FGM Female Genital Mutilation, what it is, what it is not, why you should care and what can you do about it.

This is probably something many of you don't want to know or let alone even think about.  For various reasons people will not discuss issues such as this.  The largest reason is society has a number of taboos when it comes to the topic of sexuality and things relating to sexuality.  This reason, like all reasons, any one can give about why people should not talk about topics like this are deeply flawed and far out weighed by the reasons to bring topics like this to light.  So I hope you will continue reading and find out what the facts are and what you can do to help combat against this torture of young women.

So what is Female Genital Mutilation (FGM)?  FGM is the complete or partial removal of the external female genitalia.  Some may claim that it is often no different then male circumcision.  The reality is much different.  Some argue that it is a cultural issue and no business of anyone else's to comment on another culture's practices.  But this argument ignores the fact that any time we identify a cultural practice as demonstrably harmful to an individual, group of people and/ or society as a whole we should make efforts to stop such practices.

  FGM falls under all 3 of those categories. It is clearly harmful to the individual.  Any procedure done against the will of an individual that is for non-medical reasons falls under this category.  Even if the girls are "talked into it" they are often to young to understand the ramifications of the decision and the pain, both short and long term, that they will have to endure.  The practice is demonstrably harmful to all women because its sole use is as a tool to oppress women.  To literally make sex unpleasurable for women and remind them that they are the property of men.  Finally it is demonstrable that it is harmful to society as a whole because we see time and time again that when women are oppressed in societies those societies do not do as well.  Societies where women are treated as equals have higher quality of living then those that do not.  The most successful way you can help a community flourish is to empower the women of those community and that includes giving them reproductive autonomy.

  Now to the specifics to demonstrate that this isn't just a form of "female circumcision".  The most minor version of FGM most closely resembles male circumcision.  Some apologists will claim this is the most common form but while the removal of the clitoral hood would be anatomically the same as a male circumcision, the reality is this rarely ever happens.  So Type 1 is normally the removal of the hood and the clitoris.  This is like saying that instead of a male having their foreskin removed they had not only the foreskin removed but at least the whole head of the penis.  Anatomically it it more like chopping off the entire penis.  And this is the most minor version of FGM performed.

  More severe versions of FGM removal of the labia minora, the "inner lips".  This is called type 2 FGM.  Type 2 can even include removal of the labia majora.  To shock you even further there are a total of 4 types each worse then the previous with varing amounts of damage being done in each level.  Type 3 includes actually sewing up the remaining vaginal orifice.

  There are other procedures done with FGM in various regions.  This includes cauterizing or even removal of tissue not by cutting but by abrasion.  Think of it like this.  A doctor says "We need to remove your hand." then whips out a large file and starts at the tips of your finger.

  While some procedures are done to babies, who won't remember the procedure, many are done to little girls around the age of 5.  Most procedures are, in fact, done to girls between the age of 7 and 10. Pretty much always these are done with absolutely no anesthetic.

  FGM has further complications and results in an extra 1-2% in  perinatal deaths.  Death rates from the actual procedure is recorded at 2.3%.  Compare this to the most overblown rates of death from males circumcision which is less then 0.009% or over 255 times less likely.  The more accepted numbers for deaths do to male circumcision is between  0 and 1 in 500,000 which means FGM is over 10,000 times more deadly.

Do you think this is just a problem of Muslims?  Nigeria has the highest rates of FGM and the occurrence in the Christian community is higher both in number and percentages.  Do you think it is only a problem in Africa?  A 2015  study estimates that over a half a million females in the USA are at risk of or have undergone FGM and that number is up from about 228,000 women in 2000.  It is illegal, thankfully, in the USA under 18 U.S. Code 116 - Female genital mutilation.  But this does not help girls when they go back to their parent's country of origin on holiday.  While it is illegal here the parents are not subject to prosecution if it is done overseas.  The Girls Protection Act of 2010 tried to address this issue and was cosponsored by 156 democrats and 21 republicans.  The republican controlled Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations blocked it from going to a vote.  I have no idea why they would prevent this bill from going to vote.  I can guess that the oppression of women is just part of most of their world view when you look at their voting records.

The problem needs to be brought to light.  Legislation needs to be enacted to protect those women in the USA from this practice.  More broadly we need to apply political and social pressure to stop this practice that at the end of the day serves no other purpose then to oppress women.  Something that in 1915 should not have been acceptable let alone 2015.  I encourage everyone to research this topic.  If you keep your head in the sand on the issue then that is your choice.  But as with all bad positions you hold it reflects on the type of person you are.  Yes I'm trying to guilt you into action because staying silent on issues like this is unacceptable in my opinion.

Read more about FGM here World Health Organisation
Google "FGM charity" to find were you can go to help.   Here is one article that lists 16 various organisations trying to tackle this issue.

What kind of Governor sentences 6 poor people to die every day?

I've been going over some of the literature and legislation of various states with respect to the ACA better known as Obamacare over the last few weeks.  With the deadline/milestone just past I was curious to see what various states have been doing with Obamacare.  For those that don't know as part of the ACA states have been offered an expanded Medicaid system to cover low income citizens. This care is funded by the federal government and unlike Medicare part D which Bush implemented but was completely unfunded the Medicaid expansion is fully funded.

  What both surprised me and at the same time was totally unsurprising to me is that 21 states have refused the Medicaid expansion.  This expansion was to cover very low income workers that previously would not have fallen under Medicaid.  This include single adults under the age of 65 earning less then 133% of the poverty amount.

What that would mean is a woman struggling with 3 part time jobs could be covered by Medicaid and receive the health care and medicine she needed to stay alive.  Let me call this woman, I don't know, Charlene Dill.  Now what is sad is Charlene isn't some hypothetical woman.  She was a real woman that was working as hard as she could to support her 3 children who couldn't afford health care and feed and shelter her children.  She would have been eligible for Medicaid under the expanded program.  Instead she died on the floor in a strangers home while trying to sell them a vacuum cleaner. I shit you not,  one of her jobs was as a door to door salesperson. But because she couldn't afford her hear medication because she had to make the decision to take care of her kids over taking care of her health.

You might be asking yourself why she was not covered.  The reason is Governor Rick Scott of Florida refused the expansion because he's a hard core Republican and doesn't want the ACA to succeed.  His opposition to the ACA puts 750,000 low income Florida residents, like Charlene, in a healthcare dead zone. Of these 750,000 uninsured people we can expect that 1 person will needlessly die every 4 hours because they can't afford the healthcare they desperately need.  Bu Rick Scott doesn't care.  Those are poor people and he has to stand up for his principals as a GOP member and fight against this evil Affordable Care Act, that was actually the idea of a GOP think tank, simply because it is a Democratic President enacting it.

The sad thing is there are plenty of other republican Governors that have vetoed or outright rejected the offer to expand Medicaid, 19 to be exact.  7 republican Governors have actually put their citizens health before their political obedience.

 First off Gov Brian Sandoval Nevada who, over a year ago, became the first GOP governor to break ranks and cover almost 78,000 of his citizens who would have most likely continued to go uncovered.

Gov Jan Brewer Arizona cover who fought through a deadlock of the republican controlled legislature to get 350,000 of her citizens coverage they would otherwise not have had.

Gov Susana Martinez New Mexico who was also an early adopter in Jan 2013 assured that over 170,000 of her low income citizens would now be eligible under the expanded Medicaid that previously would not have been.

Gov Terry Branstad Iowa has made it possible for over 100,000 of his citizens to be covered under the Medicaid expansion program in his state but has instituted a premium for anyone with an income over 1/2 of the federal poverty level.  Just to let you know that is just $5,835 a year for a single person.  To the state legislators credit the provision will not cut those that do not pay the premium.

Gov Jack Dalrymple North Dakota.  Next Wednesday, the 16th of April, will mark the 1 year anniversary of Gov Dalrymple signing the legislation that will see almost 30,000 new low income residents become eligible for the expansion.

Gov Rick Snyder Michigan along with a republican controlled legislature passed the expansion with a 75-32 vote to cover an additional 400,000 Michigan citizens that were previously ineligible.

Gov John Kasich Ohio just signed the expansion to the program on Jan 1, 2014.  A special bipartisan legislative panel of 7 state legislators approved the expansion with a 5-2 vote.  Republican lawmakers are now upset with the panel's decision and are preparing to fight the expansion that will cover 275,000 Ohioans.  The republicans instead want to offer income tax cuts instead.  Note those income tax cuts will do nothing to help the low-income citizens and will mostly benefit the top 1% of income earners.




So hats off to these 7 republican governors that put their citizens health ahead of the stupid politics that have plagued America for far to long.  The GOP party leadership has openly said its number one priority is to oppose everything Obama tries to do.  Think about that.  Regardless of the value of any program that aids to the success of the nation the GOP leadership have vowed to oppose it simply because it is being put forth by a democrat President.  The GOP is so bold they don't even care that they've said this while on national television.  They bank on the fact that most of their supporters would rather see America fail then to allow the current President put American on the right track on any issue.  Then they could turn around and blame President Obama for the failures that the GOP brought about.

One thing to watch is how you will hear the GOP change the way they talk about the ACA from Obamacare to The Affordable Care Act.  They've lost the battle.  As more and more Americans actually start seeing the benefits of actually having healthcare coverage that works for them and that they can no longer be dropped because they've fallen ill and the program becomes even more popular the GOP will no longer use the term Obamacare because they won't want to associate it with Obama.  Mark my words you will also see a number of republicans trying to rewrite history and claim they were always in support of it.  Many of their supporters will blindly believe it because they to don't want to think that Obama could be responsible for setting America down a path where the Charlenes of America don't die because they have to choose between feeding their kids or buying the medication that will save their lives.

Rest in peace Charlene Dill.  Hopefully the people of your state will recognize that Rick Scott isn't a Governor of the people of Florida.

Your government held hostage by republicans!

It is crazy.  Our government is being held hostage by Americans voted for to run our government.  There is blame going both ways and there is normally 2 sides to every story and this one does too.  The difference here is that one side is very definitely lying about the situation which involves the Debt Ceiling and the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

So if you live in a cave here is what is being said by both sides.

Many republicans including the leadership:
"We want to fund the government and we want to give the American people what they want with regards to the ACA."

What a few republicans and all democrats are saying:
"We want to fund the government and will not let a few republicans hold the entire nation hostage in a attempt to kill the ACA."

Now what is the situation?

Well there are 2 parts to this.  One is funding the government by raising the debt ceiling.  This involves allowing the government to get the funding they need to pay bills they have ALREADY incurred.  This has happened, automatically many times. The only times it hasn't is when the republicans try to hold the country hostage over some legislation that they don't like but still passed.  This isn't new spending.  This isn't money for new stuff.  It is paying the bills you already have.

  It would be like going and getting a mobile phone that isn't pre paid.  Signing a contract saying you'll pay $25 a month for a certain plan.  Using your phone for that entire month using all the benefits of the plan you signed up for.  At the end of the month when you get your bill you then refuse to pay and tell the phone company that you won't pay unless they provide you electricity in the Antarctic.

  Sadly this is what to many American's think ...that not raising the debt ceiling now is the way you stop spending later.  This is like thinking by not paying your bills now that you won't buy that new toy tomorrow.  How about pay the bills we've incurred, stop fighting wars we can't afford, stop buying tanks our military doesn't want, start asking the extremely wealth to actually pay their fair share!

The second demand has nothing to do with your phone plan.  The second part being the affordable health care act which the republicans claim most people don't want.  What is the reality tho?  The fact is that Obama was re-elected on a platform that was clear that the ACA was going to be implemented.  Citizens voted and he was placed back in office.  The law was legislated and even challenged as unconstitutional but the highest court of the land ruled that it is constitutional.  It has been challenged over 40 times in congress, costing the American tax payer about $2.5 million each time it has been, and won every single time.  The president is willing to talk about sensible changes to the ACA but will not have the government held hostage over it.

  The talking heads in the republican party would have you think they are willing to "compromise" but this is like a hostage taker saying they'll compromise on how many millions of dollars they'll get while they hold a gun to your child's head.  All of the "compromises" equate to the same thing.  Death of the ACA.

  The republicans are lying when they say they say they will compromise and the democrats are unwilling.

  Too many American's don't understand even the basic premise of the ACA.  Many American's don't even know that "Obamacare" and the ACA are one and the same.  No wonder with the smear campaign using misinformation against the ACA.  One can argue that the ACA is complicated and you would be right.  But the issue is complicated.  How can you unfuck a broken health care system that leaves out so many Americans with a "simple" system.  It is like complaining that you can't cure a genetic disorder by taking an aspirin.  The executive branch hasn't explained the program very well either.  Some of the confusion arises from introduced bits as "compromises" that republicans asked for.

  Here is the ideal ACA premiss.

• Health care should be attainable by all American.
• Most American should be able to pay for private health insurance.
• Insurance companies should not be able to deny health insurance to those that need it most.
• Insurance companies should not be able to stop providing insurance to those that need to use the insurance they supposedly have.
• The government should subsidise health care for those that are of lower income status.
• Women shouldn't have to pay more for health care then men.
• Health care should not have their costs artificially and arbitrarily inflated.

  For those that want specifics and more detail then go here.  Just don't complain that it is to complicated.  If you want to know the mysteries of the universe then you can't complain that you have to understand things like quantum physics, general and special relativity. 

This is achievable because insurance companies that previously denied benefits to individuals either for pre-existing conditions or cut off benefits to individuals that end up needed said benefits now can offset that risk by knowing that everyone will be covered.  

  Many people complain that they shouldn't have to be covered medically.  But we require people who drive to have insurance.  Some might say that people can choose not to drive and thus not pay car insurance so some people should be able to choose not to receive health care and not pay insurance.  The difference is somebody that doesn't drive doesn't all of a sudden find themselves behind the wheel of a car.  People who are healthy DO find themselves faced with an unexpected illness or injury.  People don't often just agree to lay down and die but will seek medical attention. 

  The biggest cause of bankruptcy is from medical bills.  This means that the bills remain unpaid.  People without insurance also end up using forms of care that are inherently more expensive like emergency rooms.  Going to a general practitioner to get looked at is much less expensive then going to the emergency room and taking up a spot that is geared up for situations that are more life threatening.  

  Another part is getting the cost of health care down.  Right now in the USA health care is the free market gone crazy.  Do you know you can pay 20x or more for medication in the USA then you would in other countries.  Same medication! Why is this?  Well in places like Australia, England and Canada the government says "Hey we'll put medication x on our pharmaceutical benefits scheme but you have to make the cost reasonable!"  The government then will subsidise the cost of the medication a bit.  People still have the choice to use medication that is not on the pharmaceutical benefits scheme if they choose.  So what happens is the pharmaceutical companies still make money and the people don't get ripped off unless they choose to be.  

  This doesn't just happen with drugs.  It happens all over the place.  Sure this does mean that you might end up paying more if you choose to use something that isn't on some government benefit scheme but that is your choice.  For example the government goes to companies and says "We want product x with these specifications" and those companies come back with their solutions and a the cheapest ones that meet the specifications are chosen to go on a benefits scheme.  Those companies know that they'll sell more so their margins can be lower.  This doesn't stop other companies from making more expensive products and does not stop you, the consumer, from using those companies.  What it does do allow most American's to access that product at a reasonable price.  In health care this is especially important because if you are told "You need medication x to stay alive." you shouldn't be held to ransom to pay 20x the reasonable cost of that medication.  Really what are you going to say?  "No I refuse to pay!" which in reality many people are forced to do when they can't afford to access the health care they need.  Others access that health care but end up going bankrupt and the rich just pay the costs and move on.

  Health care shouldn't be a luxury.  If governments can say that "Internet access" is a basic human right I'm sure that basic health care should be one too!

Watch this video.  There is a lot of humour in it but it is very informative too.  You'll find yourself laughing then a bit disgusted when you realise that while some of it sounds ridiculous it is actually all true.

  What the republicans need to do is let the government be funded no strings attached because it is a bill the government has already incurred.  Then if they want to make changes to the ACA then that is another matter that can be handled separately.  Note almost every other time they've done this they've just tried to kill the entire thing not make it better.  Also note that the basic plan is THEIR PLAN!  The individual mandate is a republican idea.  Many people might not like it but, at present, it is the most logical plan on the table.  The government is all about doing what is best for the citizens as a whole even if they don't understand it.  Ask all Americans if they would like medical care if they are injured.  See how many people say "no".  That should be the same number of people that support reform in the health care sector.

GOP on women's health

Richard Mourdock, who is running for the U.S. Senate in Indiana, says that pregnacy resulting from rape is "Something God intended"

I wonder how he would feel if it was his wife or his daughter that was the one that was raped? Or like Scott DesJarlais, a Tennessee 'Pro-Life' congressman and doctor, that pressured his mistress into getting an abortion then thought it was a good idea to tape the conversation and have his wife listen to it as proof of his commitment to her. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/10/scott-desjarlais-abortion-pro-life_n_1953136.html

Don't get me wrong.  There are women that love the children have resulted from acts of rape.  But no woman should be required to endure the mental anguish that could be associated with being forced to carry that pregnacy to term if they do not choose too.

Regardless of your belief or disbelief in a god or gods pregnancy is a biological function.  That the rape can result in a new person but the thought that a god wants the rape victim to get pregnant is an absurd thought.   If you think that then you have to ask what this god's intention where 1 in 4 women have at least 1 miscarriage in their life time.  You have to ask yourself "If God intended a woman to get pregnant and has direct responsibility for the pregnancy then why did this same God allow the violent act of rape on the woman to occur?".  You know who is responsible for that pregnancy?  The rapist!  Just like if they give the woman an STD or AIDS.  That isn't 'God' intending the women to get a STD or AIDS.  Just like if the rapist kills his victim.  That isn't 'God' intending the woman to get killed.

To his credit Richard Mourdock does accept that there are situations where the woman's life is in danger and that she should be allowed to have an abortion to save her life.

This is unlike Republican Congressman Joe Walsh of Illinois who said this just last week that there is never a situation where a pregnancy has to be aborted to save the life of the mother.  Apparently Joe doesn't know what a ectopic pregnancy is and that almost 2% of all pregnacies are ectopic and that it is the leading cause of meternal morality within the first trimester and this is in the USA.

I get if you are pro-life but know the facts.  Know that if you say life starts at conception and that a ball of 16 cells = a person that you their for think that "the pill" is murder.  The pill has multiple levels of prevention.  First it attempts to prevent ovulation from actually occuring. But this, like all birth control, isn't 100% effective.  The pill also thickens the musus around the cervix making it more difficult for the sperm to get into the uterus.  But again this is also not 100% effective.  Finally the pill affects the lining of the uters making it difficult for an egg to attach to the wall.  This is subtle and some people don't get it. Some do but don't want you to get it because it may sway your feelings on the legislation they are trying to ram down your throat.  This last line of defence means that a fertilised egg will get flushed out with the woman's normal menstril cycle.  I.E. conception happened.  That ball of cells just has a much harder time becoming viable.

So when politicians try to say that abortion is never allowed and that life begins at conception that the most popular birth control method becomes illegal.  That means a larger number of women would be force with a life threatening condition when their ectopic pregnacy causes massive internal hemoraging and they where not allowed treatment that could save their life.

The half baked ideas from the GOP are crazy.  What is even more crazy is they expect us to believe their intentions and motivations.

What the GOP think about tax cuts for people that aren't rich.

Bill S 3412 Middle-class Tax Relief.

Not surprisingly the GOP stands firmly against tax cuts for people making less then $250,000/yr.  46 of 47 republican Senators voted against S3412 Middle-class tax relief.  The 1 republican that didn't vote no, Senator Mark Kirik, didn't actually vote.  It passed 51/48 with one abstaining.

Reason for this?  The republican's will not pass this bill, which benefits all American's by providing tax relief for the first $250,000.00 of income, because they want further tax cuts for people earning over $250,000.00/yr.

Do you find this right?  Should rich people get even more tax breaks then poor people?  Already our tax code allows the rich to pay significantly lower tax rates then low and middle income earners by providing many tax shields and incentives that are only accessible by the wealthy.  Tax breaks that Mitt Romney exploits to the fullest often moving income over seas to evade taxes here.

If you had an income of $100,000/yr do you think it would be nice if you could shield it from taxes by moving the income over seas?  Who would pay for our schools?  Who would pay for our roads?  Who would pay for our emergency services? Who would pay for our wars?

The GOP blame President Obama for the current rate of unemployment.  Saying "his [Obama] economic plan has failed".  Yet every time President Obama tries to implement any plan he is confronted with this partisan blockade.  Obama has made some hard compromises and brought spending increases to a low not seen since 1953.  Obama policies, many implemented by executive order because republican congressmen refuse to vote for any bill that might make make the President look good., stopped an unemployment rate that was rising into the double digits.

President Obama has said all along that the recovery is coming to slow.  That it isn't good enough.  That we still have a lot to do.  He's made hard compromises in hopes the republicans would also make similar compromises but at every opportunity republicans refuse.  Even to compromises they agreed to in the past.

They want to privatise education giving more support to rich families sending their children to private schools at the cost of low and middle income families, that can not afford high priced schools, to attend schools that get even less funding per student.  Choice is easy for those that can afford it.  I sent my son to a private school up until year 8.  That was my choice and that choice didn't rip funding away from public schools in the process.  How does the GOP expect a low income family that is struggling to put food on the table to be able to come up with more money to send their kids to a school that is properly funded?  A school which is probably further away then their local public school.  A school which may have many other hidden costs like uniforms and "building fees".  How do they expect struggling families to come up with thousands of dollars more a year for each one of their children when the GOP plan to take away safety nets like food stamps.  When the GOP plan to roll back the Affordable Health Care Act leaving the low income families with no affordable medical insurance and no guarantee that if they do keep their health insurance that the insurance company won't drop them as soon as someone in the family gets ill?

If you vote for the GOP this coming election be assured that the unemployment rate we saw at the end of the Bush administration will only be the start.  The GOP are great at saying democrats hate America but the GOP only like the rich and they'll lie to all the low and middle income Americans to get into power.

The phrase "I'm proud to be an American" will be a joke unless you are in the top 2%.

I can't believe the $#I~ that come out of Mitt Romney's mouth

We all know Romney has a problem with connecting with the average American.  His awkward lines like

• Talking to the members of the chambers of commerce - I like being able to fire people who provide services to me. - Jan 2012
• Trying to pander to middle Americans - I'm not concerned about the very poor. - Jan 2012
• Trying to pander to a group of unemployed in florida -I should tell my story. I'm also unemployed. -  June 2011
• When asked about tying his dog to the roof of his car and not stopping to let the dog go to the toilet -PETA is not happy that my dog likes fresh air. -   2007
• Trying to show how he's an average guy that likes motor sport - I have some great friends that are NASCAR team owners. - Feb 27, 2012
• Talking to some supporters from a local bakery - I'm not sure about these cookies. They don't look like you made them. No, no. They came from the local 7/11 bakery, or whatever. - April 17, 2012
• Talking to supporters in Michigan - I love this state. The trees are just the right height. -  Feb 2012
• At a speech in Harrisburg - he [Obama] spent too much time at Harvard, perhaps, or maybe just not enough time actually working in the real world - April 2012 

note: that Romney was at Harvard longer and got 2 degrees while he was there, Obama paid his way through Harvard like most American's using student loans and worked as a community organiser for an organisation with a annual budget of $400,000 a year for 13 staff and the projects they ran.  

Now Mitt Romney comes out with this. No one has ever asked to see my birth certificate!

Well who cares.  Obama was born in Hawaii.  Has legitimate short and long form birth certificate authenticated by officials in the state of Hawaii.  Just because nut bag conspiracy idiots within the GOP keep lying and claiming that Obama isn't a real citizen of the United States of American, even when shown the evidence to the contrary.  One would hope that Mitt Romney would try to distance himself from those nut jobs.  But instead he's kept those nut jobs close.  Accepting untold amounts of money from them and now he's jump squarely in bed with them spouting the same shit as they do.  

The hypocrisy here is amazing.  No one has asked Mitt for his birth certificate but will he release his tax returns for the last 10 years?  Nope!  Mind you this is a tradition his father started back in 1968.   The only 2 years of tax returns he did release showed that he paid taxes at rate of less then 15%.  That he used banks in the Cayman islands and Switzerland to shield income from taxes to not only the USA but other countries like Italy.  Don't get me wrong.  To date nothing he's done appears to be illegal.  He's just manipulated the system which is geared to making it easy for rich people to pay very little in taxes.

The official tax policy that the republicans want to push through is even worse.  Mitt Romney would end up paying less then 1% in taxes.  The GOP wants to push through 5 trillion dollars...that is $5,000,000,000,000.00 in tax cuts that are exclusively for the top 2% of American's.  The GOP currently won't extend tax cuts that would benefit all Americans until they get further tax cuts to those Americans that earn over $250,000.00 a year.  Get this straight.  ALL Americans would benefit by the tax cuts Obama wants to push through because it covers all income up to $250,000.00.  But this isn't good enough for the GOP.  They want more tax breaks that only benefit people that earn more then $250,000.00 a year.  

Where do you think the GOP's tax cuts for the top 2% would come from?  Who's going to pay for it?  This is something they don't like you to know.  It comes from killing Medicare.  Independent economists predict that Medicare collapse within 4 years if Romney was elected and implemented his tax plan.  Taxes to low and middle income Americans would got up.  Finally services like police, fire and education would be cut back so that the rich can get richer.

What the President really says from his own mouth.

Are you for all of America or just top 2%?

Congress has gone on  recess with the Senate not voting on the tax cut bill because republicans refuse to act on it unless the richest 2%, not only get the tax cut everyone gets for the first $250,000.00 of income but, get further cuts on any income above $250,000.00.

The republicans are the party who is putting forward a presidential candidate who refuses to release more then 2 years of his tax returns, in contradiction to the standard that his own father set back in 1968 and which every other candidate since then has followed.

Do you want a president that knows what it is like to be an average American who finally paid off his university bills just over a decade ago or do you want a president that has never known what it is like to struggle and for the last 2 years still paid a lower effective tax rate then you have and may not even have paid taxes at all, for some years, in the last decade?

Do you want a president that is for helping 98% of American's in need or do you want a president that is for helping 2% of American's and hoping that 2% lets some of that aid trickle down to the rest of us even though we've seen that policy fail miserably already.

Do you think a small business is a Mom & Pop shop, that hires a few local people to staff the store, needs some help with their taxes or do you think 2 Brothers that are hedge fund managers, making millions of dollars a year working on Wall street that employs 1 or 2 secretaries, needs help from the government more?

Do you think the government should help keep further education beyond high school affordable for all Americans or do you think that only the rich should get the chance for a proper education?

Do you think the government should aid low income earners get health insurance is the right thing to do or do you think it is "free stuff" and more important to keep the tax laws that let a multi-millionaire's wife have the government flip the bill for their horse to the tune of over $70,000 in just one year?

Do you believe that Americans deserve to know who is paying to get a candidate into the highest office of the nation or do you believe it is ok for millionaires and billionaires to secretly bank roll a candidate and produce false advertisements with out any accountability?

Do you believe that women have a right to proper preventative health care or do you think that an employer should be able to stop a woman from getting that health care?

Do you want a president that has been open about his economic plan or do you want a president that basically says that he'll implement tax cuts but never tells you how the country will pay for those tax cuts?

You decide. You can vote for someone that supports the average American or you can side with the party that acts like a rich spoiled little brat that isn't happy unless they can push their way through a line just because they are rich and think they are better then every body else.

Are you part of the 2% that thinks that 98% of people just shit out of luck?  Are you part of the 98% that wants to screw over the rest of the 98% in the vain hope that you will some day be part of the 2%?   Or are you that part of America, regardless of your income, that believes America was built on the ideal that all Americans deserve a country in which they can succeed!

Is "Rape" just a left wing tactic?

  Honestly there are some "conservative" values that I have to seriously call into question.  Lately one of values that is at the top of my list is how "rape" is being discussed by the right wing.  Between arguments that we shouldn't have to spend money on programs related to sexual assault in the military to trying to redefine what "rape" really means in some cases.

Places like fox news will have you believe that it is inevitable that women will be violently raped if they are in the military. I was in the Marines for 6 years and I'm disgusted that fox news can make it seem like its only because of "feminists" that we have this problem. If there is a rise in the amount of violent rapes in the military then that is an issue that needs to be dealt with not by hiding women away but dealing with the occurrences that do happen and putting in measures so that it is understood that this isn't acceptable behaviour ever and it will be dealt with accordingly.  This isn't some "liberal agenda" to "destroy America"...unless you believe America = ignorance.

  The GOP is also pushing for a change in terminology about rape to stop some women from having a unwanted pregnancy terminated that resulted from a sexual assault to just those that involved actual force.  If the GOP has its way if a woman is drugged, raped and becomes pregnant from that rape then they should just deal with it.  To boot the GOP's position on birth control methods like the morning after pill would be removed as an option  too.  If your 12-13 year old daughter is groomed by a sexual predator and becomes pregnant the GOP also believes that situation isn't good enough to warrant the term rape.  If you have a mentally retarded female family member that doesn't have the cognitive reasoning power to understand what is happening and is sexually assaulted and becomes pregnant then that to isn't good enough for them.

  The GOP wants to twist the definition of rape to push their ideology on everyone else.  You can be assured that they wouldn't stop there either.  "Pro-Life" groups already indicate there is zero tolerance for ending a pregnancy.  Even in the case where the mother's life is at risk.  Rick Perry position now is that there is no acceptable reason for terminating a pregnancy and that includes when the mother's life is at risk.^[1]

  Combine this with the GOP's support for limiting women's access to birth control, not abortions, not the morning after pill but just normal contraceptive services is a testament to how the GOP want women in their place.  Just last week the republicans blocked any females from testifying in a house hearing on the topic of contraception access for women.^[2]

  This is the conservative party of 2012.  A party that wants to have control over your, your wife's, your sisters', your daughters', your best friends' access to basic women's health care.  No control is the wrong word.  They don't want them to have access to those services. According to them abstinence-only education is the only option and looking at the history on how that works you have to be mentally deficient if that is what you put forward.  Texas has shown us, with the highest teen pregnancy rate in the nation, how well that works. ^[3]

  The GOP's view on women's reproductive health isn't even pre 1960.  They are shooting for a return to the dark ages where rape is first looked at as a problem of the woman not a problem we have to deal within our society. Is this the "conservative America" you want to live in? I'm not asking you to vote for Obama here. I'm asking you to think about some basic "core values" the "right" is trying to ram down America's throat. If you are a republican speak up an let your politicians know that if they continually make women's rights into removal of women's rights that you won't be supporting them, unless you think that women in the military should just expect to be rape more often. Is that what you really think?

[1]  http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/rick-perry-changes-opinion-on-abortion-15244664
[2] http://publicola.com/2012/02/16/women-silenced-at-us-house-hearing-on-contraception-access/ 
[3] http://www.care2.com/causes/wisconsin-gop-pushes-abstinence-only-bill.html