Tag Archives: Mitt Romney

Monday Scraps 83

1. GIFTS: After Romney’s post-election definition-of-a-sore-loser quotes about the “gifts” the President gave young people and minorities (Did you know you can buy a 24-year-old’s vote for a couple of months of contraception. TRUE FACT), Jon Stewart shared a few other “gifts.”

2. MORMON: Super excellent piece by McKay Coppins for BuzzFeed on being the sole Mormon reporter on the Romney press bus.

3. MEXICO: What happens to journalism when bribery, threats, and frequent spates of violence directed specifically at the press plague your country? Just ask reporters covering Mexico’s drug wars (NYT Book Review).

4. LANGUAGE: Which words does the NYT use too often? A new internal tool lets the paper (and curious spectators) explore the patterns of language perpetuated and created.

5. HILLARY: Gail Collins + Hillary Clinton = excellent reading. What will Hillary do next? Sleep, aparently, and exercise.

6. DENVER: This is from 2007, but I’m kind of obsessed with Katherine Boo this week, so I’m sharing it anyway. For the New Yorker, she covers the story of Denver’s superintendent and the journey of one turnaround school that couldn’t quite turnaround.

Related Post: Sunday 82: Kevin Durant and the OKC, Rachel Maddow nails it, cute MD photos

Related Post: Sunday 81: Callie Khouri, Anita Sarkeesian, sex surrogacy

2 Comments

Filed under Education, Media, Politics, Really Good Writing by Other People

Pie and Wine, Relief and Fear

It’s over, and good riddance! Can we just wash our hands of the whole campaign season, of looping attack ads, of misquotes, of rape philosophizing, of spray-tans, of soundbites, of punditry, of Gallup and Rasmussen? Wouldn’t that be nice?

But the work isn’t over, so said President Obama on Tuesday night, and he’s obviously right. In the waves of relief and gratitude and joy and thank-fucking-God-it’s-over, there was also fear. At least, there was for me. That’s what I wanted to convey this week at Role/Reboot, how amazed I am by what we did this election, and how scared I am by the work ahead:

Related Post: xkcd on electoral precedent.

Related Post: You guessed it, I’m a privileged white girl.

1 Comment

Filed under Gender, Politics, Republished!

Binders

I know, I know, the binders have been much discussed and maligned, tumbled, tweeted, instagrammed and reviewed on Amazon. While it is a hilarious turn of phrase, in my opinion, it was one of the least problematic statements from Governor Romney during the debate.

This week for Role/Reboot, I explored why I’m down the with binders o’ women, as long as we recognize how temporary a fix such a binder is and how much opportunity equalizing we still have to do. Romney doesn’t, and that’s the real problem:

Side note: If you get a chance, read Nicole Rodgers’ piece on Role/Reboot today, because it is excellent.

Related Post: So what does “middle income” mean anyway?

Related Post: A NOH8 day.

2 Comments

Filed under Gender, Politics, Republished!

Bottom Line

Is it Election Day yet? Pretty please? Don’t know if I can handle two more months of this b.s.

And b.s. it is, on both sides. Every day we are inundated by silly shit that just does not matter. One of my conservative FB friends posted this:

Times have changed, no doubt, but for better or for worse, daytime talk shows are one of the best ways to reach the masses. And after all, when you’re President, the masses are your constituency and you take every chance you get to talk directly to them. You know who else figured that out?

Sigh. This View thing isn’t even really what’s bothering me.

It feels like my desire to be an engaged citizen and a well-informed voter means I just have to sift through garbage all day to find out what’s really going on. So Mitt Romney said something dumb about airplane windows, who cares? Everyone misspeaks, and as much fun as liberals had making fun of Bush’s made-up words, I think we can all agree that that was not his greatest flaw as President.

This airplane thing, or making fun of Romney’s tan, or Obama going on The View, that’s all beside the point. The point, as I see it, is this:

In two months, we’re going to elect a President whose job it is to represent the United States on the world stage. The person we elect should be the one who most shares our values about what makes America special, about what we need to do differently, about what are the best paths to progress, and where that path should lead. I like a fine orator, too, but that’s not what this is about.

To my view, here’s how it boils down, though feel free to jump in on the comments if you see it differently:

Fundamentally, Democrats believe that there is systemic inequality in America’s history that has led to widespread inequality now. The government should not be blind to that history, and should work to assist populations that have been harmed in the past as well as create a level playing field moving forward. Social ills (drug dependency, crime, teen pregnancy, etc) are the results of lack of access to education, health care, etc and should be addressed with holistic approaches to poverty reduction. Democrats believe in autonomy of person, which means that individuals have the right to find their own happiness as long as it is not at the expense of society. The government should stay out of the private sphere, which means not regulating or incentivizing sexual behavior or family structure. Democrats believe that America is stronger for its immigrant history, and that our future strength is also tied to embracing diversity by facilitating the growth and education of immigrating and struggling populations.

Fundamentally, Republicans believe that America is a country where anyone can succeed if they try hard enough. Systemic inequality is an excuse for laziness and lack of ambition. Republicans believe that those who work can earn enough to feed themselves, clothe themselves, educate themselves, and keep themselves healthy. Social ills are largely the result of individual or community weakness and lack of discipline and should be punished harshly as a deterrent to others, not rewarded with extra social services. Republicans believe that a free market will, in the long run, create the best solutions for all Americans, even if it leaves some behind in the short term. Republicans believe that traditional family structures are good for the health of the country, and that the government does not have a responsibility for indulging individual life choices that deviate from that model. Republicans believe that resources should be directed to American citizens first, before supporting immigrants, and that Christianity is a fundamental feature (if not explicit) of Real America.

Am I oversimplifying? Yes. Am I biased? Yes. Does this do a disservice to some Democrats and some Republicans? Yes. But reading between all the silly b.s. about talk-shows, tanner, airplane windows, this is what I hear from both sides. The Americas they envision are very different places, and this election shouldn’t be about who flubs the fewest interview lines, whose wife is a better mom, who has the most adorable children, but about what you envision for 21st century America.

But, alas, I don’t make the rules.

Related Post: The fundamental political issue: sex. 

Related Post: Huffington Post and the changing iconography of the abortion debate.

2 Comments

Filed under Media, Politics

Video Wednesday

I’m busy, and sleepy, and my coffee consumption is about 8oz behind where it needs to be, so ignore your email for 10 minutes, go find a quiet conference room, and watch some videos that will make you smile:

The Austin Police Department released an It Gets Better video:

Soledad O’Brien is on a serious hot streak. Here she is up against mega pastor Joel Osteen:

Does anyone else have a super crush on The Ill Doctrine’s Jay Smooth? Here’s Jay on why Obama’s leaked tape from 2008 isn’t the same as Romney’s 47%. Can he just talk to me sleep every night? We don’t even have to cuddle.

Related Post: Youtube win: so this is why people hate feminism!

Related Post: The Youtube video that made Elizabeth Warren famous.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Media, Politics

Middle Income

This is no longer the political story du jour thanks to Mitt Romney’s 47% speech, but it’s the topic on which I’ve been ruminating, so here are my ruminations after the fact.

Last week, on Good Morning America, Romney was asked by George Stephanopoulos what he meant by the phrase “middle income.”

Stephanopoulos: ‘‘Is $100,000 middle income?” 

Romney: ‘‘No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.”

What was the Jezebel headline? “Mitt Romney Thinks Middle Income Is Between $200K and $250K.” Sigh. No, that’s not what he said at all, and you are willfully misinterpreting his words to make them sound worse than they are. Prepositions matter, okay? “Between” is not the same as “or less”. He couldn’t remember the exact ceiling (either $200K or $250K) but that and less, was what he considered middle income. The incorrect headline feigns outrage over something he didn’t say, instead of substantiating outrage at what he actually says and means. Claiming that $200K is still middle income is problematic enough without twisting words.

So what should “middle income” mean anyway? As a non-economist, non-sociologist, I would say that middle income would be the middle 50% of American households. According to the Census, the median household income is just over $50,000. Less than 2% of households make over $250,000 a year. Wait, what? So we’re saying “middle income” is the bottom 98%? I’m no mathematician but that makes very little sense.

What I find more interesting is the middle class mindset. To me, that’s when you can cover the basics, rent, food, clothes, but the big things, health care, dentistry, car maintenance, education, always keep you a little worried. You feel good about your finances, unless something unexpected happens, and unexpected things usually happen. For the middle class mindset, as opposed to the hard numbers, context matters. In a town full of millionaires, the $250K household feels like they’re falling behind. In a town with 40% unemployment, the guy making $19K is doing pretty well.

Everyone likes to think they’re middle class. It’s how we sleep at night knowing that 15% of the population lives below the poverty line. Thinking we are just on the other side of it, or at least not that far from it, makes it easier to spend money on luxuries and feel okay about it. I think it every time I spend $20 on a manicure, I’m middle class and this is just the occasional, ahem weekly, treat…But if we really wrap our heads around what average American families survive on, many of us have to admit that we live comfortably on the far side of middle income. That’s not to minimize the struggles of the $100K households–shit is expensive, y’all–but perspective is important.

Related Post: 99% or what? Why I don’t identify with OWS.

Related Post: Why people with college loans aren’t lazy.

1 Comment

Filed under Politics

Family Matters

My piece for Role/Reboot today was inspired by a bunch of things. You’ll see references to Toni Morrison (thanks Alex!), kudos aimed at a documentary called Uña y Carne, and some spectacularly dumb Mitt Romney quotes about family:

Related Post: There’s also no wrong way to have a body.

Related Post: A small world story.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Family, Media, Republished!

Times Change

Look what one of my Massachusetts friends found from back in the day:

Oh hey, remember when Romney was just that moderate Republican that Massachusetts voters elected to Governor?

On the other side of the aisle, as everyone in the world knows, President Obama gave the big thumbs up marriage equality. I’ve since “evolved” in my own views, but my initial instinct was not the cheering/applauding/hooraying of many of my friends and the internet.

My initial reaction was one part skepticism, one part “not enough, Sir,” and one part “too little too late.” It’s hard for me to believe that a black lawyer could ever be on board with a separate but equal policy, which is what we mean when we say we think civil unions are good enough. I felt like the timing, after the crushing blow of North Carolina, was infuriating. And then I got a campaign email and I felt pandered to. The email included this:

I respect the beliefs of others, and the right of religious institutions to act in accordance with their own doctrines. But I believe that in the eyes of the law, all Americans should be treated equally. And where states enact same-sex marriage, no federal act should invalidate them.

This is what would make me a terrible politician, and possibly a dictator handing down mandates from on high, but this is how I feel: I do NOT respect discriminating beliefs of others. I do NOT believe civil rights should be a state-to-state issue. I do NOT believe that the federal government should condone states removing the civil rights of a particular group just because the people in that state feel like it. Obviously, this is not how our government works, and I’m pretty sure there are really good reasons for that. But then I watched this speech by NC’s Reverand Barber (skip to 3:10), and I got all fired up again:

“The question should have been, do you believe that the majority, by popular vote, should get to decide the rights of the minority. That’s a dangerous precedent, because that means that the rights of people are determined by who’s in the majority at a particular time.”

All of the above happened in the first five minutes after I saw the President’s announcement, but I mentioned my views have evolved, so what happened? Well, you internet people happened. I started reading Facebook posts, blog posts, Tweets and the like from some of my LGBTQ friends, and I was reminded of a few things.

My friend Helen, at Bettencourt Chase, wrote this: Today feels momentous and magical and full of hope. Will this change everything? Perhaps not in a big immediate way. Equal marriage is not going to be legalized across the country tomorrow. But things are changing, and they are changing with greater and greater momentum. I am so proud of President ObamaThings are changing. I have so much hope. I feel so lucky to be alive right now, watching this unfold.

My friend Jon, at The Daily Quinn, wrote this: Nothing the President said yesterday will change any law.  It will not erase the passage of North Carolina’s anti-equality amendment.  But if you believe that politics still matters, that words have meaning and make a difference, that symbols are an important part of our culture, yesterday was a big day.  Because the leader of your country was willing to talk about you on TV and say that he supports you.  Supports you in spite of the voices that hound you and the laws that deny you.  The President is the only person who represents the whole country, and so the voice with which he speaks is the vessel of our collected voices.  And so it is the word of the land, going forth to say: Your lifestyle has value.  Your love has value.  And instantly you are a confused teenager again, and that man on the screen, that symbol of your country, is saying the words you so longed to hear at that young and impressionable age.

And I was reminded by Helen and Jon, and so many others, that this really is a monumental moment in our history. What’s more, it’s not really my monumental moment to judge and politically dissect. I was never a confused teenager who wondered if what I wanted was good and right and allowed. I never had an authority figure tell me my lifestyle was “wrong” and I never had to worry that my relationships wouldn’t be validated in the way, however flawed, that we in this society validate them. I was reminded that it took Reagan years to acknowledge AIDS. I was reminded that Clinton put into to place DOMA and DADT. I was reminded that I will get to be there for the weddings of my LGBTQ friends, a pleasure denied my parents.

So perhaps maybe I should step off.

Related Post: Do you hope your kids will be straight?

Related Post: Happy Equal Pay Day

2 Comments

Filed under Gender, Politics

Sunday Scraps 52

1. LAWS: Some of the ladies at The Rumpus took it upon themselves to respond to the rash of lady-bashing legislation with some suggestions for bills that will make most penises curl up inside themselves.

2. RACE: In response to Trayvon Martin’s death, Urban Cusp has an essay, one of many of this theme, from Ajani Husbands on advice to black children.

3. GEEK: This is the most preposterous Twitter convo you will read this week. A female developer questions a sexist ad and is berated by an idiotic CEO who actually uses the line “I’m a family man,” as if family men can’t be sexist.

4. TEST: What happens when a 35-year-old attempts the SAT again? Bad things, according to Deadspin.

5. WAR: Great piece from The New Yorker on Robert Bayles, PTSD, the culture of war.

6. POLITICS: Kathleen Parker at the Washington Post argues that Southern Republicans in particular are getting screwed in this primary season. Whatever, Mitt Romney likes grits, y’all, so clearly he knows what’s up.

Related Post: Sunday 51 – Frank Bruni, A League of Their Own, inspiration from a trike-rider.

Related Post: Sunday 50xkcd, tenure of dictators, The Wire faces March Madness.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Gender, Media, Politics, Really Good Writing by Other People

Sunday Scraps 31

1. STEVE: There are a ton of great profiles this week of Steve Jobs. Rather than read those, spend 15 minutes listening to his 2005 commencement speech to Stanford University.

2. FEMINISM: This is the latest in the Tropes vs. Women series of clips from Feminist Frequency. Anita Sarkeesian digs into the “straw feminist” cliche, in which feminist characters are pushed to extreme views in order to distance more likable characters from ever identifying with feminism.

3. SPORTS: ESPN‘s “Body Issue” is out, and the gallery is jaw dropping. Spend some time gaping at Apolo Ohno, Gretchen Bleiler and Blake Griffin in the buff.

4. CRAFT: Bettencourt Chase is one of my new favorite all-things-pretty blogs. Crafts, photography, recipes, they’ve got it all. Look at that cake batter sprinkle bark. That’s just ridiculous.

5. POLITICS: Jon Stewart has a grand old time with old footage of Mitt Romney, the flip-flopping king of spin.

6. MICHAEL: Here’s a fun profile in NYMag about writer Michael Lewis and and the fame and fortune that seem to follow his pen (or, as is more likely, Macbook.)

Related Post: Mindy Kaling, soda bottle lamps, cereal boxes, and the Oxford comma.

Related Post: Suri’s burn book, Michael K Williams, “shorty.”

5 Comments

Filed under Art, Body Image, Education, Food, Gender, Hollywood, Media, Politics, Really Good Writing by Other People, Sports