard procedure, depending on the severity of tissue damage. But a rape kit swabbing would be if reported to police. But even a D&C isn’t full-proof in terms of prevention of an unwanted pregnancy from rape, as odd as it may sound. Because it is so physically and emotionally traumatic for a woman in those circumstances, I think most hospitals try to cover all the bases for them as much as possible. Frankly, that’s the most compassionate thing that anyone could do, under the circumstances.

Rootz be happenin

“THESE are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph…” - Thomas Paine

If anyone hasn’t seen the update — I’m hearing that Boxer might be going a little wobbly on her decision to stump for Joe. If she were to issue a statement today saying she is not coming to Connecticut, that would just be a wonderful thing and she would be deserving of all praise for supporting women’s rights with her decision. You can call her office in DC at 202-224-3553, Sacramento at 916-448-2787, or email her here.

Boxer has been on the right side of so many issues, and has been such a good friend to women and progressives in the past, please be respectful.

Ahhhh…..the term offends her sensibilties and all 12 of her readers…

Dontcha love it..Obviously effective….let us continue to repeat it..

Larry….aka as a repeater of the term Rape Guerney Joe

It’s not standard to get a D’nC. That could leave scarring on your uterus, and sometimes you can never get pregnant again. The plan B pill ensures that you do NOT get pregnant. I would much rather take a pill than go in for an invasive operation that they may refuse to give you if you do happen to get pregnant with the rapist’s baby. (D’nC is not usually used for abortion, the suction operation is usually used for early abortion. Outpatient procedure. D&C is an major operation where they scrape the inside of your uterus. Bad!

for some reason that saying about “… using a sledge hammer on a mosquito” comes to mind regarding Boxer…

I cling to the belief that while Boxer is always a politician, she is persuadeable…

We are mad because we are disappointed, but I think in the end, she will make the right decision…

“polite pressure” applied with regularity should work…

Posted the Link to Dilation and Curettage from Yahoo Health, but link didn’t work.

http://health.yahoo.com/ency/healthwise/tw2462

At the time I was working emerg, it was still standard procedure, and my s.o. who still works emerg as an R.N. still preps D&C kits for docs investigating rapes and sexual assaults coming into emerg.

But I’ll admit, my experience is confined to a set of regional metropolitan hospitals.

I sent Boxer a quote from Redd’s post on the last thread, listing all the reason why *not* to support Joe. Asterisks (four of them) bracketing the ones on Plan B and supporting the Preznit being sorta mandatory. (Redd rocks!) Said that it was truly democratic to support the person who wins the primary.

Sophist — I spoke with Denise Merrill, the Rep responsible for the clause in the budget, who was very proud that the measure they were going to require was Plan B and that it did NOT constitute an abortion. Not that I care, but they did. So it’s a good question, but Plan B is specifically what they were going to require all hospitals to administer to qualify for the funding.

looseheadprop–

Any kind of help or research we can send your way for your voting project?

Just called her office in Sacramento. Got right through with only one ring. The staffer was very polite, as was I. It felt great!

Please call and urge her to not to campaign for Lieberman!

D&C is used for miscarriages (incomplete spontaneous abortion) and for diagnostic evaluation of the endometrium– the lining of the uterus.

Gotta love that Boxer is wobbly after one day of support. I wonder what it’s like to be a staffer for her at the moment. I know I put in calls to her San Diego, San Francisco, LA and Washington office telling her what exactly what i thought about her dallying in the CT primary.

I think, perhaps, I might just do it again today …

I wrote Boxer yesterday. Didn’t mention women’s issues, figuring they would be well covered, but I got into some of the other stuff. If she turns around, I’ll be sure to write again, with appreciation.

The pearl-clutching is great … there are some stunning leaps of logic (Boxer goes to YearlyKos, Boxer is shocked to find the Netroots supporting Lamont, so therefore Boxer’s support for Lieberman is basically her shocked reaction to YearlyKos). There’s also the “oh, my, you’ll make people think you’re angry, and that’s such a political turn-off.”

At least, however, there’s an acknowledgement that opposition to Lieberman may be based on other factors than just support for the war. Now, if only the press would pick up on that fact, although the CW has already ossified around “the anti-war candidate Lamont.” I’m guessing the debate is going to stun them all when they find out it’s about more than the war, stupid.

In an attack of bad judgement, I followed a link from memeorandum to the Bullshit Moose blog.

In which he said about “the lefty bloggers” and their “Lieberman Purge Attempt”:

Let’s be clear - these bloggers are the left-wing equivalent of the Freepers.

Just thought that I would share that with all you “Freepers,” who want crazy shit like a party primary that is decided by voters, rather than incumbents.

When I’ve written emails to Barbara Boxer at her Senate website and selected “Political Parties and Elections” as the topic, I’ve received an auto-response which states that the official resource (her Senate website) cannot be used for discussions of political parties and elections.

I’ve NEVER gotten any response from Boxer’s PAC For A Change website, but here’s the email address anyway: info@pacforachange.com

============
Had Enough?
============

Indications for D&C

A D&C or dilatation and curettage is a procedure to scrape and collect the tissue (endometrium) from inside the uterus. D&C or uterine scraping may be done to: diagnose conditions using the tissue samples collected (biopsies) treat irregular bleeding remove fetal or placental tissue ( used for some elective or therapeutic abortions and to remove any remaining tissue after a spontaneous abortion (miscarriage)) D&C or uterine scraping may be recommended for: bleeding between periods heavy menstrual bleeding bleeding after intercourse investigation of infertility uterine fibroids endometrial polyps uterine cancer (early diagnosis) cervical cancer (early diagnosis) thickening of the uterus (endometrial hyperplasia ) an embedded IUD (intrauterine device) therapeutic or elective abortion miscarriage

http://www.henryfordhealth.org/115609.cfm

Kos has this list up on his site. Looks like a trend to me.

Those who would support the Democratic nominee

Hillary Clinton
Howard Dean
Russ Feingold
Al Gore
John Kerry
Bob Menendez
Barack Obama
Tom Vilsack

Those who would support a Lieberman independent bid

Ben Nelson
Ken Salazar

Update: I have heard from Obama’s staff that he will support the winner of the Democratic primary

http://dailykos.com/

Sophist: I worked in a hospital emergency ward for about 10 years, and do know that pharmaceutical abortions, (according to one of the obstetrics docs) are basically massive dose contraceptives.

While earlier contraceptive dose procedures may have been pharmaceutical abortions, and there was speculation that Plan B might work that way, medical studies have conclusively demonstrated that Plan B works by preventing conception. Anti-abortion groups have ignored these results and continued to push the discredited idea that Plan B is an “abortion pill.”

(And on a side note, since Plan B eliminates the need for abortion in these cases, that tells you a lot about whether their real motivation is opposition to abortion or just opposition to sex.)

Ugh - I forced myself to read through all the comments on Althouse’s blog, and the one word that came to mind whas “clueless.” Ms. Althouse apparently does not think any homework is required before gracing the world with her opinions. Her reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired, as well. Sloppy, very sloppy.

I think Althouse is projecting her own dislike of Lamont onto Boxer, who, if Joe were not running, I suspect would be 110% behind Ned - Boxer just can’t see over the friendship thing.

I think when you take a position that a rape victim can just hop in a cab to go get Plan B at another hospital, there is no nice nickname you can be given that sums up the heartlessness of that position. Maybe she would prefer “Cabfare Joe,” or “No Womb at This Inn Joe.” The semantics do not change how crass his position is.

Rape Gurney Joe. The only thing that I think the only slag that pisses him off more is “Lapdog”. I’d bring this up along with “The Kiss” and all the comments he made about being friends with neo-cons in the debates tonight.

wxyz 23: yep, so did I. I live in the Bay Area, so I felt that this is something I really could do to make a difference, if only in a small way.

Somewhat OT, so I hope it’s relevant enough to stand.

I saw some grumbling from a few posters who complain that FDL is “All Lieberman all the time”, to quote one contributor.

In looking at my own fascination with this story and my need to check in with FDL more often than I can afford, here’s what I think may be going on - - at least with me, and maybe with you.

Day by day, the criminal Bush administration polarizes the citizenry while the Establishment Media labors to codify (back off, Punaise!) every issue so that we are left with just slogans and predictability.

It’s like the old story about people knowing each other’s jokes so well they assigned numbers to them, and all one had to do is pronounce a number and the others dissolved into appropriate laughter or groans.

To me, political discourse has gotten like that. A current example is every. single. commentator. on the EM insisting that all the opposition to Lieberman is about the war.

When you see Bill Schneider or Norah O’Donnell, and this race is the topic, you might as well reach for the shot glass because you know it’s a matter of seconds before they say “It’s about one thing: Iraq.”

If you are serious about the drinking game and you keep the teevee on, you’ll be flat on your ass before noon.

American political life has become a Kabuki dance.

You know what almost every pol is going to say about any subject.

You know how Schumer is going to behave.

You know that when Democrats talk about issues, Republicans will talk about Democrats.

You knew, in the summer of 2002, that the Iraq war was inevitable, because you saw Rice, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush and all the rest of them bring up the Iraq threat with increasing frequency and alarm.

You know that when real problems cry out for solutions, Republicans will pull out their tried-and-true war horses of God, Guns and Gays (and flags).

You know that when Arlen Spector huffs and puffs with steely indignation, he will crumple like cellophane in a campfire when it counts.

You get the idea, and you could probably come up with more and better examples.

The fact that everything in politics and national life has become entirely predictable and the outcome so grimly easy to foresee, has given me, at least, a dull sense of impotence owing to my inability to have any influence at all on so many of the things that affect me, personally, and this country I love.

Two things in the past year do not fit this pattern.

The first is Patrick Fitzgerald. None of us has any influence on what he does, of course, but what he does do doesn’t follow an ineluctable path toward a predictable result that will keep everything status quo.

He did something no one else has been able to do in five years when he held Scooter Libby accountable for what he did to the bedrock of our system of government when he misled officers of the justice system. No one but Patrick Fitzgerald has been able to touch anybody else in this maladministration.

What he did and may continue to do, is not a Kabuki dance. The outcome is not foretold nor programmed by the media nor the Administration.

What Fitzgerald did was authentic and real and scientific, in the sense that the evidence led to his conclusions, and irrelevant bits and pieces were excised from his process.

The second example of an unexpected event with an outcome that is not pre-ordained has come to us in the person of Ned Lamont.

Whaaa? A credible candidate who is well-spoken and has enough personal money that he had to be taken seriously? You must be kidding.

That’s the response from the participants in the Kabuki dance. “How DARE you modern and improv dance people horn in on our game.”

After all, pundits look like geniuses when they accurately predict the outcome. Hell, *I* could predict it, too, because most of politics is a freaking Kabuki dance, and we ALL know how it comes out.

They are comfortable in reinforcing what they already know, and the audience is comforted that there won’t be anything surprising that might disturb their sleep.

The Lamont candidacy is exciting to us because it is off-script. We don’t know the outcome. We can even influence the outcome.

Jane is on site. The CT bloggers are telling us what is going on and what we can do. Firepups remind each other how they can help (call Boxer, tell your friends about Ned, send money, and more).

At home, Christy is collecting every piece of information that might keep us informed and enthusiastic. Frequent FDL posters add their experience and knowledge, so that even I, down here in Texas, know the issues and players in CT and find myself savoring every anecdote and every morsel of info that will feed my hope that this race, this one race, is not following the choreograph.

This one is not a Kabuki dance.

Of COURSE we are fascinated. Maybe we are obsessed. So what?

Some people are obsessed about motorcycles. Some about eating or smoking. Some about gardening. We are fascinated by a real, authentic exercise in democracy that is going on - - not in Iraq or South Africa - - but right here in one of the original 13 colonies.

So forgive us our fascination, our hope, and our obsession where that applies.

If other Firepups are like me, this is one piece of American political life that is not a tiresome, soul-killing exercise leading to the same old grimly-predictable outcome.

Patrick Fitzgerald and Ned Lamont - - we cheer as they sail uncharted waters.

These are the two subjects that have most entrhalled FDL. Is it any wonder?

Gee, Teddy @ 29 - I think I’ve sent all my emails under that topic… haven’t heard a peep from them yet…

perhaps there is too much traffic?

Old coastie @17

I for one am sick of polite. “It don’t win knife fights.”

Let them know our rage. TRexoids unite!

HAD ENOUGH?

Would our world be any different if men had the babies and women were the soldiers?

Ohh, we’re on the same wavelength! I just called Barbara boxer’s office and had this very same conversation with her young staffer before checking in here and seeing your post. I think they are really backing off from having her come out and support lieberman–before I could say anything at all they said she had “no position right now” on whether she was coming out for lieberman and the young staffer listened, like she’d heard quite a bit about this, to my entire shpiel about lieberman and the democratic base.

aimai

and your little dog, too @ 36: I don’t think your post is terribly off-topic. I don’t think blogs have to worry too much about people who are genuinely concerned about topicality - it’s the trolls who track their muddy boots into the living room, flagranty disregarding what’s appropriate.

And I know what you mean about Kabuki. Not to try to compete with punaise but:

Right wing kabuki, just say noh.

How perfect is the combo of comments 37-38!

angie,39: Would our world be any different if men had the babies and women were the soldiers?

Fewer wars and more dirty diapers.

Phone and Fax numbers for Senator Barbara Boxer

Washington DC
Ph. (202) 224-3553
Fx. (202) 228-2382

SF
Ph. (415) 403-0100
Fx. (415) 956-6701

LA
Ph. (213) 894-5000
Fx. (213) 894-5042

Sac
Ph. (916) 448-2787
Fx. (916) 448-2563

San Diego
Ph. (619) 239-3884
Fx. (619) 239-5719

Fresno
Ph. (559) 497-5109
Fx. (559) 497-5111

San Bernadino
Ph. (909) 888-8525
Fx. (909) 888-8613

ha, ojs!

I’m still flabergasted that any Dem senator would not go on record as supporting the winner of the CT primary. It’s kind of a no-brainer. What in the world is their position, then? I’d sure like to hear the reasoning - Well, whatever cockamamie statement they’d like to release for public consumption anyway…

Larry - I’m just saying the size of the knife should be relative to the size of the “enemy”… that the force applied should be proportional - use what’s necessary and not a whole lot more…

One month to go till the primary–what’s the score? Anyone know what’s happening out there? Any recent polls or anything?

dog, too… speaks for me!

I tried to call Boxer’s DC office and after holding for a significant amount of time, my call was simply disconnected. I will try one of her other many numbers. Also, I had called Schumer’s office earlier today with the same request that he support the winner of the CT democratic primary. The staffer answering the call seemed genuinely interested. Schumer’s DC phone number is: (202) 224-6542.

fwiw, implantation of a fertilized egg takes place IIRC five days after conception. Plan b I believe prevents implantation of the egg into the lining of the uterus. So, for example, in the first 24 hours after a rape, the victim may be pregnant, but the fertilized egg is still making its way down the fallopian tube, on its way to the uterus. So a d c, being a procedure confined to the uterus, would not interfere with pregnancy.

I think I got that right.

Plan B is not an abortifacent. It is emergency birth control. It does not prevent implantation; it prevents ovulation.

Let me repeat: Plan B prevents ovulation.

One of the reasons it is so important to take Plan B as soon as possible is because once the woman ovulates, or if there is an egg that has already ovulated, the woman will get pregnant. Plan B does not prevent conception nor does it prevent implantation. Plan B prevents ovulation. There is absolutely no abortion issue here.

I am one of Barbara Boxer’s constituents. Here is the text of the e-mail I just sent her:

Senator Boxer,

Please do not campaign for Joe Lieberman. He is a DINO (Democrat In Name Only), who vociferously supports the Iraq war, opposes the right to choose, and aided and abetted the right-wing takeover of the Supreme Court.

A great candidate who shares your values, Ned Lamont, who is running against Holy Joe, deserves your support, and certainly not your interference.

Sincerely,

I just called and the message said to call her other office at 415-403-0100, then they picked up before I had a chance to hag up and redial. Told her that Joe was a big boy and didn’t need Boxer to bail him out.

Little Dog #36 - that long post of yours was great and spot on!

nice post, and your little dog, too . . . . @36!!!

Yeah, Dog speaks for me too. This CT race is fascinating for so many reasons. It’s a microcosm of a much bigger picture and brings up a myriad of germane issues that we’ve been grappling with for years. It’s good stuff and I for one am proudly obsessed.

Jane,
two pieces of news:

One I just got a survey from Boxer’s pac for america asking who should be the next candidate they choose to support. Joe was NOT one of the choices.

I can’t swear he was not a previous choice, but I don’t think he was. So, this seems to imply that her Pac is treating him as radioactive.

2) last night on the nationwide DFA call Jim Dean affirmed DFA’s committment to Lamont. I got a follow up voicemail from him this AM asking me to call him to talk about the Joe problem some more. Am still playing phone tag on that, so I’m not sure what more htere was to say. Jim was pretty forceful in DFA’s support for Lamont.

This was in response from a question I asked on behalf of our local group. Dean’s answer provoked our members to high five and do the happy dance.

Snip

1. What is emergency contraception?

Emergency contraception is a method of preventing pregnancy to be used after a contraceptive fails or after unprotected sex. It is not for routine use. Drugs used for this purpose are called emergency contraceptive pills, post-coital pills, or morning after pills. Emergency contraceptives contain the hormones estrogen and progestin (levonorgestrel), either separately or in combination. FDA has approved two products for prescription use for emergency contraception – Preven (approved in 1998) and Plan B (approved in 1999).

2. What is Plan B?

Plan B is emergency contraception, a backup method to birth control. It is in the form of two levonorgestrel pills (0.75 mg in each pill) that are taken by mouth [12 hours apart]after unprotected sex. Levonorgestrel is a synthetic hormone used in birth control pills for over 35 years. Plan B can reduce a woman’s risk of pregnancy when taken as directed if she has had unprotected sex. Plan B contains only progestin, levonorgestrel, a synthetic hormone used in birth control pills for over 35 years. It is currently available only by prescription

3. How does Plan B work?

Plan B works like other birth control pills to prevent pregnancy. Plan B acts primarily by stopping the release of an egg from the ovary (ovulation). It may prevent the union of sperm and egg (fertilization). If fertilization does occur, Plan B may prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the womb (implantation). If a fertilized egg is implanted prior to taking Plan B, Plan B will not work.

http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/i.....BQandA.htm

This government site also describes some of the goings on wrt FDA’s tortured history with Plan B.

Also

“If it is taken within 72 hours after unprotected sex, it will decrease the chance that you will get pregnant by 89%, meaning 7 out of every 8 women who would have gotten pregnant will not get pregnant.”

http://sexuality.about.com/od/...../planb.htm

and your little dog, too 12:03pm: thank you for putting into words exactly what i feel, think, see is the dynamic going on in this Country.

and we’ve got a front row seat…

OldCoastie your 47

I gotcha…understood…sorry I shrilled at you

Larry

yourlittledog: Great post–keep em coming!

rosalind, agreed.

Why are so many in the balcony making out, not paying attention or trying to divert our attention?

They are scairt.

E at 22

thank you so much for the offer. And I may take you up one that. This is the most rockin’ virtual think tank I know. Right now, I am more swamped with help than I can cope with. The first draft of the chapter outlines had to be run past a couple dozen other lawyers, so i am still sorting through and trying ti internalize their input.

The help is good an appreciated, but overwhelming and somewhat hard to absorb so many good ideas all going in different directions. I need to hew to a course (trying to navigate what that course might be right now)

This is meant to be a short simple snappy “cookbook” fpr lawyers to use, so we never have to read a Boby Kennedy article again and be POd that no one collected and preserved enough evidence to prove anything at trial.

Most of it, though is how to prevent fraud. An ouce of prevention is worth, well you know

Re: Contacting Sen. Boxer

Call or Fax - they don’t do emails - just something I figured out

my email to Babs (cribbing from Christy’s laundry list a few threads back):

Honorable Senator Boxer,

As a constituent who has always proudly voted for you, I urge you to reconsider your expression of support for Senator Joe Lieberman. He has undercut the very core values of the democratic process by failing to commit to respecting the results of the Democratic primary election in Connecticut on August 8. Rather, he is hedging his bets by preparing to run in the general election as an Independent should he lose the primary. This is an utterly selfish and unacceptable contortion of the process that puts his own interests ahead of those of the party. It has the potential to do great harm to the other Congressional races in Connecticut, thus endangering our goal of regaining the House in November. We all stand to suffer from his petulant behavior.

I happen to support his Democratic rival, Mr. Ned Lamont. Much of this support has been mischaracterized as a hateful effort to “punish” Senator Lieberman for his inexcusable hawkishness on the Iraq war. While I do object strenuously to the senator’s positions enabling the egregious actions of the Bush Administration, that is only one piece of the puzzle. Please consider these other failings:

- his lack of oversight on Enron when it could have done a lot of good for all those people who have no retirement now

- his lack of curiousness about the qualifications of Michael Brown during his confirmation hearings to become head of FEMA

- his history of voting with Republicans to throw procedural votes and then claiming to be progressive by ultimately voting another way on the final vote after the damage was already done (worst example: the Alito cloture vote)

- his comments on the morning after pill in the context of energency contraception for rape victims in Connecticut

- his lecture to all progressives who criticize the President’s ignorant policies on Iraq to shut up and salute, no matter the damage

I encourage you to learn more about Mr. Lamont’s mainstream Democratic values and ideas. He may or may not prevail, but regardless of the outcome, I urge you to pledge your exclusive support for the winner of the Democratic primary. If we are to regain control of Congress and begin correcting the damage wrought by the Republicans, then we must stand united as a strong Democratic Party.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

“Mr. Punaise”

since Senator Boxer is from Marin County, calling her San Francisco Office makes the most sense — except for DC, she probably spends more time in that office (it being closest to her home)

Thanks, Larry - last thread there were all kinds of propositions from one poster that seemed to think we needed to apply all kinds of shaming street theater outside of Boxer’s offices…

it seemed over the top and far too soon - save yer ammo! see what comes out of the regular kinds of pressure…

appears it might be working… it’s going to be a “long war” and we don’t need to exhaust ourselves on the unnecessary…

First of all, even when there is “conception,” there is no guarantee that the egg will implant. Plenty of “conceived” eggs get flushed down the toilet all the time even without contraception or abortifacents of any sort in the system. It’s natural.

Second of all, PLAN B DOES NOT PREVENT IMPLANTATION. Neither does Plan B guarantee that you won’t get pregnant. Why? Because PLAN B DOES NOT PREVENT IMPLANTATION. In fact, Plan B’s effectiveness goes down drastically if the woman (and very often the poor girl) does not take the pill within 24 hours. Nor does it prevent “conception” if sperm and egg happen to meet. All Plan B does is prevent ovulation. I can’t repeat this enough. All Plan B does is prevent ovulation.

If you want to argue this and point to reports that mention that Plan B might, maybe, has a chance of preventing implantation, then that report is full of crap similar to Global Warming deniers, and promoted by many of the very same folks, incidentally. Those who promote those reports are grasping at straws.

Mr. Punaise -

Wow. That is a fantastic letter. Beautiful.

john in sacramento 65

Call or Fax - they don’t do emails - just something I figured out

OK, I’ll send it as a fax

thx JftB

little dog at 36

Wow.

Stunning. Wonderful

I’m getting so sick of people in positions of power debating things like Plan B and the Internet when they have no f’ing clue what they’re talking about.

How about a Constitutional Amendment requiring Congress to demonstrate a fundamental understanding of something before charting a course for its future?

I know that’s not practical, but really… it’s one thing to have a different idea about process or policy, but if you don’t understand how email works, you shouldn’t have any input into the future of email. If you don’t know what a pill does, you shouldn’t be allowed to decide when it can be denied to other people.

I mean, right?

Called her SD office and her LA office got a call from my sister.
The SD office sounded pleased and said he would definitely pass my message along.

Of course I am a Californian and love her so I let him know. I asked for her to just stay away…until the people of Conn. decided in the primary.

Hugh at 59,

That report overemphasizes the chances of Plan B preventing “conception” or implantation. Seriously. It came out with this White House in power. The same White House that stopped foreign aid to family planning groups that even mentioned abortion as an option. All the talk about how it “may” prevent “conception” or “may” prevent implantation is just so much hot air. The chances of it doing that are unproven and, even if true, no more likely to occur than if the woman was on regular birth control.

I sent an e-mail to Boxer, mentioning support for the Iraq war, the Alito nomination, and emergency birth control as issues on which Lieberman is out of touch with maistream Democrats. Hope she is listening.

Hey gang,
Took Jane’s advice, just sent Sen. boxer this:

Senator:
Greetings and thank you for your ongoing hard work and dedication to progressive causes. I am a life-long Democrat, a consistent voter and, more recently, a donor and precinct committee officer.

I am writing today, however, in dismay over some of your recent actions with regard to the campaign of Senator Lieberman for reelection. I take tremendous issue with Senator Lieberman’s support of the Iraq war, his position on public support for limiting women’s access to emergency medical care, his betrayal of Democratic Party principles in his vote for cloture on the Alito nomination, and his willingness to undermine Social Security. He has consistently supported the disaster that is the Bush Administration and the Republican Party in general, seemingly never missing an opportunity to stab his “fellow” democrats in the back - perhaps most recently in his parroting of Republican/Rove talking points characterizing his challenger’s supporters as angry and hate-filled.

Senator Lieberman’s recent announcement that he intends to disregard the results of the Democratic primary should he lose is an affront to our party and to the democratic process more broadly. He has in effect stated that he will ignore the will of Connecticut Democrats should they decide that they want to be represented by Ned Lamont in the general election. This is the height of arrogance and tantamount to placing himself above the party and the voters of Connecticut. He serves at their pleasure, not the other way around.

Senator Boxer, I am deeply disturbed that you are considering actively supporting Senator Lieberman in the primary race against Ned Lamont. On so many issues Senator Lieberman has betrayed our party, its leaders, and our shared principles. He self-righteously condemned President Clinton, his performance as Vice-Presidential nominee was tepid at best and he actively undermined the efforts after the 2000 vote to secure a victory for Al Gore. He has partnered with Lynn Cheney to lead an organization dedicated to silencing progressive voices on college campuses. He has repeatedly and consistently provided political cover for some of the most egregiously wrong policies and actions of the Bush Administration and the Republican Party. Senator boxer, Joe Lieberman is not worthy of your support, particularly in a primary contest with a Democrat, especially one as progressive in his positions as Ned Lamont.

Ned Lamont has pledged to support the winner of the Democratic Party primary in the general election. I share this commitment. Joe Lieberman has refused to make such a commitment and has manifestly rejected the right of the Democratic Party to choose its own nominee, should it be anyone but him. Ma’am, this tells me the Joe Lieberman is not a Democrat and has no real commitment to the Democratic Party.

Senator Boxer, I urge you to reconsider your stated intent to campaign for Senator Lieberman prior to the August Democratic primary. Moreover, I urge you to publicly state your intent to support the winner of the Democratic primary election in the general election in November. It’s a matter of principle.

Thank you,

Punaise: sign it as “Seňor Pasador” — Punaise sounds kinda foreign, ya know …

lhp –

did you see my links in the previous thread, re GOP election fraud?

*ilson, indeed….

Althouse is making excuses, which is what I take Jane’s general point as being, next to Althouse’s displayed ignorance of the law regarding rape victims and hospitals.

It is one thing to debate what are appropriate norms of civic discourse (truth be told, Rape Gurney Joe doesn’t work for me either, but who really cares? Political speech is often quite blunt and always has been. Welcome to politics. Semantic aesthetics is a topic in its own right, but hardly the real issue here.)

It is another thing to argue that because someone uses a course phrase you dislike that that justifies endorsing Lieberman’s appalling position on rape victims. Because some bloggers use a harsh name for Lieberman his position is now acceptable? That isn’t just illogical, it is a cop out. Rather than address the specifics of what Lieberman is on record as favoring (which is illegal, factually challenged, and repulsive), just cry foul about somebody’s unkind name for Lieberman.

If she want’s to make a claim that leftwing blog speech norms hurt the political process, then make that argument. Don’t imply that to get around talking about what Lieberman believes.

angie @ 12:05 pm (#39) - No. Because the qualities that make one a good parent or a good soldier are not due to whether one has a penis.

Bribes #69

A link to support your view that Plan B only affects ovulation would be helpful.

I just called Barbara Boxer’s office in Sacramento and her spokesman says that he knows their office is aware of rumors and stories on the blogs about Barbara supporting Joe Lieberman but (according to him) she has actually made no public statement about that at all. He was very polite and said he would pass along my comments regarding how negatively I would view her if, indeed, she does decide to back JL.

Dover Bitch 74 - They know all they care to know, and that’s where the money goes and how they can get their share.

Update: I’m hearing that Boxer might be going a little wobbly on her decision to stump for Joe.

right on jane, and right on all you CA people who are leaning on boxer!

if boxer backs off from actively campaigning for joe in CT, the blogosphere can take enormous credit for that!

red staters like salazar and ben nelson are untouchable here, but boxer has her precious leftie credentials to maintain, and she is gonna get smashed if she thinks that she can come to CT and try to impart her leftie aura on joe -

again, good show people!

heck, let salazar and nelson come to CT and stump for joe; that would nicely establish joe’s red state credentials!

way, way, way OT: CNN is doing a clip about beauty shops still functioning in Gaza — it’s good to see queens in Gaza : that male hairstylist looks way gay !

Althouse is making excuses, which is what I take Jane’s general point as being, next to Althouse’s displayed ignorance of the law regarding rape victims and hospitals.

No, Althouse is making semantics the issue, rather than have people focus on the issues.

It is a “classic” repug election trick; its not the message, its the foul mouths of the lecturer.

As IF “Rape Gurney” is so outre to an adult - Althouse may not be - but anyone who claims that language is patently offensive is lying, AND ON PURPOSE.

is Boxer’s soapbox starting to tilt and wobble? (as a person of rather short stature she stands on a platform when speaking in public).

twolf1, you’re right.

leftofliberal 78 - great letter!

via thinkprogress.

Larry king on his impending interview of chimpy and chimpette

What will be your first question for the president?

No idea. It might be about Ken Lay, maybe North Korea. Lay was a friend of his. It’s the president’s birthday so I might go there.

I never know in advance. I won’t know until I say hello and start the interview.

I’ll definitely ask about Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, who says he’ll run as an independent if he loses the Democratic primary. I’d like to know if Bush would support him as an independent.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/07/.....index.html

Editorial in L.A. Times today re Lieberman:

http://www.latimes.com/news/op.....editorials

you can write to them here:

letters@latimes.com

“lecturer” should be “messenger,” and even I can’t blame spell check for that one - I could, but……

Evil PU at 89, I think we are saying much the same thing. To deflect attention you pull out strong language and get your outrage on rather than look at why people are mad at Lieberman, which is his repulsive point of view.

Some guy - Evil Parallel Universe or EPU, please. But not Evil PU.

little dog 36 and punaise 65, YOU DONE WAY GOOD!

arrff!

My apologies EPU.

*pats punaise on head, accepts smoochy slurps, scratches behind his ears*

Re: to EPU’s point (previously posted at my 33, above) -

I think when you take a position that a rape victim can just hop in a cab to go get Plan B at another hospital, there is no nice nickname you can be given that sums up the heartlessness of that position. Maybe she would prefer “Cabfare Joe,” or “No Womb at This Inn Joe.” The semantics do not change how crass his position is.

Emailed (and faxed) off a letter to my Senator…

Dear Senator,

I am a proud Democrat and feel very strongly that it is important for the nation that the Democratic party regain leadership positions in our Government.

With this perspective in mind, I am concerned that you have stated that you would campaign for Senator Joe Lieberman during the Connecticut primary, especially after his announcement that he would undermine the primary process by announcing in advance that if defeated he will run as an independent against the Democratic primary winner.

I respectfully ask that you reconsider this position, and that you back the winner of the Democratic Primary in Connecticut.

Best Regards,

Chula Vista, CA

Oh, that reminds me, punaise — the kitten’s name is . . . ?