As Jasbir Puar puts it, ‘homosexual subjects who have limited legal rights in the US civil context gain significant representational currency when situated within the global scene of the war on terror’.
Praise be. Don’t forget to read this.
I just got word from my boss at Obama headquarters that there is a MAJOR problem with young voters taking pictures of their votes while in the booth and posting them to various social media sites. THIS IS ILLEGAL, disqualifies votes, and could be seriously detrimental to the Obama campaign! I know of all you are smart enough to know that taking pictures in the booth is a bad idea, but we can not afford to lose any votes or have problems that can be so easily avoided! PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD!!!
The ACA means that I can stay on my parents health insurance plan until I graduate law school and even a little after that
The ACA means that I can prevent getting pregnant while getting my education, at no extra cost to me
The ACA means that when I finally do get off my parents health insurance I won’t get denied coverage because I have a pre-existing condition.
Reblog and add what the ACA means to you!
The ACA means that my friends who can’t afford health insurance will be punished for their poverty.
It’s now up in the air whether the Obama administration will actually veto the NDAA. In past weeks, the president has established his firm opposition to the bill that would allow for the “indefinite detention” of terror suspects (though only because he wants the power for himself). Today, the Huffington Post reported that sponsors of the National Defense Authorization Act are “[adding] language on national security waivers and other changes that they [hope] would ensure administration support for the overall bill,” after hearing “personal appeals” from the administration to amend the bill.
Perhaps it’s Obama’s conscience coming to save the day!
Unfortunately, it’s quite the opposite. The administration called for amendments to the bill that would allow for greater “flexibility” for executive, military, and legal procedures in handling cases of terrorism. In short, Obama wants to be able to dictate what he wants the letter of the law to be when it is convenient. Pretty fucking scary if you ask me.
But wait! There’s more!
According to Senator Carl Levin, it was actually the Obama administration that first pressed lawmakers to ”remove the language which says that U.S. citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to [indefinite detention].” Wonderful.
If this doesn’t look like the prologue to a dystopian novel, I don’t know what would. But the cherry on the top to all of this? FEMA detention camps are being prepared for operation. Surrounding by threatening barbed wire fences, these frightening constructions are reminiscent of the Japanese interment camps set up by Executive Order 9066 in 1942. And it’s believed that these will be used to lock up mass amounts of people in the case of a declaration of martial law.
If this isn’t enough evidence to make you suspicious of what your government is plotting, I don’t know what would suffice.
I’m sorry, but this has me convinced.
This is one of the many reasons I hate Obama and America.
Fuck. FUCK. Get me out of here.
From CREDO Action:
“In August, the Obama Administration listened to women’s rights advocates and made an historic advancement for women’s health with new regulations that require insurance coverage for birth control with no co-pays.
But President Obama may be poised to cave on this tremendous step forward for women’s health.
Extreme anti-woman forces who literally oppose contraceptives are lobbying President Obama to overturn these new regulations and block access to birth control for millions of women.
If President Obama caves to the demands of the radical anti-contraception activists, certain employers like religiously affiliated universities and hospitals will be allowed to prevent their female employees from having access to the same health care as every other woman in America.
The Department of Health and Human Services and the medical community agree that providing no-cost birth control is an essential part of preventive health care for women. And Kathleen Sebelius, the director of HHS, said that providing birth control at no cost to women should be like “covering flu shots.”1
President Obama needs to hear that women’s access to critically important health care shouldn’t be determined by who they work for.
The anti-woman lobby is small but incredibly powerful. We know that President Obama has had private meetings with influential leaders from U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops who have been publicly pressuring him to restrict access to birth control. There is already a religious exemption that covers churches and other places of worship from offering birth control as part of health insurance. This new push to radically broaden that exemption is nothing more than a thinly veiled attack on contraception.
Now, President Obama needs to hear from the millions of women who use birth control and depend on it to keep them healthy. He should listen to the medical community and women in the U.S., not the extreme anti-woman forces lobbying him behind closed doors.
Thank you for working to protect women’s health.
Ali Rozell, Campaign Manager
CREDO Action from Working Assets
1. “New U.S. rules require insurance coverage for contraception,” N.C. Aizenman, The Washington Post, 8-1-2011.”
Mr. President, we’ve been protesting for two months now. From a small park in Manhattan, the protests have grown to over 2,000 cities nationwide, with hundreds of thousands of people in attendance, and even more showing their solidarity online. We’re your supporters, Mr. President. We believed in the change you promised in 2008.
But, our peaceful protests has been met with a violent, coordinated response from the police departments across the country - and evidence is emerging that the Department of Homeland Security has helped coordinate these militarized raids on peaceful protesters.
We - your supporters - have endured beatings, pepper spray, police officers using vehicles as weapons by driving into crowds, and sound cannons. Over 4,000 of us have been arrested for exercising our rights to assemble and to free speech.
Mr. President, you’ve been entirely silent on the protests, on the reasons that we’re protesting, and - worst of all - on the violent police response to these protests. You have been conspicuous by your absence, but your silence on the police violence has been deafening. As an attorney, you in particular should know that your silence is in essence a tacit approval of these tactics.
We understand that it’s an election year. We understand that you’ve raised significant money from the corporations whose corrupt practices have brought us to this point of economic instability and civil unrest. And we understand that if you speak out in favor of the protests, you risk losing the support of those corporations. In contrast, if you remain silent, you will still likely win the election because there is no one else to vote for among the narrow pool of candidates.
Mr. President, we have long memories. We will not forget that you - the candidate who promised change - have not spoken out once on these protests which are defining a generation’s return to civic engagement and civil disobedience.
And if you win the re-election, Mr. President, remember that this time we weren’t voting for you. We were voting against the other candidates.
My official voting stance for the national elections is “Anyone but the GOP candidates 2012”