|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:15 PM August 15th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
I appreciate the leadership by RADAR to mobilize those interested in pressuring our legislators to reform VAWA 2005.
In earlier comments, I understood that only written input to representatives delivered via snail mail or faxes is required to be entered into the Congressional record.
It is a foregone conclusion that VAWA will be re-authorized, possible with very mild and non-binding watered-down language about male victims being eligible for services.
So what is the best strategy to create some official Congressional history of the thousands of pro-reform comments, so that when VAWA 2010 comes up for approval (and even more billions), there will at least be a record of earlier dissent?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:36 PM August 15th, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
"It is a foregone conclusion that VAWA will be re-authorized, possible with very mild and non-binding watered-down language about male victims being eligible for services."
*meaningless* language that will have NO effect on the implementation and enforcement of this legislation -- as would have been obvious long ago to anyone who understands even a little about american matriarchy or the legislative "process" ("No Money? You Very Funny!")
"So what is the best strategy to create some official Congressional history of the thousands of pro-reform comments, so that when VAWA 2010 comes up for approval (and even more billions), there will at least be a record of earlier dissent?"
do you want a "record of dissent" and a few token lobbyist gigs -- along with more years (in reality, an indefinite extension) of INCREASING use of the Act to empower american girls and women, and to disenfranchise boys and men?
the VAWA is just another plank in america's matriarchal platform -- a strategy used by our Mistresses and Masters to consolidate power in the US, and to extend that power around the globe
or do you want to strike the VAWA from the federal codes, and actually have an activist men's movement?
if the former, than just continue with business-as-usual, and ignore anyone who dissents
it's worked GREAT so far, eh boys? LOL!!
Warren's Governor of CA now, isn't he?
:O)
and as for Jack Kammer saying at the Men's National Congress that the movement needs written works supporting the cause -- what galaxy does he inhabit?
in the past year alone i've seen (and posted about) MANY incredible MRA-related writings available on the web or in bookstores
i mean, yikes, there's GREAT stuff everywhere . . . try the extraordinary narrative/companion pieces by Michael Swanwick to Goya's famous "Los Caprichos" illustrations -- absolutely relevant to the rise of matriarchy in the modern West, and deeply illustrative of the predicament of american boys and men
we have PLENTY of ammunition, that ain't the problem . . .
the real problem is well-illustrated in a recent thread over at the SYG forum, called "This Forum: A Waste of Time??"
it provides a succint, if depressing, demonstration of the mental-lockdown, cliqueishness, and alpha-dog detriments of the men's constipati . . . er, movement
someone named Gerard Verhuis from the Netherlands had the effrontery to tell the folks at SYG the truth (that the movement is catatonically passive and lacking leadership) -- and in unfortunately typical fahsion, Gerard was rewarded with a series of ad-hom attacks, combined with people trying very hard to ignore what he wrote
[hand slapping forehead]
same as it ever was!
enjoy another fine day under matriarchy, brothers . . . hey . . . i hear there's a sale on kneepads at walmart!
:O)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:51 PM August 15th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
More extremism and pathetic excuses not to take action.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Luek on 02:10 PM August 16th, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
I just received this reply to my fax about renewing the infamous and misandrous VAWA.
He DOES seem to recognize the obvious fact that men can be and are victims of domestic violence too. Maybe it is a start from the liberating his opinion on domestic violence from the feminist mind lockdown?
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Thank you for contacting me regarding the Violence Against Women Act. I appreciate learning of your concerns and having the opportunity to respond.
Statistics on crimes of violence against women depict a safety problem that some believe may seriously limit the ability of threatened women to function fully in American society. Such crimes often have devastating consequences for these women personally, as well as for their families and society as a whole. In this light, on October 28, 2000 President Clinton signed the Violence Against Women Act of 2000 into law.
I believe one of the many roles of government is to prosecute individuals who violate another individual's rights and to preserve our system of justice. I favor a strong justice system that punishes criminals as a means to deter crime, protect human rights, and safeguard victims from further acts of crime. I look forward to helping fight sexual assault. I believe, more than ever, we must act against sexual exploitation and violence. It deeply concerns me whenever I hear reports that women are stalked, raped, or abused. However, as you point out, women are not always the only victims of domestic violence and I agree that funding for domestic violence should be gender neutral.
With that said, President Bush's total FY2006 request to fund the Violence Against Women Act is $363 million.
Again, thank you for sharing your concerns. Please feel free to contact me again if I can be of further assistance.
Representative Phil Gingrey
11th District, Georgia
Also, you may like to know that you can contact me via email at gingrey.ga@mail.house.gov or my website www.house.gov/gingrey.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:32 PM August 17th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
you just got jived, leuk
it's the daily business of these guys to write ambiguous and tricksy letters like this, that seem to say one thing, but mean another -- i know, i used to write them!
:O)
this slimeball said NOTHING specific, promised nothing specific, just offered you a little "conciliatory political language" to get you off his back and to provide the illusion that your concern has been addressed (when, in fact, it was NEVER considered)
in other words: a rotting red herring
his interest, like the interest of the vast majority of our "leaders," especially those currently infesting washington, is to keep expanding massively and unendingly the "justice system" to hunt down and punish "criminals" (evildoers)
that's how they keep in "business"
those future evildoers -- just like now -- are overwhelmingly going to be BOYS AND MEN -- despite this punk's language about what "should be"
he is a lackey of the matriarchy, and he and his kind will only bring american males further under the boot of Der Mutterland
m.r.a. guys need to learn to read between the lines (and minds), and not be so easily mollified and distracted by such patent, stock political fakeouts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:16 PM August 17th, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:11 PM August 18th, 2005 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps you can add an article to the Wiki with some typical political hack "no content" phrases to watch out for?
Tom P
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:05 PM August 18th, 2005 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps you can add an article to the Wiki with some typical political hack "no content" phrases to watch out for?
Tom P
to wikipedia?
good idea, tom, but sounds like a huge job, and i'm spread kinda thin as it is . . . it's an enormous compendium -- did you have a specific subject-area in mind?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:02 PM August 18th, 2005 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, I was thinking of the MensactivismWiki accessible through the navigation menu, upper left on this site. Start something and maybe it could be added to as you have time and others have experience - it could be very useful in seperating semantically null chaff from actual responses.
Tom P
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:12 PM August 19th, 2005 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, by all means, eliminate the content-free posts in support of the extremists. The MediaWiki engine is straightforward to program.
By the way, Scott Mann stated in his talk that one needs the revert command in MediaWiki to revert to previous versions of posts. However, you can configure MediaWiki to permit only logged in users to edit pages, and allow only the Sysop (or developers) to create new accounts. Just add these handy lines to your LocalSettings.php file:
# customizations
# wgWhiteListEdit = true means only logged in users may edit pages
$wgWhitelistEdit = true;
# Configure who may create new accounts: 0 means no, 1 means yes
$wgWhitelistAccount = array ( 'user' => 0, 'sysop' => 1, 'developer' => 1 );
Just remember not to give out accounts to extremists and whiners!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:18 PM August 20th, 2005 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, by all means, eliminate the content-free posts in support of the extremists. The MediaWiki engine is straightforward to program.
By the way, Scott Mann stated in his talk that one needs the revert command in MediaWiki to revert to previous versions of posts. However, you can configure MediaWiki to permit only logged in users to edit pages, and allow only the Sysop (or developers) to create new accounts. Just add these handy lines to your LocalSettings.php file:
# customizations
# wgWhiteListEdit = true means only logged in users may edit pages
$wgWhitelistEdit = true;
# Configure who may create new accounts: 0 means no, 1 means yes
$wgWhitelistAccount = array ( 'user' => 0, 'sysop' => 1, 'developer' => 1 );
Just remember not to give out accounts to extremists and whiners!
zeig heil, baby!
ps who is scott mann?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:20 PM August 20th, 2005 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
He must have meant Scott Garman. In any case,
the wiki code was informative and helpful, unlike
the childish and extremist drivel we've seen here advising MRAs not to "waste their time" with the legislature.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:33 PM August 20th, 2005 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
"Actually, I was thinking of the MensactivismWiki accessible through the navigation menu, upper left on this site."
oh, didnt know the site had a "wiki"
i don't wander around here much...
"Start something and maybe it could be added to as you have time and others have experience - it could be very useful in seperating semantically null chaff from actual responses.
Tom P"
ok i getcha now
unfortunately, there are no set "guidelines" i could formulate to strip the bullshit from politi-speak
each example of propaganda is slightly different, and the only way to learn to de-spin them is to read (and, in my case, write) a shitload of them
eventually, especially in correspondence as insincere and predictable as from congress-types, one just glazes over the canned language and focuses on the single line, perhaps two, that actually inform the reader as to the author's real intentions (in this case, to seem sympathetic, to seem to offer support, but in fact to do absolutely nothing, "see ya later sucker")
. . . so, not much help on this one, sorry -- and like i said, i don't think reliance and focus on the govt to address men's issues is a productive use of time and resources (both of which are in v short supply)
their job is to keep us from HAVING a movement, not to facilitate it, LOL!
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Congress reconvenes after Labor Day, a mere three weeks from now. Since the Violence Against Women Act expires September 30th, it's likely that the 2005 reauthorization bill will be one of the first things to be considered by Congress once they're back in session.