feed icon

The Violation Of A Chaste Woman By Some Party Not Her Spouse

By Kleinheider Posted on October 4, 2009 at 11:31 pm

Jeff Woods looks at the battle Sen. Doug Henry faces in what will likely be his last run for office:

“If Henry were 15 years younger and didn’t have such a terrible rap with Democratic women, he would be untouchable, but neither of those is true,” this source says. “I do not know a single knowledgeable Democratic woman who will vote for him — none, zero.”

In fact, on his first day of fund raising last week, Yarbro collected $50,000 online.

This antipathy toward Henry stems from his opposition to abortion rights, and it was aggravated last year by remarks he made on the Senate floor. During the debate on a resolution stripping abortion rights from the state constitution, Henry outraged pro-choice constituents when he explained why he’s against adding rape as an exception to an abortion ban.

“Because rape, ladies and gentleman is not today what rape was,” Henry said then. “Rape, when I was learning these things, was the violation of a chaste woman against her will by some party not her spouse. Today it’s simply, ‘let’s don’t go forward with this act.’”

bookmarkpermalink

Comments

48 Responses to “The Violation Of A Chaste Woman By Some Party Not Her Spouse”

  1. The pump house writes
    October 4th, 2009 11:45 pm

    Jeff Woods must only talk to Butch lesbians.

  2. JaStep writes
    October 5th, 2009 7:22 am

    Does anyone know if Jeff Yarbro is liberal? Where does he stand on SJR127?

    I haven’t heard.

  3. Bill Hobbs writes
    October 5th, 2009 8:06 am

    And on his second day of fund-raising Yarbo collected almost nothing.

  4. Sean Braisted writes
    October 5th, 2009 8:45 am

    Jeff Woods must only talk to Butch lesbians.

    Yes, because only “butch lesbians” think that if a woman says no, and the guy refuses to stop, than its rape.

    Bill,

    Actually, he raised about $2K the day after (online). Yes, nobody thought it was some spontaneous eruption of online giving that boosted him to the $50K mark on the first day…using Act Blue to collect the donations is the best way to have evidence of fund-raising success, that is probably why they did it.

  5. frankj writes
    October 5th, 2009 8:45 am

    “Does anyone know if Jeff Yarbro is liberal? Where does he stand on SJR127?”

    Read his website, Jeff is for education and against crime and is going to creat green jobs. As far as his stance on abortion, not really important, he and his Kitchen group don’t get involved in social matters, but do have alot of gay american friends who are delightful friends.

  6. frankj writes
    October 5th, 2009 8:49 am

    “Jeff Woods must only talk to Butch lesbians.”

    Why, yes, I am sure Mr. Woods has some lesbian american friends and I guarantee you they are delightful lesbian american friends.

  7. JaStep writes
    October 5th, 2009 8:51 am

    LOL, frankj.

    That’s what concerns me. His website is all middle of the road vanilla. No real stands on issues.

    Before we go calling this challenger a champion of women, I want to know if he is our champion. Before we call him progressive, I want to know if he is progressive.

    Will he vote against SJR127? Will he vote against banning gay adoption? Will he support a state income tax?

  8. frankj writes
    October 5th, 2009 8:57 am

    JaStep, Jeff and the brighteyed bushy tailed progressive future leaders of Nashville in their delightful Kitchen group would first want to know your position on those issues before deciding whether a response was necessary. I “sense” by you asking you may be opposed to gay american adoption and a state income tax and support SJR127; if so, although I’ve never sat in Jeff’s Kitchen, let me assure you the state of Tennessee has much more important issues facing it than abortion and gay adoptions, as we know those are DIVISIVE issues and any legislative body that would take up a gay issue given this economy at the state or LOCAL level right now would be wasting taxpayer resources.

    Now, if I’ve misread the intent of your questions and your support/non-support thereof, rest assured Jeff and his little Kitchen buddies have tons of delightful gay friends, all of which are delightful people, great neighbors and constant teachers of life lessons.

  9. Bill Hobbs writes
    October 5th, 2009 10:10 am

    Sean,

    What looked like fund-raising success on Day One looks less and less like success with each passing day as the total stagnates. He’s raised less than $1,000 in the last four days.

    It’s looking more and more like Yarbro has already plucked all the low-hanging fruit in terms of fund-raising, and from here forward he’s going to be raising money very very slowly and in very small amounts.

    The big money will go to Henry. The District is full of smart moderate Democrats who know that, A), the state Senate is staying in Republican hands for awhile and, B), their best chance of having any influence is a veteran senator respected by both sides - not a freshman from the minority party.

  10. Sean Braisted writes
    October 5th, 2009 10:23 am

    It’s looking more and more like Yarbro has already plucked all the low-hanging fruit in terms of fund-raising, and from here forward he’s going to be raising money very very slowly and in very small amounts.

    Bill, he hasn’t held a fundraiser yet…his first fundraiser is planned for October 12th, and yes, most of those will be in the form of checks so we won’t know how much he’s raised (unless he has a press release) until the end of the year.

    The purpose of the initial act blue donations was to show other people that his campaign was for real, and that it wouldn’t be a waste of money to donate to him…in that regard, we’ll see if he’s succeeded.

    But if we are only looking at Actblue donations, Sen. Henry has a whopping $250.

  11. Mark Rogers writes
    October 5th, 2009 10:58 am

    Sean,

    Wait to see how much Senator Henry gets in ‘ActHenry’ contributions.

    In reality money is not the problem for Yarbro. It will the image of Yarbro to rank and file Tennesseans when his campaign gets wrapped up with the challenge to Cooper. Since the two races will have overlapping supporters and similar messages ‘change,’ one imagines that many voters will come to see the two as the same.

    So when Emily’s List comes in for another round of attacks on Cooper over abortion, that issue will spill over into the Senate race. That will not help Yrbro.

    And when Kos and the Fellow Traveller Left launch repeated strikes on Cooper as some sort of traitor or right-winger who appeals to the hick vote, the odds are very good that moderate voters in the Senate District will feel that they are being similarly targeted and rally to Senator Henry.

  12. The OG Ben writes
    October 5th, 2009 10:58 am

    Only speaking for me, frankj and JaStep, I support gay adoption, oppose SJR127, and think Tennessee needs a progressive tax system. Where does Jeff Yarbro stand on these issues?

  13. Sean Braisted writes
    October 5th, 2009 11:04 am

    Mark,

    As of right now, we don’t know if a challenge to Cooper will materialize. If it does, I imagine that if it has any shot of succeeding, it will do so by bringing out a younger, more liberal base that might not normally vote in a mid-term election…that would help Yarbro. Maybe it’ll bring out the conservative Dem element, but those folks generally vote in every election regardless, so it might be a wash.

  14. Mark Rogers writes
    October 5th, 2009 11:13 am

    Sean,

    You may well be right. And a challenge to Cooper would energize the ‘Acid, Amnesty and Ablortion’ crowd. But such a challenge to Cooper cannot be done as a simple ‘get out the vote’ race. To win will require convining Democrats to change their minds about Cooper. That requires an attack-oriented approach (not of necessity a ‘negative’ campaign).

    The issues where a challenger can attack Cooper are similar to the case Yarbro will make against Henry. Check out the original subject of this post to see what I mean. A heated Congressional primary will filter down to the Senate and link Yarbro to Cooper’s opponent. And that will be fatal.

  15. Sean Braisted writes
    October 5th, 2009 11:27 am

    Problem is, based on the most recent poll done by R2K, the feelings towards Cooper are lukewarm at best, the same may or may not be the case for Henry, so far all we have to go on are past performances (not necessarily an indicator of future success) and anecdotes.

    There are a lot of unknowns up in the air. For starters, will the GOP primary be close? If so, are the moderate Republicans who might be willing to cross lines and vote in a Democratic primary going to risk having some wingnut like Wamp over Haslam?

    The winner of the primary for both races will be in part be determined by the composition of the electorate; we don’t know who that is going to be. Having Emily’s List come in and attack Cooper on his pro-choice record could actually have positive benefits to Yarbro if more pro-choice women come out to vote in that primary, and aren’t satisfied with having a Senator who sponsors SJR127 and opposes exceptions for rape because it ain’t what it used to be back in the good ol’ days.

  16. Ballpark Frank writes
    October 5th, 2009 11:34 am

    Before the moonbeams like OG Ben get all worked up, Jeff isn’t some leftie that’s going to legalize marijuana and require all gays to get married.

    He’s a part of Roy Herron’s campaign for governor. He’ll be quoting Bible verses all over the district.

  17. Mark Rogers writes
    October 5th, 2009 11:48 am

    Sean,

    Talk to someone who was here for the Cooper, Ray and Ariola race. Emily took Ray from a credible challenger to a dismal third with their hateful and elitist approach. America is less fond of aboprtion as an issue today than then.

  18. Sean Braisted writes
    October 5th, 2009 12:17 pm

    Mark,

    Like I said, past performance is not necessarily indicative of the future. It is quite possible that Emily’s list would’ve learned from their heavy-handed tactics in the years that have followed. Also, we don’t know if the challenger to Cooper would be a man or woman, so they might just stay out all together.

  19. Eleanor A writes
    October 5th, 2009 12:28 pm

    Your problem is that a lot of people around here think fundraising for and supporting women candidates is hateful and elitist, period. If they didn’t, there’d be more of them, as opposed to TN ranking in the bottom two states, just above Mississippi, for elected women, year after year after year.

    Note to TNDP: Republicans have a woman in Congress, their state chair is female as are several of their officers, etc. You hand them the pro-choice issue and there’s gonna be even more trouble, not that you appear to have the remotest semblance of a clue on this topic.

    Yarbro’s going to have problems over the Kurita thing. Claiming “had to do what he was told” - when he in fact was one of the lead attorneys on the case - isn’t going to cut it.

    I’ll listen to what he has to say on SJ127 personally, but you don’t play a key role in tossing out the state’s highest-ranking elected Dem woman and then claim to be the world’s biggest champion of women without folks asking questions. Just sayin’.

  20. JaStep writes
    October 5th, 2009 12:38 pm

    That’s the kind of info I need. Sounds like this challenger is anything but a champion of women.

  21. Mark Rogers writes
    October 5th, 2009 12:57 pm

    Eleanor,

    Since groups like Emily’s List and no small number of liberal women insist that only pro-choice candidates are able to represent women, that is not an unreasonable conclusion.

    The former Chair of the TRP is a woman, Robin Smith. To be fair, the Democrats have elected women to Congress but only because their husbands died in office or as a candidate. Marsha Blackburn was the first woman in Tennessee to be elected to Congress in her own right.

    Also the Republicans in the State Senate have Jamie Woodson as Deputy Speaker and Diane Black as Caucus chair. This is far more than women in the Democratic Senate caucus achieved.

  22. Sean Braisted writes
    October 5th, 2009 1:07 pm

    Yarbro’s going to have problems over the Kurita thing. Claiming “had to do what he was told” - when he in fact was one of the lead attorneys on the case - isn’t going to cut it.

    Blaming Yarbro for Kurita is like blaming the court stenographer for the outcome of a trial. Yarbro didn’t have anything to do with the outcome, he and his firm represented the TNDP, and they simply helped with the mechanics of bringing forth a hearing, required by law, after Barnes filed a challenge. Since then, he’s represented the TNDP in a frivolous lawsuit by Kurita’s rightwing Republican lawyer from Indiana.

  23. JaStep writes
    October 5th, 2009 1:16 pm

    Come on now. A court stenographer and an attorney are not the same.

    Saying an attorney had nothing to do with the outcome of a case is like saying my right foot had nothing to do with the fact that my car was driving at 15 miles over the speed limit.

  24. Sean Braisted writes
    October 5th, 2009 1:24 pm

    JaStep,

    Well, if we are using the court analogy, Jeff Yarbro didn’t represent the plaintiff or the defendant, he represented the “court”. His job was to see that the process played out…it did.

    The legislature (and quite possibly Doug Henry) set up the laws which created a State Primary Board consisting of elected members of the Democratic Executive Committee. Yarbro had no control over who got elected to this board, that the legislature made the ultimate arbiter of primary elections.

  25. JaStep writes
    October 5th, 2009 1:43 pm

    By your thinking, Sean, Winfield Dunn stole the election from Kurita. I’m sure you remember well that the Tennessee Democratic Party told anyone that would listen that he passed the law establishing the primary boards.

    That “board” was the Tennessee Democratic Party executive committee, and I believe that board was rigged by the party good ole boys and their attorneys. Sounds like we should include this attorney in that bunch.

  26. Sean Braisted writes
    October 5th, 2009 1:51 pm

    The board wasn’t “rigged,” it was comprised of elected members of the executive committee, chosen by voters in the various State Senate districts. None of the people elected to their positions probably ever had an inclination they’d have to deal with a primary challenge, as I think the last time one was done was back in the 50s.

    It wasn’t an impartial jury, it was a group of party activists…activists who generally did not like Kurita because of her vote for Ron Ramsey. I said at the time I thought she should’ve won that decision, but everybody played by the same rules in arguing their cases, the jury was simply biased (as setup by law).

    What could Jeff Yarbro have done, as an attorney for the party, to have changed the result?

  27. GoldnI writes
    October 5th, 2009 1:58 pm

    So JaStep and Eleanor, would you both oppose a public defender running for office solely on the grounds that part of their job description involved representing criminals?

  28. JaStep writes
    October 5th, 2009 2:09 pm

    “Rigged” or “biased,” what’s the difference? Democratic Party insiders, including their attorneys had worked the executive committee. The outcome of that “hearing” was pre-determined. As an insider party lawyer, this attorney knew what was going on.

    In your analogy, GoldnI, the Tennessee Democratic Party is the criminal. I agree that it was criminal in its action against Kurita. The party attorneys were part of the plot. No, I wouldn’t vote for an attorney that helped a client commit a crime.

  29. GoldnI writes
    October 5th, 2009 2:24 pm

    That wasn’t the analogy. Answer the question. Should public defenders be shunned from running for higher office because they were required as part of their job to represent people you might find undesirable?

  30. Sean Braisted writes
    October 5th, 2009 2:26 pm

    Democratic Party insiders, including their attorneys had worked the executive committee.

    If you apply “insider” to everything, sure, they were “insiders”. Fact is, members of the committee, BY LAW, were able to vote their conscience. There were many who voted against throwing out the election, while the majority (most from outside of Nashville and well beyond the influence of Gray, Jeff, or any of the party “leaders”) voted in favor of tossing the election…probably out of spite.

    The results were a foregone conclusion because, again, by law, the Primary Board didn’t have the same rules on bias as a jury would’ve.

    The laws that created the primary board were enacted in 1972…not sure if that was right before or right after Henry was elected.

    The lawyers representing the party at the time had no role in influencing how committee members would vote. If I remember correctly, most of the Davidson County delegation voted against throwing out her election. But since the primary board results, I’m not aware of any legislative attempts by Henry to change the law so that this same thing can’t happen again…if you can find such an effort, I’d be glad to hear about it.

  31. Mark Rogers writes
    October 5th, 2009 2:46 pm

    Sean,

    I think Senator Henry was elected in 1966. Perhaps in 1970. Not later since he was actually in the Legislature longer than Wilder.

  32. JaStep writes
    October 5th, 2009 3:03 pm

    That is exactly the analagy you make, GoldnI. I would have no problem voting for an attorney that represents a client after the alleged commission of a crime.

    That doesn’t apply in this case since your attorney was a part of the team that overturned a valid election because its results didn’t meet their political wishes. Your attorney took part in the crime.

    Close your eyes and pretend you don’t see it, Sean. Everyone knows party leadership rigged the executive committee vote. It’s the 21st Century. Do you really think someone in Nashville can’t contact someone in Johnson City?

  33. Harrison writes
    October 5th, 2009 3:32 pm

    If Goldeneye and Perez Braisted don’t want to ascribe Kurita’s dethroning to Yarbro, then will they at least ascribe to him the $70k in billings that his law firm generated as a reward for their handling of this debacle?

  34. Sean Braisted writes
    October 5th, 2009 3:32 pm

    Everyone knows party leadership rigged the executive committee vote.

    Who knows this and how? Which “party leaders” rigged the vote? What did these insidious party leaders do to get the members of the committee to vote against Kurita?

  35. Sean Braisted writes
    October 5th, 2009 3:40 pm

    then will they at least ascribe to him the $70k in billings that his law firm generated as a reward for their handling of this debacle

    I suppose, though I don’t think Yarbro was the only one on the case…and I actually ascribe quite a bit of that to Kurita for allowing her name to be used by the Republican James Bopp in order to suck up TNDP resources on a frivolous lawsuit.

  36. SouthernIndie writes
    October 5th, 2009 3:46 pm

    The radicals heading up the Emily’s list are
    still so bitter over the 5th Congressional
    race it’s still shows today. They continue
    to bitch about Cooper at every chance and
    now want to defeat Sen. Henry. The party
    should avoid their every notion & agenda!

  37. Steve Steffens (LWC) writes
    October 5th, 2009 3:51 pm

    The irony, of course, is that Emily’s List TWICE gave money to Nikki Tinker against that old right-wing himself, Steve Cohen, because despite Steve’s pro-choice voting record (and despite questions about whether Tinker was even pro-choice at ALL), Steve happened to be male and thus unworthy of their support.

    They don’t get much money out of Memphis any more, for some reason! :-)

  38. Mark Rogers writes
    October 5th, 2009 4:08 pm

    LWC,

    The irony of identity politics coming back to haunt the Left would be delicious if it were not so tragic for America.

  39. JaStep writes
    October 5th, 2009 4:41 pm

    Speaking of irony, this situation is full of it.

    Progressive bloggers are falling all over themselves to defend a candidate because?????? Why? Because he’s young?

    Where’s the evidence this candidate is a progressive or a champion of women? He was one of the lawyers that worked to kick out the most progressive state senator, who was a woman.

    You want someone that opposed SJR127. That was Rosalind Kurita. This challenger worked to steal an election from her.

    Yes, Harrison, a portion of that $70,000 went to this candidate. I guess the cost of my ticket to Jackson Day went to pay his bill.

  40. Sean Braisted writes
    October 5th, 2009 5:02 pm

    JaStep,

    I’m “defending” him because the attacks against because he’s a friend and the attacks against him are baseless.

    You throw out a bunch of claims about some shadowy conspiracy to steal Kurita’s election but you fail to say who headed up this conspiracy, and what Yarbro’s role in it was.

    Yes, he was a laywer for the TNDP. Yes, he aided in their legally obligated task of setting up a procedure for Tim Barnes to have his claims heard. Yes, after the elected body of the TNDP decided to throw out the election results, he helped represent the Democratic party against a frivolous lawsuit headed up by a radical anti-abortion lawyer from Indiana (the same lawyer who helped draft a GOP resolution to refer to the Democratic party as the Democrat Socialist party).

    What specifically do you think Yarbro’s role in ousting Kurita was? How could he have handled his job in another way that resulted in her election being validated?

  41. Harrison writes
    October 5th, 2009 5:09 pm

    Here’s a fair question that’s relevant: What was Yarbro’s hourly billing rate in the debacle to unseat Kurita?

  42. JaStep writes
    October 5th, 2009 5:24 pm

    If you’re his friend, tell us where he stands on SJR127. Tell us if he will defend public funding for Planned Parenthood. Will he fight to protect gay adoption?

    You tell us that he’s a progressive, Sean, but he only tells us he likes jobs and children. That makes me very suspicious.

    You know the Tenneessee Democratic Party and the forces behind Kurita’s ouster as well as anyone. You know the behind the scenes manuevers that went on.

    Good question, Harrison. Someone tell us what his hourly rate was?

  43. Mark Rogers writes
    October 5th, 2009 5:30 pm

    Sean,

    You are right.

    Of course, he could have recused himself on the grounds that respecting a vote of the people is more important than one primary. Instead he sided with the powerful over the weak.

    But in his defense, Yarbro was only following orders. That is exactly what we need in a senator.

  44. Steve Steffens (LWC) writes
    October 5th, 2009 5:49 pm

    The question that needs to be asked about Kurita is why did the TNDP even allow her to file as a Democrat after her vote for Ramsey?

    If the TNDP had done their job at that point, NO ONE would have complained, noting that it was a party matter and they had the right to refuse her a place on the ballot. Hello, Gray Sasser?

    If THAT had happened, this would all be moot.

    Now, I know perfectly well that she got hosed by the Party and the DSCC in favor of Junior, and it wasn’t right. However, her tossing an old man under the bus wasn’t right, either.

    Had the TNDP handled THAT correctly, we wouldn’t be worrying about it any more.

  45. JaStep writes
    October 5th, 2009 5:54 pm

    Sad but true Steve. Sad but true.

    Wow Mark has gotten right to what bothers me. Yarbro followed the orders of the good ole boys. He didn’t stand up for a the sanctity of elections. He didn’t stand up for the progressive woman legislators being wrong. He did what he was told.

    Doesn’t sound like a champion of progressivism to me.

  46. Steve Steffens (LWC) writes
    October 5th, 2009 6:42 pm

    Now, to be fair, JaStep, Senator Henry, as much as we all love it, is no bastion of progressivity, either. If he were, we wouldn’t be hearing the crocodile tears of Hobbsie and the republicans and Blue Dogs on this site.

    What it comes down to is this: Senator Henry has this seat as long as he wants it, but if it should become an open seat for any reason, the Goopers have a 50-50 shot at it.

    Yarbro gives us a chance to hold it for years, and if he doesn’t sell out to corporate interests, you get someone a little more to the left on fiscal matters, and a LOT more to the left on social matters.

    Am I off at all here?

  47. JaStep writes
    October 5th, 2009 7:50 pm

    Not quite Steve. No, Sen. Henry isn’t a progressive, but this challenger isn’t either. That means there is no reason to vote against Henry.

    This district is full of much stronger Democratic candidates than this challenger. They would stand a better chance of holding the seat than him.

  48. Eleanor A writes
    October 6th, 2009 12:39 am

    What JaStep says, pretty much (and if I knew who she was, I’d shake her hand.)

    From where I sit, Yarbro hasn’t put out much that’s substantive on any of the issues. My guess is he’s an ambitious young guy who wants to get a toehold in politics. Which is all well and good, but frankly I’ve had it up to my eyeballs with people who are into politics for its own sake or as a a means to promote themselves. Someone smarter than I am once said “with power comes responsibility,” and it seems that many Tennessee politicians on both sides of the fence often forget the second part of that homily.

    If we were talking about issues up front - what this guy has plans to do on civil rights, health care, environment, etc. it’d be another story.

    Yarbro damn well could have recused himself from the Kurita case. My guess is he asked to be put onto it as a means of currying favor with the folks in power. Again - not at all surprising, and in fact business as usual in TN. Doesn’t mean I personally have to like it or not point it out when it happens.

    Steffens, you and I will have to continue to agree to disagree on this. Dems just got lucky the GOP initially went along with their insane plan to keep a Democratic Senate leader after they rather spectacularly lost control of the Senate. You really expect a plan like that to continue for long, once the TN Democratic Party started to take on water - losing the state House, a Federal Senate race (in a year that featured stunning GOP upsets in states like Virginia and Montana), on top of its having rather noticeably lost the Presidency for Al Gore? After it loses the Governorship next year?

    What about “weak Party in desperate need of reform” isn’t immediately apparent here?

    Personally, I blame Bredesen and a whole cast of Democratic characters that have handed this state to the Republicans inside of 12 years for Wilder’s defeat - not Rosalind Kurita. Not that you’ll ever see anybody much actually lay the responsibility where it belongs.

    And this:

    The irony, of course, is that Emily’s List TWICE gave money to Nikki Tinker against that old right-wing himself, Steve Cohen, because despite Steve’s pro-choice voting record (and despite questions about whether Tinker was even pro-choice at ALL), Steve happened to be male and thus unworthy of their support.

    really takes the cake. You think it’s so wrong for women’s groups to hand money to women candidates? How much money you think TNDP will send to Paula Flowers this year? How much did they send Becky Ruppe, who could have won her election last year - except, oh wait, TNDP spent on the order of $300,000 to beat RK, just to teach her a lesson?

    Right. Sure. Nobody ever gives money to rich white good old boys, simply because they’re rich white good old boys.

Leave a Reply




Partly Cloudy

The Collective

Archives