An Army of Propagandistas

When the opposition party is so misogynistic that it makes Ted Bundy look like Sir Galahad, all you really have to do to seduce a nation of women into pulling the lever for you is to be your own charming self. When the chair of the RNC utters such crazy talk as calling the Republican War Against Women as fictional as a war against caterpillars, all you have to do is sit back and let the creepy crawly jokes proliferate. Rance Priebus, the inventor of the caterpillar non sequitur, is one slimy species himself. Rance Priebus Rancidus, an easily identified garish garden variety. When he is disturbed, orange horns pop out of his head and emit a foul-smelling spray.

Fight for Larval Liberty!

  

It's nonsense like this, as well as the more psychopathic anti-birth control and anti-choice invective emanating from the right wing fringe that has enabled President Obama to score double-digit leads over Mitt Romney in recent polling. He has wasted no time in "targeting" women in battleground states. Following his pal Rahm Emanuel's advice to "never let a crisis go to waste", he is hosting a women's conference at the White House today to further cement his feminist cred. He has chivalrously called for the admission of rich lady golfers to Augusta. He boldly bumped New York Times editor Jill Abramson from her commencement address gig at all-female Barnard.

And later this month, the Obama Victory Fund is sponsoring a two-day training session for potential Obamettes. Become a propagandista in the president's All-Girl Army! Show how strong you are by putting your money and energy behind a charismatic male politician and become his unpaid shill. Join the BarryWAC, contribute to the BarryPAC.

Warning: this extravaganza for the Ladies Who Lunch is obviously not designed for the 99% -- though if you're under 35 or over 65, you can buy the cheap tickets at "only" $250, with no Barry face time included. From Politico: 

The Obama campaign is hoping to train an army of women at the DNC's national issues conference in Washington, D.C., later this month.

The two-day convention will include remarks by President Obama and strategy meetings on American women, values and the 2012 election as well as economic security and strengthening the middle class.

Confirmed training sessions include: "Talking to Your Neighbor: Persuading Women Voters," "Digital Organizing: Effective Social Media Strategies," "Talking about the President’s Accomplishments," and "Crafting Your Personal Narrative."

A photo with Barry as part of the Army of Women admission package will cost you $15,000. If you fork over $75,800, you'll get a group photo, special seating, special dinner, and your name mentioned in public.

The readers' comments to the Politico article came from the usual tripartate crowd -- the left, the right and the Bots. A sampling:

I don't think Obama has my interest in mind at all. Look at the cost of the tickets.. I am an average American who makes average wages and there is no way I can afford to buy a ticket. If he really wants to train "an army of women", he needs to do it for free.

So.... Omama's camp is going to train an "Army of Women"? by highlighting how the administration “has helped create economic security for women" and convince them to Talk about the President’s "Accomplishments," Hmmmmmm... Tough Task ahead!

The "Talking about the President’s Accomplishments" class will last a total of 30 seconds. Included in the corriculum will be: "We got Bin Laden" and...um...hold on I'll think of it.....

 I think women should be proud and I do well to set a fine example for my daughter's. I encourage my daughters to be independent thinkers who will work to care for themselves and to never rely on anyone to provide for them. Obama is not emphasizing the strength of women at all. He is simply trying to produce more people to sing his praises in the guise of raising women up. More importantly, he is trying to use this as an opportunity to raise money.

Why not have these training session in each state? Some of the price of the airplane tickets could go to pay for the training. Statewide training would be more productive and easier to manage. Statewide training would work better being able to focus on each individual States special interests and needs as well would adapt to the demographics of those particular states. I can't afford to go to Washington the plane tickets alone would block me and then add on to it the tickets. It almost feels as though it is exclusive to the rich women, and not to the Middle class women. I am for Obama, but find that the costs of things are prohibitive. I was excited when I heard about this program, but now that I see the costs, it is unrealistic. And so just like the GOP things go to the rich.

And finally this, my own personal favorite from a male Bot named Michael: You just never liked Obama...If thats th case then fine, But belive me their are alot of women and young ladys out there in Amrica who are more then eager to hear a message of hope and how the world and men would be far far worse off without strong women. Mabye the message that women are better left at home to procreate for men and cook and provide only for the family, mabye that message better suits (R) women. After all Santorm see's women as too weak mentally and physically to serve in our fine military, Gingrich..... well what really needs to be said about him...My point (before i get off of track ) IMHO only one party truly represents the ideas of modern women and truly wants to invest in the future of women and thats the (D) I have not seen one peice of legislation in the last four years come from any (R) person that supports anything regarding womens rights...

Get With the Program, Ladies!

One Nation of Suspects, With Justice for None

Here's just one of many shocking takeaways from this week's Supreme Court decision (Florence vs Board of Chosen Freeholders) allowing strip searches for all prisoners, regardless of the alleged offense: Anthony Kennedy is a judicial pretzel of twisted logic. In his opinion for the majority, Kennedy surmised that since most of this country's mass murderers and serial killers also had records of minor traffic offenses in their pasts, it follows that all traffic offenders might also be mass murderers and serial killers. So making everybody strip naked before joining a filthy, overcrowded jail population will make them safe, make their fellow prisoners safe, and make the poor overworked guards safe. The American citizen has officially been presumed guilty simply by virtue of existing. Keeping. Us. Safe. Sound familiar?

Lead Plaintiff Albert Florence

The Constitution is not just being chiselled away, little piece by little piece. It's being pounded to dust by the sledge hammers of all three branches of government. In the eyes of The Homeland, we are all potential terrorist threats. And the terror comes in endless forms.  Justice Kennedy rationalized that one peachy-keen reason for strip searches is that enforced nudity will allow jail personnel to detect disease and parasites, including.... scabies! Kennedy should keep his medical opinions to himelf, because nobody can detect scabies with the naked eye. Scabies are teensy little mites that burrow under the skin and cause intense itching, mainly at night. Diagnosis is made by taking skin scrapings and examining them under the microscope.

We as a nation are suffering a massive infestation of psychic scabies. The fear of the unknown has crept under our collective skin and made us all nuts. Terror has become a cottage industry. The Supreme Court decision is just one more manifestation of how bin Laden won. Our democracy is not just beginning to be subsumed by the quicksand of  totalitarianism -- it has already been sucked in up to its eyeballs.

That President Obama's Justice Department had filed an amicus brief in the recent court case in support of strip searches should come as no surprise. This administration is going down as one of the most authoritarian and repressive in modern history. No Democratic president since Woodrow Wilson has seized upon, and fomented, fear like this one. It was during World War One that the Espionage Act was passed, making it a crime to be anti-war. It is no coincidence that Bradley Manning is now being charged under the Espionage Act for his heroic whistleblowing of war crimes. It is no coincidence that the same government which forced Bradley Manning to stand naked in his jail cell for weeks is now urging that millions more citizens suffer the same humiliation. Strip-searching is simply a corollary to indefinite detention without charge, and the self-proclaimed right to assassinate people by secret decree. It's an all-inclusive program of The Naked and the Dead.

Let's be clear -- the unfettered strip-searching of suspects has little to do with safety, and everything to do with the cowing of the underclass, and sexual humiliation -- and since the majority of inmates are male, and black -- emasculation. This is especially true for Muslim prisoners, for whom forced nudity is the ultimate horror. Look at Abu Ghraib. Look at Gitmo. Now, look to Rikers Island in New York, the world's largest penal colony.

The Supreme Court decision is just one more manifestation of this country's institutional racism. If you are guilty of walking while black or brown, the next big thing after being stopped and frisked will be getting hauled off to jail and being forced to strip naked, and worse. Writes D.L. Chandler:

Last year alone, the NYPD stopped and questioned almost 700,000 persons, 87 percent of them being either Black or Hispanic. The low level of arrests made by way of this aggressive program is another matter deserving of investigation. Further, one of out of ten African-American men are in prison. According to research from the American Leadership Forum, 1 out of 3 Black boys born in 2001 have the potential to spend a lifetime in jail.

Should a person with a few unpaid parking tickets or missed court dates for a rent hearing be subjected to the same cavity search of a known murderer? The sensible answer is that the criminal proven to have the more violent record should be treated as such. The wide-sweeping assumption that every person with a traffic violation or similar minor offense needs to be treated like the town’s biggest drug dealer is a foolish one.

The practical ramifications of the Supreme Court ruling remain to be seen, says the ACLU. Will police use it as an excuse to strip-search Occupy protesters the next time they're arrested on trumped-up charges of blocking a sidewalk? Judging from the Obama Administration's own amicus brief, the authoritarians have this possibility very much in their paranoid little minds. In oral arguments, according to Steve Bergstein of the Z Magazine blog, a Justice Dept. lawyer said:

"Protesters...who decide deliberately to get arrested... might be stopped by the police, they see the squad car behind them. They might have a gun or contraband in their car and think hey, I’m going to put that on my person, I just need to get it somewhere that is not going to be found during a patdown search, and then potentially they have the contraband with them.” This position would probably be identical to that advanced by a Republican presidential administration.

The arguments, and ensuing decision, justify strip searches because your very presence within an incarceration facility automatically strips you of your civil rights. The legality of your arrest is not taken into consideration. The security of the institution always supersedes individual rights. Wide-ranging deference must always be paid to corrections personnel, says the Obama Justice Department and the concurring Supremes. They don't mention the fact that said corrections personnel are more and more likely to be underpaid and unscreened security guards in private prisons. Or that a lot of the smuggling of contraband into jails is done by corrupt guards and wardens. 

The ultimate irony, of course, is that the liberal members of the Court did not side with the Obama Administration on this one, and for that moment of sanity we should be grateful.

I had been wondering if perhaps the Justice Department would start an investigation of the Supreme Court on suspicion of influence peddling and corruption and financial malfeasance in light of the Citizens United ruling and canoodling with the Koch Brothers. There are indeed grounds for charging Clarence Thomas will failure to disclose his finances and ties with his wife's Tea Party group. There is precedent; Abe Fortas was forced to resign during the Johnson Administration after it was revealed he was on the take from Wall Street. But if past performance is any indication, Eric Holder and his boss will most likely view the judicial jokesters as useful idiots to run against during the campaign.  

Government corruption is nothing new. What is new is that all three branches and their apparatchiks are in it up to their scalps. The wrong people are being strip-searched.

Stay tuned for a grade F for the United States when Human Rights Watch comes out with its next report. As Glenn Greenwald noted in his excellent column today, the strip-searching of detainees is also a blatant violation of international human rights treaties.  

We are exceptional, all right. Exceptionally sadistic.

Arianna Cries While Unpaid Bloggers Strategize

That class action suit by former unpaid Huffington Post bloggers, seeking a one-third share of the site's multimillion-dollar sale to AOL, has been thrown out. A judge decided that since the plaintiffs were once satisfied with the glory of simply getting their stuff published on Arianna's popular site, they have no legal basis to demand their fair share now. Just because it turns out she was making money hand over fist on ad clicks, and then reaped a $330 million bonanza from the sale, doesn't mean the people who made The HuffPo what it is deserve one penny of compensation. You can't rewrite the terms of an agreement retroactively, ruled U.S. District Court Judge John Koeltl this week. Next time, be savvier and demand to get paid for your work upfront, he suggested.

The plaintiffs plan to appeal the decision. Their argument is that an unconscionable unwritten contract can't supersede Wage and Hour Laws. Slavery is still illegal, even if the slaves seem happy. Maybe this is the case that will finally make Justice Clarence Thomas open his mouth. But I doubt it.

Arianna, meanwhile, has just blogged from one of the many international greedwashing-disguised-as-do-gooder forums for the One Percent that she attends on a regular basis. Ironically, during the same week that her starving stable of former writers was getting thrown under the bus in court, she was at Oxford for something called the Skoll World Forum on Social Entrepreneurship. This is yet another pricey confab where the global elites can gather, preen and brag about how they have the power to make the lives of the lesser people (excluding unpaid writers) throughout the world so much better.  Attendance was by invitation only -- but, gushed Arianna, "I wish everyone could be here!"

As usual, today's Arianna blog is all about Arianna and her crocodile tears, and not the details of the hopeless people the convention purportedly addressed. No mention of how this hypocritical author of Third World America is getting to keep that contested third of her AOL haul, thanks to the American judicial system:

It was exhilarating -- and deeply moving -- to hear example after example of social entrepreneurs making quantifiable improvements in lives all around the world. As Stephan Chambers, chairman of the Skoll Centre, put it: "I have cried every day this week. Remember as I tell you this, that I'm male. And British. And from Oxford." I actually cried every hour. But, remember, I'm female. And Greek. And from Cambridge. I also cried when Roy Sekoff, our founding editor, texted me that his father, Arthur, had passed away. Besides being a huge supporter of HuffPost (which he rightly felt contained some of his funny, feisty, passionate DNA), he was an eagle-eyed evaluator of my hair whenever I appeared on TV -- good or bad, he let me know about it.

But enough about your coiffure, Arianna. Let's get back to that court case. The lead plaintiff was labor activist Jonathan Tasini, who wrote over 200 blogposts for the crying kleptocratista.

 He framed the suit as a class action on behalf of an estimated 9,000 bloggers for the website. Now living in Sydney, where he is writing a book and blogging at www.workinglife.org, Tasini (said) that he planned to keep up the fight for compensation. "We're using the lawsuit to spark a movement and an organising effort among bloggers to set a standard for the future because this idea that all individual creators should work for free is like a cancer spreading through every media property on the globe."

Tasini is the same journalist who once successfully sued The New York Times for copyright infringement. The 2001 Supreme Court ruling in his favor stated that the newspaper wrongfully re-licensed his and other freelancers' published work.  The paper was found to have illegally profited by selling their work to such independent data bases as LexisNexis, and it was ordered to award the pool of plaintiffs $18 million.

(I have never submitted an op-ed to The Times, but as part of the caveat for posting comments, they absolve themselves from liability for your content at the same time they reserve their rights to same. The Gray Lady, like any royal, shall have her cake and eat it too -- she can use readers' work in the future, for whatever purpose she wishes. One change made about a year ago is that readers' comments are no longer searchable via Google or other engines. And of course, readers wishing to comment more than 10 times a month must now pay for the privilege, as per the paywall*. The Times also generates revenue via its Google-ized ads on the readers comment pages. That's the main reason I don't submit comments as much as I used to.)

When Tasini filed his lawsuit last year, Arianna was deeply affronted that some people are just not willing to be slaves. You should be grateful we don't pay you, she says, because working for free amounts to Freedom itself! Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose. From the Los Angeles Times:

But while our staff writers have deadlines and commitments, as well as specific assignments, our bloggers can post as frequently or infrequently as they like -- and write about whatever they like, whenever they like, or not at all," Huffington said. "On top of that, they can crosspost their work on their own sites or elsewhere -- they own the rights to their work and can repurpose it in any way they choose."

People blog on HuffPost for free for the same reason they go on cable TV shows every night for free: either because they are passionate about their ideas or because they have something to promote and want exposure to large and multiple audiences," Huffington said. "Our bloggers are repeatedly invited on TV to discuss their posts and have received everything from paid speech opportunities and book deals to a TV show."

If you thought Arianna might have been so upset by the lawsuit that she took Tasini's posts off her site, you'd be wrong. They are there forever, generating ad revenue ad infinitum, enriching the Huffington heirs and investors for generations to come. 

But do check out Tasini's blog, linked above. He calls New York Times reporters "dolts" in one recent entry. Made my day.

* In theory. The Times today reduced its number of freebies from 20 to 10. I guess it was their idea of playing an April Fools joke on the 99%.