President Obama: SOTU Toughness and Promises Must Lead to Action

Below you can find the full text of President Obama's first State of the Union address (copied from Huffingtonpost.com) . I have read the whole thing and watched a replay of the speech. As always, our Commander in Chief has a way with words that never fails to inspire. A blend of realism and dash of hope, mix in a sprinkle of stern instruction and a small history lesson; voila!

With his great speaking ability President Obama was able to convey annoyance with the refusal of both parties to play nice; especially those on the right. The President pledged a re-do on healthcare legislation and renewed the promise to focus on the economy. He talked about proposed policies and went hard on the latest bullshit dripping from the Supreme Court. All in all, he hit all his points, inspired Americans and gave one the impression that he means business.

But we've heard this all before. As a candidate, he ran on a firmly liberal platform. Now the President Obama has thus far attempted to go centrists, perhaps naively thinking he could bring the nation together, and its not working! I get the sense that the President is starting to recognize this fact.  Perhaps the best part of the speech was not all the numbers and things he'll do next; rather the tone and manner he spoke about the Republican party. I got the feeling that he is reluctant to reach out any longer and I hope I didn't just imagine that, for in order to truly progress the state of our nation out of this recession,  I believe Obama will have to lead with a strong hand far away from conservative principles.

Madam Speaker, Vice President Biden, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans:

Our Constitution declares that from time to time, the President shall give to Congress information about the state of our union. For 220 years, our leaders have fulfilled this duty. They've done so during periods of prosperity and tranquility. And they've done so in the midst of war and depression; at moments of great strife and great struggle.

It's tempting to look back on these moments and assume that our progress was inevitable -- that America was always destined to succeed. But when the Union was turned back at Bull Run, and the Allies first landed at Omaha Beach, victory was very much in doubt. When the market crashed on Black Tuesday, and civil rights marchers were beaten on Bloody Sunday, the future was anything but certain. These were the times that tested the courage of our convictions, and the strength of our union. And despite all our divisions and disagreements, our hesitations and our fears, America prevailed because we chose to move forward as one nation, as one people.

Again, we are tested. And again, we must answer history's call.

One year ago, I took office amid two wars, an economy rocked by a severe recession, a financial system on the verge of collapse, and a government deeply in debt. Experts from across the political spectrum warned that if we did not act, we might face a second depression. So we acted -- immediately and aggressively. And one year later, the worst of the storm has passed.

But the devastation remains. One in 10 Americans still cannot find work. Many businesses have shuttered. Home values have declined. Small towns and rural communities have been hit especially hard. And for those who'd already known poverty, life has become that much harder.

This recession has also compounded the burdens that America's families have been dealing with for decades -- the burden of working harder and longer for less; of being unable to save enough to retire or help kids with college.

Story continues below

So I know the anxieties that are out there right now. They're not new. These struggles are the reason I ran for President. These struggles are what I've witnessed for years in places like Elkhart, Indiana; Galesburg, Illinois. I hear about them in the letters that I read each night. The toughest to read are those written by children -- asking why they have to move from their home, asking when their mom or dad will be able to go back to work.

For these Americans and so many others, change has not come fast enough. Some are frustrated; some are angry. They don't understand why it seems like bad behavior on Wall Street is rewarded, but hard work on Main Street isn't; or why Washington has been unable or unwilling to solve any of our problems. They're tired of the partisanship and the shouting and the pettiness. They know we can't afford it. Not now.

So we face big and difficult challenges. And what the American people hope -- what they deserve -- is for all of us, Democrats and Republicans, to work through our differences; to overcome the numbing weight of our politics. For while the people who sent us here have different backgrounds, different stories, different beliefs, the anxieties they face are the same. The aspirations they hold are shared: a job that pays the bills; a chance to get ahead; most of all, the ability to give their children a better life.

You know what else they share? They share a stubborn resilience in the face of adversity. After one of the most difficult years in our history, they remain busy building cars and teaching kids, starting businesses and going back to school. They're coaching Little League and helping their neighbors. One woman wrote to me and said, "We are strained but hopeful, struggling but encouraged."

It's because of this spirit -- this great decency and great strength -- that I have never been more hopeful about America's future than I am tonight. (Applause.) Despite our hardships, our union is strong. We do not give up. We do not quit. We do not allow fear or division to break our spirit. In this new decade, it's time the American people get a government that matches their decency; that embodies their strength. (Applause.)
And tonight, tonight I'd like to talk about how together we can deliver on that promise.

It begins with our economy.

Our most urgent task upon taking office was to shore up the same banks that helped cause this crisis. It was not easy to do. And if there's one thing that has unified Democrats and Republicans, and everybody in between, it's that we all hated the bank bailout. I hated it -- (applause.) I hated it. You hated it. It was about as popular as a root canal. (Laughter.)

But when I ran for President, I promised I wouldn't just do what was popular -- I would do what was necessary. And if we had allowed the meltdown of the financial system, unemployment might be double what it is today. More businesses would certainly have closed. More homes would have surely been lost.

So I supported the last administration's efforts to create the financial rescue program. And when we took that program over, we made it more transparent and more accountable. And as a result, the markets are now stabilized, and we've recovered most of the money we spent on the banks. (Applause.) Most but not all.

To recover the rest, I've proposed a fee on the biggest banks. (Applause.) Now, I know Wall Street isn't keen on this idea. But if these firms can afford to hand out big bonuses again, they can afford a modest fee to pay back the taxpayers who rescued them in their time of need. (Applause.)

Now, as we stabilized the financial system, we also took steps to get our economy growing again, save as many jobs as possible, and help Americans who had become unemployed.

That's why we extended or increased unemployment benefits for more than 18 million Americans; made health insurance 65 percent cheaper for families who get their coverage through COBRA; and passed 25 different tax cuts.

Now, let me repeat: We cut taxes. We cut taxes for 95 percent of working families. (Applause.) We cut taxes for small businesses. We cut taxes for first-time homebuyers. We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children. We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college. (Applause.)

I thought I'd get some applause on that one. (Laughter and applause.)

As a result, millions of Americans had more to spend on gas and food and other necessities, all of which helped businesses keep more workers. And we haven't raised income taxes by a single dime on a single person. Not a single dime. (Applause.)

Because of the steps we took, there are about two million Americans working right now who would otherwise be unemployed. (Applause.) Two hundred thousand work in construction and clean energy; 300,000 are teachers and other education workers. Tens of thousands are cops, firefighters, correctional officers, first responders. (Applause.) And we're on track to add another one and a half million jobs to this total by the end of the year.

The plan that has made all of this possible, from the tax cuts to the jobs, is the Recovery Act. (Applause.) That's right -- the Recovery Act, also known as the stimulus bill. (Applause.) Economists on the left and the right say this bill has helped save jobs and avert disaster. But you don't have to take their word for it. Talk to the small business in Phoenix that will triple its workforce because of the Recovery Act. Talk to the window manufacturer in Philadelphia who said he used to be skeptical about the Recovery Act, until he had to add two more work shifts just because of the business it created. Talk to the single teacher raising two kids who was told by her principal in the last week of school that because of the Recovery Act, she wouldn't be laid off after all.

There are stories like this all across America. And after two years of recession, the economy is growing again. Retirement funds have started to gain back some of their value. Businesses are beginning to invest again, and slowly some are starting to hire again.

But I realize that for every success story, there are other stories, of men and women who wake up with the anguish of not knowing where their next paycheck will come from; who send out resumes week after week and hear nothing in response. That is why jobs must be our number-one focus in 2010, and that's why I'm calling for a new jobs bill tonight. (Applause.)

Now, the true engine of job creation in this country will always be America's businesses. (Applause.) But government can create the conditions necessary for businesses to expand and hire more workers.

We should start where most new jobs do -- in small businesses, companies that begin when -- (applause) -- companies that begin when an entrepreneur -- when an entrepreneur takes a chance on a dream, or a worker decides it's time she became her own boss. Through sheer grit and determination, these companies have weathered the recession and they're ready to grow. But when you talk to small businessowners in places like Allentown, Pennsylvania, or Elyria, Ohio, you find out that even though banks on Wall Street are lending again, they're mostly lending to bigger companies. Financing remains difficult for small businessowners across the country, even those that are making a profit.

So tonight, I'm proposing that we take $30 billion of the money Wall Street banks have repaid and use it to help community banks give small businesses the credit they need to stay afloat. (Applause.) I'm also proposing a new small business tax credit
-- one that will go to over one million small businesses who hire new workers or raise wages. (Applause.) While we're at it, let's also eliminate all capital gains taxes on small business investment, and provide a tax incentive for all large businesses and all small businesses to invest in new plants and equipment. (Applause.)

Next, we can put Americans to work today building the infrastructure of tomorrow. (Applause.) From the first railroads to the Interstate Highway System, our nation has always been built to compete. There's no reason Europe or China should have the fastest trains, or the new factories that manufacture clean energy products.

Tomorrow, I'll visit Tampa, Florida, where workers will soon break ground on a new high-speed railroad funded by the Recovery Act. (Applause.) There are projects like that all across this country that will create jobs and help move our nation's goods, services, and information. (Applause.)

We should put more Americans to work building clean energy facilities -- (applause) -- and give rebates to Americans who make their homes more energy-efficient, which supports clean energy jobs. (Applause.) And to encourage these and other businesses to stay within our borders, it is time to finally slash the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas, and give those tax breaks to companies that create jobs right here in the United States of America. (Applause.)

Now, the House has passed a jobs bill that includes some of these steps. (Applause.) As the first order of business this year, I urge the Senate to do the same, and I know they will. (Applause.) They will. (Applause.) People are out of work. They're hurting. They need our help. And I want a jobs bill on my desk without delay. (Applause.)

But the truth is, these steps won't make up for the seven million jobs that we've lost over the last two years. The only way to move to full employment is to lay a new foundation for long-term economic growth, and finally address the problems that America's families have confronted for years.

We can't afford another so-called economic "expansion" like the one from the last decade -- what some call the "lost decade" -- where jobs grew more slowly than during any prior expansion; where the income of the average American household declined while the cost of health care and tuition reached record highs; where prosperity was built on a housing bubble and financial speculation.

From the day I took office, I've been told that addressing our larger challenges is too ambitious; such an effort would be too contentious. I've been told that our political system is too gridlocked, and that we should just put things on hold for a while.

For those who make these claims, I have one simple question: How long should we wait? How long should America put its future on hold? (Applause.)

You see, Washington has been telling us to wait for decades, even as the problems have grown worse. Meanwhile, China is not waiting to revamp its economy. Germany is not waiting. India is not waiting. These nations -- they're not standing still. These nations aren't playing for second place. They're putting more emphasis on math and science. They're rebuilding their infrastructure. They're making serious investments in clean energy because they want those jobs. Well, I do not accept second place for the United States of America. (Applause.)

As hard as it may be, as uncomfortable and contentious as the debates may become, it's time to get serious about fixing the problems that are hampering our growth.

Now, one place to start is serious financial reform. Look, I am not interested in punishing banks. I'm interested in protecting our economy. A strong, healthy financial market makes it possible for businesses to access credit and create new jobs. It channels the savings of families into investments that raise incomes. But that can only happen if we guard against the same recklessness that nearly brought down our entire economy.

We need to make sure consumers and middle-class families have the information they need to make financial decisions. (Applause.) We can't allow financial institutions, including those that take your deposits, to take risks that threaten the whole economy.

Now, the House has already passed financial reform with many of these changes. (Applause.) And the lobbyists are trying to kill it. But we cannot let them win this fight. (Applause.) And if the bill that ends up on my desk does not meet the test of real reform, I will send it back until we get it right. We've got to get it right. (Applause.)

Next, we need to encourage American innovation. Last year, we made the largest investment in basic research funding in history -- (applause) -- an investment that could lead to the world's cheapest solar cells or treatment that kills cancer cells but leaves healthy ones untouched. And no area is more ripe for such innovation than energy. You can see the results of last year's investments in clean energy -- in the North Carolina company that will create 1,200 jobs nationwide helping to make advanced batteries; or in the California business that will put a thousand people to work making solar panels.

But to create more of these clean energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, more incentives. And that means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country. (Applause.) It means making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development. (Applause.) It means continued investment in advanced biofuels and clean coal technologies. (Applause.) And, yes, it means passing a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America. (Applause.)

I am grateful to the House for passing such a bill last year. (Applause.) And this year I'm eager to help advance the bipartisan effort in the Senate. (Applause.)

I know there have been questions about whether we can afford such changes in a tough economy. I know that there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change. But here's the thing -- even if you doubt the evidence, providing incentives for energy-efficiency and clean energy are the right thing to do for our future -- because the nation that leads the clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy. And America must be that nation. (Applause.)

Third, we need to export more of our goods. (Applause.) Because the more products we make and sell to other countries, the more jobs we support right here in America. (Applause.) So tonight, we set a new goal: We will double our exports over the next five years, an increase that will support two million jobs in America. (Applause.) To help meet this goal, we're launching a National Export Initiative that will help farmers and small businesses increase their exports, and reform export controls consistent with national security. (Applause.)

We have to seek new markets aggressively, just as our competitors are. If America sits on the sidelines while other nations sign trade deals, we will lose the chance to create jobs on our shores. (Applause.) But realizing those benefits also means enforcing those agreements so our trading partners play by the rules. (Applause.) And that's why we'll continue to shape a Doha trade agreement that opens global markets, and why we will strengthen our trade relations in Asia and with key partners like South Korea and Panama and Colombia. (Applause.)

Fourth, we need to invest in the skills and education of our people. (Applause.)

Now, this year, we've broken through the stalemate between left and right by launching a national competition to improve our schools. And the idea here is simple: Instead of rewarding failure, we only reward success. Instead of funding the status quo, we only invest in reform -- reform that raises student achievement; inspires students to excel in math and science; and turns around failing schools that steal the future of too many young Americans, from rural communities to the inner city. In the 21st century, the best anti-poverty program around is a world-class education. (Applause.) And in this country, the success of our children cannot depend more on where they live than on their potential.

When we renew the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, we will work with Congress to expand these reforms to all 50 states. Still, in this economy, a high school diploma no longer guarantees a good job. That's why I urge the Senate to follow the House and pass a bill that will revitalize our community colleges, which are a career pathway to the children of so many working families. (Applause.)

To make college more affordable, this bill will finally end the unwarranted taxpayer subsidies that go to banks for student loans. (Applause.) Instead, let's take that money and give families a $10,000 tax credit for four years of college and increase Pell Grants. (Applause.) And let's tell another one million students that when they graduate, they will be required to pay only 10 percent of their income on student loans, and all of their debt will be forgiven after 20 years -- and forgiven after 10 years if they choose a career in public service, because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they chose to go to college. (Applause.)

And by the way, it's time for colleges and universities to get serious about cutting their own costs -- (applause) -- because they, too, have a responsibility to help solve this problem.

Now, the price of college tuition is just one of the burdens facing the middle class. That's why last year I asked Vice President Biden to chair a task force on middle-class families. That's why we're nearly doubling the child care tax credit, and making it easier to save for retirement by giving access to every worker a retirement account and expanding the tax credit for those who start a nest egg. That's why we're working to lift the value of a family's single largest investment -- their home. The steps we took last year to shore up the housing market have allowed millions of Americans to take out new loans and save an average of $1,500 on mortgage payments.

This year, we will step up refinancing so that homeowners can move into more affordable mortgages. (Applause.) And it is precisely to relieve the burden on middle-class families that we still need health insurance reform. (Applause.) Yes, we do. (Applause.)

Now, let's clear a few things up. (Laughter.) I didn't choose to tackle this issue to get some legislative victory under my belt. And by now it should be fairly obvious that I didn't take on health care because it was good politics. (Laughter.) I took on health care because of the stories I've heard from Americans with preexisting conditions whose lives depend on getting coverage; patients who've been denied coverage; families -- even those with insurance -- who are just one illness away from financial ruin.

After nearly a century of trying -- Democratic administrations, Republican administrations -- we are closer than ever to bringing more security to the lives of so many Americans. The approach we've taken would protect every American from the worst practices of the insurance industry. It would give small businesses and uninsured Americans a chance to choose an affordable health care plan in a competitive market. It would require every insurance plan to cover preventive care.

And by the way, I want to acknowledge our First Lady, Michelle Obama, who this year is creating a national movement to tackle the epidemic of childhood obesity and make kids healthier. (Applause.) Thank you. She gets embarrassed. (Laughter.)

Our approach would preserve the right of Americans who have insurance to keep their doctor and their plan. It would reduce costs and premiums for millions of families and businesses. And according to the Congressional Budget Office -- the independent organization that both parties have cited as the official scorekeeper for Congress -- our approach would bring down the deficit by as much as $1 trillion over the next two decades. (Applause.)

Still, this is a complex issue, and the longer it was debated, the more skeptical people became. I take my share of the blame for not explaining it more clearly to the American people. And I know that with all the lobbying and horse-trading, the process left most Americans wondering, "What's in it for me?"

But I also know this problem is not going away. By the time I'm finished speaking tonight, more Americans will have lost their health insurance. Millions will lose it this year. Our deficit will grow. Premiums will go up. Patients will be denied the care they need. Small business owners will continue to drop coverage altogether. I will not walk away from these Americans, and neither should the people in this chamber. (Applause.)

So, as temperatures cool, I want everyone to take another look at the plan we've proposed. There's a reason why many doctors, nurses, and health care experts who know our system best consider this approach a vast improvement over the status quo. But if anyone from either party has a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors, and stop insurance company abuses, let me know. (Applause.) Let me know. Let me know. (Applause.) I'm eager to see it.

Here's what I ask Congress, though: Don't walk away from reform. Not now. Not when we are so close. Let us find a way to come together and finish the job for the American people. (Applause.) Let's get it done. Let's get it done. (Applause.)

Now, even as health care reform would reduce our deficit, it's not enough to dig us out of a massive fiscal hole in which we find ourselves. It's a challenge that makes all others that much harder to solve, and one that's been subject to a lot of political posturing. So let me start the discussion of government spending by setting the record straight.

At the beginning of the last decade, the year 2000, America had a budget surplus of over $200 billion. (Applause.) By the time I took office, we had a one-year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade. Most of this was the result of not paying for two wars, two tax cuts, and an expensive prescription drug program. On top of that, the effects of the recession put a $3 trillion hole in our budget. All this was before I walked in the door. (Laughter and applause.)

Now -- just stating the facts. Now, if we had taken office in ordinary times, I would have liked nothing more than to start bringing down the deficit. But we took office amid a crisis. And our efforts to prevent a second depression have added another $1 trillion to our national debt. That, too, is a fact.

I'm absolutely convinced that was the right thing to do. But families across the country are tightening their belts and making tough decisions. The federal government should do the same. (Applause.) So tonight, I'm proposing specific steps to pay for the trillion dollars that it took to rescue the economy last year.

Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years. (Applause.) Spending related to our national security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will not be affected. But all other discretionary government programs will. Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need and sacrifice what we don't. And if I have to enforce this discipline by veto, I will. (Applause.)

We will continue to go through the budget, line by line, page by page, to eliminate programs that we can't afford and don't work. We've already identified $20 billion in savings for next year. To help working families, we'll extend our middle-class tax cuts. But at a time of record deficits, we will not continue tax cuts for oil companies, for investment fund managers, and for those making over $250,000 a year. We just can't afford it. (Applause.)

Now, even after paying for what we spent on my watch, we'll still face the massive deficit we had when I took office. More importantly, the cost of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will continue to skyrocket. That's why I've called for a bipartisan fiscal commission, modeled on a proposal by Republican Judd Gregg and Democrat Kent Conrad. (Applause.) This can't be one of those Washington gimmicks that lets us pretend we solved a problem. The commission will have to provide a specific set of solutions by a certain deadline.

Now, yesterday, the Senate blocked a bill that would have created this commission. So I'll issue an executive order that will allow us to go forward, because I refuse to pass this problem on to another generation of Americans. (Applause.) And when the vote comes tomorrow, the Senate should restore the pay-as-you-go law that was a big reason for why we had record surpluses in the 1990s. (Applause.)

Now, I know that some in my own party will argue that we can't address the deficit or freeze government spending when so many are still hurting. And I agree -- which is why this freeze won't take effect until next year -- (laughter) -- when the economy is stronger. That's how budgeting works. (Laughter and applause.) But understand -- understand if we don't take meaningful steps to rein in our debt, it could damage our markets, increase the cost of borrowing, and jeopardize our recovery -- all of which would have an even worse effect on our job growth and family incomes.

From some on the right, I expect we'll hear a different argument -- that if we just make fewer investments in our people, extend tax cuts including those for the wealthier Americans, eliminate more regulations, maintain the status quo on health care, our deficits will go away. The problem is that's what we did for eight years. (Applause.) That's what helped us into this crisis. It's what helped lead to these deficits. We can't do it again.

Rather than fight the same tired battles that have dominated Washington for decades, it's time to try something new. Let's invest in our people without leaving them a mountain of debt. Let's meet our responsibility to the citizens who sent us here. Let's try common sense. (Laughter.) A novel concept.

To do that, we have to recognize that we face more than a deficit of dollars right now. We face a deficit of trust -- deep and corrosive doubts about how Washington works that have been growing for years. To close that credibility gap we have to take action on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue -- to end the outsized influence of lobbyists; to do our work openly; to give our people the government they deserve. (Applause.)

That's what I came to Washington to do. That's why -- for the first time in history -- my administration posts on our White House visitors online. That's why we've excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs, or seats on federal boards and commissions.

But we can't stop there. It's time to require lobbyists to disclose each contact they make on behalf of a client with my administration or with Congress. It's time to put strict limits on the contributions that lobbyists give to candidates for federal office.

With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests -- including foreign corporations -- to spend without limit in our elections. (Applause.) I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. (Applause.) They should be decided by the American people. And I'd urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems.

I'm also calling on Congress to continue down the path of earmark reform. Applause.) Democrats and Republicans. (Applause.) Democrats and Republicans. You've trimmed some of this spending, you've embraced some meaningful change. But restoring the public trust demands more. For example, some members of Congress post some earmark requests online. (Applause.) Tonight, I'm calling on Congress to publish all earmark requests on a single Web site before there's a vote, so that the American people can see how their money is being spent. (Applause.)

Of course, none of these reforms will even happen if we don't also reform how we work with one another. Now, I'm not naïve. I never thought that the mere fact of my election would usher in peace and harmony -- (laughter) -- and some post-partisan era. I knew that both parties have fed divisions that are deeply entrenched. And on some issues, there are simply philosophical differences that will always cause us to part ways. These disagreements, about the role of government in our lives, about our national priorities and our national security, they've been taking place for over 200 years. They're the very essence of our democracy.

But what frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is Election Day. We can't wage a perpetual campaign where the only goal is to see who can get the most embarrassing headlines about the other side -- a belief that if you lose, I win. Neither party should delay or obstruct every single bill just because they can. The confirmation of -- (applause) -- I'm speaking to both parties now. The confirmation of well-qualified public servants shouldn't be held hostage to the pet projects or grudges of a few individual senators. (Applause.)

Washington may think that saying anything about the other side, no matter how false, no matter how malicious, is just part of the game. But it's precisely such politics that has stopped either party from helping the American people. Worse yet, it's sowing further division among our citizens, further distrust in our government.

So, no, I will not give up on trying to change the tone of our politics. I know it's an election year. And after last week, it's clear that campaign fever has come even earlier than usual. But we still need to govern.

To Democrats, I would remind you that we still have the largest majority in decades, and the people expect us to solve problems, not run for the hills. (Applause.) And if the Republican leadership is going to insist that 60 votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town -- a supermajority -- then the responsibility to govern is now yours as well. (Applause.) Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it's not leadership. We were sent here to serve our citizens, not our ambitions. (Applause.) So let's show the American people that we can do it together. (Applause.)

This week, I'll be addressing a meeting of the House Republicans. I'd like to begin monthly meetings with both Democratic and Republican leadership. I know you can't wait. (Laughter.)

Throughout our history, no issue has united this country more than our security. Sadly, some of the unity we felt after 9/11 has dissipated. We can argue all we want about who's to blame for this, but I'm not interested in re-litigating the past. I know that all of us love this country. All of us are committed to its defense. So let's put aside the schoolyard taunts about who's tough. Let's reject the false choice between protecting our people and upholding our values. Let's leave behind the fear and division, and do what it takes to defend our nation and forge a more hopeful future -- for America and for the world. (Applause.)

That's the work we began last year. Since the day I took office, we've renewed our focus on the terrorists who threaten our nation. We've made substantial investments in our homeland security and disrupted plots that threatened to take American lives. We are filling unacceptable gaps revealed by the failed Christmas attack, with better airline security and swifter action on our intelligence. We've prohibited torture and strengthened partnerships from the Pacific to South Asia to the Arabian Peninsula. And in the last year, hundreds of al Qaeda's fighters and affiliates, including many senior leaders, have been captured or killed -- far more than in 2008.

And in Afghanistan, we're increasing our troops and training Afghan security forces so they can begin to take the lead in July of 2011, and our troops can begin to come home. (Applause.) We will reward good governance, work to reduce corruption, and support the rights of all Afghans -- men and women alike. (Applause.) We're joined by allies and partners who have increased their own commitments, and who will come together tomorrow in London to reaffirm our common purpose. There will be difficult days ahead. But I am absolutely confident we will succeed.

As we take the fight to al Qaeda, we are responsibly leaving Iraq to its people. As a candidate, I promised that I would end this war, and that is what I am doing as President. We will have all of our combat troops out of Iraq by the end of this August. (Applause.) We will support the Iraqi government -- we will support the Iraqi government as they hold elections, and we will continue to partner with the Iraqi people to promote regional peace and prosperity. But make no mistake: This war is ending, and all of our troops are coming home. (Applause.)

Tonight, all of our men and women in uniform -- in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and around the world -- they have to know that we -- that they have our respect, our gratitude, our full support. And just as they must have the resources they need in war, we all have a responsibility to support them when they come home. (Applause.) That's why we made the largest increase in investments for veterans in decades -- last year. (Applause.) That's why we're building a 21st century VA. And that's why Michelle has joined with Jill Biden to forge a national commitment to support military families. (Applause.)

Now, even as we prosecute two wars, we're also confronting perhaps the greatest danger to the American people -- the threat of nuclear weapons. I've embraced the vision of John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan through a strategy that reverses the spread of these weapons and seeks a world without them. To reduce our stockpiles and launchers, while ensuring our deterrent, the United States and Russia are completing negotiations on the farthest-reaching arms control treaty in nearly two decades. (Applause.) And at April's Nuclear Security Summit, we will bring 44 nations together here in Washington, D.C. behind a clear goal: securing all vulnerable nuclear materials around the world in four years, so that they never fall into the hands of terrorists. (Applause.)

Now, these diplomatic efforts have also strengthened our hand in dealing with those nations that insist on violating international agreements in pursuit of nuclear weapons. That's why North Korea now faces increased isolation, and stronger sanctions -- sanctions that are being vigorously enforced. That's why the international community is more united, and the Islamic Republic of Iran is more isolated. And as Iran's leaders continue to ignore their obligations, there should be no doubt: They, too, will face growing consequences. That is a promise. (Applause.)

That's the leadership that we are providing -- engagement that advances the common security and prosperity of all people. We're working through the G20 to sustain a lasting global recovery. We're working with Muslim communities around the world to promote science and education and innovation. We have gone from a bystander to a leader in the fight against climate change. We're helping developing countries to feed themselves, and continuing the fight against HIV/AIDS. And we are launching a new initiative that will give us the capacity to respond faster and more effectively to bioterrorism or an infectious disease -- a plan that will counter threats at home and strengthen public health abroad.

As we have for over 60 years, America takes these actions because our destiny is connected to those beyond our shores. But we also do it because it is right. That's why, as we meet here tonight, over 10,000 Americans are working with many nations to help the people of Haiti recover and rebuild. (Applause.) That's why we stand with the girl who yearns to go to school in Afghanistan; why we support the human rights of the women marching through the streets of Iran; why we advocate for the young man denied a job by corruption in Guinea. For America must always stand on the side of freedom and human dignity. (Applause.) Always. (Applause.)

Abroad, America's greatest source of strength has always been our ideals. The same is true at home. We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we're all created equal; that no matter who you are or what you look like, if you abide by the law you should be protected by it; if you adhere to our common values you should be treated no different than anyone else.

We must continually renew this promise. My administration has a Civil Rights Division that is once again prosecuting civil rights violations and employment discrimination. (Applause.) We finally strengthened our laws to protect against crimes driven by hate. (Applause.) This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are. (Applause.) It's the right thing to do. (Applause.)

We're going to crack down on violations of equal pay laws -- so that women get equal pay for an equal day's work. (Applause.) And we should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system -- to secure our borders and enforce our laws, and ensure that everyone who plays by the rules can contribute to our economy and enrich our nation. (Applause.)

In the end, it's our ideals, our values that built America -- values that allowed us to forge a nation made up of immigrants from every corner of the globe; values that drive our citizens still. Every day, Americans meet their responsibilities to their families and their employers. Time and again, they lend a hand to their neighbors and give back to their country. They take pride in their labor, and are generous in spirit. These aren't Republican values or Democratic values that they're living by; business values or labor values. They're American values.

Unfortunately, too many of our citizens have lost faith that our biggest institutions -- our corporations, our media, and, yes, our government -- still reflect these same values. Each of these institutions are full of honorable men and women doing important work that helps our country prosper. But each time a CEO rewards himself for failure, or a banker puts the rest of us at risk for his own selfish gain, people's doubts grow. Each time lobbyists game the system or politicians tear each other down instead of lifting this country up, we lose faith. The more that TV pundits reduce serious debates to silly arguments, big issues into sound bites, our citizens turn away.

No wonder there's so much cynicism out there. No wonder there's so much disappointment.

I campaigned on the promise of change -- change we can believe in, the slogan went. And right now, I know there are many Americans who aren't sure if they still believe we can change -- or that I can deliver it.

But remember this -- I never suggested that change would be easy, or that I could do it alone. Democracy in a nation of 300 million people can be noisy and messy and complicated. And when you try to do big things and make big changes, it stirs passions and controversy. That's just how it is.

Those of us in public office can respond to this reality by playing it safe and avoid telling hard truths and pointing fingers. We can do what's necessary to keep our poll numbers high, and get through the next election instead of doing what's best for the next generation.

But I also know this: If people had made that decision 50 years ago, or 100 years ago, or 200 years ago, we wouldn't be here tonight. The only reason we are here is because generations of Americans were unafraid to do what was hard; to do what was needed even when success was uncertain; to do what it took to keep the dream of this nation alive for their children and their grandchildren.

Our administration has had some political setbacks this year, and some of them were deserved. But I wake up every day knowing that they are nothing compared to the setbacks that families all across this country have faced this year. And what keeps me going -- what keeps me fighting -- is that despite all these setbacks, that spirit of determination and optimism, that fundamental decency that has always been at the core of the American people, that lives on.

It lives on in the struggling small business owner who wrote to me of his company, "None of us," he said, "...are willing to consider, even slightly, that we might fail."

It lives on in the woman who said that even though she and her neighbors have felt the pain of recession, "We are strong. We are resilient. We are American."

It lives on in the 8-year-old boy in Louisiana, who just sent me his allowance and asked if I would give it to the people of Haiti.

And it lives on in all the Americans who've dropped everything to go someplace they've never been and pull people they've never known from the rubble, prompting chants of "U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A!" when another life was saved.

The spirit that has sustained this nation for more than two centuries lives on in you, its people. We have finished a difficult year. We have come through a difficult decade. But a new year has come. A new decade stretches before us. We don't quit. I don't quit. (Applause.) Let's seize this moment -- to start anew, to carry the dream forward, and to strengthen our union once more. (Applause.)

Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)

I Have A Dream

Today is one of remembrance and respect, a day for recalling those who have gone before us in the civil rights movement and a reminder of what still must be done. New challenges arise every day that have changed the context of equal rights, but the message Dr. King gave all those years ago remains relevant and inspiring, even to the most down trodden. The fervor of the equal rights movement of my parent's generation no longer remains, but the spirit and message does.

Dr. King's "I have a dream" speech is arguably one of America's most recognized and well known speeches, delivered by a courageous pastor, during a time of great political and social turmoil; a time when hope and dreams where all there was to sustain. With neither an air of finality nor attitude of defeat, the pragmatic yet wistful preacher who delivered these words still provides inspiration and way to live to all those who dared to believe one day America would be equal.



Martin Luther King "I Have a Dream" - Watch today’s top amazing videos here

Why I Can No Longer Support Current HealthCare Reform Legislation

Reading through my blog archives, any reader will infer that I am a major proponent of healthcare reform legislation. Not only have I spoken out in support of a strong and robust public option, I have trashed any Senator/House Representatives who fail to put the American public’s health as priority; whether in siding with insurance companies, drug companies and various other industry special interests or being a Republican/NeoCon.

As an insider, I have a special perspective on this issue, one which has enabled me to know personally the financial predicament of the insured, mostly caused by run-away insurance costs and steadily diminishing coverage. I know, first hand, how truly fucked up this country’s insurance system really is. With this in mind, I have donated to, written about, volunteered for and re-tweeted countless pro-reform causes because I know how important this is. It is safe to say I have proven myself to be one of healthcare reform’s most ardent and devoted supporters.

Today, that all ends. I cannot in good conscience support a system that will strip more rights away from women in the name of “reform”(because at this point, its not really reforming anything and there is now a fucking mandate proposal in the senate: worst.idea.ever; but I digress). I cannot support the sacrifice of abortion and reproductive coverage and/or funding in the name of garnering needed Democratic Senatorial votes. I cannot and will not placate a bat-shit crazy, extremist, right wing-nut base of voters who don’t give a fuck about women/human-equality/LGBT anyway. To support any of this politics-as-usual garbage as it stands would be akin to lighting my house on fire and watching years of memories, hard work and tradition go up in flames-then going on my merry way saying, “Well, I needed a new house anyway”!

Equal rights for all citizens begin within the social landscape. First, as displayed by regular people like you and me; economic and political reform or action follow the people’s example. We would all do well not to forget this. So I say: it would be pathetic and short sighted to sacrifice women’s equality and the right to reproductive freedom in order to pass this ridiculously inept insurance “reform” bill- I will not support it.

Kill The Bill

-Sophia

Congressional Hearing Held on Rape Kit Backlog

Millions of federal dollars and years of prevention efforts are under scrutiny this week as a congressional hearing is underway to address the massive misuse and failure of many major U.S. cities to address the backlog of rape kits. Since 2004, cities such as Los Angeles and Detroit have received over 20 millions dollars and yet have hundreds of thousands of rape kits sitting in storage. These rape kits and the funds secured through the Debbie Smith Act of 2004 are vital to aid in rape prevention and specifically the health/legal support of rape victims.

A rape kit is absolutely vital to victims and their families in catching or convicting their attacker. Without DNA evidence, a rape trial(if the victim is so lucky to get their attacker identified and into a court room) becomes a war of words; he said, she said. What is more commonplace however is the victim's case is dead once she/he leaves the hospital or police station. It has been reported that across the country rape victim's rape kits along with their initial complaint, are often not dealt with in accordance to the law, as officers and medical professionals are deciding the validity of her/his complaint on the spot.


-Sophia

CNN Reports: Colleges Failing Women, 1 in 5 Still Rape Victims

From CNN.com

One in five college women will be raped, or experience an attempted rape, before graduation. Less than 5 percent will report these crimes to officials on or off campus, and, when they do, there's a good chance the system will let them down.

These shocking statistics were first issued nine years ago in a study conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice. Federal laws are in place to require schools to act on these allegations and look out for the rights of victims.

But a recently released investigative journalism series indicates that when it comes to dealing with sexual assaults, many higher-education institutions aren't making the grade. The investigation was done by the Center for Public Integrity, a Washington-based nonprofit that says it seeks to make institutions more transparent and accountable.

"Schools are aware it's a problem, a big problem," said Kristen Lombardi, the center's lead reporter for Sexual Assault on Campus: A Frustrating Search for Justice. She pointed to a "culture of silence" and said critics say, "The biggest sin is one of omission. They're just not dealing with this issue head-on in a public manner with their student bodies."

Over the course of nine months, Lombardi and her colleagues spoke to 33 women who'd reported rapes, interviewed about 50 experts and surveyed more than 150 crisis clinics and programs on or near campuses. They also reviewed cases and combed through 10 years of complaints against institutions that had been filed with the Department of Education.

Potentially Triggering:

Feeling invincible, an age of denial and disbelief

"I wish I'd been less trusting of my surroundings," said a woman who said she was assaulted as a sophomore in 2007. "In college, you feel as if you are invincible, when in reality, trouble could be hiding behind the façade of a casual get-together or a party where you feel completely safe. Always keep control of yourself and your surroundings, and keep a close eye out for your friends as well.

"And if you are a friend of a person who has been assaulted, all I can say is that though it might be hard, please listen and support that person," continued the former student, who said she was "met with a response that I never expected -- laughter and disbelief. Because of that, I kept silent until my attacker assaulted a friend of mine almost a year later."

Said another rape victim: "Do not binge drink or leave drinks unattended."

-Sophia

Life

I haven't posted in some time.



There have been plenty of stories I could write about; adultery and infidelity, misogyny in sports, the breast cancer debacle, Greg Oden. For some reason, I can't find the words to directly convey how these things have made me feel. Of late, I have been especially sensitive to stories about rape, domestic violence and adultery. I have no idea why. I have used this blog as an outlet of sorts, to share information and to vent frustration and anxiety. But mostly as a means to share information and to further the goals of feminism.



So I ask again:  What is feminism? Why am I a feminist?



I hardly know anymore. I used to think feminism is about equal rights; about learning and language, combating misogyny in the media, debunking gender stereotypes, equal pay for equal work; campaigning, protesting, organizing for the right to chose when, where, if and how to have children. All of this seems so trivial. The deliberate misuse by the media of simple terms such as gender, sex and sexism; powerful men with a national voice hold hostage the very rights women such as myself have been fighting for. Misleading information about socially acceptable issues such as breast cancer. The massive scale back of women's choice in federal legislation under a president and congress that promised they would work for gender equality.



Huge setbacks- sorrowful regression. It is as if all the work feminists, gender rights activists, our mother's, grandmother’s and great grandmother's have done, has all been for naught.



Do I keep writing? Posting pictures of domestic violence victims, scream about the treatment of Tiger Woods? It isn't about that some could say, take it higher up, one suggests. Well then, should I email my congressmen? I have done that. Should I support female candidates? There are none. Why? Because our system of governing, our society's gender politics, corporate ownership of almost all media outlets; our entire culture is one huge, ridiculous, patriarchal mess. Designed to discriminate and restrict minorities (white women, black women, black men, black intersexual, white intersexual, transgender citizens, black/latino/white/asian homosexual ) and it's FUCKING WORKING.



It is, in my estimation, a crisis. Current trends are not indicating progress: more Minorities are not getting more rights; our rights are less! It is not as if the government says, “NO! Women cannot vote” or, “Niggers can’t go to white schools”. Old stereotypes prevail, women are making less than equal than that of their male peers, gender is still perceived and reported to be either MAN or WOMAN, as if one must be one or the other. Our schools teach our children that Martin Luther King Jr. was great and now with President Barack Obama racism is officially dead. What a disservice and such a blatant lie. Our schools teach women that if we work hard, go to school then we can go to college as well! It’s a great place to find a husband, don’t you know. What our schools don’t tell our daughters, is they will earn $.75 for every $1.00 their male coworker makes.



What is worse, the majority of our society pretends that inequality does not exist. Is it more comfortable that way? Or is our culture now one that enables acceptance and discourages dissonance? I chose the latter.



But how to we change that?



-Sophia

Women in Military Suffer Too; One Vet's Thoughts

This is a diary from dailykos.com. This post struck me as both tragic and heroic. How daunting to share this story will millions and how amazing it is that she chose to do so anyway.

Here is her story.

The VA continues to ignore women veterans even while they face the same pressures male veterans do, with the added conditions of sexism, the usual VA incompetence, and indifference to Veterans' experiences or symptoms.

Today the VA sent me a letter, with my name and address and social on it, detailing the reasons why the special transportation they have been providing to me was being terminated. They offered a generic list of alternative options, which included 'asking for help from family and friends' and 'taking public transportation.' In order to send this letter, of course, they would have to collect this information from me, from a file which might have detailed that my family is dead, and that the reason I do not take public transportation is because I have such bad panic attacks that I black out. Nevertheless, they forged on, much like the cheerful nurse I dealt with on the phone who commented on my tone of voice, "You sure don't seem too happy about it!"

"I'm being treated for suicidal thoughts and depression after several suicide attempts."

She transferred me without comment after that. Again, a moment's notice would have provided her with that information. She didn't bother.

To add the final touch to the day, the Director's secretary, in collecting my information grudgingly to provide me with help from another bureacrat who will tell me, yet again, that I'm on my own, hung up on me promptly once the I had uttered the last digit of my phone number.

This is not a bad day at the VA; there are dozens of stories like that, just from my own experience, and part of them are due to the simple fact that I am a woman veteran, my injuries are for the most part invisible, and as a soldier who di the same job as my male counterparts, I am invisible at a VA where women soldiers are represented---if, in act, they are at all---by Viet Nam era nurses, WWII Wacs and Waves---or treated as dependents. They're much more comfortable offering PAP smears and stuffed teddy bears to women than they are even offering the appearance of attention when you tell them about the constant nightmares, the panic attacks, the flinching at loud noises, the shadowy figures on rooftops or here and there around you, especially in the dark. One doctor---or rather, one intern---has asked about my experiences in Iraq. I wound up on the floor minutes later, in agony, for the first time explicitly dealing with what I had seen and done in Iraq.

I could talk about the usual dry statistics about women veterans, but I won't, because they don't convey the day-to-day experience of being a woman veteran. No one pegs you on sight for being a soldier. When I wore a tee shirt advertising the school I went to at Ft. Bragg, a VA staffer---as well as several civilians---asked if my boyfriend had gotten it for me. When an NCO ordered me to the hospital after seeing me pound at a car door to get out of it, and then gasp by the side of the road, the VA allowed as how I might have PTSD, but that there had to be a precipitating event and----Oh, you did have a precipitating event? Well, then there needs to be documenta----Oh, you do have documentation?

Well, then, um....say, did you have a traumatic childhood?

None of which has gone unremarked upon by myself. I have offered my own momentoes of war to add to the display cases---desert camo uniforms, medals, pictures, a Koran, and so many more. No one got back to me, and in fact, I was told, "Well....we'll think about it." What's to think about? Is the display case closed? Packed, stuffed, with Barbie dolls in uniform and teddy bears? Or maybe the waiting room is too full of children's toys and books, while the PTSD clinic displays only manly hunting magazines and lad mags. And can I just say that if you're a female veteran who in any way suffered from soldier-on-soldier harassment in the war zone, pictures of starlet's tatas reinforce pretty strongly your role in some peoples' minds.

I've been put in therapy groups with wife beaters and sexual assaulters. I've been put in therapy groups with housewives who told me--when I detailed some of what I'd gone through in Iraq---that it was too disturbing for them to listen to. I've also had staffers violate HIPPA standards, shrug it off, and then refuse to address either the invasion of privacy or the feeling of invasion. I've had doctors tell me 'there are jerks everywhere' when, as a patient dealing with suicidal thoughts I was threatened by another patient and the only option was to go back home.

I was a soldier in Iraq who rode the gun turret on the long dusty roads of Iraq, past palm trees and herds of sheep, past waving men and women, past fields of sunflowers and charred craters in the Baghdad highway where men and women had lost their lives. I talked, over and over again, to men and women who looked in to my eyes, and told of relatives lost to war, to insurgents, and to disease and malnutrition wrought by years of a blockade that left a whole generation of kids so small that I repeatedly mistook twenty-year-old men for twelve-year-old boys. I took mortar attacks in strike---at the time---shouting at an attack that resulted in bombs every five minutes that I'd wasted five bucks on an alarm clock with a snooze alarm when I could have just used the insurgent snooze alarm. I sat across tables and across carpets with men who'd cheerfully try to kidnap me or kill me and marveled at the manners of the Middle East, where mutual enmity is no excuse for tea and flower language. "Come, let us have tea and discuss this unfortunate situation where this RPG happened to fire at you while it was in my hand." I've seen things that I will discuss with no civilian, because the worse things I saw happened to civilians, to civilian bodies, and I believed then and now that it was my job to have protected them, to the point of risk to myself, and that I failed. I, I, I, I know, but I saw these things and the language to describe the intimate details of war, the effects on the heart, are so hard to find that the accounts I do manage of it stumble and start, punctuated by long pauses of helpless silence, until an experience comes to mind that can be described in English words: "bomb, mortar, civilian casualties---Oh, the euphemism!----blood, my fellow soldiers were injured and I was useless and helpless, I looked into an Iraqi man's brown eyes at close range with my finger on the trigger and took one extra breath and realized he was not a suicide bomber, I talked with Iraqis and watched their hope and gratitude turn to fear and disapppointment and hopelessness, I talked to innocents imprisoned for things they didn't do and I couldn't save them from prison, why on earth can't I find a way to talk about this because it's stuff that happened to other people that haunts me the most? My fellow soldiers, sailors, and Marines were killed--cruelly, sometimes----and looking into Iraqi eyes, I saw the same grief and loss. It didn't happen to me and I have no right to claim it, but when the VA treats me like a mammogram waiting to happen, all this and so much more remains locked inside me, where it boils and comes out in nightmares and knives, with blood the only relief from the guilt and the grief, the emptiness and helplessness, the panic and confusion.

And then I go the VA, and to top it all off, they ignore fever and pain and weeks later a tooth abscess leaves in agony and illness that lingers to this day, resistant to anti-biotics that, indeed, cost me reactions elsehwere in the body. They turned me from a soldier who once limped around on thrice-broken ankle, protesting that I 'have s*** to do, it can't be broken!' till my First Sgt. ordered me to an emergency room. When a seizure from the wrong meds left me biting all the way through my own lip, I told the doctor I'd take out my own stitches, thanks---and did. The soldier who did convoys in 120 degree heat and who did one of the most difficult things of all---saying frankly, that combat was terrifying, especially when you were horribly outnumbered and outgunned---has turned into this person who begs, desperately, for simple respect and acknowledgment and despairs of it ever coming, as the insults and ignorance pile up, as I'm told repeatedly that 'there's no need' for specific PTSD programs directed at female soldiers how might have experienced the double whammy of sexual assault from battle buddies and combat. Out of sight is out of mind. Our place in the nation's sight apparently occurs only when we come home in flag-draped coffins, over which the nation flaps its yellow ribbons and enjoys a good, if temporary cry. The VA can't find enough volunteers or claims processors to treat veterans, to help them and assist them. I like to think that the latter is the reason why so many claims are denied, but in my case, the doctor's notes reveal otherwise.

And so, Mrs. Lincoln, did you enjoy the play? Oh, dear, must you go on? I just asked a simple question, why must you muddy the waters?

The men and women fighting for our country deserve better than this.

-Sophia

From Corporations to the Street: How Political Rhetoric on Rape Fuels Sexual Violence on The Street

CBS News with the disturbing report: 15 year old girl gang raped by up to 20 people after homecoming dance.

Let that sink in for a moment. Gang Raped by 20 People.

Earlier this year, Senator Al Franken from Minnesota introduced an amendment, that prohibits companies to contract with the US government if they barr their employees from obtaining legal justice in the event they are raped.  The amendment passed, however  30 Republican men decided this wasn't a government issues, and voted no. From this bitter sweet development, came a deluge of commentary from inside the beltway that used some of the most explicit and hurtful rhetoric, often times blaming the victim of rape and attempting to remove blame from the Senators who voted no by rationalizing some sort of corporate structure which allows rape, because the government should stay out of the personal lives of said corporation's employees.

How does this relate to the disgusting rape and brutal assault of the young lady in California?   As one report states: "somehow, over the past 30 years we've managed to create an entire social movement dedicated to treating and ending violence against women that rarely addresses the root cause" . That same source goes on to describe how a male dominated society,  social structure (patriarchy ) and modern media all contribute to the root cause of rape.

It is the nature of how men view and perceive women and their roles in society that will ultimately determine how they treat or mistreat women. With our society's government and justice system being male dominated, women are socially and culturally perceived as "the other", mostly as irrational, unpredictable, unreliable, and feeble minded by men (Hodgson, J. & Kelly, D., 2004, p. 102). Our very institutions are patriarchal, ruled and governed by rules that are familiar to men and conducive to "defining, controlling, and regulating women" and these institutions are so infused with male domination that sexual violence can be defended, perpetuated, and condoned (Hodgson, J. & Kelly D., 2004, p. 102). "Our culture exerts such a powerful force on defining what a man is and how he behaves...We have to change the entire society" in order to end sexual violence (Anderson, 2004).

Women, because they lack such power and dominance in society, seldom challenge the fact that rape is a part of their existence; women just modify their behavior in order to minimize the chances of being raped. They take self defense classes, they make sure that they do not wear clothing that seems too enticing, and they refrain from going certain places at night. Women live in constant fear, knowing that a man has the capacity to perform the most severe violation. Seldom, however, are men, and their aggressive and dominating personalities and perceptions, held accountable for the perpetuation of rape.

The most important part of this quote is: “women just modify their behavior in order to minimize the chances of being raped". When the media broadcasts Senators stating women should just be more careful when working for these companies (the government), the message to women is exactly as the report states: modify your behavior, we'll stay the same. I wonder what the young lady, leaving her homecoming dance, could have done differently when accosted by 20 or more men?

Another source states that the United States patriarchal structure is to blame for rape in war time. Women are perceived, at the end of the day (war) to be property. Less valuable property if they are not citizens of the US- but property none-the-less.

Why does the international community, and the United States, fail to intervene in cases of mass rape and genocide? The answer to both questions, we suggest, is the intersection of patriarchy and the notion of “otherness.” In a patriarchal society, women are seen as objects of ownership. They are the "property" of the males. At the same time, the male's masculine image creates a sense of duty to protect his female; an "ethic of protection." It is the patriarchal notion of the ownership of women and the ethic of protection that drive mass rape in warfare.

This structure certainly pertains to the States. When our social structure encourages women to protect themselves while simultaneously creating laws that prohibit women from fully taking responsibility of their own person (yeah that's a pro life dig), women are only further victimized; subject to a male dominated system, designed not to provide equal protection under the law, but to relegate "women's issues" to families, which are of course, male dominated.

Rape is not a family issue. It is a social crisis. A social crisis because the political and national rhetoric support the patriarchal system which instituted and supports, to this day, the 20 people who gang raped a 15 year old woman.

-Sophia

Under Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, Women More Likely To Be Expelled- AP

Go figure.

The AP reports:

SAN FRANCISCO — Pentagon statistics obtained by University of California researchers show that women are far more likely than men to be kicked out of the military under the "don't ask, don't tell policy" banning openly gay servicemembers.

Every military branch dismissed a disproportionate number of women in 2008 under the policy banning openly gay servicemembers. But the discrepancy was particularly marked in the Air Force, where women were a majority of those let go under the policy, even though they made up only 20 percent of personnel.

Across the military, women represented about one-third of the 619 people discharged based on sexual orientation. They account for just 15 percent of servicemembers.

The data was released Thursday by the Palm Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

With these statistics, it's doubly not surprising that the President considers his plate too full to deal with this, as Lesbian Women are like, one millionTH in line to get equal rights. Even with the tremendous strides the collective Women's Movements have made, when things like this come to the surface, the leader's response seem to be, "yeah sure, we'll get right on that". There seems to be so much yet to be accomplished.

-Sophia

History: Woman now Top Army Drill Sargeant

The New York Times reports:

On Tuesday, the Army will make Command Sgt. Maj. Teresa L. King, 48, commandant of its drill sergeant school here. It is a first: No woman has run one of the Army’s rigorous schools for drill instructors

Sgt. Maj. Teresa King is a hard core, no nonsense prototypical drill sergeant. She is also a woman and African American, a descendent of share croppers. Her ascent is even more important because of Army consolidation; she will now run the entire training operation for the United States Army.

Famous for their Smokey Bear hats, booming voices and no-nonsense demeanors, those sergeants transform tens of thousands of raw recruits into soldiers each year. It is one of the backbone jobs of the military, and having a woman in charge underscores the expanding role of women in the Army’s leadership.

I find this development to be especially meaningful. Her demeanor, her rise to leadership and her humble beginnings make her story truly inspiring
-Sophia

Changes in Constitution of the Dominican Republic could lead to ban on abortions

From Amnesty International: Legislators will essentially ban abortions out right and deny in many cases, life saving treatment to women and girls. The mortality rate during child birth has risen in the last 10 years, in part due to the lack of medical care available and the lack of support from government entities.

Proposed changes to the constitution of the Dominican Republic could lead to a ban on abortions, putting the lives of women and girls at risk and potentially increasing maternal deaths in the country, Amnesty International has warned.

Article 30 of the constitution would introduce the inviolability of life from "conception to death" under the proposal. It is widely acknowledged that this will lead to changes in the country's Penal Code that could lead to a total abortion ban.

The Congress of the Dominican Republic is to vote on the proposed changes on Thursday.

If the article is approved as proposed, it would severely limit the availability of safe abortions, even in cases when a woman is suffering from life-threatening complications or is in need of life-saving treatment incompatible with pregnancy – such as that for malaria, cancer or HIV/AIDS.

In July, Nicaragua banned abortions, which lead to the denial of life saving treatment for girls and women. It's no surprise that Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic lead the world in poverty and unemployment among women. Devastatingly oppressive legislation isn't helping anything, in fact it's making it worse.  Within Central America, the global economic crisis has a sort of domino effect, which creates an especially vulnerable woman worker even more so. While women are getting basic human rights denied, the Dominican Republic is receiving money and resources from Brazil to re-start their energy sector, jobs mostly held by men.

No woman should die on the table from childbirth. Our world is too medically advanced to allow this to happen. Religiously motivated, ideologically sound, but morally corrupt; laws that ban life saving help to women are doing more damage than good, and it unfairly affects women of the lowest class.

-Sophia

G8 Conference on Violence Against Women Recap

The conference was a two day affair hosted by the Italian President, who cited gruesome (triggering) details of the worst abuse imaginable against women. The summit seemed to only feature the accounts of abuse and how many women and children are affected each year. I suppose the purpose, in theory, was to start collaborating on ways to reduce the increasing violence against women. The members decided to wear white, and sell bracelets in honor of women killed by a spouse or partner.

Politicians and supporters are being urged to wear white during the course of the conference in order to raise awareness about the issues being discussed. More than 20,000 bracelets with the conference's slogan "Respect women, respect the world" are being distributed in major Italian cities.

In effect, such actions reveal this summit to be a largely symbolic one. From most accounts the purpose was to raise awareness of violence and think of ideas on how to stop it.

ROME — Participants at a conference on violence against women vowed Thursday to put women's rights at the center of the international agenda, saying world peace and security depended on women's leadership in government and society.

The United Nations Deputy Secretary-General, Dr. Asha-Rose Migiro states that rich nations have to make a concerted effort to fight and fund programs that work to stop increasingly drastic violence against women in the world's poorest countries. However, rich nations are not immune to this rise in violence, as America saw a huge increase in women and children seaking shelter from abuse during the economic collapse in 2008.

Migiro said, while addressing the ministerial-level Conference on Violence Against Women, held under the auspices of the Italian presidency of the Group of Eight (G8), that there was an evidence that women and girls are exposed to a greater risk of violence during times of hardship .

"We have seen rising levels of despair and frustration in families and communities around the world, exacerbating violence against women. In a recent survey of more than 630 domestic violence shelters in the United States, 75 per cent reported an increase in women seeking help for abuse since September 2008, coinciding with a major downturn in the US economy. We must remain especially vigilant through these tough times," she said.

However, besides citing the increased numbers of domestic violence, especially in the poorest countries, not much detail has been released on how they intend to fight it.

While this two day meeting among world leaders has obtained significant international media attention, lesser known but much more devastating developments have occurred, which threaten the progress the G8 Conference may have achieved. Britain has been leading the way to combine four major groups to create a sort of "super" women's defense fund/group which would, among other things, have over a billion dollars in funding and specifically help impoverished women in war torn countries. The good in this is endless, and yet four major nations are flooding the developments with legal fights and political "ambushes" to stop this "super" group from occurring.

The general assembly was set to ratify the new agency – which would have a budget of around $1bn and consolidate four existing bodies that deal with women's issues – before its current session concludes on Monday. But Egypt, Cuba, Sudan and Iran have mounted a last-minute campaign to delay ratification.

Britain's development minister, Gareth Thomas, this week called on the hold-outs to end their blocking tactics, warning that this was the last opportunity to make a UN women's agency a reality.

So, while the G8 Conference may have been a great place for world leaders to convene and share ideas, it is evident more must be done.

-Sophia

Silvio FTL (... again)

His public life has become more dramatic than a soap opera. I have written about him before. About his wife, her public displays of disdain and their highly public disputes. I have written of the irony in their relationship and how he represents his country-people.

Everytime I read of Silvio Berlusconi I am utterly disgusted.


As a man in power, he represents every negative stereotype people such as myself fight diligently against, every.fucking.day. He only hires women, unqualified at that, if they are beautiful. He invites young women, his own daughter's age, to his home to entertain him and his friends. Women are bought and sold in his own home, parties he hosts. In a shameless display of hubris, and with supreme hypocrisy, he runs an extremely conservative agenda. He is BFF's with the Vatican(way to go Pope). In every way, he reveals himself to be a misogynistic pig, with seemingly no conscience. A sociopath.

The Prime Minister of Italy.

The prime minister was in an apparently upbeat mood today, telling the press conference that he enjoyed "the admiration of 68% per cent of Italians" – though he did not cite a source. The previous evening he again joked about his reputation at a meeting of young members of his party. When a female follower got up to ask a question, he interrupted her, saying: "I'm letting off the boys, but the girls are having to give their phone numbers."

In September, for the sake of all Italians, may the opposition win at last.

-Sophia

The "debate" Over Repro. Freedom

A very disturbing conversation took place this morning when a twitter follower of mine @ replied me in response to a tweet in which I used the term “anti-choice”.

@sophiabiabia the discussion needs new labels. Anti-choice, pro-choice, pro-life, pro-death

@sophiabiabia all put the other side immediately on the defensive so no real discussion can take place

First and foremost, attempting to debate anything on twitter is always and forever futile. There are too few characters and too many tweets. Secondly, to bring up such a sensitive subject with little insight into the real issue (I’ll get to that later) on such a whimsical platform is just disrespectful.

A little back story.

Earlier today, I re-tweeted this link: Anti-Choice Group Sues for Immediate Enforcement of Illinois Law

The Thomas More Society filed a lawsuit this week with the Illinois Supreme Court that seeks immediate enforcement of a parental notification law in the state. The notification law was scheduled to go into effect on August 5th, but its implementation was delayed by a 90-day moratorium approved by the state's Department of Financial and Professional Regulation to allow medical professionals to familiarize themselves with the law, reported the New York Times.

The law in question mandates that physicians notify a young woman's parents at least 48 hours before performing abortions on women 17 or younger. Illinois law does not require that parents consent regarding the abortion, only that they are notified.

The law originally passed in 1984 and was updated in 1995, but was held up for years by legal challenges. A Chicago federal appeals court ruled in July that the law is constitutional. In its decision, the court described the law as "a permissible attempt to help a young woman make an informed choice about whether to have an abortion".

This information is an addition to the long list of legal losses for those of us who believe that per well-established legal precedent and basic morality principles, women have the right to decide when, how and if they will reproduce. Women also should be able to decide they never want to reproduce and should be allowed to obtain necessary procedures to cure diseases that are often blocked because said cure involves rendering the woman infertile (i.e. removing the uterus to cure endometriosis).

Overall, however, the removal of the reproduction rights of women by increments (parental consent and waiting periods) is not, in my opinion, the most detrimental to the reproductive rights cause. The reason these legal challenges and lawsuits are so successful is because the “debate” and ugly rhetoric, from both sides, perpetuate a sense of inequality. The “debate” suggests, subconsciously perhaps, that women aren’t intelligent enough to make their own decisions. The “debate” has been raging for longer than I have been alive and it’s still going today- what does that tell you? How long does this insensitive and demeaning rhetoric have to last? How many more women will suffer because of it? How useful is it, to anyone?

Although, I am fervently pro-choice (which is also pro life) I will not be picketing the Catholic Charities office. I will not demean women by denying her right to an informed opinion. What women, girls and youth need is education- not presumptuous accusations and harmful rhetoric.

-Sophia

What we NEED is the Great White Hope

From Dailykos.com, the VA governor’s race just got pretty interesting. Robert McDonnell, the Republican candidate, wrote a special thesis at his evangelical college, which denounces the work of feminists and displays disgust for anyone that doesn’t identify as heterosexual.

At age 34, two years before his first election and two decades before he would run for governor of Virginia, Robert F. McDonnell submitted a master's thesis to the evangelical school he was attending in Virginia Beach in which he described working women and feminists as "detrimental" to the family. He said government policy should favor married couples over "cohabitators, homosexuals or fornicators." He described as "illogical" a 1972 Supreme Court decision legalizing the use of contraception by unmarried couples.

It’s VA and I really shouldn’t care. However, this is yet another example of how underneath the mainstream conservative ideology, from those who laud the importance of the “traditional family”, there lies observable sexism and oppressive policies-aimed at minorities, homosexuals, and women.

This last week, someone on the Hill indicated that what Republicans need is another “great White hope”. That wasn’t some Freudian slip. She meant it-literally. In order for Republicans to connect with their base, they need a White Man, presumably with a firm belief in Conservative principles, ideally as charming as Ronald Reagan, to come back on board, and get America back on track! You know the track, backwards, away from social progress, probably to the 50’s, where a women’s place was in the kitchen and birthing table; where black men couldn’t look a white man in the eye; when anyone that identified as other than completely heterosexual were driven underground or legally punished for sodomy.

These, of course, are the policies they don’t want to be TOO open about. They would, obviously, drive away the independents and frustrated blue dog democrats. "In his run for governor, McDonnell, 55, makes little mention of his conservative beliefs and has said throughout his campaign that he should be judged by what he has done in office... " So, most modern conservatives campaign on a “moderately conservative” agenda and then promptly govern with an absurdly conservative agenda. For those in VA, who aren’t so sure about “socialism” and “Nazis” in the Democratic Party, McDonnell is just for them. Luckily for those in Virginia, who may be on the fence about Deeds but identify with socially progressive politics, know now that McDonnell isn’t as “moderate” as he says-that he would indeed be the wrong choice.

-Sophia

Women's right to reproductive freedom and the healthcare reform battle

“Government funded abortions” .

“we will pay for birth-control for poor women”

The ugly(ier) side of the healthcare debate has hit full speed in the last two weeks. During the lull of the Congressional August recess, a controversy is created in order to fill the airwaves. And women are at the crux of it.

Depending upon who you ask, “Obama care”, as conservatives like to call health reform legislation, will pay to cover abortions. Due to the language in each public bill currently under debate, specifically in regards to the government subsidies for insurance plans citizens already have, the slippery slope leads to this conclusion: women will have their abortions and birth control covered by the American people. Not only is this not accurate, it is as we see time and again; political propaganda at a woman’s expense.

It is no surprise that within the abortion “debate” (barf) women are portrayed as stupid, incapable of making their own decisions, and at the mercy of our patriarchal government. To counteract this negative language, let us be clear, no reasonable human can deduce from current legislation that the government will pay for an abortion, and here is why.

Since 1973, when Roe V. Wade made abortion legal, there was an immediate backlash from the right and specifically the religious right. A couple of year’s later Roe V. Wade opponents registered a huge win. With the passing of the Hyde Amendment, Medicaid funding for abortion was banned. Not only does this amendment unduly discriminate against low-income women, it still stands to this very day. With the passing of any of the bills currently under debate, a funding increase for Medicaid will not change the Hyde amendment; poor women will still not have their abortion paid for.

President Obama has never unequivocally stated that his ideal health reform bill will include 100% government subsidized reproductive care. On the contrary, as noted in a story in The American Prospect, President Obama has indicated he is willing to remove reproductive care funding if it garners the final bill more Republican votes. Indeed, within democratic circles, even the most left leaning members admit that repealing Hyde is not a priority. Also, not one democratic legislator is eager to repeat Hillary-care’s (1993) mistake- outspoken support for women’s services.

The general thinking among fierce Pro- “life” advocates is that “Premiums are akin to taxes- money goes from a citizen’s pocket to the U.S. Treasury”. So, as the argument would go, if premiums are paid by citizens and some citizens get an abortion, in effect, Americans are subsidizing abortion. It makes at the very least, topical sense, if indeed the government will provide ALL Americans insurance coverage. This is, however, not the case. No where does health care reform legislation call for the complete take over of healthcare by the government. In truth, funding will be raised for programs already in place, (hopefully) an option for a public plan will be available, cost caps will be placed on monthly premiums; pre-exiting conditions, life-time maximums and the retro active denial of coverage will be outlawed.

In reality, healthcare reform is needed now. I have already written about the fiscal reasons, and with the debate turning to highlight social issues, the need for reform is even greater.

Contact your representative now.

-Sophia