Meanwhile, anti-soda-tax forces were lobbying just as hard, with a small army of executives, lobbyists and union leaders in Council chambers. Soda mogul Harold Honickman, owner of the Canada Dry Bottling Co., in Pennsauken, was seated in the waiting area of Council President Anna Verna’s office before 9 a.m.

“The right decision is no soda tax,” said Honickman, whose family has also been persuasive with its pocketbooks, contributing this year to the campaigns of Council members Greenlee, Bill Green, Maria Quinones-Sanchez, Darrell Clarke and Jannie Blackwell, as well as to Nutter.

I know that Green, Greenlee, and Quinones-Sanchez voted for the property tax increase, and having lived in Philadelphia for ten years, I can hazard a good guess that Honickman’s money played a big role in helping these “guardians of the public trust” find the spine achieve the necessary erection to fuck their constituents yet again. I haven’t received the roll call yet, but when I do, you can bet I’ll be naming more names. These whores, however, have lost my vote. I don’t care how fucking “progressive” you say you are: when you’re hitting homneowners, most of us moderate-income and struggling with stagnant wages, over and over and over again while giving corporation a free pass, you can go kiss my ass BEFORE I wipe.

So, for that matter, have Coke and Pepsi lost my business. We’ve been hit with three property tax hikes over the past three years: 9.9% increase in 2009, I forget what the other increase was, and now we’re getting another 3.85% added on going forward. And you know, I am NOT the guy who typically bitches about paying taxes: I firmly believe they are the price we pay for living in a civilized society. But jesus fucking christ, homeowners in Philly have taken it on the chin the past three years running. It is not our fault that Tom Corbett is a fucking penisface who deliberately underfunded our schools. It is not our fault that Philadelphia hired grifter Arlene Ackerman, who together with the incompetent boobs at the School Reform Commission sank the schools into an even worse deficit (by the way, note to Council: once you get Coca-Cola’s dick out of your mouth, maybe you could take some steps to get rid of Ackerman, or is that too much to ask). It is not our fault that the economy crashed either: that was the banks.

Everyone has to sacrifice except those who can afford to sacrifice. “City of Brotherly Love”, my ass: they ought to call it Corporadelphia, because that’s who our lawmakers are standing up for. So Coca Cola and Pepsico, you who lobbyed so hard to protect your already massive profits, I am going to offset my property tax increase by giving up your product, which I usually drink during my lunchbreak. No more Coke or Pepsi, no more Minute Maid juices, no more Aquafina or Dasani (both of which have trace amounts of salt, making sure your thirst is never truly quenched). I can’t afford that luxury anymore.

And what a luxury: both of these products contain enormous amounts of caffeine, which has been linked to cancer as well as high blood pressure, heart attack, and stroke. Everyone knows that sugar is bad for your teeth, but what you may not know is that the phosphoric acid in soda is as bad for your teeth as drinking battery acid and can give you osteoporosis as well.

This is what soda does to your teeth. This is what Philadelphia’s City Council protected.

So fuck you Coca-Cola and Pepsi: I’d sooner drink piss than drink your products. And now that you’ve added on a shitload of extra money to my taxes, because god forbid a global industry worth billions pays any extra taxes, I have the perfect excuse not to.

in practice, rape and the notion of sexual conquest persist for the same reason that warfare persists: because the human animal— especially the male animal— craves drama as much as food, shelter and clothing. Conquering an unwilling sex partner is about as much drama as a man can find without shooting a gun— and, of course, guns haven’t disappeared either.

Earth to liberated women: When you display legs, thighs or cleavage, some liberated men will see it as a sign that you feel good about yourself and your sexuality. But most men will see it as a sign that you want to get laid.

Now, I think the best response to this lazy thinking was comment number 12 at Murhta’s original response:

I, personally, want to get laid. Cause it’s fun. That’s why I’m dressing up sexy and going out tonight. Conversely, I do NOT want to get raped. Cause it’s NOT fun. How is that confusing?”

I’d like to build on that for a minute, because Dan’s argument is incredibly dishonest and pernicious. It excuses inexcusable behavior by wedding it to men’s well-known susceptibility to visual stimulus. Dan’s argument is that the desire to rape is hard-wired into men. We see legs, tits, and ass, we get horny as hell, our dicks stiffen up, and we want to go rape. Sadly, many of us, Rottenberg argues, give in to our “rape urge” and the next thing you know there’s a woman crying in an alleyway.

But Rottenberg has it all wrong. Yes, men are hard-wired to be visually stimulated. Every day on my way to work, I see more beautiful women than I can count. And yes, I admit when I see tits and ass and all those other awesome parts of a lady, I get horny. And yes, I want to do all sorts of beastly, dirty, FILTHY things until my balls are drained dry. Sometimes I even want to do these things outside the confines of a relationship or during a one-night stand.

But these very instinctual, physical feelings do not constitute a desire to RAPE, but a desire to FUCK. Those are two very different things.

When I see an attractive woman that I’d like to fuck, the general hope is THAT SHE WOULD WANT TO FUCK TOO. She would be a willing participant in our debauchery, coming up with all sorts of beastly, dirty, FILTHY ideas of her own that will make everything more pleasurable for both of us (three or more if she brings a friend/s). That’s the thing about fucking: it’s about mutual pleasure. It’s consensual. I hope that most men I know feel the same way.

Rape is none of these things. It is not, as Rottenberg claims “as much drama as a man can find without shooting a gun.” It is a violent act that is no different from beating the shit out of someone weaker than oneself. There’s nothing sexy about crying, hysterical shrieks of pain and terror, and an unwilling partner who’s desperately trying to get you to stop hurting her. NOTHING. For that matter, Dan’s idea of conquest gets it all wrong too: any man knows you win a woman with your charm, your wit, your good looks to “conquer” women with physical force or trauma.

If it was about men’s uncontrollable libido and “conquering an unwilling sex partner”, shouldn’t we see more incidences of gay men raping straight men in our streets? But no: the only incidences of homosexual rape you ever hear about are those perpetrated in prison, typically by the strong against the weak. And in those incidences, no one ever pretends its about anything other than the brute application of force and power.

There’s one other bit of thoroughly-discredited nonsense in Rottenberg’s column that sadly still needs to be addressed, because it’s obvious some men just don’t get it:

Earth to liberated women: When you display legs, thighs or cleavage, some liberated men will see it as a sign that you feel good about yourself and your sexuality. But most men will see it as a sign that you want to get [raped].

Left all but unstated is the corollary: “so if you want to avoid being raped, cover up your legs, thighs, and cleavage. That way the men won’t be stimulated, and then you won’t get raped.”

This is the worst, most despicable, and most small-minded kind of victim blaming, and also the easiest to refute. Even if Dan’s hypothesis were true, that seeing women’s lady-bits make men’s worst instincts kick in, well so fucking what? We, men and women alike, have LOTS of unpleasant instincts that we manage to control in order to live in a safe and decent society. For example, I REALLY have to take a shit right now. Now, I suppose I COULD give in to my instinct and just shit in my pants (or maybe on the floor), but instead I’m going to exercise what’s called “self-control” and wait until this paragraph is done to make a quick trip to the loo, the socially accepted place to take a crap.

[...]

OK, I’m back. Here’s another instinct we all have: greed. Anyone who has kids knows what a challenge it its to teach your them to share, to not be grabby. It’s hard-wired into us, which is why we parents work so hard teach our kids differently. But by Dan’s logic, there’s no point to it. Instinct is instinct, and there’s nothing to do but give in. Thus, Dan’s logic absolves the mugger who stole your watch or the pickpocket who walked off with your wallet: it is the crime victim’s fault for flaunting his wealth, setting off the instinct to be grabby.

And don’t get me started on the human instinct to fight and kill, which is so deeply rooted in our primate past. Dan’s beliefs about rape set off my instinct to punch him in the face until his teeth break: would that be OK? Or the urge to cheat (the instinct for sexual variety can be found in both men and women): if Dan’s wife were to initiate sex with me, would THAT be OK?

So just to recap: “wanting to get laid” is not the same as “wanting to get raped”. Human beings are capable of making rational choices. And criminals, not their victims, are who we hold responsible for crimes. It is a damned shame that these points even have to be made.

Post script: over at Broad Street Review, Rottenberg whines that he’s being treated unfairly by close-minded people who have no respect for ideas. But by Dan’s own logic, he deserves what he gets: he went out of his way to provoke a response, and now his reputation has been savaged, raped if you will. I think he was asking for it.

UPDATE: Self-proclaimed genius Scott Adams (creator of “Dilbert”) also buys into the “rape=sexual” desire lie. Really? It doesn’t take a genius to understand what a flawed position that is to take. But then, Scott Adams really isn’t as smart as he thinks he is.

The details of Oh,bummer’s “deal” are trickling out: if, as some have said, he’s the only thing standing in the way of right wing disaster, we are totally, thoroughly fucked in the dick with a pickle fork a backhoe:

Compared to 2010 levels, there are big cuts to cherished Democratic-backed programs. The Women, Infants and Children nutrition program is cut $504 million, foreign food assistance by $194 million and assistance to state and local law enforcement by $415 million.

The Environmental Protection Agency is cut by $1.6 billion, a 16 percent reduction, and lawmakers from Western states were able to include a rider allowing states to de-list wolves from the endangered species list.

The Homeland Security Department sees significant cuts as well: $226 million is cut from the southern border fence at the suggestion of the Obama administration, and the number of Transportation Security Administration workers is capped. FEMA first-responder grants are cut by $786 million.

Health funding also takes a serious hit. Community healthcare centers lose $600 million while HIV and other disease-prevention funds are cut by $1 billion. But Democrats noted that the health centers would not have to close altogether under a cut of this size. [...] Low-income heating assistance is cut $390 million, while Community Development Funds are cut $942 million.

Well, at least health centers won’t have to close altogether. Instead, hours will be dramatically cut, so i guess that’s OK. If you’re not sick and poor that is. As for low-income heating assistance, maybe the poor can keep warm by burning all those “Hope and Change” posters that blanketed their neighborhoods in 2008. Anyway, continuing…

Republicans claim victory in defunding two so-called “ObamaCare” programs: the Consumer Operated and Oriented Plan (Co-Op) and Free Choice Voucher programs.

If the president won’t stand up for his signature program, what does that say about his principles? What does that say about his willingness to fight for YOUR priorities, if he won’t fight for his own?

Obama is a lying piece of shit. I expect the Republicans to be evil, heartless bastards who would rape their own daughters for a nickel, but the Democrats are simply worthless. We live in a de facto one-party country: that party is Big Money, and you can’t expect anything out of them but pain and suffering. Oh and wars. We ALWAYS have plenty of money for wars.

The whole lot of them can go die in a fire for all I care.

You can watch the whole thing here.

and call me a firebagger all you want: jane hamsher has passion and grit that you rarely see anywhere else.

We Americans have short memories: here’s a little refresher as to who ruined the economy; who started a needless wasteful war in Iraq; who was warned months before September 11 that bin laden was determined to strike in the US with airplanes; who it was that turned a record surplus into a crushing deficit; who let New Orleans drown; who saddled senior citizens with deadly out-of-pocket expenses for medications; who said the levies were fine; and on and on and on.

It was THE REPUBLICANS and we can’t let them get back into power. VOTE.

How do you fix this? I have a bad feeling that you don’t. But, probably you need Congress to come up with some patchwork retroactive fix. Basically, you have a bunch of people who can’t pay their mortgages. But no one can prove that they have a right to their mortgage payment and, therefore, the right to foreclose on the home. Technically, there are millions of people who have the right to keep their home without paying for it because the real owners didn’t follow the law.

in a later post, Booman points out:

the whole thing was so criminal from top to bottom that it kind of defies accountability. Loan originators, assessors, underwriters, rating agencies, investment bankers, mortgage servicers, all engaged in knowing fraud. Some of it was technically legal, but shouldn’t have been legal. But a huge proportion of it was illegal. So many people belong in jail that we’d have to build dozens of prisons to house them.

and then there is this:

Nicolle Bradbury bought this house seven years ago for $75,000, a major step up from the trailer she had been living in with her family. But she lost her job and the $474 monthly mortgage payment became difficult, then impossible.

It should have been a routine foreclosure, with Mrs. Bradbury joining the anonymous millions quietly dispossessed since the recession began. But she was savvy enough to contact a nonprofit group, Pine Tree Legal Assistance, where for once in her 38 years, she caught a break.
[...]
All of this is largely because Mr. Cox realized almost immediately that Mrs. Bradbury’s foreclosure file did not look right. The documents from the lender, GMAC Mortgage, were approved by an employee whose title was “limited signing officer,” an indication to the lawyer that his knowledge of the case was effectively nonexistent.

Mr. Cox eventually won the right to depose the employee, who casually acknowledged that he had prepared 400 foreclosures a day for GMAC and that contrary to his sworn statements, they had not been reviewed by him or anyone else.

Interestingly, my lender is also GMAC, and I bought MY house 7 years ago too.

So let’s get this straight: the banks and mortgage lenders were so eager for profits that in many cases they broke laws to make money on mortgages they never should have been signing off on. No one knows who owns the note to any given property, meaning the lender can’t prove they have the right to foreclose. And on the other end, the foreclosure process was also corrupted, to the point where “According to the Associated Press, financial institutions were hiring just about whoever they could find, including hair stylists and Wal-Mart employees, as “foreclosure experts” to help them rush through the massive backlog of foreclosures that were rapidly piling up.”

It’s a given that none of these institutions will face any consequences for their crimes. In fact, if Booman is correct, holding the banks accountable could possibly plunge us right back into November 2008, when Henry Paulson wrote his 3 page ransom note demanding “$700 billion or the economy gets it”, and maybe worse.

When powerful entities are allowed to break the law with impunity, rule of law is undermined. I am 99% sure that GMAC no longer holds the note to my house. As surely as any other mortgage, mine has been chopped up into a gazillion tiny pieces and sold off as securities.

So I’m thinking, even though i’m current with my mortgage, maybe I’ll see if GMAC can show me the note.

Because if indeed it is true that “Technically, there are millions of people who have the right to keep their home without paying for it because the real owners didn’t follow the law”, and if it’s also true that the banksters and the mortgage industry has been breaking the law without consequences (and they may never face a consequence), I honestly don’t see what playing by the rules is getting me, other than a monthly payment to a company that doesn’t have the right to it anymore.

I’ll tell you what: I could use that extra money. I could put it toward my even more expensive student loan.

Seriously, I’d like to know: if gigantic powerful corporations are breaking the law and getting away with it, and if they have no real legal power to throw me out of my house if I stop paying my mortgage, why the hell should I keep paying? Why the hell should ANYONE keep paying? Why should anyone honor their contractual obligations, if the party they’re contracting with is a criminal enterprise engaged in outright fraud?

Someone tell me.

Federal law enforcement and national security officials are preparing to seek sweeping new regulations for the Internet, arguing that their ability to wiretap criminal and terrorism suspects is “going dark” as people increasingly communicate online instead of by telephone.

Essentially, officials want Congress to require all services that enable communications — including encrypted e-mail transmitters like BlackBerry, social networking Web sites like Facebook and software that allows direct “peer to peer” messaging like Skype — to be technically capable of complying if served with a wiretap order. The mandate would include being able to intercept and unscramble encrypted messages.

The bill, which the Obama administration plans to submit to lawmakers next year, raises fresh questions about how to balance security needs with protecting privacy and fostering innovation. And because security services around the world face the same problem, it could set an example that is copied globally.

NYT, 9/27/2010

This morning, I heard Cokie Roberts flapping her dentures on NPR about Obama’s visit with actual people last week. One guy asked “is the American dream dead?”

Dude that dream has been dead for a LOOOOOOOOONG fucking time. A country that is so mistrustful of its citizens that it demands the right, without any probable cause, to read open their mail, listen to their phone conversations, and dig through their email has forgotten the values of freedom, liberty, and justice that it was founded on.

We live in Argentina, not America. We disappear people, we assassinate our citizens without so much as a trial, we prevent our own people from access to the courts, we torture. How soon before we start giving the babies of murdered pregnant women to our elites, to raise as their own?

“Is the American dream dead?” Does a bear shit in the woods?

I swear to God, men are conditioned to behave like animals when it comes to basic bathroom hygiene. I use that word “conditioned” deliberately, since your average men’s room is a fucking disgrace: there’s typically piss all over the floor, unflushed toilets, stalls that afford you barely a modicum of privacy. So given the disgusting conditions in which we’re expected to relieve ourselves, perhaps it’s not surprise that men typically piss all over the toilet seat no matter where they go.

But to THIS guy, it’s fucking disgusting: not two minutes ago, I took a bathroom break here at work when my coffee kicked in and did what it’s expected to do. Since we had a run-in over the summer with a seat-pisser (in an office filled with women), there’s a sign prominently posted above the toilet:

EVERYONE uses the toilet.
So Please: REFRAIN FROM URINATING ON THE TOILET SEAT OR WIPE OFF YOUR MISFIRES.

NO ONE likes to sit in a PUDDLE OF URINE.

IT’S GROSS!!

I don’t recognize either of the guys doing work in the data department next door to my office, but I suspect one of them is responsible for the practically invisible droplets of piss that I sat in when I took my morning shit, since there are only three other men on this floor (counting me) and we all have wives and/or live-in girlfriends and know a thing or two about being considerate.

I don’t have much sympathy for women who don’t bother to check whether the seat is down when they use the toilet: it’s a pretty big component of the commode, and one that can’t escape the naked eye.

But despite its rich golden color when it’s collected in a toilet bowl, individual droplets of urine are generally clear and difficult to detect unless you’re willing to get up close and personal with the shitter seat, and most people aren’t up for that. And why should they be: decent people don’t piss all over a communal toilet seat and leave it wet for unsuspecting victims to sit in. It’s as if there’s this population of men that think no one takes a shit at work, so they just spray their fucking urine all over the place.

I just don’t get it, especially when the toilet seat is the crescent-shaped variety, with a little wedge cut out of the front from the inevitable last drops. It’s not like pissing accurately into the bowl is some kind of physical challenge: I manage to get all of my urine in there without getting it all over the seat, and on the occasion where I do misfire, I grab a sheet of toilet paper and wipe it up out of consideration.

Not so hard fellas. It’s called “acting civilized”, and maybe you should consider it.

Via.

You’re going to be sick.

The website is called “Becky & Jeremy’s Exciting Adoption Adventure,” created by a Haverford couple to capture a once-in-a-lifetime odyssey to bring home a son from Kazakhstan as well as the joys of raising a first child.

But what has happened so far to Becky Compton, Jeremy Meyer, and the 16-month-old they call Noah Aldanysh Compton-Meyer in the mountain-ringed city of Taraz has been anything but routine.

It is there, about 6,350 miles from home, that Meyer, 40, and Compton, 39, have spent most of the last 7 1/2 months as Noah learned to walk, ate his first banana – and became a pawn in a battle with Kazakh officials who have blocked what the couple expected to be a routine adoption.

Compton, a psychology professor at Haverford College, remains in Taraz, spending three hours a day with Noah at an orphanage while fighting the Kazakhstan bureaucracy. Her husband, a labor lawyer with a Center City firm, returned four weeks ago to an empty house on Haverford’s campus and the possibility that Noah might never arrive at the freshly painted, toy-filled room that has been waiting for him for nearly a year.

“It was incredibly hard to leave,” Meyer said. “I may never see him again. That’s horrifying.”

Jeremy is a friend of mine, and I’ve been following this wrenching saga.

If you’d like to help the Meyers, or any of these families, please call your senator or congresscritter, especially if they prioritize children’s affairs and international relations.