Eye On Modesto

Thoughts and observations about Modesto and Stanislaus County

Archive for the tag “Mitt Romney”

“What’s on America’s Mind” Wednesday 7:00PM


Radio RED 104.9 FM

Tonight’s discussion includes:

Fireworks at the MID, who leaked MID’s confidential memo and why? Van Groningen Chastised by Board, alleged  Brown Act Violations, the need for roll call voting, and they’re finally replacing Tim O’Laughlin MID’s Million dollar man, Recalling five heroic men here in Modesto, Modesto’s home owners who kill cats,  SalidaMAC meeting last night and the low hanging fruit, Mitt Romney’s only endorsement for another candidate was Richard Mourdock GOP candidate for U.S.Senate who says no abortions for rape victims because God intended for it to happen.

This and more Wednesday night from 7:00 until 8:30 PM

Our call in number is 1-347-215-9414

104.9 FM K-GIG Salida is our flagship radio station where we can be heard throughout the week.

To hear us live or later from our archives http://www.blogtalkradio.com/centralvalleyhornet/2012/10/25/whats-on-americas-mind-with-emerson-drake


Republicans Are Showing Their True Colors

By Gaetana Drake

We’ve all heard the outrageous comments by Representative Todd Akin (R-Missouri), claiming that women don’t get pregnant as a result of a legitimate rape because “the female body has a way of shutting down that function.”  First of all, I wonder what a “legitimate” rape is….it seems to exclude statutory rape and incest.  Did Mr. Akin skip science and health ed class?  Here are some other ridiculous comments by republicans:

Representative Steve King (R) has not spoken out against Mr. Akin because he seems to agree with him.  He recently told an Iowa reporter that “I’ve never heard of a child getting pregnant from statutory rape or incest”.  A 1996 review by the Guttmacher Institute found that “at least half of all babies born to minor women are fathered by adult men.”  That would be the statutory rape that Mr. King doesn’t believe causes pregnancies.

Federal Judge James Leon Holmes, a Bush appointee, said in an article published circa 1997: “Concern for rape victims is a red herring because conceptions from rape occur with approximately the same frequency as snowfall in Miami.”

Dr. Richard Dobbins, who works in the emergency department at Hardin Memorial Hospital in Kenton, Ohio told the Columbus Dispatch in 2006, “I think that life begins when the chromosomes of the sperm and egg line up”.  Dobbins also questioned the need for emergency contraception in rape cases, saying that most women “are not fertile during assault or do not become pregnant because the trauma prompts a hormonal response that prevents ovulation.”   I wonder….do rapists only rape women who are not in their “fertile period”?

In 1995, Republican Henry Aldridge told the House Appropriations Committee:  “The facts show that people who are raped – who are truly raped – the juices don’t flow, the body functions don’t work and they don’t get pregnant”.

Representative Stephen Freind, (R-Delaware County) said “the odds that a woman who is raped will get pregnant are ‘one in millions and millions’.  The reason, he said, “is that the traumatic experience of rape causes a woman to ‘secrete a certain secretion’ that tends to kill sperm.”


Texas oilman Clayton Williams once ran against Ann Richards for Governor of Texas.  During the campaign he said “Rape is like the weather, if it’s inevitable, relax and enjoy it.”

Idaho Senator Chuck Winder (R) has made this unusual comment. “I would hope that when a woman goes into a physician, with a rape issue, that the physician will indeed ask her about perhaps her marriage, was this pregnancy caused by normal relations in a marriage, or was it truly caused by a rape.”  Apparently in his mind, it’s part of “normal relations in a marriage” for a husband to rape his wife.

The GOP has finalized it’s  party platform for this election.  It includes NO exception for federal funding for abortions for victims of rape or incest.  They are finally being honest enough to tell us that their goal is to overturn Roe v. Wade.  Mitt Romney has said he would sign a “personhood amendment” which would effectively ban the birth control pill and the IUD.  These are the most commonly used and most effective forms of birth control.

Paul Ryan along with Todd Akin (women can shut down that function) co-sponsored a nation-wide personhood amendment that tried to outline the differences in types of rape.  Statutory rape, incest and forcible rape are all different categories in their minds.  Forcible rape is the only kind where they would allow the woman to have an abortion.  The wording in their proposal also required a woman to be able to “prove the rape was against her will.”  Will America soon be like Pakistan where it isn’t rape unless it’s witnessed by four other men?

Women still earn .77 to every 1.00 a man earns for doing the same job.  Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are against the Fair Pay Act.  Imagine what women’s earnings will be if they are forced to give birth every year or two….how can a woman hold down a job when she is constantly bearing children?  I know, I know…the simple answer is “don’t have sex.”  How many relationships will survive that?  Sex is a natural part of being a human being.

If the Romney/Ryan ticket wins in November, it won’t be long before women are forced out of their jobs by constant child-bearing, and they and their children live in severe poverty.  Oh yeah..don’t forget..they would like to eliminate federal funding to help low-income women and children, too.

Many of these men claim that it is immoral of us to force conscientious taxpayers to fund abortions in these cases.  They have no concern about conscientious taxpayers who object to war but are forced to pay for it.

Is this really the kind of America we want?

Is Robert Bork Right For America?

By Gaetana Drake

It’s good to understand one of the most important reasons we should all vote and that is because the President of the United States nominates Supreme Court Justices.  The Supreme Court makes decisions that effect our everyday lives.

Mitt Romney has chosen Robert Bork as co-chair of his Judicial Advisory Committee.  This means Mr. Bork will be suggesting to Mr. Romney names of possible future Supreme Court Justices and federally appointed judges throughout the country.   Mr. Bork was nominated by President Reagan to be a member of the Supreme Court, but the nomination was not approved. 

Here are some of his beliefs:

In 1963 he wrote an article for The New Republic called “Civil Rights – A Challenge”.  He claimed that laws requiring desegregation were a violation of the freedom of business owners to associate only with the people they chose.  His argument was “the natural right not to associate with others in commerce should not be overridden in the interests of civil rights, social justice, or most significantly, the interests of the moral order.”   

Republican led states are trying to impose severe voter restriction laws. Mr. Bork has a record of defending the constitutionality of poll taxes and literacy tests in state elections.  Obviously, the right-wing believes he is the man they need to help restrict voters’ rights in America.

Mr. Bork also believes that Roe v. Wade should be over-turned.  He would also give individual states the power to prosecute women and doctors who violate abortion laws.   By using Mr. Bork as “judicial advisor”, it is obvious that any future Supreme Court nominee would have to pass the anti-choice litmus test.  Mr. Bork has denounced the Supreme Court’s protection of a constitutional right to privacy in decision-making, the basis of Griswold v. Connecticut, which legalized a woman’s right to use birth control.

United States v. Virginia is the Supreme Court’s 7 – 1 decision which required the Virginia Military Institute to stop discriminating and to admit its first women cadets.  Thousands and thousands of female soldiers have since served bravely and honorably, but Mr. Bork has attacked that decision for producing the “feminization of the military.”  He wrote, “radical feminism, an increasingly powerful force across the full range of American institutions, overrode the Constitution in United States v. Virginia.  VMI is only one example of a feminized Court transforming the Constitution.”

In 1971 Mr. Bork argued that the First Amendment protects only political speech, not art or science or literature.  He continues to promote censorship to deal with what he calls the “rot and decadence” of American society.  In a 1997 interview with Michael Cromartie, he expressed such disgust with the state of American culture that he said he was in favor of a return to censorship boards in America.

Rather than allow states to make their own decisions on the issue of same-sex marriage, he has advocated a constitutional amendment that would permanently define marriage as between “one man and one woman”.  He would also prevent individual states from offering gay couples equal benefits of any kind.

In 2005 the Supreme Court decision in Roper v. Simmons, struck down the death penalty for juvenile offenders.  Bork called the decision a “new low” for the Court.  Between 1990 (when the Court last considered this issue) and 2005, there were only seven countries other than the United States that executed juvenile offenders.  They were Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of Congo and China.  Mr. Bork, however, found nothing cruel and unusual in executing minors.

And finally, Mr. Bork once ruled that an employer may require its female workers to be sterilized in order to reduce employer liability for harm to potential children, in cases where employers used toxic chemicals.  He also believes politicians should be able to ban birth control.

Poll taxes, literacy tests, forced sterilization in order to maintain employment, executing minors, censorship boards, corporate powers over individual rights, repealing civil rights and making criminals out of doctors and women…..is Robert Bork right for America?

“What’s on America’s Mind” Tonight at 7:00 PM Pacific

Tonight we’ll discuss the Hammett Road Interchange and its relationship with the North County Corridor,  and the Salida Annexation. We’ll be discussing the six questions we asked the Board of Supervisors yesterday, and the questions we asked the Modesto City Council less than a few short hours ago. On the national scene we’ll discuss the fake Wheaton College outrage and Mitt Romney allegations, the Continuing War on Women, and the dangers of fracking.  All of these topics and more at 7:00 PM Pacific Time. 

The call in number is 1-347-215-9414 

A question for everyone: Do you want to be able to set your drinking water on fire as it comes out of the tap?


104.9 FM K-GIG Modesto   Our Flagship Station

Obama’s Affordable Health Care Act Upheld By Supreme Court

By Gaetana Drake

We’ve all heard by now that the Supreme Court gave a 5-4 ruling in favor of the Affordable Health Care Act.

I’d like to point out some very positive aspects to the plan.  Young adults who are over the age of 19 can stay on their parent’s insurance.  This effects millions of college age people in the country, who are struggling to go to school and find jobs at the same time.

A person can’t be denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition such as diabetes or high blood pressure.

Your current insurance cannot drop you if you become ill.

There is no longer a lifetime maximum coverage amount.  Most policies were limited to $1,000,000 of lifetime coverage, which could easily be wiped out by cancer treatments or care for chronic conditions.

And the best part of all….it will be illegal to charge a woman more for insurance than a man.  Some states actually allowed insurances to charge a woman up to 80% more for insurance coverage.   President Obama has made it illegal for insurances to consider having a uterus a “pre-existing” condition and charging more for coverage.

Several studies have suggested that passing this law will actually result in lower insurance premiums.  This is what happened in Massachusetts when then-Governor Romney mandated that everyone purchase insurance.  97% of the citizens of Massachusetts have coverage and the average cost of premiums declined.

Some people are concerned about the tax penalty for not purchasing insurance.  The plan calls for a $150 tax penalty in 2014, if you have not purchased insurance, with the penalty going higher each year, to a maximum of $695.  However, there are no “teeth” to this penalty.  The plan specifically says that if you fail to purchase insurance and do not pay the penalty, there will be no liens on your tax return, or your property.  The prospect of a penalty simply encourages people to purchase insurance.

All in all, the Affordable Health Care Act will be beneficial to millions of American citizens.  The Supreme Court was right on this one.

Who Will Run with Mitt?

EOM Staff

Now that Mitt Romney has basically secured the GOP nomination for president, the question becomes who will run as vice-president?

As we learned from the McCain/Palin campaign, this can be a make or break issue for a nominee.  Two names that have been tossed out there already are Chris Christie, Republican Governor of New Jersey, and Mark Rubio, Republican Senator from Florida.

We need to know as much about the person running for VP as we do the presidential candidate.  After all, they are just a heartbeat away from the presidency.  Here is some interesting information about each of these gentlemen:

Governor Christie recently cancelled what would be the largest public works project in the nation.  That would be the expansion of the underground rail that transport commuters under the Hudson River between New York and New Jersey.  Governor Christie announced that New Jersey would have to pay for 70% of the project.  The GAO (government accountability office) has said that New Jersey would only pay 14.4% of the costs.  Governor Christie also said that New Jersey would be responsible for any cost overruns, however the federal government has made several offers to share any cost overruns.  After cancelling the project, the governor steered $4 billion from the project to the transportation trust fund.  This fund is typically financed by gasoline tax and was nearly bankrupt.  By steering the money from the public works project to the trust fund, Governor Christie was able to avoid breaking a campaign promise he made not to raise the gasoline tax.

I wonder how many jobs were lost when this project was cancelled.  How much potential income was lost by engineers and construction workers? And I think it’s inappropriate for any politician to make a “promise” that he knows he probably won’t be able to keep.

Now the thousands of commuters that travel from New Jersey to New York and back each day will continue to do so on a single track shared by Amtrak and commuter trains.  And this track is a century old.

So, Governor Christie has kept his campaign promise not to raise the gasoline tax.  But jobs were lost and the infrastructure between New Jersey and New York is crumbling.  This isn’t beneficial to anyone and amounts to simple “campaign posturing”.  Is this the type of politician you would want as vice-president?

Mark Rubio, Republican Senator from Florida, was in support of the recently shot down “Blunt Amendment”.  Remember, this amendment would have allowed any employer to refuse to provide insurance coverage for anything they had a moral objection to.  We’re not talking about religious institutions.  We’re talking about ANY employer that provides insurance benefits for its employees.  And we’re not talking about a religious objection, but a moral objection.  It’s entirely possible, that had the Blunt Amendment passed, your employer could chose not to cover contraception.  Or pre-natal care for unmarried women.  Or blood transfusions.  Or treatment for cervical cancer (because it is caused by a virus that is transmitted sexually).  Your employer would not even have to give a reason, simply say that he has a moral objection to your needed medical care.

This amendment would have allowed your employer to have complete control over what medical care you received.  Do we really need our bosses to determine our healthcare?  Isn’t that better left to our physicians?

Has Ann Romney Ever Worked?

EOM Staff

According to Hillary Rosen, a democratic strategist (although not connected to the Obama campaign), Ann Romney “has never worked a day in her life”.  There has been quite an uproar over this statement, and some have decided that democrats are now waging a war on women.  Certainly, Ms. Rosen could have chosen a better way to express what many American women feel when considering Mitt Romney for president.  He is now putting his wife out there as a way of appealing to women voters.  I, along with countless other women, certainly support Mrs. Romney’s decision to be a stay at home mother.  There is no more important job in the world than raising good children to become good adults.  But where the Romneys fail to appeal to women voters is that with their vast wealth they have no idea what it is like to work full-time (and possibly a part-time job), pay for day care, gas, electricity, water, insurance, food, rent and all the other expenses involved in day to day life.  And on top of that they lose the opportunity to spend more time with their children.

Does anyone actually believe the Romneys understand that the majority of families in America have to have two incomes to support themselves?  That choosing to be a stay at home mom isn’t even an option for many of us?  If you are a low-income family, both parents work.  Many families sole support is the mother’s income.  Even if you are a middle-class family, you need two incomes to survive.  I doubt the Romneys really have a clue that most of us juggle which bill to pay this month and which we can put off until next month.  I certainly don’t believe they lay awake at night wondering if they can possibly send a child to college?  Or worry about losing their home due to medical expenses.  The majority of foreclosures in America are due to medical bills not covered by insurance.  And so many American families are living without insurance.

Mrs. Romney responded to the comment by saying that we should all respect the choice that each woman and mother makes.  Yes, we should.  She was fortunate to be able to make that choice without her family suffering financially.  For most American woman, there is no choice.  We have to work if we want our children to eat. I just don’t believe the Romneys have any idea what life is like for you and me.

Post Navigation