I think they're voting tomorrow, Susan Collins is a "no" because it doesn't have a provision to "protect" doctors who don't want to perform abortions, Lisa Murkowski is a "no" just because, and Joe Manchin won't say yet. In short, as dead as the John Lewis Voting Rights Act.
May 10, 2022·edited May 10, 2022Liked by Roy Edroso
Just like massive, election-outcome-altering voter fraud, doctors being forced to perform abortions against their will is something you just FEEL is happening, no evidence necessary.
I believe they're voting for cloture on opening a debate. I don't expect them to get that far. I'm half convinced that smirking jackass Mitch McConnell will kill the filibuster just for the lulz and blame the Democrats for shattering norms by even suggesting it, so you'd think we might as well do it ourselves now and get something useful out of it.
I am occasionally insanely depressed myself. Also, the notion of debating on whether we can debate annoys me. Apparently we've gotten enough debate on the debate for some of your standard wingnuts to cause jaws to drop across the nation. Man, the sea turtle conservationists and researchers are having some real moments today.
As angered by and hostile to conservatives as I am, it is literally NOTHING compared to the rage I feel at my own side. I’m not surprised, necessarily, because the Dems love to *talk* about rights for women and BIPOC and LGBTQ folks, they’re just a lot less keen to *do* anything about them. But I am incandescently furious.
Being so gaslit by spurious allegations of conservative victimhood that they immediately form human shields around any fascist who claims to feel ‘fraidy-scared is just too much for me. If Dem politicians can’t find a way to fucking FIGHT BACK, if only politically, around a move which is opposed by more than two thirds of the country, why don’t they just hand the keys to the White House back to Donald Trump right now.
Now now, talk like this will get you accused of “Green Lanternism” by a phalanx of centrist commenters at places like LGM. “Don’t you realize the Dems did everything possible? There was no alternative to the course of action they so wisely and prudentially chose! You need to let the Adults In The Room handle this, and by handle this I mean give civics lectures about how we need a ‘strong Republican party.’ Now go vote harder and send us money!”
"Oh, don't worry a bit about abortion being banned. It will be a big electoral loser for Republicans!"
Well, maybe. But you've read the decision, right? You've noticed that it lays the groundwork for basically doing away with the right to privacy, right?
"Oh, you're just being hyperbolic!!! Republicans would never do such a thing. Just because they're stripping one right away doesn't mean they'll take any others."
By the way, how's that John Lewis Voting Rights bill coming along? Still dead as a doornail, right? And not one single member of the Democratic leadership has tried to revive it you say?
"Oh, you activists just get worked up over nothing. If you'd just let us professional centrists take care of everything, you'd see you have nothing to worry about. Just give us your money and your votes, shut the fuck up, and remember how important it is for Democrats to keep their powder dry. So very dry."
Listen Steve, someday, and I hope for your sake that day may never come, (rest assured - it will.) On that day only Gold Bond Medicated will provide the relief your...places need.
May 10, 2022·edited May 10, 2022Liked by Roy Edroso
Dems are always bystanders to any fight for real social change, it's social movements that have always done the heavy lifting. Classic example is gay marriage, where almost every Dem politician was like, "I'll be over here in the corner waiting for this to get popular, and then I'll come out and take the credit." I'm optimistic we'll see an explosion of grassroots organizing and activism for abortion rights, led by women and POC, much will come in the form of mutual aid, all completely bypassing Dem "leadership" and with many actions that will make Dem "leaders" uncomfortable (including the out-loud speaking of the "a-word") but who cares?
And lost the South for now two generations, so much so that national Democratic leadership has essentially given up on getting it back. (Those of us who live here aren't so sanguine.)
The Dems need new leadership, and they'll get it in the next few years as the older leaders retire or die off. What happens then? Who will take control of the party?
GA 2021 showed what’s possible in the South. That it’s no better than just a possibility says too much about the Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters.
And since. Of course, the ACA was big til Obama allowed the Rs to whittle it down to big but not huge, certainly not a truly national program. So yeah, LBJ.
Problem is that even when something IS popular--abortion rights, voting rights, public healthcare, etc.--Democratic politicians are loath to get behind these ideas.
Back when I did political consulting, Democrats were the absolute worst candidates to work with. The few I had would not take a stand on ANYTHING because taking a position meant you could be attacked for that position. Guess what? Voters just don't like politicians who stand for nothing.
Republicans, however, were easy to package and sell to voters because they had actual positions and were willing to defend those positions however shitty those positions were. And in the few instances were the position wasn't even remotely defensible, the response was "fuck you! Whatya gonna do about it?" Voters may not like the positions, but they definitely liked a candidate they understood and saw as a fighter.
That's interesting, do you think they start off that way or are they trained into it? My impression was that it was the consultants telling Democrats to say as little as possible, but maybe they come pre-frightened?
As I keep ranting, neither party really cares about the majority of the people. In that sense, we have a one party state consisting of dominant and submissive wings.
Dude, I know. But I can't live if I believe that, because I don't know what the actual alternatives are that don't end with even more deaths than are going to happen. And I can't do a lot. But I can at least not actively cause more harm.
That's the mountain radicalization has to overcome. A lot of us don't trust our judgement, and rightfully so. We're paralyzed in fear of making it worse for the people who we already know are suffering. Because they'll die first, if it comes to a civil war.
Fighting locally on the electoral level and community/solidarity. If one has limited resources, then they have to be limited to what one considers the most deserving/necessary. Also taking the best care oneself of which one is capable.
See? I’m not completely incapable of providing a lot of crumbs of hope.
I appreciate this. That's the path I'm attempting to navigate. I occasionally wonder if being a disingenuous fascist shithead feels better, though. I gather it pays better and I know a lot of people who could use the cash, so there must be some reason we don't all do it.
Bad people don't often have enough self awareness to feel bad, though. The best we can do for them is occasional moments of pure misery.
What the centrists don't mention is that the Republicans have devoted a lot of time and effort to ratfucking the American electoral system so that they can do whatever they want without having to worry about all that pesky "consent of the governed" crap. They crave absolute power, and those of us who oppose them (the majority, remember?) should just shut up and obey -- or else.
Dunno that a big electoral loser for the GOP is even possible anymore now that they came claim fraud without a scintilla of proof. Time will tell, of course.
It was the Nixon pardon that did it for me. I could not believe anybody bought that "we need to heal" horseshit and I haven't trusted a Republican since.
“0h, surely that’s too severe, Roderick. They’re merely unwashed and foul-mouthed. But raise the drawbridge anyway.”
Our overlords are always a little nervous as they tiptoe toward Full Fascism and that includes many Democrats who don’t want to believe a fellow Representative carrying a gun into the House is a threat greater than peaceful protesters standing in the street within their First Amendment rights, as delineated by Chief Just Us Roberts when allowing anti-abortion protesters to harass women entering Planned Parenthood. But the reality is Republicans have held Democrats outside of solidly blue states to futile rearguard actions. Here in Wis-ala-sissippi, the US and State Supreme Corpses have solidified gerrymandering as the law of the land, leaving the Governor and State Attorney General as the only bulwark against full Texasification of a once proudly progressive state. One Republican victory in this fall's Governor election and the path is set: no reproductive rights, no voting rights, degraded public schools, hard rock mining in critical watersheds. But someone set a fire at an anti-abortion office in Madison, so time to call for comity in the face of oppression!
I sent some money to Sarah Godlweski, because she actually got on a plane to D.C. and did an ad in front of the Supreme Court. It's a low bar, I admit, but so far she's the only one clearing it.
I checked, and Madela Barnes went to an abortion-rights protest in LaCrosse, while Alex Lasry has not been heard from on the topic, possibly because there is no obvious connection between abortion rights and stadium-building.
Tried to heart but it didn't take... anyway, if only we could convince Lasry of the link – fewer babies=fewer stadium construction workers=higher pay/worker=liberal nirvana!
Per Dobbs, there are no rights other than explicit rights. If you don’t explicitly have a given right, Sammy Alito and the rest of his cohort say you should presume you don’t have it.
It would be bad if Democratic voters most concerned about abortion got the idea that Dem pols worked them for money on the subject the way Rep pols work the rubes on Gawd, guns, and freedommmmm, right?
If campaigning hard on the abortion issue and hanging Alito's opinion around the necks of the Republicans is exploitation and "working the voters for money" then please sign me up to be exploited and worked.
Maybe it’s me, but I miss the point here. Is it the lack of a hue and cry from Dems and the establishment punditocracy?
Working backwards, as I keep saying, based on what our leaders do and have been doing for a couple of decades now, neither party cares what the majority or people want or need. My latest example, of course, is the shit show of a nationwide response to Covid. I mean, it’s pure shithole stuff, nothing like what a civilized developed nation would do, culminating, of course, in SCOTUS’ recent decision that OSHA couldn’t act in regard to promoting workplaces safe from Covid because it didn’t exist when the enacting legislation was passed.
The Dems are fully complicit in this shit pulling and have been for ~30-odd years. Job 1 for the DNC has been to be as much like the GOP as possible without alienating their own voters too much. This, notwithstanding that it’s been a clear failure both electorally and for the nation. The Dems run on a one plank platform and not very hard at that: GOPphobia but without noting the worst about the GOP’s goals. Which, by the way, Alito did an excellent job of laying out in the leaked draft.
As for the liberal media’s pundits: That liberal is a right wing BS term like pro-life and nearly no pundit offers actual insight.
As for the leak, a few things I find more interesting than the leak, protesters at Blackout Brett’s mysteriously financed house or where’s Alito are:
Not only are leaks far more normal than the mainstream media would have one think but there’s the recent one on which the WSJ’s recent piece was based and there’s a third one IIRC. But the media is fixated on only one.
More fascinating to me, from a legal POV: The Griswold decision is built on a shaky foundation as was always known. What I can’t recollect from class is the exact role that the idea of freedom played in it. But I think there’s an idea floating around in it that there about an implicit right of freedom -- that’s there’s a right to be free of restrictions from the state. And being a crabby old fart, I would make the case that given (by me if no one else) that the nation was founded on the freedom from state interference in accumulating wealth, likewise for a shit ton of other private acts like, I dunno, using contraception, marrying someone of another race, or, I dunno, a woman’s choice to abort an embryo, even a viable one if health and life requires it.
All of which is ignored by the media.
Then again, we live in a time when the opposition party, with a majority in Congress, can’t or won’t or refuse to pass the most basic election rights law, so clearly my opinion is way off.
To clarify: while I get the issue that implicit rights are maybe legally unstable, it shouldn’t flow from that there’s any reason to hesitate making them explicit. In other words, however shaky the reasoning in Griswold maybe — however poorly written — trashing the concept as Alito did (and maybe will) is wrong. And the irony of saying that national rights and freedoms are limited to stated ones gets you this, for example:
In other words (🤞🏻), one has even implied rights necessary for that freedom thing and can only be limited for let’s say good cause. Which right there, for example, would limit restrictions on abortion both nationally and on the state level.
May 10, 2022·edited May 10, 2022Liked by Roy Edroso
I'm no constitutional expert, but I've heard rumors of a ninth amendment (just count seven down from The Only Amendment That Matters) that says that we have rights even when they're not explicitly mentioned in the document. Somebody should look into this.
Reading the documents of the Constitutional Convention, Alito's argument was brought up, and the 9th Amendment was specifically written and adopted to circumvent Alito's argument
This is the sort of thing that makes me wish there was a Pulitzer for substacks, but they'd probably give it to that asshole David French. Who, every time I see his name, I can only think "Weren't you going to be president?" That's how seriously the serious people take him. Because nothing to challenge "The Apprentice" like "The Dispatch". I get it. No one wants to be uncivil to a guy you might end up working with.
Also, this?
"The Washington Post dudgeoned up like six Peggy Noonans."
These are Dark Times, for sure, but on the other hand, nearly every day I see something that makes me very, very happy that I canceled my subscription to The Atlantic.
I really hesitated about doing this, because it's cruel, grossly irresponsible, and likely to cause the deaths of innocent people. You know, kind of like banning abortion.
But since some people obviously need their noses rubbed in the fact that they don't get a say in what other people do with their own bodies, I'm refusing to donate blood, plasma, or organs until bodily autonomy for women is enshrined in the law.
I'm doubtful it will catch on because the people who make such donations are far less vicious and vindictive than I am, but it's what the bastards who are pulling this shit - and the Democrats who helped them along - deserve.
As a donor and volunteer at Red Cross blood drives, I get why you're doing this, but it won't do any good. You don't know who uses your donations anyway,
she worries that “maybe a swing set peeking over the backyard fence will become as sure a sign of a household’s partisan allegiance as a Blue Lives Matter flag…”
I realize that this is a dumb question, given everything, but I have to ask it anyway: how can anyone possibly believe something so fucking stupid?
May 10, 2022·edited May 10, 2022Liked by Roy Edroso
"maybe... will become..." is such a handy trio of words when you're a professional trend-spotter. You see something (or even just imagine it) and then "maybe... will become..." your way into a nice check for three thousand words in The Atlantic.
Well, sure, but when you possess the temerity to be so precisely (and weirdly) specific about it...I mean, come on – swing sets?? Surely the really important outdoor toy trend is lawn darts! And won't it be gratifying to watch when Bruenig gets skewered by one a those darts from over the fence?!
All of these trimmers need to be forcefully told to SHUT UP and stop giving aid and comfort to the enemy. If they're too stupid or cowed or delusional to realize we're fighting a bunch of fascists, the best thing they could do is go away.
First off, why am I not reading this column in the NY Times? Aside from the fact that it's better written than most of what they publish, the opinion it expresses is completely missing from the newspaper. Instead, today they saw fit to publish something titled "Overturning Roe Will Disrupt a Lot More Than Abortion. I Can Live With That." written by some über-Catholic male (of course). He's another Conservative With A Heart (maybe they should call it "compassionate conservatism" or has that been done before?) who writes "opponents of abortion should commit ourselves to the most generous and humane provisions for mothers and children (paid family leave, generous child benefits, direct income subsidies for stay-at-home mothers, single-payer health care) since "children who would not otherwise have been born will live lives of utter misery". Prior to the specter of Roe overturned, like anti-abortion protesters, they must have taped their mouths shut while silently praying for family leave and income subsidies because this is the first anyone's heard about it. It's identical to other noonanist wankers who are suddenly and momentarily in favor of The Safety Net. That some Democrats would join them in this shit, or just fall for it, is infuriating.
In the Before-Times, they might have actually had some incentive to offer generous benefits to mothers and children, because the choice was still the woman's to make, and benefits might win her over to having the kid. But even then, not one penny did they want to spend. Now, when women have no choice but to have the kid, why should they offer a fucking thing?
Exactly. They know they're next.
So I guess we shouldn't be holding our breaths for a law protecting abortion & other reproductive care?
I think they're voting tomorrow, Susan Collins is a "no" because it doesn't have a provision to "protect" doctors who don't want to perform abortions, Lisa Murkowski is a "no" just because, and Joe Manchin won't say yet. In short, as dead as the John Lewis Voting Rights Act.
Oddly enough, I can't think of a single time a physician was forced to perform an abortion against their will.
Yes, but pearls must be clutched and hands must be wrung over it anyway, and Susan Collins is an expert clutcher and wringer.
Yeah. She should come with OSHA-mandated clutcher and wringer guards.
Not to mention the hair-splitting.
There's shampoo for that. It's not real poo, but the best sham bitcoins can buy
I’d love to see her clutch her chest instead.
Just like massive, election-outcome-altering voter fraud, doctors being forced to perform abortions against their will is something you just FEEL is happening, no evidence necessary.
I believe they're voting for cloture on opening a debate. I don't expect them to get that far. I'm half convinced that smirking jackass Mitch McConnell will kill the filibuster just for the lulz and blame the Democrats for shattering norms by even suggesting it, so you'd think we might as well do it ourselves now and get something useful out of it.
Oof. Placing "as dead as" and "John Lewis" in the same sentence...I dunno, man...
"Dead as John Lewis and his eponymous bill" is better?
Well, when you put it that way, no.
GM is being rhetorical, I think.
I am occasionally insanely depressed myself. Also, the notion of debating on whether we can debate annoys me. Apparently we've gotten enough debate on the debate for some of your standard wingnuts to cause jaws to drop across the nation. Man, the sea turtle conservationists and researchers are having some real moments today.
as a door nail.
As angered by and hostile to conservatives as I am, it is literally NOTHING compared to the rage I feel at my own side. I’m not surprised, necessarily, because the Dems love to *talk* about rights for women and BIPOC and LGBTQ folks, they’re just a lot less keen to *do* anything about them. But I am incandescently furious.
Being so gaslit by spurious allegations of conservative victimhood that they immediately form human shields around any fascist who claims to feel ‘fraidy-scared is just too much for me. If Dem politicians can’t find a way to fucking FIGHT BACK, if only politically, around a move which is opposed by more than two thirds of the country, why don’t they just hand the keys to the White House back to Donald Trump right now.
They are, as we speak
Now now, talk like this will get you accused of “Green Lanternism” by a phalanx of centrist commenters at places like LGM. “Don’t you realize the Dems did everything possible? There was no alternative to the course of action they so wisely and prudentially chose! You need to let the Adults In The Room handle this, and by handle this I mean give civics lectures about how we need a ‘strong Republican party.’ Now go vote harder and send us money!”
Those “adults” need to be committed.
Trust me, they're focus-grouping right now. They're focus-grouping HARD.
Yeah. The proper response to reports of people demonstrating/protesting at the homes of known fascisti should be "Huh. 'Bout time."
Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!
You probably won’t have to hold your breath too long.
"Oh, don't worry a bit about abortion being banned. It will be a big electoral loser for Republicans!"
Well, maybe. But you've read the decision, right? You've noticed that it lays the groundwork for basically doing away with the right to privacy, right?
"Oh, you're just being hyperbolic!!! Republicans would never do such a thing. Just because they're stripping one right away doesn't mean they'll take any others."
By the way, how's that John Lewis Voting Rights bill coming along? Still dead as a doornail, right? And not one single member of the Democratic leadership has tried to revive it you say?
"Oh, you activists just get worked up over nothing. If you'd just let us professional centrists take care of everything, you'd see you have nothing to worry about. Just give us your money and your votes, shut the fuck up, and remember how important it is for Democrats to keep their powder dry. So very dry."
Dry Ass Powder
Given the age of Democratic "leaders", I'm guessing the powder is Gold Bond Medicated.
Hey now...
I know, right?
Listen Steve, someday, and I hope for your sake that day may never come, (rest assured - it will.) On that day only Gold Bond Medicated will provide the relief your...places need.
Dems are always bystanders to any fight for real social change, it's social movements that have always done the heavy lifting. Classic example is gay marriage, where almost every Dem politician was like, "I'll be over here in the corner waiting for this to get popular, and then I'll come out and take the credit." I'm optimistic we'll see an explosion of grassroots organizing and activism for abortion rights, led by women and POC, much will come in the form of mutual aid, all completely bypassing Dem "leadership" and with many actions that will make Dem "leaders" uncomfortable (including the out-loud speaking of the "a-word") but who cares?
Well, in fairness, Lyndon Johnson went big.
Just think about a Democratic president now putting forth the idea of Medicare.
Hell, I just wish Biden would push the Voting Rights Act like LBJ did. But apparently that's too divisive or something.
Sadly Biden's predecessor didn't die
New leadership with a new attitude i.e. reversion to FDR/LBJ.
You misspelled he’s too cowardly or just unconcerned.
And lost the South for now two generations, so much so that national Democratic leadership has essentially given up on getting it back. (Those of us who live here aren't so sanguine.)
either/or meets both/and
time for a little more good cop/badcop
The Dems need new leadership, and they'll get it in the next few years as the older leaders retire or die off. What happens then? Who will take control of the party?
GA 2021 showed what’s possible in the South. That it’s no better than just a possibility says too much about the Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters.
And since. Of course, the ACA was big til Obama allowed the Rs to whittle it down to big but not huge, certainly not a truly national program. So yeah, LBJ.
Problem is that even when something IS popular--abortion rights, voting rights, public healthcare, etc.--Democratic politicians are loath to get behind these ideas.
Back when I did political consulting, Democrats were the absolute worst candidates to work with. The few I had would not take a stand on ANYTHING because taking a position meant you could be attacked for that position. Guess what? Voters just don't like politicians who stand for nothing.
Republicans, however, were easy to package and sell to voters because they had actual positions and were willing to defend those positions however shitty those positions were. And in the few instances were the position wasn't even remotely defensible, the response was "fuck you! Whatya gonna do about it?" Voters may not like the positions, but they definitely liked a candidate they understood and saw as a fighter.
Exactly. Why should voters trust someone to fight for them when that person is too scared to stand for anything?
too paid off you meant?
That's interesting, do you think they start off that way or are they trained into it? My impression was that it was the consultants telling Democrats to say as little as possible, but maybe they come pre-frightened?
“Pre-frightened” is sublime.
"No frightening required! Just slap them right on the grill!"
mutant malleable perhaps?
As I keep ranting, neither party really cares about the majority of the people. In that sense, we have a one party state consisting of dominant and submissive wings.
Dude, I know. But I can't live if I believe that, because I don't know what the actual alternatives are that don't end with even more deaths than are going to happen. And I can't do a lot. But I can at least not actively cause more harm.
That's the mountain radicalization has to overcome. A lot of us don't trust our judgement, and rightfully so. We're paralyzed in fear of making it worse for the people who we already know are suffering. Because they'll die first, if it comes to a civil war.
Fighting locally on the electoral level and community/solidarity. If one has limited resources, then they have to be limited to what one considers the most deserving/necessary. Also taking the best care oneself of which one is capable.
See? I’m not completely incapable of providing a lot of crumbs of hope.
I appreciate this. That's the path I'm attempting to navigate. I occasionally wonder if being a disingenuous fascist shithead feels better, though. I gather it pays better and I know a lot of people who could use the cash, so there must be some reason we don't all do it.
Bad people don't often have enough self awareness to feel bad, though. The best we can do for them is occasional moments of pure misery.
What the centrists don't mention is that the Republicans have devoted a lot of time and effort to ratfucking the American electoral system so that they can do whatever they want without having to worry about all that pesky "consent of the governed" crap. They crave absolute power, and those of us who oppose them (the majority, remember?) should just shut up and obey -- or else.
Word.
Dunno that a big electoral loser for the GOP is even possible anymore now that they came claim fraud without a scintilla of proof. Time will tell, of course.
"after the Trump years and the attack on the Capitol, no one should believe conservatives about anything,"
I haven't believed a Republican since Iran - Contra.
I always appreciate your straight commentary. Thanks.
You were always ahead of the curve.
When you're ahead of the curve, you pull it foul every time...
It was the Nixon pardon that did it for me. I could not believe anybody bought that "we need to heal" horseshit and I haven't trusted a Republican since.
I haven't trusted them since the day the NY Times first broke the story of Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia. I was nine.
Me either.
or Democrats. The Reagan/Nixon funerals sealed their deal for me.
“Sire, the peasants are revolting!”
“0h, surely that’s too severe, Roderick. They’re merely unwashed and foul-mouthed. But raise the drawbridge anyway.”
Our overlords are always a little nervous as they tiptoe toward Full Fascism and that includes many Democrats who don’t want to believe a fellow Representative carrying a gun into the House is a threat greater than peaceful protesters standing in the street within their First Amendment rights, as delineated by Chief Just Us Roberts when allowing anti-abortion protesters to harass women entering Planned Parenthood. But the reality is Republicans have held Democrats outside of solidly blue states to futile rearguard actions. Here in Wis-ala-sissippi, the US and State Supreme Corpses have solidified gerrymandering as the law of the land, leaving the Governor and State Attorney General as the only bulwark against full Texasification of a once proudly progressive state. One Republican victory in this fall's Governor election and the path is set: no reproductive rights, no voting rights, degraded public schools, hard rock mining in critical watersheds. But someone set a fire at an anti-abortion office in Madison, so time to call for comity in the face of oppression!
A fire, I should add, that was almost certainly an inside job.
Yeah, the cursive was a lovely touch. All that was missing was little hearts over the i's.
I sent some money to Sarah Godlweski, because she actually got on a plane to D.C. and did an ad in front of the Supreme Court. It's a low bar, I admit, but so far she's the only one clearing it.
I checked, and Madela Barnes went to an abortion-rights protest in LaCrosse, while Alex Lasry has not been heard from on the topic, possibly because there is no obvious connection between abortion rights and stadium-building.
Tried to heart but it didn't take... anyway, if only we could convince Lasry of the link – fewer babies=fewer stadium construction workers=higher pay/worker=liberal nirvana!
Or, maybe not...
Try refreshing the page.
I no longer have enough hair to flaunt that style...
I'm learning to just trust it took.
Everything old is new again. 1789, here we come.
at full gallop!!!
Something else that's not mentioned in the Constitution: in vitro fertilization.
Also, I don't see in the Constitution a right to not have protesters in front of your house on a public street when you do something awful.
Per Dobbs, there are no rights other than explicit rights. If you don’t explicitly have a given right, Sammy Alito and the rest of his cohort say you should presume you don’t have it.
This is a feature, not a bug. Because they aren't pro-life, they're anti-anyone-else making choices in their own life about how they're going to live.
If that was so, the mainstream media wouldn’t use the term pro-life in their reporting on the pieces of shit.
In Europe, the Holy Roman Empire finally came to an end two centuries ago.
But here in the good ol' USA, the Holy Roller Empire is just getting started.
It would be bad if Democratic voters most concerned about abortion got the idea that Dem pols worked them for money on the subject the way Rep pols work the rubes on Gawd, guns, and freedommmmm, right?
If campaigning hard on the abortion issue and hanging Alito's opinion around the necks of the Republicans is exploitation and "working the voters for money" then please sign me up to be exploited and worked.
From your and my lips to the Democratic Party's ears!
Maybe it’s me, but I miss the point here. Is it the lack of a hue and cry from Dems and the establishment punditocracy?
Working backwards, as I keep saying, based on what our leaders do and have been doing for a couple of decades now, neither party cares what the majority or people want or need. My latest example, of course, is the shit show of a nationwide response to Covid. I mean, it’s pure shithole stuff, nothing like what a civilized developed nation would do, culminating, of course, in SCOTUS’ recent decision that OSHA couldn’t act in regard to promoting workplaces safe from Covid because it didn’t exist when the enacting legislation was passed.
The Dems are fully complicit in this shit pulling and have been for ~30-odd years. Job 1 for the DNC has been to be as much like the GOP as possible without alienating their own voters too much. This, notwithstanding that it’s been a clear failure both electorally and for the nation. The Dems run on a one plank platform and not very hard at that: GOPphobia but without noting the worst about the GOP’s goals. Which, by the way, Alito did an excellent job of laying out in the leaked draft.
As for the liberal media’s pundits: That liberal is a right wing BS term like pro-life and nearly no pundit offers actual insight.
As for the leak, a few things I find more interesting than the leak, protesters at Blackout Brett’s mysteriously financed house or where’s Alito are:
Not only are leaks far more normal than the mainstream media would have one think but there’s the recent one on which the WSJ’s recent piece was based and there’s a third one IIRC. But the media is fixated on only one.
More fascinating to me, from a legal POV: The Griswold decision is built on a shaky foundation as was always known. What I can’t recollect from class is the exact role that the idea of freedom played in it. But I think there’s an idea floating around in it that there about an implicit right of freedom -- that’s there’s a right to be free of restrictions from the state. And being a crabby old fart, I would make the case that given (by me if no one else) that the nation was founded on the freedom from state interference in accumulating wealth, likewise for a shit ton of other private acts like, I dunno, using contraception, marrying someone of another race, or, I dunno, a woman’s choice to abort an embryo, even a viable one if health and life requires it.
All of which is ignored by the media.
Then again, we live in a time when the opposition party, with a majority in Congress, can’t or won’t or refuse to pass the most basic election rights law, so clearly my opinion is way off.
To clarify: while I get the issue that implicit rights are maybe legally unstable, it shouldn’t flow from that there’s any reason to hesitate making them explicit. In other words, however shaky the reasoning in Griswold maybe — however poorly written — trashing the concept as Alito did (and maybe will) is wrong. And the irony of saying that national rights and freedoms are limited to stated ones gets you this, for example:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1523680953087913985.html
In other words (🤞🏻), one has even implied rights necessary for that freedom thing and can only be limited for let’s say good cause. Which right there, for example, would limit restrictions on abortion both nationally and on the state level.
I'm no constitutional expert, but I've heard rumors of a ninth amendment (just count seven down from The Only Amendment That Matters) that says that we have rights even when they're not explicitly mentioned in the document. Somebody should look into this.
One would think. And if was wrong before, Sammy Alito will explain why you’re wrong, not that I agree with him in the least.
I'm probably just ignorant because I haven't paid enough attention to the legal writings of twelfth-century Witchfinders-General.
Reading the documents of the Constitutional Convention, Alito's argument was brought up, and the 9th Amendment was specifically written and adopted to circumvent Alito's argument
Well, we know how much the GOP majority on SCOTUS feels about the constitution. If it doesn’t help with their goal, they if more it.
"The Dems are fully complicit in this shit pulling and have been for ~30-odd years." That how democracy works!
Oh, Maestro, when you get all cynical...
Easy there, boy...deep breaths...
This is the sort of thing that makes me wish there was a Pulitzer for substacks, but they'd probably give it to that asshole David French. Who, every time I see his name, I can only think "Weren't you going to be president?" That's how seriously the serious people take him. Because nothing to challenge "The Apprentice" like "The Dispatch". I get it. No one wants to be uncivil to a guy you might end up working with.
Also, this?
"The Washington Post dudgeoned up like six Peggy Noonans."
That hit me like chocolate.
The "Noonan Unit" shall henceforth be the standard measure of dudgeon.
These are Dark Times, for sure, but on the other hand, nearly every day I see something that makes me very, very happy that I canceled my subscription to The Atlantic.
I really hesitated about doing this, because it's cruel, grossly irresponsible, and likely to cause the deaths of innocent people. You know, kind of like banning abortion.
But since some people obviously need their noses rubbed in the fact that they don't get a say in what other people do with their own bodies, I'm refusing to donate blood, plasma, or organs until bodily autonomy for women is enshrined in the law.
I'm doubtful it will catch on because the people who make such donations are far less vicious and vindictive than I am, but it's what the bastards who are pulling this shit - and the Democrats who helped them along - deserve.
As a donor and volunteer at Red Cross blood drives, I get why you're doing this, but it won't do any good. You don't know who uses your donations anyway,
Me too!
she worries that “maybe a swing set peeking over the backyard fence will become as sure a sign of a household’s partisan allegiance as a Blue Lives Matter flag…”
I realize that this is a dumb question, given everything, but I have to ask it anyway: how can anyone possibly believe something so fucking stupid?
"maybe... will become..." is such a handy trio of words when you're a professional trend-spotter. You see something (or even just imagine it) and then "maybe... will become..." your way into a nice check for three thousand words in The Atlantic.
Well, sure, but when you possess the temerity to be so precisely (and weirdly) specific about it...I mean, come on – swing sets?? Surely the really important outdoor toy trend is lawn darts! And won't it be gratifying to watch when Bruenig gets skewered by one a those darts from over the fence?!
Lying is a sure pathway.
All of these trimmers need to be forcefully told to SHUT UP and stop giving aid and comfort to the enemy. If they're too stupid or cowed or delusional to realize we're fighting a bunch of fascists, the best thing they could do is go away.
First off, why am I not reading this column in the NY Times? Aside from the fact that it's better written than most of what they publish, the opinion it expresses is completely missing from the newspaper. Instead, today they saw fit to publish something titled "Overturning Roe Will Disrupt a Lot More Than Abortion. I Can Live With That." written by some über-Catholic male (of course). He's another Conservative With A Heart (maybe they should call it "compassionate conservatism" or has that been done before?) who writes "opponents of abortion should commit ourselves to the most generous and humane provisions for mothers and children (paid family leave, generous child benefits, direct income subsidies for stay-at-home mothers, single-payer health care) since "children who would not otherwise have been born will live lives of utter misery". Prior to the specter of Roe overturned, like anti-abortion protesters, they must have taped their mouths shut while silently praying for family leave and income subsidies because this is the first anyone's heard about it. It's identical to other noonanist wankers who are suddenly and momentarily in favor of The Safety Net. That some Democrats would join them in this shit, or just fall for it, is infuriating.
In the Before-Times, they might have actually had some incentive to offer generous benefits to mothers and children, because the choice was still the woman's to make, and benefits might win her over to having the kid. But even then, not one penny did they want to spend. Now, when women have no choice but to have the kid, why should they offer a fucking thing?
Always the handmaid, never the fully-righted, honest to god citizen...
Because once again, it’s a lie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Why not pass family assistance NOW" is the only response.
Shee-it, that’s completely un-American.
And an obvious lie.