Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditLast week your humble correspondent learned, over a dry repast of catered chicken with some of our nation's most influential men, that unlike Canada and many other civilized democracies, we cannot have single-payer health care because Dennis Kucinich is short. I wonder what these luminaries would say about a new report from Save the Children showing that the United States compares poorly to other developed countries on an equally basic measure.
Thomas Friedman and other pundits worry -- rightly -- that America is not going to remain competitive in the global economy for much longer. But we're lagging behind in other ways, too. Save the Children's eighth annual Mother's Index ranks 141 countries, and found Sweden, among more developed countries, the best place to be a mother. The United States is not even in the top twenty. The rankings are based on criteria for women's well-being -- lifetime risk of maternal mortality, maternity leave benefits, ratio of female-to-male earned income, expected number of years of formal female schooling, female life expectancy at birth, percentage of women using modern contraception women's participation in national government, and percentage of births attended by skilled health care professionals -- as well as the country's score on the organization's Children's Index. (Italy, by the way, is the best place in the developed world to be a kid, while the United States ranks a disgraceful thirtieth.) The criteria for the Children's Index are: mortality rate for kids under five and percentage of children enrolled in school (apologies to home-schoolers, but this does tend to be a decent indicator of how children are faring in a society). Interestingly, among the least developed countries, Cape Verde is number one for both mothers and children. Malawi didn't do badly either -- maybe Madonna should take that kid back!
In other Mother's Day news, fourteen national women's groups -- representing a combined constituency of 10 million women, according to Wake Up Wal-Mart -- signed a letter to Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott asking him to bring an end to the discrimination and mistreatment endured by the company's female employees. The letter launched a Mother's Day campaign by Wake Up Wal-Martwhich included actions in at least 43 cities, and a "Million Moms Call" reaching out to over one million families asking them to pledge not to buy Mother's Day gifts at Wal-Mart. In New York state, Governor Spitzer -- in response to a dogged campaign by the United Federation of Teachers, New York State United Teachers (of which I'm a member because I teach at CUNY) and ACORN -- has issued an executive order granting over 60,000 government-subsidized family day care providers the right to form a union and collectively bargain. That's great news for those hard-working women, who make about $2 an hour, and for the low-income mothers who send their children to them -- child-care workers who are better paid have access to further education and professional development, and can do a better job.
Share this article
News & Analysis »
- Atrios
- Arts and Letters Daily
- The Caucus
- Campus Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- The Daily Gotham
- Daily Kos
- FAIR
- Feministe
- Feministing
- Firedoglake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Gothamist
- In these Times
- Hendrik Hertzberg
- Huffington Post
- Matthew Yglesias
- Media Matters
- Mother Jones
- My DD
- New York Review of Books
- Openleft
- Pam's House Blend
- Political Wire
- The Progressive
- RaceWire
- Real Clear Politics
- Roberto Lovato
- Romenesko
- Swing State Project
- Talking Points Memo
- Ta-Nehisi Coates
- Tapped
- Tech President
- Tompaine
- The Washington Note
- Utne Reader
- Wonkette
RSS
Gee, how did I know Wal-mart was going to get worked in there...hehe
Ms Featherstone, when those day care workers unionize and start getting higher pay....
aren't those mothers sending their kids to day care going to be the ones PAYING for that higher pay?
Posted by Mask at 05/13/2007 @ 09:41am
Posted by MASK 05/13/2007 @ 09:41am | ignore this person
in France, and many other countries, they have free daycare, which of course is not free. it simply means, that they've decided, as a society, this is vitally important so everybody pays for it with their taxes. societies do that all the time.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/13/2007 @ 09:46am
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 05/13/2007 @ 09:46am |
Right you are, JR....you got it.
So, in the interests of "fairness" to those women who DON'T get Federally-subsidized daycare, the eventuall call will be for...
"free daycare for all". And with them being unionized, and the unions' influence on one of the dominant political parties that control Government, it means that they will get to "bargain" for higher and higher pay...which means WE (the taxpayers) have to pony up with higher and higher taxes.
Plus all the fun of endless Gov't regulations.
I can't wait!
Posted by Mask at 05/13/2007 @ 09:58am
they will get to "bargain" for higher and higher pay.
you got a problem with people asking for higher pay? that's pretty un american.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/13/2007 @ 10:20am
free daycare for all sounds real good to me. that is an investment in the future, which pays huge dividends later.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/13/2007 @ 10:22am
I support free education for the same reason. full disclosure. I got my entire college education for free, see what a good investment that was?
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/13/2007 @ 10:23am
they will get to "bargain" for higher and higher pay.
during WW2 the gov't instituted price controls. they tried to do the same with wages. that went nowhere and was abandoned.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/13/2007 @ 10:25am
Users of legal and illegal immigrant labor love to use the argument that we need immigration to prop up a declining birthrate. So, just as long as we maintain social benefits to mothers that exceed Mexico's, we look like a paradise to our neighbors.
European countries that support maternity through leave, right to return to work, and subsidized day care are seeing a slowdown in birthrate decline or increases in birthrate. I would prefer that my taxes go to support US citizens.
I remember a documentary that interviewed US soldiers who are stationed in Germany and have married or were planning to marry German citizens. Many have decided to stay in Germany to raise their families because the US ranks so low on the scales discussed in this article. But hey remember, we have the most mighty military in the world.
Move over Third World, here comes the US.
What an appropriate read on Mother's Day Liza.
Posted by OneVote at 05/13/2007 @ 10:51am
Or maybe Liza would be happier in a land with no Walmarts...she needs counseling as everything in her writings contain Walmart..a fixation that needs to be looked at for sure...
Perhaps Sweden is the place she will be happiest, for it surely isn't America and for the amount of "free" items she wants to have provided here..well, if she ever gets her way..I may have leave America...I can't afford the "free" stuff as it is, and with more demanded from the Lizas of the world...well, more "free" things will break me..
Posted by john maasch at 05/13/2007 @ 11:01am
this is also the reason that immigration from those countries has dried up. I have lived in three separate german neighborhoods in NYC, but there won't be anymore of those, that's for sure.
one myth is that people risk their lives only to get into the US. not true, they do so also to get into europe.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/13/2007 @ 11:06am
'Move over Third World, here comes the US. "
True enough, but at the rate we are going, more of the third world will head here....not for the drive to become an American and the opportunity to get a chance on the dream, but to get a quality of life style provided by the Lizas of the world...and we can't provide "free" benefits to everyone...the math doesn't work..
How many young professionals leave Sweden these days with their tax rates?...what are the birth rates? Germany will not be German before to long, muchless the German neighborhoods in NY...Europe is becoming less European.
Posted by john maasch at 05/13/2007 @ 11:16am
to the mother of the suicide bomber:
dear lady, I send you my condolences on this mother's day. I am sorry you have lost your son/daughter.may the memory of his life, provide you with some consolation. I reach out to all mothers to join me in asking for a better way ahead.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/13/2007 @ 11:33am
How many young professionals leave Sweden these days with their tax rates?...what are the birth rates? Germany will not be German before to long, muchless the German neighborhoods in NY...Europe is becoming less European.
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 05/13/2007 @ 11:16am | ignore this person
How many John? I am curious?
Posted by OneVote at 05/13/2007 @ 11:37am
.Europe is becoming less European.
this is not such a terrible thing. we have become more multiethnic here. globalisation has many forms. they're going to have to re-populate the east german lands. and it's likely to be dark skinned folks. you'll all be glad for them, when they pay for your retirement with their taxes.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/13/2007 @ 11:51am
Posted by MASK 05/13/2007 @ 09:58am
Ya know, Mask, this is why I am NOT a libertarian. (Don't know if you're into that particular label but you sometimes sound like one.) Unfortunately, in modern life, the choice seems to be between big government and big corporations. (We may be moving towards something more humane than either in the long run but I'm not holding my breath.) To me, this is a no-brainer. All the noise that Libertarians make about "getting the government off our backs" and "letting the free market decide" (various issues that affect all our lives to core) is just so much bullshit, as far as I'm concerned. Sure, the distributed oligarchy that we a "republic" is far from perfect but as someone who's bounced around in the corporate world for the last couple of decades, I can tell you that government is one HELL of a lot more democratic and, yes, even caring for its citizen (I know, I know, far from perfectly) than ANY corporation, no matter how benign.
So yeah, I am willing to pay the tax bite for free day-care AND national health insurance, if that's what it takes. And in a truly just society, yes, the rich WOULD bear the burden of taking care of the less rich instead of whining endlessly about the capital gains and inheritance taxes.
Because Marx was right in essence. Capitalism IS a form of legitimized theft and the rich only got most of their money by stealing it (again, in a legitimized way) from the less rich. I'd be the first to agree that it's extremely difficult, evidently, to make real socialism work in a truly democratic manner, but that shouldn't keep us from trying. Meanwhile....
Posted by w_m_bear at 05/13/2007 @ 12:44pm
The reason many European countires like Sweden and Germany have such great social services for maternity needs is because their birth rates are so low that they are suffering popualtion declines. You would think that these same European countries would support an increase in immigration, but no, they wan't to protect as much of their racially pure society as they can.
Way to put the positive spin on racial superiority Liza. I didn't think you could do it.
Posted by Zeddmen at 05/13/2007 @ 12:55pm
...and it's likely to be dark skinned folks.
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 05/13/2007 @ 11:51am
Hardly. There is legislation throughout the E.U. set to curb immigration. All you have to do is go to a football match in any country in Europe to see how they view "dark skinned floks". Racial insults, are fascist slogans are ubiquitous in every football stadium in Europe.
Posted by Zeddmen at 05/13/2007 @ 1:04pm
Saddam Hussein's government was very superior to the American system because under Saddam Hussein THERE WAS NO SUCH THING AS AL QAIDA IN IRAQ. Saddam Hussein Knew, how to hunt them down and utterly destroy them, there were no car bombings, there were no kidnappings - other than 'guilty' terrorists, US Soldiers were not being sacrificed en masse on an American Satanic Altar.
FACT, FACT, FACT.
Posted by conshame at 05/13/2007 @ 1:27pm
Under Saddam Hussein, American soldiers were not being kidnapped. Only 'guilty' terrorists were being kidnapped - by Saddam Husseins competent security forces - who knew how to attack and destroy terrorists - unlike the Americans who only know how to steal money.
Posted by conshame at 05/13/2007 @ 1:29pm
How come Saddam Hussein's government was more competent, at hunting down and killing terrorists? Because of Republican Conservatives led by the idiot George Bush, who think all this it funny. Liberal, Liberal, Socialist Liberal, Ha Ha Ha - we're winning, if you dont support Bushs lies then you're with the terrorists. Ha Ha, Liberal, Liberal, Liberal, Liberal Socialist, Liberals support terrorists. Ha Ha. Iraq is making progress, smirk, chuckle, we're winning.
Posted by conshame at 05/13/2007 @ 1:32pm
Republicans: LYING about Iraq
Posted by conshame at 05/13/2007 @ 1:33pm
"Because Marx was right in essence. Capitalism IS a form of legitimized theft and the rich only got most of their money by stealing it (again, in a legitimized way) from the less rich."
And there you have it...the reason so many "progressives" and liberals can't get elected without running to the Right, and lying, ..at least this guy has the guts to claim his position...
Posted by john maasch at 05/13/2007 @ 1:44pm
Simple question...if the poor have no money and the rich get rich from stealing from the poor...then what are they "stealing", exactly?
Posted by john maasch at 05/13/2007 @ 1:45pm
"Under Saddam Hussein, American soldiers were not being kidnapped."
True, but I think hundreds of thousands of Iraqis went "missing"...comments?
Conshame=selective memory
Posted by john maasch at 05/13/2007 @ 1:47pm
Just a thought.
Health care:
Everyone talks about the cost of providing "Universal Health Care" or "Single Payer Health Care". What about the trade off of not having to pay for health care out of pocket and the savings of our corporations and businesses not having to pay for the cost of health care for their employees? I pay around 4 or 5 thousand dollars a year for health care for my family. My employer pays twice that amount. The cost for both of us has been raising. What if we didn't have to pay those out of pocket expenses and had to pay a tax for health care? Would my employer have to pay 10 grand and would I have to pay 5 grand in extra taxes? I don't think so.
I won't even get into the problems with our current system, but there has to be economies of scale with a single payer system that provide care for everyone rather than the commercial system of multitudes of companies that can pick and choose those healthy people they would prefer to insure and leave those with chronic illnesses and preexisting conditions to their own devices for care.
Let me leave you with a health care joke.
A Human Resources person comes to talk to a group of employees about their new Health Care program. The HR person says "I've got some good news and some bad new about this years' health plan." The group of employees looks concerned and there is some mumbling in the group. The HR person says "Well, the bad new is this years health plan will cost more, have higher deductibles and provide you and your families with less services." The group of employees starts to complain and starts to get very noisy. "But wait," the HR person says, "I still have some good news for you." The group quits down and the HR person says "The good news is this years health plan is way better than next years health plan."
O.K. jokes over, you can laugh now..... what, I don't hear any laughter?
"If CARE were a stock being offered on the market, it would be a wise commodity to invest in at this time on the planet. Care will soon be on the rise because everything else has been tried."
Doc Childre
itmfa
Posted by COProgressive at 05/13/2007 @ 2:07pm
America has given the Iraqi people improved access to torture and kidnapping, above Saddam Hussein levels. Under Saddam Hussein, only 'guilty' terrorists were tortured - and only to find out about ticking bombs in order to save Iraqi lives.
America has brought torture and kidnapping to the masses. Now ordinary Iraqis can be tortured and kidnapped.
Saddam Hussein's torture was primitive compared to modern Iraqi standards. Iraqis now have access to improved forms of torture such as the drill, and other innovations.
Conservative Republicans led by George Bush have given Iraqis the kind of health care that is good enough to give to Conservative Republicans.
Posted by conshame at 05/13/2007 @ 2:25pm
Under Saddam Hussein, Al Qaida in Iraq did not exist, could not exist, because Saddam Hussein Knew How, to hunt them down and eradicate them. America, doesnt. FACT.
Rebuild Iraq = Loot the US Treasury
Conservative Republican = Loot the US Treasury
Posted by conshame at 05/13/2007 @ 2:39pm
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 05/13/2007 @ 10:20am
JR, when those Federal daycare workers get higher and higher pay for working at those Federal daycares run by the Federal daycare system....
who pays their higher and higher paychecks?
Hint--it's why Segolene Royal wasn't elected
Posted by Mask at 05/13/2007 @ 3:28pm
"to the mother of the suicide bomber:
dear lady, I send you my condolences on this mother's day. I am sorry you have lost your son/daughter.may the memory of his life, provide you with some consolation. I reach out to all mothers to join me in asking for a better way ahead.
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 05/13/2007 @ 11:33am
JR,
Most of those mothers reject your condolences as they believe their son or daughter is in paradise....your condolences and well wishes should go out to those mothers whose sons and daughters were slaughtered like pigs in a processing plant BY the sons and daughters of the mothers you seem to want to console today...miss placed im my opinion and inappropiate....and represents the entire wrong end of the solujtions and problems.
Posted by john maasch at 05/13/2007 @ 4:23pm
"America has brought torture and kidnapping to the masses."
conshame=over the reef
You are living in the wrong country...with your beliefs of truth it is you who should be wearing a towel around you face and yelling allah ak bahr before getting on the bus...
you sir, are gone. complelty gone.
Posted by john maasch at 05/13/2007 @ 4:28pm
Posted by COPROGRESSIVE 05/13/2007 @ 2:07pm
Plus more bad news soon for you...in the next few years you will have to pay ALL your health care cost out of your paycheck(don't worry, it is just another deduction before you see any money, so, it won't hurt) and it is going to be brought to you by Hillary in the WH and designed by the Dems ..PLUS, it will be unionised!!! But that is part of the good news...it will function just like the Post Office and we all know that has been running real well since Ben Franklin set it up!!
AND..any price increases can be handled right out of your check!!!No problem!!!!!!..and if you don't want your family anywhere near the program, thats OK too!!!(but you still must pay)
Don't woryy, be happy...just don't get sick.
Posted by john maasch at 05/13/2007 @ 4:36pm
Ms. Featherstone: ...a new report from Save the Children showing that the United States compares poorly....
....Save the Children's...found Sweden...the best place to be a mother.
What LIZA didn't say, but is criticaally relevant to `survival of the fittest', is that in America, we have an abundance of children which, quite literally, should rank on the list of `endangered' human beings!
Let's see what the CIA's "The World Factbook" says about Birth Rates, with 223 countries listed!
Israel is the busiest developed country at No. 119 - 17.7 per 1000
The US. is the second most child-loving at No. 152 - 14.16/1,000
Sweden, LIZA's paradise for mothers, at No. 192 - 10.2/1,000
The model social-welfare states? Lookey here:
France at No. 162 - 12.91 (heavily tilted towards French-Muslims)
Norway at No. 174 - 11.27
Denmark at No. 179 - 10.91
Our Canadian friends at No. 181 - 10.75
The now Theo van Gogh-less Netherland at No. 182 - 10.70
Those perfection-oriented Germans at No. 221 - 8.20
The World Average, by the way, is 20.09/1,000
LIZA, please explain to us, What gives? Why aren't mothers doing their thing in all them paradises???????
Posted by Happy at 05/13/2007 @ 6:21pm
There is legislation throughout the E.U. set to curb immigration.
Posted by ZEDDMEN 05/13/2007 @ 1:04pm
This was part of Sarkozy's platform...decrease immigration, but for those who are allowed in, make sure they speak French.
Posted by usc1 at 05/13/2007 @ 8:13pm
So yeah, I am willing to pay the tax bite for free day-care AND national health insurance, if that's what it takes.
Posted by W_M_BEAR 05/13/2007 @ 12:44pm
Out of curiosity, just how much MORE in taxes (beyond what you were obligated to pay) did you pay this year in order to ensure that medicare and social security were fully funded?
Posted by usc1 at 05/13/2007 @ 8:23pm
I got my entire college education for free, see what a good investment that was?
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 05/13/2007 @ 10:23am
Too...many...jokes...Must...control...urge...to make...sarcastic...comment...
:)
Posted by usc1 at 05/13/2007 @ 8:30pm
The issue of health care is plagued by one horrible fact, providers and facilities that provide low quality care, costing untold tragedies in terms of lowered standards of living, are paid for doing poor work because no one has any quantifiable information on the overall value given to patients based on the quality of care given during the whole patient cycle related to caring for a medical condition. Switching to a one payer system would only allow low quality providers to lock down tighter the ability to receive a guaranteed income for while they weigh down the system.
Total national costs (lost income, lost household production, disability and health care costs) of preventable adverse events (medical errors resulting in injury) are estimated to be between $17 billion and $29 billion, of which health care costs represent over one-half. A single payer system would not address this issue and switching to a single payer system could make the problems surrounding quality worse than they are. The Institute of Medicine http://www.iom.edu/CMS/3718.aspx has done a study, To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309068371 that shows more people die in a given year as a result of medical errors than from motor vehicle accidents (43,458), breast cancer (42,297), or AIDS (16,516. Total national costs (lost income, lost household production, disability and health care costs) of preventable adverse events (medical errors resulting in injury) are estimated to be between $17 billion and $29 billion, of which health care costs represent over one-half. The context in which health care is purchased further exacerbates these problems. Group purchasers have made few demands for improvements in safety.
The only way to change the horrible quality issue is to make health care providers, suppliers (pharmaceutical companies, makers of equipment, etc. ) and facilities compete on the basis of quantifiable outcomes for overall patient care through the whole cycle of treatment related to a medical condition. Competing on value is a positive-sum competition from which all system participants can benefit.
Health Care reform will not be complete without universal, mandatory health insurance and consistent standards for health plan coverage, However, policy efforts have missed the critical insight that the government's most important role is to enable competition base on value so that the nation will be able to afford quality health care for everyone. I strongly urge anyone who is concerned about health care give up on the idea of a single payer system. We can only lower the costs of the system overall if more people participate (which would involve government subsidies for many) and if all of the current players, health care providers, health care plans and consumers agree to sit down and ask the government to mandate that results base on the results of medical care given be widely published and discussed.
The above contains quotes from ‘Redefining Health Care; Creating Value-Based Competition on Results' by Michael E Porter and Elizabeth Olmsted Teisberg published by
Posted by rverne8 at 05/13/2007 @ 9:52pm
AND..any price increases can be handled right out of your check!!!No problem!!!!!!..and if you don't want your family anywhere near the program, thats OK too!!!(but you still must pay)
Don't woryy, be happy...just don't get sick.
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 05/13/2007 @ 4:36pm
...just don't get sick. That's good advice, live health and then just die at 62 so you don't have to take that government hand-out Social Security. After all, it should be enough that we get to pay something like 438 thousand million dollars for protection (kinda sounds like a mob racket)each year, and we still are told that we must live in fear, (Current Threat Level - May 11, 2007 -- The United States government national threat level Elevated, or Yellow) why would anyone expect to burden our government with something so off the wall as "promote the general Welfare" of the American people too?
Unfortunately, not everyone is so luck as to ..Just not get sick. Not everyone is fortunate enough to have health insurance. The cost is pricing families out of health insurance. Someone, I think on this thread said that "only 29 million" were uninsured and most of those were between 24 and 36 and that people in that age range didn't feel they needed insurance. What a crock of shit. People in that age range are young families just getting a foot up in employment and for them likely aren't earning a whole lot of money. To get by, you know, feed the kids, put a roof over their heads, clothes on their backs and try to put some money away for an emergency, they don't have 10 or 15 thousand dollars a year to spend for health insurance out of a family income of maybe $50,000. So, no insurance for them, if one of the kids gets sick, they try to tough it out and hope it will pass, or if it gets real bad, and they don't want to watch their child die, they take the kid to the hospital Emergency Room and receive the most expensive care provided. They have no insurance, so the hospital charges them at a rate much in excess of the rate given a patient with insurance.
Would it not be better for a nation-wide health plan to allow the parents to take a sick child to a doctors' office and get the meds the kid needs and avoid the high priced Emergency Room visit?
And yes, I know may states care enough about our kids to insurer them in time of need, but not all states do and many time the working poor are unaware of such programs until too late.
One plan I favor is the government taking care of all extraordinary medical care thus reducing the cost of "common" care like broken arms, minor burns and other of lives difficulties and removing from the general health care cost things like cancer treatment and other long term costly care. And yes, I am in favor of rationing health care. There are health care treatments that I'm paying for that people have brought on themselves. I disapprove of people that have eaten or smoked or drank themselves into poor health and want the insurance that I pay to pay for their stomach reduction surgery and their new hips and knees or pay for the smokers' lung treatment. Sound like a cruel attitude to take from a bleeding heart liberal, but I'm a fiscal conservative on some matters too.
"Every gun that is made, every warship that is launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who are hungry and are not fed, those that are cold and are not clothed." Dwight D. Eisenhower
Posted by COProgressive at 05/13/2007 @ 10:11pm
Posted by RIO POLLO 05/13/2007 @ 9:54pm | ignore this person
Yeah, RP and it only cost us around 450 thousand million dollars to do it. What a bargain! Who needed those health clinics here in America, who needed to educate our kids to compete with the other kids in the world that are taking our jobs. Hell, education never did anything for you!
Moron!
"I'm also not very analytical. You know I don't spend a lot of time thinking about myself, about why I do things." - George W., as in wimp, Bush - Yale Cheerleader
RP, you can say you have something in common with the Commander Guy, you're both morons....
itmfa
Posted by COProgressive at 05/13/2007 @ 10:32pm
Universal and free childcare is a wonderful thing-as an insurance policy for women and men who can find no other form of childcare, or who see institutionalized childcare as a perfectly fine alternative to raising a child in the home. Frankly, sending young children to be institutionalized in droves for lack of a family member to be with is NOT a wonderful thing for children's development. Hence the phenomenon of "mummy track" whereby the oft cited, persistent 25% income gap in earning power between men and women is a function of the sexist nature of the entire organization of our economy, which makes little allowance for individuals who simultaneously manage their paid and unpaid labor in its inherent bias towards men, who traditionally count on women to liberate them from domestic responsibilites such as childrearing. The wage gap is symptomatic of women who choose to drop out of full time and thus higher income jobs in order to care for their children-a decision from which many never rebound professionally or financially, opting for lower skilled but more flexible work arrangements. The point is, all the hoopla over free and universal childcare is fine, but it's not that progressive if not accompanied by policy shifts that encourage creative working arrangements for both men and women, such as flextime, job sharing, and telecommuting options that open a space for MEN and WOMEN to contribute BOTH to household finances AND domestic responsibilites. The women's lib movement gained women entree into a man's world, now it's time to re-shape it in our own image, and liberate the men from the wild polarity they created in the first place.
Posted by lunatic7 at 05/13/2007 @ 10:44pm
Hint--it's why Segolene Royal wasn't elected
Posted by MASK 05/13/2007 @ 3:28pm
hey baby cakes. So you're against higher pay for day care workers eh?
If only all the working women of America could be a stay at home mom like you
Posted by Will C. at 05/13/2007 @ 11:07pm
Hey, they might have time to blog all day too.
Posted by Will C. at 05/13/2007 @ 11:08pm
I'm a mutha
Posted by Will C. at 05/13/2007 @ 11:24pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 05/13/2007 @ 11:38pm
I don't know about everybody else Frank, but I'm standing here in awe of the spectical of the republican party cutting it's own throat.
(and they really think they're in a ginsu commercial)
Posted by Will C. at 05/13/2007 @ 11:41pm
In Japan, the hand can be used like a knife...but it can't cut a tomato!
Posted by Will C. at 05/13/2007 @ 11:43pm
How much would you pay for a knife like this?
Posted by Will C. at 05/13/2007 @ 11:45pm
the mooners
Posted by Will C. at 05/13/2007 @ 11:46pm
not to be confused with the moonies or the washingotn post
Posted by Will C. at 05/13/2007 @ 11:46pm
hmmm, the boys the chimp surrounds himself with aren't too bright. are you sure that rove doesn;t think that he's an a theist.
it does sound like a chimpyism
Posted by Will C. at 05/13/2007 @ 11:49pm
Most of those mothers ...
what a remarkable decision for them to appoint you as their spokesman. and how kind of you to take on such an awesome responsibility.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/14/2007 @ 11:04am
Too...many...jokes...Must...control...urge...to make...sarcastic...comment...
:)
Posted by USC1 05/13/2007 @ 8:30pm | ignore this person
please don't stifle yourself on my account. it's not good for your health.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/14/2007 @ 11:05am
Posted by ZEDDMEN 05/13/2007 @ 1:04pm | ignore this person
what you say is true, but where else would they come from. I was specifically referring to east germany, not the entire Eu.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/14/2007 @ 11:07am
"Most of those mothers ...
what a remarkable decision for them to appoint you as their spokesman. and how kind of you to take on such an awesome responsibility.
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 05/14/2007 @ 11:04am "
No one appointed me..I just watched them interviewed on TV over the last 10 years..including their $25k rewards from Saddam...and I watched the mothers on TV of those blown away..
I find it interesting that the mothers I mention never received any sympathy from you..only the mothers of murderers...
Posted by john maasch at 05/14/2007 @ 12:46pm
I find it interesting that people would be mad about the US losing its manufacturing base, and then in the same breath, argue that we must remake the business structre in the US to be more friendly to working mothers.
That can't work.
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 2:14pm
Maasch, I put my sympathy where there wasn't a lot to go around.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/14/2007 @ 2:23pm
the suicide bombers are also casualties of this war. and I will not be the one to deny human feelings to their moms.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/14/2007 @ 2:31pm
the suicide bombers are also casualties of this war. and I will not be the one to deny human feelings to their moms.
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 05/14/2007 @ 2:31pm | ignore this person
Have to depart here. They knew their son's would die, and probably were "pleased?" with their decision, maybe even encouraged it in some instances.
As opposed to moms who's kid gets sent to Iraq, on a 12 month tour, praying every night that her kid makes it home.
There is a huge difference, not merely semantic.
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 2:47pm
no there isn't, wall. you don't know what moms know and don't know. a human being cannot lose his humanity. or maybe you can.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/14/2007 @ 2:50pm
"lose his humanity"? what the crap is that?
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 2:51pm
people are nothing more than time sensitive animated dirt, or am i wrong here?
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 2:52pm
a human being is always a human being. he is not, you animals, for instance. and the mom grieves for her son, that part of her humanity is indelible.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/14/2007 @ 2:53pm
I am nothing more than time sensitive animated dirt, or am i wrong here?
Posted by WALLSTREET 05/14/2007 @ 2:52pm | ignore this person
mmmh, I'm still thinking....
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/14/2007 @ 2:54pm
I like the re-write, I would include myself in that
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 2:55pm
"Humanity" is subjective
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 2:57pm
To some people it is in-human to not pay for some lady's childcare so she can "live up to her full potential"
To others it is in-human to live without air-conditioning
To others it is in-human to tear peoples arms off for not giving homage to the dictator.
Take your pick
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 2:59pm
If I had a dime for everything that I've read here as being "inhumane", I could buy Bill Gates
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 3:00pm
You make up your morality, I'll make up mine
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 3:07pm
Wall, you are arguing with yourself here. let me know how it turns out.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/14/2007 @ 3:10pm
So, you can't handle the debate, fine. But lets not pretend that the mothers of civilians getting blown up in cafes are feeling the same thing as the mothers of the sons that did the killing.
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 3:11pm
Posted by WALLSTREET 05/14/2007 @ 3:11pm | ignore this person
so, you know what all mothers are feeling? remarkable.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/14/2007 @ 3:13pm
It is remarkable
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 3:14pm
incidentally, I made no such comparison, you did. thay's what I mean about arguing with yourself.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/14/2007 @ 3:15pm
Aparently you do. Why can't I?
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 3:15pm
the suicide bombers are also casualties of this war. and I will not be the one to deny human feelings to their moms.
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 05/14/2007 @ 2:31pm | ignore this person
Did you forget aobut this?
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 3:16pm
Maybe if I canged a few of the words it would jog your memory
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 3:17pm
I did not make this comparison.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/14/2007 @ 3:18pm
Sure you did. Black and white. I can have the court stenographer read it back to to if you forgot.
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 3:20pm
the entire point of my original post was that one mother's tears are as tragic as another's.now you may disagree, but you will not be able to twist my words.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/14/2007 @ 3:21pm
one mother's tears are as tragic as another's Posted by JOHANNESROLF 05/14/2007 @ 3:21pm | ignore this person
Your point was what I disagreed with, I didn't even have to twist your words.
I do not believe that the tears of mothers that sent their sons to kill "themselves" are in any way close to the same as the mothers whos sons were sent to war in the hopes that they would return alive.
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 3:25pm
JR,
How may mothers of US soldiers have you heard anywhere "hoping" that their sons killed lots of Iraqis?
I have never seen this.
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 3:28pm
I don't even think 24 hrs of Fox News would produce that. Except for Ann Coulter who I think we agree is a nut job, and thankfully not a mother (father?)
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 3:29pm
JR,
Actually, I think this can be tested. I saw an episode of CSI or Law & Order a couple months ago where some New York City Heiress threw a party and her friend got killed.
Anyway, it came down to testing her tears, which somehow had a different chemical make-up when she was fake crying and real crying. (not that I think that Iraqi/Syrian/Iran mothers have "fake" tears, just "different" in this particular case of suicide bombing)
Posted by WallStreet at 05/14/2007 @ 3:38pm
be careful with that omniescence, I would have that looked at.
Posted by johannesrolf at 05/14/2007 @ 3:47pm
Wall St.
All JR is doing is refusing to pass the sins of the son onto his mother. What about that is so objectionable?
Posted by Hman23 at 05/14/2007 @ 5:15pm
How may mothers of US soldiers have you heard anywhere "hoping" that their sons killed lots of Iraqis?
I have never seen this.
Posted by WALLSTREET
And what would be the attitude of American mothers if it was the US being occupied by Iraq?
Posted by mtspence05 at 05/14/2007 @ 5:48pm