...will he ever win?

Again, proving that the best Sunday morning news-of-the-day conversation is to be found on Up with Chris Hayes, Hayes had on four women to discuss the Komen/Planned Parenthood backlash. Imagine that! Women like Amy Goodman, Anne Marie Slaughter, Melissa Harris-Perry and Michelle Goldberg to discuss the greater political ramifications of the reproductive health argument, instead of conservative white men. Will wonders never cease?

What appeared to catch the Komen Foundation and other conservative backers off guard was the immediate and grassroots rejection of this continued politicization of women's health issues by the conservative agenda. In an earlier segment of the show, Goldberg surmised that this is has as much to do with the insularity of conservative thinking (as evidence by Komen's continued help from Ari Fleischer) as well as the class issues, as Harris-Perry suggests in this clip. When an estimated one in five Americans have sought treatment for a wide array of health issues from Planned Parenthood (and that includes men) over their lifetime, it is truly a bridge too far for conservatives to threaten the very existence of this organization.

When one in eight women will receive a diagnosis of breast cancer, but studies show that women of lower socio-economic levels and minorities have significantly less positive outcomes, it makes the services that Planned Parenthood all that more critical and the reason so many every day citizens rose up to push back against Komen.

Republican, Democrat or Independent, the truth of the matter is that we are *not* a center-right country, and when conservatives choose to push that agenda, it all of us that remind them that we will continue to fight for the rights of those who don't get a voice in the discussion.

Also worth reading: Barbara Ehrenreich--Welcome to Cancerland

February 06, 2012 03:00 AM

(Warning: Some images can be very disturbing.)

Not exactly the Occupy Wall Street movement, but certainly government forces that openly murder innocent civilians amidst open condemnation from the international community is something we can all stand united against, and in solidarity with the people of Syria.

The Syrian forces continued with one of the deadliest attacks of the 11-month uprising on Sunday, pounding parts of Homs even as residents combed through rubble looking for victims of a sustained barrage over the weekend that killed scores of people.

Again, I caution that these images are very graphic by nature and can be quite disturbing.

February 06, 2012 02:00 AM

In Catholic masses all over this country, priests are injecting politics into their sermons, condemning the Obama administration for the new Health and Human Services regulations that religious institutions must offer contraceptive benefits to its members. It doesn't require members to violate their personal beliefs by taking advantage of the benefit, mind you. But this new regulation acknowledges that there are some who may work in a Catholic hospital who may not have the same stricture against contraceptives and want it to be part of their health services. But that's perhaps a too nuanced view:

The Catholic Church reacted strongly Friday to a White House defense of new rules that will force many religious employers to provide contraception to their workers in government-mandated health insurance plans.

"The White House information about this is a combination of misleading and wrong," said Anthony Picarello, general counsel of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. He said the bishops would "pursue every legal mandate available to them to bring an end to this mandate. That means legislation, litigation and public advocacy. All options are on the table."

The new regulations were announced last month by the Department of Health and Human Services as part of an effort to guarantee that women receive free "preventive" healthcare services, including cervical cancer screening, breast pumps — and contraception. They require employers to include those services in their employee health insurance plans by August.

Religious institutions can qualify for an exemption if the services violate their beliefs, but not if they employ large numbers of people who do not share those beliefs. [..]

In a blog post Wednesday, the White House responded that the new rules won't force anyone to buy contraceptives. Cecilia Muñoz, director of the Domestic Policy Council, wrote: "Over half of Americans already live in the 28 states that require insurance companies [to] cover contraception." These include such large states as California and New York, she said.

The Catholic bishops shot back Friday, saying it was misleading to say that no one would be forced to "buy" contraceptives, because everyone who contributes to an insurance plan will be paying a portion of the subsidy that provides for free contraception.

Alex Castellanos and David Brooks are only too happy to pick up the bishops' mantle and further the meme that this is a solid shot across the bow of religious liberty in Obama's war on religion. How nice of them to legitimize Newt Gingrich that way. Rachel Maddow and Xavier Becerra try gamely to point out that refusing contraceptive benefits in the twenty first century is beyond ridiculous, but of course, host David Gregory gives Alex Castellanos the last word.

Out of curiosity, are the bishops equally against ED drugs like Viagra? Why do I hear no denouncing of working against "God's plan" there? The reality is that despite the church's teachings, as much as 98 percent of Catholics admit to using contraception. Would that the church elders focus their efforts on dealing honestly with issues that are in line with the priorities of their members: poverty and social justice, labor unions, climate change and dealing honestly and ethically with their own sex scandals rather than plunge into politicking within homilies on Bizarro World accusations of violations of religious freedom.

Worth reading: Bishop should not insert politics into Mass

February 06, 2012 01:00 AM

Click here to view this media

This Week with George Stephanopoulos marks the passings of three service members, killed in Afghanistan.

US Marines Sgt William C Stacey, 23, Redding, CA
US Marines LCpl Edward J Dycus, 22, Greenville, MS
US Army BG Terence J Hildner, 49, Fairfax, VA

In addition, we note the passings of artist Mike Kelley, boxing trainer Angelo Dundee, impressario Don Cornelius, actor Ben Gazzara and businessman Steve Appleton.

According to iCasualties, the total number of allied service members killed in Afghanistan is now 2,883.

February 06, 2012 12:45 AM

Click here to view this media

While former Republican presidential nominee John McCain may be a big supporter of Mitt Romney, the Arizona senator isn't a fan when it comes to the GOP frontrunner's policy of "self-deportation" for undocumented immigrants.

During a recent NBC Republican presidential debate in Florida, Romney explained that he would make life for undocumented immigrants so uncomfortable that they would leave the country voluntarily.

"People decide that they can do better by going home because they can’t find work here because they don’t have legal documentation to allow them to work here," the candidate said. "If people can’t get work here, they’re going to self-deport to a place where they can get work."

On Saturday, Univision's Jorge Ramos asked McCain if such a policy was humane.

"No," the senator admitted. "I think there are some people who want to leave this country and return to the country they came from, but obviously it requires a broader solution than that, and we all know that."

"Do you think that Republicans have lost the Hispanic vote for this election?" Ramos wondered "And, therefore, they're about to lose the White House again?"

"Well, I don't know if they're going to lose the White House again," McCain replied. "But we have to present a humane approach to a very difficult issue of illegal immigration into this country."

(H/T: Think Progress)

February 06, 2012 12:00 AM

enlarge

Are you ready for some football? Live streaming here.

Amato is rooting for his beloved Giants. How about you?

February 05, 2012 11:30 PM

This Tuesday Blue America will move to a new day. We're staying at 11am (PT) but our weekly guest will drop by on Tuesdays instead of Saturdays. And this week we're starting the new schedule with an iconic progressive figure from western North Carolina, Cecil Bothwell. No doubt you saw the news at the end of the week that Cecil's opponent, Blue Dog leader Heath Shuler, has decided to turn in his cleats and go become a lobbyist or a gym teacher. Since his voting record showed him siding with Boehner and Cantor more than 60% of the time and since he worked tirelessly inside the Democratic House caucus making bills less progressive and more palatable to his friends in Big Business, his retirement announcement is worth celebrating.

Now, of course, the DCCC and local conservatives are casting around for their idea of a Heath Shuler replacement. It isn't someone progressive. It isn't someone grassroots. It isn't someone independent-minded. In other words... it isn't Cecil Bothwell. Cecil was elected to the Asheville City Council and managed to get the most votes city wide-- although pundits insisted an atheist and unabashed liberal could never win. But he won and he won so big because he stands up for working families, not special interests. Even Tea Party members have recognized him as a friend of working people. He's straightforward and very clear about who he is, why he's running and what he plans to do in Congress. Please come by and meet him Tuesday at 2pm (ET). And the fascinating video above shows Cecil last week at a Tea Party candidates session. He's serious about appealing to all the people in the 11th district.

If you're a Facebook denizen, please join and share this event with your friends. It's never been more important to get real progressives into Congress.

And if you can, please consider making a contribution to Cecil's all grassroots campaign at the Blue America ActBlue page. The three coolest contributions before the end of the Super Bowl will get signed books. Which books? Surprise!

If you're a Facebook denizen, please join and share this event with your friends. It's never been more important to get real progressives into Congress.

February 05, 2012 11:00 PM

Click here to view this media

Ah, the bold hackery of This Week's Matthew Dowd, former Democrat and born-again Bush-Cheney campaign strategist! He regurgitates the exact same argument spewed by NRO's "The Corner" earlier this week about the Komen foundation and quickly replicated throughout the right-wing and corporate media: Namely, how dare those liberals try to bully the Komen Foundation out of giving money to whoever they choose?

DOWD: I think that this demonstrates -- to me demonstrates the corrupt nature that's happened in politics has now bled into the privates, but (inaudible) view as the private sector, which is...

STEPHANOPOULOS: What do you mean by that?

DOWD: That there is now -- a private foundation can give and dispense money any way it wants. It can choose to give money -- people could have said when they first gave the money to Planned Parenthood, was that a good idea? Nobody sort of screamed and yelled. But all of a sudden they say we're going to take $700,000 back of private donations, which most people that gave money to Susan Komen Foundation had no idea they were going to go to -- be going to Planned Parenthood.

And so now what we see in Congress, this bitter response any time somebody does something, everybody screams and yell. Whether or not Congress should be investigating Planned Parenthood we can have an argument over. I don't think they should be in the middle of that. But I don't think Planned...

(CROSSTALK)

STEPHANOPOULOS: ... who say this is democracy at work...

(CROSSTALK)

DOWD: I think this is a -- this is a corrupt, poisonous part of democracy at work. I think foundations should be able to make a decision, and if Planned Parenthood wants to go out and raise the money...

Ah, yes. The "corrupt, poisonous part of democracy." The part where the peasants finally rise up and say, "You want our money? Don't screw the organizations that do useful work." Boy, they really do hate it when the hoi polloi gets uppity, huh? The wingnuts blame the Komen backlash on "Big Abortion" because they're so very disconnected from the women who, at some point or another, know that Planned Parenthood was there for them when they needed help. I guess it's just unthinkable that a young girl needing birth control doesn't go with Mummy to Mummy's OB-GYN, and then it's off to a nice lunch where Mummy twinkles at her daughter over the quiche and salad while she hands over Nana's antique pearls: "Now that you're so grown up, it's time that you had these."

Or maybe Mummy's personal assistant drives Bitsy to the doctor because Mummy's out swilling gin with the rest of the Republican fundraisers. I'm not really sure how the upper classes live these days, but at least I know I'm just making things up. The talking heads of our corporate media? They so frequently confuse their fantasies with real life.

February 05, 2012 10:00 PM

Click here to view this media

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum on Sunday suggested that Susan G. Komen for the Cure shouldn't provide grants to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screenings because abortions cause breast cancer, a false claim that has been repeatedly debunked.

The candidate told Fox News host Chris Wallace that he didn't agree with the Komen Foundation reversing itself last week and making Planned Parenthood eligible for future grants.

"I've taken the position as a presidential candidate and someone in Congress that Planned Parenthood funds and does abortions," Santorum explained. "They're a private organization they stand up and support what ever they want."

"I don't believe that breast cancer research is advanced by funding an organization where you've seen ties to cancer and abortion," he added. "So, I don't think it's a particularly healthy way of contributing money to further cause of breast cancer, but that's for a private organization like Susan B. Komen to make that decision."

According to the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the several small flawed studies that suggested a link between abortion and breast cancer have been disproven.

"Since then, better-designed studies have been conducted," the institute's website said. "These newer studies examined large numbers of women, collected data before breast cancer was found, and gathered medical history information from medical records rather than simply from self-reports, thereby generating more reliable findings. The newer studies consistently showed no association between induced and spontaneous abortions and breast cancer risk."

In 2002, the Bush administration temporarily altered NCI's website to say that scientific evidence supported a possible link between abortion and breast cancer. After an outcry from the scientific community, NCI corrected its website with an accurate fact sheet.

A study released by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) in 2006 found that the Bush administration also used pregnancy resource centers -- commonly known as “crisis pregnancy centers” -- to falsely inform pregnant teens that the risk of breast cancer increased by 80 percent after an abortion.

"This tactic may be effective in frightening pregnant teenagers and women and discouraging abortion," the study concluded (PDF). "But it denies the teenagers and women vital health information, prevents them from making an informed decision, and is not an accepted public health practice."

Ironically, there are several substantial studies that link breast cancer to BPA, which Komen has ignored in pursuit of corporate donations (and the merchandising income of their pink ribbon water bottles). However, neither Chris Wallace nor Rick Santorum appears to be concerned with actual science over debunked politically-driven pseudo-science.

February 05, 2012 09:00 PM

Click here to view this media

Mitt Romney says so many provably false statements in his stump speeches that it's hard to know where to begin to tear them down. Apparently, for Fareed Zakaria, when you use the title of his book out of context, that gets him in fact checking mode. What is obviously intended to be a red meat, "Obama hates America", jingoistic rallying cry for Romney's followers is a matter of great discussion on Fareed Zakaria GPS weekly. Set the record straight, Fareed:

In 1990, China represented 2% of global gross domestic product. It has quadrupled, to 8%, and it's rising. By most estimates, China's economy will become the world's largest between 2016 and 2018. And this is not simply an economic story. China's military capacity and reach are also expanding. Beijing's defense spending is likely to surpass America's by 2025.

It's not just China that's rising. Emerging powers on every continent have achieved political stability and economic growth and are becoming active on the global stage. Twenty years ago Turkey was a fragile democracy, dominated by its army, constantly in need of Western economic bailouts. Today, Turkey has a trillion-dollar economy that grew 6.6% last year. Since April 2009, Turkey has created 3.4 million jobs - that's more than the entire European Union, Russia and South Africa put together.

Look in this hemisphere: In 1990, Brazil was emerging from decades of dictatorship and was wracked by inflation rates that reached 3,000 percent. Today, Brazil is a stable democracy, steadily growing with foreign-exchange reserves of $350 billion.

I could go on, Mitt.

Barack Obama has succeeded in preserving and even enhancing U.S. influence in this world precisely because he has recognized these new forces at work. He has traveled to the emerging nations and spoken admiringly of their rise. He replaced the old Western club and made the Group of 20 the central decision-making forum for global economic affairs. By emphasizing multilateral organizations, alliance structures and international legitimacy, he got results.

That's all too much fact and critical thinking for your average Republican voter. They don't want to contemplate the reality that all those "We're #1!!" chants mask a country where we're actually ranked 37th in medical outcomes, 14th out of 34 OECD countries for reading skills, 17th for science and a below-average 25th for mathematics, and 28th in life expectancy. They cheer on someone whose personal income lands him in the top one-tenth of one percent, ignoring that almost half of Americans are at or near the poverty level.

I'm sure that even as I type this, Zakaria's comments are filling up with outraged notes from conservatives denouncing him as anti-American for even suggesting that Mitt might want to educate himself on the realities of the world. But frankly, I think it's high time the media start doing this for all Americans.

It's a whole new world out there.

February 05, 2012 08:00 PM