Humbled? Chastened?

In case you haven't noticed the increased volume of traffic on this blog. I have returned from the "secure undisclosed location" and I am once again ensconced in the Archlaical Compound in North Carver.

I've been hankerin' for a good old-fashioned solemn high fisking and when I heard some bits of The Messiah'a presser yesterday I thought I had a winner; alas, after reviewing the fulll text of his remarks I realized that they were far too lengthy for a less-than-book-length fisking.

But - since this is politics - perhaps I can take some items out-of-context and coment on them rather than the whole megillah.  So without further ado:

THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon, everybody. Last night I had a chance to speak to the leaders of the House and the Senate and reached out to those who had both won and lost in both parties. I told John Boehner and Mitch McConnell that I look forward to working with them. [Like I look forward to a root canal] And I thanked Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid for their extraordinary leadership over the last two years. ["Extraordinary" indeed.  Just as the decisions made by the captain of the Titanic were "extraordinary"]


Over the last few months I've had the opportunity to travel around the country and meet people where they live and where they work, from backyards to factory floors. I did some talking, [and wasn't I brilliant?  And eloquent?] but mostly I did a lot of listening. [to myself.  Nobody else knows what it's like to be me!] And yesterday’s vote confirmed what I've heard from folks all across America: People are frustrated -- they’re deeply frustrated -- with the pace of our economic recovery and the opportunities that they hope for their children and their grandchildren. [Bush had eight years to screw things up, how do they expect me to fix it all in just two years?] They want jobs to come back faster, they want paychecks to go further, and they want the ability to give their children the same chances and opportunities as they’ve had in life. [They're bitter clingers, obsessed with their guns and their religion and their enemies and their petty hatreds.]
 The men and women who sent us here don't expect Washington to solve all their problems. [Well, actually the ones who sent me here DO expect that, but I can't say it publicly.] But they do expect Washington to work for them, not against them. [Their hands are out - palms up!] They want to know that their tax dollars are being spent wisely, not wasted, and that we're not going to leave our children a legacy of debt. [Of course it's a little too late for that, they should have thought of that in 2008.} They want to know that their voices aren’t being drowned out by a sea of lobbyists and special interests and partisan bickering. They want business to be done here openly and honestly. [Again, they should have thought about that in 2008!]

Now, I ran for this office to tackle these challenges and give voice to the concerns of everyday people. [because I'm smarter than everyone else.  Figured I'd sweep into town and solve these problems and win re-election by acclamation.] Over the last two years, we’ve made progress. But, clearly, too many Americans haven’t felt that progress yet, [it's their fault, WE have made the progress but THEY haven't felt it!  Don't you understand?] and they told us that yesterday. [It was a temper tantrum.] And as President, I take responsibility for that. [I'm only saying that because I have to sound contrite.]

What yesterday also told us is that no one party will be able to dictate where we go from here, [even though we just spent the last two years shoving unpopular legislation down the nation's throat without any Republican votes.] that we must find common ground in order to set -- in order to make progress on some uncommonly difficult challenges. And I told John Boehner and Mitch McConnell last night I am very eager to sit down with members of both parties and figure out how we can move forward together. [Now that partisan is out, I want to be bipartisan, or at least give the MSM a chance to claim I am...]

I’m not suggesting this will be easy. I won’t pretend that we will be able to bridge every difference or solve every disagreement. [But now that I can't have it ALL my way I'll settle for half - what's unfair about that?]
 ...
And with so much at stake, what the American people don’t want from us, especially here in Washington, is to spend the next two years refighting the political battles of the last two. [In other words, hands-off Obamacare!  We can let the Bush tax cuts expire, and repeal anything else we dodn't like, but don't you dare touch anything WE'VE done!] We just had a tough election. We will have another in 2012. [Unless you ignorate proles figure it out by then.] I’m not so naïve as to think that everybody will put politics aside until then, but I do hope to make progress on the very serious problems facing us right now. And that’s going to require all of us, including me, to work harder at building consensus. {the 2012 Campaign starts tomorrow, I'm gonna have to criss-cross the whole country and spoon-feed it to to you thick-headed provincial noodniks so you understand how much you need all this stuff we're doing for you!] 
...
You know, a little over a month ago, we held a town hall meeting in Richmond, Virginia. And one of the most telling questions came from a small business owner who runs a tree care firm. [Let's not talk about the woman who was tired of defending me.] He told me how hard he works and how busy he was; [and I told him how hard *I* worked and how busy *I* was,] how he doesn’t have time to pay attention to all the back-and-forth in Washington. And he asked, is there hope for us returning to civility in our discourse, to a healthy legislative process, so as I strap on the boots again tomorrow, I know that you guys got it under control? It’s hard to have a faith in that right now, he said. [So you see, the problem is that the Republicans aren't civil enough.  This is beautiful - I'm half-way to turning America into a supersized Sweden and these people are still stupid enough to worry about "civility".  GodAlinsksy bless their little souls.  We're enacting a revolution but a few words about how those damn Republicans won't play ball are enough to set their tongues a-clackin' about "civility"!]

I do believe there is hope for civility. [I love this talk about "civility", keep it up!] I do believe there’s hope for progress. And that’s because I believe in the resiliency of a nation that’s bounced back from much worse than what we’re going through right now -- a nation that's overcome war and depression, that has been made more perfect in our struggle for individual rights and individual freedoms. [We survived Carter and two years of me, now that's resiliency!]

Each time progress has come slowly and even painfully, but progress has always come -- because we’ve worked at it and because we’ve believed in it, [and used parliamentary tricks, and traded pork for votes, and gotten the activist courts to decree what we never could have enacted legislatively,] and most of all, because we remembered that our first allegiance as citizens is not to party or region or faction, but to country -- because while we may be proud Democrats or proud Republicans, we are prouder to be Americans. [as long as we're Democrats]


And that's something that we all need to remember right now and in the coming months. [Listen to me, you unwashed cretins!] And if we do, I have no doubt that we will continue this nation’s long journey towards a better future. [Led on the shining path to a glorious workers' paradise by Barack the Benevolent.  Someday you will all appreciate me!]

There's plenty more fodder in The Messiah's answers to the questions, maybe I can get to those tomorrow......

(Un)Happy (No)Birth Day

There was an AP article in the Boston Daily Worker* today about the fiftieth anniversary of the introduction of "the Pill".  That's not an insignificant milestone, and all of us ought to take note of it.  Fifty years of smaller families - and shorter marriages.  Fifty years of women "taking control" - and dying early or suffering horribly from breast cancer.  Fifty years of being free to "act like men" - and wondering why men don't treat them like ladies any more.

The author of this article, however, seems to think that it's all good.  Let's take a look:

America’s favorite birth control method reaches its 50th year
US spends $3.5m on ‘the pill,’ in dozens of brands

By Carla K. Johnson, Associated Press
May 8, 2010

CHICAGO — A world without “the pill’’ is unimaginable to many young women who now use it to treat acne, skip periods, improve mood, and, of course, prevent pregnancy. They might be surprised to learn that US officials announcing approval of the world’s first oral contraceptive were uncomfortable. Of course they'd be surprised - the MSM has been the captain of the cheerleading squad for the 'sexual revolution' - why would they bother to tell the other side of the story?

“Our own ideas of morality had nothing to do with the case,’’ said John Harvey of the Food and Drug Administration in 1960. Because... morality is subjective?

The pill was safe, in other words. Don’t blame us if you think it’s wicked. "Safe" is not the opposite of "wicked" - this is a sort of straw man.  Is the author not demonstrably sympathizing with the proponents of 'the Pill'?  And do you suppose the AP - or the Boston Daily Worker - will tell us WHY anyone might think this novelty was "wicked"?

Tomorrow, Mother’s Day, is the 50th anniversary of that provocative announcement that introduced to the world what is now widely acknowledged as one of the most important inventions of the last century. The mind boggles - is the irony of 'Mother's Day' completely lost on Miz Johnson?

The world has changed, but it’s debatable what part the birth control pill played. Debatable?  Perhaps for one who is used to believing what she reads in the pages of The New York Times...

Some specialists think it gets too much credit or blame for the sexual revolution. After all, sex outside marriage wasn’t new in 1960.  1.) And some "specialists" think that the Nazis got a raw deal at Nuremburg.  Bravo sierra.  2.) Who could possibly think that a product that dramatically altered the rules of Nature and seemingly nullified the consequences of illicit sexual intercourse might lead to a dramatic increase of that sort of behavior.

The pill definitely changed sex, though, (she is forced to admit it) giving women more control over their fertility than they had ever had before (not quite - the option of keeping ones legs closed has always been effective) and permanently putting doctors — who previously didn’t see contraceptives as part of their job — in the birth control picture. Strange, this; but again Miz Johnson misses the irony - these days a doctor can lose his job for refusing to prescribe perhaps the only pharmaceutical which "treats" a normal, healthy organic bodily process by disabling it.

But some things haven’t changed. Now as then, a male birth control pill is still on the drawing board.  Why not - at $3.5M per annum for 'the Pill' there's got to be a market for this.

“There’s a joke in this field that a male pill is always five to seven years away from the market, and that’s what people have been saying since 1960,’’ said Andrea Tone, a history professor at Montreal’s McGill University and author of “Devices and Desires: A History of Contraception in America.’’  And this is funny... why?  Perhaps a 'news' article by a 'news service' published in a 'newspaper' would consider explaining the history of the attempt to develop a male version of this wondrous pill.

The pill is America’s favorite form of reversible (except for the irreversible consequences) birth control. (Sterilization is the leader overall.) Nearly a third of women who want to prevent unwanted pregnancies use it. “In 2008, Americans spent more than $3.5 billion on birth control pills,’’ Tone said, “and we’ve gone from the one pill to 40 different brands.’’

There are Yaz (I cringe every time I hear this.  I hope Carl Yastrzemski sues them for every cent they've ever made), Yasmin, Seasonale, Seasonique, and Lybrel — all with slightly different packaging, formulations, and selling points.

In the 1960s, anthropologist Ashley Montagu thought the birth control pill was as important as the discovery of fire. Turns out it wasn’t the answer to overpopulation, war, and poverty, as some of its early advocates had hoped. Nor did it universally save marriages. The four big lies we heard over and over again about 'the Pill' - do you supose there will be anything forthcoming about those who opposed 'the Pill', or their predictions?

“Married couples could have happier sex with more freedom and less fear. The divorce rate might go down and there would be no more unwanted pregnancies,’’ said Elaine Tyler May, 62, a University of Minnesota history professor who wrote “America and the Pill. Married couples might be having "happier sex" but not with each other - the divorce rate has increased nearly TENFOLD.  As for "unwanted pregnancies", the failure rate of artificial birth control was a primary argument in favor of legalized abortion, of which we have over a million a year.

“None of those things happened, not the optimistic hopes or the pessimistic fears of sexual anarchy,’’ she said. Huh?  Nice of her to admit that the 'experts' were wrong, but insofar as the "pessimist[s]" predicted "sexual anarchy", isn't that what we have now?

And it didn’t eliminate all unwanted pregnancies either. Nearly half of all pregnancies to US women are unintended and nearly half of those end in abortion, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which has gathered data on abortions for years.  Quelle surprise.

The pill is often associated with the women’s movement of the 1970s.  Because it IS associated with it.  That's like saying that Babe Ruth is often associated with baseball!

But the two feminists behind the pill, the ones who provided the intellectual spark (like Hitler provided the "intellectual spark" for The Holocaust?) and the financial backing, were born a century earlier, in the 1870s.

As suffragists worked for the vote, renowned birth control pioneer Margaret Sanger distributed pamphlets with contraceptive advice and dreamed of a magic pill to prevent pregnancy.  It is amazing to me that Margaret Sanger is still uncritically held up as a paragon of virtue - personally she was a libertine, and her "Birth Control League" was a eugenicist organization seeking to limit childbirth amongst the "inferior" races, e.g. blacks.  (Her sentiment, not mine!)

Katharine McCormick, a philanthropist with a science degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, ("science" automatically = good) bankrolled the work of Gregory Pincus, the man Sanger convinced to develop the pill. “It was my grandmother’s idea and Katharine McCormick’s money,’’ Alex Sanger said, now chairman of the International Planned Parenthood Council. And we all lived happily ever after.  What this article omits is mind-blowing, it just goes to show that media bias need not consist of slanted assertions or opinion masquerading as news, omission can be just as powerful.

*In fairness, its publishers refer to it as "The Boston Globe".  What, exactly, would be different about its content and positions if it were published by the Communist Party I cannot discern.