GOP Bill Protects the Abusers of Women

       For many of my regular readers, let's be honest-you know me by now. I am a proud partisan Obama Democrat who doesn't make the slightest bones about it. Call me a partisan Democrat my response to you is "flattery will get you everywhere, sir."

      Now, to be sure some may think the title of this blog a little visceral. I mean is it really nice to go around saying I hate Republicans? Can't I just be like David Brooks and say I disagree with them on certain matters of policy and I intend to do this very agreeably?

     No. And if you want the ideology behind Diary of a Republican Hater, it is largely this: I am the anti David Brooks. I'm not a soft, sensible Centrist. I take these issues facing my country very seriously.  The modern GOP has policy positions that I don't understand how any decent person can hold. Like letting poor people die rather than raise some rich fat cats taxes by a couple of dollars.

    I don't think that all individual Republican citizens are bad people. I think Benjamin Cole is a nice guy and have written a very favorable post about his recent piece at Marcus Nunes. But the other day he actually suggested that euthanasia should be encouraged for those over 80. I was rather incredulous about this and he asked me what my suggestion was as their care costs $.09 cents for every dollar. My answer was that assuming his numbers were accurate you pay the $.09 cents without a peep of protest assuming you are not wholly a perverse moral degenerate.

    Here is the latest from the GOP that makes me say I hate the Republican party. The congressional Republicans have drafted a bill to protect the rights of the abusers of women. How can I you feel anything but hate for a philosophy that gets you here where this is even thinkable? Maybe you can but I can't and to me it's not even worth trying.

  When you have people who actually have empathy for those who hurt women, I'm sorry, being a nice David Brooks Democrat doesn't work.

   "The GOP-led House’s version of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) would not only strip away Senate-passed protections for undocumented, LGBT, and Native American victims, it also contains a dangerous provision that violates an undocumented victim’s confidentiality by allowing immigration officials to speak with, and ask for evidence from, his or her abuser."

   "Visas offered to undocumented victims of domestic violence are called “U Visas” and the Senate version of the bill expanded the number of U Visas offered to victims. The House bill not only strips out the additional visas, it also contains a new provision enabling government officials to inform “the accused” that their victim blew the whistle on their abuse:

During the adjudication of each petition under this paragraph, an investigative officer from a local service center of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services shall conduct an in-person interview of the alien who filed the petition. The investigative officer may also gather other evidence and interview other witnesses, including the accused United States citizen or lawful permanent resident, if they consent to be interviewed.

     "Undocumented victims already fear calling the police because they risk deportation in doing so. This portion of the bill adds on another level of fear by alerting their abusers that they’ve sought help — under current law, immigrant victims enjoy a right to confidentiality that would be seriously undermined by this bill. Allowing perpetrators of domestic violence to play any role in the deportation or protection of their victims is a cruel fate, but alerting an abuser to a victim’s complaint adds yet another level of emotional abuse on top of the physical abuse that the victim already faces."

       http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/05/04/478442/house-gop-would-let-domestic-abusers-know-their-victims-called-for-help/

     So if you want someone to tell you that the House Republicans are decent Americans who are trying to do the right thing for America, you are talking to the wrong guy. David Brooks doesn't work here. There are some positions that it is unreasonable to have a reasonable armchair discussion about.