Author: Rachel Larris

Markos Moulitsas over at Daily Kos has just released the
results of a poll he had conducted by Research 2000 of over
2,000 self-identified Republicans.

The poll contains lots of interesting
information about what "self-identified" Republicans apparently think (or are
willing to cop to in a telephone poll). Apparently 23 percent think their state
should secede from the union! Didn’t
we try that already?

But in other interesting topics covered in the poll:

Republicans on Gay
issues

Should openly gay men and women be allowed to serve in the
military?

Yes 26
No 55
Not Sure 19

Should same sex couples be allowed to marry?

Yes 7
No 77
Not Sure 16

Should gay couples receive any state or federal benefits?

Yes 11
No 68
Not Sure 21

Should openly gay men and women be allowed to teach in public
schools?

Yes 8
No 73
Not Sure 19

Only 8 percent of Republicans think gays should be allowed
to teach in public schools? I’m now wondering what the response would have been if
the question was "Should being gay become illegal, should the death penalty be
imposed for it?" Would it also be plus or minus 8 percent?

Republicans: Birth Control = abortion = murder

Apparently there is also some major confusion by Republicans
about contraception being the same as an abortion (which they are also
against).

Should contraceptive use be outlawed?

Yes 31
No 56
Not Sure 13

Do you believe the birth control pill is abortion?

Yes 34
No 48
Not Sure 18

Do you consider abortion to be murder?

Yes 76
No 8
Not Sure 16

So while 31 percent believe that contraception should be
outlawed (I’d love to see them try that as a campaign platform) it’s possible
that it’s the same percentage that also considers birth control is abortion.

Anyway let’s be grateful for small favors. At least 86
percent of Republicans think women should work outside the home and only 13
percent think "men are leaders of their household."

As Kos says somewhere "Phyllis Schlafly is crying."

A coalition
of 16 religious organizations, representing a wide range of religious diversity, has signed a letter urging Congress and the White House to support
comprehensive health care reform that does not "create new restrictions to
abortion." Their letter below.

The
undersigned religious and religiously affiliated organizations urge Congress
and the White House to support comprehensive, quality health care reform that
does not create new restrictions to abortion coverage beyond what is in current
law. The health reform bills that were initially brought to the House and
Senate floors were crafted to be abortion neutral, an appropriate reflection of
the fact that this legislation is intended to serve Americans of many diverse
religious and moral views.

We believe
that it is our social and moral obligation to ensure access to high quality
comprehensive health care services at every stage in an individual’s life.
Reforming the health care system in a way that guarantees affordable and
accessible care for all is not simply a good idea-it is necessary for the
well-being of all people in our nation.

The passage
of meaningful health reform legislation will make significant strides toward
accomplishing the important goal of access to health care for all.
Unfortunately, the House and Senate-passed versions of health reform include
language that imposes significant new restrictions on access to abortion
services. These provisions would result in women losing health coverage they
currently have, an unfortunate contradiction to the basic guiding principle of
health care reform. Providing
affordable, accessible health care to all Americans is a moral imperative that
unites Americans of many faith traditions. The selective withdrawal of critical health coverage from women is both
a violation of this imperative and a betrayal of the public good.

The use of
health reform to advance new restrictions on abortion services that surpass
those in current law may serve only to derail this important effort.  American families should have the opportunity
to choose health coverage that reflects their own values and medical needs, a
principle that should not be sacrificed in service of any political agenda.

We urge
Congress and the White House to support meaningful health reform that, unlike
the provisions in the House and Senate-passed versions of health reform,
maintains current law in reference to the funding of abortion care.

 

Respectfully,

Catholics
for Choice

Christian
Community

Disciples
Justice Action Network

The
Episcopal Church

Jewish Women
International

NA’AMAT USA

National
Council of Jewish Women

Presbyterian
Church (U.S.A.) Washington Office

Progressive
Christians Uniting

Religious
Coalition for Reproductive Choice

The
Religious Institute

Union for
Reform Judaism

United
Church of Christ, Justice and Witness Ministries

United
Methodist Church-General Board of Church and Society

Unitarian
Universalist Association of Congregations

WATER – Women’s Alliance for Theology, Ethics
and Ritual

UPDATE: CBS has now formally rejected the ad.

The network shot down the commercial Friday in a letter to the
site — ManCrunch.com — saying the "creative is not within the Network’s
Broadcast Standards for Super Bowl Sunday."

Also the network said
its sales department had difficulty verifying the credit of the site to
guarantee payment of the estimated $2.5 million cost to air the ad.

"After reviewing the ad – which is entirely commercial in
nature – our Standards and Practices department decided not to accept this
particular spot," said CBS in a statement. "As always, we are open to
working with the client on alternative submissions."

If you’ve been following CBS’s twisting explanation for why
it’s allowing the ad created by the Focus on the Family ad featuring Tim Tebow
and his mother Pam to air after years of rejecting ads for progressive causes
for being too "controversial" you might have heard that they recently
changed their policy.

"We have for some time
moderated our approach to advocacy submissions after it became apparent that
our stance did not reflect public sentiment or industry norms," said
spokesman Dana McClintock. "In fact, most media outlets have accepted advocacy
ads for some time."

But I guess CBS’s change in policy must only extend to
behaviors it approves of because it still hasn’t approved an ad for a
gay dating website.

The network
refuses to say if it will allow an ad for a gay men’s dating service to air the
day of the big game, Feb. 7, despite the fact that it’s content is no more racy
than nearly any beer commercial not starring the Budweiser Clydesdales.

In the ad for
ManCrunch.com, two men watching the game reach into the chip bowl at the same
time, then look into each other’s eyes — awkwardly at first — before kissing
passionately.

At this point, with less than a week to go
before the game, CBS is claiming that it still both needs to review the ad (how
much time does it take to review a 30-second ad?) and that all the ad spaces
are full, a fact ManCrunch
spokesman Dominic Friesen denies.

"It’s
clearly a form of discrimination that we’re getting the runaround, that we’re
not being told the truth," he said. "Quite frankly, there is a lot of
ad space available — a lot of the companies that typically advertise during
the Super Bowl are not advertising this year."

So which is it CBS? Are you denying ManCrunch the right to buy the airtime or is there really not any airtime left? And if you
are denying it I’m sure we’d all like to know the reasoning behind that decision.

Watch the ManCrunch ad:

Tonight is the president’s State of the Union address and
while he is sure to address health care reform there is some hope that Obama may
also call on Congress to repeal
the "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" policy for the military.

Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Armed Services Committee,
set off the guessing game Monday when he told reporters that the White House
asked him to postpone an announcement about an upcoming hearing on the
so-called ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy because the president
plans to address the issue.

The Michigan Democrat said he didn’t know what Obama plans
to say, but speculation is mounting that he will call on Congress to
repeal the 1993 law that established the policy that bars gays from serving
openly in the ranks — either by proposing his own legislation or backing a
draft bill in the House sponsored by Democratic Rep. Patrick Murphy,
an Iraq War veteran who represents suburban Philadelphia.

This would be welcome news, particularly since President
Obama promised to repeal "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" when campaigning in 2008.
Coincidentally the Williams
Institute at the UCLA School of Law, a public policy institute that studies
sexual orientation law, just released a survey that shows an increase of gay
men and women serving in the military.

An estimated 66,000 gay, lesbian
and bisexual people are serving in the U.S. military, roughly 2 percent of all
military personnel, according to a report released Tuesday by a gay rights
policy center. The figures suggest a slight increase in the number of gays,
lesbians and bisexuals in the military, and they provide opponents of the
military’s "don’t ask, don’t tell" policy with fresh data as they
lobby the Obama administration for its repeal.

Gays, lesbians and bisexuals
account for about 13,000 active duty service members, equal to less than 1
percent currently deployed, the report estimated. About 53,000 others serve in
the National Guard and reserves, equaling about 3.4 percent.

In other good news for gay men and women the online dating
site eHarmony, which didn’t offer gay, lesbian and bisexual matching services
until last year, has settled
a class action lawsuit.

As a result of a 2008 settlement
with the state of New Jersey, which sued the company for discrimination, men
and women seeking same-sex matches were redirected from eHarmony to an
affiliate Web site, Compatiblepartners.net.

A separate class-action civil
rights lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles in 2007, saying that eHarmony violated
California law barring businesses from discriminating based on sexual
orientation.

The proposed settlement would
require eHarmony to display its gay and lesbian dating services more
prominently.

 Bonus item: Remember the former president, George W. Bush?
He’s fundraising for a
crisis pregnancy center in Indiana.

Four people were arrested on Monday trying
to bug telephones in the New Orleans’ office of Democratic Senator Mary
Landrieu. Among those arrested was James O’Keefe, the filmmaker best known for
the ACORN video scandal. Another, Robert Flanagan, is also the son of the
acting U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Louisiana, William Flanagan.

According to the FBI affidavit,
Flanagan and [Joseph Basel] entered the federal building at 500 Poydras Street
about 11 a.m. Monday, dressed as telephone company employees, wearing
jeans,  fluorescent green vests, tool
belts, and hard hats. When they arrived at Landrieu’s 10th floor office,
O’Keefe was already in the office and had told a staffer he was waiting for
someone to arrive.

When Flanagan and Basel entered the
office, they told the staffer they were there to fix phone problems. At that
time, the staffer, referred to only as Witness 1 in the affidavit, observed
O’Keefe positioning his cell phone in his hand to videotape the operation.
O’Keefe later admitted to agents that he recorded the event.

After being asked, the staffer gave
Basel access to the main phone at the reception desk. The staffer told
investigators that Basel manipulated the handset. He also tried to call the
main office phone using his cell phone, and said the main line wasn’t working.
Flanagan did the same.

They then told the staffer they
needed to perform repair work on the main phone system and asked where the
telephone closet was located. The staffer showed the men to the main General
Services Administration office on the 10th floor, and both went in. There, a
GSA employee asked for the men’s credentials, after which they stated they left
them in their vehicle.

The U.S. Marshal’s Service apprehended all
four men shortly thereafter.

The motivation for their actions are not known at this time, nor is it known whether
they were acting
with anyone else.

Robert Flanagan’s attorney, J.
Garrison Jordan, said he believes his client works for the Pelican Institute.
Asked the motivation for the alleged wiretap plot, he said: "I think it
was poor judgment. I don’t think there was any intent or motive to commit a
crime."

The Pelican Institute "is a Louisiana-based think tank founded last year by
native New Yorker and Tulane grad Kevin Kane."

Though it labels itself as
"non-partisan," the Pelican Institute is undeniably bent toward conservative
and libertarian political philosophies, with a concentration on limiting
government.

According to Politico
"the four men could each face up to 10 years and a fine of $250,000 if they are
convicted.

Media Matters also has more info about the other men arrested.

While the annual March for Life on the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade attracts hundreds of marchers to Washington, DC featuring people and children bused in from all parts, there is always a contingent of pro-choice demonstrators who show up to make sure their voices are also heard.

Despite the cold, a dedicated group of women and men, showed
up at the steps of the Supreme Court at noon on January 22 to celebrate the 37th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade. I asked people what
choice meant to them.

Laurette Cucuzza of Washington, DC said:

Choice has been very important in
my life. I am now a professional person but at 17 I was a dumb kid. And I got
pregnant and I had an abortion thanks to Planned Parenthood. And I was very
happy that I was able to make that choice because it allowed me to make
something of myself and my life. So I support women’s right to chose. I also
feel very strongly that sometimes women choose to have a baby, and I have done
that as well – later in life when I was ready.

Marc Levin, who was standing next to Cucuzza and who said he works with her,
said that as a man being pro-choice is just "being respectful to women."

"I’ll never have to get pregnant which is why it’s important
to stand with women," Levin said.

Brett Copeland, from Boerne, Texas, explained his reasons
for being at the rally. "I’m here for my mom, my sister and
someday my daughters. Choice to me just means letting women control their own
destiny."

A contingent of students from different universities were also
present, including representatives from the American University Students for Choice and
George Washington University Voices for Choices.

Amanda Pelletier is the co-director of the American
University Students For Choice group.

Choice to me means access to safe
and legal abortion. I think its very important that the post-Roe generation
cares about this issue very deeply. Although I didn’t grow up in a time where
abortion was illegal, my mom did. And she was a victim of that. And so I’m
standing up today for women like her and the women who are at risk for losing
the right to have a legal abortion.

Michelle Kinsey Bruns, a former DC resident who came down
from New Jersey, brought her Husky dog, decked out in sign "Huskies for Choice."

"She loves the attention," Bruns said. "She’s a crowd
pleaser."

Polly Stamatopoulos, a DC resident, said she’s been coming
to the pro-choice counter rallies for the last 17 years with her partner.

I come out here because I think
abortion rights are some of the most important fundamental rights in this
country and we need to protect those. If we let those fall by the wayside then
of our rights are safe.