Sports Fans Against Violence Against Women

San Diego Chargers linebacker Shawne Merriman was arrested early this morning for allegedly choking and restraining Tila “Tequila” Nguyen. The coverage on sports sites unsurprisingly focuses on how this will hurt Merriman’s team, and frustration that this could happen so close to the start of the season. According to SR at the Bleacher Report:

The real questions is…What in the world was Merriman thinking? After all this time in working to come back into the NFL, why would he do something so stupid to not only hurt himself, but his team as well?

To the author’s credit, he does assert that NFL players can’t be choking women and getting away with it. But his immediately concern for the player and the team, with very little consideration for the health of the alleged victim (a sentiment echoed by several articles) is staggering.

Check out this poll:

Misogyny in the sports world is thriving. If you have any doubts, read the comments section of any article covering this story. As a woman who loves sports, it’s growing harder to support any professional team because they condone violence against women.

Late last year, Brian Giles, outfielder for the San Diego Padres, faced assault charges by his former girlfriend. At first, the Padres came out with a strong statement insisting that they would not condone any form of violence against women and, much like the Chargers are doing, vowing to watch the case carefully as it unfolded. Despite video evidence showing Brian Giles throwing his girlfriend on the ground in a public place, the story was swept under the rug. At first, I tried not to support the Padres, a team I’ve rooted for my entire life. Eventually, I started watching games again, secretly rooting against Brian Giles each time he played. But why am I forced to choose between loving professional sports and condoning violence against women?

Sadly, Michael Vick has faced a much stronger backlash for his role in dog fighting than any recent athlete accused of violence against women. Is it because no one was able to turn the tables in the Vick case and blame the dogs? Shawne Merriman’s alleged attack on his girlfriend happened this morning. How long will it take for the media to blame his victim and then forget anything ever happened? Michael Vick has inspired boycotts and angry petitions from sports fans and non-fans alike.� Where’s the “NFL Fans Against Violence Against Women” group?

 

Violence Against Women Overload

It can all be quite overwhelming sometimes.

I woke up to this: a reminder that some people have a very different definition than I do of “life,” and skewed ideas about who decides whose lives are worth saving.

Then I stumbled upon this discussion of the sexual assault in the Watchmen and the general narrative of a rape victim falling in love with her rapist. Apparently, some people laughed at the rape scene in this movie. I worry that some of those people that laughed may live near me, or may even be people I know. I also worry what message this movie sends to young people, especially boys, about sex.

I not only found the scene not funny, but felt that it was rather explicit rape apologia and victim-blaming. Dr. Manhattan was evidently violating Laurie’s trust and expressed wishes in a sexual context, and then justified his actions by pointing to her alleged failure.

Last night at dinner, the waiter joked with my friend that if she wasn’t careful, he might have to Chris Brown her. Because punching your girlfriend in the face until her mouth fills with blood is hilarious. Yet the discourse surrounding that incident managed to allude to the fact that Rihanna was at least somewhat to blame as well.

Then I just came across this article, discussing how we’re still blaming women for the violence perpetrated against them.

The findings of the poll, conducted for the Home Office, also disclosed about a quarter of people believe that wearing sexy or revealing clothing should lead to a woman being held partly responsible for being raped or sexually assaulted.

Several reminders of why International Women’s Day is important, Obama’s new post for international women’s issues is necessary, and how far we have to go.

 

The Candidates’ Priorities

In last night’s debate I found it interesting how John McCain attempted to attack Barack Obama’s tax plan with his Joe the Plumber (at least it’s not Joe Sixpack, but we’re still not talking about Josephine the Waitress) example.

Check out the following chart put together by Viveka Weiley at Chartjunk.

It’s clear to me where the candidates’ priorities lie. Notice the inverse shapes of these two tax plans. Find yourself on the chart and see whose plan benefits you more.

If John McCain was attempting to invoke Joe the Plumber as a reference to middle class Americans, he’s greatly mistaken. Look at where a person making over $250,000 (as Joe said he would be) falls on the chart. He’ll be in the top 0.9% of wage earners! Coming from a man who doesn’t define people as rich until they make $5 million, what do we expect!

 

More Hate in the Gutter

Now I know the McCain campaign has become desperate. They are getting slammed on the economy, so they’ve resorted to a last ditch attempt to smear Obama’s character. A few things about that: 1) the Wright/Ayers/terrorist claims are old and tired, 2) they promised to run a clean, respectful campaign, so they just look like pitiful liars, and 3) these smears only work with people who were already voting for McCain.

Today they seem to be reaching out to this voter, and others like him. It’s sad. But at some point we must draw the line.

So today at a rally in Florida, when Sarah Palin started talking about Barack Obama someone in the crowd yelled “kill him!” Seriously? I hope that person got singled out by the Secret Service and questioned, but I’m not going to hold my breath.

Is that really how you want to win? And is this really someone we’re going to elect President? Someone who stands by while his fellow American, his fellow colleague from the Senate gets called a “terrorist” and he says nothing. A man who has his own questionable associations, but allows his running mate to accuse Obama of ‘palling around with terrorists.’ Come on, now. We deserve better than that. And our grandchildren, who are going to inherit this mess that this kind of shamelessness created, deserve better than that.

 

Joe Sixpack is a Woman

…and I’m not talking about Sarah Palin.

We seem to be using this generic term to refer to the “common voter,” like John Q. Public or Jane Doe.

But we are forgetting that more women than men have voted in every election since 1964. So why is it that when politicians try to associate themselves with the average voter, they don’t acknowledge that she’s a woman?

Women are not a special interest group; we are the majority! And on election day, we show up.

Women Voters in the U.S. by Kellyanne Conway

 

Trust McCain on National Security?

Arianna Huffington points out that while Obama was on vacation in Hawaii he should have been reading up on how to attack McCain’s horrific record on National Security. Despite the numerous blunders and inconsistencies outlined in her post, many voters still say that they trust John McCain more on issues of foreign policy and national security. People favor McCain over Obama on issues like Iraq (!) and national security, can anyone explain that to me?

Here are some of McCain’s high(low)lights Huffington notes:

McCain has been among the most ardent supporters of the war in Iraq — the most disastrous foreign policy decision in American history.

McCain falsely claims that, from the beginning of the war, he called on former Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld to resign. He should have, but he didn’t.

McCain thinks it’s “not too important” when American forces come home from Iraq.

McCain has repeatedly claimed that Iran was training members of al-Qaeda in Iraq, showing a fundamental misunderstanding of the key players in the war. He doesn’t understand the difference between Shiites and Sunnis, and even after being corrected he still doesn’t get it.

McCain falsely claimed that the surge was what led to the Anbar Awakening, even though the Sunni revolt against al-Qaeda in the province began months before Bush even announced his plan to send more troops to Iraq.

McCain falsely claimed at the end of May that American troops in Iraq were down to “pre-surge levels” (brandished as proof that the surge was “succeeding”) — even though two-thirds of the additional surge troops were still in Iraq. And, when called on his mistake, he refused to acknowledge that he was wrong.

McCain falsely claimed that the war in Iraq was “the first major conflict since 9/11” — either forgetting about the war in Afghanistan or deeming it not major enough. This is not all that surprising, since McCain’s policies on Afghanistan — the real central front in the war on terror — have been all over the map. Indeed, McCain first attacked Obama’s policy on Afghanistan, then adopted it for himself.

McCain has a long history of paying lip service to supporting America’s troops but voting against their interests. His handling of the new GI bill was the latest example of his hypocrisy: he consistently and vocally worked to defeat it, then, once it passed, tried to take credit for it.

Need more proof of why McCain is not “ready to lead”? Do you want a president who thinks there is an “Iraq/Pakistan border”? Who believes Darfur is in Somalia? And that Czechoslovakia is still a country?

Someone please help me understand who would elect this man. That may seem rhetorical, but I’m serious. Why doesn’t the evidence above send people fleeing from McCain’s candidacy?

Maybe someone should make a YouTube video of all of these gaffes strung together. Would that make the message more clear?

 

Troops Donate Six Times More Money to Obama

OpenSecrets.org, which tracks money in U.S. politics, reports that contributions from deployed troops are six times greater for Obama than they are for McCain.

During World War II, soldiers crouching in foxholes penned letters assuring their sweethearts that they’d be home soon. Now, between firefights in the Iraqi desert, some infantrymen have been sending a different kind of mail stateside: two or three hundred dollars — or whatever they can spare — towards a presidential election that could very well determine just how soon they come home.

Though McCain touts his reputation with military personnel, this popularity is not reflected by campaign donations.

Army Specialist Jay Navas contributed $250 while deployed in Iraq, but it wasn’t over the Internet. “It took some effort to get that check. I had my mom send me my checkbook and I walked to the post office in Camp Liberty in Baghdad with an envelope addressed to Barack Obama in Chicago, Illinois,” he said. “He was right on Iraq long when others were jumping into the sea like lemmings, and that’s hard to do. We’re soldiers and we respect courage.”

Navas anecdotally confirmed that soldiers are often conservative but that many are making an exception in the presidential race. “Most of my friends are conservative Republicans and they say, ‘I’m voting for Barack.’ McCain does not have a lock on the military vote, that’s for sure,” he said. “We’ll complete our duty — I’m deploying next year — because it’s a commitment I made to the nation, not to a president. But we all know that Iraq was a big mistake.”

Despite the fact that “money talks,” McCain will continue to lie and say that he has support from all the veterans groups. He consistently disregards facts for whatever is convenient at the moment. He may continue to brag about the success of the surge, saying that Obama’s judgment on Iraq was faulty despite the fact that he did not support the war in the first place. Perhaps the troops also know that Obama supported the new GI bill, while McCain did not.

It has nothing to do with cameras or basketball. I think they just want to come home.

UPDATE: Contrast the post above with this one, from ThinkProgress, noting that top CEOs donate more to McCain 10:1.  Which candidate has your best interests in mind — the one  the troops favor or the one the CEOs of big corporations favor?  Which is more likely to have your financial interests in mind?

 

It May Be Close in the National Polls, but…

…what about the electoral college?

Thank you to Mark Nickolas for pointing out what I’ve been screaming at the TV (well, in my case, the computer) every time I hear/read about how close the election is. They’re basing this conclusion on national polls. We don’t vote by a national popular vote, how hard is this to figure out?

Why is the media focusing on national polls when they don’t matter at all? It gives people the false notion that the race is close, and, as Nickolas points out, a small percentage lead in the national poll can actually equal a huge landslide in the electoral college vote. Yet nobody is talking about this fact, despite a mountain of evidence from past elections.

Nickolas gives us a nice summary of how things have played out historically in terms of the popular vote and the ultimate electoral college results. Check out the table he created here. Other key points:

Take note of just how large of an electoral landslide results from a five-point popular vote victory. It’s pretty massive and usually results in an Electoral Vote margin of about 200. The elections that most closely mirror the margin in the current contest are:

• 1992: Clinton won the popular vote by 5.6 points, winning the Electoral College by a 370 to 168 margin (a difference of 202);
• 1948: Truman won the popular vote by 4.5 points, winning the Electoral College by a 303 to 189 margin (a difference of 114).

So next time you hear people the media comment about how close the national polls are, please be reminded of the fact that that narrow gap can translate into a landslide victory in the electoral college.

 

Fox Poll: Unbalanced Questions

I came across a recent FOX poll (full PDF here) and wanted to share some of the questions that were asked. The respondents are 900 registered voters, almost an even number of Obama supporters and McCain supporters, including a fair number of independents. I’m not a statistics expert, but I do recognize a leading question when I see one. Bias becomes especially obvious when a question is asked of one candidate, but not the other.

First, they ask fairly predictable questions about who people plan to vote for, how much they approve of the President, and favorability ratings of various politicians or parties. One question that surprised me:

19. Have you heard any of your friends and neighbors say there is something about Barack Obama that scares them?

To their credit, Fox asks this question about both Obama and McCain. The next question, however, is only asked with regard to Senator Obama:

23. Based on the campaign so far, has Barack Obama offered any truly new ideas?

And there is a follow-up, in order to catch you in case you think he does have new ideas. Prove it!

(If yes on Q. 23) Can you please tell me one of Obama’s new ideas?

And this pair of questions had me laughing out loud:

27. Some people believe Barack Obama, despite his professed Christianity, is secretly a Muslim. Others say that is just a rumor and Obama really is a Christian as he says, and point out he’s attended a Christian church for years. What do you believe — is Obama a Muslim or a Christian?

28. John McCain was held captive for five years in a North Vietnamese prisoner of war camp. Do you think that experience would make McCain a better president or a worse president?

Hmm…First, have you heard this completely false lie about Candidate A? Second, do you think heroic stories about Candidate B’s past will make him a good president?

Finally, there are a slew of questions only about Barack Obama related to his overseas trip. No questions at all about McCain in this section.

31. Does Barack Obama’s popularity overseas make you more likely or less likely to vote for him for president?

Surprise! Republicans report that Obama’s popularity overseas makes them four times less likely to vote for him.

32. Do you think Barack Obama’s trip to Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East is better described as a fact-finding trip or as a campaign event?

33. Do you think Barack Obama had already made up his mind on Iraq before the trip or could this week’s visit to Iraq change his mind?

As if fact-finding, campaigning, or mind-changing are the only reasons to travel abroad. And finally…hey, how did that McSurge talking point make its way into our ‘fair and balanced’ survey in the form of a question?

34. Do you think the increase in U.S. troops has led to major improvements in the situation in Iraq, minor improvements, or has the troop surge not made much of a difference at all?

 

Why Can’t Networks Read Polls?

Do you get your political news from the internet or the television?

Your answer to this question may have everything to do with your beliefs about who’s winning this election, who’s voting for whom, and which issues matter most to people. Just how close do you think the race is? Your response is likely determined by your news source.

Many people acknowledge that the numbers can be interpreted to support a variety of opinions. Let’s keep this in mind as we look at who’s reporting what. Also, let’s remember that some news sources might have a vested interest in making you believe the race is closer than it is.

It’s not surprising that the networks do what they do. They invest money in polls, they’re sensitive to criticism of “bias”, and they have an eye on ratings. But there’s a reason that those who are interested in politics are increasingly turning to the internet.

A record-breaking 46% of Americans have used the internet, email or cell phone text messaging to get news about the campaign, share their views and mobilize others.

The use of the internet to get political news is growing. At times, it’s the only place you can get the news. And as long as networks insist on relying only on their own polls, or pushing an old narrative that’s not supported by the newest data, the American public is not going to get a clear and fair picture of what’s going on by relying on broadcast news alone. Not unless the networks do a better job in reading polls. (Link)

Read all about it: “Why Can’t the Networks Read Polls?” (DailyKOS)