Republicans want to turn rape victims into criminals

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Republicans just can't stop talking about rape, can they? Here's the latest:

A Republican lawmaker in New Mexico introduced a bill on Wednesday that would legally require victims of rape to carry their pregnancies to term in order to use the fetus as evidence for a sexual assault trial. 

House Bill 206, introduced by state Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R), would charge a rape victim who ended her pregnancy with a third-degree felony for "tampering with evidence."

"Tampering with evidence shall include procuring or facilitating an abortion, or compelling or coercing another to obtain an abortion, of a fetus that is the result of criminal sexual penetration or incest with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime," the bill says. 

That's right, if you're raped and get an abortion, which of course is a constitutional right, Republicans want to throw the book at you, make you the criminal.

Crazy? Yes, but really not much of a stretch for Republicans.

Tell me again how they're not waging war on women?

New polls: Tight races in North Carolina and New Mexico

By Richard K. Barry

PPP is reporting a post-DNC North Carolina poll that is virtually unchanged from last week. It shows Barack Obama ahead by a margin of 49% to 48%, which is little different than last week's 48-48 tie. 

In responding to why there was no bounce for Obama, they write this:

North Carolina voters have simply proven to be pretty intractable. We have polled an Obama/Romney match up in the state 25 times since November of 2010. Obama and Romney have been within 3 points of each other 24 out of those 25 times. Sometimes Obama's up by a little and sometimes Romney's up by a little but it's never outside the margin of error.

They conclude their report with the observation that  "North Carolina's been a swing state from the start and it looks like it will be a swing state to the end."

PPP surveyed 1,087 likely North Carolina voters from September 7-9. The margin of error for the survey is +/-3.0 percentage points. 

In New Mexico, where it has been assumed Obama is in a good position to take the state, things are tighter than some would have thought.

An Albuquerque Journal poll has the president ahead of Romney by only 5 points, 45% to 40%. Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate, is at 7% in the poll:

"When we look at the other polls that have come out over the last number of months, this race seems to be narrowing in New Mexico," said Journal pollster Brian Sanderoff.

Other recent surveys of the presidential contest in New Mexico by national polling firms found Obama leading Romney by as much as 13 percentage points, causing some political analysts to suggest New Mexico would break in Obama's favor without much of a campaign in the state.

Sanderoff said the Journal Poll indicates a notable shift in Obama's strength here. "Most pundits categorized New Mexico as 'lean Democrat,' but we might be moving back to battleground status," Sanderoff said.

You see, you can't take anything for granted.

The Journal poll was conducted by Research & Polling Inc. of Albuquerque from September 3-6. The sample is based on land-line and cellphone interviews with 667 likely voters across the state. The margin of error is +/-3.8 percentage points.

(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)

Big day for elections on June 5

By Richard K. Barry

Tomorrow is a big day for political junkies with five of the remaining six presidential primaries scheduled: California, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, and South Dakota. (Utah goes on June 26, if you were wondering). Of course, the match-up for the presidency is set, but a number of other very important races are to be decided, which, as Daily Kos points out, will select 73 House and four Senate nominees.

Senate primaries are in California, Montana, New Mexico, and New Jersey.

In Montana, Jon Tester, Democratic incumbent Senator, will be taking on Republican challenger Denny Rehberg in the fall, though they'll have to go through the motions on Tuesday. In New Jersey, Democratic incumbent Bob Menendez is running unopposed for the nomination. There is a four-way race to see which Republican, probably, gets to lose to Menendez in November. 

Give 'em hell, Dianne!

California has an interesting new process to determine Senate candidates, called a "blanket primary," which works like this:

In the primary election on June 5, voters may vote for any candidate listed, or write-in any other candidate, regardless of the candidate's party affiliation. The top two finishers — from all parties combined — will advance to the general election in November, even if a candidate manages to receive a majority of the votes cast in the June primary.

It would appear that incumbent Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein is all but certain to make it through the primary and quite likely the general. Recent polling has Feinstein at 51% for the primary with none of the other 24 with more than 2%. Because I know you care, crazy birther Orly Taitz is one of the challengers. It's true that 30% are undecided, but I doubt that will matter.

Democratic Senator Jeff Bingaman is not running for re-election in New Mexico. The Republican candidates are Greg Sowards and Heather Wilson, and the Democratic candidates are Hector Balderas and Rep. Martin Heinrich.

For what it's worth, there seems to be a consensus from pollsters that California's Senate seat is a safe hold for Democrats in November, New Jersey's is a likely Democratic hold, and New Mexico's is anywhere from "leans Democratic" to a toss-up, while everyone thinks Montana is a toss-up.

In addition to California, Montana, New Mexico, and New Jersey, Iowa and South Dakota have U.S. House of Representatives primaries on June 5. I won't take on the task of going through all of those at the moment.

And then there's the election in Wisconsin:

Two statewide elections and four state senate elections will determine the balance of power in what arguably has been the epicenter of the Republican revolution that was visited upon the country after the 2010 elections. Democrats are working hard to end the political career of one of the most visible figures of that revolution, while Republicans are expending tremendous energy in preserving his career.

There's a lot going on. Just because we know what the top of the ticket looks like doesn't mean there isn't reason to tune in.

(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)

Tea Party racism, example #8,334

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Democrat Ben Luján represents New Mexico's 3rd Congressional District, basically the northern half of the state. He was in Farmington on Tuesday, a conservative enclave up in the northwest, visiting non-profit groups, when he was accosted by Teabaggers. Most it was the usual right-wing bullshit, but some of it was viciously racist:

Darrel Clark of Farmington said he came for "a chance to see the elusive representative."

"He needs to get out of politics and make room for an American," Clark said.

Luján is a lifelong New Mexican. Clark later explained that he meant an "American patriot."

Uh-huh. Sure. And by "American patriot" he meant a white Teabagger. Certainly not someone the name Luján, a person of color.

Now, okay, this was just one guy. But do you really think he was alone in thinking that? Do you really think he was the lone exception? Please.

As for Luján, as ThinkProgress notes, he "was born in Santa Fe, has lived in the U.S. all his life, and is the son of a public school administrator and the speaker of New Mexico's state House of Representatives.

Sounds awfully American to me. Not that that matters to the racists who make up a lot more of the Tea Party "movement" than its members and apologists would like us to think.

Dumb and dumberer

By Carl

I had a feeling this might happen:

Weeks before President-elect Barack Obama chose New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson to head the Commerce Department, a small group of volunteers with ethics, tax and investigative expertise -- most of them lawyers -- scoured his background looking for embarrassing facts or political problems.

[...]Sources within the transition and the Justice Department said that Richardson had played down the importance of the probe and did not reveal that his office and staff could be at risk. The seriousness of the matter became apparent after the FBI began its own background check on Dec. 2. But Richardson's longtime aides defended his disclosures, noting that subjects under examination by a grand jury are rarely aware of its secret deliberations.

[...]But a source with the Obama transition said Richardson's disclosures to the team were incomplete.

My first reaction when I heard the BillR was considering taking the Commerce job was "WTF?"

Not that he's a bad choice, but as career moves go, this was a no-brainer: stay governor of New Mexico or go be a minor Cabinet official in the Obama administration, when you had already been UN ambassador and energy secretary?

I'd pick governor in a heartbeat, screw the "pleasure of the president" service stuff.

As well, he would have had to deal with Hillary, whom he knifed in the back at the earliest opportunity. Imagine trying to keep her in front of you for two or four years.

If you're going to accept a plum for beating up your old boss' wife, I would think an assignment as ambassador to a nice tropical island nation that has no extradition treaty with the US would be in order. You're 60. You deserve it. You've earned it.

But Commerce Secretary?

And to think, I gave this moron a contribution for governor!

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)