717 Comments
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 25, 2022

Thank you for having the stamina after such a day/week to write so measured and historically-grounded an analysis. Your historian’s detachment coupled with gimlet critiques sustain us during times that challenge, anger, and dismay.

Expand full comment
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 25, 2022

I posted this to another woman on a diff Substack. I’ll post it here and I’ll keep posting it to any media outlet and have sent it in expanded letter form to the White House and to barbed wire fence sitter Roberts… who does not have a pair left.

Thank you, Laura, for correctly describing these challenging times. To say the least.

….”You know, I am not quite sure that any man can understand the depth of emotion that women feel today. A depth embedded in centuries of repression. A depth imbedded in the memory of the double X chromosomes.

Well, the good news is……that depth is our strength. If there is a judge or moneymaker or political cabal that actually thinks they will wrest our freedoms based on 5 assenting votes from 5 judges? Who, last time I checked are human beings and not deities?

Ummmmm, no.

It’s not about abortion. It’s about who says now that a woman may attain that procedure safely, if at all. It’s about women making reproductive health decisions without interference from political agenda. It’s about men not having to travel across states to exercise their reproductive freedom. But women must?

Let’s keep the messaging correct as we go to the polls. We are not going to be relegated to second class enslaved status. Women actually are the majority in this country so someone please make it clear to me how minority rule once again is muscling away freedom. Religious liberty and theocrats, my ass.

And by the way…America overturns Roe v. Wade but cannot keep infant formula on its grocery shelves? Pshaw.”

Expand the Court. Right after massive Blue Wave and end to radical right in November 2022. 54 Dem Senators at least! Let’s get Loud.

Salud! 🗽

Expand full comment

Get rid of the filibuster too. Needing 60 votes to pass legislation is bs.

Expand full comment

Except that elimination of the filibuster was McConnell’s means of packing the Court with radical ideologues. When justices required a minimum bipartisan 60% vote for confirmation, we typically did not get political ideologues like these.

This was not an “unintended consequence” for Senator McConnell, although it almost certainly was unintended by Harry Reid when he set the precedent of eliminating the filibuster for appointments.

Expand full comment
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 25, 2022

I am late to the game this am. I love this post, Christine. We were over to our neighbors last night and of course, the discussion focused on this until we got into some hilarious and not so hilarious family history. My spouse has Sioux ancestry and two of us have slave owners among our ancestors. We are all too old to be directed affected by the abortion decision but old enough to remember how things were before it was legal including long term suffering in my own family. We also discussed DNA and how XX is a source of strength, so I concur with your observation. So now guns have more rights than women. Fie on that. There was a demonstration here in Salem, but I haven't looked to see what happened. I did read where some rube tried to run over some demonstrators who were peacefully crossing the street somewhere. I also find it ironic somehow that the old pervert (and mostly likely insurrectionist) Thomas thinks it's OK to sexually harass female subordinates, but wants to interfere rather profoundly in everyone's sex lives. On one Facebook page this am someone wondered how we got all these conservative justices. I posted a long answer which was not friendly to certain individuals like Susie Q Collins. Also I responded to a dope who announced that here in Oregon it is legal to bop a baby on the head when it is being born. He got a lecture on late term abortions and judging from the fact that he and another male were not a friend of the page owner, I judged them to be trolls. My spouse and I were discussing the political ramifications and now some Rs are worried that it might affect the vote in November.

Expand full comment

You are never late to the game, fierce Michele, because you are on the right side. That of which there is no opposite.

Light and Love! Unidad.

Expand full comment

Same to you. I love your spirit.

Expand full comment

Generally speaking, I'm not in favor of abortion, BUT, I realize there are problematic situations for which abortion is the only reasonable solution. In any case, it is not my business to decide the issue; it is for the woman and her doctor to decide, certainly not the government. After all, we don't want

"big government" intruding into our personal lives (Republican talking point). Two articles that are of interest:

"The Court is ignoring science" (Science, May 2022)

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adc9968?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmed

and "Lawmakers v. The Scientific Realities of Human Reproduction" (New Engl. J. Med., yesterday)

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2208288?query=RP&cid=NEJM%20Recently%20Published,%20June%2024,%202022%20DM1187630_NEJM_Non_Subscriber&bid=1041815165

That a Republican-dominated Supreme Court would ignore science and medical opinion is shocking, SHOCKING! I say.

Yesterday my Congressman ("Jim" McGovern) sent out a mass email regarding the Roe decision, for the first time a no-nonsense missive. I sent him an email reflecting things that I have written to him before and also stated here:

"Dear Rep. McGovern: your email message this morning, the day of the repeal of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court, was right on target, calling out the Republican justices on the court for their hypocrisy, and vowing to work in Congress "to mitigate the incredible harm of this decision," as you say. But your message is aimed at the constituents in your congressional district, many -- perhaps most -- of whom already hold the same position. As I have written to you previously, about the Republican policies and actions more generally, it is time for the Democratic Party to fire up its public relations efforts and take this message to the public at large. So far I have not seen anything in the public political discussion along these lines. It's almost as if the Democratic Party is simply accepting defeat prior to the upcoming elections in 2022 and 2024. Although I am an independent voter, there is no rational choice except to vote Democratic in these elections, but the public at large has to be convinced. I believe there is a "reasonable middle" stratum of the population that could be convinced; the hard core Trump supporters probably could not. But the middle and left-leaning segment of the populace should be enough to swing the elections.

It is also important not to let the abortion decision overshadow the results coming out of the House Committee on the January 6 insurrection. Those findings are if anything more important than the repeal of Roe, and need to be emphasized to the public. The Democratic messaging will have to do both at once. Up to now, as far as I can tell, the Democrats have done nothing in that regard."

This has turned into a rant, so I'll shut up for now.

Expand full comment

J, I'd like to point out that no one I know is "in favor of abortion", so not sure what you mean yourself by that. It's ALWAYS a difficult decision and NO ONE goes happily into the abortion clinic or swallows those pills. At best there may be relief, perhaps gratitude but there is also angst of varying degrees. There is never joy; no one looks forward to aborting a pregnancy.

I and millions of others, women and men, the majority in this country, are in favor of women having safe abortion be easily accessible in case they are raped and impregnated, have chosen not to have children, their contraception fails (nothing is 100% as the abstention fans like to remind us) and this is not a time they are prepared to have a pregnancy/child, they have an ectopic pregnancy (life threatening), or other very good reasons for not continuing a pregnancy, what you call "problematic situations".

The point being, as you went on to say, that it is up to the woman to decide what's problematic and no one else.

If you're an older female or man you may not be aware that contraception is not as easy to obtain for everyone as we tend to think it is, for a lot of reasons, some having to do with insurance companies playing shell games with what they'll cover. Or you may not be aware that hormonal contraception often has side effects that women really don't like. Or that a lot of male partners are very resistant to using a condom every single time, or ever. This puts a lot of pressure on a woman at a very vulnerable moment. This is to say there may be a lot more "problematic situations" possible than you realize. Women bare the brunt of all the shit around sex, and if for no other reason, should have the sole responsiblility for choosing what to do in the case of an intended pregnancy.

Glad you went on to say it's not your business. I'm not sure we can compare the repeal of a basic human right for half the populatioin to the hearings on the insurrection, one being more important than the other. The public can do little at this point to change the outcome of the hearings or the consequences of them. The public can do a lot to push back against the overturn of Roe by staying mad and voting and getting everyone you know to vote in the mid-terms including state elections, where the future of abortion rights lies until Congress has the cajones to codify access to abortion and contraception into law.

The country is on fire, the empire is falling and we need to pay attention to all of it.

Rant over.

Expand full comment

Trudeau calls the decision horrific. "No government, politician, or man should tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her body." -Reuters. Canada has no laws regarding abortion.

Expand full comment

We need Trudeau to openly accept those of us who struggle seeing ourselves staying here in this disparate collection of states.

Expand full comment

The article went on to say there is an inadequate number of facilities that perform abortions, despite their legality. Perhaps our plight will encourage Canada to expand services. Though it could go the other way. There are conservatives in the political fringes who have proposed abortion bans.

Expand full comment

Not too long ago, in a backward Western town where I once lived, the local male pharmacist refused to fill "Day After" prescriptions, the local public hospital was closed by a Catholic newer hospital and women who were miscarrying had to go 60 miles away for a D&C, and a the newly elected councilwoman took info relating to locations of Planned Parenthood clinics in the state off the shelves at Public Health. Bye, bye, American Pie.

Expand full comment

Just so wrong.

Expand full comment

Excellent 'rant'....well said!

Expand full comment

Not too long ago, as in last week? Because that's happening, especially with Trump's rule about healthcare workers being able to refuse to provide care they feel is against their religion or conscience. South Caroline governor just passed a state law allowing the same.

I'm thinking we should all become lesbians but they're coming for gay marriage next.

Expand full comment
Jun 26, 2022·edited Jun 26, 2022

Yes, this RW SCOTUS has already said they plan to overturn gay marriage AND ban contraception in the Thomas decision. They want women to be forced to have babies, stay @ home and be broke and NO control over their own bodies. (Would they go so far as to mandate that women MUST submit to involuntary insemination? Who knows...)

Expand full comment

Beth - I'm an old male fart, but I think I'm aware of most, if not all, of the points you raise. There were no hidden meanings in what I said. "Problematic situations" was just shorthand for all the situations you mentioned and no doubt others. I do think the ramifications of the Jan. 6 insurrection and hearings are more important than the question of abortion because, if the insurrection stands, then there's no hope of resolving problems such as abortion, among many others. The only thing the public can do regarding the consequences of the Jan. 6 hearings is to vote overwhelmingly Democratic.

There were two amusing typos in your "rant": one "bears the brunt" (not "bares"), and it's "cojones" rather than "cajones", which means something else.

Now I've ranted again. Good night.

Expand full comment

J, I'm so pleased you found my silly typos amusing. Perhaps Autocorrect knew what she was doing with cajones as with all the unwanted babies about to come in the world, we may well be back to bedding them down in drawers . And might women both bear and bare the brunt of all the shit around sex that I mentioned? Ever seen a baby be born? Lotta baring, brunt and shit there.

But, J, you missed a meaningful typo. I meant to say UNintended pregnancy, not intended. That's not autocorrect's fault, but my typing too fast. Shouldn't have started a rant just before dashing off to my RN job helping women with their reproductive health needs.

Expand full comment

Beth - I'm pleased you have a sense of humor. I got a lot of feedback, some from people who don't have one. Either way, we shouldn't be too hard on Autocorrect: it's only human. J.

Expand full comment

You on the clock with the copy editing? From some white male-funded think tank that deploys useless trolls to cavil at/ fiddle with typos while Rome burns for women? Otherwise chomp your oats, you sorry Hobson’s choice of a representative “old fart” responder, and stay out in the useless former stud pasture while women are talking.

Expand full comment

You opened your post by stating, "Generally speaking, I'm not in favor of abortion". No one is actually 'in favor' of abortion. Anti-abortion activists often call pro-choice advocates "baby killers", and we are tempted to respond and defend our views. This sidesteps the real issue, which is that bans on abortion have not been found to actually decrease the number of abortions. To quote the NEJM article you cited, "Experience around the world has demonstrated that restricting access to legal abortion care does not substantially reduce the number of procedures, but it dramatically reduces the number of safe procedures, resulting in increased morbidity and mortality." Specifically, data from the WHO demonstrates that making abortions illegal actually has very little impact on the number of abortions performed - it simply drives desperate women to seek abortions that are illegal and dangerous. The tragic net effect of the recent decision by Alito, et al, will be to INCREASE human suffering and death. The responsibility for that result is upon the shoulders of every Republican. The cannot avoid the moral responsibility.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-where-abortion-is-illegal

Expand full comment

I certainly don't know, and doubt that you do, whether "nobody" is in favor of abortion. In any case, the point I was making is that decisions about abortion should be made only by the woman involved, not by me or by the government or anyone else. I think that was clear. We're on the same page regarding the consequences of abortion bans.

Expand full comment

I did not intend for my quoting of your opening line to criticize you, and if it was so interpreted, I apologize. My point - apparently insufficiently articulated - was to counsel that we avoid being lured into a binary "yes/no" debate, because it forces us to defend a procedure that pro-lifers will vigorously declare to be evil and end the conversation. I think it a better strategy to focus on the futility of banning abortion, which does not achieve their wished-for ends, and instead work to provide affordable contraception to all women - that method DOES reduce the number of abortions. But of course I agree that the woman - and not the government - should be the sole decisionmaker. Once again, mea culpa.

Expand full comment

To Frank V. and J. Horowitz---thank you for continuing your discussion beyond the initial exchange. This has been valuable in raising several good points that we should all pursue in discussing the current situation precipitated by SCOTUS---and also illustrated quite well how calm discussion can clarify statements and bring a more unified understanding, so to speak. Onward.

Expand full comment

Frank - No apologies or mea culpas necessary since there was no offense. My opening sentence in the original post certainly got a lot of feedback, but the main point was what followed. We're all on the same side in this.

Regards,

J

Expand full comment

Brilliant.

Expand full comment

Like your post after the opening line, but you sure buried the lede under a stinker.

What you opened with was exactly like saying, "Generally, I'm not in favor of heart surgery."

Seriously?

Trivially, yes, no one is in favor of having heart surgery, because no one ever wants a REASON to have heart surgery. But if you have a reason, no one is NOT in favor of it.

It is no different with abortion, and the fact that this would even be said has the subtext that the abortion is ... "recreational." Trivial. Unconsidered. Just the fancy of a silly woman.

The very statement of this opinion is to pass judgment, sight unseen, on the reason a woman is seeking to end a pregnancy.

NO WOMAN does this trivially. Just as no one trivially opts for heart surgery.

Expand full comment

Please don't put words in my mouth.

Expand full comment

That wasn't my intent. I've dropped plenty of class-centric comments in mixed company, and will inevitably drop many more, and while the rebukes I received stung at the time -- and some were vicious -- they were useful. I've assumed your intentions were benign, otherwise I'd not have bothered to comment.

I'm explaining how your words -- the words you wrote -- were read by me, and likely by others.

Expand full comment

Joseph N. - my intention was certainly benign. I received a lot of feedback, most understanding, three rather vitriolic (from the same person). If anyone understood what I said as implying abortion is "recreational" or the other phrases you mentioned, that certainly was not my meaning. We are on the same side in this issue.

Expand full comment

Not being in favor of an abortion means not having one yourself and nothing else. Your choice to not be “in favor of abortion” is simply your own personal choice and cannot impact anyone else’s personal choice or life experience.

At this moment in time I feel like it’s important to be clear - either you are FOR humans making their own personal choices or you’re against personal choice. Do or do not have an abortion. But you can’t decide to be against the choice for other bodies.

Expand full comment

Relax. It was clear from my post that I think that women should make their own choices about abortion. Aside from that, I am allowed to have and express opinions (1st amendment).

Expand full comment

How about telling a woman (in the imperative mood) “relax” and choosing to express your petulance about typos and “mah rights” in a discussion where your antiquated blattings are clearly not as good a fit as your probable “grouchy grammarian/aging (self-described) contrarian blog somewhere? And expressing to women what we “should” do (can anyone else see this one’s index finger wagging and the sprouting grey nose hairs waving in the wind as it pontificates)?

Expand full comment

Your patronizing response is unnecessary commentary. Glad you’re out here being authentic.

Expand full comment

Maigen - Sorry it came across as patronizing. Just being gently (I thought) sarcastic. Truce: we're on the same side.

Expand full comment

Brava, Maigen!

Expand full comment

Your 2 points here are very important:

1) Democrats must find a way to help Americans understand the fascist threat that faces us from “Republicans” so more people will join the fight to March these monsters out of all influence here.

and

2) And - as tragic as the Supreme Court decision is.- we must not let it distract us from number 1). The timing of the decision was probably part of the calculation to do just that.

.

Expand full comment

When someone like this says “for now,” women can be assured of a treat to follow, probably irrelevant insertions about his pearls of wisdom (spittle-flecked from pedantic lips) in comments to come….wait for it….

Expand full comment

Laura T. - sorry, but your vitriol in this and your other two responses to my comments say more about you than about me.

Expand full comment

J., vitriol is normal and to be expected for women with this wretched SC kill.

Expand full comment

Ashley R - Outrage at the Court is understandable and I share it. I'm also open to criticism, preferably constructive. But personal venom is another thing, at least in this forum (I hope). She really outdid herself.

Expand full comment

Let’s get loud, J!

Unidad!

Expand full comment

Very level-headed response, Christine. Copying to share on FB.

Unita!

Expand full comment

UNITAD more than ever, Lynell! It’s good we have so much practice under our gorgeous petticoats, our strong minds, fierce spirits, and beautiful hearts.

🙋🏻🙋🏼🙋🏽🙋🏾🙋🏿🗽

Expand full comment

Thank you, Christine from Florida. I am in Canada and I assure you, Canadian women will travel to march with you if need be. We are ENRAGED!!

Expand full comment

Great to read this solidarity from Canada❤️Thx!

Expand full comment

Yes, Christine ! You are a warrior! And 🤞for privacy clause in Fl Constitution !

Expand full comment

Brava!

Expand full comment

Foolish dreams. The far right has a strangle hold on the country, and this next election cycle will tilt it even further right. Basically, the Republican Party, as it is known now, will do exactly what they want. The rest of us will be screaming in the swamp. Look at how other single party, person, government treats dissent.

Expand full comment

As much as I wish I did not, I agree with your sentiment. The far right does indeed have a strangle hold on the country. The overturning of Roe is bad enough, but consider:

- the U.S. has the greatest number of COVID deaths in the world. Very Red areas like Mississippi and Alabama had the highest per capita death rates from COVID anywhere on the planet

- the U.S. has, by far, the highest number of gun deaths in the world

- the U.S. is the 2nd highest emitter of CO2, behind only China, which produces twice the CO2 we do with 3 times the population

- the U.S. has the highest income inequality of developed nations

- We have become a banana republic where a defeated president fabricated a lie of election fraud to facilitate an attempt to overturn the results, which resulted in a violent assault on the Capitol, and continues to be aided and abetted in that effort by an entire party - thus far with impunity.

And that party has, through gerrymandering, voter suppression, disinformation, propaganda-dispensing right wing media and packing of the Supreme Court with ideologues, solidified its political power despite its minority.

Those of us on the left have hoped that eventually some respect for our constitution and rule of law would bring us back from the brink of fascism, but it seems to me that hopes for peaceful reform of our government are fading fast. If this is true, where does that leave us?

Help me out here. I have not given up the fight, but I truly fear dark days lie ahead.

Expand full comment

Respectfully, Fred….shushie. That is a foolish thing to say on this day.

Expand full comment

Exactly, fantastic sister Christine! We need supporters, including these “Fr” fellas. Otherwise, they need to shushie for sure.

Expand full comment

Thank you Laura Thomas.

Expand full comment

Just happened to be up in a rage when Professor HCR’s missive pinged my inbox so happened to reply first with what a lot of us think…but welcome, of course!

Expand full comment

Such Originalist hypocrisy concerned about state's rights and the will of voters in each state. Barf! Where was that concern in Bush v Gore when it stepped in to stop vote counting in Florida to give the Presidency to W Bush on grounds that the use of different standards of vote counting in different Florida counties violated the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution? So much for deference to states. More bad stuff to come from SCOTUS, guaranteed. BUT if you don't vote from now on, you can not complain. If everyone voted, these clowns would be run out of town.

Expand full comment

A direct line can be drawn connecting todays events to those who boycotted the 2016 election because they were convinced that Clinton and the DNC had conspired to steal the nomination from Sanders.

You are absolutely correct. When a person stays home, they forfeit their right to complain.

Expand full comment

Good point! For those that stayed home in protest or worse went from Bernie to Trump in protest…’how did that workout for you’?

Expand full comment

And then RBG refused to give Obama a Court appointment.

I’ve said it for years, Democrats are the Democrats worst enemy.

Expand full comment

Let's focus blame where it really lies: with the GOP.

Expand full comment

Ellen - point taken. However, the "stay at home" protest vote comes in a close second. Just had a heated argument with a person yesterday who is justifying her threat to sit it out with the DNC "choosing" Biden instead of Sanders. There is no stupider thing to do - two sit out persons = one Republican vote.

Expand full comment

Absolutely Jay! Anyone who sits out their vote to essentially register a "childish pout" has no concept of the danger represented by the Republican party. My question to those pouters is "Who do you think you're hurting by not voting?"

Expand full comment

Like Manchin and Sinema?

Expand full comment

Oh, and some to Roberts as well. It's his court and he has turned a blind eye to White Supremacy, Cultism, Corruption and Treason. And...Can we now revisit exactly why Kennedy was conveniently booted off by the Trump Gang? And why Kavanaugh and Thomas have yet to be investigated? Can we pass a law regarding Court nomination timelines during an election year to level the playing field? Or... can we just say FU and pack the damn Court?

Expand full comment

The court is already packed with partisan hacks. What we need to do is expand the court to restore balance.

Expand full comment

MITCH MCCONNELL

Expand full comment

The decision was 6-3.

Had Bader-Ginsberg resigned, it would have been 5-4 against.

Instead of spilt milk, we need to focus on what’s in front of us.

Expand full comment

Had McConnell not decided that eight months before the 2016 Presidential election was too late to appoint Garland but it was OK to push Coney-Barrett through after Presidential voting had already started in 2020, the decision would have been 5-4 in the other direction. Chalk RBG's decision up to hubris, but Gorsuch and Coney-Barrett's presence on the Court were due to Republican larceny, pure and simple.

The core Republican approach to governing: it's not how you play the game, it's whether you win or lose that counts. There are a lot of smiling Republicans today.

Expand full comment

Their presence was also due to lying.

Expand full comment

We can revile Anthony Kennedy as well... He was aware this would happen and gave in to the pressure of the right wing.

Expand full comment

I am positive that there is something nefarious there.

Expand full comment

Disappointed a supreme court justice would bow to pressure.

Expand full comment
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 25, 2022

Yes, but had Obama had the nerve to install a judge with a recess appointment, it would be a different situation. Rather harder to get a 60 vote majority to kick the recess appointment off the bench.

Whoever said Dems are their own worst enemy is right. We get out-politicked, out-messaged, and unilaterally disarm.

Expand full comment

He also could have sued.

But it’s water under the bridge.

We need to get our act together for change. The past presents only learning opportunities.

Expand full comment

5/4 would have made Roberts relevant to the Court.

Now he’s just another voice in the wilderness.

Expand full comment

Robert’s tries to carve out a little Centrist niche for himself, but then ends up looking hapless and ineffectual. What a sad state for a position once held by Earl Warren.

Expand full comment

RBG had seen what Mitch McConnell had already done with Merrick Garland and knew that, if she stepped down, there would be a conservative majority on the court. I support her decision.

Expand full comment

She needed to step down in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 or 2014! She was an incredible, formidable woman who contributed so much to this country and the world and so very smart. But we each have an achilles heel. She was keenly aware she was living with 2 different always terminal cancers for at least 10 years and for whatever reason chose to roll the dice . It might have been her only mistake and we now pay the steep price. She would be more than horrified were she here. And, I am quite sure, would have inspired us to keep up the fight!! The war on women has just turned deadly and if we don't fight we'll be living the Handmaid's Tale!

Expand full comment

RBG was extraordinary. Perhaps a 1 in a billion in intellect, grace, and poise.

Expand full comment

That is the Republican intent- to turn women into 2nd class citizens; I wouldn't put it past this Court to renege on the 19th Amendment (and how many others?). They OBVIOUSLY don't believe in Stare Decisis unless it benefits their dark money donors.

Expand full comment

Reading a book about RBG and Sandra Day O’Conner. While glad to take the win, RBG was always frustrated about the basis upon which RvW was decided, fearing this exact thing would happen. She wanted the decision about abortion based on the 14th Amend and equality.

Expand full comment

I think I do too - she was hoping to hang in there until after the presidential election. She almost did.

Expand full comment

Yes! It gave me great comfort to know she was on the bench. She is my hero!!

Expand full comment

I adore RGB. But there was an argument for her to have stepped much earlier then Scalias death.

Expand full comment

She was a smart woman! God bless her!

Expand full comment

Obama tried to get her to retire long before McConnell blocked Garland.

Expand full comment
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 25, 2022

Could she have stepped down earlier in his term? This lesson has to be learned by current and future justices.

Expand full comment

I also.

Expand full comment

I know that she’s venerated by many (including me), but yes, I am angry with her for not stepping down when she was asked to do so. Had she done so, there would have been no Justice Amy Coney Barrett. Period.

Expand full comment

It is always more complicated and we will never really understand why she did not retire earlier. But we forget that the Democrats did not have a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. Any nomination would have been blocked. Just like how Kavanaugh's and Comey-Barrett breezed through as the Republicans had the votes to over-ride any filibuster. No, we need to turn our eyes inward and put the blame squarely where it belongs, on us fickle voters who act like we are electing 7th grade class president.

Expand full comment

The Dems had a supermajority in the first Obama administration. Hence ACA. They could have secured abortion rights then as well.

Expand full comment

And don’t forget either the three actually LIED under oath. SC justice nominees!

Expand full comment

Seventh grade class president, indeed! “Vote for me, I’m the guy who was not the president while gas prices and inflation were a global phenomenon. But it was his fault for being elected.”

Expand full comment

No, they stopped Obama from appointing anyone and they would have stopped him again. We would have just had Amy Coney Barrett for longer.

Expand full comment

Democrats (at this point in history) are the decent people who play by the rules.

Republicans are not, and they don't (and I say this as a former Republican). Democrats can still maintain our integrity, "go high" and prevail if we all just acknowledge that Democrats are the majority in this country. 101,000,000 US citizens did NOT vote in 2020 and based on statistics 2/3 of THIS group are Democrats/Independents. ALL of us just need to vote like our right to vote depends on it, because apparently now it does. No more blame, we no longer have that luxury, we must be laser-focused solely on getting out the Vote!

Expand full comment

100%! More voters solve so many of our problems.

Expand full comment

Do you really think if she had retired Moscow Mitch would have allowed An Obama nominee? Seriously? How did that work out for Garland? RBG kept the wolves at bay for a while longer.

Expand full comment

She was heroic.

Expand full comment

In the early part of Obama first term she could have. Mitch had no say then.

Expand full comment
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 25, 2022

I love RBG. But she made an error of judgement. Believing Hillary would win 2016, she could be the first female President to appoint another female progressive to the court. Even RBG could not see that through SM, white grievance populism, and Russian interference TFG would be elected. This one decision is indeed a haunting tragedy.

Expand full comment

Justice Ginsburg made her decision from the same heart and mind that was dedicated to justice her entire career. I believe she deserves respect for that.

Expand full comment

“Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” “I am not a member of any organized political party; I’m a Democrat.” The dems seem incapable of making common sense statements about anything. It is all hand wringing sensitivity, don’t ruffle any feathers, hold your breath and hope your coalition holds. They are afraid of losing even a single vote. They are playing the short game. The GOP long game began with Reagan opening his presidential campaign in Philadelphia MS, where Schwerner, Cheney, and Goodman were killed.

Expand full comment

👍🏼

Expand full comment

...and where he did a 180 degree turn from "pro-choice" to "anti-abortion" because that was part of the strategy to gain and keep power, no matter justice or rights. We need a better long game!

Expand full comment

And if RBG had retired during the Obama Administration, McConnell would have blocked the nominee to replace her, just as he blocked Garland.

Expand full comment

Why couldn’t Democrats have blocked more R nominees?

More voters solves so many of our problems.

Expand full comment

Have you forgotten that President Obama did have a supreme court justice lined up and it was Mitch McConnell who refused to allow discussion! But RBG should have retired earlier, and here in California, Ms.Feinstein should retire while the democrats still hold the slimest of possibilities that another democrat could be appointed, before the dreaded 2024 elections. Oh, my. Do we ever have WORK to do!! Freedom isn't "free" and we have to FIGHT for what is RIGHT!

Expand full comment

Don't blame RBG. Do you really think McConnell would have allowed action on a replacement?

Expand full comment

👍🏼

Expand full comment

I always feel like I am disrespectful for criticizing RBG for not stepping down

Expand full comment

She did her best trying to hang on and hoping for Hillary Clinton to be elected. Obama was stopped earlier and would have been stopped again. We would have just had the same thing.

Expand full comment
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 26, 2022

Addressed to H. H. Rose and Bradley:

I lived in Michigan in 2016 which was recognized along with PA and WI as one of three states causing the election of trump. Before I start on my numbers, I do have to say as a Dem a part of many, we recognized we were in trouble 6-8 weeks out. The DNC did not respond to Michigan Dems asking for help.

Moving on, it is important to note, more people turned out in 2016 to vote in PA and MI than in 2012. I do not mean a few either, it was hundreds of thousands. WI in 2016 did not fair as well and the total was ~90,000 less than in 2012. Did people stay home, maybe true in WI. They did turn out in PA and MI.

What is important is how did they vote? Trump won all three states which went DEM in presidential elections since 1992. You can not gerrymander presidential and senatorial elections. now to my point(s).

In 2012, the vote for "Others" in all three states was 161,951. In 2016, the vote for "Others" was 707,536. In 2020, the Vote for Others was 250,441. Data off of Balllotpedia. Your numbers may be different but I doubt the percentage who voted for "Others" is much different. Note in 2016 a huge difference in the vote for others as compared to 2012 and 2020.

People did turn out and vote in 2016. Except the percentage vote in "Others" was 3 - 4+ times greater than in 2012. Voting for Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, neighbors, Libertarians, Constitutional, Socialist party were up, etc.

If we were to assume in all three states, those who voted for "Others" in 2016 minus the numbers from 2012 were Dems, and reversed it; Clinton would have won. I am not going to do the other options.

People voted. Voted for anyone but trump of Clinton.

Lecture over . . .

Expand full comment

Agreed-at least some responsibility for this must be laid at the feet of the Clintonians

Expand full comment

2016 Michigan, 63% turnout, meaning 37% or 1,785,000+ did not show up. Add in protest votes and that is a good amount of people who have no right to complain and I think, are responsible for bad results in that, if all people voted then the 'will of the people' is clear. Here are voter turnout rates by ethnicity. Note that for Obama, non-hispanic Blacks were highest demographic, while for 2016 and 2020 highest turnout ethnicity was non-hispanic whites. A lot of people are sitting on the sidelines! http://www.electproject.org/home/voter-turnout/demographics

Expand full comment

Bradley;

What are you using to derive the 100%? Is it VEP = "represents an estimate of persons eligible to vote regardless of voter registration status in an election."

I compared actuals from 2012 to 2020. It is easy enough to go back and see what was occurring if I feel like. I have a different site for that excursion (not that I am going to do it).

If your beef is voter turn out, in many elections there is always a percentage who never turn out. I did not consider ethnicity. And yes there are many people sitting on the sidelines who will gripe later. 2016 was peculiar and we got trump.

The point here is the anyone but trump or Clinton gave trump the election.

Sanders has his own axe to grind and many do not like him. Clinton has a not-so-good legacy. I would have picked Sanders over trump the same as I picked Biden over trump and Clinton over trump.

We will not know how well Sanders would have done. I suspect he would not have faired well amongst many for various reasons.

Does the site calculate an average turnout over multiple elections? Consider maybe Eisenhower onward?

Expand full comment

Top blaming Bernie Sanders. It’s ignorant.

There are many reasons Hilary Clinton and DNC lost, amount them are not having a fifty state strategy.

STOP BLAMING SANDERS!

Expand full comment

The Clintonians are far more to blame for this than Sanders or the Bros. I say this having voted HRC in 2016. In California.

Many decisions were made (or not, in some cases) by centrist Democratic leaders over the last three decades that helped things get to this point.

Expand full comment

Agreed. Also, “democratic” third party candidates have to go after the primaries. Splitting our vote to find the “perfect” candidate will never work for us and will continue to lose us elections. Republicans have managed to focus on (all the wrong) positions and shape their base to all of the wrong policies. Surely Dems can take that playbook and run to the finish line with rational and humane arguments? Anything less will give us minority rule by the least among us, I.e.Republicans.

Expand full comment

Recall their sainted Scalia intoned ‘…to have an extended recount would damage the legitimacy of Bush’s administration…!’ (Paraphrase)!

Indeed where does the constitution support such spurious reasoning?

Scalia, the ultimate con man, beguiling RBG through their mutual affinity toward opera!

Expand full comment

I hope he's in a circle of Hell all to himself

Expand full comment

Scalia, who authored the original fraud redefining the 2nd Amendment to allow massive gun sales, often went hunting on the dime of gun lobbyists. SC ethics code, anyone?

Expand full comment
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 26, 2022

I have said this before, communities can ban assault weapons such as an AR15 and such has been done in Cook County and Highland Park, IL. It was upheld in 7th District COA and SCOTUS agreed with the 7th District COA June 2020. The ban follows the guidelines which Scalia's Heller decision put in place. Heller did say assault type of weapons can be banned.

Except in TX which is not part of the Union anyway. :)

Expand full comment

perhaps the portly robed con man was a dashing hunter!? NOT! ethics codes are for the peons!

Expand full comment

Scalia did like hunting, very much. The problem is that he hunted from luxury lodges paid for by gun lobbyists, and then mangled the Constitution he took an oath to serve in order to please his hosts, unleashing carnage on the country he pledged to serve.

Expand full comment

The Originalist hypocrisy regarding states' rights is their chance to deliberately IGNORE the Federal Supremacy clause in the Constitution.

Expand full comment

That clause is obviously missing in ‘their’ constitution, just as the phrase “…a well formed militia…” is missing!!!

Expand full comment

Oh how I wish that were true!

Expand full comment

It's been obvious for years that the GOP wants what it wants and will use States Rights to get it, or a Federal ban or Presidential proclamation if that works. There is no consistent theory or process here. They want a white, male dominated, Christian (their definition, not mine) free of oversight (except the oversight they want) gun toting country that celebrates Thanksgiving without Indians and Columbus Day with statues in place. They want some of the wild west with Puritan overtones. That's an interesting combination. Doc Holiday and George Hearst meet Carrie Nation & Jeff Davis in McCarthy's 1950's. That's pretty surreal isn't it. Rod Serling or Ray Bradbury could probably do something with that in a time travel "Something Wicked this Way Comes" meets Nightmare at 30,000' with Shatner & Lithgow.

Expand full comment

With so much inconsistent reasoning across multiple cases, could states start passing laws implementing a liberal agenda using Supreme Court logic in conservative cases? Is there a pro-choice argument that can be based on the concealed-carry justification in Bruen? Is gun control legislation possible based on the state's rights arguments of Dobbs? What doors were opened by the reasoning in Carson that refusing state funding of religious schools somehow violates religious freedom?

Hoist the Supreme Court on the petard of the specious justifications they used to impose their will and personal viewpoints instead of upholding the law and Constitution. They deserve no less.

Expand full comment

Don’t know in detail but California often feels like a totally different country than much of the rest the US. Might happen in California if any state.

Expand full comment

Good questions. I wish I knew the answers.

Expand full comment

Surreal AND insane

Expand full comment

What a perfect synopsis, Mike, of what the GOP has become.

Expand full comment

Thank you. It all gelled yesterday after watching the J6 Hearings and then the SCOTUS news on Roe. The release of the Supreme's decision was obviously an attempt to blunt the J6 news and give conservatives a victory before July 4. I really feel the GOP has totally screwed up. They now have Dems fighting mad, who will register folks to vote and get them out in numbers. Roe is not a victory...it's now Remember the Alamo or Remember 9-11 for the Libs. They have a cause...Women have a cause. People with a heart & soul have a cause.

Expand full comment
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 25, 2022

Thank you, Mike. That is the truth and correct focus instead of some on this forum already commenting and blaming Ruth Bader Ginsberg for the current debacle and focusing on Democrats being the enemy. Unbelievable. On such a day as this when half the population of this country became enslaved and in servitude to a government decision yesterday. It sickens my spirit. I could wallop such a commenter on this day. And I’m sure there will a lot more of same in days to come.

Someone said to me yesterday….America…overturns Roe v. Wade but can’t get enough baby formula on grocery shelves. Exactly. Keep that non regulation coming, Republicans.

I just wonder what same commenters will say when they have to drive across states for a vasectomy to protect their reproductive freedom or order condoms from the black market.

Keep Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s name out your mouths on this day.

Salud, Mike, and thank you for helping to pry an arrow out of our souls today.

Expand full comment

Yes, Christine. Let's keep our focus on the future, not on what someone did/didn't do in the past. We need to VOTE these scumbags out. Every. Single. One.

Expand full comment

That is fascinating. What garbage are your friends spewing? My KoolAid buddy (former sergeant of mine) threw that "RBG did not like Roe" and posted an article. What the article said was that RBG thought the case was decided on a privacy issue rather than a due process issue. I pointed out that RBG was a staunch proponent of reproductive rights from conception to after birth; part of that is the availability of safe, legal abortions.

Expand full comment

Blessings on you, Christine, for comments, your sauciness, your energy.

I’m so pissed I could spit. I’m esp. unsettled anticipating other shoes dropping.

Expand full comment
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 25, 2022

Christine, in summary, Democrats: Circle The Wagons!

Expand full comment
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 25, 2022

Agreed about RBG. Thanks for reminding me about vasectomies and condoms. Condoms for disease prevention could be disallowed because they could act as contraceptives.

Expand full comment

Well said.

Expand full comment

This before the midterms may have saved the country.

Expand full comment

This is what I'm clinging to. They could have saved these decisions for right after the midterms and we wouldn't have been handed this ENORMOUS incentive to get out the vote.

We'd damn well better take this terrible, horrible decision and use it in our favor.

Expand full comment

So, whose going to high school grads and getting them registered to vote? Who is giving rides to the polls, and working in the election process to keep it uncorrupted? Who examines judges up for election? Who is checking out funding sources for candidates? To those of you doing the work, I applaud you.

Expand full comment

The League of Women voters does this!

Expand full comment

Mike As a realist, I am greatly concerned about the November elections. Under FDR, when the economy turned sour (‘Roosevelt recession,’), in 1938 the Democrats suffered in the 1938 congressional elections. Ditto with Truman in 1946, after the post-WW II peacetime economic disruptions. Inflation, gas prices, and the absence of some critical Democratic legislation, augurs poorly for the Dems in November.

I consider it highly likely that the House will be Republicans. We have a chance in the Senate, in part because the Republicans have a number of poor candidates. Hope for the House, work your butt off on senatorial contests. Chinless Mitch as Senate Majority Leader would block President Biden on everything, including any replacement on the Supreme Court.

Expand full comment

I hear you. The two BIG differences are the Trump effect and split in the GOP and the Roe decision. I think folks are fired up...and the GOP won't stop grabbing what they can. But it's all going to take focused work.

Expand full comment

I agree with your analyses but suggest we all stick to the facts and get rid of “chinless Mitch” comments outside of our living rooms. I’m guilty at home, too. But to make public discourse civil-and stick to the facts-should be a Democratic cornerstone. Bile is useless. It causes wrecks on the freeway and in our public forums. I appreciate your (and others’) opinions on this site, so much. Thank you.

Expand full comment

❤️

Expand full comment

Folks need to understand where the battle is...who the enemy is (and I hate calling other Americans, "the enemy") Intramural BS is a waste of time and focus. Get real. The King was the enemy. Jeff Davis was the enemy. Hitler was the enemy. Trump is the enemy...and the people who support them.

Expand full comment

Naw, he’s just a representation of what has been created here. There are plenty others who will fall in line when he’s gone or not elected. The disease is in greed and power. Follow the money. Always follow the money. One day we may all learn what really matters in life, love, truth, compassions. But til then these are just the things that will keep happening over and over again and usually strangely in the name of Christianity.

Expand full comment

You're right. The disease is greed & power. Trump is our current ultimate manifestation of that. and it will repeat. But we NEED to DEAL with this, NOW.

Expand full comment

This girl nails it....https://twitter.com/MeidasTouch/status/1540489008001691650

Expand full comment

emoleary, I'm going to the top of this page and reposting. Thanks so much for this link.

Expand full comment

I hope you are right!

Expand full comment

I used to think that logic, good sense, adherence to the facts, and basic decency would win any argument in the political arena (or elsewhere). Wrong again! None of these are adhered to by the current GOP. Except for a few, I don't doubt that most Republican politicians are intelligent enough; rather, avoidance and disdain of these characteristics has become their modus operandi on purpose. As others have said here, the Republicans have played the long game. Very difficult to combat. Only overwhelming voting can win the day.

Expand full comment

What they have always been since the swap.

Expand full comment

The Christian Taliban.

Expand full comment

Yes, as you say, for the GOP, consistency was never the point. Their end(s) justify their means. But there is one point of consistency, a through-line: that we are their enemy. The zealots among them were never concerned about life but some perverse conception of purity (of the fetus, of their brand of Christianity, of their conception of Nature as intended by their god, of their conception of the "free" market vs. "godless" socialism and communism, and so on). The attack on gun laws and the Dobbs abortion ruling, along with that ruling's attack the most personal aspects of our privacy concerns, amount to a declaration war on those they deem impure, which means us, the demonized liberals, the "woke," social justice warriors, etc. (epithets all to them). It's little wonder they arm their followers to the teeth, knowing that liberals are less likely own, much less fetishize guns. I honestly do not think it is hyperbole to suggest that the zealots are on the fascist path of "cleansing," which means ridding themselves of the impure. They have rightwing militias. They create vigilante laws in TX and elsewhere. Their brown shirts/red hats are going after LGBTQ+ again after years of relative peace. There's too much more to write here.

It's time for the majority (that is, us) to regain control of our nation -- by voting, yes, by protesting, yes, of course. But also, we must actively fight back and resist their illegitimate control on our society.

Expand full comment

I heard Heather refer to "us" and "them" yesterday. That is good enuf for me. I had resisted the temptation to define Americans this way; fearing to add to the polarization that has encircled this country. But here we are and it seems like the right time.

Expand full comment

The ballot box is where it's at. Focus there. Good candidates. Well defined and working it.

Expand full comment

Mike, I think the right-wing and far right-wing have made their objectives clear and acted on them. Heather spells it out, along with the history of the Republican party and a good sense of the Democratic Party over time as well.

Expand full comment

When does your movie start shooting?

Expand full comment

Want to fund it ? Audition? Write the script ?

Expand full comment

I really just wanted to use the word "shooting" to make you smile.

Expand full comment

Interesting review of recent realities

Expand full comment

One of the DARKEST days in history. It portends more to come for Women, making us not only 2nd class Citizens, but Chattel! Welcome to the 18th century! There is only one thing to do! The BALLOT BOX in November. Vote only BLUE. Do NOT let any Republiclithug win any seat in the house, in the Senate, in your State, turn the Country BLUE. Then let's see what happens! Vote as if your life depends on it, because it does!

Expand full comment

I dare say, Eileen, you're in good company:

"Today, the Supreme Court expressly took away a constitutional right from the American people. They didn't limit it, they simply took it away.

"It's a sad day for the court and for the country. Fifty years ago, Roe v. Wade was decided, and it has been the law of the land since then. This landmark case had protected women's right to choose. It reaffirmed basic principles of equality. And it reinforced a fundamental right of privacy, the right of each of us to choose how to live our lives. Now, with Roe gone, the health and lives of women in this nation are at risk.

"Let me be very clear and unambiguous. The only way we can secure the right to choose is for Congress to restore Roe v. Wade as federal law. No executive action from the president can do that. If Congress, as it appears, lacks the votes to do that now, voters need to make their voices heard this fall.

"This November, we must elect more senators and representatives who will fight back. We need to elect more state leaders to protect this right at the local level. We need to restore the protections of Roe as law of the land.

"This decision must not be the final word. We will use all appropriate, lawful powers, but Congress must act. With your vote, you can act. You can have the final word. This is not over.

Thank you for your support."

Joseph R. Biden, Jr.

President of the United States

Expand full comment

"Today, the Supreme Court expressly took away a constitutional right from the American people. They didn't limit it, they simply took it away."

Expand full comment

If ever there was a time to end the filibuster this is it. It’s long past time to put the majority back in control.

Expand full comment

I'm not sure where to put this comment, so I'll just stick it here.

The Supreme Court's decisions these past few weeks has caused me to lose

total faith in that institution. It is now illegitimate.

If this country were a computer we would take in for repair, install a new operating system and used interface.

It is now dysfunctional.

Expand full comment

I have much more faith in powerful crystals linking us to Light. Especially the amethyst and clear and rose quartz ones. Make sure they get summer solstice moonlight, Charlie.

Salud!

Expand full comment

I've got a lovely amethyst one. Does the winter solstice work?

Expand full comment

Yes! Just add your intention.

Salud, Anna-Louise!

Expand full comment

Yep. "Daisy....Daisy...."

Expand full comment

Charlie, many subscribers post at the end of the line; some who are responding to someone link up with them; others who want to make sure that they are read (not willing to be in the back of the bus) jump in near the top, where they're more likely to get attention. Surprised you were not familiar with pattern.

Expand full comment

I do not understand why executive action cannot be a temporary remedy. It would go a long way toward getting people to the polls. Many are not going to show up, because they know it just won't matter. Cannot overstress how disappointed young progressives are. They want someone to wave a magic wand over this and make it better.

Expand full comment
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 25, 2022

So... they're disappointed...

Who isn't?

But they're still alive and free, still responsible.

And... because they're disappointed -- poor little blind kittens Mom hasn't yet washed behind the ears -- they go vote for Fascists. And Fascists will ensure that citizens never vote freely ever again.

Can't these silly, spoiled kids understand the kind of world they're up against, and their responsibility as citizens of the USA to rise up again every time they are knocked down, rise, take a beating, rise again, take another beating, never, ever admit defeat?

Tell them to look at their unfortunate contemporaries fighting and dying in Ukraine, understand how fortunate they themselves still are, then understand what may face them too if they fail to do their duty to themselves, their duty as human beings...

Can they not understand that to fail to vote is worse than treason? It is a vote for the enemies of humanity, it is to betray not just America, not only mankind, but the very planet we all live on?

Expand full comment

STOP, stop it.

You’re trashing young people?!!! You’re blaming young progressives?!! “Silly, spoiled kids”??? “… they want a magic wand…”?! You’re putting our dire, absurd, unthinkable, dangerous predicament on THEIR heads? Seriously?

First of all, you must not know many — any? — young people. They are at least as fired up, maybe even more so, as many of us were back in the day. They. Get. It.

Second, WE DID THIS! We handed them this world. OUR older generations have made this frightening mess. Guns, fascism, governing by conspiracy, climate terror, gutted-out middle class, housing crises, ignored infrastructure maintenance, on and on and on.

Please, DO NOT BLAME THIS ON YOUNG PEOPLE! Whatever we do, however we interpret, whatever solutions we scramble for, however ANGRY we are, PLEASE.

This is NOT THEIR FAULT.

In fact, they are our abiding hope.

Expand full comment

So many soft heads in America. Soft heads, hard hearts. Or no hearts at all...

If you paid closer attention to what I wrote you'd see plainly enough:

I am not "trashing" the young, I am certainly not blaming them, I am GOADING them. And everyone else. I am yelling "Fire!" I am trying to wake people up to danger. Before it is too late!

All my life I've had friends and companions who were older than me. Or younger. Men and women who'd fought and suffered in the Second World War. In Europe. In Asia. In my forties, my youngest friends were twenty years younger, my oldest mentor, a lady who adopted me the moment we met. I was 42, she was 90.

Another feature, mixing with and learning from men and women from different cultures, Asian, African, European.

Now, of course, "older" doesn't make much sense any more. But I still have good friends three to four decades younger than myself.

Less direct contact with the very young, but here I do have two things to say:

First, that among the human beings I've met in the past couple of decades, some small children made a particularly deep impression. Great human beings. Diogenes would have needed no lantern to find them.

Secondly, the teenagers with whom I do speak have their problems, but they have qualities and maturity I could never dream of at their age. If more adults were as alive and awake as these, we'd be living in a very different world.

And they have to climb uphill, each rolling his or her great rock like Sisyphus, in a world where the spoilt kids of the wealthy and powerful are well set up for life regardless of native ability but others must make their own way. No doubt, more advantageous for them in time than never to have faced obstacles...

But if the discouraged don't pull themselves together fast, they risk ending up in a prison regime with far, far deeper cause for discouragement...

In my experience, the very best friends I have known have been those who knew when to play the enemy, forcing me to confront what I didn't want to see or know. Anyone who finds such friends will be most fortunate.

Expand full comment

Oh I do know young people, and I respectfully disagree that they do not have a role to play here, and I fear will not do it well. I have a family of them. Two of which are so angry and disappointed in what has and has not happened that they literally are ready for the USA to implode, and hope that something better comes up out of the ashes. Yes - they think that. I have two more who have literally fled the country, partly for political reasons. Although they can still vote. Will they? Dunno. They believe that the DNC screwed them by pushing Biden over Sanders, as if anything would be different had that taken place. They all did their part in 2020 and held their collective noses and voted Biden/Harris, but now are seeing practically nothing for it. They blame Biden for being "centrist" despite my arguments that he has our most progressive lawmakers' backs, and must do a delicate balance to maximize effectiveness. And they do not seem to realize that DNC did what they did because they figured that was the best formula for taking back power. The alternative was too dire to risk, and I am sure there was good polling out there to justify what they did. It worked and we will never know if a Bernie/Warren ticket would have worked or not. They fail to realize that to achieve their vision (and mine BTW) they need to look at the current administration as a stepping stone across a very wide stream. Wide enough that a single step will not get to the other side. A means to an end. They fail to adequately recognize that staying home in disgust will play straight into the hands of the Republicans, who might just make their power grab permanent. They fail to realize the power of the Senate filibuster in a closely divided Senate, and that the way to overcome it is to vote in more blue Senators, starting this November. They constitute a huge voting block that could swamp the Republicans. Let's see the numbers this November - I hope I am pleasantly surprised.

Expand full comment

Peter, how can these “silly kids” see and understand the world” when the adults in the room are dismantling and destroying their country and their future. The great disconnect between party and country, of Democracy, and what we have modeled and mentored, is not the fault of children. It’s the greed and corruption and failure of our system. And the adults in the room.

Expand full comment
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 25, 2022

Sure, isn't that plain?

There's even hope in it -- the disease is getting so extreme, it can be a sign that the stinking regime is coming to an end.

Of course it's not the youngsters' fault, but they're getting thrown in at the deep end and it's they who'll have to live with the world our generations are bequeathing to them.

Now past 80, my overriding concern is FOR THEM, their future, their happiness, their freedom from the meaningless rage, greed and violence into which we are currently descending.

And I have some reason for this. I am a war child born a month into what Britons called "the phony war". I may have lived in an island that was safe, never invaded, but I've not forgotten the bombs, the air raid sirens, the shelters, fire, destruction. That is where I developed a horror of war and a horror of the kind of men who unleash death and the machinery of death on human beings.

That is why I spent so much time in Germany, trying to learn from people decades younger than myself. Not easy.

If there's one thing I'm sure of, it is the need for a strong alliance between young and old -- too many of the rest are useless. Brainwashed. Conditioned. Unfree. Either on the treadmill or worse.

Therefore I was cheered by the successes of Bernie Sanders and bitterly disappointed by the machine politics that drove his campaign and the young into sidings. But that is neither here nor there, what counts now is that there is not a moment to be lost, and it is the prospective victims of oligarchic tyranny who need to rise up now as one being and play their full part in the struggle for a better world. Those with experience can back them, maybe help, and counterbalance their mix of energy and inexperience.

I read of concern to protect youngsters, especially university students, from unpleasant truths and the very idea shocks me to the core. Our first need is to stand our ground and take stock of WHAT IS. Only then shall we be able to act appropriately on our circumstances.

“Rise like Lions after slumber

In unvanquishable number-

Shake your chains to earth like

dew

Which in sleep had fallen on you

Ye are many-they are few.”

Expand full comment

If they watch FOX 24/7 no they can’t understand anything because they’ve been brainwashed. This is what we’re up against, a population whose ignorance and frustration has been weaponize. Figuratively and literally.

Expand full comment
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 25, 2022

You haven't generalized Peter but mischaracterized. The vast majority of young people in America are not rich. They lived through the Grand Recession, which set back most Americas, some of whom lost their homes. The red states spend much less on education, so the paucity of important subjects, such as civics, music, art and much more have shortchanged the children. Families, youth, seniors... need support from the country, which they do not receive. Biden made some improvements, but the Republicans have voted against legislation that would have provided a big boost. Very importantly, you are correct in stating more young people need to vote. The wealth of the American people has been taken from us over the past 45 years. The American youngsters that you described were imagined.

Expand full comment
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 25, 2022

So much irrelevance. First sentence, second sentence, final sentence -- my imagination doesn't stretch to that, nor do I need to imagine the kids I know. I fear you too are getting yourself sidetracked by awful events, but concern for the rising generations will never sidetrack anyone.

It's they that matter now.

Oh, and "spoiled" in my book has nothing to do with wealth or material comfort. Spoiled is when kids' minds have been poisoned and they've been made blind to reality. Like too many of their elders.

Expand full comment
Jun 25, 2022·edited Jun 25, 2022

Peter, I was not sidetracked by ' awful events' rather. it was your comment that alerted me to, perhaps, bringing you up to date. Clearly, you will not give up your 'perfectly' misguided description of America's youth. Instead, you have provided us with a bushel of your experiences and 'insight'. Your 'spoiled' children, Peter, is not how I would describe the influence of parents, race, class and place on young people. Salud!

Expand full comment

Oh, your comments are spot on!!! I had to tell my 31 year old granddaughter this morning to please listen to at least a smidgen of national news (she hadn't heard about the court's decision). And I also told her that she has a responsibility as a citizen to pay attention to national news headlines and most importantly, to VOTE!

Your comment that "to fail to vote is worse than treason" is a stretch--I wouldn't go that far! But I do think, like Australia, people should be fined for not voting, and national election days should be on a Saturday & Sunday. Schools would be freed to be polling places, less costly all around, and almost guaranteeing participation. We could make it a tad easier to vote!

I also think we need to let non-voting folks know that they do not have to vote for everything on the pages! I say that because here in CA, we have too many propositions on the ballot that are confusing and annoying. If we don't have kids in school, we don't have to vote for superintendent of schools. It's OK to leave some boxes unchecked. I think a lot of the populace don't know that!

(I'm relatively new to this blog, and so happy i found it--I'm about as far west as a person can get, so comments will be late, and will be few...)

Expand full comment

Disappointed? Magic wand? There is no magic wand - there is only our responsibility to VOTE!!! Another wave of people who "know it just wont matter - so wont show up? Really? And that worked so well in 2016, didnt it?

Expand full comment

You are of course right. The "magic wand" is "Biden - do something about it!" Ironic - that Trump would try to find ways to overextend his power when president. I agree though - that some sort of exec action is needed here. I continue to suspect a statistically significant number of young progressives will stay home in disgust, and that will add to the large swath who will stay home just because. It's been that way forever especially for midterms. It is so frustrating to me, because they collectively have so much political power. I want to be proven wrong.

Expand full comment

I do agree - have to hope that whatever brought out voters in the 2018 midterms could possibly come to pass again in 2022. I guess a few prayers wouldnt hurt either!

Honestly, I really do NOT understand anyone who refuses to vote because their "chosen" candidate isnt running. I think most of us have voted for the lesser of 2 evils more than once.

Expand full comment

I saw AOC on Twitter asking Biden to open up abortion clinics on Federal land. Not sure how doable that is, but...

Expand full comment

Elizabeth Warren said the same thing.

Expand full comment

Sorry, but I have to say that anyone wanting a magic wand to be waved is just young, not progressive.

Expand full comment

Discrimination is discrimination is discrimination! Time for another underground railroad?!!!

Expand full comment

No. Go on offense. Time for a Supreme Court purge and return to Roe. Expand the court, force the losers out, or both. These creeps are an abomination.

Expand full comment

…and yes, build the Underground Railroad as well.

Expand full comment

Yes, that too.

Expand full comment

We need more “woke” citizens. Too many are enthralled by the Kardashians or the Real Housewives bull Schitt. I’m sure 99% of HCR readers will do just that. But too many are asleep at the wheel. Hope current events will wake up a few. How dare that idiot tool Thomas think that he has the right to get into anybody else’s bedroom? Well, I’m sure Ginni told him. Lock them both up.

Expand full comment

Wait until Thomas’s undoing of the constitution and amendments makes his own marriage unconstitutional. But he and she won’t care. Just like now they don’t care. The supremes are more interested in power than in justice.

Expand full comment