Entries Tagged 'women’s issues' ↓

Originally published on 2.0: The Blogmocracy

‘Obamacare’ is full of nasty surprises…

…as I pointed out in my previous article, Another hidden zinger in Obamacare. But the inevitability of ‘death panels’ and ‘administrative euthanasia’ to ration government-controlled health care funds should have surprised nobody. It always happens with socialized medicine. It has already happened in the UK; just for starters, see This is your future under Obamacare.

With Obamacare, the government saves money every time it declares a drug ineffective…

…Does anybody see a conflict of interest here?

US breast cancer drug decision ‘marks start of death panels’

h/t: huckfunn

Nick Allen in Los Angeles and Andrew Hough
Published: 10:07PM BST 16 Aug 2010

A decision to rescind endorsement of the drug would reignite the highly charged debate over US health care reform and how much the state should spend on new and expensive treatments.

Avastin, the world’s best selling cancer drug, is primarily used to treat colon cancer and was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2008 for use on women with breast cancer that has spread.

It costs $8,000 (£5,000) a month and is given to about 17,500 women in the US a year. The drug was initially approved after a study found that, by preventing blood flow to tumours, it extended the amount of time until the disease worsened by more than five months. However, two new studies have shown that the drug may not even extend life by an extra month.

The FDA advisory panel has now voted 12-1 to drop the endorsement for breast cancer treatment. The panel unusually cited “effectiveness” grounds for the decision. But it has been claimed that “cost effectiveness” was the real reason ahead of reforms in which the government will extend health insurance to the poorest.

If the approval of the drug is revoked then US insurers would be likely to stop paying for Avastin.

Read the rest.

The Deadly Pact: How Obamacare will ‘Save’ Money

By John Griffing

Andy Griffith, the former TV Sheriff of Mayberry and guardian of small town America, is now the national spokesman for ObamaCare. More specifically, this venerable gentleman is the spokesman for the new Medicare. Apparently Griffith is under the naïve belief that ObamaCare is a genuinely good thing for seniors. As much as it pains me to say this, Griffith is dead wrong. ObamaCare is a fatal bargain for seniors, and all Americans.

Although media reports covering ObamaCare have centered mainly on the health insurance mandate and hidden tax increases, the real danger of ObamaCare lies in the official sanction of “mercy death” for America’s seniors as a means of reducing federal medical outlays. No, ObamaCare doesn’t say this outright. It simply limits hospital readmissions for those using Medicare, thereafter automatically committing said Medicare recipients to hospice facilities, called “community-based care.”

Read the rest.

Obamacare opponents need to protest as vociferously as possible!

Why? Because, at least some of the time, it works.

Obama wasn’t the first corrupt Chicago politician to pay a price for tampering with America’s health care. Obama failed to learn from the example of Dan Rostenkowski. By their efforts to force Americans into socialized medicine, both have revealed their arrogant and self-serving natures, and both have permanently alienated many supporters that neither could afford to lose.

Is Obamacare Having a Rostenkowski Moment?

Politico reports:

Angry protesters shouted down Democrats at public events from Texas to Pennsylvania over the weekend, leaving the party only one real hope for getting its message out over recess: a backlash. In Austin, Texas, Rep.Lloyd Doggettwas drowned out by a group of noisy, sign-waving demonstrators who shouted, “Just say no” as he tried to talk abouthealth care reform. … In Morrisville, Pa., Rep. Patrick Murphy was forced to scrap plans for a one-on-one meet-the-congressman session when people in the crowd started shouting. Murphy switched to a town hall format mid-event and even then had to ask the audience at times to “be respectful.” And at a healthcare event in Philadelphia, Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius were repeatedly interrupted by booing and heckling. “We can shout at one another, or we can leave the stage,” Sebelius said at one point. “It’s up to you.”

I’m old enough to remember not just Hillarycare, but also the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988:

The 1988 Catastrophic Act focused on providing protection against catastrophic medical expenses under Medicare. Specifically, the Act expanded the Medicare program to provide protection against catastrophic medical expenses and for the first time, provided coverage under the Medicare program for prescription drugs. To pay for these benefit expansions, a new supplemental premium tax on all persons eligible for Medicare was enacted.

Chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means Dan Rostenkowski lead the charge for the 1988 Act and paid a price. The Chicago Tribune from August 19, 1989 tells the story:

Congressman Dan Rostenkowski, one of the most powerful politicians in the United States, was booed and chased down a Chicago street Thursday morning by a group of senior citizens after he refused to talk with them about federal health insurance. Shouting “Coward,” “Recall” and “Impeach,” about 50 people followed the chairman of the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee up Milwaukee Avenue after he left a meeting in the auditorium of the Copernicus Center, 3106 N. Milwaukee Ave., in the heart of his 8th Congressional District on the city’s Northwest Side.

Eventually, the 6-foot-4-inch Rostenkowski cut through a gas station, broke into a sprint and escaped into his car, which minutes earlier had one of the elderly protesters, Leona Kozien, draped over the hood. Kozien, one of more than 100 senior citizens who attended the gathering, said she had hoped to talk to Rostenkowski, her congressman, at the meeting.

But Rostenkowski clearly did not want to talk with her, or any of the others who had come to tell their complaints about the high cost of federal catastrophic health insurance. “These people don’t understand what the government is trying to do for them,” the 61-year-old congressman complained as he tried to outpace his pursuers. [PB: I think they understood all too well.]

…
The law was repealed…

Read the rest.

Epilogue

Rostenkowski eventually was indicted and sent to prison for corruption. Following his indictment, he lost his congressional seat to Republican Michael Flanagan. Unfortunately, Flanagan was, in turn, defeated by the politically well-connected Rod Blagojevic, who later became governor of Illinois. As of this writing Blago is on trial for, among other things, selling Obama’s vacant Senate seat. Dan Rostenkowski died on August 11, 2010.

Also see:

American Thinker: Two Cheers for Old-Fashioned Political Scoundrels

By Gramfan

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary Feminism is defined thus:

It was everywhere when it was first published in 1970.

It was virtually the next best thing that had happened to women since Emmeline Pankhurst and her Suffragettes worked to get women the vote. So we were told.

And certainly you cannot deny the benefits and progress that have come from these two women, and the many others who have taken over the baton and changed the lives of millions.

Many of today’s other famous feminists are living very comfortably on self-earned wealth: fine with me, it’s well-deserved.

They have turned their politics and activism into income sources by working in journalism and other media.

People listen to them.

They have power, enormous power.

Camille Paglia is but one of many whose opinions are highly respected, and it is easy to see why.

Germaine Greer is still going on strongly about all kinds of issues.

Gloria Steinem is another member of this esteemed crowd and there are also very many not-so-famous feminists.

These feminists are in almost all professions from politics to pianists, parents and yes, prostitutes – the oldest “profession” of them all!

Then of course there are the other women in the world who don’t occupy this rarified space but who have decided, and yes, it is a decison now, to become home-makers and mothers. Some of them decide to resume successful careers and some chose not to.

But I wonder if we all really received so many benefits from all these feminists? Some of us didn’t.

With all that is good and liberating in human progress there are often side effects and “unintended consequences”. Sadly there are goals that have not, and will not be achieved.

Certainly many of us get equal work for equal pay nowadays but not all of us. Then there are those who chose to be wives and mothers, who are often scorned, or looked down upon, for their choices.

They had jobs, but feminists weren’t satisfied; every other woman had to get one too. So they opened fire on homemakers with a savagery that still echoes throughout our culture. A housewife is a “parasite,” [Betty] Frieden writes; such women are “less than fully human” insofar as they “have never known a commitment to an idea.”

And….

Housewives, not men, were the prey in feminism’s sights when Kate Millett decreed in 1969 that the family must go. Feminists do not speak for traditional women. Men cannot know this, however, unless we tell them how we feel about them, our children, and our role in the home.

Men must understand that our feelings towards them and our children are derided by feminists and have earned us their enmity. Whether or not this understanding garners men’s support, traditional women must defend ourselves because the feminist offensive is, most essentially, a breach of solidarity with us, a disavowel of the obligation to honor the Women’s Pact [that religious celibates, professional women, and homemakers respect each other] that women in the movement owed to us (Source).

Oh yes, this site has more. Feminism today goes on and on, intellectualising and re-defining feminism to the extent where it is almost too difficult to follow, let alone comprehend.

Quite frankly I am more interested in the practical day-to-day realities. I take the two definitions at face value and I note it doesn’t specify any nationality,political allegiance or religion.

1. the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
2. organized activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests

It is true a lot of this has happened in the West but rather than have Greer et al espouse “intellectual yada yada” I would rather see these women get militant again and do something to help their long-suffering sisters who live in Islamic countries, and who can but only dream of the lifestyle many of their famous feminist sisters enjoy.

All too often I see stories of honour killings, rape, female genital mutilation, subservience, domestic (and other) violence, forced marriage and utter discrimination perpetrated against women in Muslim countries and now also in the West.

Some women are getting hymenoplasties and buying repair kits before they marry.

Some are being recruited as homicide bombers.

One is punished for drinking beer, others face lashings or stonings.

An Australian Islamist tries to justify polygamy for everyone.

There are women who suffer terribly from acid attacks quite frequently.

Women in Gaza are not allowed to ride motorcycles, and Somali women are being scrutinised when wearing a bra!

Where’s Germaine when you need her, or would this make her happy I wonder?

And recently we have the on-going case of Rifka Bary who, as a minor, cannot chose her religion, and could become a victim of honorcide for apostasy. If she is sent back to her parents her fate is unknown. If she is allowed to remain alive the Islamists can deny honorcide even exists. This is happening in the USA now.

Yet in spite of these incidents feminists like Naomi Wolf manage to defend discrimination towards women in Islam and it then takes a compassionate feminist, Phyllis Chesler, who has actually lived in a Muslim country, to sort it out for her!

I know many feminists, and women in general, can be fearless fighters.

Code Pink, for example, have gone to Iraq and Afghanistan. True, they are an anti-war movement, but perhaps, just perhaps, they could have drawn some attention to the women who live and suffer in the war zones they are so adamantly against.

They could have easily added one more mission statement to what is on their website which mentions “social justice”.

Indeed, any other anti-war group could easily have done the same. I know they do not define themselves as feminists per se, but why not do more?

Could they not have met with Malalai Joya and offered some help?

Indeed, could not some of our famous feminists, female politicians and celebrities who spend so much time choking on their own venom over Sarah Palin have done the same? Are they afraid?

Or are they simply not interested in the women’s issues of today because they think it is another culture and therefore they shouldn’t interfere. They know it isn’t right but they can turn a blind eye to it, even as it happens under their noses, in their own countries.

It’s a cop-out.

The improvement of the condition of women in Islam is, to me, a far loftier goal than getting to wear trousers, getting equal pay, getting an abortion on demand, and having a man treat a woman more like a man! This was definitely an “unintended consequence” for me: trivial as it may seem.

I am much heartened by the fact that progress is being made, albeit in small steps.

Kuwati women in parliament refuse to wear the veil.

An Egyptian Cleric wants to ban burqas and other facial coverings.

Honor killing or honoricide is getting more attention.

Lubna Hussein got a lot of media attention over her sentence for wearing trousers.

Najwa Bin Laden and her son, Omar, wrote a book about their husband and father, Osama, and seem to be fearless about it. They have provided a fascinating insight into this man.

I think the real “feminist” heroines now are the ones who have literally put their lives on the line, not only for women in Islam but for the world in general.

Their goals and committment are what is truly deserving of our respect and support.

I am referring to women like Wafa Sultan, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Nonie Darwish, Supna Zaidi, Irshad Manji and women like them.

There is another one who would have possibly made it to this list: Neda Soltan.

Tragically she cannot, but in spirit she can inspire so much. I feel she deserves a mention among these brave, dedicated and fascinating women.

This is my challenge to todays feminists. Use your power again.

I am “just a Mom”. I do not have your platform and power.

This is indeed a most worthy cause to support and fight for.
With thanks to MuslimsAgainstSharia.

“Gramfan” has been blogging since 2002. She is “just a Mom” of two grown-up sons, and helps her husband of 38 years. She has occasionally written pieces for other ‘blogs, and posts comments. She now writes exclusively for Muslims Against Sharia.

The Infamous 1389 Stirs The Pot Again

Subject: Banned from BoingBoing with NO notice or explanation?

Dear Mark Frauenfelder,

For all your supposed interest in getting rid of onerous censorship, there seems to be some of it taking place on BoingBoing itself.

I created an account for the purpose of posting a comment on the BoingBoing article having to do with what was purportedly a kid’s lingerie line being sold by Noah Cyrus (but was actually no such thing). I roundly criticized BoingBoing for having run what I deemed to be a hysterically-worded and error-riddled article in the first place. I used NO vulgar language, NO bigoted comments, NO threats, NO libelous accusations, nothing that should have gotten me banned from your site.

My comment was posted for maybe half an hour or so. Then the comment vanished. I saw a notice that my logon had expired, so I tried to log on again to see what had happened. I simply got a message saying “Permission denied.” Then I went to check my email. There was NO notification that my comment had been taken down or that I had been banned from BoingBoing. But apparently that is what happened.

It seems awfully hypocritical that someone at BoingBoing is banning people, WITHOUT notice or explanation, simply for criticizing BoingBoing itself.

It looks as though I need to go back to blogging about censorship issues, as tired of that topic as I am by now, simply because sites such as BoingBoing are failing to do their job. Obviously, just because a site CLAIMS to be in favor of free expression of ideas, does not mean that it actually IS. And in my experience, no site that employs, or is run by, persons of a left-wing bent, ever truly goes to bat for free expression for anybody who DISAGREES with material on the site itself. In other words…it’s always free speech for me, but not for thee!

For obvious reasons, I see no reason to identify myself to you any further. If you don’t trust me to comment on your site, why should I trust you with my personal information?

1389AD

“Hey, it’s their site, and they can do what they want!”

That’s true.

It’s also completely irrelevant.

“Why?”

Here’s why:

If BoingBoing and Mark Frauenfelder want to posture as defenders of free expression on the Internet and everywhere else, that’s their privilege.

If BoingBoing and Mark Frauenfelder want to ban me for making a comment that criticizes them for having run a deeply flawed article on their own website, that’s also their privilege.

But if they choose to do both at once, they’re going to look like a bunch of fools, and it’s MY privilege to point that out!

Oh, and by the way, whether you agree with me or not, you can contact Mark Frauenfelder at mark@boingboing.net and let him know what you think!

Saudi King Pardons Rape Victim

Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:39pm EST
By Andrew Hammond

RIYADH (Reuters) – Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah has pardoned the victim of a gang-rape whose sentencing to 200 lashes caused an international outcry, officials said on Monday.

Pardoning a rape victim?

Is there not something inherently wrong in the world view that gave rise to this situation?

A tremendous moral distortion is inherent in Islam.

We saw it also in the recent plight of the British woman in Sudan. Angry mobs had been demanding that she be put to death for having allowed her pupils to name a teddy bear “Mohammed” (h/t TexasFred).

The answer? Confront, challenge, and refute Islam at every turn.

Shari’a law – inherent in the Koran and in Islamic tradition – demands that those who renounce Islam are to be killed. The same penalty applies to those who preach Christianity to Muslims.

Given that reality, I must point out that we can scarcely expect people to abandon Islam unless we offer them a better alternative. Nonetheless, evil must be renounced. Early Christians faced the same penalty in the days of the Roman Empire, and we face it again today in many parts of the world. We must be prepared to explain, both to ourselves and to Muslims, why embracing Christianity is worth the risk.

(H/T: CZ the day)

For comparison:

King James Version: John 8:1-11

1 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.

2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

4 they say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: Lev. 20.10 · Deut. 22.22-24 but what sayest thou?

6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

Further explanation…

What was Christ writing on the ground?

Bishop St. Nikolai Velimirovich shows how Church tradition sheds some more light upon the meaning of this story.

Remember the Nancy Pelosi hijab flap?

Pelosi had no business going to Syria, undermining Bush Administration foreign policy, and giving an undeserved PR boost to Bashar Assad in the first place. She had to compound that error by wearing the symbol of a religion that she (supposedly) does not believe in, and by embracing a symbol for the oppression of women. But then, tasteless behavior and bad judgment is exactly what one would expect from a liberal Democrat, especially one from California. (See Syrian Reformists: The Damage from Pelosi’s Visit Will Be Felt for Years.)

Covering the cranium to cuddle up to CAIR

Bush officials don the hijab for the rededication ceremony of The Islamic Center in Washington June 27, 2007. They took some heat in the blogosphere for that. Here again, they had no business attending such a gathering at all.

Did Laura Bush get the take-home lesson?

Photo op: Touring the Middle East for breast cancer awareness

Laura Bush plans six-day tour of the Middle East; spokeswoman says she won’t wear abaya

Laura Bush departs Saturday on a six-day tour of the Middle East, with stops planned in the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Jordan. The White House says the first lady plans to meet with government officials and leaders of medical and women’s groups during her overseas trip.

Given that the first lady wore a headscarf when she visited a Jewish holy site in Jerusalem and a mantilla when she met with Pope Benedict XVI, we asked if Bush will be wearing some sort of abaya while she’s in Saudi Arabia. “No,” Sally McDonough, the first lady’s spokeswoman, tells USA TODAY’s David Jackson, adding: “they do not expect nor encourage it” of Western visitors.

There’s nothing wrong with working for improved detection and cure of breast cancer, or any other type of cancer. I’m all for that, and you may recall that I have blogged about cancer both here and on the 1389 Message Blog. But some have questioned Laura Bush’s priorities in taking that quest to the Muslim world, where there are more severe and immediate threats to females’ health and survival. To put it bluntly, too many girls will not live long enough to be at much risk for a disease that mainly afflicts mature women.

But that’s not all: Laura Bush went back on her word about not wearing the abaya, as you can see from the photo above.

“So she’s wearing an abaya. Why does this matter?”

Why does breast cancer goes untreated in the Middle East?

See Breast cancer often untreated in Mideast, Lifting the Veil From A Deadly Disease, and Cancer in Saudi Arabia.

Evidently, Laura Bush donned the abaya because it was a gift and she felt that it would be appropriate to be photographed in it. Unfortunately, this was a setup that sends exactly the wrong message, on so many levels!

In a nutshell, when women are veiled and kept in seclusion according to Islamic principles, how likely are they to go out and get proper medical care, which would include screening for, and treatment of, breast cancer? In Saudi Arabia, women still aren’t allowed to drive. Many Muslim women are unwilling to be examined by male doctors. Girls are too often discouraged from becoming educated in medicine or anything else.

And don’t forget that the country that is responsible for the bulk of the advances in medical treatment in the Middle East is, of course, Israel. But Israeli physicians are not welcome in the Muslim Middle East.

Poor Longevity for Saudi Women

Stein hoist to mean Gene on LGF for the above link and for these statistics:

I often use the CIA World Fact Book’s stats about demographics.

In regards the “kingdom,” the stats show an incredible drop off in women after age 15….

0-14 years:
male 5,369,285
female 5,162,585

15-64 years:
male 9,316,694
female 7,089,370

What does this picture reveal?

In this picture, Laura herself is unveiled, but she is seated between two veiled breast cancer survivors. If women like these were free to seek whatever medical care they needed, without the necessity of wearing veils, of finding a male relative to drive them, and finding a female doctor to examine them, wouldn’t their chances of early detection and remission be far better?

It’s about CANCER, not photo ops and protocol!

By wearing an abaya to meet with dignitaries, Laura Bush is promoting the anti-woman Islamic ideology that is causing the problem in the first place!

Updated 10/27/07:
Accepting such “gifts” means accepting Islamization!

Hanging Tough in Oklahoma

The handlers for the Bush entourage should have made it clear, before the trip, that gifts of an Islamic nature should not be given and cannot be accepted. The Saudis don’t even allow Christian or Jewish items into the Tragic Kingdom at all!

Update (10/28/07): Laura Bush missed a great opportunity to keep quiet

LGF: Laura Bush Defends Saudi Misogyny

“They do not see covering as some sort of subjugation of women:” Laura Bush defends the hijab.

Note: wearing the abaya in Saudi Arabia is not a “choice.” It’s mandatory for all women when they are in public. If they show even a little bit of ankle, they’re subject to being beaten and arrested by the Saudi religious police (mutaween).

Does Laura Bush really think those women will be honest about their opinions on this misogynistic practice?

Republican Riot: The Ghost of Ramadan Future

More bizarre pix!

Updated 1/1/08:

GOV: Burqas are Bad for Your Health

Lack of sunlight is unhealthy for women, unborn babies, and nursing infants.

How many find the below picture a bit “Pointless”? Repressive?

Technorati : Bush, Islam, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Syria, breast cancer, cancer, enemy propaganda, health, political correctness, women
Del.icio.us : Bush, Islam, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Syria, breast cancer, cancer, enemy propaganda, health, political correctness, women
Ice Rocket : Bush, Islam, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Syria, breast cancer, cancer, enemy propaganda, health, political correctness, women

Powered by Zoundry

First National Consensus On Ovarian Cancer Symptoms Stresses Education For Earlier Diagnosis

From the article:

Researchers, including Dr. Barbara Goff, a gynecologic oncologist at the University of Washington, have conducted conclusive research that demonstrates that the following symptoms are much more likely to occur in women with ovarian cancer than women in the general population. These symptoms include:

• Bloating
• Pelvic or abdominal pain
• Difficulty eating or feeling full quickly
• Urinary symptoms (urgency or frequency)

Women who have these symptoms almost daily for more than a few weeks should see their doctor, preferably a gynecologist. [emphasis mine]

This is an important breakthrough because, up to now, ovarian cancer has been known as the “silent killer.” Without obvious, clear-cut symptoms, it has been difficult to detect ovarian cancer before it has spread too far for successful treatment. But now we know what to look for, and this can offer women stricken with this disease a much better chance for early detection and cure.

Whether or not you yourself happen to be an adult woman at risk for ovarian cancer, please pass this information along to the women in your family. It could save someone’s life!

Technorati tags:
cancer
ovarian cancer
PSA

More about ovarian cancer at Science Daily.

According to this Breitbart article from AFP, more and more physically normal women are demanding plastic surgery to “improve” the appearance of their vulvas. This “designer vagina” surgery (or, rather, butchery) involves cutting away healthy sensitive tissue, with the end result being a vulva resembling that of a prepubescent girl.

1389 declines to speculate on the depth of the mental, emotional, and spiritual sickness that could motivate supposedly modern, civilized people to begin toying with the savage custom of female genital mutilation.

Off-topic tech note for fellow mobile web enthusiasts: 1389′s laptop was down, so this entire blog post was entered via a bare-bones Sanyo SCP-7000 cell phone. This is not the easiest way to go, but it will work. However, the memory limitations of the cellphone itself are a problem, in that this limits the size of the file that can be loaded back into the cellphone for editing with the Blogger editor.

Technorati : atavism, culture wars, moblog
Del.icio.us : atavism, culture wars, moblog
Ice Rocket : atavism, culture wars, moblog

Powered by Zoundry