Health Minister Philpott Blows a Dog Whistle

Health Minister Jane Philpott blew an anti-choice dog whistle on Tuesday. Did you catch it?

While pro-choice activists marched through Charlottetown's streets to protest the lack of abortion services on P.E.I., the issue received some attention in the House of Commons Tuesday.

It came in the form of a question from the NDP MP from Nanaimo-Ladysmith, Sheila Malcolmson, who said the service must be available to all Canadian women.

...

[Health Minister Jane Philpott] pointed out that abortion is not the only service not available across the country.

"There are inequities in access to a number of health services across the country, including abortion," she said.

"There should be access to all medically-necessary services on the basis of need and not on the basis of ability to pay. I will continue to work with my colleagues to make sure access is available to all Canadians."

Before I get to the dog whistle, let me address Philpott's assertion that other services are not available across the country. Yes, indeed, this is true. Smaller centres do not have the expensive equipment or trained specialists to carry out a number of procedures, like organ transplants, complicated surgeries, etc.

But abortion, especially the more than 90% done in the first trimester, requires no expensive equipment or extensive training. In fact, if a hospital or clinic can treat a miscarriage, it can perform abortions.

In PEI, the government inexplicably turned down a proposal to provide abortion services on the island that would have actually saved money.

So, the argument that abortion is in the same category as a coronary by-pass is a non-starter. And Minister Philpott is being disingenuous at the very least to suggest it is.

Back to the dog whistle. It's the "medically necessary" (with the grammatically unnecessary hyphen) bit.

"Medically necessary" appears just once in the Canada Health Act, under "interpretations".

hospital services means any of the following services provided to in-patients or out-patients at a hospital, if the services are medically necessary for the purpose of maintaining health, preventing disease or diagnosing or treating an injury, illness or disability, namely....

But google "medically necessary abortion" and you'll find a slew of fetus fetishist screeds like this one: "Abortion is Never Medically Necessary to Save a Mother's Life, This Case Shows Why."

If you haven't had a whanging headache in a while and feel the need, read the mental gymnastics fetus freaks perform around ectopic pregnancy or the totally unnecessary death from septic miscarriage of Savita Halappanavar, in order to maintain the fantasy that abortion is never medically necessary.

"Pregnancy/childbirth is not a disease!" they SHRIEEEEEK. No, but it has significant risks and, in fact, a higher mortality rate than abortion.

The phrase "medically necessary" from the mouth of the Liberal Health Minister is simply music to fetus freak ears.

It is used by provinces like PEI and New Brunswick to restrict funding of abortion. And, it sounds like Minister Philpott is going to continue to give them this wiggle room.

This is worrying, to say the least. Especially as Philpott herself is a bit conflicted on the issue. From a 2014 article on vetting Liberal candidates, here what she had to say about it:

“That’s where we need to clarify the nuance on it,” she said. “I can support the policy but abortion is not a great thing.”

Oh lard, that "nuancy" thing again.

When so-called progressives go nuancy on abortion, it does NOT bode well.

Here, by the way, is the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada's position paper (pdf) on "medically required abortion."

Abortion: Once and For All

My entire blogging career -- if you can call something that doesn't pay a "career" -- has been conducted during the Dark Ages.

It started back at Birth Pangs, now sadly gone but snippets have been saved at the WayBack Machine (hours of fun!). Birth Pangs was focussed on reproductive rights just about exclusively.

We created DJ! in 2009. Our birthday was yesterday.

With DJ! we spread our focus, but I -- and deBeauxOs to a lesser extent -- stayed on the repro rights beat.

I've been thinking about what I want to do now that the Dark Ages are over and we don't have to remain constantly on guard for sneaky fuckery from Conservative misogynist nutbars.

I've decided to go on the offensive.

According to the fetus freaks, we now have the most "pro-abortion" PM EVAH! Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (ARCC) reckons the anti-choice brigade in the House of Commons has been halved, from 38% to 18% and ALL of them are in minority opposition.

The Liberals ran on some pretty big promises to women, specifically on abortion access.

I propose we not only hold the government to those promises but push for more.

Here is ARCC's list of demands.
• Enforce Canada Health Act against NB and PEI – i.e., arbitrate to resolve access/funding issues, and if the provinces still don’t comply, withhold federal transfer payments.
• To reduce abortion, fully fund most contraception through Medicare (the Pill, IUDs, Depo, emergency contraception, etc.).
• Increase number of hospitals that provide abortions outside major cities.
• Increase medical school training in abortion; provide continuing education in abortion techniques to existing doctors.
• Incentivize and support doctors to provide abortions in smaller communities.
• Prohibit so-called “conscientious objection” in reproductive healthcare, or at least require referrals and discipline doctors who disobey.
• Screen out anti-choice medical students before they enter the Family Planning program or Obstetrics/Gynecology specialty (inability to fulfill job requirements should make them ineligible).

To which I would add:
• Require comprehensive sex ed, including consent and gay and trans rights, in every publicly funded school.
• Regulate and license so-called Crisis Pregnancy Centres to ensure they are telling the truth and treating "clients" respectfully and responsibly. Shut them down if they don't.
• Create a media climate in which any reporter who goes to a fetus freak for a "balancing" comment on a proposal that should be judged on its own merits gets laughed out of the room.
• Crowdfund as necessary to bring suit against organizations and pundits that tell outrageous lies about sexual health and reproductive law.

Of course there are other important things on the feminist agenda that we will continue to work on, like violence against women, child care, equal pay, decriminalizing sex work, and so on.

But I think we have a historic opportunity to get this one done. Once and for all.

Canada is a pro-choice country. We have the chance to move our institutions, media, and culture to the point of no return. Where it will become simply unthinkable for anyone to question a woman's right to make her own decisions on her own life.

We can discredit, delegitimate, disrupt, and demoralize the anti-choicers so that only the most insane of them think it's worth their time to continue.

We can do this. And serve as a beacon of compassion and sanity to the world.

Is Our Pro-Lifers Losing?* Part I: The New Government

First, the happy dance. Press Progress reports on 12 "star" Cons who will no longer be with us. Its list contains several cabinet ministers who went down to defeat, as well as Numero Uno MP Fetus Freak, Stephen Woodworth.

Of other prominent CON dinosaurs: Vellacott and Benoit didn't run;
in addition to Woodworth, Lizon also lost; and Warawa and Trost are baaaack.

Also back are the "grandfathered-in" (appropriate term, yes?), but now supposedly muzzled Liberals for Life: Kevin Lamoureux, Lawrence MacAuley, John McKay, Francis Scarpallegia, and Borys Wrzesnewskyj.

Both the anti-choice Lib and NDP candidates I wrote about here lost too.

There are, of course, many unknowns among the new CONs. Macleans put out a nifty graphic you can sort by various criteria such as age, gender, region, and incumbent/rookie status. By my count, there are 33 CPC rookies.

Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada has issued new estimates of anti-choice MPs. They figure we're down to 18% of the new House compared to 36% of the previous gang.

So, pro-choice upshot of Election 2015: we can relax a little. Given that the Liberals got a majority and the newly explicit stand of the party is pro-choice, it's unlikely the government will introduce any sneaky new measures or even tolerate private member's bills or motions from its own back benches.

The NDP won't either, so we'll be keeping an eye on the usual CON suspects, while assessing the new goobers.

Trudeau promised many things on the campaign. We'll be watching for abortion funding to be returned to Canada's foreign aid programs and for the scoff-law provinces of Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick to be brought to heel.

More thoughts on his other promises to come.

* Title's origin will be revealed in Part II.

UPDATE (Oct. 22/15): LieShite identifies new fetus freak MPs for us.

Campaign 2015: New Twist on "No Country for Old White Men"

It's almost over, folks. The longest, and dare I say, dirtiest election campaign in Canadian history will soon be toast.

I'm not going to speculate on the outcome -- I'm barely hanging on to my sanity as it is -- but I thought I should provide a round-up of the campaigns from a prochoice perspective.

We all know that Harper is the worst prime minister ever but he's been particularly awful for women of all sorts, and of course even worse for Muslim, Indigenous, and other minority women. Here's Shit Harper Did's look at his record, titled: "Shush baby! Just look pretty. 17 ways the Conservative government has controlled you like a terrible boyfriend."

The 2011 campaign had its bozo eruptions on the misogynist front, but Harper managed to maintain his tight-lipped "my government will not reopen the abortion debate" mantra.

And the stenographers we laughingly call the mainstream media mostly reported just that.

This time, though, there has been a little more attention paid to the most basic of women's rights, abortion. (Call me old school feminist, but if we don't have control of our reproductive lives, all the pay equity in the world means squat.)

Press Progress published a totally predictable list of 86 CON anti-choice candidates.

All the usual suspects are there with a couple of wee twists.

Blogger Robert Jago has been digging into the online lives of CON candidates and found some interesting stuff. We reported on one of his finds, religious nutbar, antichoice homophobe Toyin Dada.

He also found Saskatchewan's Michael Kram in a literal cover-up of his extremist views, which the CBC ran with.

No MSM was interested in Toyin, though.

Another minor bozo eruption occurred when old comments by Manitoba candidate "Professor Popsicle", Gordon Geisbrecht, made the news. Supposedly a scientist, he equated the number of abortions to "a 9/11 every day."

None of this is surprising, really.

What's new this time, is the explicit statement by Justin Trudeau that the "Liberal" party would no longer tolerate antichoice voting by its old white farts. This caused a stir among the fetus freaks who responded with gore and hyperbole in its No 2 Trudeau mission.

What was more interesting to us was the double-plus good rating given by Campaign Lie to London-Fanshawe Liberal Khalil Ramal from his time as an Ontario MPP.

He apparently promised never to act on his misogynist and homophobic beliefs and that made it A-OK with the "Liberals."

Another poser, though, came from the chest-beatingly prochoice NDP who are also running a anti-abortion, anti-same-sex-marriage candidate, K.M. Shanthikumar.

He too said: "Hahahahaha. Only blowing dog whistles for my peeps" and that made it peachy-keen with the NDP brain trust.

Among the grassroots, in addition to the gore-fest of No 2 Trudeau, the underground gas line marker gang got on their bus for what they styled Life Tour.

These efforts resulted in a couple of local news stories in antediluvian Saskatchewan, here and here.

But overall, abortion has not played much of a role in this election.

WHICH IS AS IT SHOULD BE in a country with a long-established and proud record of upholding women's rights to bodily autonomy.

And while we're pleased that an organization with a bit more reach than the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada or bloggers like us found some time to publish a list of avowed misogynists, we're rather concerned that both PROCHOICE parties, the NDP and the Liberals, are allowing antichoice homophobes to run.

Both candidates, we note, are from visible minority groups and presumably are expected to have some extra clout in those communities.

So, the take-away: the prochoice parties are saying quietly: we don't really expect (targetted) minority groups to assimilate to the law of the land when it comes to women's rights.

Because, as everyfuckingbody on the planet knows -- women's rights are always negotiable.

Or, as we said before, Canada may be "no country for old(stock) white men," but it seems it's fine for New Stock Men.

No Country for Old White Men

Or, Point and Laugh.

A group of former Liberal backbenchers is blasting Justin Trudeau’s “discriminatory” decision to call on all party MPs to vote in favour of abortion rights in Canada.

Many (most?) of these pathetic old misogynists and homophobes are former members of Liberals for Life, aka the Gang that Prompted Jean Chrétien to Over-ride Riding Association Takeovers Nominations.

Chief among them, of course, is Tom Wappel, an execrable POS if there ever was one. (Really, check the Wiki entry.)

Here at DJ! we're no great fans of Justin Trudeau, but you gotta love this.

Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau, faced with an open letter from seven former Liberal MPs denouncing him for his stance on abortion, tweeted that the days "when old men get to decide what a woman does with her body are long gone."

True that those days are long gone, but those who can't accept it refuse to give up. So, the fight continues. Rallies across Canada for expanded and improved abortion access are planned for tomorrow, Saturday, September 20.

h/t for illustration.

Tea Bagger Misogynists Target Liberal Party

Look out, Liberals!

Not only are the fetus fetishists gunning for you in a testerical new petition whinging about Trudeau's discriminatinon against Xians, they have other plans as well.

They are going to reprise their attempted take-over of the party from 30 years ago.

In particular, they're targeting the new ridings.

Here is Campaign Lie's Jim Hughes:

“Nomination meetings for those 30 new ridings will be held by each party. If we have a large number of card-carrying pro-lifers in each of these 30 new ridings it consequently increases the chances of being able to elect 30 new, pro-life MPs. Our goal is to have a large number of party members in every riding of the country,” says the website.

At the moment, there are only four or five remaining anti-choice Liberals. Karygiannis is turning to municipal politics and maybe some of the others will take the hint and decline to run next time.

Nonetheless it spells trouble for the Liberals.

Mr. [Nik] Nanos [of Nanos Research] compared organizations like the Campaign Life Coalition to the Tea Party in the U.S. where they play a critical role in determining the outcome of nominating their party’s candidates but have a less important role in Congressional elections. 

“They don’t necessarily play a significant role in the outcome of elections but they can punch above their political weight in a nomination race where 50 members can tip the balance in favour of one particular candidate or another. That’s the risk. It’s unlikely that those voters would have an impact on the election writ large,” said Mr. Nanos.

“This is the variation of the Tea Party impact. The Tea Party cannot affect the outcome of the U.S. election, but they can have a significant influence on who is [elected] through the primary process. That’s kind of the potential political heft that those groups have basically on nominations if they decide to get engaged.”

So, a bunch of Tea Bagger misogynists try to take over nomination meetings or ridings themselves. Liberal Head Office squelches them.

Cue MASSIVE whine-fest.

Here's some info on the previous attempt, Liberals for Life.

Liberals for Life was a pro-life advocacy group that worked within the Liberal Party of Canada during the 1980s and early 1990s. Some of its members were also affiliated with the Campaign Life Coalition, and, as such, the group was often accused of entryism.

According to its members, Liberals for Life was created after the national victory of Brian Mulroney's Progressive Conservative Party in the 1984 federal election. The organization attracted little attention until the early 1990s, when it endorsed Tom Wappel in his bid for the party leadership, and gained control of several riding associations.

The Liberal Party's constitution was amended to allow the leader to appoint candidates in certain ridings in 1992. Jean Chrétien defended the change as necessary to prevent "single-issue groups" from taking over the Liberal Party. It was generally understood that Liberals for Life was the primary target of this remark.

The movement effectively dissolved in 1993 after the Liberal Party formed government.

Chantal Hébert remembers (video here at around 9:30 mark).

It ain't gonna be pretty.

What needs to happen is that we and sensible people like Sandy Garossino must advocate and insist that abortion is NOT a "conscience issue", NOT a "free speech issue."

Abortion rights are essential to women's basic human right to bodily autonomy.

Indeed, is anything a "conscience issue" these fraught days?





I gotta learn to PhotoShop. If anyone is inclined, it would be very cool to replace the tea bags with fetus dolls.

UPDATE: k'in in the comments points out that they tried it in the 2012 by-election in Toronto-Danforth. Didn't work then either.


MORE UPDATE: Trifon Haitas, wannabe Liberal for Life, is a candidate in municipal election in Richmond Hill.


WOOHOO! Look what Montreal Simon made for me!

I haz excellent friends.

Dear Opposition Leaders: COOPERATE

I'm at my wits' end. Stephen Harper's government is making me literally sick.

Our leaders and betters are crapping out. It's up to us. We've gotta do what we can.

So, here's my first petition ever.

Canadian Federal Opposition Leaders: Cooperate to resist Government's anti-democratic/anti-environmental laws

While the Conservatives have a majority, there is little to be done to stop their more determined anti-Canadian laws and regulations. But what Opposition Leaders can do is act together to show Canadians voters that someone cares about big issues like the environment and democracy. Opposition Leaders can reassure Canadians that Stephen Harper will NOT change Canada beyond recognition. That our old respected and hopeful Canada is within reach again.

Please sign this petition to convince Opposition Leaders that a majority of Canadians want them to act together for a better government for all the people.

Please Tweet, blog, post on Facebook, or other social media.

Let's see what we can do.

Fair - that is non-fraudulent - elections

Yesterday this retweet in Nancy LeBlanc's twitter stream caught my attention.

Like all politically aware and engaged Canadians, the blogging team at DJ! has been observing the CONtemptuous CPC maneuvers to pass their Unfair Elections Act, which the smarmy Poilièvre titled, with considerable malevolent double-speak from PMSHithead's PMO, the "Fair Reform Act".

So I turned to resolution 31 in the LPC convention program.  It's a long one, and advances this: 

... A truly independent, properly resourced Parliamentary Budget Officer;

A more effective Access-to-Information regime with stronger safeguards against political interference;

An impartial system to identify and eliminate the waste of tax-dollars on partisan advertising; Careful limitations on secret Committee proceedings, Omnibus Bills and Prorogation to avoid their misuse for the short-term partisan convenience of the government;

Adequate funding, investigative powers and enforcement authority to ensure Elections Canada can root out electoral fraud; ...

In short, the Liberals bringing this resolution forward hope that it acknowledges the harm and damage Harper's CPC government has wrought upon Parliamentary process, address it with specific actions to redress Con malfeasance, and inscribe it within their own party's mandate.

It's a tall order.  I don't know if media folks and bloggers are allowed to attend the discussions that accompany the presentation of resolutions, but I will certainly be reporting on how this one is received and whether it passes.

Note in the twit pic the presence of Fair Vote Canada, a non-partisan organization.  May this augur well for a unified and cohesive cooperative strategy by all opposition parties to rid the country of Harper's greedy grifters, fatuous felons, corporate criminals and sleazy kleptocrats.

Conventional.

A message confirming that I could attend the Liberal Party of Canada convention as an accredited blogger arrived without fanfare in my email box a few weeks ago.

This is the program.

First, I was surprised; DAMMIT JANET! has published some very rude posts, justifiably critical of specific LPC actions.

Then ambivalent - did I want to spend four days or so in the febrile, adrenaline-charged environment of a political convention?  I had attended one at the provincial level when I lived in Québec; from my perch as an observer, I noted what ideological hothouses they are.

Which is inexorably, the point of these conventions: to gather the troops, get every one armed - from the grunts to the generals - and in a state of readiness do to battle AGAINST the other parties.

So, I took myself to Montréal, registered, got my media pass, settled into the media room with my spiffy new MacBook all charged up; a wise move since the dozens of yellow extension with NO power bars are somewhat artisanale et broche à foin.  

With one eye on the closed circuit monitor which would eventually transit the feed from Liberal Live, I checked the convention program and saw that Chrystia Freeland and Larry Summers were to have a little chit-chat to *warm* up the crowd for Justin Trudeau welcome speech.

WTF?  Yes, that Larry Summers.

There's much that he has done that is not admirable.

More information about Naomi's reference, and Larry Summers' role in facilitating white collar crime.

As Treasury Secretary under Clinton, Summers played an important role in convincing Congress in 1999 to pass the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed key portions of the Glass-Steagall Act and allowed commercial banks to get into the mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations game. The measure also created an oversight disaster, with supervision of banking conglomerates split among a host of different government agencies -- agencies that often failed to let each other know what they were doing and what they were uncovering. 

At the signing of the bill, Summers hailed it as "a major step forward to the 21st Century." 

Summers also backed Phil Gramm's other financial time bomb, the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which allowed financial derivatives to be traded without any oversight or regulation. So it was on his watch that the credit-default swaps warhead that has blown up our economy was launched. 

Indeed, during a 1998 Senate hearing, Summers testified against the regulation of the derivatives market on the grounds that we could trust Wall Street. "The parties to these kinds of contract," he said, "are largely sophisticated financial institutions that would appear to be eminently capable of protecting themselves from fraud and counterparty insolvencies and most of which are already subject to basic safety and soundness regulation under existing banking and securities laws." 

It would be hard to make assumptions that turned out to be more wrong than Summers' were.

But aside from his association with catastrophically WRONG economic strategies, Summers uttered his Lib14 convention platitudes as though they were the fruit of some arcane lojong that he had cut up into children's bite-sized pieces.  All with the insufferable arrogant delivery that has branded his toxic imprint upon institutions.

So, I voted with my feet and left Le Palais des congrès.

As for the rest of the convention, I've set up some Real Life meetings with women who have chosen the Liberal Party as the route they want to explore to engage politically. One of them is Naomi.  Another is Nancy LeBlanc, also known as the blogger impolitical. I am curious about the path that has brought them to this convention, and what their own personal hope might be.

There are others, too.  Stay tuned.

Liberal Leadership Watch

In our role as pro-choice watchdogs of Canadian politics, we bring you two endorsements for Marc Garneau.

.@marcgarneau So Karygiannis campaignlifecoalition.com/index.php?p=Fe… and McKay campaignlifecoalition.com/index.php?p=Fe… supported #M312 - Why #antiChoice MPs on yr #lpcldr team?

— deBeauxOs(@deBeauxOs1) January 30, 2013

We're sure Marc is a nice guy and all, but what the heck do two anti-choice Liberals know about him that would lead to their support?

Just askin'.

How Fucked Is the Liberal Party?

This fucked.

Some federal Liberals fear single-issue pro-lifers are trying to hijack their weakened party.

Their fears have been stoked by the apparent re-emergence of a group calling itself Liberals for Life, which is promoting Trifon Haitas's bid to represent the party in a March 19 by-election in Toronto-Danforth.

The nomination meeting is tomorrow, so sane Libs don't have a lot of time to counter this move. If Haitas is well-organized and brings a lot of his Fetus Lobby friends, it could be a romp for the NDP and a huge black eye for the Elite Party of Canada.

Those fetus fetishists manage to screw everything up, don't they?

A Bold Move for the Liberals

Bold idea for federal Liberals.

Stand up for the decriminalization of marijuana. Or even better, regulation and taxation. . . . PROFIT!

In the process, knock the crap out of the Contempt Party's despicable Omnibus Crime Bill.

The War on Drugs is an utter failure. The FBI's recent recent report proves it. A brave Canadian judge says so right out loud.

More and more sane people and countries are turning to harm reduction, like Portugal's highly successful program.

Will the Libs do it?

I'd be gobsmacked if they did.

On the other hand, what the hell do they have to lose?

They might even win a little. Maple Matters comments at the Globe link:

this would force me to vote Liberal.
Will they do it?
Not a chance.

Stop It! All of You!

Can we progressives agree on one thing? Stephen Harper has evil plans for Canada. And under a majority, he'll finish the job he's already started so effectively.

Ergo, progressives should work to scupper the majority.

OK? We good with that?

So, for fuck's sake, knock it off with the sniping at each other!

I'm looking at you, Jack. Two of the three videos here take aim at Iggy. (The only other one is positive and points out, rightfully, that it is the NDP who can defeat ReformaTories in several ridings.)

I haven't seen any Liberal ads or videos swiping at the NDP, but I sure read a lot of crap from Liberals on blogs and tweets.

Remember, people, we're in a war here. And in war, 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'.

And what Jymn said.

Only I'm not giving up. I'm going to use my little voice to exhort people to behave rationally and vote strategically.

Canadian democracy first. Back to politics as usual later.

Progressive Push-Back

I started this blogpost soon after the Merkin election, but then got too busy for a long, linkful post.

While I was mightily depressed over the results, I was looking for silver linings. And I found a few.

Traditionally (somewhat) more progressive places like Illinois, New York, and California stayed Democratic.

In the Illinois governor's race, the Democrat beat the Teabagger after trailing badly for weeks in the polls. On election morning, did the good/sane people of Illinois wake up and say 'Holy crap! What were we thinking?'

In Colorado, where, despite its nutbars' obsession with the Humpty-Dumpty Initiative, the rest of the people are really quite sane. Not only did they thumpingly reject yet another attempt to give 'personhood' to fertilzed eggs, they crushed the ambition of another Teabagger, much credit going to the women.

Dick Wadhams, chairman of the Colorado Republican Party, says Ken Buck lost his Senate races because independent women voters flocked to Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) on Election Day.

“Ads attacking Buck on abortion and rape and all those issues were targeted to unaffiliated women and it worked, Buck became unacceptable and they voted for Bennet,” Wadhams said in an interview.

(This is the jerk who, as district attorney, referred to a woman's rape as 'buyer's remorse'.)

New York stayed Democratic too.

And in California, after one of the most vitriolic campaigns against an incumbent I've ever seen, the Dem won.

Yet in spite of her perennially weak approval ratings, a political climate that favored Republicans and what she called the "toughest and roughest campaign" of her lifetime, Boxer pulled out yet another victory, trouncing former Hewlett-Packard Chief Executive Carly Fiorina 52% to 42.6%, with some ballots still to be counted.

Carly Fucking Fiorina is anti-choice, natch.

In the governor's race, millionaire businesswoman Meg Whitman went down to defeat at the hands of Jerry 'Moonbeam' Brown, after reportedly spending $175 million of her own dough. This time, credit the Latinos after Whitman got 'tough on illegals'.

So, where the Dems had the wit to actively campaign against the nuttier notions of the Douchebaggers, the sane people woke up.

And I think -- and this guy too thinks -- that the extreme anti-abortion position acted as the clarion call.

While almost nothing went right for Democratic candidates this fall, one issue turned out to be a winner in some of the closest Senate races in the nation: abortion.

By branding Republican challengers as outside the cultural mainstream on the issue, Democrats managed to hold on to at least a slice of the political center by courting and winning over moderate women in a handful of key states.

The strategy ran counter to the one that enabled the party to broaden the political map in 2006 and 2008, when Democrats thrived by running candidates whose positions on abortion were closely attuned to the socially conservative areas where they sought office.

This year, however, Democrats adopted almost the opposite approach late in the 2010 campaign. As many of the anti-abortion Democrats elected over the last four years were going down in defeat, the party made abortion a central concern in a handful of battleground Senate races — and they ended up in the Democratic column as a result.

I think the boyos in the 'war rooms' underestimate the (sometimes) slumbering giant of women's rights as an issue.

Over Motherhood Steve's totally hypocritical Maternal Health Initiative, I was encouraging the fucking Liberals to use abortion rights as a wedge issue.

But, of course, being fucking Liberals, they fucked it up.

Maybe this US election will show our progressives how to do it right.

Call the shitheads out. Show them to be the extremists they are. Fight back!

Fucking Liberals

So there I was, having a quite pleasant day, happily anticipating the Liberal abortion gotcha -- backed by the NDP and the Bloc -- designed to force the TheoCons to show their true colours over family planning and women's rights.

Earlier, after an 'emergency' caucus meeting, the ReformaTories had come up with an absolutely brilliant counter to it -- the motion is 'anti-American'.

No. Really. They went with that. I was laffing my ass off all over the Intertoobz.

I was enjoying the witty comments at the various sites that reported the Cons' genius move.

Like this one from the Globe site:

I suppose its Anti semitic as well.

The Freaks were exercised too -- always fun to watch.

The CBC's Question of the Day was: Should access to safe abortion be part of a maternal health plan? The sane answer to that was doing very well indeed.

And, extra bonus! Kady was going to liveblog the latter part of the debate and the vote.

I mean, it was a no-brainer, done deal, all the Opposition would vote for it and the Cons would look like ijits. Poifect! Non-binding but at least Canada wouldn't look quite so stooooopid on the world stage.

Well. If you haven't heard yet, the MOTION WAS DEFEATED.

BY THE FUCKING HARPER LIBERALS, to wit, Dan McTeague, Paul Szabo, and John McKay, who voted with the TheoCons against family planning.

Yes, indeedy, in the 21st century, there are people who have the gall to call themselves Liberals and yet vote against their party in order to tell the wimmins -- yet again -- what we can do with our lady parts.

Two other Harper Liberals -- Albina Guarnieri and Gurbax Malhi -- abstained.

And here's Kady on the other Liberal no-shows:

Curiously absent from the Chamber, despite having been there just a few moments earlier: Derek Lee.

Other Liberal absences, some of whom, at least, were simply not in Ottawa and would almost certainly have supported the motion had they been around, from a list provided by the ever helpful PMO: Anita Neville, Gerard Kennedy, Andrew Kania, Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Alan Tonks, Marlene Jennings, Joe Volpe, Lawrence MacAuley, Stephane Dion, Mario Silva (paired with B. Calkins), Jim Karygiannis.

Just when I was developing a smidge of respect for the Liberals. . .

Just when I was not quite so despairing of Opposition cooperation . . .

Well. That shows me, I guess. Women's rights, here as in the Excited States, are always negotiable. At least for Liberals.

Here is Sister Pale's take complete with a reminder of where that other great Liberal leader, Stéphane Dion, was when another assault on women's rights was passing second reading. When the Kicking Abortion's Ass Bill was being voted on, Dion was absent, eating little pink hamburgers in celebration of -- are you ready for it? -- International Women's Day.

Ah well. As the Liberal boyos are saying today, 'no big diff'.

You look like absolute, complete idiots, Liberals. You couldn't organize a piss-up in a brewery. And the Cons are crapping their pants laughing at you.

You deserve every snide snigger and gloating guffaw.

Iggy Throws Down the Abortion Gauntlet

Regular readers may remember that Iggy and I have a troubled relationship, but if he keeps this up, I may change my tune.

Today he threw down the gauntlet and dared Harper to address abortion.

Here's the headline: 'Include abortion in maternal-health pledge, Michael Ignatieff tells PM'.

The press release issued after the presser included some gems from the ReformaTory anti-choice songbook:

This from Treasury Board President Stockwell Day in March 2000: “The thinking is, if you can cut a child to pieces or burn them alive with salt solution while they’re still in the womb, what’s wrong with knocking them around a little when they’re outside the womb?”

Ontario Tory MP Cheryl Gallant said in 2004 reference to an abortion clinic: “We saw that young American (in Iraq) have his head literally cut off in front of the cameras, but what’s happening down there is absolutely no different!”

Yeeheehee. So, inquiring minds do want to know -- is abortion included in your maternal-health pledge, Steve?

UPDATE: Gauntlet upgraded to grenade.

Michael Ignatieff has lobbed an abortion grenade into the midst of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's plans to become an international champion of women's and children's health.

Iggy and Me

OK. I admit it. Michael Ignatieff and I have a troubled relationship. (We are related by marriage, but I don't think he knows that.) I have tried to be nice and even supportive.

But today, after promising he never ever no-how no-way do that again, he did it again.

In a totally typical and predictable Liberal way, he and his handlers have opportunistically tried to hi-jack another grassroots group -- Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament.

After his open letter to CAPP evincing support and bum-kisses, his on-line town hall today, supposedly to address CAPPers' issues, was a TOTAL FUCKING JOKE.

I give you the bits that have anything REMOTELY to do with CAPP's issues.

[Comment From Wendy Perry Wendy Perry : ]
Mr. Ignatieff,will you be attending one of the CAPP rallies?
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:00 Wendy Perry
3:00

Michael Ignatieff:
Thank you Wendy for your question. Yes, I will talk at the Ottawa rally on Saturday.
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:00 Michael Ignatieff
3:00


[Comment From Ian Perkins Ian Perkins : ]
Mr. Igantieff can you explain why Canadians are upset with the prorougation of Parliament?
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:00 Ian Perkins
3:01

Michael Ignatieff:
Ian, Canadians want their MPs back at work and they want their Prime Minister to be accountable to Parliament.
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:01 Michael Ignatieff
3:01


[Comment From Jeff Jedras Jeff Jedras : ]
I'd like to ask about democratic reform. Many Canadians feel the current First Past the Post system doesn't fairly value or reflect their votes. Do you believe we should consider a new voting system, and what do you think that system should look like?
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:01 Jeff Jedras
3:02

Michael Ignatieff:
Im prepared to look at reform of our voting system provided that reform doesnt fragment the country and weaken the ability of national parties to hold the country together.
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:02 Michael Ignatieff
3:03

Michael Ignatieff:
Whats important is getting more Canadians to turn out at elections. Our participation rate is now below 60 percent. We need to get more people involved.

Mario Lagüe (moderator):
3:02 [Brad Bossack] -
Greetings, as a member of CAPP (Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament), I wish[...] to speak of changing the currant democratic structure to providing and endorsing more participation within the process decision making. As you have seen, there are many Canadians who are feeling very disenfranchised, and are rallying to be heard in a new way. What are your feelings and idea's on democratic renewal in this country?
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:09 Mario Lagüe (moderator)
3:10

Michael Ignatieff:
Politicians need to get out on the road and answer tough questions face to face with voters. there:s a hunger for direct participation and involvement. Thats what I discovered on my tour of colleges and universitiesand I want to keep on going with town halls in every Canadian community I can get to.

Comment From Alan Goodhall Alan Goodhall : ]
Thank you for this forum Mr. Ignatieff. Yesterday Mr. Layton stated to the media that the NDP would propose legislation to limit the power of a prime minister to prorogue the house. Do you feel legislation is required or is this more a question of ethics of the party in power and best left to the public to decide through the ballot box?
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:39 Alan Goodhall
3:40

Michael Ignatieff:
Provided a Prime Minister respects Parliament and its authority, legislation isnt needed. Mr. Harper used prorogation to duck a confidence vote and to evade tough questions in the House. That;s wrong. Ive already pledged not to use prorogation that way. The problem is not the power itself, so much as its abuse.
Mr. Harper has abused his power.

Comment From Glynn Pearson Glynn Pearson : ]
I am very concerned about your response about prorogation. Harper was elected on promises of accountability and transparency after a debacle with the Liberals of the day (including a long prorogation). I don't know you and I don't want you to feel disparaged but it has been demonstrated that we cannot trust the person in power to act with the public's best interests in mind. Would a new Liberal government consider committing to legislation to ensure the responsible use of prorogation?
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:55 Glynn Pearson
3:57

Michael Ignatieff:
As a great writer once said, rules are for people with no character. Meaning, that you need to legislate when you cant trust the people who hold power. My view is that we dont need to legislate limits on prorogation. We just need to return to the basic understanding that used to limit prerogative power, namely that you dont use it to duck tough questions in parliament and you dont use it to duck a confidence vote. harper used it this way and it was wrong, and Canadians are telling him dont ever do that again.

Faff, faff, and more faff. (Go to the link for some really gagsome slo-pitches about his favourite part of the job, for example.)

Insulting, the whole damn exercise. We, the grassrooty CAPPers, got all moisty-panty, thinking, 'Wow, party leader takes note of discontent, wants to address us.'

Ha. Iggy and his handlers bethought themselves: 'Hoho, a ready-made huge audience. We'll deign to talk to them -- showing off our super-duper webby skills -- and they'll all join Iggy's Facebook page.'

In short, it was a better handled version of the attempted co-option of the feminist 'Left Wing Fringe' movement.

I sent in a question, which, needless to say, did not make the cut. It was:
Mr. Ignatieff [moi being polite], would you work with the NDP and the Bloc to form a coalition that would represent the majority of Canadians and work cooperatively on the pressing problems of the day?

So. Sorta-cousin-in-law Iggy, FUCK YOU.

Ignatieff Responds to CAPP

An open letter to the members of Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament. (I put that [you] in the second para.)

To the members of CAPP,

This Saturday, January 23, thousands of Canadians will attend anti-prorogation rallies organized by the Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament (CAPP) Facebook group. They won’t be going as Liberals or New Democrats, as Bloc Québécois, Conservatives or Greens. They’ll be going as Canadian citizens, united in their opposition to Stephen Harper’s shut down of Parliament. That will happen because one of you had the courage to stand up in protest – and then another, and another, and another.

I want [you] to know how heartened I am by the mere existence of this group – the largest spontaneous online political movement we’ve seen yet in this new digital age of politics in Canada. I am heartened because the vitality of our democracy depends on the participation of its citizens, regardless of their political stripes. And your efforts and your numbers – over 200,000 of you so far – proves that Canadians truly are standing guard over our democratic traditions and institutions.

Some dismiss your efforts as nothing more than a click of a button. They are wrong. I know that your organizers have been volunteering their own time for several weeks to prepare Saturday’s rallies. And I know that thousands of you will be taking time off school and work, or away from your families to attend them. Anyone who pretends that those sacrifices don’t count is highly mistaken.

When this group first formed, your rallying cry was “Get back to work.” Well, on January 25, the day Parliament was set to resume, my entire caucus will be back on Parliament Hill for several weeks of roundtables and working sessions on job creation, veterans affairs, the environment, health – issues you care about. Issues that can’t wait.

And this Thursday, January 21, from 3 - 4pm EST, I will be holding an online town hall on my Facebook page. It’s part of a national conversation about this country’s future that includes all Canadians and recognizes the importance of open and honest debate. I encourage all members of CAPP to join us on http://www.facebook.com/michaelignatieff. I will be happy to answer any questions you might have.

When Stephen Harper shut down Parliament on December 30, he was counting on Canadians’ reacting with cynicism and indifference. You showed him that’s not who we are. You showed him that Canadians believe in their institutions and have clear, common sense expectations of their politicians: Get to work, work together and get the job done. It’s what’s expected of every Canadian all day long, and politicians should not live by a different set of rules.

I hope your important work these past few weeks means Stephen Harper gets that message loud and clear this Saturday.

Sincerely,
Michael Ignatieff

Be there or be square. (All this talk of protest has knocked my slang back about 40 years.)

My question: Will you work towards a coalition?

My real question: Do you think you can grow a pair before Parliament comes back to work?

Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament membership now over 206,500.

Teabagger WIN!

The US Democrats are as fucked up as our Liberals.

I really really really don't understand why the The Good Gals/Guys® lose to the Liars/Homophobes/Misogynists/Racists/Fear-Mongers etc.etc.

Can anyone enlighten me?

CAPP for Coalition?

I floated this idea on the Facebook wall, but things are still moving there at lightning speed and no one responded.

So far, no opposition leader has taken notice of the Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament (CAPP) movement.

I proposed that whichever of Layton or Ignatieff publicly announces that he and his party fully supports CAPP, that he's ready to work with the other party leader (and the Bloc) to form a coalition, and that he'll organize a non-confidence vote at the earliest opportunity gets ALL of CAPP's support.

And that all -- at the moment over 140,000 -- CAPPers go out and work their butts off for that party and the coalition.

Personally, while I'd have to hold my nose to vote or work for Iggy and many Liberals, I'd do it to get the Refomathugs out of MY government.

Realistically, it can't be May. And logistically, it can't be Duceppe.

What think?