Fallout continues over the leaked draft decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the draft overturning Roe v. Wade. Tonight, in addition to the “non-scalable” fence erected last night, Capitol Police are placing concrete barricades around the United States Supreme Court. Legal commentator Joyce White Vance tweeted: “Odd that the Supreme Court is acting like they’re under assault, when it’s actually us who are under attack by them.”
I will not go back to being treated a second class citizen! I broke the glass ceiling and I'm not going to allow these control freaks take us backwards and make the next generations have to do it again and again. It rather tickles me that the Supreme Court is preparing for siege. Remember the Women's March in 2017. Millions protested and no one was arrested. We need to keep to non-violent protesting. Our strength is in our numbers and having a worthy cause! By our I mean all of us this time working for women's rights, immigration reform, healthcare reform, disability justice, reproductive rights, the environment, LGBTQ rights, racial equality, freedom of religion, workers' rights and tolerance. (Go enjoy refreshing your memory at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Women%27s_March) I sense a huge movement from all those determined not to lose their rights and, in fact, expand them and make sure everyone (every one, no one left behind) benefits with lives of well-being and community. Like my alma mater, M.I.T., where each and every individual is respected just because they are there, we can have a country where everyone is respected just because they exist! Let's quit competing for a slice of the pie and start making more and bigger pies valuing our differences as synergistic strength. Let's do the right thing by each other and our communities. Let's go forward to phase 2 of this beautiful experiment of democracy and take humanity to the next level of maturity and well-being for all. We, the People, all of us this time. The People's March begins now!
Thank you, Heather, for this brilliant gauge of the rising temperatures.
The Women's March has called for a day of protest on 14th May. Any differences of opinion with their leaders should be set aside and we should all be out on the streets!
"Legal commentator Joyce White Vance tweeted: 'Odd that the Supreme Court is acting like they’re under assault, when it’s actually us who are under attack by them.'"
We ARE under attack -- our rights are under attack: men, women, LGBTQIA, BIPOC, ALL.OF.US! We really must unite against this latest attack on our freedoms and our very being.
Thanks! The first one in Chicago was tremendously inspiring. People of all ages who had never before rallied or protested came out, and the solidarity was powerful. Far from being ineffectual as some have suggested, it showed new participants the power of nonviolent protest and the importance of showing up. It showed longtime organizers that new people are ready to roar and vote and etc. And it surely led to new connections and a heightened attention and worldview going forward. Voters came out in 2018 and again in 2020, and we will do so again in 2022. People who marched for women later marched for Black Lives Matter. I know, because my mom and I did. And friends of ours did. Showing up always matters. Keep showing up, keep roaring, keep being in solidarity across all the social justice issues. We are powerful individually and collectively. And sing! Songs are powerful and motivating.
Rhea Graham, I could not agree more. One irony is that the attacks are being led by a political party that includes an arm in Congress that has the gall to call itself the "Freedom Caucus". Pure Orwellian behavior at every level...
I agree m, Laura! I have participated in almost every single Women’s March and flew to DC with both of my daughters in 2019. It was quite the experience for them and for me too. I lived in DC for 5.5 years with my husband before moving to CA in 1974. We were there when Watergate occurred. Yet, another disgusting act by the crazed Repubs!
The good old days of Watergate when lies mattered and public service was taken seriously. Now the fringe worships a mass murder sexual predator who has already caused a million deaths.
In Vermont, the women's march was so big, and supported with many men. Montpelier's offramps all had to be closed off and no one could enter during the march once the town reached max capacity. It was freezing cold and had snowed, yet all of us persisted. We shall do it again--modern suffragettes to maintain everyone's right to vote and to keep bans off our bodies. I expect real men to rise with us again and to demonstrate to the world We Stand Stronger, Together.
Will people come home from a march and actually organize this time? These marches have not historically produced effective follow-up. Frankly they remind me of women dressing in white for photo ops for suffragette day then having tea with watercress sandwiches and calling it a day.
Agree 100%. After the 2017 Women's March I said to a woman "Now we get busy." And she said. "Huh"?
As a boomer I am a mix of angry, sad, understanding and furious that these younger people made fun of us and then let this ball drop. I have been asking younger women to get involved in politics for years; telling them that we need to begin handing the baton to them. I have been telling grisly tales of what it was like to work, earn, marry and face pregnancy in my younger boomer days as an effort to get their attention. And yes, I understand the busyness of family, career and care free days of the younger years.
We are facing huge life/death issues in the United States and have been for some time; including Democracy being on life support. I am aware that voting by younger people surged in the 2020 election. And I am aware that the political, economic and life events are radically different for young people now. With the election of Joe Biden we had been given a reprieve from the onslaught of authoritarianism. We are wasting it. Elections count but politics has become a 365 day effort. It's not about the "we are mad moments" when adrenalin runs high. It really is the slogging somewhat boring part of organizing, writing Congress people etc. that makes the difference.
And to all the younger people I met during the 2020 election cycle my hat is off to you and I am so sorry for the awful messes you face. But at the end of the day it comes down to this. Shame on them for what they are doing. Shame on us if we don't do anything about it.
I disagree. More women have run for office since that first March . I see much more activism in in young women now. It kept me from jumping off a cliff. Seeing so many others who felt like me gave me hope in these terrifying times.
I think a lot of them were arrested, jailed and force-fed. (A Lorton, VA, prison, just down the road from D.C., was the site of the incarceration. Today the facility is a thriving visual and performing arts center -progress.) Optics are a good beginning. Marchers learn from one another and are empowered to organize. They were on their own back then. Now we have organizations like Vote Save America to provide structure and direction for those who want to take action to protect our rights. And we have Heather to insure we are fortified with the facts.
The organizing is not the the problem. It's about being effective. It's about having a clear agenda, sustainability, communicating that agenda and being able to recruit people.
I'm sure there will be, Hope, but you may also get a lift to Montpelier from Burlington with someone, if you advertise. I'd offer, but we're coming from a different direction.
I say yea! What about at noon in the middle of the left lawn? (Left as you look at the Statehouse.) I'm not sure where the crowd will be, but that might be at or beyond the fringes. Shall we wear or carry something unusual for instant identification? That would be fun.
Okay-- I think there is a fence or stone wall to the far left. Why don't all Vermonters to want to meet at 12:00 talk about this privately. My email is DecencyandDemocracy@gmail.com.
Respectfully what does that do? Wastes a day of everybody’s time for a photo op. Those pink pussy hats made middle class women feel like they were doing something; look what followed. The women’s march was a joke because no real disciplined action followed, and if that’s all you have in your quiver you’re doomed.
You forget that the left took the House, Indivisible organized. Then we took the Senate and the Presidency. In my area Spanberger defeated Brat. Your defeatist, distainful stance serves no purpose except to divide. Reminds me of my mother, who at the end of her life admitted she was especially critical of my brother and me because she thought it would galvanize us to success. Instead she destroyed our spirits.
You come here for cheerleading or free maternal encouragement, scroll on by, respectfully. I mother my own children; here I express my opinions. And it’s a stretch for you to call me “defeatist” when you don’t know me, Gail Adams. I get up every morning and teach college; I participate in activism, I organize and I’m a candidate for public office. Sorry about your mommy issues, for which I hope you get professional advice, and hope you are able to be activist yourself.
Laura, I join you in seeking strong organization employing logistics, pressure by numbers, strategy and influence with specific goals. Why aren't you using your activism here, instead of fault finding? Your tone is more alienating than it is motivating. Why not recruit?
A: what makes you (&others) feel a need to “tone police” me? I stop by here to express opinions and don’t give a hang who likes my tone. Scroll on by if you want to Hello-Kitty-Kumbaya each other and only read “positive affirmations” — that’s just not me and there are plenty of flavors of resistance here on Professor Cox’s platform.
B:what makes you think I don’t “recruit?” I just don’t chivvy people to go to popup marches working people can’t be at, then call that enough action.
Ah Joan. Perfect You can be oversight for the committee of Laura/ Gail who have been named to oversee the new law demanding all males have vasectomies at age 12. As we all know vasectomies are reversible at any time males can show responsibility for creating pregnancies. These two as committed adult women would be perfect working in tandem to achieve a broader sense of equally sharing the burden of achieving that broader equality.. So now, which one gets the knife or the snips.
Actually, when faced with my own motherhood many years ago, I did get professional help. How sad that an obviously educated individual cannot recognize an analogy. And yes, I, and my daughter, are active in fighting for that in which we believe. Your defensiveness in the face of push back, resulting in an insulting reply, is uncalled for. Have a lovely day.
IDK you, but your attitude is like some militant lesbians I met in gay activism in the '90s who tore the movement apart. Yeah, gay men have less in common with lesbians than they do with str8 men but at times you have to unite for a cause. Ya know "A house divided ..."
Whoa. I didn't get that from Laura at all. The cold hard fact is that the numbers marching in 2017 didn't equate down to political involvement. You are rightfully justified in being proud of the work younger women, middle aged women and older women accomplished post the 2017 march.
You are attacking the wrong person. I recommend you take all that anger and make change happen.
Are you being presumptuous in judging Gail's response to Laura who generally belittled women who attended marches without knowing a thing about the subscribers she was addressing? I'm not being coy, but suggesting that you reread the exchanges here.
I did read the exchanges Fern. This this what I was saying "whoa" to from Gail: Your defeatist, distainful stance... in response to Laura's "Respectfully what does that do?"
Disagreeing is one thing. Labeling in a negative way accomplishes nothing.
Not anger, Barbara, dismay. I was in DC that day (sans hat) with my girlfriend and my daughter. I can't tell you how it shook me out of my admitted complacency and spurred me to action.
We also faced many, many other traumas during the tfg's administration which we worked very, very hard to dismantle. Then we were faced with a global pandemic which prevented us from gathering and protesting very much. Though many of us still did with masks on. These times have been excruciating. I say calm down all this rhetoric and let's remember to undergird one another for our rights and to save our democracy. Keep your lights shining brightly into this darkness of tyranny. This is OUR moment in history to do the right things. Not to judge the small stuff. Let's all keep our eyes on the prize--- freedom with responsibility and re-creation of a stronger democracy.
Thanks, Seth. Don’t want to speculate on your gender, but especially if you are not female, wanna roll up your sleeves and do it instead of directing in the imperative mood?
By imperative I mean WE the people of all genders and identities. In union there is strength. Let’s work together. Marching and demonstration and getting people to vote. All efforts in all ways according to what one can do.
Respectfully, I was one of the millions of women who marched and did not wear a pink pussy hat. You are right, however, that no real, long term disciplined action followed. Class, Race, & Religion got in the way. Many BIPOC women felt that their voices were not being heard. And they were right. Now, ALL women in the US may be completely marginalized because, among other things, women who make statements like those you are making don't want to get their hands dirty. The tell? Your saying "if that's all YOU have in your quiver, YOU'RE doomed." If you have ideas to offer, do so, but you are echoing the rhetoric of division. You don't seem to feel Choice is a right to fight for as you've offered nothing here, in this discussion, from your own quiver. In the meantime, do you really think the rhetoric of division is something folks on this page are interested in? If you are a woman is this not your fight? Stop sea lioning and bring something worthwhile to the table.
Those who would outlaw abortion do not aim at women’s rights to control their own bodies, but at their right to control their own lives. And men’s, too, if they are not one of the elect. This is, or ought to be, everyone’s fight.
Jon, I can't agree with you completely. I do agree that this is ( or should be) everyone's fight. EVERYONE'S! But, where I disagree is this: Not one single man in the United States, entering a doctor's office, would be refused reproductive health services based on his gender. Therefore, any man working to overturn Roe is operating under the assumption that men have the right over women to determine a women's reproductive healthcare decisions including abortion and contaception. Assuming you are a man, until you personally are able to conceive a child, you cannot ever fully understand the impact of that biological process, physically, emotionally, financially, professionally. Nor can you ever understand the fact that the inability of women to have a CHOICE a is punishment based solely on gender and situation of pregnancy. We are being punished by so called men of faith and supposed high moral stature who couldn't care less about an unwanted child. The women who have joined their ranks do so in order to retain power over other women if and when the shoe finally drops and CHOICE is taken away from women.
To get right down to it, even white men who are not of the elect are more respected than women, BIPOC, LGBTQ+, Differently Abled. I understand where you're coming from and I appreciate your sentiments. But right now, being a biological creature with a uterus, able to conceive a child is the sole factor in determining whether or not 1/2 the population of the United States will have full citizenship or not.
Laura, every bit of action helps. Change can take time. Gathering together with like-minded others is inspiring and can have far-reaching effects. It is something we can do now, and that's no small thing. The visual of massed bodies peacefully protesting is powerful and inspiring. It is also an opportunity to exchange information and further organize. It is a really good and important thing!
That is right. Trump, with as much damage he did and continues to do, lost the house, then Senate and WH, because normal rational Americans woke up and got outraged. Those marches helped. The silver lining in this draft decision is that it has sparked that outrage again. We need it, and we need to maintain it. Progressives are so good at becoming lackadaisical and staying home on election day while the deplorables stampede to the polls. Unfortunately we need a big shock to get too many of us off our collective a_ses.
"Democrats had predicted they would pick up new seats in the House this election. Instead, eight incumbent House Democrats have lost their races, and not a single Republican has lost their seat.
Though some races have not yet been called, the party is expected to secure about 222 or 223 of the 218 seats necessary to control the House, their slimmest majority since World War II.
The party hasn’t coalesced around a clear answer about why and doesn’t seem poised to do so. Moderates have argued that progressive policies allowed Republicans to brand them as socialists, and progressives have argued it was moderates’ own fault for not campaigning strategically during the pandemic. Each side feels they have enough evidence to support their own view and there are no signs of any serious soul-searching for the party as a whole.
Hahahahahaha. Someone forgot to let you in on a really important truth, Laura Thomas among you. Let me remedy that. Men are the glass. Women are the water. Our beautiful destiny has always been that each woman is irrevocably in charge of how much water is in the glass. Don’t get stuck at any particular waterline because you’ve been “told” to be there. Ha! Be the flow, do not go with the flow. And respect the glass and its thoughts. A glass that can cherish women’s hearts is easy to fill. Until it’s not.
Christine, I'm with you -- all of us here seeking union and rights for all the American people. Accusations and one-upmanship by one party or more among us need not tempt retorts, which can fuel more discord. We need to find ways to recognize the critic. If that person maintains negativity, I'm in favor of asking them to contribute and moving on.
Never underestimate a good photo-op. The idea is to move people [voters] to make change. Note that Biden beat Trump mainly from voters who quietly voted by mail during a pandemic. Yes, change can happen like that without having to literally role up sleeves and have disciplined action by a majority of the people.
The problem is our country is split and in some locations it's so entrenched with conservative ideology that any action other than voting is not easy. So, how do you get people to vote? How do you get better candidates? Yes, it takes action but not everyone has to do action other than march [to raise awareness on a large scale] and vote [to make change on a large or maybe small scale]. Nonetheless, the women's march was not a joke except to conservative men or neo-Marxists who want to burn down the country. I know you are neither of those.
I would agree some of those who push for change have to be more disciplined and in a position to make change. Others just have to be aware and to vote. I mean, look how the SCOTUS just took down abortion rights. Three justices got selected by Trump - who was voted into office - just did this. Not a revolution. Just judges in robes who were all placed into their position in rather mundane ways. And all along individual states were chipping away at abortion rights. Sometimes change is incremental. But it starts with making people aware of the action you want. Marches can do this.
I don't disagree with you at all. When canvassing or text banking/phonebanking, one always makes the next ask, right? So if people make time to march and commit right there/then to not only vote but work to GOTV in concrete ways (one more person each is a good starter ask) it becomes more than a photo op. And that is frankly what a lot of us feel like we saw little of in 2016/17. And that's why I bother to comment on posts like this, because if you think I *need* to engage with a bunch of armchair keyboard warriors who apparently enjoy speculating on whether my motives are "good" or I'm a "radical lesbian" or want me to scurry to Urban dictionary to look up "sealioning" (frankly an insult to those good animals) you misread me.
I do agree that action such as GOTV will do more than just talking about it and photo-ops. No doubt, people only commenting with like-minded citizens on a blog won't do much to move the needle. I only point out that when done right the less active activities can produce results. But its success depends on too many factors to consider in a comment. Thanks.
I find it interesting that separation of church and state is being ignored in the abortion coverage. This is clearly about establishing a state religion. I think the Supreme Court would more aptly be call the Supremacy Court. Decades ago when I was working in the nascent field of artificial intelligence,the business card company misprinted my card saying I was from the Artificial Intelligency. Rather enjoyed handing out those cards.
"This is clearly about establishing a state religion."
Kathy, having grown up in a fairly fundamentalist church in East Texas (although not as nutty as today's fundamentalist churches), I really think that what we are seeing is a move by white males to dominate the landscape again. Not Republicans trying to establish a state religion (although they may act like they want that to get some folks vote).
Who in the Republican Party is "Christian" and wants to establish anything like a real Christian ethic in their party? Nobody.
What the Republican party DOES want is white male domination of women, blacks, and anybody who is not easily burned working outside in the sun (not that any white guys do that much any more).
So, I would encourage folks not to buy in to any narrative that says Republicans want a state religion. Republicans are not even slightly religious in anyway.
They are white men who want more control no matter that they are too incompetent to manage once they get that control.
“What the Republican party DOES want is white male domination of women, blacks, and anybody who is not easily burned working outside in the sun (not that any white guys do that much any more).“
You are so right but you omit an operative emotion of white men—fear. FEAR of women, blacks, and anything and and anyone else. Religion is simply and hypocritically used….
Afraid of the possibility that when in power, we will do unto them as they have done unto us. I certainly have seen that fear from straight guys when looking at gay men; terrified that these gay men will treat them the way they treat women.
Sophia, you could very well be right about the Fear driven part. But, being fear driven is so foreign to me (and sometimes that is bad for me honestly) that I just cannot see it when, perhaps, that is the origin.
Mike, the fear of “Christian” white males that is being fanned is the fear of replacement: losing their power and status gained solely through their gender, race, heterosexuality and patriarchal religion. Lyndon Johnson put it best: “If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.”
The root of all negative emotions is fear, i.e. hatred (fear that you have lost something), anger (fear that you are losing something), jealousy (fear that you will lose something), etc., so the thinking goes: if I control everything and everyone, I have nothing to fear....
Religion has for millennia been a way for a powerful few to dominate and control the masses. It had nothing to with ethics or religious belief in a spiritual entity. Just power over the other.
Growing up, my church had a beautiful pulpit with intricately carved figures around the base. One of them was a guy engulfed in flames. I asked what was up with that guy, and was told he wanted to translate the Bible from Latin to a language the people understood, and that would take away absolute power from the clergy who could pretty much say anything about religious doctrine without being challenged.
The particular brand of Christianity that places a man at the head of household and forbids any kind of sexuality except between men and women is exactly the kind of state religion that would reinforce white male Republican sovereignty. So I respectfully disagree with your statement. If you’re saying it does not spring from any real spirituality, though, I would agree.
A broad instance of an organization, male led, heirarchical, money acquiring entities to control peoples minds (Religion) then, I agree with your summary.
Before we had a Health and Welfare Department, I think, correct me please if I'm wrong, the church was responsible for keeping birth, marriage and death records for tax purposes. The church taxed the people because the church was the government.
While you are right that the main issue here is white male domination of everyone else, the authoritarians are clearly cloaking themselves in what they call Christianity and gleeful to force it on everyone else.
Don’t forget the money. The have-mores are deathly afraid that the ordinary wage earners want some for themselves. They believe in the zero-sum game. They encourage white male fears of lost status to protect their fortunes.
believe the biggest failure lies at the feet of National Democratic pollster Celinda Lake and other Democratic party operatives whose job it is to read and understand public opinion, which in turn drives intervention effor
Cathy, you’re right. The “church” you call out is a patriarchal “religion” that calls itself Christian while it cherry picks passages from the King James Bible that command women to speak only through their husbands, command couples to only have married sex for the purpose of procreation, and teaches hatred of “the other” unless they repent of being true to themselves and toe the party line. The reward is that you can judge those you are told are sinners and can punish them with “righteous” laws.
Let's also remember that the opposite of patriarchy is not matriarchy -- it's egalitarianism. The big OR - the us vs. the other - is replaced by AND - stronger together.
I highly recommend this Twitter thread by Greg Olear, whose take-no-prisoners style of writing I admire. He slices and dices Leonard Leo, the right-wing religious zealot singularly responsible for stacking the Supreme Court (and many other courts) for decades with like-minded people. Shocking, isn't it, that Leo believes he's on a mission from God? Of course he is. https://twitter.com/gregolear/status/1522356441285283841
As a religious person, I could not agree with you more. Not only because these theocrats want me to observe their religion not my own. Not only because our Constitution is clear on the subject. Religious observance cannot be free if it is coerced.
I like that very much! In fact, a little history here... I have a song book of songs the Suffragists used - familiar tunes with lyrics much like you just did. Did you know that the Battle Hymn of the Republic was authored by a woman - Julia Ward Howe She wrote the lyrics after meeting President Abraham Lincoln at the White House in November of 1861.
Speaking of plantations, I am reading and recommend Trayvon Generation by Elizabeth Alexander. She writes eloquently about issues of race, past and present, and the artwork is stunning. One chapter is about 'Angola', The Louisiana State Penitentiary. There, thousands of Blacks, on a property the size of Manhattan, are imprisoned, often for life, forced to pick cotton while observed by whites on horseback. The conditions and sentences are appalling. Today.
My friend, the Vermont songwriter Patty Casey, offered this one. The Chorus goes: "We are smarter than that/We are kinder than that/We are moving forward, we are not going back." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3HvarBiWWA
Hi Ron. I didn't know where the lyrics you provided came from. First went to Youtube to look for the song that they belonged to. It took me a while to figure out that the lyrics were for the song Bronwyn linked in a comment before yours. I suggest that making the connection within you comment would helpful to subscribers - Cheers!
I, too, had a little difficulty locating them. I had to use the search in Google as "Stronger Than That lyrics Patti Casey."
I, also, noticed they did not exactly match Bronwyn's quote but had already posted it. In any event, I didn't feel there was enough difference to detract from the message itself so left it as is. I apologize if I misjudged that.
Hey, no apologies, Ron. I was just suggesting that we connect the dots in our comments by including the source - what prompted those lyrics to appear.
I have a great friend in Englewood. She's a teacher. We talked last night about students who are or think that they may be trans and how they could be affected when constitutionally approved rights are denied.
Ron, A tip: if you click on the three dots next to delict at the bottom of your lyrics comment, the dots provides an edit function. If you press it, you will then be able to place the song link in the comment with lyrics. Repeat: At the end of you lyrics comment are three dots next to the delete function. Press a dot and you will be able to add to the comment. Copy the song link within the lyrics comments. More cheers!
For weeks in the 2018 Election I stood with others carrying signs supporting the Dem choice for Governor of Florida (To no avail). Since then I have lost some ability to walk or stand but still got that sign board and planning to paper over it with something like:
As I said yesterday, you are setting the right tone, Sister Cathy. And from the beginning, I am feeling how many brothers are standing with us. Peaceful protest is ours. It is our voices—not cudgels or bear spray or ropes or military gear—that rise. It is our right. We must stand fast because that right is being threatened once again by opponents willing to disrupt a march and silence protest.
I thought of John Lewis yesterday as I watched the Court being fortified. May our skulls be protected with the same effort by law enforcement.
Time for a second women's March on the scale of the first as this is WAY more important than a pissant like DJT. There were 10 people protesting in Antarctica at 60 below zero.
@CathyLearoyd well said! Let’s begin an organized and spontaneous March to the November 8th midterm elections. Let’s call on the 81% of single-issue voters to push back the GOP’s assault on women and reproductive rights.
Exactly, Cathy! As Heather says, This is not the conversation Republicans want to have. We need to force them to have it, every minute of every day from now to November 8th.
Cathy, when I posted this LFAA on my FB page, I encouraged my followers to pay attention to the vote of their senators next week. I consider a vote to strip over half our population of a Constitutional right a vote of Catholic theocracy which cares not a whit about anyone else's beliefs or needs. I am urging those disenfranchised by five (or six) robed religious fanatics to remove their members of like persuasion in Congress from their comfortable offices - which - by the way WE are PAYING for. I have yet to discuss this topic with a person who is not as enraged as I am. Alito has no clue what millions of "women scorned" will be doing next November and in the months leading to that ballot box. I hope he enjoys hiding inside his barricaded pavilion knowing that he is utterly despised by the majority of this country. Same with Collins. Greg Olear calls her "amoral" in today's "Prevail" and I believe that is the only way to think of her and her ilk.
5the woman hired by my large corporation here. Marches are good, but door-to-door better. Having a table to have people sign petitions at street fairs/open markets better. Women need to once again “put their bodies on the line” to have face-to-face engagement.
It’s all right there just what you said in the Preamble of the Constitution. How much more “ Original “ can you get ! The only thing I disagree with is we need to stop calling it an Experiment. I think Democracy was working really well over the last 50 yrs for the 99% of us. Still need’s a few tweaks here and there. That 1% only has interest in the 1%.
Then you believe Forced Pregnancy is a Blessing of Liberty? Tells me women are not part of We, the People. The top 1% is making our laws and the Supremacy Court so it is all trickle up actually all the cream rises to the top economics causing extreme income disparity to the point a family has to have at least two full time jobs just to feed their family. The 1% are hollowing out the middle class which will lead to the collapse of capitalism. Nineteen states are now autocracies with the Supremacy Court and the Congress doing nothing about Article IV Section 4 which guarantees a republican, i.e. by the people, form of government in all the states. Marcia, please wake up. Democracy is about to go over a cliff. The experiment is not over even with its interim successes.
Because it is working against their desire for power - total control. They can't win in a democracy so they are changing it to an autocracy. It is broken and about to fall apart. The Supremacy Court is not representing the People where a huge majority do not want Roe overturned.
Thank you for that reminder about no arrests at the Women's March. When I read that part of this letter, I thought, "they're afraid of us?" They're trying to suggest something about us that isn't true. Your comment is spot on. Thank you!
While in my corporate position I needed to know the rules of the politics going on around me, I didn't find a need to play by those "rules". For instance, if someone is expecting you to play by the rules and then you surprise them by reacting in another way it was always so fun to watch the confusion on their faces! In other words, if you don't like the rules, change them. So rather than a Senator, I would much rather fix the system and come up with a more constructive set of rules of the Senate. I'd, for instance, get rid of the aisle down the middle. A technique I used in meetings was to sit next to rather than across from the person the most disagreed with my position. You tend to want to agree with the person next to you and argue with the person on the other side of the table. So, by getting rid of the center aisle Senators would tend to look for ways to find solutions from a larger perspective with the Senators the randomly find next to them.
I’m down with your negotiating style, Cathy. I bet you have many interesting and productive ideas. More than happy to back you as Majority Leader! Haha
Dear Justice Alito, when the Founders wrote the Constitution, many of them had slaves, black men like Clarence Thomas. Black men were seen as not a person but 3/5 of a person to increase the count for the South.
In the 1780’s women weren’t even in the Constitution. Women were not considered a person but chattel of their fathers and then their husbands, no rights. How can we consider Amy Coney Barrett as a person since the Founders wouldn’t, strict constructionists.
To argue that abortion isn’t in the Constitution and that a strict constructionist would find that the right to an abortion isn’t a protected liberty interest in the Constitution because it’s not rooted in the country’s history and tradition, should also assume that Clarence Thomas is 3/5 of a human being and
Amy Coney Barrett belongs to her husband and no say in any legal matter. In the 1780’s Justice Thomas would most likely be a slave, rooted in our history firmly.
And the word ‘woman’ is still not in the Constitution. It used to puzzle me as a Catholic child when my teacher told us that the word ‘men’ meant ‘men and women’. I asked why, if that was true, that women couldn’t be priests. (They had told us that Jesus picked only men to be his apostles). My teacher called my mom and told her I asked too many questions. ( And the books of the almighty bible itself were cherry picked from among many other ancient writings, then translated over and over, so why anyone takes any part of it literally is astonishing to me,)
By Alito's reasoning that means women have no rights. In the movie "On the basis of sex" RBF's biography I loved the part where her opposition compiled and presented as evidence all the laws in the land that claimed women were not a man's equal. I especially liked the one's that said women were poor at math so couldn't be executors of wills and such.
“:...so why anyone takes any part of it literally is astonishing to me,)” yes, it’s puzzling that faith depends on where and when and how you got here. A random delivery in one state or another or one country or another. But a “believer” would say it’s not random. It’s divine. There is no argument. Debate club would be interesting.
“…in the 1990s, when power shifted to leaders who believed that the country worked best when businessmen could organize the economy without meddling from government bureaucrats.”
Perception:
Too many Boomers feel that they are dealing with Ike. That somehow in that cesspool of insanity, aka Republicans,there are reasonable minds that can come to compromise and consensus that is overall good for the nation.
Meanwhile according to reports from Harper’s Magazine This Week:
“the former head of the Oklahoma Republican Party called for the execution of Anthony Fauci by firing squad, and the Oklahoma Election Board ruled that a lawmaker cannot use the moniker “The Patriot” on the ballot.7 8 9 Madison Cawthorn, a congressman from North Carolina, was stopped at an airport in possession of a loaded gun for the second time.”
Centrist Democrats, and especially so called Independents, are going to sell the nation down the river to Fascist rule.
You read it here first: My solution to ending abortions:
You macho studs out there who want to have careless sex; a great, you can pay the societal price and for the externalities of crime and inhumanity that result.
By my proposed Law - Any woman who is impregnated can call for a DNA test of the man she cites as the father of the fetus/child.
If there is a positive match, then that man will be required to provide the necessary financial support for the child until age 20.
Marriage will not end this requirement.
Just watch the abortion issue fade to next to nothing and the stock prices in male contraceptives go through the roof.
I love your solution to the abortion issue by making the father’s financially responsible for 20 years, however, that still doesn’t keep the outrageous possible law off a Women’s own body & right to choose!
Maybe she doesn’t want the fkr’s baby or the constant reminder of being raped or the victim of incest. Adding your point would definitely make it better as another law though, so thanks for that!
No, it is far from a 100% remedy and in fact I just found out from Citizen60 that as I confirmed there are laws on the books in FL pursuant to paternity and support by the natural father….
Apparently not well enough, because one would think that part of one’s HS education this would be common knowledge… I have to read the statute and dig in deeper, which is wading through lots of legal jargon….
I would add that the father who "seeded" the child needs to raise it if the woman wants to have a life of her own to pursue her goals, education and career.
Agreed. Custody, as well as all financial and physical responsibilities, of the baby should automatically revert to the father, even before adoption. That would include the hospital and medical costs for the infant, of course.
Agreed Fred - it would be both great for crime and to provide a database that would make the process much faster.
I was rather stunned to find that even here in a fascist state like Florida that there are pretty clear cut laws for paternal responsibility including court mandated testing.
Every student at age 13 should be made aware that this law exists and will be enforced.
But are these laws enforced? There should be It-Takes-Two-to-Tango laws so men can see what how one's life is impacted to be FORCED to be barefoot in the kitchen with a babe.
That is the part that is weirding me out. If the Florida 742 Determination of Parentage Law was simply enforced it would seem to to be an excellent deterrent and a lot of unwanted pregnancy might be averted.
Apparently a lot of pregnant women out of wedlock are simply in the dark or fearful of filing w/ the clerk of the court.
Instead of life insurance, every 15 year old male should be required to carry Liability Insurance to cover accidental pregnancy. Suggest there be a high deductible and that the premium pool be accessible to pregnant women not otherwise covered for medically necessary abortions and childcare for 25 years. Rate setting may consider all the extracosts women bare in their lifetime or until menopause is over. And I would suggest there be no gay-guy exclusion to ward off mother-fakers and have a built in support group to monitor the scrum and violators of this fair-share post Roe decision.
That is already the law in almost every state. Collection is another issue.
I’m for male hormonal birth control and reversible vasectomies to end abortion. Both exist. Never mentioned by “Evangelicals/Catholics/Mormons/Muslims (big 4 behind this movement).
Wow! I looked at FL statute and “ In order to preserve the right to notice and consent to the adoption of the child, an unmarried biological father must, as the “registrant,” file a notarized claim of paternity form with the Florida Putative Father Registry maintained by the Office of Vital Statistics of the Department of Health which includes confirmation of his willingness and intent to support the child for whom paternity is claimed in accordance with state law.”
So, this makes me wonder why this is NOT clearly enforced. My son spent 3 days in jail for simply falling behind on payments. So, why is this statute not made clear to every male in a state where these laws prevail?
I don’t blame you for wanting “hormonal birth control” or reversible vasectomies
Why are the support laws enforced at all/uniformly? Why was Viagra approved by Medicare and every insurance company in America on Day 1 and birth control bills weren't until the ACA in 2014 (available in the 60's)? Why did women get the vote nearly 70 years after freed slaved? Why could Black men (fill in your color/ethnic) purchase a car or get a credit card with a "responsible male" signing for her until 3 years after Roe? What is not mentioned at all in the Constitution? Women. Even slaves (Blacks) were mentioned since they were to be counted as 3/5 of a human in the census.
Look at the dominant religion that settled this nation -- Catholics. Far more than Christians (West/Southwest; Florida/Louisiana Purchase. Except for the Quakers, the Christian "sects" among early settlers were Puritans, orthodox Lutheran (now called Missouri Synod). Later came the Anti-Baptists (originally an anti-Catholic political party, but guess which part of the movement "stuck" during the Great Revival?) and the Mormons--whose Dessert Territory once encompassed what are now 4 other states besides Utah. What is the role--and value--of women in those religions?
And that's why child support that men are supposed to pay is unevenly enforced. Let's talk about enforcement when women are required to pay child support....
I agree completely. While much of the Alito draft is deserving of opprobrium, I am most deeply troubled by one section of that odious document, wherein Alito, citing Washington v. Glucksberg, 1997 opines that "the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment . . . has been held to guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such rights must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition” and “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.”
Let us set aside for the moment the fact that James Madison - ultimately the primary architect of the Bill of Rights - was initially opposed to it as being unnecessary, for he believed that any rights and liberties not specifically reserved to the government were retained by individuals. Madison feared that some might interpret the enumeration of specific liberties as a denial of any others. It would seem he was prescient.
If Alito is correct that only rights and liberties that are "deeply rooted in this Nation's history" can be considered to be protected by the Constitution, does that not guarantee stagnation of our society? If the Constitution bars the nation from embracing new liberties as it adapts to evolving scientific knowledge, culture and mores, does that not condemn us to a society where progress is outlawed?
I can’t believe Madison and his coauthors expected the future Americans to do nothing to form a more perfect union. It is silly and complete nonsense to expect people in the future to make no changes to this living document to meet the needs of their times. Perhaps Alito would be more comfortable if we were hunters and gatherers.
Ooo, Molly. New quotes in my quiver. You are so smart. A+ for critical thinking skills (only “critical”thing I’ve seen taught in my decades of public education.) Salud!
And now Peggy Noonan is blathering the bull Schitt, as she did then. All republicans are on the same train, barreling down on us all with no conscience and no brakes.
No one sane can "like" what you have written, but that is how it is. They've broken something bigger than a bank.
“Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand."
Despite all we may feel, despite what we are tempted to think, the great challenge before us is how to bring together again what has been torn apart. Not just to survive but, after the work of the scalpel, to recover, to heal.
The tireless, multi-pronged approaches of those who sought the eventual theocracy/authoritarian “democracy” that exists to take taxpayer money and outright give it to the already wealthy (pandemic boondoggles, Halliburton war pig contracts for showers that nearly electrocuted US military members) was, while evil, disciplined and relentless. With disciplined GOTV and constant attacks on the integrity of the US judiciary, with the creation of think tanks and hate radio/propaganda/Faux News, through collusion with political machines masquerading as tax-exempt churches, the right rose and here we are. Why are we looking around in surprise and wondering (or explicating) how we got here?
The left quit. Resting on “laurels” it never earned, from the failure of ERA to the persistent underpaying of women to Roe which is a Frankenstein compromise that left women’s unalienable rights to our own bodies only partially protected. Instead of fighting back, most women with the most access to money and education sat smugly and equated photo-op inclusion with progress. Some of this is the successful distraction of right-wing hate groups that use small, visible distractions and ginned up “culture war” victories detract from bigger goals; some of it is the crushing workload of domestic and professional life many women choose; some of it is the smug, effete laziness of the privileged who chose to focus on pronouns instead of proactive trench warfare to expand rights and looked the other way while poor, rural sisters suffered from lack of health care and educational/economic opportunities.
A good, succinct analysis that can be summed up: Republicans play to win, rules don't matter. Democrats do sort of, sometimes, maybe play to win but they do not use all the tricks and they also don't openly find the most corrupt white guys they can find, absent any ethics, and put them on a list to be Supreme Court Justices.
Anyway, its like the middle school bully and the nice kid in school. As long as the nice kid follows all the rules he was taught important, the bully makes his life miserable.
But, when the nice kid finally brings a short piece of steel rod to school, and catches the bully at the lockers with his head turned, and puts a 1 inch dent in the back of his skull precipitating a two week stay in the hospital.....?
Then, things change for a lot of people, and, for the better.
During the campaign for the 2020 election, a Biden rally was going on downtown, despite the threat of COVID. There were about 1000 people there. At some point, a group of 15 heavily armed young men arrived wearing MAGA hats and flack vests. 400 or so of us simply surrounded them and did not let them near the main rally. We did not speak to them. We just stood there, en mass, completely encircling them. After only 45 minutes or so, they decided to leave, and were allowed to do so. No healing came out of this action, but a firm boundary was set. No heavily armed MAGAs have turned up in my town for subsequent rallies.
As an environmental activist, I’ve had my life threatened many times over the last 50 years Steve. Facing down violent opposition takes courage - and large numbers of like-minded folks really helps. Great story; terrific outcome, thanks for the inspiration.
Solidarity. Sorry you have endured death threats. My most recent work as what the NY post labeled “tree defender” (although I wouldn’t give myself that accolade yet) resulted in physical assault by a member of NYPD.
Gads. Don’t know what is worse - law enforcement or MAGAt nutballs. Meanwhile, India is melting under an unprecedented heat wave, New Mexico is burning, and we have high wind/grassfire warnings here in MN. Its the climate, stupid….and your sorry ass will burn right alongside the rest of the planet….
We had fire condition warnings in NYC last week (before a ton of rain we’re enjoying today) and an unhoused person burned to death because of a wind-stoked fire probably from open cooking/camping. I wish “It’s the climate, stupid” resonated with potential voters the way “economy” did, but the short-sighted self-interest is strong these days (what’s new?)…
Most of these MAGA militia members, when outnumbered, will back down. They like to talk a big game and lie about military experience but are cowards. That is why they tried to blame Jan. 6th on Antifa.
Democrats don’t play to win, or the many “special interests” would line up to vote vote for anyone with a “D” next to their name. Coalitions just stay home if they don’t get what they want. Will Rogers joked 100 years ago that “I’m not a member of an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.”
Republicans will line up to vote for a tree stump.
Thanks Mike S … problem where I grew up was the Superintendent of the School District would suspend or expel the “nice” student who finally found the courage to fight back, saying they had a “zero tolerance policy for violence.” (Even though nice kid and parents might have reported the bullying up the chain like the rules said to, and gotten nowhere and nothing except a more vicious beating or taunting from the bully.).
Using your analogy, where would that leave a nice kid tactically? Can’t change the world from jail, can you? Did hunger-striking suffragettes or Bobby Sands make differences? Or was it the behind-the scenes pressure? I wouldn’t know, really, but am not inclined to miss a meal and weaken myself while a guest of the state, being of hearty peasant stock.
Yes, being expelled was part of the equation where I went to school as well. So, during my two weeks off from school, I learned to use the arc welder in my barn.
It was nice and peaceful in the barn, and, my welding got better and better.
Then, I went back to school. The bully never came back to school. I don't know what happened to him. I still don't care.
That sounds like you were suspended, then, not expelled. Also sounds like the school was a better place for you after the bully disappeared, but somewhere, someone had to care for that underage child and tend to his injuries (I’d guess his mom). Now, you could maybe say that she deserved it, raising a bully, but it’s not always the mother’s fault when a kid is a dick, pace Sigmund Freud.
Most of what I write for this community comes ASTERISK-PRESENT-COMPANY-EXCEPTED since we are obviously strongly like-minded fans of Professor HCR’s work.
However, there seems to be a lot of glass-jawed pushback every time I make a comment about an experience that was based on personal reality. I’m thrilled for you and your lucky junior high kids that the bullying brigade did not include an administration filled with stupid, thuggish, dim-witted rural bigots. I’d speculate that might have to do with annual income average in the school’s zip code. However, now that we have all read that “not all men” or “not all schools” could we maybe accept that it’s luck and/or privilege to be a nice kid somewhere nice, but many nice kids aren’t (in this ANALOGY, which was obviously constructed ny Mike S to elucidate the greater problem facing US citizens who don’t want to be pawns of a fascist authoritarian theocracy)?
And then, could we talk about tactics or self-identify and take it offline to i/r/l to meet and strategize and DO?
Yep. I admit to being surprised that people are not talking about ERA. If we had had an Equal Rights Amendment as we should have done in the 1970s, then these issues would have been moot. But the fear and loathing by males of female bodies and minds has always meant that any challenges to the patriarchal policing of those bodies and minds would be met with extreme violence and punishment.
I mentioned it yesterday, and was (well, "taken to task" is too strong a word) for how I phrased my comment.
Men *insert obligatory "not all"* simply do not believe that women are the equal of men. Those of the same bent (to include some *not all* women) do not believe that all religions are "equal" (which I do, because they almost all depend on an imaginary sky pilot) nor do they believe that all races are equal.
I think I get where Laura Thomas comes from with her indictment of Democrats who quit thinking the war was won. It was just a series of skirmishes that were won that have lead to the counterstrike we are seeing today from the anti regulation/pro "religion facets of the Republqan party.
I was fortunate that in the career I chose (which I was able to choose because of stronger women who went before me) that my pay rate was for a non-gendered position of Deputy Sheriff, and not tied to my gender. This is not to say that I did not suffer gender based discrimination, but pay and benefits were not tied to gender.
I fully agree that men are afraid women becoming equals as they fear that they could be subjected to the same things that we have been subjected to. Same with Black and Brown people gaining equity. I believe that 2008 taught me that women are more of a threat than are Black people when Obama was chosen over Clinton by the Democrats.
I found a quote about 45 years ago that seems appropriate for now. It was in reference to the fight for the ERA going on at the time. “ Nature gave women so much power that the law wisely gave her none.” I cannot, for the life of me, remember the author of that quote. But it referred to women being able to give birth. When I read the quote I was horrified. The quote stuck in my head, but not the author, probably some 19th century male.
There’s also another quote whose author I cannot recall either. “The law is but man’s opinion.” Tailor made for Samuel Alito, who is creating legal theories out of whole cloth.
Yikes! These sound like some of the Russian proverbs I learned about 40+ years ago while studying Russian in college. Gems such as "A woman's hair is long, but her wit is short"...
I am not a fan of the word “wisely” either. What an arrogant point of view. I like what my mother used to say, “God looked at Adam and said, ‘I can do better.’ So God created Eve.” 😂😂😂
I had to read a bit of Samuel Johnson and I would bet that in the 1700’s he already knew that god looked at Adam and said “ I can do better” and created Eve. After you posted I found your exact quote in an old Catholic cook book dated 1948.
It has passed, and just recently. But past the artificial deadline Republicans imposed, and the supermajority under Obama did nothing, some Reps or Senators proposed voting to end the time limit, but it never reached the floor because the anti-abortion advocates feared it would be applied to abortion.
“ some of it is the smug, effete laziness of the privileged who chose to focus on pronouns instead of proactive trench warfare to expand rights and looked the other way while poor, rural sisters suffered from lack of health care and educational/economic opportunities.”
You may driving away potential allies here with this attitude. It is what the Republicans do. They blame a progressive attitude on the “elite” which nobody wants to identify with. It is young people who are concerned about pronouns and they are not all wealthy and white. The Democratic Party always seems to want to turn in the progressive young people who are the future base they will need to keep involved.
I never said I identified as D, although I vote/caucus as necessary to keep Trump from power. I am/was “the progressive young” of whom you speak and feel no fealty to the current power structure. Thanks for distracting from the point that Ds haven’t delivered as promised for women or poc while counting on those votes for decades tho
That’s exactly it. Women are on the hamster wheel just trying to make a living wage at 60 cents on the dollar, plus if we made that choice, caring for parents or bio family or family of choice as an unpaid second shift. No one gave anyone any laurels except a few dozen or few hundred self-congratulatory privileged types who went back to their bubbles
Uh, I am not doing that at all. But as far as we know, the Dems have not committed sedition nor have they spurred on an insurrection. Bill Clinton was an adulterer and lied about it, yes, but did he engage the country in those mentioned above? The answer is NO.
I agree with you that Democrats never incited an insurrection on January 6 and I do not participate in “false equivalency” rhetoric. But mainstream feminists who call Republicans the “pro-rape” party without irony ignore the fact that Bill Clinton raped women, his wife and party helped cover for him, coded their disdain for accusers in classist abuse (“drag a $20 bill through a trailer park”) and people like you turn things rhetorically by conceding “yes, he committed adultery” without admitting that he felt entitled to help himself to Juanita Broderick’s body and then lied about it.
You not a US resident/citizen? “We” otherwise --although the rich can always pay for a nice safe abortion, laws be damned, pretty soon all women won’t be safe if they decide we can’t own property, hold jobs outside the home, have credit in our own names (law of the land until the 1970s) go outside without our sons/brothers/fathers escorting us, &c.
If you’re safe from the spectre of all this because of citizenship elsewhere, congratulations on your good fortune.
Please read my comment to you above, do some reading, look up “assume” while you’re at it, and get back to us. I speak openly, under my own name, and never look for pillars from which to speak behind, thank you.
Citizens of individual states must fight harder to win back their own legislatures. The majority is up against a series of walls built by the minority extremists.
Additionally, right wing laws now in place must be used to hold extremists accountable to their own laws. Force them to eat their own cake.
Finally, don't just invite those who need women's health services to liberal states for services, invite Americans, businesses and money, labor and brains who want civil rights to come and stay. Make the Abbott & DeSantis states pay the price that Russia now pays for their aggression.
Let’s not call them extremists anymore. Let cqll them Pro-Rape people because that's what they are. Let’s make them feel uncomfortable with calling them that. They have managed to incense us at every turn so we have to dish it right back at them…right between their eyrs.
David, time and again, election results are given to the minority by the electors and once, by the SCOTUS. There is also the filibuster and jaw-dropping lying ignorance which is so amplified by the conspiratorial thinking of the radical right. Then, there's authoritarianism on the rise here and elsewhere. The hurdles are disheartening, to say the least.
Why should women’s healthcare rights be decided by the state? Why should a woman in Alabama have different healthcare rights than a woman in NY or CA? That’s like saying a woman in one state can have treatment for uterine cancer but in another state they can’t. Maybe I shouldn’t say that out loud. The scotus might say since it’s not in the constitution…
Yesterday I saw a post that was a spoof on the Supreme Court Justices that lied about their stances on Roe v Wade during their confirmation hearings. It showed actual footage of their comments to uphold the decision countered with video of an audience laughing. At first I laughed along with it, until I hit the replay and watched it again.
The reality of their lying has certainly found a home with the current situation.
How did we get snookered into thinking the best, trustworthy judges would make a perfect choice for a lifetime appointment to have our best interests in mind?
Linda, I am an engineer that reads about an hour of news (time limited) every day. In other words, I am mostly ignorant BUT.....
EVEN I knew that Kavanagh had a $200,000 baseball ticket debt paid off anonymously right before he was picked by the Federalist Sosciety to be the nominee (if you can imagine wasting THAT much time watching baseball).
IF I KNEW ABOUT THIS KAVANAUGH PURCHASE EVERYONE IN DC also knew that Kavanaugh had been bought.
Unfortunately, instead of initiating an FBI investigation to examine the Kavanaugh purchase, the Democrats brought forth a woman to claim she was ALMOST raped 35 years ago at a high school party by Kavanaugh. She provided zero evidence of her ALMOST being raped.
The reason she provided no evidence is because she was NOT raped by her own admission.
So, when Dem's cannot figure out how to play the game appropriately, and, getting someone to accuse someone else of ALMOST raping them is about as dumb as it gets, then,
this is what happens.
Kavanaugh was bought and paid for and we could have easily tracked who paid off his debts (I am sure it was the Federalist Society) and THEN we could have just decided that he was too corrupt to confirm as a justice. Like I say, even I can figure that out. But the Democrats apparently could not.
But, no, Dems are not paying attention or, honestly, are just dumb sometimes. OR, perhaps Dems are ALSO all paid off too and are normed to accepting someone who is bought and paid for in Washington?
I don't know. All I know is that Kavanaugh was bought, and, he is also hugely lazy because WATCHING $200,000 worth BASEBALL is for a profoundly lazy man.
Even ignorant me knows all of this. But, apparently, not the Democrats.
So, the Dems confirmed Kavanaugh and now they want to try to hide from their own poor judgement.
Honestly, sometimes I just cannot believe how dumb Americans are.
Brain washed, gullible, ignorant and stupid. No one wants to admit that republicans have turned evil. Still want to know why Kennedy resigned. So much needs investigating, but Dems have been buried in so much bull Schitt that their vision is murky. Raskin, Shiff and a few get it, but there is always Manchin
The Kavanaugh thing was particularly disappointing.
Trotting out a woman to accuse someone of ALMOST raping her? Where can that go? I have never ALMOST raped anybody (or raped anybody) but I also am aware that ALMOST is not a crime.
However, BRIBERY IS A CRIME. The Democrats totally ignored bribery and focussed on ALMOST.
Gentlemen, please look up the definition of sexual violence. It is the crime that Kavanaugh was accused and clearly guilty of - not rape. To minimize the effect of what he and his friend did because no penetration occurred shows a lack of understanding of the seriousness of ALL sexual violence. Please think about this.
Mike, when a man says he has been robbed, he is not assumed to be lying until someone else proves it happened. His testimony itself is considered evidence. Perhaps not sufficient in itself to send the alleged robber to jail, but valid evidence nonetheless, unless proven otherwise. When a woman says she has been sexually assaulted, it's the other way around: too many people assume she is lying until proven otherwise, and say there is "no evidence" as if her testimony does not count.
Also, Kavanaugh was not on trial for crime with loss of liberty as a possibility. His character was in question, his suitability for the job he wanted.
The majority of the current court seems to have gotten their jobs through perjury. At least two have been credibly accused of sexual assault. Apparently flaws that would keep a person from many other jobs are unimportant when a radical reactionary Republican man is being considered for one of the highest positions in the country.
Assault is a crime. I’m disturbed you seem to think penetration is the only measure a crime was committed. Ever have to fight off someone twice your size to keep your clothes intact? Please reconsider your stance.
Gail, I was mostly focussed on the reason there was no evidence, however, your point is valid. Assault is a crime, but, impossible to prove 35 years later. Rape would have been reported to the police presumably, and, Kavanaugh would have a documented record assuming his parents could not pay off enough cops to ignore the incident.
Part of the problem here is in legal definitions of crimes that are based on both conduct and intent. Crimes of sexual violence occur daily and leave little or no physical evidence, and depend on the testimony of those involved in the incident to make a determination of prosecution. When a woman (or gay man) comes forward with a report of a crime of sexual violence that lacks tangible physical evidence (bruising, swelling, visible injury, deposits of genetic material) they are (conservatively) 85% of the time reporting it to someone who looks like the person who committed the assault. Factor in the mindset that even the best, most open, understanding male officer grew up in the culture where the crime occurred, and it shows how difficult it is to proceed with any investigation with any chance of successful prosecution. In Mr. Brock Turner's case, EVEN THEN his potential "damage" by a successful prosecution outweighed his victim's trauma.
Good post Ally. I was not questioning the validity of what the woman offered. I was more attempting to highlight that there WAS plenty of hard evidence against Kavanaugh and if I knew it, everyone could have, and, I think, should have known who he really was.
Spot on Jeri. I honestly believe that the truth will never come out why Kennedy suddenly retired. That should have been an investigation on par with January 6th. Had that been exposed in a timely manner, completely laid out for all of its putrid truth, maybe January 6th could have been curtailed.
It's actually unclear how Dr. Christine Blasey Ford got dragged into public at the Kavanaugh hearings. She certainly did not ask for public exposure. Greg Olear, who did a long investigative series on the Kavanaugh hearings, argued that Kavanaugh's right wing handlers used her as a screen to distract attention from his dubious finances and unexplained large infusions of cash from invisible sources.
Whoa,Mike. You've gone off course here. Did you know the FBI did a hasty review of K's past? Left out were a multitude of individuals who offered to give witness to K's questionable behaviors. Please do not minimize the life-altering consequences of a sexual assault. Dr.Ford was not a patsy of the Democrats, she volunteered on her own accord and knew very well that she could risk personal judgements. Her credentials were excellent, (Just like Anita Hill v. Clarence Thomas.)The most ridiculous response was the judgement of several Republicans which was, "I believe her, but her assault was by someone else."
Great analysis. Here's the nugget: Rather than go after the blatant "buy off" of Kavanaugh and/or the failure of the FBI to do any sort of investigation (guy things of one flavor) all that could come forward was an allegation of sexual misconduct (a guy thing of a different flavor) that all knew would carry no weight. At. All. Because in my experience (not personal, mind you, but investigatory) men*, as a general rule, believe they are entitled to certain sexual behaviors that involve non-consensual women because it is their due.
*Obligatory "not every man" here. There's probably a percentage of y'all that do not have this. I remind you that this was an investigatory and not personal experience.
Yes, “ Dems are ALSO all paid off too and are normed to accepting someone who is bought and paid for in Washington?”
Corruption and greed by politicians regardless of party is human nature for most. It may start small but then expands like flood waters over the lowlands. Without term limits in congress this will continue. Without removing or at least limiting money from politicking democracy may be doomed. Republicans as a group are only more corrupt.
If you are lucky enough to be polyglot, congratulations! The US public school system mostly discourages our citizens from significant proficiency in other languages through starting late and using terrible paedogogy. Were you privately educated, or raised bilingually? What other languages do you speak?
I was raised bilingual until age 5 or so when my father told me: English is your path to success. From now on I will take you to the local library every Friday for a book. Every Friday evening we can all discuss this book together. He then stopped speaking Spanish. My mother was American and may have influenced this.
And so began my odyssey of reading in English and exploring the world through books, which, I still do.
Not to put words into Laura Thomas's mouth, but the American standard that English should be the only language spoken, ever. I have friends from other countries that are multi lingual who do not assume that their native language is superior to all others, as we do.
You nailed it—my feelings exactly! With my own eyes and ears I saw and heard Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett boldfacedly lie UNDER OATH about overturning Roe vs Wade, and do just the opposite after being seated. What does taking an oath mean? Aren’t they committing perjury? They need to be held accountable for this duplicity….
In Oregon, if a police officer is determined to be "untruthful" (a mandatory termination offense in my career agency) they are "Brady Listed" meaning that because of the requirements of Brady v Maryland, a prosecutor has to provide that information to the defense. The practice of that is that most District Attorneys will never file charges based on a Brady Listed officer, nor call them to testify in a criminal or civil proceeding as a witness for the state.
I don't think lying is a crime at a Congressional Supreme Court Confirmation. So, anybody can and does lie during that time. It is incumbant upon the people doing the confirmation not to be snowed with lies.
Only in a courtroom during a trial is it a crime to lie, and, people still do that all the time.
Lying under oath is perjury. Lying to Congress is a criminal offense. Technically, anyone who does that can be charged, convicted, and jailed. Technically, any Supreme Court justice who does it can be impeached, convicted, and removed from office.
Realistically, these perjured partisans will not be held accountable by the congress or the courts. The best we can do, aside from making a lot of noise, is to elect enough progressive candidates to pass the Judiciary Act, expand the court, and impose a formal ethics standard.
They are under oath, Sophia, at confirmation hearings, and subject to the same penalties. The trick is to get the proper authorities to prosecute them as such. I don't know who those proper authorities are, however.
Morning, Linda. I'm always looking for a way to laugh, so can completely understand your first reaction. In this case, as I'm sure you figured out, the joke is on us women which may be funny strange, but definitely not funny ha-ha.
Good morning Lynell. The joke is most definitely on us. If I remember correctly, the post was from The Daily Show. I wish every news outlet would play the videos of the Justices lying 24/7.
Linda, I too was confused by the three judges saying that Roe was settled law until I heard Marcia Coyle on the PBS NewsHour say "to me, settled law means nothing" . Her explanation at around minute 6 in the following clip is very enlightening. https://youtu.be/iFcNXujoRDM
Thanks, Paul. The fact that each candidate said words similar to "it's settled law," now makes me think it's how they effectively dodged answering the intended question. Too bad nobody thought to ask a follow up like, "Do you have any thought to unsettling it?"
When the SCOTUS issued Chief Justice Taney’s opinion in the Dred Scott case in 1857, it ignored the same ‘public reaction’ that Justice Alito references in the ‘draft.’ Three years later the Civil War began, precipitated by that decsion. This is what happens when the SCOTUS climbs down from its supposedly non-political pedestal, takes off its blindfolds and swears in Justices chosen for their political beliefs on specific issues.
Judiciary Subcommittee Hearing on Judicial Ethics, May 3, 2022. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Opening Remarks. Approximately 8 minutes: "One Helluva Day"
(@ approximately 50 seconds)
"...so it appears that this precedent is being thrown into the bin like so many other precedents that displease the right-wing donor base that had such an important role in getting these justices on the Court."
Judiciary Subcommittee Hearing on Judicial Ethics, May 3, 2022. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Closing Remarks. Approximately 10 minutes:
(@ approximately Minute 5:45)
"...that citizens be allowed to understand who is doing the talking. Citizens have an important role in our democracy. And if you disable them from the most basic element of knowledge of who is doing the talking so that everything comes to them from behind masks, from behind front groups, from behind organizations that they know not to be real in their real lives, does enormous damage to our democracy; and in court it gets even worse. The judges in a court, the other parties in a court, and the public watching a court proceeding have a right to know who is showing up, and what their motivations are, whether they've all been orchestrated by an outside influence."
Judiciary Committee Business Meeting, May 5, 2022. Senator Whitehouse Remarks on Roe v. Wade During a Judiciary Committee Business Meeting. Approximately 7.5 minutes (Note right at the beginning of this video you'll hear a whispered voice say "This is disgusting.")
(@ approximately Minute 2:00)
...So that's a secondary outrage of dishonorable conduct with this committee by pretending not to notice the supposedly egregious mistake of Roe versus Wade when they were specifically asked about it during the hearings."
Yes, Sheldon Whitehouse has, for a LONG time, been pointing out the role for "dark money" which he often notes as the Federalist Society and its donors (Kochs and Mercers).
But, nobody is listening to him because he speaks in detail, with good English, at lengtj, without any insults or inflammatory one liners.
I brought that up after yesterday’s letter from HRC and was told perjury could not be inflicted upon these liars. The remedy would be impeachment or telling these 5 that their resignations will be expected. We can’t even effectively get rid of a hateful white guy who was twice impeached!
Hey, Marlene. Whoever you replied to deleted their message. I specifically had your comments in mind about perjury when I posted the Senator's videos, because of his pointedly saying that the justices had lied at their confirmation hearings. Without going back to listen again, I admit he may not have used the word "lie," but did infer in no uncertain terms that that is what they did.
It's a lot like the Dred Scott decision. This time, the variation is that the American people, starting with anyone who can get pregnant or cares about anyone who can get pregnant, have no rights that a majority of the court is bound to respect.
Thank you, Heather, for continuing to keep us informed on the Supreme Court’s (and the repub’s) assault on Women’s Right to Choose, attempting to overturn Roe v. Wade. The distractions and lies seem unprecedented, but they continue the repub process of unraveling our freedom and our Democracy. The Truth is in front of us: “Legal commentator Joyce White Vance tweeted: “Odd that the Supreme Court is acting like they’re under assault, when it’s actually us who are under attack by them.”
We are at a tipping point about who we really are when the Supreme Court Building becomes a walled fort out of fear of the people's response to a leaked opinion. For years now the ultra conservatives have been trying to find ways to exert their will on the rest of us...and part of their strategy has been to paint all democrats and Rhino's as misguided, ultra-liberal, socialist, commie, queer, academic, Hollywood, tree hugging science freaks. And that we want to take away all your guns, make all your kids queer, kill Christianity, eliminate Christ, kill Christmas and make RuPaul the Secretary of Defense....oh and here's the one truth...treat Blacks, Latinos, Asians, Indians & Women with respect and dignity. To use a song that Keith Moon was smashing in (literally) Who are you ?
Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer’s heart is in the right place. But his vow to have the Senate vote on a bill to protect abortion rights is little more than a toothless political gesture. It will be filibustered immediately and will not survive the inevitable cloture vote. Until the filibuster is ended any Senate non-supermajority will continue to live at the mercy of the minority. His vow to bring legislation to the Senate floor will generate support from those committed to civil rights but little else. As far as putting Republicans on record, we already know where they stand on abortion rights, on voting rights, on gun control, on same sex and interracial marriage, on contraception, on business regulation, on healthcare, etc., etc. If Senator Schumer wants to protect reproductive rights, he needs to end the filibuster, and the rest of us need to vote in Democratic majorities in the Senate so such legislation cannot be overturned by a future Congress.
It takes 50 senators plus the VP to modify or end the filibuster. Schumer does not have the votes. Two Democrats and 50 Republicans will vote against it. It's up to us to change those numbers in the next election.
"[Collins] will vote against the measure because she thinks it goes too far." She won't actually "vote against the measure" because she will not support a motion to proceed to a vote. Collins, Murkowski and other Republicans should have the courage to support moving to a vote to codify Roe v Wade into law and then the courage to vote what they believe.
Honestly, Ellie, I don’t want to read what they have to say. Either they vote for it or they don’t, in which they will feel the wrath of their constituents.
Does appear to “leave the door open “ for states to impose severe restrictions.
(a) In General.—A State—
(1) may not impose an undue burden on the ability of a woman to choose whether or not to terminate a pregnancy before fetal viability;
(2) may restrict the ability of a woman to choose whether or not to terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability, unless such a termination is necessary to preserve the life or health of the woman; and
(3) may enact regulations to further the health or safety of a woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy.
This bill was introduced in February 2022. By two repubs. What happened to it? Is/was it intended to replace a settled law? And while it was in the Senate, the Roe vs Wade crisis. Any connection (we might ask.)
Courage. It’s what’s needed and missing in action. Fear is an overriding reaction to change and that includes laws that protect civil and human rights, the umbrella of our Democracy.
Just where has Joe been. Didn’t he have trump on his show almost every day. Didn’t he pal around with trump for years. It’s good he finally is saying what we’ve known for years but sheesh!!!
If I had a dollar for every time Susan Collins expressed "dismay" and then did exactly what her Dear Leader told her to do, I'd have more than enough cash for a very swanky dinner at a very swanky restaurant. She is the dictionary definition of a hypocrite. 🤢🤮 are the two emojis I have been using most frequently these days. I propose a new policy: every man who is the cause of an unwanted pregnancy--for whatever reason--is subjected to forced sterilization. Make it a political platform issue. Propose the policing of male bodies to the degree that female bodies are policed. And then see what they do.
Absolutely. Females have paid for unwanted pregnancies forever. The biggest problem in getting to that point of responsibility is that males have made the laws and still do. The Suits. We are so outnumbered. In so many ways. The Scale of Justice?
The Supreme Court is acting like they are the Vatican. They are not justices, but priests claiming legal infallibility. And they are becoming more and more secretive with the extensive use of the shadow docket - deciding things in secret without open debate. And they are becoming more arrogant and insular just like the secretive college of cardinals. They might as well wear red robes and hats to signify their absolute power. “Absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Giving them lifetime positions insulates them further and allows them to have contempt for those who do not agree with their ideology. Significant that many of them are Catholics. And perhaps much worse - they have taken the lying culture into our highest court. Their blatant lies under oath during confirmation hearings are now exposed for all to see. They are helping to normalize the lying culture whose motto is “I lied, so deal with it. I’ve got a lifetime appointment” - the equivalent to being immortal on this earthly plane. Finally Robert’s indignation about the leak as if it is the worst thing that could have happened - the equivalent of a mortal sin - a violation of the commandment “thou shall have no other gods but me” - ignores the devastating direction this supposedly august impartial body is taking us as a nation. If Roberts was moderating, he will now go turtle and withdraw into his hard conservative shell and proceed to destroy rights at will. Dangerous times - no longer “interesting” but turning deadly!
Ned, you, of course, are right to characterize the history of the Vatican and its players as a hierarchical, patriarchal, sexist and closed system....it has been and there is still a cohort wanting to keep the vestiges that way to maintain control and power. But the current Pope is not one of them. His efforts to reform from within are meeting strong resistance from an anti-Francis element heavily financed and controlled by ultra right conservative Catholics--many populating places like The Federalist Society and other power groups. But be careful about painting all Catholics with the right wing brush. As with everything else, there is a spectrum. As to the heavy and punitive hand of a priest-ridden, Curia -driven Roman infallibility machine, it has just been unplugged from its life support system by Francis's latest reform document, Praedicate Evangelium. But the real unplugging began in 1968 when many U.S. Catholic women exercised their primacy of conscience (a long but unemphasized teaching of the church) and quietly ignored Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI's encyclical banning contraception.
Much like our current political division, if the octogenarian Pope Francis (of the torn ligament) can hang on long enough to "codify" the necessary reforms, the RC church (which also does huge good works alongside its brokenness) might have a way to enter the future with a more faithful adherence to the best of its beliefs. But the strong, well financed, political and evangelically embedded ultra-right cohort( fronted by a few outspoken Cardinals and former Nuncio's and aided by the complicit silence of many Bishops Conferences) cannot wait for him to die!!
Thank you, Carol. Pope Francis is a true light in the darkness and the church has some hugely positive characteristics as you rightly point out. But the Supreme Court seems to have none of these mitigating elements except for the 3 powerless liberal women for whom I see nothing but darkness and dissent. Alito's language is the language of the Inquisitor! And the contempt and condescension in his writing is akin to those who employed the rack and other torture instruments during the dark ages. That this body is unassailable and has a lifetime to wreak havoc is what calls forth such dark thoughts and comparisons. I really do think they should wear red robes and wear hats to make it clear what they are.
Of course generalizations are dangerous. But look at the history of religion, either as victim or victimizers. And wars in the name of God, as if there are multitudes of these gods, depending on your faith. Maybe there are. Or not.
I will not go back to being treated a second class citizen! I broke the glass ceiling and I'm not going to allow these control freaks take us backwards and make the next generations have to do it again and again. It rather tickles me that the Supreme Court is preparing for siege. Remember the Women's March in 2017. Millions protested and no one was arrested. We need to keep to non-violent protesting. Our strength is in our numbers and having a worthy cause! By our I mean all of us this time working for women's rights, immigration reform, healthcare reform, disability justice, reproductive rights, the environment, LGBTQ rights, racial equality, freedom of religion, workers' rights and tolerance. (Go enjoy refreshing your memory at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Women%27s_March) I sense a huge movement from all those determined not to lose their rights and, in fact, expand them and make sure everyone (every one, no one left behind) benefits with lives of well-being and community. Like my alma mater, M.I.T., where each and every individual is respected just because they are there, we can have a country where everyone is respected just because they exist! Let's quit competing for a slice of the pie and start making more and bigger pies valuing our differences as synergistic strength. Let's do the right thing by each other and our communities. Let's go forward to phase 2 of this beautiful experiment of democracy and take humanity to the next level of maturity and well-being for all. We, the People, all of us this time. The People's March begins now!
Right on, Cathy!
Thank you, Heather, for this brilliant gauge of the rising temperatures.
The Women's March has called for a day of protest on 14th May. Any differences of opinion with their leaders should be set aside and we should all be out on the streets!
"Legal commentator Joyce White Vance tweeted: 'Odd that the Supreme Court is acting like they’re under assault, when it’s actually us who are under attack by them.'"
We ARE under attack -- our rights are under attack: men, women, LGBTQIA, BIPOC, ALL.OF.US! We really must unite against this latest attack on our freedoms and our very being.
Find a Women's March rally near you!
https://www.mobilize.us/womensmarchfoundation/
Thanks! The first one in Chicago was tremendously inspiring. People of all ages who had never before rallied or protested came out, and the solidarity was powerful. Far from being ineffectual as some have suggested, it showed new participants the power of nonviolent protest and the importance of showing up. It showed longtime organizers that new people are ready to roar and vote and etc. And it surely led to new connections and a heightened attention and worldview going forward. Voters came out in 2018 and again in 2020, and we will do so again in 2022. People who marched for women later marched for Black Lives Matter. I know, because my mom and I did. And friends of ours did. Showing up always matters. Keep showing up, keep roaring, keep being in solidarity across all the social justice issues. We are powerful individually and collectively. And sing! Songs are powerful and motivating.
Showing up always matters. Indeed. Always.
In Ukraine their freedoms are being attacked by force.
In the USA our freedoms are being attacked by courts.
"Showing up always matters. Indeed. Always."
Rhea Graham, I could not agree more. One irony is that the attacks are being led by a political party that includes an arm in Congress that has the gall to call itself the "Freedom Caucus". Pure Orwellian behavior at every level...
"Tis time to fear when tyrants seem to kiss." Pericles, Pericles, Act I, Scene 2
I agree m, Laura! I have participated in almost every single Women’s March and flew to DC with both of my daughters in 2019. It was quite the experience for them and for me too. I lived in DC for 5.5 years with my husband before moving to CA in 1974. We were there when Watergate occurred. Yet, another disgusting act by the crazed Repubs!
The good old days of Watergate when lies mattered and public service was taken seriously. Now the fringe worships a mass murder sexual predator who has already caused a million deaths.
Yes, Gigi, so frigging true. Ugh
In Vermont, the women's march was so big, and supported with many men. Montpelier's offramps all had to be closed off and no one could enter during the march once the town reached max capacity. It was freezing cold and had snowed, yet all of us persisted. We shall do it again--modern suffragettes to maintain everyone's right to vote and to keep bans off our bodies. I expect real men to rise with us again and to demonstrate to the world We Stand Stronger, Together.
💪🏽💪🦾💪🏾👏🏼👏🏼🎉🎉
Will people come home from a march and actually organize this time? These marches have not historically produced effective follow-up. Frankly they remind me of women dressing in white for photo ops for suffragette day then having tea with watercress sandwiches and calling it a day.
Agree 100%. After the 2017 Women's March I said to a woman "Now we get busy." And she said. "Huh"?
As a boomer I am a mix of angry, sad, understanding and furious that these younger people made fun of us and then let this ball drop. I have been asking younger women to get involved in politics for years; telling them that we need to begin handing the baton to them. I have been telling grisly tales of what it was like to work, earn, marry and face pregnancy in my younger boomer days as an effort to get their attention. And yes, I understand the busyness of family, career and care free days of the younger years.
We are facing huge life/death issues in the United States and have been for some time; including Democracy being on life support. I am aware that voting by younger people surged in the 2020 election. And I am aware that the political, economic and life events are radically different for young people now. With the election of Joe Biden we had been given a reprieve from the onslaught of authoritarianism. We are wasting it. Elections count but politics has become a 365 day effort. It's not about the "we are mad moments" when adrenalin runs high. It really is the slogging somewhat boring part of organizing, writing Congress people etc. that makes the difference.
And to all the younger people I met during the 2020 election cycle my hat is off to you and I am so sorry for the awful messes you face. But at the end of the day it comes down to this. Shame on them for what they are doing. Shame on us if we don't do anything about it.
Support:
Voters of Tomorrow
https://votersoftomorrow.org/
Students Learn Students Vote Coalition
https://slsvcoalition.org/
Let America Vote works to defeat anti-voter Republicans and elect brave voting rights champions.
and
Moms for The Union.
https://www.redwine.blue/
Good idea to post this. I have been aware of them.
I have no idea why younger folks don't vote. Its as if all is taken for granted. Perhaps this will "shake them up a bit."
Maybe they don’t vote because it’s mostly SOS for them no matter who’s in office?
I disagree. More women have run for office since that first March . I see much more activism in in young women now. It kept me from jumping off a cliff. Seeing so many others who felt like me gave me hope in these terrifying times.
I think a lot of them were arrested, jailed and force-fed. (A Lorton, VA, prison, just down the road from D.C., was the site of the incarceration. Today the facility is a thriving visual and performing arts center -progress.) Optics are a good beginning. Marchers learn from one another and are empowered to organize. They were on their own back then. Now we have organizations like Vote Save America to provide structure and direction for those who want to take action to protect our rights. And we have Heather to insure we are fortified with the facts.
Organizing is everywhere already! I learned of 4 more active groups just today, among them
https://www.redwine.blue/
The marches in and of themselves do something for Democracy. They ARE democracy.
The organizing is not the the problem. It's about being effective. It's about having a clear agenda, sustainability, communicating that agenda and being able to recruit people.
Nah! We are really po'd!
Thanks! We'll be going to Vermont's at our statehouse in Montpelier. 11 a.m, Saturday, May 14.
Thanks, Becky. I hope there's a rally in Burlington, too. I have no affordable wheelchair transportation to Montpelier.
I'm sure there will be, Hope, but you may also get a lift to Montpelier from Burlington with someone, if you advertise. I'd offer, but we're coming from a different direction.
The problem is with a power chair which is too heavy and large for a car. But thank you.
I think HCR Vermonters should plan to meet sometime during the day! What say you, Becky?
I say yea! What about at noon in the middle of the left lawn? (Left as you look at the Statehouse.) I'm not sure where the crowd will be, but that might be at or beyond the fringes. Shall we wear or carry something unusual for instant identification? That would be fun.
Okay-- I think there is a fence or stone wall to the far left. Why don't all Vermonters to want to meet at 12:00 talk about this privately. My email is DecencyandDemocracy@gmail.com.
We might need to have little signs that say HCR!
warmly,
Penelope
Putney
Thanks Ellie!
Thanks.
Many thanks, Ellie, for yet another, wonderful, action opportunity!💙
Thank You Ellie!!
The barbarians are not only at the door, they are hacking it down..enough
Respectfully what does that do? Wastes a day of everybody’s time for a photo op. Those pink pussy hats made middle class women feel like they were doing something; look what followed. The women’s march was a joke because no real disciplined action followed, and if that’s all you have in your quiver you’re doomed.
You forget that the left took the House, Indivisible organized. Then we took the Senate and the Presidency. In my area Spanberger defeated Brat. Your defeatist, distainful stance serves no purpose except to divide. Reminds me of my mother, who at the end of her life admitted she was especially critical of my brother and me because she thought it would galvanize us to success. Instead she destroyed our spirits.
You come here for cheerleading or free maternal encouragement, scroll on by, respectfully. I mother my own children; here I express my opinions. And it’s a stretch for you to call me “defeatist” when you don’t know me, Gail Adams. I get up every morning and teach college; I participate in activism, I organize and I’m a candidate for public office. Sorry about your mommy issues, for which I hope you get professional advice, and hope you are able to be activist yourself.
Laura, I join you in seeking strong organization employing logistics, pressure by numbers, strategy and influence with specific goals. Why aren't you using your activism here, instead of fault finding? Your tone is more alienating than it is motivating. Why not recruit?
Thank you, Fern!
💙
A: what makes you (&others) feel a need to “tone police” me? I stop by here to express opinions and don’t give a hang who likes my tone. Scroll on by if you want to Hello-Kitty-Kumbaya each other and only read “positive affirmations” — that’s just not me and there are plenty of flavors of resistance here on Professor Cox’s platform.
B:what makes you think I don’t “recruit?” I just don’t chivvy people to go to popup marches working people can’t be at, then call that enough action.
Laura, Gail, take a deep breath, we are allies not enemies. Let's not let the stress of this moment turn us against each other.
Ah Joan. Perfect You can be oversight for the committee of Laura/ Gail who have been named to oversee the new law demanding all males have vasectomies at age 12. As we all know vasectomies are reversible at any time males can show responsibility for creating pregnancies. These two as committed adult women would be perfect working in tandem to achieve a broader sense of equally sharing the burden of achieving that broader equality.. So now, which one gets the knife or the snips.
Actually, when faced with my own motherhood many years ago, I did get professional help. How sad that an obviously educated individual cannot recognize an analogy. And yes, I, and my daughter, are active in fighting for that in which we believe. Your defensiveness in the face of push back, resulting in an insulting reply, is uncalled for. Have a lovely day.
IDK you, but your attitude is like some militant lesbians I met in gay activism in the '90s who tore the movement apart. Yeah, gay men have less in common with lesbians than they do with str8 men but at times you have to unite for a cause. Ya know "A house divided ..."
Whoa. I didn't get that from Laura at all. The cold hard fact is that the numbers marching in 2017 didn't equate down to political involvement. You are rightfully justified in being proud of the work younger women, middle aged women and older women accomplished post the 2017 march.
You are attacking the wrong person. I recommend you take all that anger and make change happen.
Are you being presumptuous in judging Gail's response to Laura who generally belittled women who attended marches without knowing a thing about the subscribers she was addressing? I'm not being coy, but suggesting that you reread the exchanges here.
I did read the exchanges Fern. This this what I was saying "whoa" to from Gail: Your defeatist, distainful stance... in response to Laura's "Respectfully what does that do?"
Disagreeing is one thing. Labeling in a negative way accomplishes nothing.
Not anger, Barbara, dismay. I was in DC that day (sans hat) with my girlfriend and my daughter. I can't tell you how it shook me out of my admitted complacency and spurred me to action.
We also faced many, many other traumas during the tfg's administration which we worked very, very hard to dismantle. Then we were faced with a global pandemic which prevented us from gathering and protesting very much. Though many of us still did with masks on. These times have been excruciating. I say calm down all this rhetoric and let's remember to undergird one another for our rights and to save our democracy. Keep your lights shining brightly into this darkness of tyranny. This is OUR moment in history to do the right things. Not to judge the small stuff. Let's all keep our eyes on the prize--- freedom with responsibility and re-creation of a stronger democracy.
Marches raise awareness. Afterwards get out the vote and help people get to the polls. Mobilize
United Seth!
Thanks, Seth. Don’t want to speculate on your gender, but especially if you are not female, wanna roll up your sleeves and do it instead of directing in the imperative mood?
By imperative I mean WE the people of all genders and identities. In union there is strength. Let’s work together. Marching and demonstration and getting people to vote. All efforts in all ways according to what one can do.
💝
Respectfully, I was one of the millions of women who marched and did not wear a pink pussy hat. You are right, however, that no real, long term disciplined action followed. Class, Race, & Religion got in the way. Many BIPOC women felt that their voices were not being heard. And they were right. Now, ALL women in the US may be completely marginalized because, among other things, women who make statements like those you are making don't want to get their hands dirty. The tell? Your saying "if that's all YOU have in your quiver, YOU'RE doomed." If you have ideas to offer, do so, but you are echoing the rhetoric of division. You don't seem to feel Choice is a right to fight for as you've offered nothing here, in this discussion, from your own quiver. In the meantime, do you really think the rhetoric of division is something folks on this page are interested in? If you are a woman is this not your fight? Stop sea lioning and bring something worthwhile to the table.
Those who would outlaw abortion do not aim at women’s rights to control their own bodies, but at their right to control their own lives. And men’s, too, if they are not one of the elect. This is, or ought to be, everyone’s fight.
Jon, I can't agree with you completely. I do agree that this is ( or should be) everyone's fight. EVERYONE'S! But, where I disagree is this: Not one single man in the United States, entering a doctor's office, would be refused reproductive health services based on his gender. Therefore, any man working to overturn Roe is operating under the assumption that men have the right over women to determine a women's reproductive healthcare decisions including abortion and contaception. Assuming you are a man, until you personally are able to conceive a child, you cannot ever fully understand the impact of that biological process, physically, emotionally, financially, professionally. Nor can you ever understand the fact that the inability of women to have a CHOICE a is punishment based solely on gender and situation of pregnancy. We are being punished by so called men of faith and supposed high moral stature who couldn't care less about an unwanted child. The women who have joined their ranks do so in order to retain power over other women if and when the shoe finally drops and CHOICE is taken away from women.
To get right down to it, even white men who are not of the elect are more respected than women, BIPOC, LGBTQ+, Differently Abled. I understand where you're coming from and I appreciate your sentiments. But right now, being a biological creature with a uterus, able to conceive a child is the sole factor in determining whether or not 1/2 the population of the United States will have full citizenship or not.
Do either of you know if there is a male contraceptive pill......available?
Fierce and fabulous as usual, Daria. Toast to you during happy hour.
Salud!
Christine, here's to you! 🌷
To you and Daria, Cheers! Happy Happy Hour! Home after a two day drive.
Gail, put your feet up and relax! Welcome home🌷
Laura, every bit of action helps. Change can take time. Gathering together with like-minded others is inspiring and can have far-reaching effects. It is something we can do now, and that's no small thing. The visual of massed bodies peacefully protesting is powerful and inspiring. It is also an opportunity to exchange information and further organize. It is a really good and important thing!
Amen.
The marches in 2017 were the start of the wave that took over the House in 2018, and the Senate and White House in 2020.
That is right. Trump, with as much damage he did and continues to do, lost the house, then Senate and WH, because normal rational Americans woke up and got outraged. Those marches helped. The silver lining in this draft decision is that it has sparked that outrage again. We need it, and we need to maintain it. Progressives are so good at becoming lackadaisical and staying home on election day while the deplorables stampede to the polls. Unfortunately we need a big shock to get too many of us off our collective a_ses.
"Democrats had predicted they would pick up new seats in the House this election. Instead, eight incumbent House Democrats have lost their races, and not a single Republican has lost their seat.
Though some races have not yet been called, the party is expected to secure about 222 or 223 of the 218 seats necessary to control the House, their slimmest majority since World War II.
The party hasn’t coalesced around a clear answer about why and doesn’t seem poised to do so. Moderates have argued that progressive policies allowed Republicans to brand them as socialists, and progressives have argued it was moderates’ own fault for not campaigning strategically during the pandemic. Each side feels they have enough evidence to support their own view and there are no signs of any serious soul-searching for the party as a whole.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/addybaird/democrats-house-election-losses#:~:text=There%20Is%20No%20Democratic%20Reckoning%20Coming%20Over%20Their%20Election%20Misses
That linked quote is from November 2020. What relevance does that have today? Very little, I'd say.
"Jon Margolis5 hr ago
The marches in 2017 were the start of the wave that took over the House in 2018, and the Senate and White House in 2020."
Per your own comment referencing the 2020 outcome Jon I provided the article talking about House losses.
You are def a glass half empty person. Get to the tap, Laura Thomas, and flush that Koolaid out your mouth with some cool spring water.
It was Flavor Aid in Jonestown, Christine. And why the fuck should a woman be satisfied with half a glass and a pink hat when men get a full glass?
Hahahahahaha. Someone forgot to let you in on a really important truth, Laura Thomas among you. Let me remedy that. Men are the glass. Women are the water. Our beautiful destiny has always been that each woman is irrevocably in charge of how much water is in the glass. Don’t get stuck at any particular waterline because you’ve been “told” to be there. Ha! Be the flow, do not go with the flow. And respect the glass and its thoughts. A glass that can cherish women’s hearts is easy to fill. Until it’s not.
That is our powerful reminder and protest now.
United!
🙋🏻🙋🏼🙋🏽🙋🏾🙋🏿
Christine, I'm with you -- all of us here seeking union and rights for all the American people. Accusations and one-upmanship by one party or more among us need not tempt retorts, which can fuel more discord. We need to find ways to recognize the critic. If that person maintains negativity, I'm in favor of asking them to contribute and moving on.
Beautiful
Where might that analogy leave nonbinary and trans comrades?
That’s what you’re fighting for to have a full glass.
Bot? Troll?
It does have that tone, doesn't it? I thought the same.
Me too.
I use my name as a pronoun, rather than “it,” but thank you for not assuming a gender binary.
Trolls worried. No one giving troll tolls at the bridge. Upping their game before moving on.
Perhaps, just perhaps, we raised enough consciousness to out vote the repuglitans in 2020?
Never underestimate a good photo-op. The idea is to move people [voters] to make change. Note that Biden beat Trump mainly from voters who quietly voted by mail during a pandemic. Yes, change can happen like that without having to literally role up sleeves and have disciplined action by a majority of the people.
The problem is our country is split and in some locations it's so entrenched with conservative ideology that any action other than voting is not easy. So, how do you get people to vote? How do you get better candidates? Yes, it takes action but not everyone has to do action other than march [to raise awareness on a large scale] and vote [to make change on a large or maybe small scale]. Nonetheless, the women's march was not a joke except to conservative men or neo-Marxists who want to burn down the country. I know you are neither of those.
I would agree some of those who push for change have to be more disciplined and in a position to make change. Others just have to be aware and to vote. I mean, look how the SCOTUS just took down abortion rights. Three justices got selected by Trump - who was voted into office - just did this. Not a revolution. Just judges in robes who were all placed into their position in rather mundane ways. And all along individual states were chipping away at abortion rights. Sometimes change is incremental. But it starts with making people aware of the action you want. Marches can do this.
I don't disagree with you at all. When canvassing or text banking/phonebanking, one always makes the next ask, right? So if people make time to march and commit right there/then to not only vote but work to GOTV in concrete ways (one more person each is a good starter ask) it becomes more than a photo op. And that is frankly what a lot of us feel like we saw little of in 2016/17. And that's why I bother to comment on posts like this, because if you think I *need* to engage with a bunch of armchair keyboard warriors who apparently enjoy speculating on whether my motives are "good" or I'm a "radical lesbian" or want me to scurry to Urban dictionary to look up "sealioning" (frankly an insult to those good animals) you misread me.
I do agree that action such as GOTV will do more than just talking about it and photo-ops. No doubt, people only commenting with like-minded citizens on a blog won't do much to move the needle. I only point out that when done right the less active activities can produce results. But its success depends on too many factors to consider in a comment. Thanks.
Freedom OF religion but also freedom FROM religion.
I find it interesting that separation of church and state is being ignored in the abortion coverage. This is clearly about establishing a state religion. I think the Supreme Court would more aptly be call the Supremacy Court. Decades ago when I was working in the nascent field of artificial intelligence,the business card company misprinted my card saying I was from the Artificial Intelligency. Rather enjoyed handing out those cards.
"This is clearly about establishing a state religion."
Kathy, having grown up in a fairly fundamentalist church in East Texas (although not as nutty as today's fundamentalist churches), I really think that what we are seeing is a move by white males to dominate the landscape again. Not Republicans trying to establish a state religion (although they may act like they want that to get some folks vote).
Who in the Republican Party is "Christian" and wants to establish anything like a real Christian ethic in their party? Nobody.
What the Republican party DOES want is white male domination of women, blacks, and anybody who is not easily burned working outside in the sun (not that any white guys do that much any more).
So, I would encourage folks not to buy in to any narrative that says Republicans want a state religion. Republicans are not even slightly religious in anyway.
They are white men who want more control no matter that they are too incompetent to manage once they get that control.
“What the Republican party DOES want is white male domination of women, blacks, and anybody who is not easily burned working outside in the sun (not that any white guys do that much any more).“
You are so right but you omit an operative emotion of white men—fear. FEAR of women, blacks, and anything and and anyone else. Religion is simply and hypocritically used….
Afraid of the possibility that when in power, we will do unto them as they have done unto us. I certainly have seen that fear from straight guys when looking at gay men; terrified that these gay men will treat them the way they treat women.
Sophia, you could very well be right about the Fear driven part. But, being fear driven is so foreign to me (and sometimes that is bad for me honestly) that I just cannot see it when, perhaps, that is the origin.
Mike, the fear of “Christian” white males that is being fanned is the fear of replacement: losing their power and status gained solely through their gender, race, heterosexuality and patriarchal religion. Lyndon Johnson put it best: “If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.”
That’s because you are a male, Mike. That fear for women and especially women who are black and brown, have experienced fear from day one.
The root of all negative emotions is fear, i.e. hatred (fear that you have lost something), anger (fear that you are losing something), jealousy (fear that you will lose something), etc., so the thinking goes: if I control everything and everyone, I have nothing to fear....
Religion has for millennia been a way for a powerful few to dominate and control the masses. It had nothing to with ethics or religious belief in a spiritual entity. Just power over the other.
Growing up, my church had a beautiful pulpit with intricately carved figures around the base. One of them was a guy engulfed in flames. I asked what was up with that guy, and was told he wanted to translate the Bible from Latin to a language the people understood, and that would take away absolute power from the clergy who could pretty much say anything about religious doctrine without being challenged.
Ha!
💝
The particular brand of Christianity that places a man at the head of household and forbids any kind of sexuality except between men and women is exactly the kind of state religion that would reinforce white male Republican sovereignty. So I respectfully disagree with your statement. If you’re saying it does not spring from any real spirituality, though, I would agree.
OK.
If we define the word "religion" to represent:
A broad instance of an organization, male led, heirarchical, money acquiring entities to control peoples minds (Religion) then, I agree with your summary.
Money and power is the real religion here. Masked in Christianity.
But, as always, political religion is the means to the end. And I’m not talking heaven here
Jeri, WHAT? Religion is not going to get me to heaven even if I shaft everyone I meet and lie constantly?
Dadgummit! What is church for then???
:-)
Before we had a Health and Welfare Department, I think, correct me please if I'm wrong, the church was responsible for keeping birth, marriage and death records for tax purposes. The church taxed the people because the church was the government.
While you are right that the main issue here is white male domination of everyone else, the authoritarians are clearly cloaking themselves in what they call Christianity and gleeful to force it on everyone else.
Don’t forget the money. The have-mores are deathly afraid that the ordinary wage earners want some for themselves. They believe in the zero-sum game. They encourage white male fears of lost status to protect their fortunes.
believe the biggest failure lies at the feet of National Democratic pollster Celinda Lake and other Democratic party operatives whose job it is to read and understand public opinion, which in turn drives intervention effor
Cathy, you’re right. The “church” you call out is a patriarchal “religion” that calls itself Christian while it cherry picks passages from the King James Bible that command women to speak only through their husbands, command couples to only have married sex for the purpose of procreation, and teaches hatred of “the other” unless they repent of being true to themselves and toe the party line. The reward is that you can judge those you are told are sinners and can punish them with “righteous” laws.
Let's also remember that the opposite of patriarchy is not matriarchy -- it's egalitarianism. The big OR - the us vs. the other - is replaced by AND - stronger together.
Egalitarians. Thanks for the reminder, Cathy! That is the party we want to support!! AND Stronger Together!
Cathy, how true!
💙
Cathy, there is nothing artificial about your intelligence or integrity. Still, I wish I had one of those cards of yours...
😁
I highly recommend this Twitter thread by Greg Olear, whose take-no-prisoners style of writing I admire. He slices and dices Leonard Leo, the right-wing religious zealot singularly responsible for stacking the Supreme Court (and many other courts) for decades with like-minded people. Shocking, isn't it, that Leo believes he's on a mission from God? Of course he is. https://twitter.com/gregolear/status/1522356441285283841
Yes, I have wondered how LL stays behind the curtain and pulls strings, like the Wizard of Oz. Thank you for shining the light on him.
As a religious person, I could not agree with you more. Not only because these theocrats want me to observe their religion not my own. Not only because our Constitution is clear on the subject. Religious observance cannot be free if it is coerced.
A new Battle Hymn of the Republic, Cathy.....
Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the woman;
She is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored;
She hath loosed the fateful lightning of her terrible swift sword:
Her truth is marching on.
I like that very much! In fact, a little history here... I have a song book of songs the Suffragists used - familiar tunes with lyrics much like you just did. Did you know that the Battle Hymn of the Republic was authored by a woman - Julia Ward Howe She wrote the lyrics after meeting President Abraham Lincoln at the White House in November of 1861.
Fervent abolitionist and her husband too.
And after seeing the camp fires of the union soldiers.
Black women, Stuart. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson .. is marching on.
Her too, Sandy. Seperating white women from black women is what kept the plantation oligarchs in power and prevented a coordinated rebellion.
Speaking of plantations, I am reading and recommend Trayvon Generation by Elizabeth Alexander. She writes eloquently about issues of race, past and present, and the artwork is stunning. One chapter is about 'Angola', The Louisiana State Penitentiary. There, thousands of Blacks, on a property the size of Manhattan, are imprisoned, often for life, forced to pick cotton while observed by whites on horseback. The conditions and sentences are appalling. Today.
Wow.
And what about...all the in-between shades?
They quite evidently dominated your world Sandy and it sounds like that you were very lucky to have at least that.
Not at all, Stuart.
My friend, the Vermont songwriter Patty Casey, offered this one. The Chorus goes: "We are smarter than that/We are kinder than that/We are moving forward, we are not going back." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3HvarBiWWA
We are stronger than that, we are kinder than that
We are moving forward, we are not going back
We are stronger than that, we are kinder than that
Love is stronger than that
When the storm is rolling in and our hopes start to fade
That’s when we rise as one, our spirits like a blade
We are many, we are mighty, and even when we are afraid
We are stronger than that
We will not yield to hatred, to lies or to shame
Our power lies in courage, and our love is not tame
If the lights go out on justice, we will light a flame
‘Cause we are stronger than that
To every one that’s turned away, we open up our town
If fear can build a wall, then love can tear it down
Then we’ll build a bigger table for all to gather round
‘Cause we are stronger than that
We will not yield to hatred, to lies or to shame
Our power lies in courage, and our love is not tame
If the lights go out on justice, we will light a flame
‘Cause we are stronger than that
We will not yield to hatred, to lies or to shame
Our power lies in courage, and our love is not tame
If the lights go out on justice, we will light a flame
‘Cause we are stronger than that
https://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/p/patti_casey/stronger_than_that.html
Beautiful. One line reminds me of Chef Andre's motto: Build a longer table, not a wall.
💙
This needs to be our New Anthem for 2022 & 24 election cycles
Hi Ron. I didn't know where the lyrics you provided came from. First went to Youtube to look for the song that they belonged to. It took me a while to figure out that the lyrics were for the song Bronwyn linked in a comment before yours. I suggest that making the connection within you comment would helpful to subscribers - Cheers!
Fern, I got the lyrics from this site: https://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/p/patti_casey/stronger_than_that.html
I, too, had a little difficulty locating them. I had to use the search in Google as "Stronger Than That lyrics Patti Casey."
I, also, noticed they did not exactly match Bronwyn's quote but had already posted it. In any event, I didn't feel there was enough difference to detract from the message itself so left it as is. I apologize if I misjudged that.
Hey, no apologies, Ron. I was just suggesting that we connect the dots in our comments by including the source - what prompted those lyrics to appear.
I have a great friend in Englewood. She's a teacher. We talked last night about students who are or think that they may be trans and how they could be affected when constitutionally approved rights are denied.
Ron, A tip: if you click on the three dots next to delict at the bottom of your lyrics comment, the dots provides an edit function. If you press it, you will then be able to place the song link in the comment with lyrics. Repeat: At the end of you lyrics comment are three dots next to the delete function. Press a dot and you will be able to add to the comment. Copy the song link within the lyrics comments. More cheers!
Plus “I Am Woman. Hear Me Roar” by Helen Reddy.
Could that be used for this season by the Dems? It seems the perfect anthem to sum up our philosophy and direction we want the country to head in.
Thank You Bronwyn.
For weeks in the 2018 Election I stood with others carrying signs supporting the Dem choice for Governor of Florida (To no avail). Since then I have lost some ability to walk or stand but still got that sign board and planning to paper over it with something like:
“I’M GETTING TOO OLD FOR THIS SHIT”
“80% of the Nation Supports Abortion Rights”
“Bring Democracy Back to the U.S.”
The other side something like:
“THE SUPREME COURT IS CORRUPT”
“3 (IN)JUSTICES LIED UNDER OATH”
“PERJURY IS A CRIME”
TALKING THE TALK when it is difficult to walk and telling THE SUPREME COURT that we know it RULES AGAINST DEMOCRACY. Rob Boyte, HERE'S TO YOU!
Love it all, Rob. You are always fierce.
Alito, too, lied during his confirmation hearings.
YES!
As I said yesterday, you are setting the right tone, Sister Cathy. And from the beginning, I am feeling how many brothers are standing with us. Peaceful protest is ours. It is our voices—not cudgels or bear spray or ropes or military gear—that rise. It is our right. We must stand fast because that right is being threatened once again by opponents willing to disrupt a march and silence protest.
I thought of John Lewis yesterday as I watched the Court being fortified. May our skulls be protected with the same effort by law enforcement.
It’s a seminal moment.
Salud. United!
https://www.mobilize.us/womensmarchfoundation/
And being threatened by a male majority (like a semi-popular religion. You know, the one the GOP* wants the US to be ruled under)
*Get Out Pagans
Time for a second women's March on the scale of the first as this is WAY more important than a pissant like DJT. There were 10 people protesting in Antarctica at 60 below zero.
May14th!!
https://www.mobilize.us/womensmarchfoundation/
@CathyLearoyd well said! Let’s begin an organized and spontaneous March to the November 8th midterm elections. Let’s call on the 81% of single-issue voters to push back the GOP’s assault on women and reproductive rights.
https://www.mobilize.us/womensmarchfoundation/
Exactly, Cathy! As Heather says, This is not the conversation Republicans want to have. We need to force them to have it, every minute of every day from now to November 8th.
Cathy, when I posted this LFAA on my FB page, I encouraged my followers to pay attention to the vote of their senators next week. I consider a vote to strip over half our population of a Constitutional right a vote of Catholic theocracy which cares not a whit about anyone else's beliefs or needs. I am urging those disenfranchised by five (or six) robed religious fanatics to remove their members of like persuasion in Congress from their comfortable offices - which - by the way WE are PAYING for. I have yet to discuss this topic with a person who is not as enraged as I am. Alito has no clue what millions of "women scorned" will be doing next November and in the months leading to that ballot box. I hope he enjoys hiding inside his barricaded pavilion knowing that he is utterly despised by the majority of this country. Same with Collins. Greg Olear calls her "amoral" in today's "Prevail" and I believe that is the only way to think of her and her ilk.
ABORT THE COURT! IMPEACH THE INJUSTICES! (I'm making my signs already.)
Love this one, Hope! How danged appropriate is that!
Right on! I am 100%with you. Great statement. Thank you.
5the woman hired by my large corporation here. Marches are good, but door-to-door better. Having a table to have people sign petitions at street fairs/open markets better. Women need to once again “put their bodies on the line” to have face-to-face engagement.
Both approaches work, together.
Excellent actions - grass roots!
Amen sister
It’s all right there just what you said in the Preamble of the Constitution. How much more “ Original “ can you get ! The only thing I disagree with is we need to stop calling it an Experiment. I think Democracy was working really well over the last 50 yrs for the 99% of us. Still need’s a few tweaks here and there. That 1% only has interest in the 1%.
Then you believe Forced Pregnancy is a Blessing of Liberty? Tells me women are not part of We, the People. The top 1% is making our laws and the Supremacy Court so it is all trickle up actually all the cream rises to the top economics causing extreme income disparity to the point a family has to have at least two full time jobs just to feed their family. The 1% are hollowing out the middle class which will lead to the collapse of capitalism. Nineteen states are now autocracies with the Supremacy Court and the Congress doing nothing about Article IV Section 4 which guarantees a republican, i.e. by the people, form of government in all the states. Marcia, please wake up. Democracy is about to go over a cliff. The experiment is not over even with its interim successes.
Cathy, respectfully, if it wasn’t working they wouldn’t be trying to break it.
Because it is working against their desire for power - total control. They can't win in a democracy so they are changing it to an autocracy. It is broken and about to fall apart. The Supremacy Court is not representing the People where a huge majority do not want Roe overturned.
Have you not seen my post that what upsets me the most is they are using Democracy to Kill Democracy.
Over a hundred years ago, Justice Holmes wrote of the First Amendment, “It is an experiment, as all life is an experiment.”
Thank you for that reminder about no arrests at the Women's March. When I read that part of this letter, I thought, "they're afraid of us?" They're trying to suggest something about us that isn't true. Your comment is spot on. Thank you!
https://www.mobilize.us/womensmarchfoundation/
Cathy Learoyd, are you interested in running for the Senate?
While in my corporate position I needed to know the rules of the politics going on around me, I didn't find a need to play by those "rules". For instance, if someone is expecting you to play by the rules and then you surprise them by reacting in another way it was always so fun to watch the confusion on their faces! In other words, if you don't like the rules, change them. So rather than a Senator, I would much rather fix the system and come up with a more constructive set of rules of the Senate. I'd, for instance, get rid of the aisle down the middle. A technique I used in meetings was to sit next to rather than across from the person the most disagreed with my position. You tend to want to agree with the person next to you and argue with the person on the other side of the table. So, by getting rid of the center aisle Senators would tend to look for ways to find solutions from a larger perspective with the Senators the randomly find next to them.
I’m down with your negotiating style, Cathy. I bet you have many interesting and productive ideas. More than happy to back you as Majority Leader! Haha
Dear Justice Alito, when the Founders wrote the Constitution, many of them had slaves, black men like Clarence Thomas. Black men were seen as not a person but 3/5 of a person to increase the count for the South.
In the 1780’s women weren’t even in the Constitution. Women were not considered a person but chattel of their fathers and then their husbands, no rights. How can we consider Amy Coney Barrett as a person since the Founders wouldn’t, strict constructionists.
To argue that abortion isn’t in the Constitution and that a strict constructionist would find that the right to an abortion isn’t a protected liberty interest in the Constitution because it’s not rooted in the country’s history and tradition, should also assume that Clarence Thomas is 3/5 of a human being and
Amy Coney Barrett belongs to her husband and no say in any legal matter. In the 1780’s Justice Thomas would most likely be a slave, rooted in our history firmly.
You can’t pick and choose your history.
And the word ‘woman’ is still not in the Constitution. It used to puzzle me as a Catholic child when my teacher told us that the word ‘men’ meant ‘men and women’. I asked why, if that was true, that women couldn’t be priests. (They had told us that Jesus picked only men to be his apostles). My teacher called my mom and told her I asked too many questions. ( And the books of the almighty bible itself were cherry picked from among many other ancient writings, then translated over and over, so why anyone takes any part of it literally is astonishing to me,)
By Alito's reasoning that means women have no rights. In the movie "On the basis of sex" RBF's biography I loved the part where her opposition compiled and presented as evidence all the laws in the land that claimed women were not a man's equal. I especially liked the one's that said women were poor at math so couldn't be executors of wills and such.
Ha! RBG. What a human.
Salud, Cathy!
“:...so why anyone takes any part of it literally is astonishing to me,)” yes, it’s puzzling that faith depends on where and when and how you got here. A random delivery in one state or another or one country or another. But a “believer” would say it’s not random. It’s divine. There is no argument. Debate club would be interesting.
Excellent points! And the Supreme Court cannot pick and choose in the constitution.
And yet, here we are, with Originalists creating a new history by proclamation
Originalism is made up legal bs.
The Myth that keeps on giving
Indeed!
Excellent points, Molly!
“…in the 1990s, when power shifted to leaders who believed that the country worked best when businessmen could organize the economy without meddling from government bureaucrats.”
Perception:
Too many Boomers feel that they are dealing with Ike. That somehow in that cesspool of insanity, aka Republicans,there are reasonable minds that can come to compromise and consensus that is overall good for the nation.
Meanwhile according to reports from Harper’s Magazine This Week:
“the former head of the Oklahoma Republican Party called for the execution of Anthony Fauci by firing squad, and the Oklahoma Election Board ruled that a lawmaker cannot use the moniker “The Patriot” on the ballot.7 8 9 Madison Cawthorn, a congressman from North Carolina, was stopped at an airport in possession of a loaded gun for the second time.”
Centrist Democrats, and especially so called Independents, are going to sell the nation down the river to Fascist rule.
You read it here first: My solution to ending abortions:
You macho studs out there who want to have careless sex; a great, you can pay the societal price and for the externalities of crime and inhumanity that result.
By my proposed Law - Any woman who is impregnated can call for a DNA test of the man she cites as the father of the fetus/child.
If there is a positive match, then that man will be required to provide the necessary financial support for the child until age 20.
Marriage will not end this requirement.
Just watch the abortion issue fade to next to nothing and the stock prices in male contraceptives go through the roof.
I love your solution to the abortion issue by making the father’s financially responsible for 20 years, however, that still doesn’t keep the outrageous possible law off a Women’s own body & right to choose!
Maybe she doesn’t want the fkr’s baby or the constant reminder of being raped or the victim of incest. Adding your point would definitely make it better as another law though, so thanks for that!
No, it is far from a 100% remedy and in fact I just found out from Citizen60 that as I confirmed there are laws on the books in FL pursuant to paternity and support by the natural father….
Ok, but is it enforced? Maybe there has to be a steeper penalty than money, like Jail or Mandatory Community Service!
Apparently not well enough, because one would think that part of one’s HS education this would be common knowledge… I have to read the statute and dig in deeper, which is wading through lots of legal jargon….
I would add that the father who "seeded" the child needs to raise it if the woman wants to have a life of her own to pursue her goals, education and career.
Agreed. Custody, as well as all financial and physical responsibilities, of the baby should automatically revert to the father, even before adoption. That would include the hospital and medical costs for the infant, of course.
❤️!
Let's just register their DNA so we can quickly match and track the errant little studs. 🤪 Getting carried away I am.
Agreed Fred - it would be both great for crime and to provide a database that would make the process much faster.
I was rather stunned to find that even here in a fascist state like Florida that there are pretty clear cut laws for paternal responsibility including court mandated testing.
Every student at age 13 should be made aware that this law exists and will be enforced.
But are these laws enforced? There should be It-Takes-Two-to-Tango laws so men can see what how one's life is impacted to be FORCED to be barefoot in the kitchen with a babe.
That is the part that is weirding me out. If the Florida 742 Determination of Parentage Law was simply enforced it would seem to to be an excellent deterrent and a lot of unwanted pregnancy might be averted.
Apparently a lot of pregnant women out of wedlock are simply in the dark or fearful of filing w/ the clerk of the court.
That would save a LOT of time Fred! Perhaps Elon could put the DNA and tracking devices in those male brainchips at birth!
A great idea!
Instead of life insurance, every 15 year old male should be required to carry Liability Insurance to cover accidental pregnancy. Suggest there be a high deductible and that the premium pool be accessible to pregnant women not otherwise covered for medically necessary abortions and childcare for 25 years. Rate setting may consider all the extracosts women bare in their lifetime or until menopause is over. And I would suggest there be no gay-guy exclusion to ward off mother-fakers and have a built in support group to monitor the scrum and violators of this fair-share post Roe decision.
That is already the law in almost every state. Collection is another issue.
I’m for male hormonal birth control and reversible vasectomies to end abortion. Both exist. Never mentioned by “Evangelicals/Catholics/Mormons/Muslims (big 4 behind this movement).
Wow! I looked at FL statute and “ In order to preserve the right to notice and consent to the adoption of the child, an unmarried biological father must, as the “registrant,” file a notarized claim of paternity form with the Florida Putative Father Registry maintained by the Office of Vital Statistics of the Department of Health which includes confirmation of his willingness and intent to support the child for whom paternity is claimed in accordance with state law.”
So, this makes me wonder why this is NOT clearly enforced. My son spent 3 days in jail for simply falling behind on payments. So, why is this statute not made clear to every male in a state where these laws prevail?
I don’t blame you for wanting “hormonal birth control” or reversible vasectomies
Why are the support laws enforced at all/uniformly? Why was Viagra approved by Medicare and every insurance company in America on Day 1 and birth control bills weren't until the ACA in 2014 (available in the 60's)? Why did women get the vote nearly 70 years after freed slaved? Why could Black men (fill in your color/ethnic) purchase a car or get a credit card with a "responsible male" signing for her until 3 years after Roe? What is not mentioned at all in the Constitution? Women. Even slaves (Blacks) were mentioned since they were to be counted as 3/5 of a human in the census.
Look at the dominant religion that settled this nation -- Catholics. Far more than Christians (West/Southwest; Florida/Louisiana Purchase. Except for the Quakers, the Christian "sects" among early settlers were Puritans, orthodox Lutheran (now called Missouri Synod). Later came the Anti-Baptists (originally an anti-Catholic political party, but guess which part of the movement "stuck" during the Great Revival?) and the Mormons--whose Dessert Territory once encompassed what are now 4 other states besides Utah. What is the role--and value--of women in those religions?
And that's why child support that men are supposed to pay is unevenly enforced. Let's talk about enforcement when women are required to pay child support....
I agree completely. While much of the Alito draft is deserving of opprobrium, I am most deeply troubled by one section of that odious document, wherein Alito, citing Washington v. Glucksberg, 1997 opines that "the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment . . . has been held to guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such rights must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition” and “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.”
Let us set aside for the moment the fact that James Madison - ultimately the primary architect of the Bill of Rights - was initially opposed to it as being unnecessary, for he believed that any rights and liberties not specifically reserved to the government were retained by individuals. Madison feared that some might interpret the enumeration of specific liberties as a denial of any others. It would seem he was prescient.
If Alito is correct that only rights and liberties that are "deeply rooted in this Nation's history" can be considered to be protected by the Constitution, does that not guarantee stagnation of our society? If the Constitution bars the nation from embracing new liberties as it adapts to evolving scientific knowledge, culture and mores, does that not condemn us to a society where progress is outlawed?
I can’t believe Madison and his coauthors expected the future Americans to do nothing to form a more perfect union. It is silly and complete nonsense to expect people in the future to make no changes to this living document to meet the needs of their times. Perhaps Alito would be more comfortable if we were hunters and gatherers.
I can’t believe it either. Maybe Alito is becoming demented. It just doesn’t seem right. Deep anger can do that to a man.
How is it that 9 Justice’s can overrule 57% of the American Public anyway?
Selective facts ignore history
Therefore, Coney Barrett must be removed from the Supreme Court. 1 down, 5 to go.
Doesn't that then include Clarence as well? 2 down, 4 to go?
!!
Molly Ciliberti, Please hit 'send' on this one! TY!
How do I do that?
Put it in an envelope addressed to Justice Alito, United States Supreme Court with a stamp on it and put it in a US Mailbox ~ please ~
Ooo, Molly. New quotes in my quiver. You are so smart. A+ for critical thinking skills (only “critical”thing I’ve seen taught in my decades of public education.) Salud!
Fabulous!! Print and send to every sitting member of SCOTUS! And to your newspaper!
It is ridiculous, it is crazy, it is dangerously irresponsible to keep talking of and talking to the Wolf that Ate Grandma.
The criminal conspiracy that hides behind the name "Republican Party".
A stealth charade like Putin's little green men taking over Crimea.
You go to bed as citizens of the United States of America, you wake up as subjects of the Confederacy.
Great sentence:
"The criminal conspiracy that hides behind the name "Republican Party".
That has literally been true since Ronald Reagan and his illegal actions.
And now Peggy Noonan is blathering the bull Schitt, as she did then. All republicans are on the same train, barreling down on us all with no conscience and no brakes.
Peggy Noonan must be about 125 years old? Dang. I guess the Republicans can only find one woman to support them, then, they keep her alive forever.
Before I dropped my WSJ subscription I regularly saw her bashed in the comment section. Even she was subjected to disdain.
Taxidermy
That is still what bugs me the most. To use the system,Democracy, to kill it !
Fractured states of America
No one sane can "like" what you have written, but that is how it is. They've broken something bigger than a bank.
“Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand."
Despite all we may feel, despite what we are tempted to think, the great challenge before us is how to bring together again what has been torn apart. Not just to survive but, after the work of the scalpel, to recover, to heal.
Survival first
The tireless, multi-pronged approaches of those who sought the eventual theocracy/authoritarian “democracy” that exists to take taxpayer money and outright give it to the already wealthy (pandemic boondoggles, Halliburton war pig contracts for showers that nearly electrocuted US military members) was, while evil, disciplined and relentless. With disciplined GOTV and constant attacks on the integrity of the US judiciary, with the creation of think tanks and hate radio/propaganda/Faux News, through collusion with political machines masquerading as tax-exempt churches, the right rose and here we are. Why are we looking around in surprise and wondering (or explicating) how we got here?
The left quit. Resting on “laurels” it never earned, from the failure of ERA to the persistent underpaying of women to Roe which is a Frankenstein compromise that left women’s unalienable rights to our own bodies only partially protected. Instead of fighting back, most women with the most access to money and education sat smugly and equated photo-op inclusion with progress. Some of this is the successful distraction of right-wing hate groups that use small, visible distractions and ginned up “culture war” victories detract from bigger goals; some of it is the crushing workload of domestic and professional life many women choose; some of it is the smug, effete laziness of the privileged who chose to focus on pronouns instead of proactive trench warfare to expand rights and looked the other way while poor, rural sisters suffered from lack of health care and educational/economic opportunities.
And now here we are.
Great post Laura.
A good, succinct analysis that can be summed up: Republicans play to win, rules don't matter. Democrats do sort of, sometimes, maybe play to win but they do not use all the tricks and they also don't openly find the most corrupt white guys they can find, absent any ethics, and put them on a list to be Supreme Court Justices.
Anyway, its like the middle school bully and the nice kid in school. As long as the nice kid follows all the rules he was taught important, the bully makes his life miserable.
But, when the nice kid finally brings a short piece of steel rod to school, and catches the bully at the lockers with his head turned, and puts a 1 inch dent in the back of his skull precipitating a two week stay in the hospital.....?
Then, things change for a lot of people, and, for the better.
During the campaign for the 2020 election, a Biden rally was going on downtown, despite the threat of COVID. There were about 1000 people there. At some point, a group of 15 heavily armed young men arrived wearing MAGA hats and flack vests. 400 or so of us simply surrounded them and did not let them near the main rally. We did not speak to them. We just stood there, en mass, completely encircling them. After only 45 minutes or so, they decided to leave, and were allowed to do so. No healing came out of this action, but a firm boundary was set. No heavily armed MAGAs have turned up in my town for subsequent rallies.
I think we should refer to them as maggots from now on because that’s exactly what they are, that might get them to throw away those insipid hats.
I just use the word "MAGAts."
As an environmental activist, I’ve had my life threatened many times over the last 50 years Steve. Facing down violent opposition takes courage - and large numbers of like-minded folks really helps. Great story; terrific outcome, thanks for the inspiration.
Solidarity. Sorry you have endured death threats. My most recent work as what the NY post labeled “tree defender” (although I wouldn’t give myself that accolade yet) resulted in physical assault by a member of NYPD.
Gads. Don’t know what is worse - law enforcement or MAGAt nutballs. Meanwhile, India is melting under an unprecedented heat wave, New Mexico is burning, and we have high wind/grassfire warnings here in MN. Its the climate, stupid….and your sorry ass will burn right alongside the rest of the planet….
We had fire condition warnings in NYC last week (before a ton of rain we’re enjoying today) and an unhoused person burned to death because of a wind-stoked fire probably from open cooking/camping. I wish “It’s the climate, stupid” resonated with potential voters the way “economy” did, but the short-sighted self-interest is strong these days (what’s new?)…
Steve. Well done!
Most of these MAGA militia members, when outnumbered, will back down. They like to talk a big game and lie about military experience but are cowards. That is why they tried to blame Jan. 6th on Antifa.
Democrats don’t play to win, or the many “special interests” would line up to vote vote for anyone with a “D” next to their name. Coalitions just stay home if they don’t get what they want. Will Rogers joked 100 years ago that “I’m not a member of an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.”
Republicans will line up to vote for a tree stump.
2016 demonstrated exactly how both parties act.
Thanks Mike S … problem where I grew up was the Superintendent of the School District would suspend or expel the “nice” student who finally found the courage to fight back, saying they had a “zero tolerance policy for violence.” (Even though nice kid and parents might have reported the bullying up the chain like the rules said to, and gotten nowhere and nothing except a more vicious beating or taunting from the bully.).
Using your analogy, where would that leave a nice kid tactically? Can’t change the world from jail, can you? Did hunger-striking suffragettes or Bobby Sands make differences? Or was it the behind-the scenes pressure? I wouldn’t know, really, but am not inclined to miss a meal and weaken myself while a guest of the state, being of hearty peasant stock.
Yes, being expelled was part of the equation where I went to school as well. So, during my two weeks off from school, I learned to use the arc welder in my barn.
It was nice and peaceful in the barn, and, my welding got better and better.
Then, I went back to school. The bully never came back to school. I don't know what happened to him. I still don't care.
That sounds like you were suspended, then, not expelled. Also sounds like the school was a better place for you after the bully disappeared, but somewhere, someone had to care for that underage child and tend to his injuries (I’d guess his mom). Now, you could maybe say that she deserved it, raising a bully, but it’s not always the mother’s fault when a kid is a dick, pace Sigmund Freud.
Correct.
Perhaps, my older self would do something different Laura.
I don't know.
Yes, hindsight is interesting sometimes, but indulging in too much woulda/coulda/shoulda these days is fiddling while Rome burns, no?
When I worked at junior high, the administration was not part of the bullying brigade.
Most of what I write for this community comes ASTERISK-PRESENT-COMPANY-EXCEPTED since we are obviously strongly like-minded fans of Professor HCR’s work.
However, there seems to be a lot of glass-jawed pushback every time I make a comment about an experience that was based on personal reality. I’m thrilled for you and your lucky junior high kids that the bullying brigade did not include an administration filled with stupid, thuggish, dim-witted rural bigots. I’d speculate that might have to do with annual income average in the school’s zip code. However, now that we have all read that “not all men” or “not all schools” could we maybe accept that it’s luck and/or privilege to be a nice kid somewhere nice, but many nice kids aren’t (in this ANALOGY, which was obviously constructed ny Mike S to elucidate the greater problem facing US citizens who don’t want to be pawns of a fascist authoritarian theocracy)?
And then, could we talk about tactics or self-identify and take it offline to i/r/l to meet and strategize and DO?
Sure. Why not?
Yep. I admit to being surprised that people are not talking about ERA. If we had had an Equal Rights Amendment as we should have done in the 1970s, then these issues would have been moot. But the fear and loathing by males of female bodies and minds has always meant that any challenges to the patriarchal policing of those bodies and minds would be met with extreme violence and punishment.
I mentioned it yesterday, and was (well, "taken to task" is too strong a word) for how I phrased my comment.
Men *insert obligatory "not all"* simply do not believe that women are the equal of men. Those of the same bent (to include some *not all* women) do not believe that all religions are "equal" (which I do, because they almost all depend on an imaginary sky pilot) nor do they believe that all races are equal.
I think I get where Laura Thomas comes from with her indictment of Democrats who quit thinking the war was won. It was just a series of skirmishes that were won that have lead to the counterstrike we are seeing today from the anti regulation/pro "religion facets of the Republqan party.
I was fortunate that in the career I chose (which I was able to choose because of stronger women who went before me) that my pay rate was for a non-gendered position of Deputy Sheriff, and not tied to my gender. This is not to say that I did not suffer gender based discrimination, but pay and benefits were not tied to gender.
I fully agree that men are afraid women becoming equals as they fear that they could be subjected to the same things that we have been subjected to. Same with Black and Brown people gaining equity. I believe that 2008 taught me that women are more of a threat than are Black people when Obama was chosen over Clinton by the Democrats.
I found a quote about 45 years ago that seems appropriate for now. It was in reference to the fight for the ERA going on at the time. “ Nature gave women so much power that the law wisely gave her none.” I cannot, for the life of me, remember the author of that quote. But it referred to women being able to give birth. When I read the quote I was horrified. The quote stuck in my head, but not the author, probably some 19th century male.
There’s also another quote whose author I cannot recall either. “The law is but man’s opinion.” Tailor made for Samuel Alito, who is creating legal theories out of whole cloth.
https://quotepark.com/quotes/1886532-samuel-johnson-nature-has-given-women-so-much-power-that-the-law/
A treasure trove of quotes - thanks!
Becky Phillips, thank so so much for finding that reference. It is now firmly attached to the quote.
Ah, Google and I are best friends! You're very welcome.
Yikes! These sound like some of the Russian proverbs I learned about 40+ years ago while studying Russian in college. Gems such as "A woman's hair is long, but her wit is short"...
Love that first quote Jenn! Excepting the word “wisely”.
I am not a fan of the word “wisely” either. What an arrogant point of view. I like what my mother used to say, “God looked at Adam and said, ‘I can do better.’ So God created Eve.” 😂😂😂
I had to read a bit of Samuel Johnson and I would bet that in the 1700’s he already knew that god looked at Adam and said “ I can do better” and created Eve. After you posted I found your exact quote in an old Catholic cook book dated 1948.
It has passed, and just recently. But past the artificial deadline Republicans imposed, and the supermajority under Obama did nothing, some Reps or Senators proposed voting to end the time limit, but it never reached the floor because the anti-abortion advocates feared it would be applied to abortion.
Yep. Funny how it barely blipped on most radars, no?
“ some of it is the smug, effete laziness of the privileged who chose to focus on pronouns instead of proactive trench warfare to expand rights and looked the other way while poor, rural sisters suffered from lack of health care and educational/economic opportunities.”
You may driving away potential allies here with this attitude. It is what the Republicans do. They blame a progressive attitude on the “elite” which nobody wants to identify with. It is young people who are concerned about pronouns and they are not all wealthy and white. The Democratic Party always seems to want to turn in the progressive young people who are the future base they will need to keep involved.
I never said I identified as D, although I vote/caucus as necessary to keep Trump from power. I am/was “the progressive young” of whom you speak and feel no fealty to the current power structure. Thanks for distracting from the point that Ds haven’t delivered as promised for women or poc while counting on those votes for decades tho
And some, like me, did what we could. Never had any laurels to rest on…
That’s exactly it. Women are on the hamster wheel just trying to make a living wage at 60 cents on the dollar, plus if we made that choice, caring for parents or bio family or family of choice as an unpaid second shift. No one gave anyone any laurels except a few dozen or few hundred self-congratulatory privileged types who went back to their bubbles
The Dems were asleep at the wheel because that’s how the House lost seats! There is no Republican Party now. The are the Pro-Rape party.
In fairness, Bill Clinton knew how to rape with the best of them. Let’s not sanctify the current D party.
Uh, I am not doing that at all. But as far as we know, the Dems have not committed sedition nor have they spurred on an insurrection. Bill Clinton was an adulterer and lied about it, yes, but did he engage the country in those mentioned above? The answer is NO.
I agree with you that Democrats never incited an insurrection on January 6 and I do not participate in “false equivalency” rhetoric. But mainstream feminists who call Republicans the “pro-rape” party without irony ignore the fact that Bill Clinton raped women, his wife and party helped cover for him, coded their disdain for accusers in classist abuse (“drag a $20 bill through a trailer park”) and people like you turn things rhetorically by conceding “yes, he committed adultery” without admitting that he felt entitled to help himself to Juanita Broderick’s body and then lied about it.
No. There you are.
You not a US resident/citizen? “We” otherwise --although the rich can always pay for a nice safe abortion, laws be damned, pretty soon all women won’t be safe if they decide we can’t own property, hold jobs outside the home, have credit in our own names (law of the land until the 1970s) go outside without our sons/brothers/fathers escorting us, &c.
If you’re safe from the spectre of all this because of citizenship elsewhere, congratulations on your good fortune.
I’ll say this. You assume a lot. Not a good pillar to speak from behind.
Please read my comment to you above, do some reading, look up “assume” while you’re at it, and get back to us. I speak openly, under my own name, and never look for pillars from which to speak behind, thank you.
Citizens of individual states must fight harder to win back their own legislatures. The majority is up against a series of walls built by the minority extremists.
Additionally, right wing laws now in place must be used to hold extremists accountable to their own laws. Force them to eat their own cake.
Finally, don't just invite those who need women's health services to liberal states for services, invite Americans, businesses and money, labor and brains who want civil rights to come and stay. Make the Abbott & DeSantis states pay the price that Russia now pays for their aggression.
Let’s not call them extremists anymore. Let cqll them Pro-Rape people because that's what they are. Let’s make them feel uncomfortable with calling them that. They have managed to incense us at every turn so we have to dish it right back at them…right between their eyrs.
David, time and again, election results are given to the minority by the electors and once, by the SCOTUS. There is also the filibuster and jaw-dropping lying ignorance which is so amplified by the conspiratorial thinking of the radical right. Then, there's authoritarianism on the rise here and elsewhere. The hurdles are disheartening, to say the least.
Why should women’s healthcare rights be decided by the state? Why should a woman in Alabama have different healthcare rights than a woman in NY or CA? That’s like saying a woman in one state can have treatment for uterine cancer but in another state they can’t. Maybe I shouldn’t say that out loud. The scotus might say since it’s not in the constitution…
Thank you Heather.
Yesterday I saw a post that was a spoof on the Supreme Court Justices that lied about their stances on Roe v Wade during their confirmation hearings. It showed actual footage of their comments to uphold the decision countered with video of an audience laughing. At first I laughed along with it, until I hit the replay and watched it again.
The reality of their lying has certainly found a home with the current situation.
How did we get snookered into thinking the best, trustworthy judges would make a perfect choice for a lifetime appointment to have our best interests in mind?
I'm disappointed at best.
Be safe. Be well.
Linda, I am an engineer that reads about an hour of news (time limited) every day. In other words, I am mostly ignorant BUT.....
EVEN I knew that Kavanagh had a $200,000 baseball ticket debt paid off anonymously right before he was picked by the Federalist Sosciety to be the nominee (if you can imagine wasting THAT much time watching baseball).
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/07/new-strike-against-kavanaugh-season-tickets/565022/
IF I KNEW ABOUT THIS KAVANAUGH PURCHASE EVERYONE IN DC also knew that Kavanaugh had been bought.
Unfortunately, instead of initiating an FBI investigation to examine the Kavanaugh purchase, the Democrats brought forth a woman to claim she was ALMOST raped 35 years ago at a high school party by Kavanaugh. She provided zero evidence of her ALMOST being raped.
The reason she provided no evidence is because she was NOT raped by her own admission.
So, when Dem's cannot figure out how to play the game appropriately, and, getting someone to accuse someone else of ALMOST raping them is about as dumb as it gets, then,
this is what happens.
Kavanaugh was bought and paid for and we could have easily tracked who paid off his debts (I am sure it was the Federalist Society) and THEN we could have just decided that he was too corrupt to confirm as a justice. Like I say, even I can figure that out. But the Democrats apparently could not.
But, no, Dems are not paying attention or, honestly, are just dumb sometimes. OR, perhaps Dems are ALSO all paid off too and are normed to accepting someone who is bought and paid for in Washington?
I don't know. All I know is that Kavanaugh was bought, and, he is also hugely lazy because WATCHING $200,000 worth BASEBALL is for a profoundly lazy man.
Even ignorant me knows all of this. But, apparently, not the Democrats.
So, the Dems confirmed Kavanaugh and now they want to try to hide from their own poor judgement.
Honestly, sometimes I just cannot believe how dumb Americans are.
Brain washed, gullible, ignorant and stupid. No one wants to admit that republicans have turned evil. Still want to know why Kennedy resigned. So much needs investigating, but Dems have been buried in so much bull Schitt that their vision is murky. Raskin, Shiff and a few get it, but there is always Manchin
I too want to know why Kennedy resigned. Where is the press? Clarence and wife as well as seems to have evaporated.
Kennedy had wanted to resign for a while, but stayed through Obama. Trump promised Kennedy he’d appoint his former clerk, Kavanaugh, if he’d resign.
Kennedy's son was Trumps personnel banker at Deutsche Bank
The Kavanaugh thing was particularly disappointing.
Trotting out a woman to accuse someone of ALMOST raping her? Where can that go? I have never ALMOST raped anybody (or raped anybody) but I also am aware that ALMOST is not a crime.
However, BRIBERY IS A CRIME. The Democrats totally ignored bribery and focussed on ALMOST.
Dumb as a 10 year old tree stump.
Gentlemen, please look up the definition of sexual violence. It is the crime that Kavanaugh was accused and clearly guilty of - not rape. To minimize the effect of what he and his friend did because no penetration occurred shows a lack of understanding of the seriousness of ALL sexual violence. Please think about this.
Carol, I was mostly focussed on the reason there was no evidence, however, your point is valid.
Mike, when a man says he has been robbed, he is not assumed to be lying until someone else proves it happened. His testimony itself is considered evidence. Perhaps not sufficient in itself to send the alleged robber to jail, but valid evidence nonetheless, unless proven otherwise. When a woman says she has been sexually assaulted, it's the other way around: too many people assume she is lying until proven otherwise, and say there is "no evidence" as if her testimony does not count.
Also, Kavanaugh was not on trial for crime with loss of liberty as a possibility. His character was in question, his suitability for the job he wanted.
The majority of the current court seems to have gotten their jobs through perjury. At least two have been credibly accused of sexual assault. Apparently flaws that would keep a person from many other jobs are unimportant when a radical reactionary Republican man is being considered for one of the highest positions in the country.
Assault is a crime. I’m disturbed you seem to think penetration is the only measure a crime was committed. Ever have to fight off someone twice your size to keep your clothes intact? Please reconsider your stance.
Gail, I was mostly focussed on the reason there was no evidence, however, your point is valid. Assault is a crime, but, impossible to prove 35 years later. Rape would have been reported to the police presumably, and, Kavanaugh would have a documented record assuming his parents could not pay off enough cops to ignore the incident.
Part of the problem here is in legal definitions of crimes that are based on both conduct and intent. Crimes of sexual violence occur daily and leave little or no physical evidence, and depend on the testimony of those involved in the incident to make a determination of prosecution. When a woman (or gay man) comes forward with a report of a crime of sexual violence that lacks tangible physical evidence (bruising, swelling, visible injury, deposits of genetic material) they are (conservatively) 85% of the time reporting it to someone who looks like the person who committed the assault. Factor in the mindset that even the best, most open, understanding male officer grew up in the culture where the crime occurred, and it shows how difficult it is to proceed with any investigation with any chance of successful prosecution. In Mr. Brock Turner's case, EVEN THEN his potential "damage" by a successful prosecution outweighed his victim's trauma.
Good post Ally. I was not questioning the validity of what the woman offered. I was more attempting to highlight that there WAS plenty of hard evidence against Kavanaugh and if I knew it, everyone could have, and, I think, should have known who he really was.
Your point is clearly stated, true to its core, and delivered from experience. I really value your posts, thank you.
Spot on Jeri. I honestly believe that the truth will never come out why Kennedy suddenly retired. That should have been an investigation on par with January 6th. Had that been exposed in a timely manner, completely laid out for all of its putrid truth, maybe January 6th could have been curtailed.
I'm with you; there is something very suspicious about Kennedy's resignation.
Ally. There is. All fingers point to his Son.
Agreed.
It's actually unclear how Dr. Christine Blasey Ford got dragged into public at the Kavanaugh hearings. She certainly did not ask for public exposure. Greg Olear, who did a long investigative series on the Kavanaugh hearings, argued that Kavanaugh's right wing handlers used her as a screen to distract attention from his dubious finances and unexplained large infusions of cash from invisible sources.
https://gregolear.substack.com/p/who-owns-kavanaugh-4-the-operatives?s=r
It's a conspiracy, Joan. My heart button refuses to engage. But thanks for reminding me about Greg Olear's postings.❤
Thanks for reminding me that it was from Olear that I first read about the Kavanaugh debacle.
Whoa,Mike. You've gone off course here. Did you know the FBI did a hasty review of K's past? Left out were a multitude of individuals who offered to give witness to K's questionable behaviors. Please do not minimize the life-altering consequences of a sexual assault. Dr.Ford was not a patsy of the Democrats, she volunteered on her own accord and knew very well that she could risk personal judgements. Her credentials were excellent, (Just like Anita Hill v. Clarence Thomas.)The most ridiculous response was the judgement of several Republicans which was, "I believe her, but her assault was by someone else."
Great analysis. Here's the nugget: Rather than go after the blatant "buy off" of Kavanaugh and/or the failure of the FBI to do any sort of investigation (guy things of one flavor) all that could come forward was an allegation of sexual misconduct (a guy thing of a different flavor) that all knew would carry no weight. At. All. Because in my experience (not personal, mind you, but investigatory) men*, as a general rule, believe they are entitled to certain sexual behaviors that involve non-consensual women because it is their due.
*Obligatory "not every man" here. There's probably a percentage of y'all that do not have this. I remind you that this was an investigatory and not personal experience.
Dear Mike,
Yes, “ Dems are ALSO all paid off too and are normed to accepting someone who is bought and paid for in Washington?”
Corruption and greed by politicians regardless of party is human nature for most. It may start small but then expands like flood waters over the lowlands. Without term limits in congress this will continue. Without removing or at least limiting money from politicking democracy may be doomed. Republicans as a group are only more corrupt.
Janet,
I completely agree.
Thank you for this trenchant analysis!!! Yes!!
Laura, thank you for the new word for my vocabulary: trenchant. Never heard that english word before. I like it!!
vigorous or incisive in expression or style:
"she heard angry voices, not loud, yet certainly trenchant"
*****
synonyms:
incisive · cutting · pointed · piercing · penetrating · sharp · keen · acute · razor-sharp · razor-edged · rapierlike · vigorous · forceful · strong · telling · emphatic · forthright · blunt · biting · stinging · mordant · pungent · scathing · caustic · acid · tart · acerbic · astringent · sarcastic · devastating · savage · fierce · searing · blistering · withering · acerb · mordacious · acidulous
*****
archaic / literary
(of a weapon or tool) having a sharp edge:
"a trenchant blade"
😑😊😇😊😑
Kathleen. I love this new word!!
Likewise Mike - fitz like a glove!!
If you are lucky enough to be polyglot, congratulations! The US public school system mostly discourages our citizens from significant proficiency in other languages through starting late and using terrible paedogogy. Were you privately educated, or raised bilingually? What other languages do you speak?
Laura,
I was raised bilingual until age 5 or so when my father told me: English is your path to success. From now on I will take you to the local library every Friday for a book. Every Friday evening we can all discuss this book together. He then stopped speaking Spanish. My mother was American and may have influenced this.
And so began my odyssey of reading in English and exploring the world through books, which, I still do.
The analysis is strong, but who are you attacking?
Not to put words into Laura Thomas's mouth, but the American standard that English should be the only language spoken, ever. I have friends from other countries that are multi lingual who do not assume that their native language is superior to all others, as we do.
Everyone who voted to confirm Kavanaugh that now claims he was "lying".
You nailed it—my feelings exactly! With my own eyes and ears I saw and heard Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett boldfacedly lie UNDER OATH about overturning Roe vs Wade, and do just the opposite after being seated. What does taking an oath mean? Aren’t they committing perjury? They need to be held accountable for this duplicity….
If SC JUSTICES don’t take an oath to be truthful seriously, how can we expect anyone else to do so?
Maybe we should Brady list those justices....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brady_disclosure
In Oregon, if a police officer is determined to be "untruthful" (a mandatory termination offense in my career agency) they are "Brady Listed" meaning that because of the requirements of Brady v Maryland, a prosecutor has to provide that information to the defense. The practice of that is that most District Attorneys will never file charges based on a Brady Listed officer, nor call them to testify in a criminal or civil proceeding as a witness for the state.
Good point.
Sophia,
I don't think lying is a crime at a Congressional Supreme Court Confirmation. So, anybody can and does lie during that time. It is incumbant upon the people doing the confirmation not to be snowed with lies.
Only in a courtroom during a trial is it a crime to lie, and, people still do that all the time.
Lying under oath is perjury. Lying to Congress is a criminal offense. Technically, anyone who does that can be charged, convicted, and jailed. Technically, any Supreme Court justice who does it can be impeached, convicted, and removed from office.
Realistically, these perjured partisans will not be held accountable by the congress or the courts. The best we can do, aside from making a lot of noise, is to elect enough progressive candidates to pass the Judiciary Act, expand the court, and impose a formal ethics standard.
Correct. The only way to hold Kavanaugh accountable was to recognize who he was and not confirm him.
Sadly, that di dnot happen.
Why can't/won't these lying liars just say, "I changed my mind"?
That might offend the donors who put them on the court.
Uh, no.
Lying is not a crime unless you lie under oath....
They are under oath, Sophia, at confirmation hearings, and subject to the same penalties. The trick is to get the proper authorities to prosecute them as such. I don't know who those proper authorities are, however.
What about the DOJ? It's about time they got to work....
I didn’t believe them for a nanosecond, I really doubt that anyone did, despite their lying protestations
Morning, Linda. I'm always looking for a way to laugh, so can completely understand your first reaction. In this case, as I'm sure you figured out, the joke is on us women which may be funny strange, but definitely not funny ha-ha.
Good morning Lynell. The joke is most definitely on us. If I remember correctly, the post was from The Daily Show. I wish every news outlet would play the videos of the Justices lying 24/7.
I remember rolling my eyes and throwing my bra at the screen. Especially Frat Brat lying. Ewwwww. What a worm.
Oh, my goodness, Christine. Did you get a video of that? Morning!
Morning, Lynell. I'm desperately in search of something funny "ha-ha" and finding nothing.
Me neither; perhaps tomorrow. Morning, Ally.
Linda, I too was confused by the three judges saying that Roe was settled law until I heard Marcia Coyle on the PBS NewsHour say "to me, settled law means nothing" . Her explanation at around minute 6 in the following clip is very enlightening. https://youtu.be/iFcNXujoRDM
Thanks, Paul. The fact that each candidate said words similar to "it's settled law," now makes me think it's how they effectively dodged answering the intended question. Too bad nobody thought to ask a follow up like, "Do you have any thought to unsettling it?"
Snookered once, so be it. Try again and feel our wrath.
Salud, Linda. Be Fabulous. Be Well!
We didn’t get snookered—Those who wanted to be were.
Yet, Kavanaugh and Barrett and others were approved . They will sit on that bench as long as they want.
When the SCOTUS issued Chief Justice Taney’s opinion in the Dred Scott case in 1857, it ignored the same ‘public reaction’ that Justice Alito references in the ‘draft.’ Three years later the Civil War began, precipitated by that decsion. This is what happens when the SCOTUS climbs down from its supposedly non-political pedestal, takes off its blindfolds and swears in Justices chosen for their political beliefs on specific issues.
Judiciary Subcommittee Hearing on Judicial Ethics, May 3, 2022. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Opening Remarks. Approximately 8 minutes: "One Helluva Day"
(@ approximately 50 seconds)
"...so it appears that this precedent is being thrown into the bin like so many other precedents that displease the right-wing donor base that had such an important role in getting these justices on the Court."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cY94JL2B9Ys
Judiciary Subcommittee Hearing on Judicial Ethics, May 3, 2022. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Closing Remarks. Approximately 10 minutes:
(@ approximately Minute 5:45)
"...that citizens be allowed to understand who is doing the talking. Citizens have an important role in our democracy. And if you disable them from the most basic element of knowledge of who is doing the talking so that everything comes to them from behind masks, from behind front groups, from behind organizations that they know not to be real in their real lives, does enormous damage to our democracy; and in court it gets even worse. The judges in a court, the other parties in a court, and the public watching a court proceeding have a right to know who is showing up, and what their motivations are, whether they've all been orchestrated by an outside influence."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBpuW35aZHQ
Judiciary Committee Business Meeting, May 5, 2022. Senator Whitehouse Remarks on Roe v. Wade During a Judiciary Committee Business Meeting. Approximately 7.5 minutes (Note right at the beginning of this video you'll hear a whispered voice say "This is disgusting.")
(@ approximately Minute 2:00)
...So that's a secondary outrage of dishonorable conduct with this committee by pretending not to notice the supposedly egregious mistake of Roe versus Wade when they were specifically asked about it during the hearings."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouZH4gqY9zI
And finally, the Lawrence O'Donnell interview. Approximately 6 minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tai_wY1iu2k
That's all, Folks!
Yes, Sheldon Whitehouse has, for a LONG time, been pointing out the role for "dark money" which he often notes as the Federalist Society and its donors (Kochs and Mercers).
But, nobody is listening to him because he speaks in detail, with good English, at lengtj, without any insults or inflammatory one liners.
So, Americans don't even know who he is.
That's okay. He needs to keep speaking. I'll be happy to keep spreading his message.
❤️
Thanks for this!
I brought that up after yesterday’s letter from HRC and was told perjury could not be inflicted upon these liars. The remedy would be impeachment or telling these 5 that their resignations will be expected. We can’t even effectively get rid of a hateful white guy who was twice impeached!
Hey, Marlene. Whoever you replied to deleted their message. I specifically had your comments in mind about perjury when I posted the Senator's videos, because of his pointedly saying that the justices had lied at their confirmation hearings. Without going back to listen again, I admit he may not have used the word "lie," but did infer in no uncertain terms that that is what they did.
Hi Lynell! The inference is definitely there! I just realized I typed “can get rid of” instead of can’t. I stand corrected and I did so.
It's a lot like the Dred Scott decision. This time, the variation is that the American people, starting with anyone who can get pregnant or cares about anyone who can get pregnant, have no rights that a majority of the court is bound to respect.
Thank you, Heather, for continuing to keep us informed on the Supreme Court’s (and the repub’s) assault on Women’s Right to Choose, attempting to overturn Roe v. Wade. The distractions and lies seem unprecedented, but they continue the repub process of unraveling our freedom and our Democracy. The Truth is in front of us: “Legal commentator Joyce White Vance tweeted: “Odd that the Supreme Court is acting like they’re under assault, when it’s actually us who are under attack by them.”
We are at a tipping point about who we really are when the Supreme Court Building becomes a walled fort out of fear of the people's response to a leaked opinion. For years now the ultra conservatives have been trying to find ways to exert their will on the rest of us...and part of their strategy has been to paint all democrats and Rhino's as misguided, ultra-liberal, socialist, commie, queer, academic, Hollywood, tree hugging science freaks. And that we want to take away all your guns, make all your kids queer, kill Christianity, eliminate Christ, kill Christmas and make RuPaul the Secretary of Defense....oh and here's the one truth...treat Blacks, Latinos, Asians, Indians & Women with respect and dignity. To use a song that Keith Moon was smashing in (literally) Who are you ?
Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer’s heart is in the right place. But his vow to have the Senate vote on a bill to protect abortion rights is little more than a toothless political gesture. It will be filibustered immediately and will not survive the inevitable cloture vote. Until the filibuster is ended any Senate non-supermajority will continue to live at the mercy of the minority. His vow to bring legislation to the Senate floor will generate support from those committed to civil rights but little else. As far as putting Republicans on record, we already know where they stand on abortion rights, on voting rights, on gun control, on same sex and interracial marriage, on contraception, on business regulation, on healthcare, etc., etc. If Senator Schumer wants to protect reproductive rights, he needs to end the filibuster, and the rest of us need to vote in Democratic majorities in the Senate so such legislation cannot be overturned by a future Congress.
Yes, Fran, I feel it’s a futile attempt just to “be on record”. I like Schumer but wish Amy Klobauchar was in his place.
fran. Agree. Schumer is just blowing wind. Again.
It takes 50 senators plus the VP to modify or end the filibuster. Schumer does not have the votes. Two Democrats and 50 Republicans will vote against it. It's up to us to change those numbers in the next election.
Thank you Heather. Tough times go away but tough people don’t. Thank you.
"[Collins] will vote against the measure because she thinks it goes too far." She won't actually "vote against the measure" because she will not support a motion to proceed to a vote. Collins, Murkowski and other Republicans should have the courage to support moving to a vote to codify Roe v Wade into law and then the courage to vote what they believe.
Collins/Murkowski bill S. 3713 - Reproductive Choice Act (thank you, reader Joan!)
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/3713/text
Honestly, Ellie, I don’t want to read what they have to say. Either they vote for it or they don’t, in which they will feel the wrath of their constituents.
Does appear to “leave the door open “ for states to impose severe restrictions.
(a) In General.—A State—
(1) may not impose an undue burden on the ability of a woman to choose whether or not to terminate a pregnancy before fetal viability;
(2) may restrict the ability of a woman to choose whether or not to terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability, unless such a termination is necessary to preserve the life or health of the woman; and
(3) may enact regulations to further the health or safety of a woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy.
This bill was introduced in February 2022. By two repubs. What happened to it? Is/was it intended to replace a settled law? And while it was in the Senate, the Roe vs Wade crisis. Any connection (we might ask.)
Aaargh, don't get me started about two-faced Sen. Collins. She does this every time. What a weenie!
Courage. It’s what’s needed and missing in action. Fear is an overriding reaction to change and that includes laws that protect civil and human rights, the umbrella of our Democracy.
Just where has Joe been. Didn’t he have trump on his show almost every day. Didn’t he pal around with trump for years. It’s good he finally is saying what we’ve known for years but sheesh!!!
He did, but…
If I had a dollar for every time Susan Collins expressed "dismay" and then did exactly what her Dear Leader told her to do, I'd have more than enough cash for a very swanky dinner at a very swanky restaurant. She is the dictionary definition of a hypocrite. 🤢🤮 are the two emojis I have been using most frequently these days. I propose a new policy: every man who is the cause of an unwanted pregnancy--for whatever reason--is subjected to forced sterilization. Make it a political platform issue. Propose the policing of male bodies to the degree that female bodies are policed. And then see what they do.
Linda, this is the emoji I have been using for Collins....💩
Absolutely. Females have paid for unwanted pregnancies forever. The biggest problem in getting to that point of responsibility is that males have made the laws and still do. The Suits. We are so outnumbered. In so many ways. The Scale of Justice?
The Supreme Court is acting like they are the Vatican. They are not justices, but priests claiming legal infallibility. And they are becoming more and more secretive with the extensive use of the shadow docket - deciding things in secret without open debate. And they are becoming more arrogant and insular just like the secretive college of cardinals. They might as well wear red robes and hats to signify their absolute power. “Absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Giving them lifetime positions insulates them further and allows them to have contempt for those who do not agree with their ideology. Significant that many of them are Catholics. And perhaps much worse - they have taken the lying culture into our highest court. Their blatant lies under oath during confirmation hearings are now exposed for all to see. They are helping to normalize the lying culture whose motto is “I lied, so deal with it. I’ve got a lifetime appointment” - the equivalent to being immortal on this earthly plane. Finally Robert’s indignation about the leak as if it is the worst thing that could have happened - the equivalent of a mortal sin - a violation of the commandment “thou shall have no other gods but me” - ignores the devastating direction this supposedly august impartial body is taking us as a nation. If Roberts was moderating, he will now go turtle and withdraw into his hard conservative shell and proceed to destroy rights at will. Dangerous times - no longer “interesting” but turning deadly!
These theocrats are, in fact, idolaters, setting themselves as gods above the rest of us. Thank you for spelling it out.
Pro-Rape Party and that could be applied to the Vatican, as well.
Ned, you, of course, are right to characterize the history of the Vatican and its players as a hierarchical, patriarchal, sexist and closed system....it has been and there is still a cohort wanting to keep the vestiges that way to maintain control and power. But the current Pope is not one of them. His efforts to reform from within are meeting strong resistance from an anti-Francis element heavily financed and controlled by ultra right conservative Catholics--many populating places like The Federalist Society and other power groups. But be careful about painting all Catholics with the right wing brush. As with everything else, there is a spectrum. As to the heavy and punitive hand of a priest-ridden, Curia -driven Roman infallibility machine, it has just been unplugged from its life support system by Francis's latest reform document, Praedicate Evangelium. But the real unplugging began in 1968 when many U.S. Catholic women exercised their primacy of conscience (a long but unemphasized teaching of the church) and quietly ignored Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI's encyclical banning contraception.
Much like our current political division, if the octogenarian Pope Francis (of the torn ligament) can hang on long enough to "codify" the necessary reforms, the RC church (which also does huge good works alongside its brokenness) might have a way to enter the future with a more faithful adherence to the best of its beliefs. But the strong, well financed, political and evangelically embedded ultra-right cohort( fronted by a few outspoken Cardinals and former Nuncio's and aided by the complicit silence of many Bishops Conferences) cannot wait for him to die!!
Thank you, Carol. Pope Francis is a true light in the darkness and the church has some hugely positive characteristics as you rightly point out. But the Supreme Court seems to have none of these mitigating elements except for the 3 powerless liberal women for whom I see nothing but darkness and dissent. Alito's language is the language of the Inquisitor! And the contempt and condescension in his writing is akin to those who employed the rack and other torture instruments during the dark ages. That this body is unassailable and has a lifetime to wreak havoc is what calls forth such dark thoughts and comparisons. I really do think they should wear red robes and wear hats to make it clear what they are.
Of course generalizations are dangerous. But look at the history of religion, either as victim or victimizers. And wars in the name of God, as if there are multitudes of these gods, depending on your faith. Maybe there are. Or not.
What a great analogy.