Roe v Wade is on deck

[pood]

Very interesting: The Religious Right and the Abortion Myth

 

[Metaphor]

Dr. Jack Brown on Twitter: "BREAKING: In a brief re abortion, Supreme court Justices Amy Coney Barrett/Alito's Draft, said US needs a “domestic supply of infants” to meet needs of parents seeking to adopt — that those who would otherwise abort must be made to carry to term — giving children up for adoption." / Twitter
That's near the bottom of PDF page 34 of the 98 pages.

Where does the ruling say that "those who would abort must be made to carry to term"?

There is no ruling. There is a DRAFT of a ruling. Please follow the link and please read more carefully.

My question was directed at lpetrich. He has approvingly reproduced a Tweet which implies something that the draft ruling, as far as I can see, does not say.

I know it's a leaked draft. Your pedantic note is not warranted.

 

[lpetrich]

Obameter: | PolitiFact

Sign the Freedom of Choice Act

"Throughout my career, I've been a consistent and strong supporter of reproductive justice, and have consistently had a 100% pro-choice rating with Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America. ... And I will continue to defend this right by passing the Freedom of Choice Act as president."

Nothing to sign; bill has fizzled

After initially vowing to sign the Freedom of Choice Act, President Barack Obama quickly said it's not his "highest legislative priority."

That was in March 2009. Since then, it has scarcely been mentioned. A version of the bill was last introduced in Congress in 2007, and no new bill has appeared since.

I looked in  Party divisions of United States Congresses
Democrats had several chances to codify RvW into law over the last half-century, but they failed.

• 1977-79 - Jimmy Carter -- 61-37 -- 292-143
• 1979-81 - Jimmy Carter -- 58-41 -- 277-158
• 1993-95 - Bill Clinton - 57-43 -- 258-176-1
• 2009-11 - Barack Obama - 60-40/59-31 - 257-178

Now they are being obstructed by Joe Manchin, who is anti-abortion and Kyrsten Sinema, who is pro-choice but also pro-filibuster.

 

[Elixir]

So

I think that there's an argument to be made that all the people who decided not to vote or did not care to vote also elected Trump.

Is there a good argument against mandatory voting? The myth is that it would turn the GQP into a dinosaur. I kinda doubt it. But would love to find out.

 

[Metaphor]

So

I think that there's an argument to be made that all the people who decided not to vote or did not care to vote also elected Trump.

Is there a good argument against mandatory voting? The myth is that it would turn the GQP into a dinosaur. I kinda doubt it. But would love to find out.

There are lots of points against mandatory voting. Can you not think of any on your own?

 

[Politesse]

The pros and cons of mandatory voting sound like a great topic. For another thread.

 

[lpetrich]

Max Burns on Twitter: "Help me collect the @GOP's anti-choice extremism from the past few days: ..." / Twitter

Help me collect the @GOP's anti-choice extremism from the past few days:

- AZ Senate candidate calls for state bans on condoms
- TN Sen. @MarshaBlackburn calls for contraception ban except for married couples
- @LeaderMcConnell floats a "possible" national abortion ban
- Missouri GOP debating bill to ban women from traveling out of state for abortions
- Louisiana GOP declaring life begins "at fertilization"
- Tennessee GOP law makes it a felony (with a $50K fine) to recieve abortion medication via mail

These are of course in addition to the more than 500 abortion restrictions red state legislatures have passed in the first five months of 2022, and the 13 states that will immediately ban abortion after the Dobbs decision is official.

- Arkansas GOP trigger law would make it a felony to obtain an abortion
- North Dakota GOP Gov. @KristiNoem pledges a special legislative session to pass new abortion restrictions
- Oklahoma GOP passes Texas-style abortion "Bounty Hunter" law
- Ohio GOP debating two trigger laws that would immediately ban abortion once Roe is overturned.
- Ohio GOP trying to reinstate a fetal heartbeat law stuck in the courts.
- Idaho passing a law authorizing civil lawsuits against abortion clinics/providers.
- West Virginia leaving in place a 19th Century anti-abortion law that makes obtaining an abortion punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
- Florida Sen. @marcorubio introducing federal legislation to punish private companies that provide travel benefits for women to obtain abortions in states where they are legal.
- Kansas GOP leading a push to remove abortion protections guaranteed to Kansans by their state constitution.
- Alaska GOP rejects its own state court rulings on abortion, calls for a state constitutional convention to permanently criminalize abortion.

It took less than a week for over a dozen state Republican parties to roll out sweeping anti-abortion policies that even the @GOP of the 1980s would have rejected as unworkably extreme.

- Idaho GOP openly discussing the idea of banning not only Plan B, but IUDs.

It all has a very Taliban-y feel to it, right? The willingness to rewrite laws and even state constitutions with incredible speed, the unwillingness to even frame their goals as ideas to be debated and discussed among their voters. This is top-down government at its worst.

And one small ray of hope (h/t @BrettSBaker) (defeat of Nebraska anti-abortion bill)

- North Carolina @GOP lawmakers will make it their main priority to pass full abortion criminalization in early 2023.
- South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster announces he will call a special session to immediately pass abortion criminalization without any exceptions.
- Alabama GOP will ban abortion immediately following the Dobbs decision becoming official, with a law that does not currently contain any exceptions for rape or incest.

I can't say I'm "excited" given the grim topic, but I've turned this thread of @GOP totalitarian anti-privacy insanity into a special Sunday edition column for @thedailybeast

Stay tuned, dropping soon!

NEW from me: The @GOP is wasting no time unrolling a dystopian post-abortion future for Americans. They still have time to stop it.

5/9 UPDATE

- Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves refuses to rule out sweeping ban on male and female contraception if SCOTUS overturns Roe v. Wade.
- Montana anti-abortion advocates are floating the idea of replacing the ENTIRE MONTANA SUPREME COURT in order to overturn the Court's 1999 decision giving women state abortino protections.

Marco Rubio Targets Citi, Amazon With Bill on Abortion-Travel Benefits - Bloomberg

• Apple also has plans to reimburse abortion travel costs
• Rubio calls out Disney for paying childrens’ transgender care

Senator Marco Rubio is sending a message to Amazon Inc., The Walt Disney Co., Citigroup Inc. and other U.S. companies that have vowed to pay travel costs for their employees to access abortion services or gender-affirming care for their children: Republicans want to make it more expensive.

The Florida Republican, a potential contender for the GOP nomination in 2024, is proposing legislation that would prevent companies from writing off these costs for their employees and their families. The tax code generally allows companies to deduct their business costs, including employee health coverage and other benefits.

Joining the governor of his state in being anti-business whenever a business does something that he doesn't like.

Overturn of Roe v. Wade raises stakes for Kansas abortion rights battle in August - Kansas Reflector

Brett Baker on Twitter: "@themaxburns State Senators in Nebraska doing some good work this week in keeping would be Talibaners. (link)" / Twitter
noting
Nebraska senators defeat Abortion Ban bill with late night vote

Alaska political fight brewing as Roe v. Wade looks to be overturned soon

McMaster says he’d call SC lawmakers back to curb abortions | The State

What’s next for abortion access in Alabama if Roe v. Wade is overturned?

Republicans Are Wasting No Time Pushing Dystopian Post-Roe v. Wade Laws - The Daily Beast, by Max Burns himself

Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves won't rule out banning contraception - The Washington Post

Montana abortion rights governed by state law, not SCOTUS

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Are you suggesting the tyranny of the minority is preferable?

Certainly not. It is always a balancing act. The majority is not always right and neither is the minority always right. If we ever work out how to balancing all those competing and sometimes contradictory wishes it will be wonderful.

Pregnancy is perhaps the most intimate and invasive thing a human being can go through. At its very least, it is an extraordinary sacrifice.

What?

Pregnancy is perhaps the most intimate and invasive thing a human being can go through. At its very least, it is an extraordinary sacrifice.

I assume you mean this definition of sacrifice:

a : destruction or surrender of something for the sake of something else
b : something given up or lost

I mean the part where there is suffering, compromise, and even a bunch of pain. While I'm glad you think pregnancy is roses and lilacs with cherubs floating around for over nine months, that isn't exactly how it works.

I didn't say pregnancy and birth were 'roses and lilacs'. I asked what was given up or lost because of pregnancy?

Many women even plan and want to get pregnant.

And marathon runners want to run in a marathon. That doesn't mean it isn't hard and painful.

I know a marathon runner. I doubt he would call his training an act of sacrifice.

I'm certain you are going to get to some point here. Was it that the state should be allowed to force a woman to endure a pregnancy? Because your mom was overjoyed over conception?

My point is nothing about the State allowing or forbidding abortion. It's that calling every pregnancy 'an extraordinary sacrifice' seems like you understand neither the word 'extraordinary' or 'sacrifice'.

Well, I’ve led a horse to water, not much else can be done.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Obameter: | PolitiFact

Sign the Freedom of Choice Act

"Throughout my career, I've been a consistent and strong supporter of reproductive justice, and have consistently had a 100% pro-choice rating with Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America. ... And I will continue to defend this right by passing the Freedom of Choice Act as president."

Nothing to sign; bill has fizzled

After initially vowing to sign the Freedom of Choice Act, President Barack Obama quickly said it's not his "highest legislative priority."

That was in March 2009. Since then, it has scarcely been mentioned. A version of the bill was last introduced in Congress in 2007, and no new bill has appeared since.

I looked in  Party divisions of United States Congresses
Democrats had several chances to codify RvW into law over the last half-century, but they failed.

• 1977-79 - Jimmy Carter -- 61-37 -- 292-143
• 1979-81 - Jimmy Carter -- 58-41 -- 277-158
• 1993-95 - Bill Clinton - 57-43 -- 258-176-1
• 2009-11 - Barack Obama - 60-40/59-31 - 257-178

Now they are being obstructed by Joe Manchin, who is anti-abortion and Kyrsten Sinema, who is pro-choice but also pro-filibuster.

Will you shut up about Manchin? He doesn’t represent 10 votes and if the Dems kill the filibuster, ACA and the Roe protection will be axed by next January,

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Dr. Jack Brown on Twitter: "BREAKING: In a brief re abortion, Supreme court Justices Amy Coney Barrett/Alito's Draft, said US needs a “domestic supply of infants” to meet needs of parents seeking to adopt — that those who would otherwise abort must be made to carry to term — giving children up for adoption." / Twitter
That's near the bottom of PDF page 34 of the 98 pages.

Where does the ruling say that "those who would abort must be made to carry to term"?

There is no ruling. There is a DRAFT of a ruling. Please follow the link and please read more carefully.

My question was directed at lpetrich. He has approvingly reproduced a Tweet which implies something that the draft ruling, as far as I can see, does not say.

I know it's a leaked draft. Your pedantic note is not warranted.

The draft ruling implies wild west for anti-abortion. It doesn’t express any limitations to repealing of the right to abortion and plants seeds for repealing a number of other rights. This very vague ruling makes appealing anti-abortion laws very hard, especially in light of the whole we don’t have elephant gestation time lines.

About the only good thing is that it doesn’t say abortion is automatically banned in the US.

 

[Gospel]

Previous elections =/= coming elections (which is what I was talking about).

TomC is not wrong. There is not much of a gender difference in opinions on whether abortion should be legal. Appealing to the "war of the sexes" narrative, a feminist instinct, is not likely to be fruitful.

The whole "Women's March" was also a bad idea for this reason and others (including Islamists and racists as part of the leadership team being a big one).

I grant you respect for not doubling down on TomC's addon, but to make your own addon to what I said is just special. Let's wait and see what happens in the coming elections MMkay? See you then sweetie.

 

[Copernicus]

I suspect that the timing for this decision may have had something to do with the election coming a half year later, giving the GOP candidates time to work on softening the negative impact on their image. In November, the abortion issue may not be the hottest one in the election, and there will be ample time stoke anger against the arrogant "woke" Democrats, who will be dealing with simultaneous inflation and a recession. That's what happened to Jimmy Carter when OPEC caused a huge spike in oil prices and cars formed lines at gas stations. Interest rate hikes may cool down the job market. I already have one Facebook friend who is so outraged at the cost of filling his diesel-guzzling truck that he vows not to vote for Democrats in November.

 

[Gospel]

I'm gonna get in trouble for asking. But have you ever dealt with pissed-off women? Pshaw.

 

[Toni]

I suspect that the timing for this decision may have had something to do with the election coming a half year later, giving the GOP candidates time to work on softening the negative impact on their image. In November, the abortion issue may not be the hottest one in the election, and there will be ample time stoke anger against the arrogant "woke" Democrats, who will be dealing with simultaneous inflation and a recession. That's what happened to Jimmy Carter when OPEC caused a huge spike in oil prices and cars formed lines at gas stations. Interest rate hikes may cool down the job market. I already have one Facebook friend who is so outraged at the cost of filling his diesel-guzzling truck that he vows not to vote for Democrats in November.

Exactly right. Abortion is a raw meat issue for mad dog GQPers. They'd do more law and order but I think they've gotten the message that too many black people vote and people are noticing the not so subtle ways the GQP is trying to discourage that in states they control. Best not rile up the black folk or the woke whites.

But we haven't had a good abortion throw down for a while. That always opens the pocketbooks of those who just cannot believe that women should be able to control an intimate aspect of their lives such as their body.

Gas prices and inflation are great issues, too.

But Gospel is right. Never underestimate angry women.

 

[lpetrich]

With the "life begins at conception" ideology, not only abortion but some means of birth control are at risk.

Roe v. Wade’s Fall Could Threaten Birth Control and IVF Access | WIRED - "In certain states, politicians could leap on the opportunity to push for the criminalization of certain methods of birth control and to impair access to IVF."

On fetal personhood:

Not only does such terminology outlaw abortion, it could jeopardize access to certain forms of birth control, such as intrauterine devices, as well as emergency contraception like Plan B. This is because these forms of contraception are considered by some anti-abortion advocates to be abortifacients—substances that induce abortion—when interpreting life as beginning at fertilization. (This is despite IUDs and emergency contraception largely preventing pregnancy by stopping eggs from being fertilized or from being released, respectively, rather than interacting with eggs after fertilization.) It could also impair access to assisted reproductive therapy, namely IVF.

In-vitro fertilization will also be affected.

A further knock-on effect of these laws could be to impair access to IVF, where superfluous embryos are part and parcel of the procedure—multiple eggs are harvested and fertilized to raise the likelihood of the process being successful, with those embryos not immediately needed often being frozen, to potentially be used in later rounds. “The entire practice is predicated on some embryo disposal,” says Eliza Brown, a sociologist at UC Berkeley who specializes in reproduction. This is especially true if the clinic is employing methods such as preimplantation genetic testing to look for and dispose of embryos with genetic abnormalities, which is becoming the standard of care. Another commonly used procedure is selective reduction. In IVF, multiple embryos are often transferred into the uterus to up the chances of conception. If a person is found to be carrying multiple fetuses after the embryos have been transferred, which is common in IVF, clinicians will reduce this number to increase the chances of a healthy pregnancy; instead of carrying quintuplets, a mother might instead choose to carry twins.

But in a post-Roe world, these standard interventions could be deemed illegal. Typically, a person with frozen embryos has three options: to discard them, to donate them to research, or to donate them to another couple. The latter, called embryo donation, is the approach most favored by the pro-life movement. The former could be under serious threat; IVF clinics found to be disposing of unused embryos could be subject to criminal charges. “In a state that says a frozen embryo is a person, then basically, you are destroying a kid,” says Kimberly Mutcherson, a professor at Rutgers Law School who focuses on reproductive justice and bioethics.

Then discussing how birth control may be next, noting the Hobby Lobby case. In it, the management of that chain of craft stores refused to cover birth control in its employees' medical benefits, in violation of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). This was because of their religious beliefs, that some forms of birth control are baby killing, just like abortion. The case went all the way up to the Supreme Court, and that court decided that that mandate violated Hobby Lobby's religious freedom.

That in itself opens up a can of worms. Will the more strict Jews and Muslims object to pork? Will the more strict Hindus object to beef?

 

[lpetrich]

I note that some anti-abortionists compare Mississippi's current abortion law with the laws in many European countries. But the European countries don't have a lot of anti-abortion TRAP-law obstructions, and they allow abortions for medical necessity after the first three months.

That's rather strange, because they would thus be accepting abortion over much of the pregnancy -- and accepting it over when the embryo is the least like some itty bitty baby.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I suspect that the timing for this decision may have had something to do with the election coming a half year later, giving the GOP candidates time to work on softening the negative impact on their image. In November, the abortion issue may not be the hottest one in the election, and there will be ample time stoke anger against the arrogant "woke" Democrats, who will be dealing with simultaneous inflation and a recession. That's what happened to Jimmy Carter when OPEC caused a huge spike in oil prices and cars formed lines at gas stations. Interest rate hikes may cool down the job market. I already have one Facebook friend who is so outraged at the cost of filling his diesel-guzzling truck that he vows not to vote for Democrats in November.

Except this isn’t about abortion, it never has been. This is about regulating sex and states are already pushing legislation to ban birth control. This isn’t giving anyone cover. There is still time to write rebuttals and once this comes out, we’ll realize the most important elections of our time was every single election from 2000 to 2016.

 

[Worldtraveller]

Not for the first time this reminds me that while I would crawl through broken glass and have my face melted by acid if it meant being able to consent to having a child,

What a goddam boy.

Trust me. Pregnancy is no cake walk.

I grew up in a huge Irish Catholic family. Pregnant women were just a regular fact of life. By the time my youngest aunt was birthing her last child, my oldest cousin was married and trying to get pregnant. It was just everywhere.

Believe me when I say. You don't wanna get pregnant. For some people it's not a bigger comittment than a summer garden. For some, it's much more involved. For some others, it's a life or death situation.

Do not take it lightly. It's a big fucking deal!
Tom

I think this post might win the prize for most tone deaf post evar in the history of the internets.

Runner up in the lack of reading comprehension category!

 

[Worldtraveller]

Are you suggesting the tyranny of the minority is preferable?

Certainly not. It is always a balancing act. The majority is not always right and neither is the minority always right. If we ever work out how to balancing all those competing and sometimes contradictory wishes it will be wonderful.

Pregnancy is perhaps the most intimate and invasive thing a human being can go through. At its very least, it is an extraordinary sacrifice.

What?

Pregnancy is perhaps the most intimate and invasive thing a human being can go through. At its very least, it is an extraordinary sacrifice.

I assume you mean this definition of sacrifice:

a : destruction or surrender of something for the sake of something else
b : something given up or lost

I mean the part where there is suffering, compromise, and even a bunch of pain. While I'm glad you think pregnancy is roses and lilacs with cherubs floating around for over nine months, that isn't exactly how it works.

I didn't say pregnancy and birth were 'roses and lilacs'. I asked what was given up or lost because of pregnancy?

Many women even plan and want to get pregnant.

And marathon runners want to run in a marathon. That doesn't mean it isn't hard and painful.

I know a marathon runner. I doubt he would call his training an act of sacrifice.

I'm certain you are going to get to some point here. Was it that the state should be allowed to force a woman to endure a pregnancy? Because your mom was overjoyed over conception?

My point is nothing about the State allowing or forbidding abortion. It's that calling every pregnancy 'an extraordinary sacrifice' seems like you understand neither the word 'extraordinary' or 'sacrifice'.

Well, I’ve led a horse to water, not much else can be done.

Drowning comes to mind....

 

[Gospel]

Previous elections =/= coming elections (which is what I was talking about).

TomC is not wrong. There is not much of a gender difference in opinions on whether abortion should be legal. Appealing to the "war of the sexes" narrative, a feminist instinct, is not likely to be fruitful.

The whole "Women's March" was also a bad idea for this reason and others (including Islamists and racists as part of the leadership team being a big one).

Record amounts of Chinese, black & female niggas came out to vote for Obama. Reason? Inspiration. If you think this draft isn't inspiration you're in for a surprise.

White people[/URL], now, there is a group to blame for the GOP winning.

Always blame whitey for everything!
Dems are not at all at fault for pretty much abandoning the white working class. And still, in the post-Obama era, insisting that racial preferences should be upheld.

Agreed, although you should note that republicans don't help them either, they give tax breaks to the wealthy.

 

[ZiprHead]

Is the draft a leak or a trial balloon?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Is the draft a leak or a trial balloon?

Way too long to be a trial balloon. NPR suggested that it was a conservative leaking it to keep the majority strong.

The other side, if this were a balloon, imagine the right-wing rage if SCOTUS steps it back! And the rage wouldn't be targeted at the Dems.

 

[Politesse]

You think? Seems to me that they would just blame the failure of the decision on the "outraged woke mob" that "persecuted the judges" after the evil communist Democrats illegally stole and leaked the unfinished draft.

 

[southernhybrid]

If a government can force a woman to have a baby when she wants to have an abortion, why cannot that same government force a woman to have an abortion when she wants to have a baby?

If the government should be empowered to do the former but not the latter, I ask, why? What legal principle distinguishes one from the other?

When the issue is put this way, it becomes plain that there is no legal or constitutional issue here. There is only religion.

Life, the anti-abortion crowd yammers, begins at conception! But what does that mean? Do they hold that a zygote is a person? No one could be so daft. A zygote is not sentient. It does not feel pain. It does not think. It cannot in any way care for itself.

But apparently a certain sort of religious dementia teaches their adherents that a zygote is ensouled. Ah, there it is! It has nothing to do with constitutional principle or even personhood — it has only to do with the fact that people believe in non-existent souls! And because of this stupid belief, we are going back to the coat-hanger confederacy that existed pre-Roe v. Wade.

That stupid belief is driving us back there, and the equally stupid and sinister belief that women are appliances for men to use as they see fit.

The Democrats are now talking about passing a federal law to permit abortion, even though they know that it cannot pass the current evenly divided Congress. Hmm? Why the hell did they not do that when they had actual Democratic majorities under the corporate-bought milquetoasts Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama?

Meanwhile, Moscow Mitch McConnell is talking about a federal ban on abortion if the GOP regains Congress, meaning the ban on abortion would be nationwide. A house divided against itself cannot stand, warned Lincoln in 1858, predicting that the house of the union would indeed stand, but only because it would soon become all free or all slave.

This Supreme Court decision, if it comes down as leaked, will be the most infamous decision since Dred Scott and must awaken the Blue State majority — not just because of this, but as the culmination of all the other Red State aberrations imposed by Red upon Blue, including the election of two Republican presidents in sixteen years who lost the popular vote but were elected because of the reactionary anachronism of the Electoral College. Confederate secession occurred a few years after Dred Scott, even though the decision went their way, because Lincoln and his fellow Republicans (the opposite of today’s Republicans) would not bow before it — Dred Scott, Lincoln said, was not a “Thus saith the Lord.”

Blue State secession must be contemplated now, not only because of this decision but for myriad other reasons. The Blue and Red states are two different nations de facto and perhaps it is time to recognize this fact de jure. Even Lincoln, who opposed secession, conceded that peaceful divorce was possible, that the two sides in a dispute could agree to dissolve the contract between them. Maybe peaceful separation is the way to go.

I've heard this blue/red state thing before. But, the problem is that there really aren't any red or blue states. Florida used to be very blue, but now it appears to be very red. Georgia is now moving toward being blue, but I won't be surprised if it's very red in the fall. And, if you really believe that there are states that are permanently blue or red, most of them are on the west and east coasts. Just how do you make a country out of New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, etc. along with California, and a couple of other western states? And what about Illinois? What if Georgia turns bright blue? it borders on Alabama, Florida and SC. Georgia has voted blue for federal office holders but we have red state officials. Even New Jersey has had several red governors, as has Massachusetts. What do you do with that mess?

The division is more along the lines of rural verses urban, with a big mix in the sunburn areas. I live on a street that is mixed race and mixed politically. Most or all of my black neighbors are Democrats while many if not most of my white neighbors are Republicans. Imo, it's very unrealistic to think that the country can be divided based on politics. How would you do it? You'd have to have a civil war first and then how would you unite states that are on opposite sides of the country? There's not going to be a peaceful division. That's wishful thinking.

It might be better if we Dems spent less time fighting culture wars and more time concentrating on things that would help the majority of people. I'm not suggesting we forget about things like abortion and gay civil rights etc, but I do think that cancel culture, defund the police etc. have done real damage to the Democratic Party. I think it might have been Bill Maher or one of his guests who said last week, "The Democratic Party was once the party of the working class but it's become the party of the faculty lounge". That's the problem. Too many average working class people haven't been helped by the Democrats which has allowed the Republicans to use the culture wars to lure them into their party.

 

[Jarhyn]

You think? Seems to me that they would just blame the failure of the decision on the "outraged woke mob" that "persecuted the judges" after the evil communist Democrats illegally stole and leaked the unfinished draft.

Wouldn't it be a mindfuck if that were the play:

Give up the battle in a way that creates a phyrric victory for democrats so as to win the "midterm war".

What ought the counterplay be?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I've heard this blue/red state thing before. But, the problem is that there really aren't any red or blue states. Florida used to be very blue, but now it appears to be very red. Georgia is now moving toward being blue, but I won't be surprised if it's very red in the fall. And, if you really believe that there are states that are permanently blue or red, most of them are on the west and east coasts. Just how do you make a country out of New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, etc. along with California, and a couple of other western states? And what about Illinois? What if Georgia turns bright blue? it borders on Alabama, Florida and SC. Georgia has voted blue for federal office holders but we have red state officials. Even New Jersey has had several red governors, as has Massachusetts. What do you do with that mess?

The division is more along the lines of rural verses urban, with a big mix in the sunburn areas. I live on a street that is mixed race and mixed politically. Most or all of my black neighbors are Democrats while many if not most of my white neighbors are Republicans. Imo, it's very unrealistic to think that the country can be divided based on politics. How would you do it? You'd have to have a civil war first and then how would you unite states that are on opposite sides of the country? There's not going to be a peaceful division. That's wishful thinking.

Whites vote 3 to 2 for whomever the GOP nominates. Minorities 3 to 1 for the Dems (except in Florida if you use the s-word). 3 to 2 is a very solid majority on paper (20 points!!!) but in a large stadium, 3 to 2 doesn't look quite as impressive a majority. I looked at Ohio, the rural rural counties were 7 to 3 / 8 to 2 Trump in 2020. The mainly white, but linked to civilization counties (Lake, Medina, Ashtabula) were batting the 3 to 2 advantage for Trump (similar to white folk in general).

There seems to be two classes of white people, those involved with metropolitan areas and those that are rural. It is so easy to continue living in 1930 in the rural areas, where as being kind and nice and allowing different people the modesty of owning property forces the evolution of social change a lot faster in the city. And when the rural people hear that things are changing, they get whiny and bitchy. Why? Because they don't live in an actual civilization that is more than one or two degrees of separation of who they are.

It might be better if we Dems spent less time fighting culture wars and more time concentrating on things that would help the majority of people. I'm not suggesting we forget about things like abortion and gay civil rights etc, but I do think that cancel culture, defund the police etc. have done real damage to the Democratic Party. I think it might have been Bill Maher or one of his guests who said last week, "The Democratic Party was once the party of the working class but it's become the party of the faculty lounge". That's the problem. Too many average working class people haven't been helped by the Democrats which has allowed the Republicans to use the culture wars to lure them into their party.

Isn't this patently false? Democrats have been fighting for tax policy that benefits the workers. Democrats support retraining workers, but those workers want to put toothpaste back in the tube (and the GOP keeps telling them they will). Go to West Virginia and Obama is the reason for all the coal losses, yet the coal industry was hemorrhaging jobs since Reagan. I'm sick of hearing how the Democrats don't care about 'the people'. It is all the Democrats do. Biden got an infrastructure bill passed, more Covid support, etc... and people are whining he isn't doing anything for 'the people'.

 

[Worldtraveller]

It shows how effective the right wing smear machine is that even sohy buys into the "cancel culture" bullshit. That whole last paragraph could have come out of any right wing radio show.

And that's just fucking depressing.

 

[Politesse]

You think? Seems to me that they would just blame the failure of the decision on the "outraged woke mob" that "persecuted the judges" after the evil communist Democrats illegally stole and leaked the unfinished draft.

Wouldn't it be a mindfuck if that were the play:

Give up the battle in a way that creates a phyrric victory for democrats so as to win the "midterm war".

What ought the counterplay be?

I wish I knew. It doesn't seem like their base is very responsive to things like evidence or logical refutation. We could figure out exactly who leaked the documents, prove it beyond any shadow of a doubt, put their face on the front page of every center-left media outlet in the country for two weeks, and most people would still beleive whatever narrative best suits their politics of the moment. If you're on the defensive in a propaganda war, you've lost before you start.

 

[southernhybrid]

I've heard this blue/red state thing before. But, the problem is that there really aren't any red or blue states. Florida used to be very blue, but now it appears to be very red. Georgia is now moving toward being blue, but I won't be surprised if it's very red in the fall. And, if you really believe that there are states that are permanently blue or red, most of them are on the west and east coasts. Just how do you make a country out of New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, etc. along with California, and a couple of other western states? And what about Illinois? What if Georgia turns bright blue? it borders on Alabama, Florida and SC. Georgia has voted blue for federal office holders but we have red state officials. Even New Jersey has had several red governors, as has Massachusetts. What do you do with that mess?

The division is more along the lines of rural verses urban, with a big mix in the sunburn areas. I live on a street that is mixed race and mixed politically. Most or all of my black neighbors are Democrats while many if not most of my white neighbors are Republicans. Imo, it's very unrealistic to think that the country can be divided based on politics. How would you do it? You'd have to have a civil war first and then how would you unite states that are on opposite sides of the country? There's not going to be a peaceful division. That's wishful thinking.

Whites vote 3 to 2 for whomever the GOP nominates. Minorities 3 to 1 for the Dems (except in Florida if you use the s-word). 3 to 2 is a very solid majority on paper (20 points!!!) but in a large stadium, 3 to 2 doesn't look quite as impressive a majority. I looked at Ohio, the rural rural counties were 7 to 3 / 8 to 2 Trump in 2020. The mainly white, but linked to civilization counties (Lake, Medina, Ashtabula) were batting the 3 to 2 advantage for Trump (similar to white folk in general).

There seems to be two classes of white people, those involved with metropolitan areas and those that are rural. It is so easy to continue living in 1930 in the rural areas, where as being kind and nice and allowing different people the modesty of owning property forces the evolution of social change a lot faster in the city. And when the rural people hear that things are changing, they get whiny and bitchy. Why? Because they don't live in an actual civilization that is more than one or two degrees of separation of who they are.

It might be better if we Dems spent less time fighting culture wars and more time concentrating on things that would help the majority of people. I'm not suggesting we forget about things like abortion and gay civil rights etc, but I do think that cancel culture, defund the police etc. have done real damage to the Democratic Party. I think it might have been Bill Maher or one of his guests who said last week, "The Democratic Party was once the party of the working class but it's become the party of the faculty lounge". That's the problem. Too many average working class people haven't been helped by the Democrats which has allowed the Republicans to use the culture wars to lure them into their party.

Isn't this patently false? Democrats have been fighting for tax policy that benefits the workers. Democrats support retraining workers, but those workers want to put toothpaste back in the tube (and the GOP keeps telling them they will). Go to West Virginia and Obama is the reason for all the coal losses, yet the coal industry was hemorrhaging jobs since Reagan. I'm sick of hearing how the Democrats don't care about 'the people'. It is all the Democrats do. Biden got an infrastructure bill passed, more Covid support, etc... and people are whining he isn't doing anything for 'the people'.

I agree that the Dems support those things, but they do a terrible job of marketing them, or getting things passed, so the sleazy Republicans take the most extreme parts of the culture war and pretend they are the biggest issues of interest in the Democratic Party. It's all about perception. The perception seems to be that the Dems don't care about the mostly white working class.

The working class doesn't want to see all college loans forgiven, or the police funding cut back, or being forced to use new pronouns for groups that they aren't familiar with and at least for now, hold some prejudice towards. They've been persuaded that people like Trump have their best interests at heart because they scream that they care about them and they aren't going to let those libs teach their children scary things about gay and trans folks or make them feel guilty due to systemic racism. It's not that I'm against any of those things, but maybe Dems have put too much emphasis on those things and not enough on the fact that they passed the infrastructure bill etc. Then again, it's hard to fight against the disinformation on Fox or other far right sites.

I'm afraid the Dems need to learn how to play dirty and put less emphasis on the social things and more emphasis on the things that help everyone. Sadly, most dumbass Republicans don't realize that their party would love to end or drastically reduce social security benefits and Medicare. Sadly, many poor white people who are on M'caid, have been lured in by false claims that the Dems want to destroy Christianity or force their little girls to share a bathroom with a trans girl who still has a penis. Idiots fall for this shit and I'm afraid it has hurt the Dems to the point where people are voting against their best interest out of fear of what the liberals are going to do to them.

I don't know. Maybe it's hopeless, especially if people don't even bother to vote. I read yesterday that here in Georgia, early voting is breaking records. Unfortunately, the Republicans are coming out in much larger numbers than the Democrats. I hope that changes soon. They will drop you from the rolls in Georgia if you miss voting in two consecutive elections. I assume that includes primary elections.

 

[Elixir]

I already have one Facebook friend who is so outraged at the cost of filling his diesel-guzzling truck that he vows not to vote for Democrats in November.

That’s fine. Will he vote Dem when it’s even worse with a GQP Congress?

 

[marc]

Is the draft a leak or a trial balloon?

Heard there was a previous leak than Roberts didn't want to overturn Roe, just chip away at it some more. So this could have been leaked to prevent him from toning down the rhetoric in the decision, and make it sound like it is actually based in legal theory.

 

[Elixir]

 

[TSwizzle]

Fuck Newsom! And not in a 'oh he made me wear a mask, but not really, I hate him' sort of way, but in a, what is fucking wrong with him?

What is wrong with Newsom? He is an insufferable prick.

 

[Copernicus]

I already have one Facebook friend who is so outraged at the cost of filling his diesel-guzzling truck that he vows not to vote for Democrats in November.

That’s fine. Will he vote Dem when it’s even worse with a GQP Congress?

No, I think that he, like so many Americans, votes in kneejerk fashion against the party in power when things are not going swimmingly well. He blames Biden for the inflation in fuel and food prices, even though he knows Biden didn't break anything that caused the problem. Biden didn't make Putin start a war against Ukraine, for example, and that has been a major factor in the inflation. However, he's the president. He's supposed to fix everything. If the Democrats can't pass their agenda because of one or two Democratic senators that can block the agenda, then don't vote for Democrats. Republicans, at least, don't have any clear agenda for fixing things, but they get mad as hell that so many things are broken. Anger is an easier sell than proposed solutions that don't manage to squeak through the Senate.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I've heard this blue/red state thing before. But, the problem is that there really aren't any red or blue states. Florida used to be very blue, but now it appears to be very red. Georgia is now moving toward being blue, but I won't be surprised if it's very red in the fall. And, if you really believe that there are states that are permanently blue or red, most of them are on the west and east coasts. Just how do you make a country out of New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, etc. along with California, and a couple of other western states? And what about Illinois? What if Georgia turns bright blue? it borders on Alabama, Florida and SC. Georgia has voted blue for federal office holders but we have red state officials. Even New Jersey has had several red governors, as has Massachusetts. What do you do with that mess?

The division is more along the lines of rural verses urban, with a big mix in the sunburn areas. I live on a street that is mixed race and mixed politically. Most or all of my black neighbors are Democrats while many if not most of my white neighbors are Republicans. Imo, it's very unrealistic to think that the country can be divided based on politics. How would you do it? You'd have to have a civil war first and then how would you unite states that are on opposite sides of the country? There's not going to be a peaceful division. That's wishful thinking.

Whites vote 3 to 2 for whomever the GOP nominates. Minorities 3 to 1 for the Dems (except in Florida if you use the s-word). 3 to 2 is a very solid majority on paper (20 points!!!) but in a large stadium, 3 to 2 doesn't look quite as impressive a majority. I looked at Ohio, the rural rural counties were 7 to 3 / 8 to 2 Trump in 2020. The mainly white, but linked to civilization counties (Lake, Medina, Ashtabula) were batting the 3 to 2 advantage for Trump (similar to white folk in general).

There seems to be two classes of white people, those involved with metropolitan areas and those that are rural. It is so easy to continue living in 1930 in the rural areas, where as being kind and nice and allowing different people the modesty of owning property forces the evolution of social change a lot faster in the city. And when the rural people hear that things are changing, they get whiny and bitchy. Why? Because they don't live in an actual civilization that is more than one or two degrees of separation of who they are.

It might be better if we Dems spent less time fighting culture wars and more time concentrating on things that would help the majority of people. I'm not suggesting we forget about things like abortion and gay civil rights etc, but I do think that cancel culture, defund the police etc. have done real damage to the Democratic Party. I think it might have been Bill Maher or one of his guests who said last week, "The Democratic Party was once the party of the working class but it's become the party of the faculty lounge". That's the problem. Too many average working class people haven't been helped by the Democrats which has allowed the Republicans to use the culture wars to lure them into their party.

Isn't this patently false? Democrats have been fighting for tax policy that benefits the workers. Democrats support retraining workers, but those workers want to put toothpaste back in the tube (and the GOP keeps telling them they will). Go to West Virginia and Obama is the reason for all the coal losses, yet the coal industry was hemorrhaging jobs since Reagan. I'm sick of hearing how the Democrats don't care about 'the people'. It is all the Democrats do. Biden got an infrastructure bill passed, more Covid support, etc... and people are whining he isn't doing anything for 'the people'.

I agree that the Dems support those things, but they do a terrible job of marketing them, or getting things passed, so the sleazy Republicans take the most extreme parts of the culture war and pretend they are the biggest issues of interest in the Democratic Party. It's all about perception. The perception seems to be that the Dems don't care about the mostly white working class.

That'd be 40 years of AM radio / 20 years of cable news turn propaganda to blame for that. Yes, Dems aren't as good as messaging, but the GOP have been cheating at this for decades.

The working class doesn't want to see all college loans forgiven, or the police funding cut back, or being forced to use new pronouns for groups that they aren't familiar with and at least for now, hold some prejudice towards.

[rant time, please don't take personally! ]And another thing, I'm fucking tired of not being called working class. It is some damned perverted labeling shit to equate what a bunch of stuck in the 50s rural white people want as being what the "working class think". I work, I work hard. I've worked extraordinarily hard at times. I'm tired of my opinions being lopped into some pit of unimportance because the "working class" believes....

No, the "working class" doesn't believe that. The "working class" consists of the "lower", "middle", and "upper" classes that work. The "working class" believes a lot of things. Being a disgruntled white person who is stuck in a 1950s utopia mindset doesn't make them the sole inhabiter of the "the working class".

I'm afraid the Dems need to learn how to play dirty and put less emphasis on the social things and more emphasis on the things that help everyone. Sadly, most dumbass Republicans don't realize that their party would love to end or drastically reduce social security benefits and Medicare. Sadly, many poor white people who are on M'caid, have been lured in by false claims that the Dems want to destroy Christianity or force their little girls to share a bathroom with a trans girl who still has a penis. Idiots fall for this shit and I'm afraid it has hurt the Dems to the point where people are voting against their best interest out of fear of what the liberals are going to do to them.

If it makes you feel any better, it doesn't matter, we lost, so 20 to 40 years of some tough times ahead. Well, I'm a white heterosexual male, so probably not as bad for me.

 

[TomC]

It shows how effective the right wing smear machine is that even sohy buys into the "cancel culture" bullshit. That whole last paragraph could have come out of any right wing radio show.

And that's just fucking depressing.

What's even more depressing, to me, is that when someone like Sohy makes a clear eyed assessment of the current reality people like you dismiss her as a victim of the right wing smear machine.

This is why, IMHO, Democrats are such losers. They consistently make the perfect the enemy of the good.

TeaPartiers don't bother with that strategy for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. They'll go vote for people like Gaetz and Trump, even though they're douchebags. So many leftists were too pure to vote for Clinton in 2016 that she lost, and now RvW is on deck.
Tom

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It shows how effective the right wing smear machine is that even sohy buys into the "cancel culture" bullshit. That whole last paragraph could have come out of any right wing radio show.

And that's just fucking depressing.

What's even more depressing, to me, is that when someone like Sohy makes a clear eyed assessment of the current reality people like you dismiss her as a victim of the right wing smear machine.

But it is true. The GOP has perfected messaging. "PC", "CRT", "wokeness" was either created by or manipulated into a monstrosity by the GOP and right-wing media.

America, in general, have accepted this messaging. "ACA" = "Obamacare", Actual working class = "working class" (as in white labor), Democrats are the "faculty lounge" party. These things are just accepted because the terms or representations have been used repeatedly. As Trump proves, you stick to a lie long enough, it becomes true enough in the minds of enough people.

This is why, IMHO, Democrats are such losers. They consistently make the perfect the enemy of the good.

And this is where we get to the point of the real fraud. The Democrats aren't losers. The Democrat nominee for President has won all but one popular vote since 1992. For That is about 30 years of Presidential Races. Dems managed a huge majority in 2008, and the Dems managed to win two Senate seats in Georgia in 2020, losers my ass!

The Dems, however, lost in 2010 though (because of death panels... yeah, the Democrats are to blame for slander), and that changed the House of Representatives probably forever, via egregious gerrymandering, both Federal and State wide. Ohio Government is becoming Alabama, despite being a solidly purple state.

TeaPartiers don't bother with that strategy for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. They'll go vote for people like Gaetz and Trump, even though they're douchebags. So many leftists were too pure to vote for Clinton in 2016 that she lost, and now RvW is on deck.
Tom

The Clinton supporter argument is still under-supported with evidence. The numbers in 2016 were all over the place. In some states Clinton under performed Obama, in some states she overperformed. 2016 is not easy to put into a bottle. And Trump defied all known political conventions.

Also, McConnell stole that SCOTUS seat, and Ginsburg should have retired!

 

[prideandfall]

What's even more depressing, to me, is that when someone like Sohy makes a clear eyed assessment of the current reality people like you dismiss her as a victim of the right wing smear machine.

but nothing about that assessment was clear eyed - it was entirely a screed based on a right wing narrative about the last 40 years of politics, which is predicated on lies believed by stupid people.

the democrats are fine on messaging, it's just that people don't like their message - because the message is boring and strictly concerns the day-to-day operations of national government.
and "the working class" doesn't believe any of that crap SH said, *stupid* people believe that.
*stupid* people are afraid of gays, and think that the federal government is an all powerful demigod who controls capitalism, and think that any sort of cultural or racial expression that isn't white judeo-christian is 'identity politics'

the dems are a stodgy and conservative right-center party that seems mostly interested in governance.
that isn't sexy, or explosive, or good fuel for the sort of rabble-rousing needed to perpetuate a political party that is mostly interested in power and the exertion thereof, so republicans have to blatantly lie about the nature of reality and most americans are so pants-on-head retarded that they just go along with it.

This is why, IMHO, Democrats are such losers. They consistently make the perfect the enemy of the good.

that is one of the dumbest fucking expressions in politics, and also is not in any way applicable to democrats.

also, here's a reality check: the dems are "losers" because they've scored less "points" in getting to impose their will on the american populace.
but that argument already fails before it begins, because that isn't the goal of the democratic party in the first place, and as a party they don't have a specific will to impose - they are a loose collection of varied interests that address issues of national governance as they arise.

republicans are 'winners' if you think that human civilization is a game where you win by 'owning' everyone and everything else.
so, republicans simply exert power whether or not it's in their authority to do so, and democrats operate within the existing confines of governmental procedure.

the democrats literally stick to their constitutional lane, and the republicans overstep their authority at every possible opportunity.

TeaPartiers don't bother with that strategy for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. They'll go vote for people like Gaetz and Trump, even though they're douchebags. So many leftists were too pure to vote for Clinton in 2016 that she lost, and now RvW is on deck.
Tom

well yes, that's because the democrats are a political party engaged in governance for a huge country, and republicans are psychotic theocratic asscocks who have the stated goal of stifling the governance of a huge country, and exist only to exert control and power for the sadistic pleasure of old white men.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Saw this out in the Web.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

.50 cal cans are even heavier.

And don't get me started how heavy that fucking SAW was...

Ammo cans are heavy even when empty. (There are several on local mountaintops, used to protect logbooks from the weather.)

 

[Jarhyn]

.50 cal cans are even heavier.

And don't get me started how heavy that fucking SAW was...

Ammo cans are heavy even when empty. (There are several on local mountaintops, used to protect logbooks from the weather.)

Yes they are. And also are good for protecting stuff from the weather!

They're so much worse when they contain a massive brick of lead, copper, brass, and powder ._.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

.50 cal cans are even heavier.

And don't get me started how heavy that fucking SAW was...

Ammo cans are heavy even when empty. (There are several on local mountaintops, used to protect logbooks from the weather.)

Yes they are. And also are good for protecting stuff from the weather!

They're so much worse when they contain a massive brick of lead, copper, brass, and powder ._.

I have no intention of even trying to lift a full ammo can. (And I don't think the the ones on the mountaintops are .50 cal, but something smaller. They're still something I really wouldn't want to lug up the mountain, though.)

 

[Bomb#20]

So would you describe yourself as anti-fire-department, because in your ideal dream world nobody would need one?

Bailing out of a plane is traumatic. Pilots report becoming permanently shorter afterwards. Would you describe yourself as anti-ejection-seat?

Man, you seem possessed over people not wanting to use the term pro-abortion. You might need to get over it.

Hey, I'm not the one who brought it up. Playball40 and Elixir hassled Steve about it for no good reason; tell them they're possessed.

Now, I would say I will be pro-decriminalization of abortion (and birth control) soon. Which really seems to be the more important thing and not the molehill you apparently want to set your flag on.

I think our side's refusal to say we're pro-abortion is only hurting us in the battle for hearts and minds, and that's the battle we who are pro-decriminalization of abortion need to win. There may well have been some strategic benefit to avoiding such language back when it was possible to say you're personally against abortion but you think the government should stay out of people's bedrooms, and still win a Republican primary; but those days are long past.

 

[southernhybrid]

It shows how effective the right wing smear machine is that even sohy buys into the "cancel culture" bullshit. That whole last paragraph could have come out of any right wing radio show.

And that's just fucking depressing.

It's not me that believe in it, but I know that the Republicans have used it to lure people into their party. I think there are more important issues to concentrate on, if we don't want a country run by extremists on the far right.

But no. Cancel culture isn't bullshit. Too many people have become so fragile that they can't laugh at themselves. It has nothing to do with being indoctrinated by the far right. I have no problem with any group of people, but it makes no sense to talk more about social issues than about the things that help all groups of people. I want children to learn about systemic racism and gay rights etc., but that shouldn't be the primary purpose of a campaign. It just gives the right more ammunition to attack Dems.

A few years ago, Caitlyn Jenner was roasted and mocked during a comedy special. She was there and she was able to laugh at herself. A few years later, Dave Chappell gets "cancelled" for making a few trans jokes. I watched the controversial performance. There wasn't anything to it. Chappell has been a controversial comedian who makes jokes about most every group since he first became popular. If you don't like his comedy, don't watch him, but for fuck's sake, what he said wan't worth all the criticism he got. I'm a petite blond female, and I can laugh at dumb blond jokes because I don't take them seriously. Sure there are limits, but the things that are getting liberals up in arms over these days are insane, imo. So yeah. There is cancel culture. It's not bullshit. It's an over reaction. It's good that George Carlin is dead because I'm sure the fragile little libs on the far left would be cancelling him too. That's the kind of shit I'm talking about. So, if you wanna cancel me for having this opinion, that's on you.

Don't worry about me. I will never vote Republican and I only discuss this shit with my closest Democratic friends, who also feel that these issues are losing elections for the Dems. I don't agree with everything the Dems propose, but they are far better than the alternative. Right now, I'd like to see the party concentrate on climate change, improving education for our youth, basic civil rights, and reasonable social programs, instead of going overboard with this shit. Btw, the Republicans also do the cancel culture stuff and what they do is far worse than what the Dems do. The Dems need to do to them what they do to the Dems. It's very sad that it's come to this, but if we want to win elections, unfortunately, we need to play the game.

I'm off topic, so I'll bow out now.

 

[lpetrich]

Rep. Jim Jordan on Twitter: "Can you imagine the media outrage if protestors were outside Justice Sotomayor’s house?" / Twitter - he's a right-wing Republican


Manchin to oppose Democratic bill guaranteeing abortion access | The Hill

“We’re going to be voting for a piece of legislation that I will not be voting for today,” Manchin told reporters.

“But I would vote for a Roe v. Wade codification if it was today. I was hopeful for that, but I found out yesterday in caucus that that wasn’t going to be,” Manchin added.

...
Democrats made changes to the bill from earlier this year to try to assuage members of their caucus. In a win for that effort, holdout Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) announced this week that he supported the substance of the revised bill.

They removed a nonbinding findings section that, among other provisions, referred to restrictions on abortion as perpetuating “white supremacy” and called them “a tool of gender oppression.”

The revised bill would still prevent governments from limiting a health care provider’s ability to prescribe certain drugs or from providing immediate abortion services if a delay would risk a patient’s health, according to the Congressional Research Service.

The bill also prevents governments from being able to require that a patient make “medically unnecessary in-person visits” before an abortion, and would also prevent the government from requiring patients to disclose why they are seeking an abortion.

The bill also broadly would prevent governments from enacting any law that would create similar limits or that “singles out the provision of abortion services, health care providers who provide abortion services, or facilities in which abortion services are provided” and “impedes access to abortion services.”

I'll keep my eyes out with what happens to this bill. I'm sure that the Republicans will filibuster it.

 

[ZiprHead]

.50 cal cans are even heavier.

And don't get me started how heavy that fucking SAW was...

Ammo cans are heavy even when empty. (There are several on local mountaintops, used to protect logbooks from the weather.)

I use one to keep my drill bits in.

 

[Bomb#20]

Is there a good argument against mandatory voting? The myth is that it would turn the GQP into a dinosaur. I kinda doubt it. But would love to find out.

There are lots of points against mandatory voting. Can you not think of any on your own?

It would turn us all into Australians.

No one wants that.

 

[prideandfall]

But no.

yes.

Cancel culture isn't bullshit.

yes it is.

Too many people have become so fragile that they can't laugh at themselves.

become?
do you have any truthful realistic idea what would have happened 60 years ago if a black man said something a white man found offensive?

people have *always* been fragile, and people have *always* taken measures (some within the confines of the bounds of society, and some without) to try to either argue against or simply silence those who said something they didn't like.

the problem you people have with it now is that it's not white christian men dictating what is or isn't acceptable speech, and it isn't white christian men dictating what the consequences are.

60 years ago 'cancel culture' was lynching blacks for making eye contact with a white woman.
you trying to tell me that rubbing your dick on a woman's hip and getting called out for it worse than that?

It has nothing to do with being indoctrinated by the far right. I have no problem with any group of people, but it makes no sense to talk more about social issues than about the things that help all groups of people. I want children to learn about systemic racism and gay rights etc., but that shouldn't be the primary purpose of a campaign. It just gives the right more ammunition to attack Dems.

wait, what 'more' ammunition are you talking about?

the dems, as a party, have zero interest in social issues - there is absolutely no part of the democratic party's governance or campaigning plan that involves gays, or racism, or abortion rights, or women's rights, etc etc.

and yet, the right just pretends that there is, because it's nice for them as a political pinata to beat on.
what the dems actually do bears absolutely no relation to what the repubs attack them for, and hasn't in at least 70 years.

A few years ago, Caitlyn Jenner was roasted and mocked during a comedy special. She was there and she was able to laugh at herself. A few years later, Dave Chappell gets "cancelled" for making a few trans jokes.

cancelled how, exactly?
trans people don't like his material, and speak up about it.
chapelle continues getting gigs booked and has a multi-million dollar with netflix.

So yeah. There is cancel culture. It's not bullshit.

no there isn't, and yes it is.

worst case scenario, there is a burgeoning consequence culture wherein for the first time in history people who aren't white men are getting some kind of cultural say in what is and isn't within the bounds of society's standards.

 

[Copernicus]

...Don't worry about me. I will never vote Republican and I only discuss this shit with my closest Democratic friends, who also feel that these issues are losing elections for the Dems. I don't agree with everything the Dems propose, but they are far better than the alternative. Right now, I'd like to see the party concentrate on climate change, improving education for our youth, basic civil rights, and reasonable social programs, instead of going overboard with this shit. Btw, the Republicans also do the cancel culture stuff and what they do is far worse than what the Dems do. The Dems need to do to them what they do to the Dems. It's very sad that it's come to this, but if we want to win elections, unfortunately, we need to play the game.

I liked your long rant about how Democrats screw up their message, but the Republicans really are better at dominating the public narrative. Part of that has to do with their ownership of so many radio, TV, and news outlets, which make sure to report only on the topics that rile up the Republican base. What Democrats don't seem able to do is stray far from the Republican narrative, and their focus on Donald Trump keeps dragging them back into discussions about the issues that Republicans dote on. Climate change is something that people don't want to think about or discuss very much, because individuals can't do much about solving that problem except give up some of the things that they really like to do. Schools are important, but improving education opportunities and cancelling student debt isn't red meat for either side. I don't have a good solution for how Democrats can fix their messaging problem. I just don't think that Democrats can do a better job than Republicans at doing what Republicans are good at doing. Everyone wants infrastructure improvement, but they can't easily make blockbuster movies out of repairing bridges. Republicans are really good a mud wrestling. The abortion issue is a rare headline that works for Democrats right now, but it probably won't last until the November elections.

 

[lpetrich]

Congresswoman Marie Newman on Twitter: "I'll march over there every damn day if I have to.
Senators -- do your job and codify Roe." / Twitter
noting
Scott Wong on Twitter: "House Democratic women march to the Senate before abortion vote, chanting “my body, my decision!” (vid link)" / Twitter
Scott Wong on Twitter: "At least 37 House Dems are in the Senate chamber, including Jayapal, Clark, Omar, Tlaib, Cicilline, Bustos, Takano, Escobar, Espaillat
They applauded when @PattyMurray wrapped up her speech and were told those expressions not allowed in the chamber." / Twitter
Also Nydia Velazquez NY and Marie Newman IL and maybe also Val Demings FL. Some male colleagues went with the women.

US Senate to vote on legislation to codify broad abortion rights protections / Twitter

US Senate to vote on legislation to codify broad abortion rights protections

US Senator Chuck Schumer set a vote for Wednesday to take up a bill that would codify abortion rights in federal law in response to last week’s leaked draft opinion from the US Supreme Court that could potentially overturn Roe v. Wade. If passed, the Women's Health Protection Act of 2022 would “protect abortion access nationwide at a moment when it is under imminent threat, with multiple states enacting or proposing strict limits or outright prohibitions,” The New York Times reports. While the bill does not have the 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster in the 50-50 Senate, according to USAToday, it marks Democrats' first legislative attempt to protect the right to abortion by law.