The Buffett Rule fails – or did it?

As reported on CNN, the Republicans in the Senate were able to force a 60 vote rule on the vote for the  Paying a Fair Share Act,” (The so-called Buffett Rule), and because the Democrats were unable to muster the necessary 60 votes, the actual vote on the new law won’t be taken. Republicans, both Nationally and Statewide are celebrating. They are, therefore Idiots.

I realise that this is a small part of American Government that seems to get forgotten during elections like this, but those stupid, sad sacks of crap have one job – and one job only – to REPRESENT THE PEOPLE THEY ARE ELECTED TO REPRESENT.

If you are a politician or even thinking about being a politician or even thinking about voting for a politician, read that damn line a second time. Now read it a third time. By now, you should have it memorized.

Fact is, the majority of the electorate (that means voters for those who didn’t pass US government) WANTED the Buffett rule. Munch on that simple fact for a second. THE VOTERS WANTED THE BUFFETT RULE TO PASS. Every single one of those stuffed suits that voted against the Buffett Rule broke their promise to “faithfully represent the good people of (Insert State Name Here)”. Every Representative in the US House that advocated voting against the Buffett rule was breaking their commitment to doing their damn job.

The idiots that voted against this legislation are probably doing a happy dance right now and celebrating their “Victory against the damn socialist Democrats”. Sadly for them, they now have to face the 72% of the voters that wanted that damn bill to pass. Might be a bit uncomfortable for them come next November.

Posted in Federal, Politics | Leave a comment

Thoughts on the Jefferson Dinner

I want to get this down while it is still relatively fresh in my head. These are my impressions of the Candidates I met at the Jefferson-Jackson Democratic Dinner here in Dillon.

I want to preface this by saying that I am not going to make any sweeping endorsements (with one notable exception). My purpose in going to this dinner was to meet these candidates and form my initial impressions of them – before I start researching their record, their campaign or their issue stances. I have spent a lot of time focusing on the Presidential election but now it is time to start focusing on the elections closer to home.

My overall impression of the evening was that the Beaverhead Democrats did a wonderful job arranging the get-together. It was well attended (for Dillon) and the overall evening was noticeably friendly and upbeat – even between rival candidates. Some of the candidates made small, hidden digs at their opponents, but these were VERY understated and there was also a lot of respect expressed for their opponents. I was happy to have attended tonight and I actually look forward to getting a better look at most of these candidates.

All that said – here is my take on the evening…

The get-together before the dinner was informal and I was able to speak personally with all but two of the candidates. I was able to speak to the other two after the presentations, so I actually got to speak personally with all the candidates by the end of the evening. This is important because it is one thing to read about a candidate’s resume or issue position, it is quite another to shake their hand, look them in the eye and ask them a question. I did a lot of that – asking questions – and I got some surprising answers.

The Dinner was excellent. I had the Chicken Breast and it was tender and tasty. According to my wife, the prime rib was equally excellent. The service was great and I have no complaints. We were also lucky enough to get a seat at the same table as Monica Lindeen and her husband. They are both wonderful people.

The first speaker was the Democratic State Party Chairman, Jim Elliot. I make no bones about it, I did NOT like his predecessor McDonnald – not one bit. He came across as a used car salesman and that is the quickest way to turn me off in politics there is. Jim Elliot is just the opposite. He seems personable, reasonable, and approachable. Moreover, when you talk to him, he is REALLY talking to you, not as a potential voter, but as a Human Being. In short, I liked him. He also has a natural humor that came out pretty strong tonight.

The Keynote speaker was Senior Senator, Max Baucus. This is a tough one for me. Max was the very first Montana Representative I voted for when I reached voting age. I used to love to hear the idealistic and passionate younger Max talk. He did things, he kicked butt and he took names. I continued to vote for Max for many years.

The Max Baucus I saw tonight was somewhat of a disappointment. He seems disorganized and made a lot of sweeping statements I know to be factually incorrect. I also had a problem with him taking credit for the incredible things Jon Tester has done for Veterans. Yes, he waxed eloquent about Jon and his dedication to veterans and voters in Montana, but he also took joint credit for them.

Part of the reason I wanted to hear Max talk was I wanted to know if he was here tonight to drum up support for the Democratic Candidates running or if he was actually here to campaign for himself. Sadly, the answer was both. He actually spent more time tonight talking about himself and his own accomplishments than he spent convincing us to support the candidates who were actively running for an office.

Next, a letter from Jon Tester was read, and while it was a nice letter (and I do understand that Sen Tester has other commitments), it would have been nice to see him and hear him speak for himself. I don’t think even he realises just how much support he has in the area due to his unfailing fight for the rights of Veterans. I really hope that Sen Tester makes it to Dillon at some point.

General John Walsh spoke next. It is obvious how much support he has in Dillon based on his support of the Montana Youth Challenge Program. You can also tell he is – at his core – a military man by the way he speaks. I was pretty impressed by him and I think that his selection by Bullock was genius. Steve Bullock is an intelligent man with an impressive record of standing up for the rights of Montanans but – so far – he has the appeal of watching paint dry. General Walsh is very charismatic and speaks from the heart. They will make a wonderful team for the Governor’s office. I don’t need to endorse this pair as that election is all but over. Bullock and Walsh will destroy Hill in the General.

Next came the candidates for the US House. Some impressed me, some not so much. I won’t comment too much on those races as I have done ZERO research on the candidates other than to say that both Franke Wilmer and Diane Smith impressed me with their passion and commitment to serving the people of Montana. Count on more impressions on this primary race as I learn more about the candidates. If I do end up voting in the Democratic Primary, it will be because of this race.

Pam Bucy and Jesse Laslovich – both candidates for the Montana Attorney General’s office – were in attendance. On line, the supporters for these two candidates have had some heated and sometimes nasty exchanges. I did not see that in the two candidates themselves. They are certainly different. Bucy appears competent and well qualified but her presentation was stiff and somewhat contrived. Laslovich was passionate, eloquent and personable but I am not sure he has the background that Bucy has. I will have to do a LOT more research into this race. Both would do the job better than the Republican Candidate wanting the position, so for me, it will come down to which one of the two Democrats I like better in the primary.

One of my distinct pleasures of the evening was seeing Monica Lindeen. I have devoted a LOT of pixels to our current  Commissioner of Securities and Insurance (State Auditor). I have met few political representatives that I would – without question – support. Lindeen and Tester are such representatives. She is personable, knowledgeable, hard working, smart and she has served the people of Montana faithfully in every public endeavor she has taken on. Her office has seen the return of quite literally millions of dollars from fraudulent security scams and denied insurance claims. Monica Lindeen has my complete endorsement.

Next came the two Demcratic Candidates for the Montana PSC District 3 – Mark Sweeney and John Vincent. I have to admit that early on in the evening, Mark Sweeney kind of pissed me off. As I said, I wanted to ask certain candidates a few very pointed questions about concerns I had about the positions they were running for. One of those questions was for the PSC candidates. I wanted to know if either candidate had an answer for the ongoing destructive behavior of certain members of the current PSC (if you don’t know what I am talking about, I will explain it in the upcoming post about the race). I had no idea how either candidate would respond but I wanted to see if either one would even admit that the problem existed. Mark Sweeney knew exactly what I was referring to but his response was canned, seemed insincere, and contrived. Worse, in the middle of his response to me, he started another conversation with someone standing at the counter next to us. In short, it pissed me off.

His presentation to the assemblage did little to convince me that he was any more sincere about representing us. He did the usual resume thing and the entire time, he sounded like a used car salesman. I won’t go so far as to say I wouldn’t vote for him but he certainly didn’t impress me. John Vincent, on the other hand, did. He wasn’t as polished as Sweeney, but he talked at length about the importance of what had to be done. He talked about working with the legislature to give the PSC actual “teeth” to protect the citizens of the state.

My impression of John Vincent only increased when I was able to get him one on one after the presentations. I asked him the same question I asked Mark Sweeney, and without missing a beat, he said that the only way a situation like what is going on now could be resolved is if Montana were to work the PSC like quite a few others states – an appointed board. He was clear that he was not advocating such a move (it would be difficult to turn the PSC into an appointed position) but it would certainly prevent a situation like what we have now. My appreciation for John Vincent increased further when – to my surprise – I found that he was more than willing to talk about some non-traditional energy production methods – including Nuclear Power. He said that we have to address the energy problem with all the tools we have available to us – even if it means exploring new technologies or technologies that have traditionally been ignored as difficult or unpopular.

Richard Turner (running for State Senator for Senate District 36) and Norma Duffy (running for State Legislature District 72) both gave presentations. Neither were polished like many of the other candidates but both spoke openly and honestly. One of the biggest laughs of the night was when Richard announced that he was running against Debby Barrett because “she pissed [him] off”. I loved it (in part because her wing nuttery has pissed me off too).

I am glad I went and I look forward to learning more about the Candidates for all the local, state, and national offices I will have to choose from.

Posted in Federal, Local, Politics, State | 6 Comments

The Anchor around his neck

Romney kicked off his campaign before a group assembled by the NRA, and true to form, he went immediately on the attack. This is Romney’s style and it is why he is considered to be so unlikable by a significant majority of the electorate.

What will sink his campaign in the end, though, is this -

Romneycare and Romney’s wishy washy attitude about it will end up sinking him with the majority of the electorate. The screaming will be hot and heavy (Romney tends to overwhelm his opposition with negative attack ads) but in the end, people will realise that this idiot is just another stuffed suit playing whatever tune  he thinks his voters want him to play. America simply doesn’t need another one of those.

Posted in Federal, Politics | Leave a comment

I Told You So

Usually I start off with the phrase “I hate saying this” but this time, not so much. I Told You So.

Rick Santorum has “suspended” his campaign. It isn’t so much that he has done it, but more along the lines of “Why the hell did it take so long?”. Jim Wright over at StoneKettle Station has a wonderful take on this (and Jim Wright is likely the best political blogger I have ever had the pleasure to encounter). Go ahead and read it. I will wait….

The only thing I will add to Jim’s wonderful take on the matter is that the reason candidates like Santorum “suspend” their campaigns is money. Nothing more, nothing less. Anyone want to take any bets that Santorum will run again in 2016?

This isn’t what I am referring to, though, when I say again – “I Told You So”. It was inevitable and only the most gullible people believed otherwise. Mittens Romney will be the Republican Candidate to face President Obama in the General Election in November. Again, I could say I told you so, but again, it was inevitable. This was written on the wall back in 2011 when there were 8 or 9 “Candidates”. The vast majority of them were wingnuts or publicity seekers and the only one that made any sense was Romney.

But now we get to the part where I really mean “I FUCKING TOLD YOU SO”. Back in 2011, when I was saying to everyone that Romney would be the candidate for the Republicans, I was also saying that a heated, contentious primary would only work against the Republican and get President Obama re-elected. Pundits (both in Montana and on the National stage) responded with a variety of comments that basically boiled down to “you are wrong”. -

“A tough primary fight will energize the base”.
“Having so many choices will result in a better candidate”.
“The Debates will make the final candidate appreciate the issues that we want addressed”.
“The hard primary fight will show how Obama is ruining the country”.
“A heated primary fight is good for the party”.
“Negative campaigning has always been used and it strengthens the Candidates”.

Well to all those Pundits (both professional and amateur), I respectfully thumb my nose at you and call you idiots.

The tough primary fight has effectively undermined support for the Republicans nationally and in Montana. The Tea Party is now viewed by the majority of Americans as the joke it has become. Idiot Candidates like Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin, and Santorum have proven that the Republican Party has jumped the rails and is unlikely to find their way back. Moreover, the heated Primary Debates and Ads have completely undermined any hope that Romney can A) win the General and B) aid in the election of the downticket Republicans.

Don’t take my word for it. Read what the very same pundits are now saying (you know, the ones that said a tough primary fight was a good thing).

CNN political Analysts Dana Bash and Alan Silverleib – Romney Still Faces Challenges Rallying the Right. The money quote -

Like other conservative leaders, Scheffler said the issue isn’t so much whether conservatives already going to vote will check the box for Romney over President Obama. The issue is whether people are going to get out and work for him — providing critical grass roots energy fueled by the kind of passion that can mean the difference between winning and losing.

Let’s think about that for a second. Romney has about as much appeal as watching paint dry. He is not very charismatic, his “business creds” are basically buying companies to take them apart and make bucketloads of cash, as a Governor, he was a moderate Republican that pushed for and enacted a fairly decent piece of legislation on Health Care that has a lot of resemblances to the ACA.. I just don’t see Romney “energizing the base” at all.

The article goes on to say that, for Romney to win, he has to energize the Tea party patriots and evangelical vote. The articles lists a number of suggestions on how he should go about it, but the authors miss a VERY important point.

For Romney to energize his party, he has to go farther to the right than he did in his campaign to date. This is actually saying something, since he has already moved lightyears to the right since his days as a moderate Governor. Hell, he is already being called wishy washy and insincere and those labels will only be proven right if he goes any farther to the right.

Make no mistake, the Tea Party Patriots and Christian evangelicals will vote for Romney no matter what he does. The question is whether they go to the polls at all. This article (as well as many others) suggest that Romney will not be able to get “butts in the seat” unless he embraces these special interests in his campaign.

What the authors miss (and actually have been missing for a while now), is the insane dicotomy in that idea. Romney is already having problems with Independent Voters and Moderates. His flip flop from the more moderate stances he had as Governor have already made him somewhat unappealing. If he goes even more to the right to satisfy the evangelicals and Tea Party crowd, he will lose even more moderates and independents.

The result is a choice Romney will have to make. To win the election, he has to do two things that are simply incompatible. He either has to cater to the independents and moderates (costing him votes because the Tea Party Crowd and Evangelicals might stay home) or he has to cater to the Tea Party Crowd and Evangelicals costing him the general election in November. The only advantage to Romney to catering to the hard right is that it would probably help the Republican downticket races, but I just can’t see Romney making the choice to “Take one for the team”. His ego wouldn’t allow it.

The Obama Camp is not unaware of the situation, either. They are already capitalizing on it. A video was released shortly after Santorum made the announcement that he was suppending his candidacy. I invite you to watch it.

In this video, the Obama camp points out all the wingnut, hardright stances Romney has already taken during the primary battles. They want everyone to remember just how far to the right Romney has already gone. In subsequent videos, ads and campaign literature, they will either Juxtapose these hard right stances with his more moderate stances as Governor (or they will allow the Tea Party/Evangelicals to do it for them) or they will use these wingnut stances to bury Romney with the moderates and independents. Either way, the Primary Campaign will bite Romney in the ass and he will be lucky to exit the Campaign with any ass left.

So I told you so. Romney tanked himself during the Primary Campaign, and the acramony of the primary campaign did not make him stronger, energize the base or aid the Republicans in defeating President Obama. Just remember, you heard it here first.

UPDATE :

Today, CNN posted two more opinion peices questioning Romney’s ability to win in November. Both are interesting reads and one raises some of the same questions I raised  in my post. The other explores the difficulty Romney will have with the evangelical voters because of his faith.

Posted in Federal, Politics | Leave a comment

The Jefferson-Jackson Dinner

Today I picked up tickets for my wife and I to attend the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner hosted by the Beaverhead County Democratic Party. The dinner is scheduled for Friday night, April 13th at the Dillon Elk’s Lodge.

I make it a point to try to be as informed on my choices of Candidates as I can be and since Democrats don’t visit Beaverhead County all that often, we decided to spring the money for the tickets.

The Keynote speaker will be Montana’s Senior Senator, Max Baucus. It is unclear at this point whether he is there to aid the other Democratic Candidates raise money/campaign or whether he is already campaigning for his 2014 bid to stay Montana’s Senior Senator. He is likely to be challenged both in the Primary and in the General so it might be a little of both.

Also to be in attendance are -
General John Walsh, the candidate for Lt Governor (running with Steve Bullock as the Democratic Candidate for Governor),
Denise Juneau running for re-election to the office of State Supt. of Schools,
Monica Lindeen running for re-election to the office of State Auditor,
Linda McCulloch running for re-election to the office of Secretary of State,
Franke Wilmer candidate for US House of Representatives,
Dave Strohmaier candidate for US House of Representatives,
Rob Stutz candidate for US House of Representatives,
Jesse Laslovich candidate for State Attorney General,
Pam Bucy candidate for State Attorney General,
John Vincent candidate for Public Service Commission,
Richard Turner candidate for State Senate Dist 36 
Norma Duffy candidate for State Legislature House Dist 72.

This will be a golden oppurtunity to get a look at many of the Democratic Candidates we will have to choose from. Since I am still undecided which primary I am going to vote in (I am currently leaning toward voting in the Democratic Primary since there are some races there that I would like to weigh in on), it behooves me to meet these candidates.

I have already decided on a few races. I will definitely vote for Jon Tester for Senate. I will definitely vote for Monica Lindeen for State Auditor. These incumbants have already convinced me through their actions that I should support them.

The rest will have to be determined by more research and part of that research is looking a candidate in the eye. No amount of TV/Radio ad time can ever replace actually meeting and talking to a candidate asking for your support.

Posted in Federal, Local, Politics, State | Leave a comment

Under Construction

While this could easily refer to the ongoing work we are doing to our house and my shop, this time, it actually refers to things I am doing both with this blog and my website. As anyone that has been to my website can attest, I have been woefully neglecting the site (as well as this blog).

On my website, you will be seeing this image as I build the new webpages. It will larger than the current web and will also include my updated business sites. With luck, I should have most of the major structure done pretty quickly and content will added as I get to it.

Understand this is a pretty major project as I will be going through the literally gigabits of information I have stored over a period of years to develop the various areas on the web. This is no small undertaking for me and it is long past due.

As far as this blog is concerned, there won’t be a lot of changes. I like the layout and it is easy to read and manage. The only major change will be that I will be taking down my previous blogs and “archiving” some of my old posts to those blogs here. There will be some small changes to the subject matter that I post here (I was unsuccessful in trying to get out of political blogging), but this site will continue to have posts covering a variety of subjects.

Hope you all enjoy the changes.

Posted in Blogging, General | Leave a comment

A Health Care Debate

In case you missed it, there has been an ongoing debate over at Cowgirl’s Site that has been fairly good. Many people who normally do not comment on that site have joined the conversation and even though Cowgirl’s resident troll has tried to disrupt the conversation, there is a lot of good information being passed back and forth.

I do find it interesting how many people (from various political backgrounds) support a Single Payer system VS the Frankenstien system we practice here in the US. Do yourself a favor and check it out.

It should also be pointed out that much of the discussion was more directed to what we should be doing to solve the issues rather than a discussion about the ACA. The ACA was brought up and discussed by a few people, but that was not the primary focus of the debate.

I will also be using this post to “archive” the major comments I put up in this debate. I want to save that information because it is part of an ongoing project I have been working on for months. Those comments can be found under the fold for those that are interested.

Continue reading

Posted in Federal, Politics | 1 Comment

I Live a Full Life

Today I received an email from someone that apparently occasionally reads this blog. That, in itself is cool, but the subject of the email – in short – pissed me off. It is not my intention to single this person out and I have no intention of identifying this person – so don’t ask. It is the subject of the email that pissed me off.

I live a very full life. That life includes not only my online world, but a very happy personal life, a very busy home life and a very rewarding professional life. Being ADHD, (I have never hid this fact), I sometimes have a hard time striking a balance between the four. I make no apologies for that.

The email essentially read me the riot act about not posting to this blog more often. This person was/is mostly interested in my political posts, but the reason the person reads the blog is moot. It is the idea that I “owe” people anything when I post to this blog.

I write this blog for myself. If I feel like saying something here, I will. Sometimes my life is too busy or full to post things – sometimes for months at a time. I do not take the blog down because I am still interested in it and I still – occasionally – post to it. Sometimes I choose to spend my online time posting short stuff to Facebook or as comments on other blogs. It is my choice to do so. If you enjoy my writing here enough to continue reading, GREAT. Just remember that I am under no obligation to post to your schedule.

Posted in Blogging, General | 2 Comments

Spring is upon us

Whether I am ready or not, it appears spring is upon us. It really would have been nice to have a winter this year but it seems that just wasn’t in the cards.

It is time to dust off the rakes, shovels and other tools and get to work. This year will be a busy one as there are quite a few projects that my wife and I want to get done. Money will dictate which ones actually get done but it is no use crying over the lack of winter anymore and a lot of the prep work can get done whether we have the money to complete these projects or not.

Besides the usual stuff (mowing the lawn, planting the garden, turning the compost ect), the projects we want to complete this year include – Putting a fence in the backyard so the dog has a place to run where he can’t see the people and cars go by, building a cover over the back porch to turn it into a psuedo mud room, pulling the door off the shop side of the garage and walling it in so I can finish the shop in preparation to set up a forge, replacing the “windows” in the shop with windows that actually open for shop ventilation, working on insulating the upstairs better to save on electric bills, re-designing the garden so next year I can put in an in-ground garden, hot boxes for tomatos, hot boxes for melons and a perennial herb pyramid in the back… the list goes on. It should prove to be a busy summer and if the fire season prediction is correct, I will probably spend a majority of the summer working on these alone as Brittany will probably be gone on fires.

No use whining about it.. time to roll up my sleeves and get to work.

Posted in Montana Life | Leave a comment

No means No – regardless of sex

I am a Facebook Junkie. Yes, I have said it and I can’t take it back. I check Facebook at least three times a day. Besides being able to use Facebook to keep tabs with my friends and relatives that live far away, I also get to see things I would normally find in my daily perusal of the Montana Blogs and CNN.

One such item came up today. It was posted by 0ne of my political Facebook friends and while the article itself bothered me, the responses to the posting was what really upset me. You see, the article linked by this friend was about a man accusing a woman of sexual assault.

Before we go any further, I need to relate something. I have been the victim of sexual assault. Yes, I am a large man and well able to take care of myself, but as I will discuss later, being larger, stronger, smarter or better prepared doesn’t always mean anything when it comes to sexual assault.

When I was much younger, I had a girlfriend that I lived with that I thought the world of. She was adventurous, intelligent, humorous and gorgeous. She was also a little crazy but since that translated into passion in our relationship, I was willing to look past it. What I didn’t know was that she was also a drug user. I was (and still am) pretty naive when it comes to drug use and I make no excuses for it.

One night, she decided she wanted to try tying me up for sex. We enjoyed a pretty active and varied sex life so this wasn’t all that unusual. What was unusual is that she was afraid to ask me about it, so instead, she drugged my drink and when I fell asleep, she tied to our bed with rope and handcuffs. When I awoke, I lost it. First, I absolutely hate being tied up or restrained. Call it a flaw, but I lose it completely. To be tied up and then sexually assaulted was beyond what I could handle. In about 10 minutes, I destroyed the bed getting loose and that was the end of our “relationship”.

I didn’t report this as sexual assault. In fact, the few people I did tell about it at the time laughed at me for having an issue with it. Now I get that this wasn’t a case of a complete stranger “raping” me. I also get that we were involved in a sexual relationship. That said – NO MEANS NO, regardless of sex.

In the article, a woman is accused to breaking into a man’s house and sexually assaulting him. The article doesn’t give many details (nor should it until after the trial). This is a rare situation but one that is becoming increasingly more common – where a man accuses a woman of sexual assault.

What I would like to focus on more, though, were the comments made by others about the article. Let me provide a few examples -

 Poor guy! His wife must have caught him?

 Yes, poor man. I wonder if she swallowed?

If he “rose for the occasion” couldn’t he be considered a willing participant

 Im sure the poor guy was ” raped”. I think what really happend was he got caught. Oral sex without his consewnt? Riiiight.Im sure.

 he should consider it a freebie and walk away.

Some guys have all the luck

I can’t begin to express my absolute disgust with this kind of response. Besides the double standard here (I will get to that in a minute), the lack of compassion for a fellow human being that has (at least on it’s face) endured a sexual assault is beyond disgust.

If this was a woman accusing a man of sexual assault, the comments would have been much different. There would have been calls for castration and all manner of horrible things to be visited on the man. Moreover, there would have been an outpouring of sympathy for the woman. Instead, since is a man reporting the assault, there is derision, disbelief, sexually charged jokes and dismissal. This double standard is inexplicable to me.

The bottom line is … NO MEANS NO WHEN IT COMES TO SEX. It doesn’t matter one whit whether the victim is male or female. Rape is Rape. The law shouldn’t have a double standard when it comes to abuse of any kind. Abuse against a male is just as damaging as abuse against a female. In our society, men are simply not allowed to admit it.

A rape victim advocacy group attempted to do a study on men who have been sexually assaulted about 12 years ago. I admit that I can’t find the link now, though I have looked a while for it. What I found sad about the study was stated in the very first paragraph though. The people doing the study admitted that it was likely that study was equivical because they had a really hard time getting men to even admit to being sexually assaulted – even when their attackers confessed to the crime.

I can speak from personal experience. The few times I have discussed the incident I had with others have all – with few exceptions – brought one of three responses -

1) You should have laid back and enjoyed it
2) Either utter disbelief (even though I still have scars on my ankles and wrists) or dismissal that it could occur
3) I am a wimp for either allowing it to occur or I am less than a man because it did occur.

Would you, as a man, admit to being sexually assaulted? The people doing the study found out that most men wouldn’t. I guess I see that as no surprise. I do find it saddening and sick, though, that our society is so backwards that we would fail to recognise such a fundamental problem.

Two other points to keep in mind. Just because a man is bigger or stronger, they can still be assaulted. I am 6’1″ tall, at the time I was 235lb with almost no body fat due to competing in martial arts, and I was a tourney winning heavy blade fencer at the time. My “girlfriend” was 5′ even and weighed 100lbs. Size, weight, strength etc can often not be a factor. Remember that rape is not about sex, it is about control. Anytime someone attempts to touch you sexually without your consent, it is rape. Period.

The second point to keep in mind is that anyone undergoing sexual assault can react physically – men or women. A lot of it is involuntary. How many of you guys have had an erection in a classroom and then been called to the board? Sometimes you just don’t have control. Therein lies the whole idea of rape. The fact that someone can force your reaction without your consent is the very nature of rape.

No means NO and if anyone disregards a person’s wishes by taking away that choice they have committed rape. Never forget that.

Posted in General, Politics | 2 Comments