Showing posts with label senate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label senate. Show all posts

Friday, September 18, 2020

Ginsburg bites the big one

WASHINGTON — Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died on Friday of “complications of metastatic pancreas cancer,” the Supreme Court announced.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg sitting in a chair: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was the leader of the court’s four-member liberal wing.© Doug Mills/The New York Times Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was the leader of the court’s four-member liberal wing. 

“Our nation has lost a jurist of historic stature,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said in a statement. “We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague. Today we mourn, but with confidence that future generations will remember Ruth Bader Ginsburg as we knew her — a tireless and resolute champion of justice.” 

The development will give President Trump the opportunity to name her successor, and Senate Republicans have promised to try to fill the vacancy even in the waning days of his first term. The confirmation battle, in the middle of a pandemic and a presidential election, is sure to be titanic.
 
 
Let's get ready to rumble. Most Presidents only get to nominate one judge to sit on the Supreme Court. If they are lucky. Two is rare and Three is unheard of but that is what awaits Trump. To come up with an pro-libertarian conservative jurist to replace Ginsburg. I'm sure the Dems are loving this. I can imagine Kamala Harris tearing her hair out while screaming: "Why couldn't that bitch die in January when we may have a chance to retake the White House?" 
 
Mr. Trump has appointed two members of the Supreme Court, Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh, moving the court slightly to the right. The replacement of Justice Ginsburg, the leader of the court’s four-member liberal wing, could transform the court into a profoundly conservative institution, one in which Republican appointees would outnumber Democratic ones six to three.

I'm sure it has the DNC scared shitless. Socialism has an ending date and I believe this is it. Whomever Trump nominates and if they get approved by the Senate is going to put an end to socialism. Hopefully that jurist will protect this country from socialists and other threats.

In 2016, Senate Republicans refused to consider President Barack Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick B. Garland, saying that holding hearings in the last year of a president’s term would deprive voters of a role in the process.
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, led the effort to block Judge Garland’s nomination. But he has said he will press to fill any vacancy that might arise in the last year of Mr. Trump’s first term.

Mr. McConnell and his allies say the two situations are different. Where one party controls the Senate and the other the presidency, as in 2016, they say, vacancies should not be filled in a presidential election year. Where the same party controls both the Senate and presidency, they argue, confirmations may proceed.

Democrats say this is hairsplitting hypocrisy that damages the legitimacy of the court. But they may have little practical power to stop a third Trump nominee after changes in Senate rules on filibusters on nominations. All it takes now is a majority vote to confirm judicial nominees.

The situations are very different: Obama was on year 7 going on to year 8 and adios see ya later charly. There was no way Obama would ever face the voters again ever. While Trump is running for re-election IOW Trump is on year 4 and he is going to face the voters. Something Obama was not going to do.

Justice Ginsburg is revered in liberal circles, with her many fans calling her Notorious R.B.G., a nod to the rapper Notorious B.I.G. The justice has embraced the connection. “We were both born and bred in Brooklyn, New York,” she liked to say.

Justice Ginsburg, who was 87, had repeatedly vowed to stay on the court as long as her health held and she stayed mentally sharp. “I have often said I would remain a member of the court as long as I can do the job full steam,” she said in July, announcing a recurrence of cancer. “I remain fully able to do that.”

While during her lifetime she didn't impress me, in death I gained an admiration for her. Rather than retire she stuck to her guns. She stood up to what she viewed as a threat. I would do the same. I would demand that of myself and my soldiers. Stick to your guns and never surrender.

The discovery of lesions on her liver in May was only her most recent medical setback. She had had surgery for lung cancer and radiation treatment for pancreatic cancer in recent years. She had also had surgery for early-stage pancreatic cancer in 2009 and treatment for colon cancer in 1999.

Justice Ginsburg was born in Brooklyn in 1933, graduated from Cornell in 1954 and began law school at Harvard. After moving to New York with her husband, she transferred to Columbia, where she earned her law degree.

She taught at Rutgers and Columbia and was a leading courtroom advocate of women’s rights before joining the court. As the director of the Women’s Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union in the 1970s, she brought a series of cases before the court that helped establish constitutional protections against sex discrimination.

Her litigation strategy invited comparison to that of Justice Thurgood Marshall, who was the architect of the civil rights movement’s incremental legal attack on racial discrimination before he joined the court.

She was appointed to the court by President Bill Clinton in 1993. At recent arguments, she asked probing questions based on an assured command of the pertinent legal materials and factual record.

During the Obama administration, some liberals urged Justice Ginsburg to step down so that President Barack Obama could name her successor. She rejected the advice.

She was critical of Mr. Trump during the 2016 campaign, and he responded that “her mind is shot” and said she should resign. She later said she had made a mistake in publicly commenting on a candidate and promised to be more “circumspect” in the future.

Saturday, August 10, 2019

Terrence Popp's message to Donald Trump



Let's make sure President Trump gets the message. Tell him your opinion on how this needs to be addressed right away. In fact also contact your Congressional Representative and Senators and let them know as well. The more of us they hear from the better.

Sunday, October 7, 2018

President Trump says false rape accusations are unacceptable and those that make them should be held fully accountable

WASHINGTON - Hours after his Supreme Court pick was sworn in Saturday, President Donald Trump said on Fox News that those who made up "false" stories about Brett Kavanaugh should be penalized.

Trump, talking with Fox News' Jeanine Pirro, said he hated watching the slew of sexual assault allegations grow against Kavanaugh and dubbed all the accusations "fabrications" with "not a bit of truth."

"I think that they should be held liable," Trump told Pirro. "You can't go around and whether it's making up stories or making false statements about such an important position, you can't do that. You can destroy somebody's life."

Pirro started the segment by congratulating the president on Kavanaugh's swearing-in then asked about the accusations and whether any of those who came forward or promoted "falsehoods" should suffer "consequences." She specifically asked about allegations brought by Julie Sweatnick, who was represented by lawyer Michael Avenatti.

Swetnick alleges she witnessed efforts by Kavanaugh and his classmate Mark Judge to get teenage girls "inebriated and disoriented so they could then be 'gang-raped' in a side room or bedroom by a 'train' of numerous boys."

Avenatti has been dueling with the president for months in court representing porn star Stormy Daniels, who alleges an affair with Trump and signed a hush money deal to stay quiet.

Trump alleged Avenatti had made "false accusations about me" in the past and said he would love to see libel laws get tougher.

Trump said he watched the saga and watched Kavanaugh suffer "with false statements made about him, things that never happened."

"There were many, many false things that were said about a very, very fine man and would have destroyed his family if this didn't happen," Trump said, referring to the confirmation. "It all came together in the end and people realized it was false accusations and false statements."

President Trump mocked Dr. Christine Blasey Ford's testimony against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh during a campaign rally on Tuesday night in Mississippi. USA TODAY

Avenatti, in an interview with USA TODAY, said it was despicable that Trump and others, including members of the media, would call his client's claims false without first investigating them. Swetnick was not interviewed by the FBI in its investigation of Kavanaugh.

"Donald Trump is the most dishonest individual to ever hold the office of President of the United States," Avenatti said. "He is the last person in the nation that should be accusing other people of engaging in falsehoods."

He added his client was "trying to hold it together" after Saturday's vote but was "disgusted" by the barrage of attacks. "This is why women don't report sexual assaults," he said.

Earlier Saturday, Trump praised Senate Republicans for their work in getting Kavanaugh confirmed and said he believes a speech he made earlier this week attacking the credibility of accuser Christine Blasey Ford helped generate support for the embattled nominee.

“I think that the Mississippi speech had a great impact, yes - I think it was a very important thing," Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One en route to a political rally in Topeka, Kansas.

During the controversial speech, Trump mocked Ford and mimicked her, claiming her allegations against Kavanaugh lacked sufficient detail. Numerous lawmakers, including undecided Republican senators like Susan Collins and Jeff Flake, said they were appalled by Trump's behavior, but wound up voting for Kavanaugh anyway.

The polarizing battle over Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh has ended, but voter repercussions could be coming soon.


Source

Sounds good. Let's thank President Donald Trump for taking the stance he is taking. Let's let him know there are men out there that take the stance he is taking and that we are not all like the sissies of the past that were scared of their wives,girlfriends and the intolerant left. The more of us he hears from the better so email him today right away. To contact him click on his name and position.

Thursday, September 27, 2018

Get 'em,Lindsey. Get 'em.



If you are tired of the Kavenaugh inquistion like I am then you are glad that Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said what he did. I know I am. The femocrats were going to drag this out until the November elections. Hopefully Graham put a stop to it. It may be a good idea to thank Graham for the position he took. I did and so can you. The more of us he hears from the better. To contact him click on his name.

Saturday, October 8, 2016

Women persecute Donald Trump

TRUMP: 'Certainly has been an interesting 24 hours!'
Pamela Engel
4h 2,804 8

After issuing multiple apologies over a recording of himself making vulgar comments about women, Donald Trump addressed the controversy in a tweet Saturday morning.

"Certainly has been an interesting 24 hours!" he tweeted.
After the recording surfaced Friday afternoon, Trump initially issued a statement dismissing his comments as "locker room banter."
In the 2005 clip, Trump was heard saying he could "grab" women "by the p---y" because "when you're a star they let you do it." He also discussed trying to sleep with a married woman and failing.

"This was locker room banter, a private conversation that took place many years ago," Trump said in the statement. "Bill Clinton has said far worse to me on the golf course — not even close. I apologize if anyone was offended."

But the firestorm of criticism continued, and he issued a second apology early Saturday morning.

"Everyone who knows me knows these words don't reflect who I am," he said in a pre-recorded video posted to his Facebook account.

"I've never said I'm a perfect person, nor pretended to be someone I'm not. I've said and done things I regret, and the words released today on this more-than-a-decade-old video are one of them," he continued. "I said it. I was wrong. And I apologize."

Several prominent Republicans called for Trump to step out of the presidential race, and the condemnation of his comments from party officials and leaders was nearly universal.


Source

(sarcasm)Oh Goddess forgive us our sins of misogyny. Forgive us as we are not as perfect as females are. May we learn our place at your feet.(/sarcasm) In the old days if you said anything offensive toward God you were called to task. It seems that women and their bloated egos and ideals of self importance have replaced God in the eyes of western men. As far as Kelly Ayotte is concerned fuck her. She is gynocentric garbage. So is her female Democratic counterpart. If you're a man I suggest Brian Chabot. I don't know too much about him but I do know that Ayotte is a loser. A loser we don't want.

Tuesday, September 20, 2016

Tell your college alma mater and/or elected officials about victim centered investigations on college and university campuses

From SAVE Services:

A new trend called "victim-centered investigations" is troubling us at SAVE.

The gist of the new investigatory approach is to start from believing the complainant and to continue the investigation from the complainant's perspective--thus ending the police's role as neutral fact-finder.

Colleges are starting to look into using this technique, and we need stop it.

We are asking you to contact the university or college where you attended school, and ask them to continue implementing fair investigative procedures.

Tell them to preserve the presumption of innocence on their campus.


If you didn't attend college or do not want to contact your alma mater then contact your elected officials. Congressional Representative:click here and Senators: click here. You can also contact Senator James Lankford and Senator Lamar Alexander. Neither of the aforementioned Senators are big fans of what the Obama administration is doing to college and university men so contacting them would be a plus. On Lankford's website click on "send an email on legislation" to send him an email.

Tuesday, June 14, 2016

Senate votes to require women to register for the draft

The United States Senate voted to pass a defense bill today that would require young women to sign up for a potential military draft for the first time in U.S. history. The vote was 85-13 in favor of the National Defense Authorization Act, a $600 billion defense spending bill that had a host of other controversial provisions in it, including prohibiting the closure of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and denying the Pentagon’s attempt to close military bases.

Republicans were divided about whether the U.S. should require women to register for the draft when they turn 18. Sen. Ted Cruz told Politico it was a “radical change that is attempting to be foisted on the American people,” while Sen. John McCain said “a large bipartisan majority on the Armed Services Committee agreed that there is simply no further justification to limit Selective Service registration to men.”

The Senate and the House will now meet to compare and resolve differences between the two versions of the defense spending bill. The House version does not have the female draft requirement in it.


Source

I love this. I am loving it. It's about time women did their fair share and not heap burdens upon men and men only. Let's send a "atta boy" to Senator John McCain and tell him he's right. The burden should not be upon men and men alone. On the other hand,I am disappointed in Senator Ted Cruz for taking the position he did. Perhaps we should remind him that selective service is a burden that is already heaped upon men whether they like it or not so requiring women to fulfill the same requirements that men are forced to do is not much of a stretch. The country can handle it.

Monday, June 6, 2016

Add Your Voice to the Call for Free Speech

From SAVE Services:

Right now, the Office for Civil Rights is stifling student and professor free speech, due process, and liberty rights in order to enforce a policy agenda.

This has to stop.

Fortunately, the Senate Homeland Security Committee is holding an oversight hearing on agency overreach

This Thursday, June 9th, at 10:45 a.m. EST: Senate Hearings on overreach

But let's not wait until then for your voice to be heard--

Free speech is too important.

This moment,call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and ask to speak to your federal representatives.(Senate) Tell them the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is a loose cannon that needs to be reigned in immediately.

Please call now and help protect the Constitution, in crisis on our campuses.


Let's see. Senator Lamar Alexander and Senator James Lankford are just of fond of this little bullshit game as we are. Which means they are not too fond of it either which means they may be allies in our cause so if you do or you do not live in their district contact them anyway and ask for their help in restoring due process on our college and university campuses. You can also contact the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee here and tell them how displeased you are with Catherine Lhamon and the damage she has caused.

Monday, April 25, 2016

The Georgia lawmaker taking on "dear colleauge" and the female bureaucrat who thought she was a queen

A Georgia lawmaker is suing the federal government on behalf of taxpayers for what he calls "illegal and unconstitutional directives" from the Education Department.

Republican State Rep. Earl Ehrhart, who chairs the influential Georgia House Appropriations Subcommittee on Higher Education, filed the lawsuit along with his wife, alleging the federal government violated the Administrative Procedure Act when they issued a "guidance document" that included onerous new regulations for schools to follow. If schools fail to abide by the Department's Office for Civil Rights' ever-changing guidance, they risk losing federal funding.

Ehrhart has been a vocal critic of the Department's "Dear Colleague" letters, which began forcing colleges to spend more and more money to adjudicate felonies in 2011. In January, Ehrhart told school administrators: "If you don't protect the students of this state with due process, don't come looking for money." It was the strongest statement yet on the issue from a legislator.

In his lawsuit, Ehrhart claims the 2011 "Dear Colleague" letter imposed "unnecessary costs and expenses that flow directly to both Federal and Georgia Taxpayers, including Plaintiffs, under the threat of Federal funding being revoked for the schools' failure to comply."

"The illegal and unconstitutional directives issued in the Obama Administration's 'Dear Colleague' letter have resulted in a clear disregard for the due process rights of male college students and fostered an environment of male gender bias on campuses throughout the country," Ehrhart said in a press release. "As Chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Higher Education, I have seen firsthand how colleges and universities, intimidated by [the Education Department's Office for Civil Right's] threat to their federal funding, have set up kangaroo court systems to comply with the Obama Administration's unconstitutional policies."

He added: "It is unacceptable that state and federal taxpayers in this country continue to fund these mandates and their attendant costs at higher education institutions."

The 2011 "Dear Colleague" letter demanded that schools adopt processes that make it easier to find accused students culpable without affording them much chance to defend themselves. Schools aren't required to allow them legal representation and lack subpoena power to obtain relevant evidence; and it's up to the schools what evidence is "relevant" or "exculpatory," meaning oftentimes accused students aren't made aware of evidence that could exonerate them.

It's all due to the Obama administration's agenda on looking tough when it comes to sexual assault. The belief that women are oppressed and victimized at large numbers in this country permeates the administration, and it has introduced policies that take self-reported, manipulated surveys as fact and eviscerates due process rights in pursuit of ending a non-existent "epidemic."

Ehrhart and his wife claim they have standing to sue as taxpayers of the state, who help fund the colleges and universities. The Ehrharts are also deeply concerned about the policies forced upon colleges because they have a son enrolled in the Georgia Institute of Technology, a school that has a horrendous track record on sexual misconduct accusations.

Ehrhart is represented by Andrew Miltenberg, Jeffrey Berkowitz and Tara Davis of Nesenoff Miltenberg Goddard Laskowitz, LLP and Jonathan Hawkins of Krevolin & Horst, LLC. Miltenberg is also representing a former Colorado State University-Pueblo student who was suspended for multiple years (essentially expelled) for sexual misconduct even though his alleged victim said she wasn't raped. The student in that case is also suing the Education Department.

"It is our hope that his case, together with the Grant Neal case (commenced earlier this week), have cornered the OCR, highlighting its abuses and providing a compelling narrative as we try to dismantle the OCR's continued assault on the rights of young men," Miltenberg told the Washington Examiner in an email.

Ehrhart told the Examiner that if he got the "right panel" on the Georgia court where his lawsuit was filed, "we could be in very good shape." And if they lose, he said, "we'll appeal. We'll take this right up to the Supreme Court."


Source

This is a man. Earl Ehrhart is perhaps one of the last of the men left in government. A brave man that is taking on the feminist juggernaut. Fine,we will stand beside him and let him know that there are men standing beside him. That we at the Men's Rights Blog stand with him and wish him the best as he rights this wrong and restores and gets justice for the wrongfully accused men whom this suggestion "dear colleague" has destroyed. In fact let's tell him ourselves: earl.ehrhart@house.ga.gov The more of us he hears from the better so let's let him know we appreciate what he is doing. After all he is doing this on our behalf as well so let's let him know today.


There is a second take on this story:

Georgia lawmaker sues Department of Ed officials for exceeding authority in campus rape rules
Greg Piper - Associate Editor •April 22, 2016

Our son could be ‘wrongly accused and found responsible’

The Department of Education and its Office for Civil Rights (OCR) have harmed not only students but their parents and taxpayers by enforcing unlawful rules in campus sexual-misconduct investigations, according to a lawsuit by a Georgia lawmaker.

State Rep. Earl Ehrhart chairs the Georgia House subcommittee that controls the purse for the state’s public colleges and universities, and he has used his position to pressure schools to restore due-process rights, with some success.

But in the suit filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Atlanta, Ehrhart and his wife Victoria spoke as parents of a son enrolled at Georgia Tech.

They have “heard countless stories of young men being accused, investigated, and subsequently expelled from Georgia colleges and universities without being provided appropriate due process protections,” owing to OCR’s 2011 “Dear Colleague” letter to colleges, the suit says.

They are “concerned that in the current regulatory climate” their son could, “like any other male college student, be wrongly accused and found responsible under the directives imposed by the Dear Colleague Letter.”

‘Imperative language’ means it is intended to be enforced

The Ehrharts’ lawsuit names Education Secretary John King and OCR chief Catherine Lhamon as defendants, as well as the agencies they lead and the United States government itself.

It was filed by the same lawyer, Andrew Miltenberg, who earlier this week sued Colorado State University-Pueblo on behalf of a male student who was functionally expelled for a sexual encounter that his partner has repeatedly said was not rape. That suit also named Department of Ed officials.

The core of the suit is that OCR did not follow the proper regulatory procedure in issuing substantive new rules, including the use of an “excessively low” evidence standard and the discouragement of cross-examination, while threatening the federal funding of schools that didn’t comply.

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) requires a notice-and-comment rulemaking for any substantive rules, which are often marked by “imperative language” such as “must,” the suit says. It points to the repeated use of “should,” “must,” “requires” and “strongly” throughout the letter.

When OCR’s Lhamon was challenged on the letter’s legality by Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla. and chair of the Regulatory Affairs Subcommittee, she claimed the Dear Colleague was “interpretive” because the Title IX statute went through notice-and-comment 44 years ago, the suit says.

All decisions from the past five years are ‘arbitrary and void’

The Ehrharts are calling for “all disciplinary decisions arising” from the Dear Colleague letter – five years of misconduct findings from proceedings that were tailored to OCR’s demands – to be rendered “unconstitutional, arbitrary and void.”

The 2011 letter “was not, in practice or effect, a genuine guidance document” that carries no force of law, because it “coerced the schools’ compliance” with rules that were not implemented in the last rulemaking in 2001.

Because it set up “quasi-legal” proceedings that “violate many civil liberties,” the Dear Colleague has become “a highly divisive document, criticized by law professors, lawyers, educators, journalists, civil liberties groups and members of Congress,” the suit says.

The Ehrharts argued that the Department of Ed and OCR couldn’t avoid judicial review, as provided by the APA, by simply calling the Dear Colleague a guidance document.

The letter “is a final agency action in that it is the consummation of the agency’s decision-making and has been carried out as binding law since its adoption in 2011,” with “direct legal consequences” for institutions that do not comply.

The suit notes that Lhamon has repeatedly said in public settings that she expects colleges to follow the 2011 letter and “I will enforce” it – a threat made good when Tufts University “balked” at agreeing to an OCR finding that its policies suddenly violated Title IX in 2014.

Georgia taxpayers and academic programs are threatened

Those threats have forced all Georgia public colleges to create Title IX enforcement offices and hire personnel, costing them millions of dollars, to avoid the risk that their federal funding could be cut – with taxpayers hit and academic programs slashed as a result, the suit says.


It contrasts the multi-billion dollar endowments of Ivy League schools that have each hired dozens of Title IX staff in response to the Dear Colleague, with the endowments of Georgia Tech and the University of Georgia, which are “a shadow of their Ivy League peers.”

The suit notes Ehrhart’s own subcommittee hearings into how state schools handle sexual-misconduct investigations and says money can’t make students safer: The feds are demanding that colleges “micromanage the sex lives of students.”

The closest the suit gets to arguing that male students face inherent bias in post-Dear Colleague investigations – the core claim in lawyer Miltenberg’s CSU-Pueblo lawsuit – is its reference to the “rapid increase” in suits filed by students who were “wrongly disciplined.”

“Typically, these cases are brought by male students erroneously found responsible for sexual misconduct after being subjected to an arbitrary, biased and Kafkaesque investigation and adjudication,” it says.

Washington University Law Prof. John Banzhaf, who has called the 2011 Dear Colleague “unconstitutional,” said other states or municipalities could also challenge OCR in court by approving rules that contradict OCR’s, such as the right to cross-examination.

“Here it is not even clear that the [Title IX] statute authorized the Department of Education to have any involvement in the issue of rape complaints involving college students,” Banzhaf wrote in an email blast Thursday, “much less that it clearly intended to preempt any statutes individual states or municipalities might adopt. ”


Source

You know where this bitch came up with "dear colleague"? If it wasn't handed down to her then she reached as far up her ass as she could and pulled it out. It's not a law. It has no enforcement value yet she is acting like a smug little bitch about it. Let's see how smug she is with a congressional investigation looking up her ass. We'll see how smug she is then. Let's contact our Congressional representative and our Senators,especially Senator Lamar Alexander and Senator James Lankford. Let's teach this little bitch she can't just fuck with innocent men just because she feels like it.

Sunday, March 20, 2016

The one,two combo

Let's do a one,two combo that results in a knockout. What I am referring to is telling select Senators the actions of Catherine Lhamon and the damage that she has caused this nation. Letting these Senators know that she has engage in criminal action. the more of us that do this the better.

Sunday, July 26, 2015

Join with the NCFM in fighting CASA

There is a misandric draconian bill,the Campus Accountability and Safety Act or CASA for short,S.590. The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) committee are going to hold hearing to discuss CASA. The panel that will testify at this hearing does not include those favorable to men's rights,especially due process rights. We need to make our voices heard. For more information go the National Coalition For Men website.

Monday, February 17, 2014

Protest misandric bill SB 967

Law proposal will increase access to sexual assault justice

STATE ISSUES: Proposed legislation would make it easier for victims of sexual assault to access the support they need and bring their attackers to justice.

By Senior Editorial Board | Staff
Last Updated February 14, 2014

The prevalence of sexual assault on college campuses across the country has reached the point where the need for sweeping institutional reform is undeniable. Exacerbated by notions of assumed consent in modern ‘hookup culture,’ abundant drug and alcohol use, misunderstandings and malevolence, sexual assault — and university and government authorities’ failure to properly respond to it — has become an epidemic. Legislation proposed by three Sacramento lawmakers on Monday represents a solvent institutional response to the problem, as it seeks to tighten and standardize sexual assault policies across California colleges and make those policies more survivor-centered.

The proposed law — SB 967 — improves upon the efforts of even the most progressive universities, like the UC system, to address sexual assault. By their very nature, sexual assault cases are difficult to prosecute. They are often characterized by a lack of physical evidence since the crimes tend to take place in private and are sometimes not reported until some time after the fact. For all California colleges, SB 967 would establish a “preponderance of the evidence standard in the determination of disciplinary action,” meaning courts would give extra consideration to incomplete or inconclusive evidence in sexual assault cases. In this way, the benefit of the doubt would be given to the survivors, encouraging them to speak out and help ensure that more perpetrators of sexual assault are brought to justice.

But the law does more than simply aim to increase the perpetrated-to-prosecuted rate — it works to spark a necessary cultural shift in what it means to engage in consensual sexual activity. Though any policy is incapable of fully addressing the crux of the sexual assault problem, the proposal’s requirement that defendants in a sexual assault case demonstrate they obtained verbal “affirmative consent” before engaging in sexual activity makes SB 967 a step in the right direction. By setting clearer parameters and removing ambiguity around consent, this mandate places responsibility for consent on both parties and thus makes cases of assault easier to prosecute.

Tough action against perpetrators of sexual assault, and stringent, comprehensive policy standards on college campuses where many sexual assaults occur are necessary to stem this national epidemic. The proposals outlined in SB 967 represent the best policy solution to the problem of sexual assault at California schools thus far, and should be adopted by the California legislature. Although in most cases this mandate will be a simple inconvenience, it is necessary to shift the paradigm away from assumed notions of consent under which sexual assault have proliferated.


Source

This is going to be California's answer to the Department of Justice's "dear colleague" directive which stripped male students of their rights on University and College campuses when it came to false rape accusations. SB 967 is about one thing and one thing only and that is get men. This is so bad no commenters are siding with this bill.

Let's oppose this bill. If you live in California you can contact your Legislators and the Governor:

Assembly:click here
Find your Representatives and Senators

Senate: click here

Governor Jerry Brown: Governor's website
Email the Governor

If you don't live in California contact the legislative speakers and Governor, tell them that you don't support SB 967 and that you don't want to spend your money to benefit a state that passed SB 967 or similiar legislation. It's time to end the anti-male sexism.

(UPDATE: The current status of SB 967 as of 2-18-14)

CURRENT BILL STATUS


MEASURE : S.B. No. 967
AUTHOR(S): De León and Jackson (Principal coauthor: Assembly Member
Lowenthal) (Coauthors: Senators Beall, Evans, Galgiani,
Pavley, and Torres) (Coauthors: Assembly Members
Gonzalez and Williams).
TOPIC : Student safety: sexual assault.
HOUSE LOCATION : SEN

TYPE OF BILL :
Active
Non-Urgency
Non-Appropriations
Majority Vote Required
State-Mandated Local Program
Fiscal
Non-Tax Levy

LAST HIST. ACT. DATE: 02/11/2014
LAST HIST. ACTION : From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 13.

TITLE : An act to add Section 67386 to the Education Code,
relating to student safety.


Source

Let's keep an eye on this one,dudes. Even if you don't live in California this could spread to your state. The best way to get rid of SB 967 and Dear Colleague is to oppose them. The more of us that do that the better our chances are of prevailing over them.

Friday, January 10, 2014

U.S. Senate candidate goes through misandric system

Maine Senate GOP Challenger: Domestic Violence Conviction Shows Integrity
Daniel Strauss – January 3, 2014, 2:15 PM EST12827

A conservative candidate running against Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) in the Republican primary argued that his decision to fight his domestic violence conviction in court showed his integrity.

The candidate, Erick Bennett, a consultant in Portland who worked on the anti-marriage equality push in 2012, made the argument Monday at a press conference. He discussed his Senate campaign, his time serving for Maine Gov. Paul LePage's (R) campaign in 2010 and his domestic violence conviction.

"The fact that I have been jailed repeatedly for not agreeing to admit to something I didn’t do should speak to the fact of how much guts and integrity I have," Bennett said. "I've noticed some people questioning that."

In 2003 Bennett was convicted of attacking his then-wife. A district court convicted him of Class D Assault. Bennett fought the conviction but in 2004 a Maine Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the lower court "sufficient evidence does exist in the record to support his conviction," according to the Bangor Daily News. At the press conference Bennett stressed his innocence.

Bennett went on to say that that his time in jail demonstrates how much character he has.

"If I go to D.C., I'm going to have that same integrity in doing what I say, and saying what I do, when it comes to protecting people's rights, as well as their pocketbooks," Bennett continued, according to the Daily News.


Source

To contact Erick Bennett

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Dismal turnout for runoff elections

My California correspondant weighs in with the following:

SENATE ELECTION: Norma Torres beats Paul Leon for Inland seat

BY JIM MILLER |

SACRAMENTO BUREAU |

May 14, 2013; 08:26 PM |

SACRAMENTO – Assemblywoman Norma Torres defeated Ontario Mayor Paul Leon in Tuesday’s special election to fill a vacancy in the state Senate seat that extends from Pomona to San Bernardino. In another vote with anemic turnout, Torres, D-Pomona, opened a significant lead over Leon, a Republican, shortly after polls closed. With all precincts reporting, she had 59.4 percent of the vote to Leon’s 40.6 percent.

Torres will serve out the almost 19 months remaining on the term of former state Sen. Gloria Negrete McLeod. The Chino Democrat resigned her 32nd Senate District seat in January to go to Congress. Torres will run for re-election in the redrawn 20th Senate District. That seat is similar to the 32nd, but includes Chino and excludes all but about one-third of San Bernardino.

Torres and Leon were the top finishers in a six-candidate special primary election in March. The Pomona Democrat was the strong favorite leading up to the special election in the 32nd, where Democrats have a 23-percentage point advantage and historically have won handily. Besides the district’s strong Democratic leanings, Torres outraised Leon by more than two-to-one. She also benefited from more than $472,000 in spending by independent groups since January.

Torres, who was a bilingual emergency dispatcher before her election to the Assembly in 2008, received 44 percent of the vote in March. She won all but one of the precincts in the 32nd’s Pomona portion and two-thirds of the precincts in the district’s San Bernardino County portion. Leon is a longtime local elected official and received 26.4 percent of the votes in March. He received the most votes in about a quarter of the district’s precincts.

A little more than 9 percent of voters participated in the March 12 special primary election. Torres topped four Democrats, including San Bernardino Auditor-Controller Larry Walker, who finished a distant third behind Leon.

As of late Tuesday evening, turnout stood at about 9.7 percent.

Torres’ win means Democrats will have 28 seats in the Senate upon her swearing-in, one shy of what they held in December but one more than the two-thirds majority needed to pass tax measures, place initiatives on the ballot, and take other actions without Republican votes. There is another Senate special election next week. There likely will be another vacancy soon, though, with state Sen. Curren Price, D-Los Angeles, the favorite to win next week’s runoff for a seat on the Los Angeles City Council.

The election is good news for Torres but it means San Bernardino and Los Angeles counties will have to pay for at least one, and possibly two, more special elections to fill her Assembly seat. The Democratic-leaning 52nd Assembly District includes Pomona, Ontario and Chino.


Source:here

In case you forgot or this is the first time you're learning of this click here and it will make sense. Under 10% turnout. That says something.

Friday, March 29, 2013

Re-elect Mitch McConnell


Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell


Why am I mentioning Senator McConnell? Because he is one of the 22 Senators that stood up to the feminazi bullies and voted against VAWA. He remembered us now it is time we help him. If you are an MRA and a resident of Kentucky or allowed to vote there re-elect Mitch McConnell. Not only that but McConnell is big supporter of the other Senator from Kentucky,Rand Paul. Like I said if McConnell is defeated then some liberal Obama-loving,feminist loving democrat will take his place. You want that? I don't. So like I said if you are able to do so re-elect Mitch McConnell.

Monday, February 18, 2013

The good,the bad and the lobbyists

Here is the list of Senators that stood up for men,the Constitution and due process. They voted against VAWA so we need to thank them.They remembered us so we need to remember them when they come up for reelection. I want everyone to send them a thank you email for a job well done. Here they are:

Sens. John Barrasso (WY) – @SenJohnBarrasso
Roy Blunt (MO) – @RoyBlunt
John Boozman (AR) – @JohnBoozman
Tom Coburn (OK) – @TomCoburn
John Cornyn (TX) – @JohnCornyn
Ted Cruz (TX) – @tedcruz and @SenTedCruz
Mike Enzi (WY) – @SenatorEnzi
Lindsey Graham (SC) – @GrahamBlog
Chuck Grassley (IA) – @ChuckGrassley
Orrin Hatch (UT) – @OrrinHatch
James Inhofe (OK) – @jiminhofe
Mike Johanns (NE) – @Mike_Johanns
Ron Johnson (WI) – @SenRonJohnson
Mike Lee (UT) – @SenMikeLee
Mitch McConnell (KY) – @MitchMcConell
Rand Paul (KY) – @SenRandPaul
Jim Risch (ID) – @SenatorRisch
Pat Roberts (KS) – @SenPatRoberts
Marco Rubio (FL) – @marcorubio
Tim Scott (SC) – @SenatorTimScott
Jeff Sessions (AL) – @SenatorSessions
John Thune (SD) – @SenJohnThune

Senate info: click here

On the other hand here is a list of VAWA supporters. Let's tell them the truth about VAWA and ask them how they could support bigoted legislation.

House:

Rep Andrews, Robert E. [NJ-1] - 2/12/2013
Rep Barber, Ron [AZ-2] - 2/4/2013
Rep Bass, Karen [CA-37] - 1/22/2013
Rep Beatty, Joyce [OH-3] - 1/22/2013
Rep Becerra, Xavier [CA-34] - 2/12/2013
Rep Bera, Ami [CA-7] - 1/22/2013
Rep Bishop, Sanford D., Jr. [GA-2] - 2/12/2013
Rep Bishop, Timothy H. [NY-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Blumenauer, Earl [OR-3] - 1/22/2013
Rep Bonamici, Suzanne [OR-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Bordallo, Madeleine Z. [GU] - 1/22/2013
Rep Brady, Robert A. [PA-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Braley, Bruce L. [IA-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Brown, Corrine [FL-5] - 1/22/2013
Rep Brownley, Julia [CA-26] - 1/22/2013
Rep Bustos, Cheri [IL-17] - 1/22/2013
Rep Butterfield, G. K. [NC-1] - 2/12/2013
Rep Capps, Lois [CA-24] - 1/22/2013
Rep Capuano, Michael E. [MA-7] - 1/22/2013
Rep Cardenas, Tony [CA-29] - 1/22/2013
Rep Carney, John C., Jr. [DE] - 1/22/2013
Rep Carson, Andre [IN-7] - 1/22/2013
Rep Cartwright, Matt [PA-17] - 2/5/2013
Rep Castor, Kathy [FL-14] - 1/22/2013
Rep Castro, Joaquin [TX-20] - 1/22/2013
Rep Christensen, Donna M. [VI] - 1/22/2013
Rep Chu, Judy [CA-27] - 1/22/2013
Rep Cicilline, David N. [RI-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Clarke, Yvette D. [NY-9] - 1/22/2013
Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Cleaver, Emanuel [MO-5] - 1/22/2013
Rep Clyburn, James E. [SC-6] - 2/5/2013
Rep Cohen, Steve [TN-9] - 1/22/2013
Rep Connolly, Gerald E. [VA-11] - 1/22/2013
Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-13] - 1/22/2013
Rep Cooper, Jim [TN-5] - 2/13/2013
Rep Costa, Jim [CA-16] - 1/22/2013
Rep Courtney, Joe [CT-2] - 1/22/2013
Rep Crowley, Joseph [NY-14] - 2/4/2013
Rep Cuellar, Henry [TX-28] - 2/13/2013
Rep Cummings, Elijah E. [MD-7] - 1/22/2013
Rep Davis, Danny K. [IL-7] - 1/22/2013
Rep Davis, Susan A. [CA-53] - 1/22/2013
Rep DeFazio, Peter A. [OR-4] - 2/4/2013
Rep DeGette, Diana [CO-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Delaney, John K. [MD-6] - 1/22/2013
Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [CT-3] - 1/22/2013
Rep DelBene, Suzan K. [WA-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Deutch, Theodore E. [FL-21] - 1/22/2013
Rep Dingell, John D. [MI-12] - 1/22/2013
Rep Doggett, Lloyd [TX-35] - 1/22/2013
Rep Doyle, Michael F. [PA-14] - 1/22/2013
Rep Duckworth, Tammy [IL-8] - 1/22/2013
Rep Edwards, Donna F. [MD-4] - 1/22/2013
Rep Ellison, Keith [MN-5] - 1/22/2013
Rep Engel, Eliot L. [NY-16] - 1/22/2013
Rep Enyart, William L. [IL-12] - 1/22/2013
Rep Eshoo, Anna G. [CA-18] - 1/22/2013
Rep Esty, Elizabeth H. [CT-5] - 1/22/2013
Rep Faleomavaega, Eni F. H. [AS] - 1/22/2013
Rep Farr, Sam [CA-20] - 1/22/2013
Rep Fattah, Chaka [PA-2] - 1/22/2013
Rep Foster, Bill [IL-11] - 1/22/2013
Rep Frankel, Lois [FL-22] - 1/22/2013
Rep Fudge, Marcia L. [OH-11] - 1/22/2013
Rep Gabbard, Tulsi [HI-2] - 1/22/2013
Rep Gallego, Pete P. [TX-23] - 2/12/2013
Rep Garamendi, John [CA-3] - 2/6/2013
Rep Garcia, Joe [FL-26] - 1/22/2013
Rep Grayson, Alan [FL-9] - 2/6/2013
Rep Green, Al [TX-9] - 2/4/2013
Rep Green, Gene [TX-29] - 2/4/2013
Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-3] - 1/22/2013
Rep Gutierrez, Luis V. [IL-4] - 2/12/2013
Rep Hahn, Janice [CA-44] - 1/22/2013
Rep Hanabusa, Colleen W. [HI-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Hastings, Alcee L. [FL-20] - 1/22/2013
Rep Heck, Denny [WA-10] - 1/22/2013
Rep Higgins, Brian [NY-26] - 1/22/2013
Rep Himes, James A. [CT-4] - 1/22/2013
Rep Hinojosa, Ruben [TX-15] - 1/22/2013
Rep Holt, Rush [NJ-12] - 1/22/2013
Rep Honda, Michael M. [CA-17] - 1/22/2013
Rep Horsford, Steven A. [NV-4] - 1/22/2013
Rep Hoyer, Steny H. [MD-5] - 2/4/2013
Rep Huffman, Jared [CA-2] - 1/22/2013
Rep Israel, Steve [NY-3] - 2/4/2013
Rep Jackson Lee, Sheila [TX-18] - 1/22/2013
Rep Jeffries, Hakeem S. [NY-8] - 1/22/2013
Rep Johnson, Eddie Bernice [TX-30] - 1/22/2013
Rep Johnson, Henry C. "Hank," Jr. [GA-4] - 1/22/2013
Rep Kaptur, Marcy [OH-9] - 1/22/2013
Rep Keating, William R. [MA-9] - 2/4/2013
Rep Kennedy, Joseph P. III [MA-4] - 2/4/2013
Rep Kildee, Daniel T [MI-5] - 1/22/2013
Rep Kilmer, Derek [WA-6] - 1/22/2013
Rep Kind, Ron [WI-3] - 1/23/2013
Rep Kirkpatrick, Ann [AZ-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Kuster, Ann M. [NH-2] - 1/22/2013
Rep Langevin, James R. [RI-2] - 1/22/2013
Rep Larsen, Rick [WA-2] - 1/22/2013
Rep Larson, John B. [CT-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-13] - 1/22/2013
Rep Levin, Sander M. [MI-9] - 1/22/2013
Rep Lewis, John [GA-5] - 1/22/2013
Rep Loebsack, David [IA-2] - 1/22/2013
Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA-19] - 1/22/2013
Rep Lowenthal, Alan S. [CA-47] - 1/22/2013
Rep Lowey, Nita M. [NY-17] - 1/22/2013
Rep Lujan Grisham, Michelle [NM-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Lujan, Ben Ray [NM-3] - 1/22/2013
Rep Lynch, Stephen F. [MA-8] - 1/22/2013
Rep Maffei, Daniel B. [NY-24] - 1/22/2013
Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. [NY-12] - 1/22/2013
Rep Maloney, Sean Patrick [NY-18] - 2/6/2013
Rep Markey, Edward J. [MA-5] - 1/22/2013
Rep Matsui, Doris O. [CA-6] - 1/22/2013
Rep McCarthy, Carolyn [NY-4] - 1/22/2013
Rep McCollum, Betty [MN-4] - 1/22/2013
Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] - 1/23/2013
Rep McGovern, James P. [MA-2] - 1/22/2013
Rep McNerney, Jerry [CA-9] - 1/22/2013
Rep Meeks, Gregory W. [NY-5] - 1/22/2013
Rep Meng, Grace [NY-6] - 1/22/2013
Rep Michaud, Michael H. [ME-2] - 1/22/2013
Rep Miller, George [CA-11] - 1/22/2013
Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 1/22/2013
Rep Murphy, Patrick [FL-18] - 1/22/2013
Rep Nadler, Jerrold [NY-10] - 1/22/2013
Rep Napolitano, Grace F. [CA-32] - 1/22/2013
Rep Neal, Richard E. [MA-1] - 2/12/2013
Rep Negrete McLeod, Gloria [CA-35] - 1/22/2013
Rep Nolan, Richard M. [MN-8] - 1/22/2013
Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [DC] - 1/22/2013
Rep O'Rourke, Beto [TX-16] - 1/22/2013
Rep Owens, William L. [NY-21] - 1/22/2013
Rep Pallone, Frank, Jr. [NJ-6] - 1/22/2013
Rep Pascrell, Bill, Jr. [NJ-9] - 1/22/2013
Rep Pastor, Ed [AZ-7] - 2/5/2013
Rep Payne, Donald M., Jr. [NJ-10] - 2/4/2013
Rep Pelosi, Nancy [CA-12] - 1/23/2013
Rep Perlmutter, Ed [CO-7] - 2/12/2013
Rep Peters, Gary C. [MI-14] - 1/22/2013
Rep Peters, Scott H. [CA-52] - 2/4/2013
Rep Pierluisi, Pedro R. [PR] - 1/22/2013
Rep Pingree, Chellie [ME-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Pocan, Mark [WI-2] - 1/22/2013
Rep Polis, Jared [CO-2] - 2/6/2013
Rep Price, David E. [NC-4] - 1/22/2013
Rep Quigley, Mike [IL-5] - 1/22/2013
Rep Rahall, Nick J., II [WV-3] - 2/12/2013
Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-13] - 1/22/2013
Rep Richmond, Cedric L. [LA-2] - 2/5/2013
Rep Roybal-Allard, Lucille [CA-40] - 1/22/2013
Rep Ruiz, Raul [CA-36] - 2/13/2013
Rep Ruppersberger, C. A. Dutch [MD-2] - 1/22/2013
Rep Rush, Bobby L. [IL-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Ryan, Tim [OH-13] - 2/4/2013
Rep Sablan, Gregorio Kilili Camacho [MP] - 1/22/2013
Rep Sanchez, Linda T. [CA-38] - 1/22/2013
Rep Sanchez, Loretta [CA-46] - 1/22/2013
Rep Sarbanes, John P. [MD-3] - 1/22/2013
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] - 1/22/2013
Rep Schiff, Adam B. [CA-28] - 1/22/2013
Rep Schneider, Bradley S. [IL-10] - 1/22/2013
Rep Schrader, Kurt [OR-5] - 1/22/2013
Rep Schwartz, Allyson Y. [PA-13] - 1/22/2013
Rep Scott, David [GA-13] - 2/13/2013
Rep Scott, Robert C. "Bobby" [VA-3] - 2/4/2013
Rep Serrano, Jose E. [NY-15] - 1/22/2013
Rep Sewell, Terri A. [AL-7] - 1/22/2013
Rep Shea-Porter, Carol [NH-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-30] - 1/22/2013
Rep Sinema, Kyrsten [AZ-9] - 1/22/2013
Rep Sires, Albio [NJ-8] - 1/22/2013
Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [NY-25] - 1/22/2013
Rep Smith, Adam [WA-9] - 1/22/2013
Rep Speier, Jackie [CA-14] - 1/22/2013
Rep Swalwell, Eric [CA-15] - 1/23/2013
Rep Takano, Mark [CA-41] - 1/22/2013
Rep Thompson, Bennie G. [MS-2] - 2/12/2013
Rep Thompson, Mike [CA-5] - 2/12/2013
Rep Tierney, John F. [MA-6] - 2/4/2013
Rep Titus, Dina [NV-1] - 1/22/2013
Rep Tonko, Paul [NY-20] - 2/4/2013
Rep Tsongas, Niki [MA-3] - 1/22/2013
Rep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8] - 1/22/2013
Rep Vargas, Juan [CA-51] - 1/22/2013
Rep Veasey, Marc A. [TX-33] - 2/12/2013
Rep Vela, Filemon [TX-34] - 2/13/2013
Rep Velazquez, Nydia M. [NY-7] - 1/22/2013
Rep Visclosky, Peter J. [IN-1] - 2/13/2013
Rep Walz, Timothy J. [MN-1] - 2/12/2013
Rep Wasserman Schultz, Debbie [FL-23] - 1/22/2013
Rep Waters, Maxine [CA-43] - 1/22/2013
Rep Watt, Melvin L. [NC-12] - 1/23/2013
Rep Waxman, Henry A. [CA-33] - 1/22/2013
Rep Welch, Peter [VT] - 1/22/2013
Rep Wilson, Frederica S. [FL-24] - 1/22/2013
Rep Yarmuth, John A. [KY-3] - 1/22/2013

Email addresses: click here or you can click here or here

Senate:

Sen Ayotte, Kelly [NH] - 1/22/2013
Sen Baldwin, Tammy [WI] - 1/28/2013
Sen Baucus, Max [MT] - 1/24/2013
Sen Begich, Mark [AK] - 1/23/2013
Sen Bennet, Michael F. [CO] - 1/22/2013
Sen Blumenthal, Richard [CT] - 1/28/2013
Sen Boxer, Barbara [CA] - 2/4/2013
Sen Brown, Sherrod [OH] - 1/28/2013
Sen Cantwell, Maria [WA] - 1/22/2013
Sen Cardin, Benjamin L. [MD] - 1/23/2013
Sen Carper, Thomas R. [DE] - 1/31/2013
Sen Casey, Robert P., Jr. [PA] - 1/22/2013
Sen Collins, Susan M. [ME] - 1/22/2013
Sen Coons, Christopher A. [DE] - 1/22/2013
Sen Cowan, William M. "Mo" [MA] - 2/7/2013
Sen Crapo, Mike [ID] - 1/22/2013
Sen Donnelly, Joe [IN] - 1/29/2013
Sen Durbin, Richard [IL] - 1/22/2013
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA] - 1/23/2013
Sen Franken, Al [MN] - 1/23/2013
Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [NY] - 1/28/2013
Sen Hagan, Kay [NC] - 1/23/2013
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 1/28/2013
Sen Heinrich, Martin [NM] - 1/28/2013
Sen Heitkamp, Heidi [ND] - 1/24/2013
Sen Heller, Dean [NV] - 1/31/2013
Sen Hirono, Mazie K. [HI] - 1/28/2013
Sen Johnson, Tim [SD] - 1/30/2013
Sen Kaine, Tim [VA] - 1/29/2013
Sen King, Angus S. Jr. [ME] - 1/23/2013
Sen Kirk, Mark Steven [IL] - 1/22/2013
Sen Klobuchar, Amy [MN] - 1/22/2013
Sen Landrieu, Mary L. [LA] - 1/28/2013
Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] - 1/28/2013
Sen Levin, Carl [MI] - 1/28/2013
Sen Manchin, Joe, III [WV] - 1/28/2013
Sen McCaskill, Claire [MO] - 1/22/2013
Sen Menendez, Robert [NJ] - 1/28/2013
Sen Merkley, Jeff [OR] - 1/28/2013
Sen Mikulski, Barbara A. [MD] - 1/22/2013
Sen Moran, Jerry [KS] - 1/29/2013
Sen Murkowski, Lisa [AK] - 1/22/2013
Sen Murphy, Christopher S. [CT] - 1/29/2013
Sen Murray, Patty [WA] - 1/22/2013
Sen Nelson, Bill [FL] - 1/31/2013
Sen Pryor, Mark L. [AR] - 1/24/2013
Sen Reed, Jack [RI] - 1/23/2013
Sen Reid, Harry [NV] - 1/28/2013
Sen Rockefeller, John D., IV [WV] - 1/28/2013
Sen Sanders, Bernard [VT] - 1/28/2013
Sen Schatz, Brian [HI] - 1/31/2013
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY] - 1/28/2013
Sen Shaheen, Jeanne [NH] - 1/22/2013
Sen Stabenow, Debbie [MI] - 1/24/2013
Sen Tester, Jon [MT] - 1/23/2013
Sen Udall, Mark [CO] - 1/22/2013
Sen Udall, Tom [NM] - 1/23/2013
Sen Warner, Mark R. [VA] - 1/28/2013
Sen Warren, Elizabeth [MA] - 1/23/2013
Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [RI] - 1/23/2013
Sen Wyden, Ron [OR] - 1/23/2013

Senate contacts:click here

The lobbyists? That's us. Let's tell them our disgust toward VAWA and that it is either made male friendly or scrapped altogether. S.47 is going to be voted on this week so let them know ASAP.

Monday, February 11, 2013

VAWA vote today at 5pm est

From SAVE Services:

SAVE has just issued a report showing many of the programs funded under S. 47, the Violence Against Women Act, place victims at risk of continued abuse and even death. Restraining orders, mandatory arrest, and aggressive prosecution policies are all found to be increasing partner violence, according to the research summary.

The report can be viewed here.

For example, VAWA funds the enforcement of restraining orders, but they are widely believed to be ineffective in curbing abuse. A review of homicide-suicides in North Carolina revealed the issuance of a restraining order was the most common trigger for such tragedies, present in 41% of such incidents.

The SAVE report terms the continued taxpayer funding of these harmful policies as "A triumph of ideology over science and common-sense."

Sounds crazy? Call your Senators today 1-866-220-0044. Tell them that S. 47 would be a deadly proposition for many.

Please act now....voting on S. 47 is expected to begin at 5pm ET on Monday!

teri

Teri Stoddard, Program Director

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments
www.saveservices.org


Let's defeat this now. If you don't know who your Senators are click here to find out. If you are man who hates being discriminated against then help us defeat VAWA. VAWA is misandric and it has to go.

Thursday, February 7, 2013

Let's stop VAWA in the Senate

From SAVE Services:

No Time to Spare, Show your Senators You Care!

Dear (Contact First Name),

The Senate is expected to vote on VAWA today. Let's use these last moments to express our views to our lawmakers:click here

You can also find your senators here.

If you don't call, they'll never know what you want.

teri

Teri Stoddard, Program Director
Stop Abusive and Violent Environments
www.saveservices.org


If we can get VAWA aka S.47 killed in the Senate then we won't have to concern ourselves over it anymore. If it passes and goes to the House then we have to go after it in the House as well. It would be a lot easier to just end it now so send in those emails. The following Senators are also not VAWA friendly: Rand Paul,Mike Lee,Chuck Grassley and Orrin Hatch. Also Senator Mitch McConnell is the ranking Republican member there so it may be a good idea to let him know as well.

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

S.47,VAWA,goes before the Senate soon so voice your displeasure with it now

The Senate vote on VAWA should be very soon.

The Senate is expected to vote on S. 47, a Violence Against Women Act reauthorization bill this week. Unfortunately, S. 47 ignores well-documented problems. VAWA Reform Principals are urgently needed to create a comprehensive and effective VAWA.

DO NOT DELAY!

Please call your Senators TODAY.

Tell them, "Say NO to S. 47 and YES to Real VAWA Reform!"

Call 202-224-3121 or find your senators here: click here

Keep calling!

Thanks!

teri

Teri Stoddard, Program Director
Stop Abusive and Violent Environments
www.saveservices.org


Or you can email them too. Tell your Senators you hate VAWA and don't want it reauthorized. I've also contacted Senator Rand Paul and Senator Mike Lee because they are not big fans of it either especially Lee who flat-out called it "unconstitutional" and voted against VAWA. Can't fault another VAWA hater so way to go,Lee. The Republican leader in the Senate is Senator Mitch McConnell so you may want to let him know too.

Tuesday, January 29, 2013

VAWA is back as S.47,defeat S.47

Today we have an urgent request.

As we told you last week, S. 47, a Violence Against Women Act reauthorization bill has been introduced in the Senate. Unfortunately, S. 47 is very similar to last year's VAWA and ignores well-documented problems.

You'd think that with all of the controversy surrounding VAWA, the Senate would afford time for discussion and the possible addition of amendments. But this may not be the case! Word is that it may skip the Judicial Committee and go straight to the floor for a vote!

We believe that these VAWA Reform Principals are vital and urgently needed to create a comprehensive and effective VAWA: click here

Our urgent request: Please call your Senators RIGHT NOW. Tell them, "Say NO to S. 47 and YES to Real VAWA Reform!"

Find your senators here.

Let's show them what we're made of. Use those phones!

Thanks!

teri

Teri Stoddard, Program Directora
Stop Abusive and Violent Environments
www.saveservices.org

P.S. Please help us grow our efforts. And share this e-lert with a friend.


Or you can email them. Looks like they're trying an old game on a new Senate hoping to get their way of putting the burden upon men even more but we've got to tell them it won't work we're not going to take it anymore.