Are the “sex lives” of our teens any business of presidential hopefuls?  Should the Plan B pill, also known as the “morning after” pill or whether we give our daughters the vaccine that prevents cervical cancer even be on the list of debate topics?

That’s what I’m writing about this week at my Spin Cycle column at Babble Voices.  Let me know what you think!

The “new, old” Obama was on display this week in Kansas, invoking the name of another populist president, Theodore Roosevelt:

“I’m here in Kansas to reaffirm my deep conviction that we’re greater together than we are on our own. I believe that this country succeeds when everyone gets a fair shot, when everyone does their fair share, when everyone plays by the same rules. These aren’t Democratic values or Republican values. These aren’t 1% values or 99% values. They’re American values. And we have to reclaim them.”

He’s clearly in full rallying-the-base mode with this kind of speech and he’s going to need every last vote from that group to win in 2012.  Observers are saying this recent speech is reminiscent in tone of the one he made at the Democratic National Convention in 2004, when he was just a mere blip on the political radar as Illinois State Senator Obama:

“Now even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us — the spin masters, the negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of ‘anything goes.’ Well, I say to them tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America — there is the United States of America. There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America — there’s the United States of America.

The pundits, the pundits like to slice-and-dice our country into Red States and Blue States; Red States for Republicans, Blue States for Democrats. But I’ve got news for them, too. We worship an “awesome God” in the Blue States, and we don’t like federal agents poking around in our libraries in the Red States. We coach Little League in the Blue States and yes, we’ve got some gay friends in the Red States. There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and there are patriots who supported the war in Iraq. We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America.”

So as a Democrat, I should be happy and excited that the President has gotten his political groove back, right?  Sadly, while his public appearances are great, there are some other headlines that suggest that the President doesn’t know which side his political bread is buttered on.

Two announcements from the administration suggest that the President’s 2012 campaign team has started a strategy of pandering to the conservatives.  First, a recommendation by the Food and Drug Administration to allow the contraceptive Plan B to be sold over the counter to all customers was shot down by Kathleen Sebelius, the Secretary of Health and Human Services.  News reports say that’s the first time that has ever happened.  Ever.

The FDA’s recommendation would have allowed teens under 18 to have access to what’s often called the “morning after” pill without a prescription, based on the research provided to the FDA.  According to a post at RH Reality Check:

[The Center for Drug Evaluation and Research] carefully considered whether younger females were able to understand how to use Plan B One-Step.  Based on the information submitted to the agency, CDER determined that the product was safe and effective in adolescent females, that adolescent females understood the product was not for routine use, and that the product would not protect them against sexually transmitted diseases. Additionally, the data supported a finding that adolescent females could use Plan B One-Step properly without the intervention of a health care provider.  [Emphasis added.]

As if that story about what seems to be a wavering commitment to reproductive rights isn’t enough to make me question what’s going on in those strategy sessions at the White House, there are now news reports that the Obama administration has launched a high profile investigation into food stamp fraud just as 2012 is upon us.    Banking fraud and Wall Street fraud that caused our economy to tank in 2008?  No investigation.  Possible wrongdoing by hungry Americans?  That’s SOOO much more important to fixing economy, isn’t it.

So in addition to populist-sounding speeches, the White House apparently has decided that the way to win re-election is to go on the attack against pregnant teens and food- stamp recipients.  Maybe polling shows those demographics don’t vote much, so the administration can ignore promises made in the past in order to woo some conservative voters who don’t like reproductive rights or Americans who need financial assistance.

So I have to ask — which Barack Obama is running for president?  The one who wants to lift all boats and make us a better nation by bringing us together and advocating policies that will benefit us all?  Or the one who seemingly is directing his administration to keep some conservatives happy?

Don’t get me wrong.  I don’t want any of the Republican candidates to become president in 2012.  But President Obama should be careful about playing with policy to allay conservative fears about teen sex or poor people on food stamps.   If he’s not careful, he’ll start alienating those who fervently supported him and campaigned for him four years ago.  He’s already slipping in his support numbers from that group.  If he doesn’t want to move back to Chicago until 2016, he really can’t afford to be seen as abandoning the philosophies of his base in favor of a handful of red votes.

Image via barackobama.com

via iStock Photo/Natalie Ozog

How would you feel if your doctor declared, “No more birth control for you!”  Or what if your life was at risk because you had an ectopic pregnancy and doctors wouldn’t operate on you for fear of being charged with murder?

Openly talking about and seeking treatment for our reproductive health with our doctors and then making decisions that we each individually decide are right for us based on that medical advice is something that pretty much every woman in America has done at one time or another.  We rely especially on our OB/GYNs as we navigate the variety of medical issues that arise over our reproductive lifetimes.

But if some people in Mississippi get their way this week, those decisions would be made by the state and some could become criminal acts.

On November 8, if the voters of Mississippi approve Initiative 26, which is also being called the “personhood amendment,” it would be the first state to alter its constitution to give full legal rights that its citizens currently have to fertilized human eggs at the moment of conception.

The language of the amendment may seem simple, but the implications for women and their health goes way beyond choosing sides in one of the hottest political debates in America.  Initiative 26 states:

“Should the term person be defined to include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the equivalent thereof?”

Proponents of the effort claim that passage of the amendment is merely the next logical step in their efforts to ban abortions to protect unborn children.  But the actual consequences of such a constitutional provision could eventually mean that various common forms of birth control, like the IUD, the morning-after pill and, possibly birth control pills, would be viewed as forms of abortion and could be outlawed.

Are you ready for that?

Reasonable people can differ on whether they support a woman’s right to an abortion or under what circumstances they should be allowed.  But women still have a constitutionally protected right to have an abortion, even though some state laws and Supreme Court opinions since Roe v. Wade, which was decided in 1973, have restricted the circumstances under which they can occur.  If Mississippi passes Initiative 26, not only would all abortions be outlawed in that state, even in the cases of rape, incest or the life of the mother, certain types of birth control could be outlawed, procedures related to ectopic pregnancies – a potentially life-threatening condition where a fertilized egg implants itself in a woman’s fallopian tubes rather than in the uterus – could be forbidden, and, if taken to its logical conclusion, women could potentially face criminal prosecution if someone deems their miscarriage as suspect.

The Mississippi State Medical Association has gone on the record as opposing the initiative because of the myriad issues it would present for women’s health, including a doctor’s ability to decide what’s in the best medical interests of his or her patient, and whether doctors could be charged with murder or wrongful death by performing certain, regular medical procedures.

Think that some of the darker scenarios sound extreme?  Do you believe that we would never live in an America where women’s lives would be considered less valuable than that of a zygote?

Obviously, each one of us can have different views on abortion, the Mississippi initiative, and the current political climate promoting it, as well as similar legislative efforts pending in several other states.  But with the potential passage of a state constitutional amendment that is as seemingly extreme as Initiative 26, I can’t help but remember the fictional world of The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood, a novel that explored a future dystopian world where women’s choices about having and raising children were stripped from them and made by the

Odds are that even with a U.S. Supreme Court majority that’s not a friend to Roe v. Wade, if the Mississippi amendment is approved by voters, ultimately it would be ruled unconstitutional.  But that would still give Mississippi years to pass and enforce laws needed to implement the constitutional amendment that could, for a period of time, force hospitals to turn away women who are miscarrying, criminalize certain birth control methods, and suspend fertility treatments.

Stranger things have happened.  And we live in a country where extreme views are trumping rational thought more each day.  Keep a close on eye Mississippi, because of the Initiative 26 folks win, they’ll be headed to your state next.

What are women voters thinking about for the 2012 election — when they’re not being bombarded by stories about Herman Cain’s lady troubles or Rick Perry’s very own Howard Dean moment?  It shouldn’t come as a surprise that they’re focused on other more important things.  So BlogHer asked me to talk to some impressive women from around the web in a new series they are featuring called “Why I’m Political” to find out what’s on their minds and what prompted them to stick their toes into the sometimes murky waters of writing political essays.

As some of you may know (I hope you know), I recently wrote a book called Mothers of Intention: How Women and Social Media are Revolutionizing Politics in America, which explores the rise of women’s voices online and features essays from over 50 great writers. I’m going to interview some of those terrific contributors again to get their thoughts on what prompted them to take the leap into those sometimes-dangerous waters, and how they’re viewing the 2012 election season.

My first featured contributor is a wonderful writer you may know — Shannon Lowe from Rocks in My Dryer. While she doesn’t do as much blogging now as she used to, Shannon wrote two amazing posts that were included in Mothers of Intention — “Why I’m Pro-Life” and “The Southern Girl’s Guide to Proper Political Discourse: What Your Momma Should’ve Told You.” Shannon’s essay about how her thinking evolved on the issue of abortion is a powerful one, so I wanted to talk with her more about how she came to write it and what she’s thinking about now as we head into the 2012 campaign season:

1. What motivated you to become political and/or go public with your political views? Were you afraid of what your readers would think? In hindsight, would you write these posts again?

I was never a political blogger — I only wrote about politics publicly a handful of times. So yes, it was a bit of a personal leap for me jump straight into the hot topic of abortion. I don’t regret doing it, though. I find it frustrating that there is so much “shouting” over this issue (on both sides). I wanted to speak my piece in a way that was reasoned and calm, and I think I accomplished that. At the time, I received some very kind feedback both from those who agreed and disagreed with me, thanking me for sharing my experience. For all the rancor that can appear in this debate at the public/political level, I think there’s actually room for courteous, respectful dialogue at the more personal level — at least, that’s been my own experience.

2. What are the issues you most focused on now going into the 2012 campaign season? What energizes you? Drives you crazy? What issue do you think is important that the candidates aren’t talking about?

Thankfully, I think most of the candidates are talking about the right issues — like most Americans, I’m focused on economic issues in this election. I’m glad to see candidates tackling the hard questions such as how to offer incentives and freedom to small business owners and other entrepreneurs so that job creators can get back to creating jobs.

3. How do you connect your political views or activism with your role as a mother?

I want my kids to grow up to be adults who are responsible, self-disciplined, and innovative. And honestly, I hope they inherit a government that is also responsible, self-disciplined, and innovative!

Please read the rest of the interview with Shannon over at BlogHer!

Sure, I get to leave the dishes in the sink and the dirty laundry in the hamper today. And it’s great that “some people” (you know who you are!) are going to make me dinner tonight, but on the tenth anniversary of being able to celebrate Mother’s Day as a mother myself, I’ve been thinking of some things about babies and children and motherhood for which I am eternally grateful:

1. The Pill. It’s the 50th anniversary of this amazing medical feat and, in many ways, my life as it is today is a direct result of that miracle. Yes, I think The Pill was a miracle. For me, it wasn’t about being a wild teen or crazy college co-ed who was sowing wild oats and didn’t want to be bothered with responsibility. Ask anyone who knew me in my teen years and they would roll on the floor laughing (their A’s off) at the thought that my name would be used in a sentence with either the word “wild” or “crazy.” Unless I was talking about Steve Martin. But I digress.

The word “dating” didn’t get a lot of use when it came to describing my life then, either. But I did start dating in college and, though I don’t know how I’m ever going to explain this to PunditGirl, I got married the first time when I was 19. Not a good choice for many reasons. But I am thankful every day that in that short, two-year marriage I did not get pregnant. If I’d had a baby at that point in my life, I can only imagine how much harder it would have been to get out of a truly bad situation and what that would have meant for my life — and my child’s life going forward.

2. Roe v. Wade. I came of age in the era just after the Supreme Court ruled that women had a Constitutional right to have an abortion. Don’t think that I wasn’t also grateful for that knowledge every day during my first marriage, even when I was on The Pill, that if I had still gotten pregnant (hey, no birth control works 100 percent of the time), that I had the right not to bring a child into the world when I was in the midst of an abusive relationship. Today, as a woman of a certain age (as I was called recently on Twitter!) looking back, I’m not sure if I ever would have exercised my right to end a pregnancy, but I certainly felt much more in control of my destiny knowing that I had that right.

3. The Women of Newsweek (and so many like them). When some brave, young women filed a gender discrimination lawsuit against Newsweek for not allowing women to be reporters, I was an impressionable 12-year-old (not so much older than PunditGirl is now. YIKES!) I was reminded about their brave act recently when I was asked to moderate a panel with some current Newsweek journalists who wrote about that lawsuit. Without those “women’s libbers” forging the way for me while I was still pondering pre-algebra and just how long I was going to have to wear those darn braces (trust me, they weren’t the fashion statement then as they are today), my ability to major in political science and dream of taking over Tom Brokaw’s job one day wouldn’t even have been on the table. While not directly related to motherhood, their desire for professional lives and their commitment to fight for that was all the proof I needed that it was okay to think about motherhood later. Which was a very good thing for me.

4. Women online. My sisters on Twitter, Facebook, personal blogs and group blogs were there for me after I became what CNN recently called an “older mother.” Being in the ‘burbs with a baby, I felt pretty alone. I’d been in the workplace for over 20 years as a reporter then as a lawyer before I became PunditGirl’s mom. Most of the women I knew were still in the office 60 hours a week. I found myself without a job shortly after we returned from China with our new daughter and I didn’t know any other moms of young children. And I was woefully unschooled then in the ways of play groups and Gymboree. When I started my mom journey, I was unprepared for a lot of things and there were plenty of times when I wished that there was a Xanax in the house, especially when our three-year-old screamed with night terrors and I was afraid someone would hear her and call the police, thinking that only a child who was being beaten could make noises like that.

Thank goodness for the wonderful, amazing women I’ve met online who became my lifeline. All of a sudden, just by reading their stories, I knew I wasn’t the only one. And then I met some. And then I met some more. And they became my friends and they helped me in many ways. (I purposely left out site links to my amazing sisters in social media because inevitably I would have forgotten someone and would not want to hurt anyone’s feelings, especially on Mother’s Day).

Aside from being grateful for these things, I will continue to fight to keep access to effective birth control, abortion and equal pay for equal work so that one ten-year-old girl I know won’t have to worry about them quite as much as I did. I’m hoping she’ll find her own way in the world of women and friendship!

5. And, of course, last, but not least, I’m grateful for “some people.”

Because without them, well, I can’t even imagine that life.

Photo by PunditMom, all rights reserved.

Fortunately, we’ve got some advocates in Washington who are, to paraphrase from the movie A Few Good Men, on that wall for us.  On the Senate floor, Kirsten Gillibrand said this:

“The votes we’re going to have tomorrow — to defund Planned Parenthood, to repeal health care — American women, make no mistake about it, this is an attack on you. It’s an attack on every preventive health service, every safety net, everything that you care about. Whether it’s early childhood education, whether it’s pap smears, whether it’s mammograms, whether it’s pre-natal care when you’re pregnant, that is what their efforts are all about. And you should just know that you have women of the Senate who will stand by you. We have drawn this line in the sand and we will not allow them to cross it. We are your voice in Washington, we are your voice in Congress and we will protect you and the basic safety net and equality that you should expect out of the US government.”

I want her on that wall. I need her and other women in the Senate and in the House of Representatives on that wall — especially with people like Senator Jon Kyl’s who are willing to bend and break the actual facts for their own purposes.

Let’s not forget, Kyl was the one who also wanted to keep maternity benefits out of health insurance plans because he doesn’t need it.  Yup — that’s the kind of Republican party I think some mothers might have a problem with.

You heard me.  If the federal government closes because lawmakers can’t agree on whether women should be allowed to get annual physical exams, contraceptives or cervical cancer screenings, they’ll blame it on us because we want low-income women to have access to important health services.  Both sides in the federal budget fight agree that there is only one sticking point left in this prolonged debate — whether or not to defund Planned Parenthood.

Many politicians on the right claim they’re just standing strong against their belief that there should be no government money for abortion.  But the thing is this — they’re lying.   No federal funds go to Planned Parenthood for abortion, but they want you to believe that so they can shut down the rest of the health services many women receive there. They think that if they say it loud enough and long enough, that if they pound the tables and shake their heads as they roll their eyes on cable news shows, that we’ll believe they’re taking a moral stand about life, even though there isn’t a shred of truth to their budget ruse.

One thing is clear and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (though she will always be Madam Speaker to me) said it best just this week — the GOP is trying to use the budget process to advance its social war on women.

Some of these Republicans are devious, but they aren’t stupid. They know they’re in the process of putting one over on the voters (and the wishy-washy Democrats) for the sake of their long-range social agenda of turning back the clock on women.  They aren’t trying to save unborn babies.  They’re striving to make it harder for women to control their lives, enter the workforce and support their families.  Because they know that if they keep throwing up roadblocks for women, then maybe the little ladies will just give up and stay home with the kids, allowing those jobs to go to men — men like them.

GOP efforts to control women’s lives and bodies are on a dual track.  They’re using substantive legislation and budget battles as a two-pronged approach to advance their war on social values.  Women are the last pawns in this year’s budget showdown and it’s just an artifice for the march by the political right — mostly white men –who want to keep women at home, out of the workforce, and out of the jobs that they think men should have.

The Planned Parenthood red herring isn’t the only evidence of  the GOP assault on women. We’ve seen it in the attack on labor unions and collective bargaining in states like Wisconsin, where police and firefighters — traditionally male jobs — will still be able to bargain collectively, but nurses and teachers — traditionally women’s jobs –  would lose that right. We’ve seen it in the efforts to defeat the Paycheck Fairness Act which would require employers to pay women the same as men for the same job.  And there’s virtually no support for expanding the Family and Medical Leave Act or increased amounts of paid sick leave for workers.  Who usually has to take the time off from work to care for children and lose income because of that?  Women, not men.

Let’s be clear.  Those on the far right of the political spectrum want you to think that the dollars that go to Planned Parenthood for cancer screenings and access to contraception are somehow going to be the downfall of the Republic.   They want us to be convinced that the social fabric of America will unravel if they don’t put a stop to the ability of women to be the final decision makers about their own reproductive lives.  And they’ll do pretty much anything in their power to achieve their goals.

If the Republicans win this budget battle  — if President Obama and the Democrats allow the Republicans to win this — women better start hoarding their Pills, their sponges, and their IUDs, and they’d better have a nest egg for mammograms, Pap smears, and other cancer screening tests.  Because if the Republicans win this war against Planned Parenthood, they’re not going to stop there.

Sadly, the conversation on cable news is this — are the Democrats really going to furlough 800,000 federal workers over a measly $300 million for Planned Parenthood?  The underlying suggestion is unmistakable that a few prescriptions for birth control pills and some Pap screenings shouldn’t shut the government down and if Democrats allow that, they’re being irresponsible.  The thing they’re missing is this — next year, it will be something else.  If Planned Parenthood is gone, then the next GOP “budget” chip will be funding for children –Congressman Paul Ryan has already made it clear that’s the target he has his eye on as the chair of the House Budget Committee.  And they will keep chipping away at the programs that benefit women and children until their social agenda has been fulfilled.

I’m not a particularly religious person, but I do believe there’s a special place in hell for those who lie and create false constructs that put women’s lives at risk to achieve their unstated, but unmistakable, goals.

Morning after morning, I hear reports about those who want to cut funds for access to contraception and screenings for breast and cervical cancer that American women of all political persuasions get from Planned Parenthood. Conservatives protest the use of pre-tax dollars for breast pumps, claiming it’s an unnecessary tax break for working mothers who need to stay in the workplace to support their families and pump healthy breast milk for their infants.

States like Minnesota are trying to repeal fair-pay laws and local governments are cutting Head Start funds, saying young children should be educated at home (which, by the way, would also help trim budget deficits).

So what decade am I living in anyway?  That’s what I’m wondering over at Politics Daily.

Don’t count out Congresswoman Gabby Giffords. Before she was shot in the head in the Tucson shooting spree at a January constituent meeting, she had her eye on Senator Jon Kyl’s seat in the event he decided not to run for re-election in 2012.  Given her recovery progress, she might still be in that race.

What do you think of Michelle Obama’s Facebook rules for Sasha & Malia?  Mine are similar and, at least as far as my fifth grader is concerned, have landed me in the “mean mom” club.

This is an amazing piece about a fierce “mother of intention” — the Yemeni mother of three who is leading her country’s Egypt-inspired revolution through social media.

Will South Dakota really make it permissible to kill abortion providers?

And Elizabeth Warren for Senate?  Man — I wish I had thought of this!

The GOP is focusing on the budget, but not for creating jobs — they are trying to impact substantive issues through bills that control spending, as they recently did in their (thankfully) failed attempt to redefine rape in the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act.” It initially called for limiting the availability of Medicaid funds for abortion only to women who had been “forcibly” raped.

Since the original passage of the Hyde Amendment in 1976, no federal taxpayer funds have been available to cover the cost of abortions through Medicaid except in instances of rape, incest or if the life of the mother is in danger. The forcible rape exception, introduced by Representative Chris Smith (R-N.J.), didn’t explicitly spell out in the bill what that meant, but a variety of organizations, including NOW and EMILY’s List, believed it would exclude victims of statutory rape, date rape, rape victims who initially said “no” but weren’t able to fend off their attackers, and women who feared for their lives unless they acquiesced to a rapist’s demands.

Often, Democrats are scarily silent in these debates.  Thankfully Democratic Senators Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut led the charge that ended in having that exception pulled from the bill.  That’s good news as far as it goes.  Fortunately, they’re also spearheading a full court press to make voters aware of the mostly-Republican efforts to further chip away at women’s reproductive health rights.

Their full-court press includes a petition effort encouraging voters to contact their representatives if they disagree with the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act.  And now several other Senators have joined with a fiery Gillibrand to protest not only this specific bill, but the GOP’s bait-and-switch agenda:

But why go to such lengths when the bill has little chance to ever become law? Gillibrand explained it to me this way:

“This legislation is an unprecedented effort to restrict access to women’s reproductive health care and it is critical that my colleagues and everyone who cares about women’s rights have the facts about the damage this bill would cause. ”

The GOP’s mantra has long been that there is too much government involvement in our lives. Right now, one commercial airing daily calls on the government not to tax soda and soft drinks because that’s just too much intrusion into our private lives. So if conservatives are upset that Uncle Sam is too involved in what we put in the shopping cart, how do they square that with telling a woman who has been raped that maybe her rape just wasn’t violent enough to warrant an abortion?

I’ll make a deal with the Republicans — I’ll keep my hands of their soft drinks if they stay away from my uterus.