Roe v Wade is on deck

[marc]

Truck driver plows through pro-choice protesters. So much for being pro-life

 

[Ford]

I was listening to NPR this afternoon, and they had a former Mississippi governor on to provide the opposing view. This case was from that state.

The host asked him what about the women who for whatever reason simply want to choose when and how they have children, and he said "those women need to get down on their knees....and pray." The pause was telling. He went on about praying to God, how people just need to learn to be responsible, and basically....if you didn't want a baby you shouldn't have had sex, you sinful tramp. He also talked about how men...need to be there for the children once they're born. No mention of men being responsible. No, that's the woman's job.

It was the whole Gilead thing wrapped up with a bow and a southern accent. They didn't discuss rape, but I suspect he'd have blamed women for that, too, and gosh darn it the rapist is a father now, too, and needs to be in that child's life!

Then of course all the "this is an issue for the states to decide waited at least an hour after the ruling to call for a nationwide ban on abortion. So depressing.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Sanders beat her in the presidential election. He made sure that enough Democratic voters considered her terrible that Trump won the White

Cut this bullshit. More Sanders voters voted for Hillary than Hillary voters voted for Obama when she lost the primary. Sanders did 35 campaign rallies to get people to vote for Hillary. He in no way made people consider her a terrible candidate. 25 years of republican smears of her, and her own pro-corporate politics-as-usual made her terrible in some people's eyes.

I'd like to see a link supporting your assertion that more sanders voters voted for Hillary than Hilary voters voted for Obama. I actually do think that Sanders adequately supported H. He fought for her at the end. I don't blame him in the least for fighting as hard as he did before the primary. And when he lost (and he did lose) he did fight for H. However, the meme that H and Gore and other main stream dems are really just "pro-corporate politics as usual" is destroying the democratic party. It's split the democratic party enough to allow the republicans to win election after election despite having fewer numbers.

 

[Rhea]

Remember when Madeline Albright, one of her campaign surrogates, suggested that there was "a special place in hell" for women who did not support Hillary?

Looks like they are in it, now, doesn’t it?

 

[ZiprHead]

Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances on Roe v. Wade. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. - The New York Times

“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”

“Roe is 45 years old, it has been reaffirmed many times, lots of people care about it a great deal, and I’ve tried to demonstrate I understand real-world consequences,” he continued, according to the notes, adding: “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge. I believe in stability and in the Team of Nine.”

Persuaded, Ms. Collins, a Republican, gave a detailed speech a few weeks later laying out her rationale for backing the future justice that cited his stated commitment to precedent on Roe, helping clinch his confirmation after a bitter fight. On Friday, Justice Kavanaugh joined the majority in overturning the decision he told Ms. Collins he would protect.

Sen. SC said that she was "misled" and Sen. Joe Manchin expressed similar sentiments.

“I trusted Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh when they testified under oath that they also believed Roe v. Wade was settled legal precedent and I am alarmed they chose to reject the stability the ruling has provided for two generations of Americans,” said Mr. Manchin, who himself is anti-abortion.

 

[ZiprHead]

Listening to Thom Hartmann yesterday. A caller suggested that federal aid to anti-abortion states be cut off.

 

[Jarhyn]

Listening to Thom Hartmann yesterday. A caller suggested that federal aid to anti-abortion states be cut off.

Can the federal government revoke statehood?

 

[Harry Bosch]

Remember when Madeline Albright, one of her campaign surrogates, suggested that there was "a special place in hell" for women who did not support Hillary?

Looks like they are in it, now, doesn’t it?

That's a great line Rhea! But I would add that we're all (Americans) going to be in hell. Electing Trump in 2016 has really torn up our country.

 

[Rhea]

I'd like to see a link supporting your assertion that more sanders voters voted for Hillary than Hilary voters voted for Obama.

I don’t have a link, but I recall researching that previously. If you look at raw numbers, it’s a true statement. Not sure if it’s still true by percent.

But regardless, in my opinion, BOTH of those groups of spite voters acted against their own claimed interest and instead for the very tribalism that makes the GOP so wrong.

The Democratic party *is* a party of many differing views. Because it embraces tolerance of differences. It will obviously include people who disagree with each other on some goals.

These spite voters choose to throw away ALL their goals if they are asked to compromise and collaborate. These spite voters want to win every item o their platform or they will self-righteously throw away any.

They were all wrong, but the consequences of the Sanders spite voters have been more destructive.

I actually do think that Sanders adequately supported H. He fought for her at the end.

Not enough to convince his spite voters to vote for Bernie’s platform in the Democratic party, though.

I don't blame him in the least for fighting as hard as he did before the primary.

I blame him for including in his fight the undermining of the integrity of the election. He made statements that claimed the election was illegitimate. That was something he could not turn back at the end of the primary. It made lasting damage to his own ideals. It was stupid and destructive To his own goals.

And when he lost (and he did lose) he did fight for H. However, the meme that H and Gore and other main stream dems are really just "pro-corporate politics as usual" is destroying the democratic party.

He bolstered that meme. That is something I blame him for.

He ran as a Dem because he wanted the “pro-corporate politics as usual” to work for him. He always hd the option of running in his own party, always. But he knew that he had to court the coalition that the Dem party had built, which includes some corporatists. He KNEW THIS and decided to run as a Democrat so he could be a part of it.

Then he made statements to damage it - and the Republicans won.

It's split the democratic party enough to allow the republicans to win election after election despite having fewer numbers.

Yes. The people who don’t want the government to be a coalition of diverse thoughts and beliefs. The people who want a purity test. The people who are intolerant of others and will not vote for someone who is partly good - instead taking actions to see people who are mostly bad in office to “show us all.” Nader specifically said this in 2000. That having Bush win was a victory “wake up call” that would prove him right. He sacrificed hundreds of thousands of lives in the Gulf War to his “you’ll wish you’d heeded me.” His gleeful statement that this anarchy would be cleansing was wrong, so very very wrrong.

Sanders’ main goals were added to the Dem platform. But his political skills were not up to the task of getting it to happen. He did not rally enough voters, instead setting the stage for, and letting them do, exactly the thing they railed against Hilary’s 2008 voters for doing.

 

[Metaphor]

Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances on Roe v. Wade. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. - The New York Times

“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”

“Roe is 45 years old, it has been reaffirmed many times, lots of people care about it a great deal, and I’ve tried to demonstrate I understand real-world consequences,” he continued, according to the notes, adding: “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge. I believe in stability and in the Team of Nine.”

Persuaded, Ms. Collins, a Republican, gave a detailed speech a few weeks later laying out her rationale for backing the future justice that cited his stated commitment to precedent on Roe, helping clinch his confirmation after a bitter fight. On Friday, Justice Kavanaugh joined the majority in overturning the decision he told Ms. Collins he would protect.

I don't hear Kavanaugh saying he would protect it. In fact, I see a politician-worthy response that says everything but "I will not overturn Roe v Wade".

Sen. SC said that she was "misled" and Sen. Joe Manchin expressed similar sentiments.

“I trusted Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh when they testified under oath that they also believed Roe v. Wade was settled legal precedent and I am alarmed they chose to reject the stability the ruling has provided for two generations of Americans,” said Mr. Manchin, who himself is anti-abortion.

I have some trouble understanding what 'settled legal precedent' is supposed to mean. It seems it actually does not mean any one thing. It seems to me that I would say that Roe v Wade was 'settled legal precedent' and I would also say settled legal precedent can be wrong. Certainly the Supreme Court respects precedent, but it isn't forever bound by its earlier decisions. If it were, nothing could ever be overturned.

 

[ZiprHead]

I found this from someone who posted it six years ago:

While we are busy fending off allegations of being "scary nasty mentally damaged totalitarian fundamentalist atheists" hurled at us by Concern Trolls, this stuff is going on:

Vision America's Rick Scarborough was a guest on Gordon Klingenschmitt's "Pray In Jesus Name" program recently, where he explained that God is blessing the state of Texas because "Christians have infiltrated" and taken over the state GOP. Scarborough was discussing his efforts to mobilize right-wing pastors to get involved in politics across the nation and noting that he has had a great deal of success in Texas; so much so that if one now attends an annual Republican Party convention in Texas, it feels as if one is attending a revival meeting.

It is not astrologists nor atheists who are trying to enforce their world view wherever they can.

It is not astrologists nor atheists who are insidiously trying to dominate the "seven mountains of power" and take over the country.

While we argue on forums whether it is insane to debate theists on internet forums, theists are pressing on quietly with their strategic plans.

From Here

The George Grant quote cited below comes from a book he published in 1987 with Dominion Press, entitled The Changing of the Guard. Yes, they have been aiming for this for a very long time. And for a very long time they have worked under the cover of our ignorance. Who could have predicted a few nut cases could ever acquire such influence in our politics and our military? (No apologies to Condoleeza Rice).

"Christians have an obligation, a mandate, a commission, a holy responsibility to reclaim the land for Jesus Christ-to have dominion in the civil structures, just as in every other aspect of life and godliness.
But it is dominion that we are after. Not just a voice.

It is dominion we are after. Not just influence.

It is dominion we are after. Not just equal time.

It is dominion we are after.

World conquest. That’s what Christ has commissioned us to accomplish. We must win the world with the power of the Gospel. And we must never settle for anything less.

If Jesus Christ is indeed Lord, as the Bible says, and if our commission is to bring the land into subjection to His Lordship, as the Bible says, then all our activities, all our witnessing, all our preaching, all our craftsmanship, all our stewardship, and all our political action will aim at nothing short of that sacred purpose.

Thus, Christian politics has as its primary intent the conquest of the land – of men, families, institutions, bureaucracies, courts, and governments for the Kingdom of Christ. It is to reinstitute the authority of God’s Word as supreme over all judgments, over all legislation, over all declarations, constitutions, and confederations."

 

[Toni]

Sanders beat her in the presidential election. He made sure that enough Democratic voters considered her terrible that Trump won the White

Cut this bullshit. More Sanders voters voted for Hillary than Hillary voters voted for Obama when she lost the primary. Sanders did 35 campaign rallies to get people to vote for Hillary. He in no way made people consider her a terrible candidate. 25 years of republican smears of her, and her own pro-corporate politics-as-usual made her terrible in some people's eyes.

I agree that some women who might have voted Republican voted for Clinton because she's a woman. I also am certain that a fair number of Sanders' voters did not vote for Clinton for the exact same reason. Yes, Sanders eventually came out and campaigned for her. But his bros campaigned very hard against her and still show up whenever anything slightly negative about Saint Sanders is mentioned and to denigrate female candidates. In the 2016 general election, there certainly were people who could not bring themselves to vote for a woman and so they voted for a misogynist racist traitorous scumbag instead.

And--I know this because I know some of these people--some of Hillary voters were Hillary voters in 2008 because they could not bring themselves to vote for a black man, just as some voters cannot bring themselves to vote for a woman.

 

[lpetrich]

Pramila Jayapal on Twitter: " Today, ..." / Twitter

Today, a right-wing Supreme Court overturned the right to abortion established in Roe v. Wade.

As one of the one in four women in this country who has had an abortion — I am outraged. (1/6)

This decision will disproportionately harm Black and Brown women, folks in rural areas, young people, the LGBTQ+ community, women in abusive relationships, and lower income Americans that can’t afford to travel hundreds of miles to seek the care they need in another state. (2/6)

Pregnant people no longer have the personal freedom to make decisions about our own bodies with a doctor or loved one. Instead, those decisions will be made for us by politicians. (3/6)

But let’s also be clear that this Supreme Court and Republicans in Congress aren’t done — same-sex and interracial marriage, LGBTQ+ rights, the right to contraception, and more could very well be next. (4/6)

However, all hope is not lost. House Democrats have already passed legislation to protect many of these rights — but each has been blocked by Senate Republicans.

Now more than ever, we need to reform the filibuster and act on behalf of millions of frustrated Americans. (5/6)

In the meantime, we all must continue to take this righteous anger to the streets and to the voting booths this fall — because this fight is NOT over. (6/6)

Pramila Jayapal on Twitter: "This fight is NOT over.
Abortion rights are human rights. We’ll never stop fighting until that’s guaranteed all across America." / Twitter

Pramila Jayapal on Twitter: "The House took action to codify Roe and protect abortion rights MONTHS ago.
The ball is the Senate’s court. End the filibuster. Pass the Women’s Health Protection Act.
The Senate needs to meet this moment. Americans are watching." / Twitter

Pramila Jayapal on Twitter: "America has the worst Black maternal death rate in the developed world.
My heart is broken thinking about how many lives this decision will endanger, disproportionately Black women’s lives.
Congress can’t stand idly by and watch this happen." / Twitter

Pramila Jayapal on Twitter: "1 in 4 women have had an abortion, including me. That number won’t change because of this ruling.
People will STILL get abortions. But so many more of them will be unsafe." / Twitter

 

[ZiprHead]

The Alito decision, with annotations:

The Dobbs v. Jackson Decision, Annotated

New York Times reporters are providing analysis of the landmark Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade.

www.nytimes.com

 

[ZiprHead]

Notable in the above decision is it relies almost fully on historical references to state regulations during a time in our history where women had no right to vote, let alone sit on government seats.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Notable in the above decision is it relies almost fully on historical references to state regulations during a time in our history where women had no right to vote, let alone sit on government seats.

Whoosh!!!!!!!!!!!! Were you able to duck? I think that's the point. Women should be obediently making and raising babies. That's their only purpose.

 

[bilby]

Define "socialism".

This is one of those things you should never say on this discussion board, along with “What is ‘free will’ anyway?”.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Anyone with a functioning brain would have told Collins not to trust them. They are rligious zealotts who would do anything to impose their religious views onto everyone. Fuck her and fuck the 6 assholes on the supreme court. When I was growing up the Supreme Court was the ultimate protecters of what's right. They have become the enemy of all that's good.

I think she just wanted to be "shocked" at their actions, not seen as condoning them. She had to have known what she was voting for.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Would anyone be surprised if there isn't a real attempt to assassinate a SCOTUS judge? The one a couple weeks ago doesn't count.

The ones most likely to assassinate are happy with the situation.

 

[lpetrich]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "Here’s how Dems can + must do more than wait for an election. …" / Twitter

Here’s how Dems can + must do more than wait for an election.

Let’s start w/ why:

- 7 of the 9 justices were appointed by a party that hasn’t won a popular vote more than once in 30 years

- 1 of those seats was stolen

- Several lied to Congress to secure their appointment…

- 1 justice’s family (Thomas) was paid by right wing groups for years and he never disclosed it, violating Federal law

- Same justice’s spouse participated in 1/6 and he used his SCOTUS seat to vote to keep potential info related to his wife from investigators in Congress…

- 2 justices stand very credibly accused of sexual assault

And that’s the tip of the iceberg.

Election or not, the Supreme Court has a legitimacy crisis and the public reaffirms it: 75% of the US public reports lacking confidence in SCOTUS, & those numbers were *pre-Roe ruling*

In a legitimacy crisis, the solution Biden + Dem leaders must offer can’t just be one of voting, but of statute & authority.

Compared to Exec + Leg branch, checks on Court overreach and misconduct are little to none. Leaders must share their plans for Roe AND a rogue court.

Past Presidents, from Lincoln to FDR, understood the dangerous stakes of allowing an unchecked Court overreach its authority and threaten our democracy.

Lincoln ignored the court to issue the emancipation proclamation.

FDR, in the plunges of the Great Depression, also sought to confront the Court’s structure (and core gerontocracy problem of lifetime appointments) via public appeal. While he did not succeed, that check came from the ppl & Congress, NOT scotus.

The ruling is Roe, but the crisis is democracy. Leaders must share specific plans for both

The President & Dem leaders can no longer get away with familiar tactics of “committees” and “studies” to avoid tackling our crises head-on anymore:

- Restrain judicial review
- Open clinics on federal lands
- Court expansion
- Expand Fed access/awareness of pill abortions
- etc

For the moments when we DO insist on elections, we must be PRECISE with what we need and we will do with that power:

How many seats does the party need to Codify Roe?

Dems must SAY THAT. Not just “go vote” or “give us $6 to win.” That is demoralizing, losing, unfocused nonsense

Dem leaders must tell voters the plan:

What’s the *actual* need? Which specific seats are we focused on? WHAT votes do we need & WHERE (what states + races?)

And, what’s the return? What is Biden/Congress ACTUALLY willing+able to do at 52/60 seats?

Be honest. Details motivate

So let’s wake up everybody! What’s good Democrats! If you don’t like what I’ve laid out here, then please present YOUR plan instead of little “why we can’t” lists!!

Let’s cut the handwringing and get moving! Chop chop! No more showtunes till November unless it’s for GOTV!!

Yesterday: Team AOC on Instagram: “@aoc addressed the crowd at an abortion rights rally in NYC” and in her YouTube channel AOC with Abortion Rights Organizers in NYC: Full Rally Remarks | Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez - YouTube

Yes, there is a "Team AOC" of activists and campaigners. It was formed some time in mid-2019, as far as I could tell.