I'm getting nervous. Polls are showing that 49% of Californians support passing Proposition 4, which would require women under the age of 18 to obtain parental consent before getting an abortion. Only 41% oppose it. This is so unbelievably bad. Do you know how many girls would be discouraged to get a legal and safe abortion because they're too terrified to tell their parents? The people who support this appalling proposition don't understand that parents are not always forgiving - many girls run the risk of getting kicked out of their homes after telling their parents they're pregnant. What about girls who are abused by their parents?

Actually, no, the ignorant supporters of Proposition 8 covered that. If a girl tells her doctor she cannot get parental consent because they abuse her, the doctor is legally obligated to tell the police. And thus we have more incentive for a girl to be too terrified to go through the humiliation of getting parental consent... and out come the wire hangers.

Visit NoOnProp4.org to help oppose putting limitations on a woman's reproductive choices. This cannot pass.

Check out this opinion piece on Salon.com about last night's debate. I am so happy that Joan Walsh commented on the fact that McCain acted like a disgruntled child:

I wish I'd organized a drinking game around the number of times John McCain said, "Sen. Obama doesn't understand," or found some other way to sneer at Obama as naive and inexperienced. For the most part he refused to even look at Barack Obama over 90 minutes. What an ass. It was hackneyed and condescending and, to me, repellent.

Unfortunately, she also makes the point that you could either see McCain as a major jerk for his behavior and Obama as admirable for not stooping to McCain's level, or you could see it completely the opposite.

I thought he looked gracious and presidential; others may think he looked insufficiently tough. I think Obama more than held his own in this first debate, but if you're looking for a grumpy, sarcastic put-down artist as president, your choice is quite clear.

Come on, America, it really isn't that difficult.

What did everyone think about the first debate last night? I was very nervous, because these debates can make or break candidates. Overall, I thought each candidate held his own very well. They were both able to make strong arguments without stumbling, and I think Obama proved that he can stay strong in his principles and can undoubtedly fight against the "maverick." Speaking of the devil, I got increasingly angry over the course of the debate with how unbelievably rude and inconsiderate John McCain was. Up until then, I had some hope that despite his bad policies, he's a nice guy - but after last night's debate, forget about it. Almost every time that Obama would speak, particularly when he would criticize McCain's war knowledge or talk about something that he strongly disagrees with, I kept seeing McCain smirking and laughing. It was like he wasn't taking Obama's points seriously. Just look at this clip:





Additionally, McCain told Obama four times that he "doesn't understand." It was "Senator Obama doesn't understand this" and "Senator Obama doesn't seem to understand that." At one point, he told Obama that he didn't know the difference between a strategy and a tactic. He also called Obama naive. It was 90 minutes of McCain talking down to him. I don't believe I've ever disliked McCain more.

As far as who "won" the debate, the general consensus is that there is no clear winner on this one. Some polls show people think Obama won, and others show people think McCain won, but each is by a small margin. Many are undecided, or think it was a tie. But it seems that people favor Obama when it comes to the economy, but McCain when it comes to foreign policy. I don't know what kind of impact this debate will have, and we won't really be able to tell until tomorrow's poll results come out. Crossing my fingers that some people converted to Obama.

Oh, and you know what's funny? Remember a little while ago when a woman called in on a show Obama was on and criticized him for not wearing a flag pin? Well, guess who was wearing a flag pin during this debate. And guess who wasn't (ahem, McCain).

You can go to PolitiFact.com to find out which statements from last night had truth, and which were complete BS. As usual, McCain surpasses Obama on the BS scale.

People are so fucking ignorant sometimes. This video from CNN tells the story of a teenage boy who is into the goth look, and likes to wear a little eyeliner and black lipstick. When he wore it to school, administrators told him to take it off because it was distracting. They claim that they would do the same thing to a girl, but I highly doubt someone goes up to every girl wearing eyeliner and lipstick and tells her to remove it.

She certainly did not do very well. Maybe this was why the McCain campaign was keeping her away from the press?





Watch CBS Videos Online

Which candidate does a person vote for when they are avidly pro-choice, but conservative in every other respect? Recently, Republicans for Choice (yes, they do exist) issued a commentary on their opinions of Sarah Palin. I respect the fact that they will not officially endorse Palin because of her anti-choice views, but I was highly irritated by the other claims made in their commentary. First of all, they start off with this:

"But let me make clear this is not an endorsement of Palin as a candidate—but a vote of support for what she represents for all women."

What exactly does she represent for all women? Not allowing them control over their bodies? Charging rape victims $1,200 for their rape kits? Infamously ignoring an epidemic of sex crimes in her state while Governor?

Then, they play the sexism card with these statements: "Obama's charges against her as inexperienced are just silly at best and misogynist at worst....we are incensed by the petty and misogyny of the small-minded statement the Obama campaign released totally dissing her background!"

I am so overwhelmingly sick of people crying "sexism" and "misogyny" when Democrats merely question Palin's experience. That is NOT being sexist! That's being an informed voter! Why is it okay for Republicans to buy a Sarah Palin doll that's dressed in a school girl outfit and wear "Hottest VP Ever" pins at the convention, but God forbid Democrats question her qualifications?! I can't use enough exclamation points to express how angry this makes me.

Furthermore: "The Democrats stood by while the media and others, including extreme elements in our own party, trashed Hillary Clinton and did not speak up to defend her."

I'm not sure what they're basing that statement on, but this Democrat most definitely didn't "stand by" while the media trashed Clinton. But the Republicans? Well they certainly did.

And, of course, it wouldn't be a party unless someone implied that Palin is a feminist: "Did we mention she is a feminist for life?"

I refuse, refuse, REFUSE to label a woman who opposes choice and let rape victims pay for their own fucking rape kits a feminist. No way, no how.

This is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. A middle school in Virginia has decided to follow the sexist ideology of author Leonard Sax, who wrote the book "Why Gender Matters," and teach boys and girls separately and differently. His philosophy? We are trying too hard to "feminize" boys and "masculinize" girls, and we should just accept the fact that males and females have different brains. It should be noted that very little solid scientific evidence exists to support this claim - and even if some evidence does exist, it is liable to change within the next few years, as it has been for the past several decades. For years, scientists have been falsely identifying certain characteristics of "male" and "female" brains, and attributing the more dominant and positive characteristics to men. I don't think this is any different.

According to a report done by CNN, "Boys don't have to sit in desks, reviews have become relay races" and "Girls work more in groups, in less stressful non-competitive settings." In the video, you can see young boys running around outside to learn vocabulary words, while the girls sit inside, doing math problems. Which setting would I have liked better as a 12 year-old? My money is on the fun outdoor activities. What child wouldn't better like to get out of the classroom and run around, regardless of their gender? But according to Sax, boys "suffer" in a traditional classroom setting.

This is completely outrageous. You cannot generalize an entire sex - there are undoubtedly some boys who do not enjoy sports and would rather work in a classroom setting, and there are inarguably some girls who would much rather run around outdoors than sit in a desk all day. I absolutely refuse to believe that all girls work better sitting inside and all boys work better being active outside. Just observe what CNN says the Department of Education's take is on this new teaching style:

"The Department of Education says this can provide some benefits to some students under certain circumstances."

Some benefits! Some students! Certain circumstances! Oh GEE, sounds to me like all boys and all girls aren't exactly the same! I appreciate the insight into our education system, and the suggestion of new and innovative teaching styles, but this guy is just going about it all wrong. There are indeed many students who despise classroom settings and have trouble paying attention while sitting in desks - but they are both male and female! Let's put our rigid gender norms aside for a moment and consider keeping classes integrated, but making them smaller. One girl who participated in the experiment claimed, "I liked it more because I could concentrate." I don't believe that was because all boys were removed, I think it was because she was in a smaller group of children, so she was better able to concentrate and was given more attention by the teacher. Additionally, instead of keeping kids in the classroom all day, teachers could try a combination of both - a few hours in the classroom, and then some time outside participating in relay races to learn vocabulary. Or, the relay races could be optional, allowing those who don't wish to participate to stay inside and continue working. Everyone wins, and we don't impose nasty and misguided sexist beliefs on young and impressionable children. We don't teach them that boys and girls are inherently different, thereby feeding into our exclusive Barbie-vs-GI Joe culture, and we don't encourage the fact that males are meant to be active and females are meant to be calm and "non-competitive."

I can't believe that this school would even consider such a terrible teaching style. I just hope they haven't done irrevocable damage on these poor kids.




(Thanks to Jamie for the link!)

I was watching The Simpsons the other day, episode 19 of season 19 ("Mona Leaves-a"), and there was a great part that reminded me a lot of my rant about the sexism in Halloween costumes. The entire family went on a mall trip, and ended up in a Build-a-Bear-like store, where Lisa was making her own stuffed dolphin. She walked up to a woman working there to put clothes on her toy:

Employee: What outfit do you want for your doll?
Lisa: Doctor!
Employee: Okay, nurse it is.
Lisa: Professor!
Employee: Kindergarten teacher.
Lisa: Chef!
Employee: Lunchlady.
Lisa: CEO!
Employee: Secretary to a CEO.
Lisa: You know, it's a boy dolphin.
Employee: Ohhh, here you go... doctor.
Lisa: (to her dolphin) Heh heh heh, we fooled her... Betsy.

I laughed really hard, and once again commended The Simpsons for being one of the smartest shows on television. Here's the entire episode if you want to check it out - this specific scene happens around 4:20.

Cell phone cameras are a wonderful invention. Especially when they help to land a scumbag harasser into police custody. While walking up the stairs at the Dyckman Street station, a 28 year-old woman noticed a man following her and taking pictures up her skirt with his cell phone. Suddenly, she decided "since he is taking pictures of me, I am going to take pictures of him." She followed the jerk onto a train, where she held up her cell phone camera, and told him: "smile, because I am going to the police."

She sent the picture to the police, and on Tuesday, an officer recognized the degenerate, 36 year-old Aaron Olivieri, and arrested him. He was charged with unlawful surveillance and attempted sexual abuse and harassment. Oh, sweet justice.

So ladies, have those camera phones ready. We can learn a lot from the wonderful Holla Back NYC blog, because not only is snapping a picture of a disgusting pig gratifying, but it can also lead to one less harasser on the street.

For those of you who are interested, there's a new and innovative way to say a big "fuck you" to Sarah Palin, and to help a good cause. A Feministing reader made a post, asking everyone to consider making a donation to Planned Parenthood in Sarah Palin's name. The best part? Sarah Palin will be sent a card, making her aware of the donation made in her honor. Heh.

If you can, go to Planned Parenthood's website, fill out the donation form, and be sure to put her name in under "I would like to make this gift in honor of." A good address to send acknowledgments to is the McCain campaign headquarters:

McCain for President

1235 South Clark Street

1st Floor

Arlington, VA 22202

Some people oppose doing this, thinking it might take money away from the Obama campaign. However, I don't find these two to be connected, just as long as you avoid donating money to Planned Parenthood that you would have otherwise donated to the Obama campaign. But even so, Planned Parenthood is a great cause that can always use more funds. And honestly, I think this is a great way to respectfully protest Sarah Palin's anti-choice stances.

Now, I'll be the first one to proudly state that I can't stand the song "I Kissed a Girl" by Katy Perry. But I was quite angry to learn that when it's played on the radio in Indonesia and Malaysia, the word "girl" is cut out, making the song essentially "I kissed a ___ and I liked it." I wonder if they bleep out "she" and "her" as well, just to make sure that there are absolutely no same-sex references in the song, because God forbid it helps promote perverted homosexuality. I'm thinking that whoever was responsible for such censoring should get together and have coffee with the person who made this sign:

Are men better politicians than women? My guess is that the average, rational, non-sexist person would say, "No freaking way! Both genders are more than capable to be politicians." Well, too bad that such a substantial amount of people disagree.

In a recent survey, when presented with the statement, "Most men are better suited emotionally to politics than most women," 33% agreed.

What does that even mean? "Better suited emotionally"? Do they think that women are just going to break down crying when presented with a difficult task? Are they afraid we're going to get our menstrual blood all over the immaculate White House?

When presented with: "A preschool child suffers if his or her mother works," 41% agreed.

Because clearly, a child could never be taken care of by his/her father. And obviously, a woman can't juggle both work and family.

And on the statement, "It's God's will that women care for children," 31% agreed.

If that were true, I wonder why God created woman as a being who is strong, determined, and physically and emotionally capable of working hard, rather than as a brainless baby-maker with no goals and aspirations.

I don't know how much these views will affect the polls, because you have to keep in mind that most of the people who voted "yes" on these statements are very religious, namely Evangelicals, and their most important issue is abortion. They're going to vote for the party who believes that abortion is a crime, even if it means leaving the country in the hands of an emotionally unstable woman who should be home taking care of her children.

I'm sorry, I just need to take a moment to send an enormous hug to Brad Pitt, who donated $100,000 to fight a November ballot initiative in California that would overturn the legalization of same-sex marriage. Here's his take on the situation:

"Because no one has the right to deny another their life, even though they disagree with it, because everyone has the right to live the life they so desire if it doesn't harm another and because discrimination has no place in America, my vote will be for equality and against Proposition 8."

I love when celebrities use their power for good. Click here to visit NO ON 8, and send your own contribution, although I promise it doesn't have to be $100,000.

I don't know why I continue to subject myself to the ignorant and painful "Greg-alogues" on Fox News. Greg Gutfeld will never be anything more than a complete and utter waste of life.

Watch him claim that we hate Sarah Palin because she's "normal." Well, firstly... I don't recall seeing any left-wing blogger or "elite" journalist using the word "hate." Secondly, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say we dislike Sarah Palin because of her policies. Wow, what a concept! We're actually basing our opinions of candidates on the issues! Since when do political issues play any part in this election?

But my favorite part of this video is the wonderfully moronic and sexist rant Greg's lapdog, Bill something-or-other, goes off on towards the end. Enjoy. Try your best to restrain yourself from punching your computer screen.

Ugh.

I nearly peed myself watching this clip from The Colbert Report, where he does his famous segment, The Word. Check it out, and I bet you will particularly enjoy the last half, where he gets into all the blatant sexism us Democrats are apparently hurling at Sarah Palin.

Colbert: It IS sexist, and we should know... we've been feminists for over two weeks now!
Tagline: Longer than Palin.

I really like this advertisement for the Obama campaign. It addresses the fact that women are making less than men, and states Obama's support for laws that enforce equal pay, while McCain simply thinks women need more "education and training." Right. Hopefully this will open the eyes of some female (and male) voters who are considering voting for McCain without knowing the outrageous things he's done.

Are we clear?

I only wish the anti-choicers in Colorado would see it that way. Amendment 48 is officially on the ballot for November, which will define a person "to include any human being from the moment of fertilization." In other words, fetuses will be given "inalienable rights."

This is bad. If passed, this is a major step towards overturning Roe v. Wade, not to mention the true inhumanity of the amendment itself. How can a woman who has been alive for 20, 30, 40 years not be given control over a cluster of cells growing inside of her? I believe that when a woman is making reproductive decisions, she should take the potential child into consideration, but to give something smaller than my fingertip "inalienable rights" is preposterous.

You can visit Pro-Choice Colorado's website to learn more about the amendment, and to help oppose it. Pro-choicers are working hard to make sure our reproductive rights are protected, but they could use all the help they can get.

If you need more incentive, check out this scary video put together by Colorado's anti-choice organization, deceptively titled "Colorado for Equal Rights."

About a year ago, the College Republicans on my campus proved themselves to be both tasteless and sexist. Unfortunately, I never got the opportunity to see what they did... but I had heard from several people that they took it upon themselves to post flyers all around campus with images of "unattractive" Democrat women, along with pictures of "attractive" Republican women, with the phrase, "This is why men prefer Republican women." The other day, I was browsing the Facebook group of the College Republicans and found that someone had posted part of said flyer:




Lovely, ain't it? But you'll be happy to know that some members of the Feminist Majority Leadership Alliance wouldn't have it. To protest this disgusting tactic, they made masks out of these faces, put them on, and attended the next College Republicans meeting, where they stood silently, holding signs. It prompted a friendly debate, and the members re-thought their charming flyers. I doubt they'll be pulling a similar stunt anytime soon - and if they do, I'll be on their asses so fast they won't know what hit 'em.

If anyone can please explain to me exactly what the hell McCain adviser Carly Fiorina is talking about in this interview, I would really appreciate it. Because I have been racking my brain, and I can't understand why she's calling Tina Fey's representation of Sarah Palin "sexist." It really pisses me off that Republicans only play the gender card when it's convenient for them.

In an election ridden with ignorant and clueless people incorrectly labeling Sarah Palin as a feminist and a maverick, this is really refreshing. Over 1,000 women in Alaska banded together to partake in the largest protest the state has ever seen. They were all fed up with Sarah Palin, and they wanted the world to know it. They stood together, holding signs with phrases such as: "Sarah Palin: Undoing 150 Years of American Feminism" and "Palin Does Not Speak for Us." They united to serve a common goal: keeping our country out of the hands of unqualified people who will do more harm than good.

Today in my Feminism in the U.S. class, we started talking about how feminism doesn't seem to be what it used to be, and how "lame" we seem in comparison to the women of the past who chained themselves to the gates of the White House to gain the right to vote. But I guess there is hope for us after all.

SO. GOOD.

Out of curiosity, I decided to search the word "bitch" on UrbanDictionary.com to see what comes up. I'm surprised my laptop didn't instantly explode out of inability to contain all the ignorance that slapped me in the face. For those of you who aren't familiar with the site, it's purpose is basically for people to submit their own definitions for slang words. My favorites:






And the best one...


Gotta love the internet and how it gives any moron with a computer the ability to broadcast whatever thoughts enter their tiny brains.

Well, Johnny Mac's at it again. His crime this time? Telling blatant lies about the Obama campaign. Seriously, this is going beyond just "typical politics" - his offenses are even drawing criticisms from some Republicans. This New York Times article will leave you good and angry as it outlines the twisted claims McCain has been making. My favorite one has to be the new advertisement the "maverick" put out that claimed Obama is in favor of teaching sex education to kindergarteners. The truth? Obama doesn't want to teach five year-olds how to put a condom on... he only wants to teach them the differences between "good touch" and "bad touch," you know, how to identify unwanted sexual advances.





According to the New York Times:

Indeed, in recent days, Mr. McCain has been increasingly called out by news organizations, editorial boards and independent analysts like FactCheck.org. The group, which does not judge whether one candidate is more misleading than another, has cried foul on Mr. McCain more than twice as often since the start of the political conventions as it has on Mr. Obama.

Looks like the "Straight Talk Express" just jumped the track and landed in a pit of lies.

Okay, okay, I know Matt Damon probably isn't the most credible source for politics, but I actually found his criticism of Sarah Palin to be smart, funny, and a good summation of how I feel about this election.

I actually found this pretty heartwarming. I appreciate the fact that both candidates can put politics aside to remember an American tragedy.

I think I might cry. Cry from either pure frustration or blatant sadness that Republicans and some Independents are so blindly seeing Sarah Palin as a maverick feminist who will single-handedly save our country. This hurts:



Supporters are sporting signs and t-shirts with this image of Sarah Palin's face photoshopped onto Rosie the Riveter's body, a classic feminist icon. For me, this is like the ultimate punch in the stomach. Ignorant journalists and blind followers are so moronically associating Palin with feminism, when Palin stands for everything that feminism isn't. I'm not any sort of elitist feminist who believes feminism is some sort of exclusive club whose members must adhere to strict rules, but I can confidently draw the line at Sarah Palin. It is an insult to align feminism with a woman who doesn't believe we should have complete control over our bodies and reproductive choices, a woman who doesn't support the Equal Rights Amendment, a woman who has such a narrow view of marriage and family structure. It is wonderful that women have advanced so far in politics, but Sarah Palin does not represent me. The only thing we have in common is a chromosome.

Still, people are worshiping her. Most of her followers are people who probably don't know the first thing about feminism, and most likely didn't give Hillary Clinton the time of day. But that can of course be attributed to the fact that Hillary wore pants and Sarah Palin wears skirts. Seriously. Just ask Donny Deutsch of CNBC, who said: "There is the new creation that the feminist woman has not figured out in 40 years of the feminist ideal that men can take in a woman in power and women can celebrate a woman in power. Hillary Clinton didn't figure it out. She didn't put a skirt on!" Republicans seem to only be okay with "feminism" when it's represented by a woman who passes their standards of femininity - i.e. wearing a skirt. Feminism is all well and good, just as long as we stay girly and only idolize women who wear lipstick and join the PTA. If Sarah Palin traded in her skirt for pants, she would be crucified by the media.

And so I sit by in awe and fear as this new warped tamed-down version of "feminism" is created in the Republican eye. I sincerely hope this ridiculous hype dies down, and we can get back to real politics.

Yep, someone invented a Sarah Palin action figure. I wish I were kidding.



She comes with three outfits, one of which is a schoolgirl uniform. Gotta love the sexism.

I wish I cared more about the Video Music Awards, because apparently this year's VMAs are sparking debates over "purity rings" and vows of abstinence. The members of a popular band, the Jonas Brothers (no, I don't listen to them...) all sport purity rings, and a comic at the VMAs took it upon himself to make the abstinent Jonas Brothers part of his stand-up material.

I didn't see the comedian, so I don't know how tasteless the jokes were, but I really don't think it's okay to make fun of someone's personal sexual choices on national television. Honestly, I don't have a problem with purity rings, as long as they don't replace sex education. Simply because a teenager is abstinent does not mean that s/he shouldn't learn about safe sex practices. Think of it as stocking canned food in your basement in case the apocalypse arrives - it probably isn't going to happen anytime soon, but it's good to be prepared.

Despite the comedian being out of line, I was very displeased with American Idol winner Jordin Sparks' response, who also wears a purity ring. She held up her hand, and said, "I just have one thing to say about promise rings. It's not bad to wear a promise ring, because not everybody — guy or girl — wants to be a slut."

So if I don't wear a promise ring and vow to abstain from sex until marriage I'm a slut?

Not an okay thing to say. Both parties were wrong in this debate. I think I'll just sit alone on the sidelines, waving my "it's okay to wear a ring and still know how to put on a condom" flag.

1. The Real McCain 2: why John McCain should fear YouTube.

2. What is this 'Iraq war' charge on my bill? Under McCain, we can expect less jobs, and more wars.

3. John McCain vs. John McCain: the Double Talk Express!

4. McCain's Spiritual Guide: the same man who thought God sent Hurricane Katrina to punish people for their "sins."

5. Why Won't McCain Sign the GI Bill? The hypocrisy of his campaign.


(Courtesy of TheRealMcCain.com)

Tonight, 8PM (EST) on MSNBC, the Countdown with (my hero) Keith Olbermann will feature his interview with Barack Obama. Don't miss it!

During Sarah Palin's speech at the Republican National Convention, I sat with my mouth hanging open and my fists clenched while Palin uttered these tasteless words:

"I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a community organizer, except that you have actual responsibilities."

She was blatantly attacking Barack Obama's experience as a community organizer. The crowd was well aware of her intentions, as they immediately erupted into a chorus of cheers for Palin, and boos for Obama.



This wasn't the first time a Republican attacked Obama's years as a community organizer. During Rudy Giuliani's speech, he joked: "He worked as a community organizer... what?!"



The overall tone of the Republicans is that being a community organizer is a shameful thing, that community organizers don't do important work, and that Obama's experience as a community organizer is not relevant to his campaign for presidency.

Today, bloggers are banding together to post about the childish comments of the Republicans, and to say that being a community organizer is NOT bad thing. Despite what his opponents say, Barack Obama did do important work during his three years as a community organizer. Freshly graduated from Columbia University, 24 year-old Obama took a job working for Chicago's far South Side at a whopping $13,000 a year.

His responsibilities? According to Obama, he "worked with churches, who were dealing with steel plants that had closed in their neighborhoods, to set up job training programs for the unemployed and after-school programs for youth, and to try to deal with asbestos in homes with poor people -- community service work -- which John McCain has been talking about, putting country first and extolling the virtues of national service."

Doesn't sound bad to me.

Community organizers work as catalysts to jump-start progress in communities that need it the most. They bridge gaps between people, solve conflicts, and form relationships. According to TheNation.com:

Interviews with people who worked with him during that time elicited few complaints--virtually everyone described him in glowing terms, including dedicated, hard-working, dependable, intelligent, inspiring, a good listener, confident but self-effacing. They expressed admiration for him as an organizer who trained strong community leaders while keeping himself in the background and as a strategist who could turn general problems into specific, winnable issues.

And so I ask the Republicans: where is the shame in being a community organizer? How does Obama's years of helping people find jobs and keeping kids off drugs warrant those nasty comments that your party has become so accustomed to making? Before being so quick to judge, I would suggest the candidates take a few minutes to research all the positive things that Barack Obama actually did as a community organizer, because I'm sure none of them even bothered to do so.

Being a community organizer is a good thing.

Well, we questioned Obama's religion, McCain's religion, Hillary Clinton's religion, and now it's time to move onto our dear Sarah Palin. I don't feel right scrutinizing someone else's religion, but it is a fact that people are beginning to question Palin's church, the Wasilla Bible Church.

According to an article in the New York Times, last month a leader of the group Jews for Jesus, which strives to convert Jews to Christianity, spoke at the Wasilla Bible Church. Many Jews are now upset that Palin's church seems to condone the mission of Jews for Jesus, a group that is opposed by a large majority of practicing Jews.

Additionally, advocates for gay rights are also upset with the views of the church, since it promoted an upcoming Focus on the Family conference in Anchorage that deals with "curing" homosexuality.

Overall, the Wasilla Bible Church seems to be a controversial establishment with extremely conservative views. And now we're faced with the same argument that arose when Barack Obama's former pastor was thrust into the spotlight: should we judge our candidates based on this evidence? Sarah Palin might not necessarily believe in converting Jews to Christianity or "curing" homosexuality, but she is a dedicated member of the congregation and a very religious person. This issue will undoubtedly be the cause of much controversy and debate.

Hilarious segment on The Daily Show about the, ahem, choice that Bristol Palin made about her pregnancy:





Also, has anyone been watching the Republican National Convention? I'm overwhelmed by the sheer nastiness of comments aimed at Democrats. An editorial in the New York Times puts it well:

But there were also chilling glimpses of the new John McCain, who questioned the patriotism of his opponents as the 'me first, country second' crowd and threw out a list of false claims about Barack Obama's record, saying, for example, that Mr. Obama opposed nuclear power. There was no mention of immigration reform or global warming, Mr. McCain's signature issues before he decided to veer right to win the nomination.

On Wednesday, the nastiest night of the week, Mr. McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin, and other speakers offered punch lines, rather than solutions for this country's many problems — ridiculing the Washington elite (of which most were solid members) and Barack Obama.

'Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America, and he's worried that someone won't read them their rights,' Ms. Palin said.

Yeah, the claws were most definitely out. I felt nauseous watching the entire predominantly white crowd wearing large cowboy hats and red, white, and blue "McCain - Palin" pins cheering the candidates on every time they made a cheap shot like this, encouraging the dirty politics that have plagued the RNC. I'm so irked by the fact that everyone sees John McCain as a hero and Sarah Palin as a maverick, when their election would be detrimental to this country. The numbers are ridiculously close, and I'm getting increasingly nervous.

The irony/hypocrisy of our Republican candidates truly never ends. An article on Yahoo! News exposes that despite the fact that his running mate has admitted that she has a pregnant teenage daughter, John McCain has voted against proposals to spend federal money on teen-pregnancy prevention programs and voted for requiring poor teen mothers to stay in school or lose their benefits.

In 2005, he opposed a Senate Democratic proposal that would have spent tens of millions of dollars to pay for pregnancy prevention programs other than abstinence-only education.

In 2006, he voted against a proposal to send $100 million to communities for teen-pregnancy prevention programs.

It seems as if John McCain refuses to offer necessary support to pregnant teenagers in America... unless of course, that teenager happens to be the daughter of his running mate. In that case, she has every right to make her "own" decision about her pregnancy, and the Palin family should be praised for handling this situation in a classy manner. Right.

How do you sell extremely overpriced clothing and accessories? Stick them on people far too poor to afford them. At least, this was the strategy of Vogue magazine. In the August issue, Vogue India featured a 16-page spread of extremely poor Indian families modeling expensive designer handbags and umbrellas.







Those are not even the worst ones. The New York Times describes a photo that shows a woman holding a Hermès Birkin bag, usually sold for more than $10,000.

Despite Vogue India editor's advice to "lighten up," I am really fucking disgusted by these photos. Almost 500 million Indians live on less than $1.25 a day, and Vogue has them modeling designer accessories?! Are you kidding? Mostly, I hate this shoot because it reminds me of how instead of buying disgustingly overpriced handbags, we could donate our money to feed hungry families abroad. I wonder how these people felt modeling accessories that are worth a year supply of food. I think this was an extremely insensitive move on Vogue's part.

Well, Sarah Palin was certainly slapped in the face with a hefty dose of irony. Palin, conservative running mate of John McCain and strong proponent of abstinence-only education has admitted that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant. And, of course, Palin's daughter plans to marry the father of her baby... because anything else would simply not be good for mommy's image. Governor Palin's statement:

"Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows that she has our unconditional love and support."

Hmm, I wonder if things would have turned out differently if Governor Palin had taught her daughter about proper condom use.