Friday Femme Fatale: Limbaugh, Post-Ledbetter & Poor Polling

For this week's Friday Femme Fatale, I'm going to share a handful of really interesting articles published this week with some of my favorite excerpts.

From Tracy Viselli over at CARE2's "Protect Women's Rights" blog, some analysis on US News Poll: Speaker Nancy Pelosi Has Changed Enough Diapers:

On Saturday morning US News' political section, Washington Whispers, published a poll asking their readers the following, very profound, question:

"If you had a choice of four daycare centers run separately by Michelle Obama, Sarah Palin, Hillary Clinton, and Nancy Pelosi, which would you choose for your kids?" (you might be able to still see the results here)

First of all, are you kidding? Second of all, are you kidding?

What on earth are the editors of US News thinking? It goes without saying that US News would NEVER ask the same question of any male political leaders--Michelle Obama has been an accomplished healthcare executive, Sarah Palin is a governor, Hillary Clinton is the Secretary of State, and Nancy Pelosi is the FIRST female Speaker of The House for Christ's sake--and this is the question US News asks us about them?

The Chicago Tribune gives accolades to Michelle Obama in the story, First lady's work-life balance is telling:

First lady Hillary Clinton suffered a backlash for barreling straight to the role once termed "copresident," after joking that she had chosen professional fulfillment instead of cookie-baking and tea-hosting.

Michelle Obama is clearly taking the opposite approach, starting with hearth and home and venturing outward from there. It's a more familiar route for the experienced six-figure professional with the reputation for sizing up the waters before diving in.

Over at The Women On The Web, Dee Dee Myers Reveals Why Harvard's Womens' Rooms Say It All:

The simple fact is: Men and women often experience the world differently. And that experience influences what we buy, what we read and what we watch, who we vote for and how we lead. It shapes our priorities and values. It makes us who we are. And when we include - and respect - these different points of view, we broaden the dialogue, expand the scope of inquiry, change the way we think. We make business more efficient. We make government more responsive. We get better science, better schools and better courts. It matters that there will be a woman in the solicitor general's office. And in the secretary of state's office. And in the speaker's office. And in countless other offices across the country.

Jill Miller Zimon at Writes Likes She Talks reports on how Women don't like Limbaugh so he wants a women's summit:

After the non-sensical GOP response from Bobby Jindal last night - whom Rush says is the next Ronald Reagan (who was called The Great Communicator - that same Ronald Reagan?), I am seriously, seriously worried on behalf of my conservative friends. Who on earth are your real leaders and icons right now? Who measures up?

RH Reality Check offers a great Roundup of Anti-Choice Legislation in the States and Amanda Marcotte shares a provocative piece about Sex-Positive Evangelicals? Oh, Yes:

Wait, come again? Sex-positive evangelicals? Well, sort of. While they're not bringing in enough numbers to drown out the dominant attitude of shaming, there does seem to be a trend in the evangelical community of promoting more and better sex within marriage -- for the good of the marriages. There are now Christian sex shops, Christian sex advice columns, and Christian sex blogs. Most of it is tame compared to secular counterparts, but the fact that it exists at all gives pause to those of us who spend quite a bit of time wrangling with evangelicals who want to ban abortion, restrict contraception, put virginity rings on girls, and teach nothing but abstinence-until-marriage.

Women's International Perspective shares some positive coverage in Finally, a Glimmer of Light: More Women in Leadership Is Better for Business:

Here's a news flash: in one week, two major economic articles in national newspapers raise the same point - we need more women in top leadership. Why? Because we need more balanced risk-taking, more looking at the long-term and less testosterone-driven hyper-competitiveness. We need fresh blood and new ideas - much of which lies with the talented and experienced people who have largely been cooling their heels outside of the fancy corner offices. That's women.

Women's eNews pushes the envelope with Schakowsky: Pushing for More After Ledbetter

Prospects for work-family legislation this congressional cycle are uncertain because of the recession, which curtails federal tax revenues and makes money for discretionary programs harder to find, said Heather Boushey, an economist at the Center for American Progress, a think tank in Washington, D.C.

Also, massive budget and health care initiatives are coming down the legislative pike and could push work-family measures farther down the to-do list.

Still, she said there's reason to believe Congress will act on behalf of working women, and cited as proof the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, signed into law by President Obama in January. It effectively reverses a 2007 Supreme Court ruling that made it more difficult to sue for wage discrimination.

The Politico covers the next round of elections with Female candidates line up for 2010

A slew of formidable female candidates, mostly Democrats, are lining up to run for the Senate in 2010, enough to raise the prospect of a surge of women into a chamber that currently has just 17 women senators.

And finally, Nancy Goldstein at Salon challenges women to pay attention to the fiscal crisis with The economy is a feminist issue:

I'm guessing that women aren't writing about the economy at nearly the rate that we're writing about abortion, sexist ads and the latest asshattery from the Palin clan for a number of reasons. First, we've too narrowly defined what constitutes a feminist issue. Second, our response to any of those hot button issues is stronger, more immediately personal and easier for us to understand than the slog through hell that is the 1,000+-page stimulus bill. Finally, I suspect that many of us are hesitant either because we think we don't know enough, or because we really don't know enough.