Monday Open Thread

It's too bad we can't send him back to New Jersey.

I can't think of any Supreme Court Justice that TalkLeft argued against more at the time of his nomination. All to no avail. And now, we pay the price. And the price of the losing the 2016 election to the albatross who still wants to hang around our necks (who gave us two more conservative Justices).

Here's a post about Alito's Roe v. Wade comments during his confirmation hearing. And People for the American Way's 155-page report on his Judicial Philosophy written at the time of his confirmation hearings.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< New Details of Torture of CIA Detainee in Black Site Prisons | Friday Night Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Statistics on abortion (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by MKS on Mon May 09, 2022 at 06:30:49 PM EST
    According to the Guttmacher Institute, over 93% of abortions occurred at 15 weeks or less.  88.3% occurred at 12 weeks or less.

    Only 5.4% occurred after 15 weeks.  One can only assume that such abortions were due to very difficult problems during pregnancies.  I have anecdotally read of brains forming outside skulls, etc.


    So, the Mississippi 15 week ban would be almost meaningless in practical effect.  It was the Trojan horse to get Roberts to bite. The real objective is a complete ban.

    Complete ban, not likely. (1.50 / 2) (#49)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed May 11, 2022 at 10:22:50 AM EST
    There is virtually no or very little support for a complete ban in any of the polls.

    If the Supremes to overturn Roe, I hope they include a ruling that the tenth amendment reserves abortion regulation for the states.  Having abortion policy and line drawing (weeks and exceptions) every time party control of the national government changes would not be a good thing.

    If left to the states it will remain similar to heart surgery in that it is unavailable in the vast majority of zip codes, but still available to all who seek it.


    No (5.00 / 7) (#50)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 11, 2022 at 12:34:53 PM EST
    leaving it to the states means a complete ban. Since when has the GOP cared if there is no support for an issue or not? They just plow ahead hoping they can lie or gaslight their way through the issue. Even now some conservatives are saying that there won't be a ban and yes, there will be. Mitch McConnell said there will be a ban. Marco Rubio is resurrecting the old runaway slave laws and applying them to women going to other states to get abortions. The GOP will track women going to abortion clinics with their cell phones. It is already being done in Texas. Women will have to prove they had a miscarriage and doctors are afraid to treat women who had a miscarriage because they could be charged with murder.

    There is no limit to my disgust with conservatives like you who brought us here. You bought it and you broke it and now you get eat it. Get ready.


    "Similar to heart surgery" - LOL! (5.00 / 3) (#101)
    by Yman on Fri May 13, 2022 at 02:09:38 PM EST
    Ahhhhh, yes ... I remember it well.  All those Republican politicians passing laws imposing civil fines on heart patients and threatening cardiologists (and patients) with murder charges and life in prison.

    THAT'S the best you guys can come up with?!?


    And here's the thing: (none / 0) (#5)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 09, 2022 at 06:36:35 PM EST
    if the GOP was honest we could sit down and definitely work with basically a 15 week ban with exceptions going forward. I know of one person that had a 2nd trimester abortion and it was in the days when ultrasounds were not as good and at 20 weeks they found the fetus had no head. So she terminated and went on with her life but I mean it was tragic. She was so excited to be pregnant etc. It's like Pete Buttigieg says these people get devastating news and then have to make a decision with really no good choices.

    Why isn't that the bill the Democrats (none / 0) (#102)
    by itscookin on Fri May 13, 2022 at 03:29:12 PM EST
    proposed in the House and Senate? Fifteen weeks, no questions asked, and a doctor's sign off after that? Why go for abortion on demand up to the moment the baby takes its first breath, which they knew wouldn't pass? The reality is neither party wants the issue of abortion resolved. Because it could be if we follow France's lead.

    Your Post is the (5.00 / 7) (#106)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 13, 2022 at 03:56:02 PM EST
    Perfect example of why. Conservatives will lie and make up shit like women are walking into clinics at 40 weeks for an abortion.

    Besides conservatives have said they want a no exceptions ban with criminal charges for women.


    And, it is (5.00 / 2) (#108)
    by MKS on Fri May 13, 2022 at 04:46:19 PM EST
    demeaning that women are subject to having their rights negotiated away.  As if they are not completely autonomous, and only entitled to whatever a vote in the local legislature will give them.

    Men's rights are not subject to negotiation or a vote in the legislature.


    Why isn't that the bill the Democrats (none / 0) (#103)
    by itscookin on Fri May 13, 2022 at 03:29:38 PM EST
    proposed in the House and Senate? Fifteen weeks, no questions asked, and a doctor's sign off after that? Why go for abortion on demand up to the moment the baby takes its first breath, which they knew wouldn't pass? The reality is neither party wants the issue of abortion resolved. Because it could be if we follow France's lead.

    Republicans new misdirection tactic (none / 0) (#95)
    by MO Blue on Fri May 13, 2022 at 11:00:10 AM EST

    Senator Ben Sasse, a Republican from Nebraska, used the debate Wednesday over whether to codify an expansive right to abortion to ask members of both parties to focus American politics on what he called "an ethic of life" -- including more prenatal care and an expanded social safety net for expectant and new mothers. The prospects of a nation where the right to an abortion is no longer guaranteed by the Constitution have become very real after a draft Supreme Court decision came to light that would overturn the decision that recognized that right, Roe v. Wade.

    Anyone who has the luxury of having a Democratic Senator or has the misfortune of being one of Sasse's constituents, please flood their telephone lines and inboxes requesting they immediately bundle together all the policies that help mothers, babies, and children contained in the BBB plan in a bill and make Republicans take a vote on them. The Dems have Sasse's comments as well from various Governors and state legislators saying that they are going to suddenly provide support for mothers and children. Let them prove it.


    Alito needs to (none / 0) (#96)
    by KeysDan on Fri May 13, 2022 at 12:21:51 PM EST
    pick-up on Senator Sasse's great idea in his next draft....along these lines: who needs the right to an abortion when it is possible for Congress to provide all the support that is needed to care for the child.  And, while every Republican will work day and night to keep that from happening, it is a possibility, which cannot be overlooked. Hence, Roe is overturned. Period.

    And, too, Sasse is on to something in his urging "both parties" to focus on his "ethic of life". Surely the Democrats need encouragement to support that which they support.

    Maybe, Sasse can march into Schumer's office and say he is ready to take up that vote of Manchin and urge another Republican senator to join him so that the Build Back Better program of President Biden can be passed with all its endorsement and support of his brainstorm idea.


    There is a great quote (none / 0) (#98)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 13, 2022 at 12:30:47 PM EST
    in the SciFi series I'm reading -

    "If I'm planning to destroy you, what business is it of yours?"


    Reproductive rights? What business (none / 0) (#100)
    by KeysDan on Fri May 13, 2022 at 01:22:45 PM EST
    is it of yours, young lady? This is up to the state, my dear!

    And, just how do these fascists intend to determine that an illegal abortion has taken place?  Government enforcement agents would need to investigate. A new career opportunity for abortion gum shoes.

    Check medical histories, phone records, google searches, location data, text messages. Interview all medical providers, family members,  Lyft or Uber drivers, surveillance camera monitoring of OB-Gyn providers.

    A miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy or still birth would need to be investigated as if a possible illegal abortion. A woman's reproductive system becomes a potential crime scene.  Maybe Ben Sasse can brainstorm enforcement of the SC reactionary-five (or six) abortion ban.


    I had (5.00 / 2) (#104)
    by Zorba on Fri May 13, 2022 at 03:29:39 PM EST
    a miscarriage years ago, very early on.  How would I have proved it wasn't a self-induced abortion back then, if I had to?

    Same. My miscarriage was in the third month (5.00 / 4) (#115)
    by Towanda on Sat May 14, 2022 at 07:37:55 PM EST
    and I didn't even know I was pregnant. Yes, it happens.

    Heck, I remember interviewing a college student who didn't know and delivered full term. Hers was stillborn, though, and a crazy DA was going to prosecute. So I did that interview and others with her family, friends, doctors, etc., and the story stopped the DA. (I was rather proud of that.)


    My wife experienced an ectopic pregnancy (5.00 / 3) (#117)
    by Peter G on Sat May 14, 2022 at 07:56:37 PM EST
    when our first was two years old, and we were ready for another. Had the obstetrician not acted immediately, without hesitation to terminate that non-viable pregnancy (yet still an abortion, by the anti-choicers' standards), my wife might have died then and there; and had he not called a fertility specialist to join him in the operating room and save the fallopian tube, we could not have gone on, a few years later, to have our second and third children.

    Rep Lucy McBath's powerful speech (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 18, 2022 at 03:21:08 PM EST
     'After which failed pregnancy should I have been imprisoned?'

    Rep. Lucy McBath (D-GA) on Wednesday gave an emotional speech about her struggles to get pregnant and the miscarriages she suffered during a four-year effort.
    "So, I ask, on behalf of these women, after which failed pregnancy should I have been imprisoned? Would it just have been after the first miscarriage? After doctors used what would be an illegal drug to abort the lost fetus? Would you have put me in jail after the second miscarriage? Perhaps that would have been the time. Forced to reflect in confinement on the guilt I felt, the guilt that so many women feel after losing their pregnancies. Or would you have put me behind bars after my stillbirth?

    My daughter had 3 miscarriages prior (none / 0) (#105)
    by MO Blue on Fri May 13, 2022 at 03:43:52 PM EST
    to successfully carrying my oldest grandson to term and safely delivering him.

    She and her husband desperately wanted children and the miscarriages were extremely traumatic. I can't imagine her being mentally able to cope with the situation if MO or the federal government had required her to prove that she wasn't voluntarily aborting her pregnancies.


    My daughter has had four (5.00 / 4) (#114)
    by Towanda on Sat May 14, 2022 at 07:31:53 PM EST
    miscarriages, two before finally bringing her firstborn to term and two more when she was carrying triplets. Early on, one was determined to be not viable and harming the other two, as well as endangering my daughter owing to her age and health issues,  so a panel of doctors decided it ought to be terminated -- but sent her out of state, for fear of Wisconsin law, even now. That was called an induced miscarriage, of a fetus that could not survive.

    That did save one of the triplets, but another also failed and was stillborn. Heartbreaking to have my daughter call her mom twice with news of the losses -- and with so much worry for months, many more calls, about the sole survivor  Even so, the survivor was a preemie and has health issues.

    But we are so happy to have her -- and we still mark the loss of her stillborn sibling every year. Had Republicans had their way, we could have lost all three triplets and my daughter. Or we would be driving her firstborn to see his mother in prison.


    A while back (none / 0) (#107)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 13, 2022 at 04:44:10 PM EST
    my nephew was telling me about a friend of his who was a star athlete.  Who got pregnant.  

    He said she told him that she "ran until she had a miscarriage".  She had disappeared for a while when this happened.

    I thought at the time that she had probably had an abortion and just didn't want people to know because of the stigma here.

    I have wondered since if that was a thing.  Can you run until you have a miscarriage?  

    It's a grim thought.


    Grim to consider doing it (none / 0) (#110)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 13, 2022 at 05:06:20 PM EST
    even more grim to think she could be prosecuted for such a sad desperate act.

    Susan Collins calls the police (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 10, 2022 at 09:23:27 AM EST
    on non-threatening calk message on the sidewalk in front of her house. "Susie, please, Mainers want WHPA ---> vote yes, clean up your mess,"

    "We are grateful to the Bangor police officers and the City public works employee who responded to the defacement of public property in front of our home," Collins said.


    Maybe she can sponsor a law that bans hopscotch grids calked on the sidewalk. What a waste of public resources.  

    She (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by KeysDan on Tue May 10, 2022 at 10:16:34 AM EST
    was troubled.     We can always depend on Collins when we don't need her.

    The 5 year olds next door (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by MKS on Tue May 10, 2022 at 03:06:10 PM EST
    Write in chalk all kinds of things all the time on the sidewalks and street around here.  I saw a dad yesterday washing it off with a hose.

    Is Collins just getting stranger and stranger, or what?


    As a Republican, (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 10, 2022 at 03:24:54 PM EST
     she has to portray herself as a victim on a regular basis even if it makes her look like a complete idiot. Can't be a card holding Republican without whining about being a victim. It is in their genes.

    Great article on New Yorker (5.00 / 4) (#54)
    by MO Blue on Thu May 12, 2022 at 08:33:01 AM EST
    What the "Life of the Mother" Might Mean in a Post-Roe America

    Highlighted is the true story of Savita Halappanavar's extremely painful and unnecessary death.

    Savita Halappanavar's water broke just after midnight on October 22, 2012, in a hospital in Galway, Ireland, in her seventeenth week of pregnancy. This meant two things: the fetus could not possibly survive, and Halappanavar was at risk of infection if the fetus was not immediately expelled or removed. She begged doctors to terminate her pregnancy--or, put another way, to treat her miscarriage--but they refused. A fetal heartbeat could still be detected, and the Eighth Amendment to Ireland's constitution effectively banned abortion. After two days, Halappanavar developed sepsis; on October 28th, she went into cardiac arrest and died, at the age of thirty-one. An inquest into Halappanavar's death found that even as her temperature and heart rate soared, even as she was entering septic shock, doctors continued to monitor the fetal heartbeat. "They were worried that, if they did a termination, they might be accused of performing an illegal act by not complying with the Eighth Amendment," the doctor who led the inquest later said. A national outcry over Halappanavar's death catalyzed a movement to repeal the amendment, which Ireland's voters accomplished by referendum in 2018, with a two-thirds majority.
    In states where abortion becomes illegal, and particularly in states where there are criminal penalties for doctors or anyone who assists in an abortion, I fear that it will send a chill through the entire medical community," Audrey Lance, an ob-gyn in Michigan, said. "People are going to be scared to intervene until the last minute or perhaps until it's too late."

    The pro-choice movement (5.00 / 3) (#56)
    by MO Blue on Thu May 12, 2022 at 01:58:25 PM EST
    is all about a female having control of her own body. It is all about a pregnant girl/woman having the choice of whether or not to continue a pregnancy. Let me repeat that for those unable to understand this simple concept. Pro-choice means pro-choice. It means that no one has control of the female's body to either deny them an abortion or to force an abortion on them.

    Legal abortion providers will not perform the procedure on anyone girl or woman who does not want one. Nothing in Roe gives a parent the right to force a child to take drugs to induce a pregnancy. Abolishing Roe and banning abortions will once again move this activity underground where unlicensed and unskilled quakes will put girls/women lives at risk and make it easier, not harder, for parents to force a procedure onto their child.


    Should read (none / 0) (#59)
    by MO Blue on Thu May 12, 2022 at 02:29:27 PM EST
    where unlicensed and unskilled quacks.

    After that tragic case, (2.00 / 4) (#55)
    by ladybug on Thu May 12, 2022 at 12:24:26 PM EST
    Ireland, a largely Catholic country, came to be more in line with most of Europe, which allows abortion in the first trimester (up to 12 weeks) and restricts it in the second and third trimesters.

    Equally tragic cases can be found in abortion survivors. If you haven't read those stories, here is the congressional testimony of one of them. The whole story should be read, but here is just a small quote:

    Abortion survivors are citizens of this country who were denied their basic right to life. We are members of a marginalized, unprotected population that continue to experience trauma, as abortion access is lauded as a right
    to be pursued, as our tax dollars go to fund the very act meant to end our lives, which has left deep emotional, mental and for many, physical scars, as our experiences and suffering are overlooked or played down as political fodder.  

    Their stories are also compelling and heart-breaking. Eventually, by sharing the stories of both sides, we will hopefully get to a workable consensus on the issue.


    Abortion (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by Chuck0 on Thu May 12, 2022 at 02:09:28 PM EST
    should be legal, safe and rare. The it's not my decision, nor yours on who gets one.

    Any abortion ban should be followed up by the same folks who push the ban with 100% free medical care, 100% financial assistance (for the entire life of the forced child), that's free groceries, free childcare, free rent, etc. and 100% free education through college.

    Anyone who is anti-abortion should be more than willing to provide these things for that saved, precious life. And until that happens, STFU!


    Also each state who have forced birth (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by MO Blue on Thu May 12, 2022 at 02:43:31 PM EST
    laws on their books need to devote all necessary resources to prioritize adoptions of mixed race babies and babies with physical or mental disabilities. These children should not be forced to live their lives in foster homes or institutions.

    And, the old (5.00 / 2) (#63)
    by MKS on Thu May 12, 2022 at 02:53:26 PM EST
    Barney Frank quote comes to mind:  Conservatives believe the Right to Life begins at conception and ends at birth.

    Roe is the compromise (5.00 / 6) (#62)
    by MKS on Thu May 12, 2022 at 02:52:05 PM EST
    Under Roe, third trimester abortions can be banned, and national legislation has already passed banning late term abortion.

    As I posted on another thread, 94% of all abortions are at 15 weeks or less.   88% are 12 weeks or less.

    Your "compromise" is the current status quo.

    What the conservatives want is the complete ban.

    You are talking to the wrong people.  Why don't you take your comments to conservative blog?  Not much interest here, I would think, for your view.    


    The thousands, upon thousands of women (none / 0) (#75)
    by MO Blue on Thu May 12, 2022 at 04:02:55 PM EST
    like Savita Halappanavar, who died because they were denied life saving procedures or put themselves at the mercy of quacks because of inhumane laws are not able to testify at hearings because they are dead.

    That is not (5.00 / 4) (#66)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 12, 2022 at 03:22:32 PM EST
    even relevant to the discussion today. First of all she's a director of an anti-abortion organization and has a vested interest in shading the truth and secondly it was thought that she was not 31 weeks gestation. That was done back in the day when you did not have accurate due dates and some told me and some one said is not gossip not facts. Thirdly George. W. Bush did some law called "born alive act" or some such which would outlaw this practice that in reality was almost never done. Secondly conservatives need to stop lying about abortion. They lie that every abortion is 3rd trimester when in fact it is very few. Third trimester abortions are only done in rare cases and basically it's a dead baby now or dead baby later situation but you all insist that a woman carry a non-viable fetus because it makes you feel better. To hell with the woman and her physical and emotional health.

    "Equally tragic" (5.00 / 3) (#77)
    by Yman on Thu May 12, 2022 at 04:52:04 PM EST

    Savita Halappanavar is dead.  For someone who claims to have studies quite a bit of linguistics, you repeatedly misuse basic English words.


    Since you note Catholicism (5.00 / 3) (#116)
    by Towanda on Sat May 14, 2022 at 07:42:03 PM EST
    I, raised Catholic, can attest that the Church will not baptize stillborns. They have to take a breath.

    That would seem to mean that fetuses are not babies, huh?


    years ago.

    Anyway, is not baptism simply a sacrament for the living? Like all the sacraments?

    iow, whether it's a newborn who's had one breath, or an adult who's had millions of breaths, the person must be alive to be baptized (or married, or confirmed, or ordained, etc.).



    This is a big deal (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2022 at 02:16:57 PM EST

    January 6 Committee Subpoenas Five GOP Lawmakers
    May 12, 2022 at 1:29 pm EDT By Taegan Goddard 82 Comments

    "The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol issued subpoenas on Thursday to five Republican members of Congress, including Representative Kevin McCarthy, the minority leader, who refused to meet with the panel voluntarily," the New York Times reports.

    "The committee's leaders had previously been reluctant to issue subpoenas to their fellow lawmakers. That is an extraordinarily rare step for most congressional committees to take, though the House Ethics Committee, which is responsible for investigating allegations of misconduct by members, is known to do so."

    Playbook: "This is a huge escalation by the committee, one it had been debating for months. Among the concerns is the precedent that it sets, and the potential for Republicans to return in kind if, as expected, they take control of the House after the midterms. The committee is also prepping for a slate of prime time hearings that are expected next month."

    It could have implications beyond the J6 hearings.  The expected non-cooperation could be a map for democrats to use to ignore BS investigations that are sure to come if the House goes Maga.

    And it's being noted they don't really need testimony from these guys since they likely know everything they did and said.

    Its more like giving them an opportunity to respond to what's coming.

    Seems like a pretty big deal to me.

    Also big (none / 0) (#60)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2022 at 02:34:07 PM EST

    Finland's leadership announced support Thursday for expedited NATO membership despite dire Kremlin warnings of "retaliatory steps."

    Russia is running out of army (none / 0) (#64)
    by MKS on Thu May 12, 2022 at 03:04:45 PM EST
    Just who will Russia attack Finland with?

    The Russian Military has been exposed as weak and incompetent, and dwindling....


    weak and incompetent (none / 0) (#65)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2022 at 03:18:38 PM EST
    Irrational, desperate and packing the largest nuclear arsenal on earth.

    They keep making nuclear threats which rationally seem ridiculous.  

    I really hope those threats are as empty as they seem and Putin is not as out of touch with reality as he seems.


    The FP (none / 0) (#71)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 12, 2022 at 03:36:35 PM EST
    experts I have listened to say that Putin knows if he uses nuclear weapons it will be returned in kind several times over and Putin knows that. So they don't think Putin will go the nuclear route. Let's hope they are right.

    Because (none / 0) (#73)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2022 at 03:38:19 PM EST
    everything he has done so far is so logical and competent

    Yeah (none / 0) (#76)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 12, 2022 at 04:50:54 PM EST
    I get the concern. I do.

    One can wonder (none / 0) (#78)
    by MKS on Thu May 12, 2022 at 06:52:23 PM EST
    given Russia's currently demonstrated military incompetence, if its nukes actually work.

    Dangerous line of thinking....and best to not get to know the answer.....


    If 1% of them work (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2022 at 07:39:30 PM EST
    it would be more than enough

    WSJ (none / 0) (#83)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2022 at 07:41:02 PM EST

    Russia has more than 1,500 warheads deployed on strategic long-range systems and almost 3,000 in reserve, according to an assessment published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.Mar 30, 2022

    Sweden continues (none / 0) (#67)
    by KeysDan on Thu May 12, 2022 at 03:25:54 PM EST
    to consider seeking membership in NATO.  Apparently, a decision will be made by May 15. It might have been even more impactful if Finland and Sweden announced in tandem.  But, if it takes rolling it out over a few days it will make little or no difference.

    Finland (none / 0) (#72)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2022 at 03:37:13 PM EST
    Has the 1000 mile border tho.

    True, (none / 0) (#80)
    by KeysDan on Thu May 12, 2022 at 07:04:58 PM EST
    the Fins are  fierce fights, the Swedes are important in that they have been neutral for so long---and now see the futility of continuing so.

    IMO, one of Biden's best personnel choices (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by MO Blue on Fri May 13, 2022 at 08:35:19 AM EST
    was Jan Psaki. She will be missed.

    So far, one of his most disappointing is Merrick Garland. If Biden chose to replace him, I doubt he would be missed.

    I still (none / 0) (#130)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 16, 2022 at 09:35:22 AM EST
    hold out hope for Garland. I may end up being wrong.

    I would prefer you being right (none / 0) (#136)
    by MO Blue on Mon May 16, 2022 at 03:08:55 PM EST
    I just don't see it.  

    Biden appointees will have a majority (5.00 / 2) (#94)
    by MO Blue on Fri May 13, 2022 at 10:31:07 AM EST
    on the postal service board.


    Once Tangherlini and Kan are sworn in, a majority of the USPS Board of Governors will be Biden nominees.

    The two nominees that the Senate replaces two Trump nominees, which means that there is a majority on the board that can fire Postmaster General Louis DeJoy.

    Now that DeJoy can be fired, the question remains, will he be fired.

    NBC (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun May 15, 2022 at 10:58:46 AM EST

    Support for Abortion Rights Hits New High
    May 15, 2022 at 11:07 am EDT By Taegan Goddard 86 Comments

    "Support for abortion rights has reached a record high, and nearly two-thirds of Americans oppose the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade, according to a new national NBC News poll conducted after the leak of a draft opinion that would strike down the constitutional right to abortion."

    "What's more, the survey finds abortion climbing up the list of issues that Americans believe are the most important, and that Democratic interest in the upcoming midterms has increased since earlier this year."


    This should surprise no one (5.00 / 2) (#119)
    by MO Blue on Sun May 15, 2022 at 11:43:59 AM EST
    Failure of an American ideology': why Covid has an outsized impact on the US

    As the US records 1 million Covid deaths, experts note underinvestment in long-term care, primary care and public health all contributed to the toll.
    According to public health experts, the virus's outsized impact on the US can be attributed in part to underinvestment in long-term care, in primary care and in public health departments. As a result, some people were more vulnerable to Covid and had little connection to - or trust in - the healthcare providers who urged them to socially distance, to wear masks and to get vaccinated.

    It was a disconnect, they say, that was only exacerbated by misinformation - particularly by Republican leaders' undermining of scientists' recommendations.
    In 2018, the country spent an average of $10,637 on healthcare per person, almost twice as much as other large and wealthy countries, according to data from the Kaiser Family Foundation. And yet, compared with those countries, the US had a significantly lower life expectancy and the worst healthcare quality and access.

    Thank god the powers that be have protected us from universal, single payer healthcare or we would be forced to live longer, healthier lives.

    I'm not sure (none / 0) (#131)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 16, 2022 at 09:37:34 AM EST
    single payer would have made any difference with COVID. Italy supposedly has one of the best healthcare systems and it was horrific there even to the point of triaging the elderly.

    During a right wing conference, (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by KeysDan on Sun May 15, 2022 at 01:41:33 PM EST
    last Friday, Clarence Thomas spoke with belligerent self-pity. The leak of the Alito majority draft opinion was "an unthinkable breach of trust."

     John Yoo, a former clerk of Thomas, and infamous author of the "torture memos"( e.g., waterboarding and crushing of the testicles of the person's child are OK), was the interviewer.

    "When you lose that trust, especially in the institution I'm in, it changes the institution fundamentally, you begin to look over your shoulder.  It's like kind of an infidelity that you can explain it, but you can't undo it," he mewled.

    And, he does not like that protesting at houses, one bit: "you would never visit SC justices' houses when things didn't go our way."  he said.  "We did not throw temper tantrums. it is incumbent on us to always act appropriately and not repay tit for tat."

    That infidelity line sure adds to my suspicion that the leaker was Ginni, so she could taut her enemies--she got her way on this one and couldn't wait to let it be known, even though her efforts to overthrow the government, when she did not get her way, failed.

    Overall, I think Thomas was better off when he never spoke.  

    Right-wing word of the day (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun May 15, 2022 at 02:25:18 PM EST

    A terrific, in-depth analysis of the Alito draft (5.00 / 2) (#127)
    by Peter G on Sun May 15, 2022 at 11:58:52 PM EST
    and its implications, written for an educated lay audience by a highly experienced non-lawyer journalist, who has a deep and very well-informed understanding of Supreme Court precedent and practices, is available here, in three parts.

    Hands off (none / 0) (#121)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun May 15, 2022 at 02:23:36 PM EST
    That driveway (none / 0) (#123)
    by KeysDan on Sun May 15, 2022 at 03:19:39 PM EST
    looks too treacherous for a beer truck to navigate. Probably needs the Budweiser Clydesdale horse-drawn wagon.

    Thomas (none / 0) (#132)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 16, 2022 at 09:38:11 AM EST
    can resign his seat on the supreme court any day now then.

    A long fight, finally won (5.00 / 2) (#170)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 18, 2022 at 11:08:06 AM EST
    U.S. Soccer reaches landmark equal pay agreement

    The U.S. women's national soccer team engaged in a yearslong fight with the federation for equal pay. In February, their gender-based pay discrimination lawsuit was settled for $24 million, with the federation promising to equalize pay between men's and women's teams in all competitions.

    Hurray for girl/women power!!

    The Supreme Court (5.00 / 2) (#174)
    by KeysDan on Wed May 18, 2022 at 02:36:54 PM EST
    sided with Senator Ted Cruz against the Federal Elections Committee (SEC), 6-3. The Court ruled that Section 304 of the Campaign Reform Act of 2002, which limits the amount of post-election contribution that may be used to repay a candidate who lends money to his own campaign- constitutionally burdens core political speech

    In Cruz's senate campaign against Beto O'Rourke, Cruz repaid $250,000 of a $260,000 personal loan to his campaign within a 20-day post-election window according to the law, but was unable to repay the final $10,000, since the law only permits repayment up to $250,000. Cruz alleged, in his test case, that the law prohibiting repayment of a loan over $250,000 violated his First Amendment rights.

    Chief Justice Roberts, the author of the majority opinion, stated that the SC recognizes only one permissible ground for restricting political speech, prevention of "quid pro quo" corruption or its appearance. Roberts stated that the government had not shown any quid pro quo corruption could come for the post-election repayments.

     Justice Kagan in her dissent (Breyer, Sotomayor) stated "the purpose of the law is easy to grasp: post-election contributions pose a special danger of corruption, because at that point, a candidate has a more-than-usual interest in obtaining the money (to replace personal finances) and is now in a position to give something in return."

    Roberts, apparently using his logic in the VRA gut-job, essentially, holds that corruption doesn't exist in the US, unless you can prove it.  If you can prove that corruption exits, then the system is working and, ergo, there is no corruption.  Moreover, if the legislation is working then this proves that the legislation is unnecessary.

    Hence, Cruz or any billionaire or fake billionaire candidate can get personal loans repaid after winning the election.

    The SEC.above (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by KeysDan on Wed May 18, 2022 at 05:25:45 PM EST
    was a typo for FEC, but SEC is also in the news.  A Fifth Circuit panel (Trump & W appointees) in a 2to 1 consequential ruling overturned the SEC finding against a hedge fund manager, claiming defendants in securities fraud cases involving penalties have a right to trial. Administrative law judges lack authority.

    The ruling may, in effect, dismantle the SEC's power to enforce securities law. The long-held right-wing attack on regulations continues in earnest.


    These yahoos are clearly seeking to de-fang the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. Sec. 78d), which Congress expressly created 88 years ago to protect the public from market manipulation. Pursuant to this legislation, the SEC's mission is three-fold:
    (1) To protect investors;
    (2) To maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets; and
    (3) To facilitate capital formation.

    So much for (1) and (2), if the 5th Circuit has its way. The plaintiffs in Jarkersy v. Securities and Exchange Commission were demanding a jury trial after the SEC brought a civil action against them for securities fraud. This decision is beyond radical. It is nihilistic:

    "We hold that: (1) the SEC's in-house adjudication of Petitioners' case violated their Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial; (2) Congress unconstitutionally delegated legislative power to the SEC by failing to provide an intelligible principle by which the SEC would exercise the delegated power, in violation of Article I's vesting of 'all' legislative power in Congress; and (3) statutory removal restrictions on SEC ALJs violate the Take Care Clause of Article II. Because the agency proceedings below were unconstitutional, we GRANT the petition for review, VACATE the decision of the SEC, and REMAND
    for further proceedings consistent with this opinion." (Emphasis is mine.)

    Here's the link to the opinion, in case anyone is interested in reading it.


    This is Roberts (none / 0) (#179)
    by jmacWA on Wed May 18, 2022 at 03:38:47 PM EST
    doing what, IMO, he was put on the court to do.  Get as much money into elections as possible, the theory being that the GOP will be the beneficiary of most of that cash.

    Margaret Atwood: (none / 0) (#1)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 09, 2022 at 05:23:57 PM EST
    Women who cannot make their own decisions about whether or not to have babies are enslaved because the state claims ownership of their bodies and the right to dictate the use to which their bodies must be put.

    Not surprisingly (5.00 / 3) (#53)
    by MO Blue on Thu May 12, 2022 at 08:20:45 AM EST
    in twitter threads in support of Roe, the most frequent and most caustic comments against that position come from men. Insecure men who feel that we need to return to the time when men controlled all aspects of a woman's life.

    Well (none / 0) (#68)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 12, 2022 at 03:29:36 PM EST
    that and one man who is an ally pointed out that men used to be guaranteed a woman. They could be the most disgusting man on earth and they still would get a woman. Now they actually have to work at it and get rejected a lot. They want to go back to basically picking who they want.

    That's just brilliant. (none / 0) (#198)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu May 19, 2022 at 02:00:02 PM EST
    And while we're at it, how cool would it be if we could bring back the medieval custom of concubines? That way, we would actually be defending the sanctity of traditional marriage because then, we wouldn't have to legalize polygamy.

    Now, that's what really thinking out of the box looks like. And we can all thank Donald Trump for taking the time to first pull all the nails from the lid.

    Next, all I need to do is conjure up the ghosts of Sheldon Addison and the Koch Bros. and get them to underwrite the nationwide syndication of my proposed talk radio show, "Money For Nothin' (Chicks For Free)", and then summon the ghost of Roger Ailes to convince Rupert Murdoch to put me on Fox News. You know, I'll even settle for a mid-day slot. That way, I can still go out with my friends and tie one on after work.

    As you can no doubt see, Mama didn't raise any old fool.


    Unlike the (none / 0) (#2)
    by KeysDan on Mon May 09, 2022 at 06:29:09 PM EST
    fablers Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett, Alito let it rip at his confirmation hearing.  In response to Senator Durbin's  questions on Roe precedent, he made it clear that precedent deserved respect (especially after successful challenges), but not deference. It did not take much reading of the Americans for a Democratic way to pick-up his misogyny and hostility to rights--all of them.  

    But no points for not lying; just as no points to Il Duce for his commitment to railway punctuality.

    Safety first (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon May 09, 2022 at 06:29:29 PM EST

    Senators Move to Boost Security for Justices
    May 9, 2022 at 4:26 pm EDT By Taegan Goddard 86 Comments

    "Members of the US Senate are aiming to pass a bipartisan bill that would expand security protection to the family members of justices, following protests at some Supreme Court justices' homes over the weekend," CNN reports.

    I have always been uncomfortable (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Peter G on Mon May 09, 2022 at 07:37:01 PM EST
    with demonstrations at people's homes. Too aggressive and punitive for me, even though such demonstrations are usually within the bounds of protected free speech. I think demonstrations should aspire to be persuasive, either to other people or to one of the "political branches" of government. I have no problem with demonstrations that exhibit anger, seriousness and solidarity by large numbers of folks (in a public place), although not when they devolve into vandalism against public or private property, frankly. And I am too much of a lawyer to like demonstrations at courthouses that imply that public pressure or opinion should affect judges' decisions.

    Peaceful protests (5.00 / 4) (#12)
    by KeysDan on Mon May 09, 2022 at 09:39:02 PM EST
    outside the Justices' homes seems appropriate, especially, given  that the Court has gone out of its way to avoid even seeing protesters.  The.sanctity of women's sovereignty over their own bodies outweighs the sanctity of the space in front of the homes of the Justices who would deny such.  

    The right to peacefully assemble should not be a foreign concept to these Justices, although Barrett could not name all rights when asked by a Republican senator at her confirmation hearing, so she maybe excused.  And, of course, a real originalist like Alito may think that women have no rights to assemble without permission of husbands or fathers.

    At the 11th Circuit Judicial Conference last Friday, Justice Thomas said the Judiciary is threatened if people are unwilling to live with outcomes we don't agree with.   Alito began his draft opinion by stating Roe was egregiously wrong from the start.
    And, for almost 50 years anti-abortion activists protested, all too often violently, from preventing patients entering clinics to murdering abortion providers.  And,a long term political project ensued, including the subversion of the nomination process of Justices.  

    Alito, in his draft, arrogantly and dismissively lays down the gauntlet---essentially, we don't care what you think.   Thomas stated that he can't be.bullied.   And,  they claim they are not hacks.   Not great choices remain as these reactionaries continue on their rampage to takeaway rights. Anyone who takes away rights needs to be protested.  At home, in restaurants, anywhere and everywhere.  In my opinion, this is no time for excessive civility.


    Evidently this only applies to outcomes (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 10, 2022 at 07:43:29 AM EST
    that Thomas and his zealot friends prefer.

    At the 11th Circuit Judicial Conference last Friday, Justice Thomas said the Judiciary is threatened if people are unwilling to live with outcomes we don't agree with.

    Based on his statement, Thomas and his ant-abortion cohorts have continuously  threaten the Judiciary since they we were never willing to live with the outcome of Roe.


    Translation (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue May 10, 2022 at 08:25:59 AM EST
    Judiciary is threatened if people are unwilling to take what we give them.  And like it.

    How is the judiciary threatened? (none / 0) (#19)
    by RickyJim on Tue May 10, 2022 at 09:14:40 AM EST
    Does he think that the US might jettison judicial supremacy in some areas?

    Perhaps he is thinking about (none / 0) (#31)
    by ladybug on Tue May 10, 2022 at 02:22:14 PM EST
    "Court packing" or attempting to intimidate justices through illegal leaks or doxing of their home addresses.

    Illegal leaks? (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Jack E Lope on Tue May 10, 2022 at 06:29:14 PM EST
    Does the Supreme Court have info that would be illegal to leak, too?

    That might be a question for the (none / 0) (#46)
    by ladybug on Tue May 10, 2022 at 08:57:41 PM EST
    lawyers but it appears to be a gray area. Here is a politifact about it.

    I have my opinions but IANAL.


    Angus King on sidewalk protests (5.00 / 5) (#45)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 10, 2022 at 07:21:56 PM EST

    "I find it deeply ironic that we now have an `unscalable' fence around the Supreme Court when that same court in 2014 declared a 35' safety buffer zone to protect workers and patients at Massachusetts abortion clinics unconstitutional as a constraint on free speech and the right to protest," King wrote in his post. "Guess constitutionality depends upon whose life is at risk."


    Chuck Schumer on protests (5.00 / 3) (#48)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 11, 2022 at 09:12:53 AM EST
    If protests are peaceful, yes. My house -- there's protests three, four times a week outside my house. The American way to peacefully protest is OK," Schumer said before checking his ringing phone, noting his wife was calling him.
    "Maybe there's a protest outside," the New York senator joked.

    Here's another excellent take on (5.00 / 2) (#137)
    by Peter G on Tue May 17, 2022 at 11:28:17 AM EST
    the law and politics of protesting judicial decisions, at judges' homes, at courthouses, and otherwise. By a Cornell law professor, but I think it will be fully accessible to anyone who follows TalkLeft.

    I would suggest (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue May 10, 2022 at 08:32:06 AM EST
    It's supposed to make you uncomfortable.

    From ACTUP to George Floyd demonstrators used tactics I might be personally uncomfortable doing.  But I'm not just OK with it I'm glad there are brave soles willing to make me uncomfortable.

    People start to pay attention when they are made uncomfortable.

    'The job of the newspaper is to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable'

    Mr Dooley

    John Lewis: (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by KeysDan on Tue May 10, 2022 at 02:01:53 PM EST
    Good trouble, necessary trouble.   Theocratic-fascism/authoritarianism does not have a place at a democratic table and merits peaceful protests.

    And, this is just the beginning.  When the right case comes along, and these reactionaries will be on the lookout, personhood will be ruled to be at conception.  So much for legal abortion in any state. Or, hopes that a federal lawful abortion law at any point in pregnancy, even if enacted,  would pass constitutional muster.  Homicide.  And, next: life begins with erection.  

    Citations going back a thousand years to interpret the present is perverse in almost all fields.  Yes, to recognize and built upon, but to undo a more recent and germane past and so as to negatively  impact the future?   Back in the 13th century, we didn't have all this clamoring, it appears, to be treated decently. People knew their place and were not always complaining about things like the dangers of ectopic pregnancies or otherwise being oppressed.  


    Just got back from the drop-box (none / 0) (#6)
    by Peter G on Mon May 09, 2022 at 06:42:11 PM EST
    where I cast my vote in the Pennsylvania primary, for which Election Day is a week from tomorrow.

    I got (none / 0) (#8)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 09, 2022 at 07:32:01 PM EST
    redistricted ironically back into my named district the 6th. Only this time it's R +24 or some such. I'm afraid I will have another nightmare Trumper as a rep.

    Our primary is the 24th and I guess I will go ahead and just vote in person as I have heard a number of complaints about mail in voting.


    Well, bury the lede (none / 0) (#11)
    by MKS on Mon May 09, 2022 at 08:47:08 PM EST
    Who did you vote for in the Senate primary?

    And, absentee is okay in Pa?


    We now have no-excuse absentee (mail-in) (none / 0) (#13)
    by Peter G on Mon May 09, 2022 at 10:05:49 PM EST
    voting. Currently under bogus attack at our State Supreme Court as contrary to the language of the PA Constitution, which it is not. The Republican dominated state Legislature overwhelmingly approved it three years ago, as part of a compromise bill. (They got a provision they wanted eliminating straight-ticket voting.) Now they want to rescind it, because four times more Democratic voters choose to use it than do Rs (after their own Fearless Leader baselessly attacked it as rife with problems). As for whom I voted for, I ultimately chose Malcolm Kenyatta, who after watching two debates I concluded was the best candidate. Decided not to game my vote (this time).

    It was an uphill climb for op-ed writer Ronald Townbridge, no pun intended, and he failed and rolled back down.

    Given that Justice Alito's draft opinion rests in part upon the legal constructs of Sir Matthew Hale, an nominally obscure 17th century English magistrate who's probably much better known in the history of western jurisprudence for his zealous persecution of witchcraft (which resulted in the hanging of Amy Duny and Rose Cullender on March 17, 1664), there is really nothing at all courageous about his effort to use Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health as the vehicle to strike down Roe v. Wade.

    There is, however, no shortage of archaic reasoning and rationalization in Alito's treatise, some of which is worthy of SNL's 1978 skit "Theodoric of York, Medieval Barber."

    It's time to reacquaint myself with Arthur Miller's "The Crucible."

    I don't have to approve of 17th Century beliefs (none / 0) (#10)
    by Peter G on Mon May 09, 2022 at 08:03:04 PM EST
    -- which I obviously do not -- to recognize that your description of Sir Matthew Hale as "best known" for presiding over a trial for witchcraft is simply false. Alito's draft opinion is deeply wrong, but not because Hale is other than a genuinely renowned scholar of the English law prior to and of his day. Its relevance to interpreting the U.S. Constitution in the 21st Century, of course, is something else again.

    What if one (none / 0) (#14)
    by MKS on Tue May 10, 2022 at 02:13:11 AM EST
    preface's the comment to say "with respect to women's rights" he is best known for.....

    There was no such concept, in Hale's time (none / 0) (#23)
    by Peter G on Tue May 10, 2022 at 11:05:41 AM EST
    as "women's rights," as a political and philosophical idea growing out of, but hardly accepted by the Enlightenment. Was the idea not first articulated in the very late 18th Century, almost a century later, by Mary Wollstonecraft et al.? Before then, equality of the sexes was a fringe, radical religious idea held by the Quakers and perhaps a few others. It is true, I gather, that by the 1660s when Hale presided over a notorious witchcraft trial and sentenced the defendants to death, skepticism and opposition was growing. The English law against witches was eventually repealed in the 1730s.

    I found this interesting (none / 0) (#18)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 10, 2022 at 08:43:55 AM EST
    Andrew Amos (1791 - 18 April 1860) was a British lawyer and professor of law who wrote the critique Ruins of Time (1856)

    Andrew Amos wrote a critique of the Historia titled Ruins of Time exemplified in Sir Matthew Hale's History of the Pleas of the Crown, which both criticised and praised Hale's work while directing the main criticism at the judges and lawyers who cited the Historia without considering that it was dated.


    So as early as 1856, a legal scholar was criticizing judges who cited Hale's opinions without considering that they were dated.

    We would have better served if Alito had spent more time reading Amos.


    Arguing with the reactionaries about (none / 0) (#22)
    by Peter G on Tue May 10, 2022 at 10:39:35 AM EST
    English legal history is just playing into their hands. It assumes that the correct way to interpret the Constitution is a sort "originalism" that by design rejects constitutional protection for "liberty" that keep pace with social advances. As best I can tell (not being a historian) performing an abortion, at any time during pregnancy, was a crime under British "common law" at the time of the Founding. But so what? Lots of things were considered crimes then that are not so viewed now. The social conditions that led to and supposedly justified this pronouncement by judges (i.e., "common law") were "natural law" (which assumed women had no independent human rights, much less equal rights) and the scientific fact that all then-known methods of abortion were medically highly dangerous to the person who was pregnant. Both of these predicates are falsified today. Was our Constitution intended to endure into unknown future times, and thus be open-ended and flexible enough to adapt to those future times, based on underlying principles, not on rigid rules? I think so. The failure to appreciate that the Constitution expresses a set of principles and values, not a catalog of unchanging 18th and 19th Century rules, is what is fundamentally wrong with the Alito draft.

    I appreciate your take since I am no (none / 0) (#24)
    by ladybug on Tue May 10, 2022 at 11:25:36 AM EST
    expert and I like your reasoning. I am reminded about how you said that even though words change their meanings, they do not change in the law and so we have to go back to the old contemporary dictionaries to interpret them. So for concepts such as "liberty" which can be fuzzy, and even "life," which would include the life of the unborn, couldn't the common law of abortion be one guiding principle?  Everyone (who is normal) agrees on abortions that save the life of the mother. Isn't the issue today that people disagree about the life of the unborn? Now that science allows us to see the fetus, more people are attuned to that life.

    I never said that words do not change meaning (5.00 / 5) (#26)
    by Peter G on Tue May 10, 2022 at 12:44:06 PM EST
    "in the law." I advised you that words cannot change their meaning in a criminal statute. The Constitution is not a statute (one of the things that the reactionary judges and theorists pretend not to appreciate), much less a criminal statute (except insofar as it contains a specific and narrow definition of "treason"). How to interpret and apply the Constitution is a whole different kettle of fish, and highly contested among scholars and jurists, both as a matter of principle, and when invoked tendentiously, as in this instance.

    Every debate is tendentious (1.00 / 1) (#28)
    by ladybug on Tue May 10, 2022 at 01:07:23 PM EST
    but abortion is one of the most tendentious because it involves not only the life of the mother but the life of an unborn child. I was wondering about the common law argument, but I understand these are complicated issues.  

    As usual, I don't think we have the same idea (5.00 / 5) (#51)
    by Peter G on Wed May 11, 2022 at 02:45:20 PM EST
    of what the word "tendentious" means. Not every debate is "tendentious" in the pejorative sense that I was using the term. And most Americans do not agree that the typical abortion necessarily "involves ... the life of an unborn child." That's your opinion, which is basically a religious view, held by some but not by others. You have expressed your opinion here repeatedly (often as if your expressed opinion were a baseline of agreed fact). You are entitled to that opinion but cannot expect to persuade anyone simply by repeating it. Which I suggest you stop doing, as repetition that does not advance the discussion is a form of what Jeralyn calls "blog-clogging." It not only wastes others' time, but also contributes to prematurely reaching the 200-comment limit for each thread. It therefore violates the rules of this site.  

    If you don't want me to post, (2.33 / 3) (#52)
    by ladybug on Wed May 11, 2022 at 07:32:54 PM EST
    you probably should not encourage me by posting comments such as these. 16 comments out of 200 from Tuesday's open thread (from May 3-8) is hardly "blog clogging," but if Jeralyn thinks it is I will certainly refrain. She simply said to continue the debate on a new thread.

    "Tendentious: expressing or supporting a particular opinion that many other people disagree with (Collins Dictionary)." What else are debates for? Perhaps not all debates are tendentious in your preferred sense but the abortion debate certainly is.

    I never said "most Americans [think] that the typical abortion necessarily 'involves ... the life of an unborn child'" as you put it. I said I think that it is such a contentious issue because it involves a fetus that eventually becomes a child. Not because I am religious but because I have seen pictures of fetuses that look like human babies at various stages of development.

    And I have been pregnant and have felt the life of a child moving inside of me. (I am not religious.)

    I cited polling statistics showing that when we get into the second and third trimesters, support for abortion lessens dramatically, probably because most people believe that a fetus that has survived that long will most likely become a living child. Scott Peterson was charged with double homicide for the deaths of Lacy and their unborn child.

    I did not say and do not know at what point a bunch of cells become a human child (no one does) but I do think it happens before birth. Perhaps that is where we differ. Do you have an opinion on that?

    Instead of shutting out different opinions I think it is better to encourage them and to listen to each other.

    I think this is my fifth comment on this thread. So what is the limit for blog-clogging?



    the limit for blog-clogging (5.00 / 4) (#85)
    by Jeralyn on Thu May 12, 2022 at 11:36:51 PM EST
    is four comments a day. Blog-clogging (and "chattering") are defined in our comment policy. There's a link to our comment policy on the home page.  

    But I'll quote from it to save you the time, and bold the parts that apply to you:

    All points of view are welcome on TalkLeft, with the following exception:

     TalkLeft will limit commenters to four comments a day if, in its sole discretion, the commenter is a "chatterer," loosely defined as one who both holds opposing views from those expressed by TalkLeft and :

     Posts numerous times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread; or

     Posts numerous times a day and insults or engages in name-calling against other commenters or the site's authors or repeatedly makes the same point with the effect of annoying other commenters. (i.e. is a blog-clogger)

        A message will be left in the last thread that the commenter chattered on advising that he or she has been limited to four comments a day. All comments in excess of this amount will be deleted. Repeated violators will be banned.

    Ladybug, this is your message that your multiple comments on abortion which conflict with TalkLeft's position are irritating to other commenters. You are limited to four comments a day (on any topic).

    Thank you, and I believe you should have seen this coming. Peter's comments are a gift to TalkLeft, he is widely recognized by lawyers and judges as one of the smartest and most accomplished appellate lawyers in the country. You are clearly irritating him and needlessly taking up his time to respond to your multiple comments.


    Got it. Thanks! (none / 0) (#97)
    by ladybug on Fri May 13, 2022 at 12:27:10 PM EST
    As a lawyer and a legal expert (none / 0) (#25)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 10, 2022 at 11:35:22 AM EST
    It is understandable that you view arguments as what would be the most successful in a legal environment or a court of law.

    I'm not convinced that those same arguments are the best in the court of public opinion or for getting people to the polls to vote against regressive policies.

    Republicans have successfully railed against "judicial activism" for decades. Their attacks have worked to get their supporters to the polls where the Democrats more scholarly arguments have gone over the heads of the voters we need. Case in point:

    Republicans in Congress are engaged in a broad-based, sustained effort targeting the federal bench. GOP lawmakers have talked about impeaching judges for unpopular decisions, proposed term limits and suggested reducing the number of appeals judges. They have held hearings on "judicial activism" -- singling out judges who they think have gone beyond interpreting the law to making it -- and offered legislation that would shrink a judge's authority.

    1997 WaPo


    I was not suggesting the "argument" (none / 0) (#27)
    by Peter G on Tue May 10, 2022 at 01:07:15 PM EST
    that I though would be "most successful" in any environment or venue. I was expressing my personal and professional understanding of what the U.S. Constitution means, and was intended to mean. As Chief Justice John Marshall wrote in 1819: "We must never forget that it is a constitution we are expounding, ... intended to endure for ages to come, and consequently, to be adapted to the various crises of human affairs." Quoted, interestingly, on the Supreme Court's website as the conclusion to its little official essay on the Constitution, which also states, "The Founding Fathers had wisely worded that document in rather general terms leaving it open to future elaboration to meet changing conditions."

    Peter, I just read a comment (5.00 / 4) (#86)
    by Jeralyn on Fri May 13, 2022 at 01:22:57 AM EST
    on a list-serve of a small and highly accomplished group of veteran criminal defense lawyers, written by a lawyer whom we both know well that said s/he was seated at the same dinner table as Justice Alito (and his wife I think) at some big event and Alito said you were smarter than him! (Email me and I'll tell you who it was if you don't already know.)

    I used to say the same (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by Peter G on Fri May 13, 2022 at 08:53:06 AM EST
    ... about him. (As I've mentioned, we were in law school together.) I am no longer so sure of that.

    Then, I have got to ask (5.00 / 2) (#111)
    by MKS on Fri May 13, 2022 at 05:19:40 PM EST
    you as a digression, given this great recommendation, if you know if the Originalists have a good explanation for the Ninth Amendment?  

    I come at constitutional interpretation issues from a contract interpretation background. In basic contract law, as you surely know, if a contract is "integrated" and intended as the full and final expression of the parties' agreement, then parol or extrinsic evidence cannot be used to contradict or supplement the agreement.  And, a contract will often contain an "integration" or "merger" clause that states the contract is intended to be fully integrated.  Such a clause is often, if not always, determinative.

    So, using basic rules of contract interpretation, which may a bit crude here, is the U.S. Constitution an "integrated" document, making the use of parol evidence inappropriate, i.e., the Originalists' position, as I understand it?  

    The answer:  No.  The Constitution by its terms is not an "integrated" document.  The Ninth Amendment specially refers to rights that are not "enumerated."  Thus, according to its express terms, there do exist rights that are not written in the Constitution.  So, the Originalists' position that the word "abortion" must be written in the Constitution to be enforceable as a Constitutional right, is not supported the language of the Constitution itself.

    I have read a couple of conservatives' views on the Ninth Amendment, and they are dense and make no sense to me.  Perhaps, the Ninth Amendment does not serve as the source of a woman's rights to terminate a pregnancy--which seems to be the strawman argument that the Originalists address.  (Most abortion rights proponents rely on the "liberty" or "equal protection" clauses for the source of the right.)

    But the Ninth Amendment would still serve as a rule of interpretation--the right need not be written down or enumerated.

    So, what do the Originalists do other than ignore the Ninth Amendment?



    The Constitution is not a contract (5.00 / 7) (#113)
    by Peter G on Sat May 14, 2022 at 12:33:51 AM EST
    The Articles of Confederation were a contract, that is, an agreement among the former colonies, which had declared independence and thus became independent states, to cooperate and work together in certain ways, each giving something up and getting something of value in return, like the E.U.  The Constitution, on the other hand, started over from scratch -- in theory -- and represents an agreement among the People of all of those now-United States, not among the states themselves, to delegate their inherent and complete power ("All power belongs to the People," as the great originalists, the Black Panthers, put it) in some respects to a federal government, reserving the rest of the power to the States, subject to some authority that was held back from government entirely (which is what we call "rights"). The Ninth Amendment says, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." The originalist reading of this text, as I understand it, is that when the amendment refers to "other[ rights]" that are "retained by the people" it refers, by its terms, to rights that the people already have, as of 1791. Otherwise they could not be "retained." And if you cannot find any scholars or jurists of that time (or before) who had recognized something as a "right," that is, as a limitation on the power of government to restrict personal autonomy, then it could not be said to have then already existed such that it could be "retained." I'm not persuaded by that, but there you are. I also think that the inherently broad and evolving nature of what is understood as "liberty" (both in the Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth) is as good a foundation as any for rights like "autonomy" and "privacy."

    Intended to endure for ages to come?? (none / 0) (#29)
    by RickyJim on Tue May 10, 2022 at 01:36:18 PM EST
    Washington said at the end of the Constitutional Convention, which he presided over, that he expected it would last for 20 years.  Jefferson said that a country's constitution should be rewritten every 19 years.

    Neither Washington nor Jefferson ever sat (none / 0) (#34)
    by Peter G on Tue May 10, 2022 at 03:05:40 PM EST
    on the Supreme Court and had the official responsibility of interpreting the Constitution. Nor would this be the only time that Jefferson and his cousin Chief Justice Marshall disagreed.

    I have been unable to ascertain (none / 0) (#99)
    by MO Blue on Fri May 13, 2022 at 12:37:07 PM EST
    If Hale discussed the legality of abortion prior to quickening.

    Alito notes that Hale described the abortion of a "quick child" as a "great crime.

    There are various opinions on when this occurs...13-16 wks, 13-25 wks, 16-24 wks etc.

    Scientifically, there is no data that supports quickening occurs at conception.

    I'm confused on how Hale's comment described above would be supportive of invaliding Roe.


    Having read... (none / 0) (#109)
    by Jack E Lope on Fri May 13, 2022 at 04:57:42 PM EST
    ...as much of that 1st Draft as I can stand, Alito points out that in Hale's time, we did not have a way to determine there was a live fetus until the mother could feel it moving - the quickening. The quickening was the line defining a crime because we did not know and could not prove anything before that point.

    I think Alito's position is that pregnancy testing overcame those limitations - and a positive test is proof of a live fetus, or something to that effect. The earlier-in-the-term bans came after we had more scientific information about gestation.

    I don't know how often there may be false positives from pregnancy tests. Those could be dangerous if they get treated as prima facie evidence of a life.


    Thanks for info (none / 0) (#112)
    by MO Blue on Fri May 13, 2022 at 05:30:07 PM EST
    My eyes glazed over and my brain shut down after reading only a few pages of the text. Have been relying on limited info from google searches.

    Sir Matthew Hale is an obsolete source. (none / 0) (#40)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue May 10, 2022 at 05:39:03 PM EST
    To be sure, he was a renowned legal scholar in his day and was influential in the gradual development of English common law. But that was also nearly four centuries ago. As you so noted, his scholarship is legally irrelevant in any modern-day interpretation of the Constitution.

    As you also noted in another post, there were no women's rights in Hale's era. I've already cited his reprehensible role in facilitating the execution of two women on charges of sorcery and witchcraft. Further, per Andrew Amos (1856) we know that Hale was also an advocate in the use of capital punishment on children as young as 14.

    Hale was also a staunch defender of the prerogatives of the English Crown during the era of Oliver Cromwell and the Parliament Roundheads, when being a royalist was grounds for at least political suspicion if not a much worse fate. Cromwell disagreed but liked Hale anyway, and subsequently appointed him to head up an effort to reform the judiciary.

    Sir Matthew Hale was a man who reflected his times, which were rife with intrigue, ignorance and superstition. So, citing him in a present-day legal ruling on a women's right to reproductive freedom and bodily autonomy should be disqualifying as a work of scholarship.

    In fact, doing so makes as much sense as Russia basing its present military strategy in Ukraine by trying to replicate the Battle of Stalingrad. Neither is reflective of present-day circumstances and realities, and both are destined to cause a lot of grief for everyone impacted by the inevitable consequences of such fatuous decision making.

    Plessey v. Ferguson was likewise decided in 1896 by the preeminent legal authorities of their day. But their esteemed stature as learned men certainly didn't confer upon them the necessary sagacity and wisdom to do their duty properly. Plessey is rightly ridiculed and condemned today as one of the most egregiously immoral legal decisions in SCOTUS history and further, it was one which took nearly seven decades to undo at least in part if not in toto.

    The most charitable thing to be said on Justice Alito's behalf is that he's a f*cking jackass.



    Interesting article in the Boston Globe (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by MO Blue on Fri May 13, 2022 at 09:54:15 AM EST
    on Alito's use of Hale as a source for his opinion.

    Alito's invocation of Hale has stunned some lawyers and historians, who say Hale's discredited ideas have been used for centuries to subjugate women.

    "There are many themes running through America's legal traditions that have deep injustices embedded within them," said Jill Hasday, a constitutional and family law professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, about Alito's reliance on Hale. "We have to decide how we're bound by the past. And nothing is forcing us to carry the consequences of women's legal subordination forward in time."

    "The right to an abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation's history and traditions," Alito argues in the draft opinion. "On the contrary, an unbroken tradition of prohibiting abortion on pain of criminal punishment persisted from the earliest days of common law until 1973."

    Many historians disagree with Alito's argument. In an amicus brief submitted in the Mississippi abortion-rights case before the justices, the American Historical Association and the Organization of American Historians counter that up until the Civil War, most states barred abortion only in the later stages of pregnancy, and that abortions before fetal "quickening" were legal

    Boston Globe


    Lancet (none / 0) (#91)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 13, 2022 at 10:01:24 AM EST
    "What is so shocking, inhuman, and irrational about this draft opinion is that the Court is basing its decision on an 18th-century document ignorant of 21st-century realities for women. The route forward is unclear and perilous. This Court's argument suggests possible future attacks on a raft of other civil rights, from marriage equality to contraception."



    Something weird about that link (none / 0) (#92)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 13, 2022 at 10:09:47 AM EST
    Maybe the site is overloaded

    here's a link to The Lancet

    It's the top story


    Excerpts from The Lancet article (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by MO Blue on Fri May 13, 2022 at 10:22:42 AM EST
    The Justices who vote to strike down Roe will not succeed in ending abortion, they will only succeed in ending safe abortion. Alito and his supporters will have women's blood on their hands.
    ... That a Court is about to force through a health policy supported by only 39% of Americans is dysfunctional. Indeed, if the Court denies women the right to safe abortion, it will be a judicial endorsement of state control over women--a breathtaking setback for the health and rights of women, one that will have global reverberations.

    A regular pillar (none / 0) (#47)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 11, 2022 at 06:40:46 AM EST
    Of western jurisprudence

    Casey to vote yes on legislation (none / 0) (#32)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 10, 2022 at 02:32:48 PM EST
    to codify abortion rights.

    "In light of the leaked Supreme Court decision draft overturning Roe v. Wade, and subsequent reports that Republicans in the U.S. House and Senate will introduce legislation to enact a nationwide six-week ban, the real question of the moment is: do you support a categorical ban on abortion? During my time in public office, I have never voted for -- nor do I support -- such a ban," he added.  

    The Hill

    Of course we still have Manchin, who has not supported this legislation in the past.

    That does surprise me (none / 0) (#33)
    by MKS on Tue May 10, 2022 at 03:03:55 PM EST
    DeSanta Cancel Culture (none / 0) (#37)
    by KeysDan on Tue May 10, 2022 at 04:26:44 PM EST
    A high school in central Florida, Lyman High, will not distribute the Year Book until images of students holding rainbow flags and a "Love is Love" sign while protesting the Florida "don't say gay" law are photo-shopped out.

    The principal said rather than reprinting the Year Book at great cost and delay, we have decided to cover the material "that is out of compliance" with Florid policy.

    "Florid policy" (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue May 10, 2022 at 04:58:38 PM EST
    Was that a Freudian typeo

    I heard (none / 0) (#69)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 12, 2022 at 03:32:45 PM EST
    DeathSantis called Dollar Store Donald. Best name ever.

    We lied (none / 0) (#38)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue May 10, 2022 at 04:56:04 PM EST
    I am glad (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue May 10, 2022 at 07:06:37 PM EST
    those Fulton County poll workers got a settlement. They literally had to go into hiding IIRC. I hope they are also suing the other networks.

    Supreme Court Commission (none / 0) (#41)
    by RickyJim on Tue May 10, 2022 at 06:20:42 PM EST
    The Presidential Commission issued its final report in December. I did read a much shorter pdf of Kai Lane Scheppele's testimony comparing how the SCOTUS operates to the SCs of other countries:
    For a comparative constitutional law scholar, the most compelling reason
    for Supreme Court reform is that the U.S. has fallen behind its peer
    democracies in thinking about how to structure the role of the Supreme Court and its responsibilities in the constitutional order.
    She sees the biggest problems as the supremacy of court decisions as well as the difficulty in amending the US Constitution.  She thinks that Congress can structure the court into separate panels handling different matters, in particular one for constitutional questions only.  This would give justification for adding more justices.

    If CLarence Thomas (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue May 10, 2022 at 07:07:45 PM EST
    is so worried about "respect for the court" then he should cheerfully support expansion. It's the quickest way for Americans to stop looking at the supreme court as a gathering of federalist society hacks.

    This is really really something (none / 0) (#70)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2022 at 03:36:11 PM EST

    Remembrance of Earth's Past is a science fiction series by Chinese writer Liu Cixin. The series is also popularly referred to by the title of its first novel, The Three-Body Problem


    I'm almost through the second book.  It is epic.  Spanning hundreds of years.  
    It's the story of earth accidentally contacting an advanced alien race that happens to be in a dying solar system.  Too bad for us.

    It's so well written and put together.  It's also nice to read this kind of story from the point of view of another culture.  China.  Where the USA is not really the hero.  Just a spot at a large table.

    One thing it imagines is that 200 years in the future (half way through the 400 year trip the aliens are making to earth) English, the most common language on earth, and Chinese, with billions of speakers, basically merge into one language.


    One jacket blurb you see a lot is from President Obama.  He says it's "wildly imaginative"

    It really is.

    You might see (none / 0) (#74)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2022 at 03:56:12 PM EST
    promos for an incoming Netflix series, which I think will be amazing because the books are so visual, but the author has some other streaming deals.

    A bunch of his other stories are being made into an anthology series.


    Have you seen (none / 0) (#79)
    by MKS on Thu May 12, 2022 at 06:53:35 PM EST
    the end of Ozark yet?  

    Not yet (none / 0) (#81)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2022 at 07:38:50 PM EST
    Let us know your take (none / 0) (#84)
    by MKS on Thu May 12, 2022 at 09:53:11 PM EST
    when you do.

    Yahoo (none / 0) (#148)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue May 17, 2022 at 09:02:45 PM EST

    If you asked us three weeks ago whether or not Ozark would somehow continue, we'd say no. Now, Ozark's showrunner, Chris Mundy is opening the proverbial door just enough to make us wonder whether or not he's secretly been drafting a spinoff treatment this entire time. "It's definitely something that people have talked about a bunch. There's nothing definitive," Mundy told TVLine of the possibility of an Ozark spinoff. "We're lucky that people seem to really like the show so there's obviously going to be some interest there."

    Started watching "We Own This City" (none / 0) (#89)
    by McBain on Fri May 13, 2022 at 09:19:05 AM EST
    It's by the same producer as The Wire, David Simon, takes place in Baltimore, involves law enforcement and has some of the actors from the Wire.  I wanted to like this but it has too many flashback in time scenes so far.  I usually prefer a story to be told the conventional way.

    I might give it another try at some point.  It took a while for the Wire to grow on me and ended up being one of my all time favorites.

    This latest racist massacre.. (none / 0) (#124)
    by desertswine on Sun May 15, 2022 at 04:09:54 PM EST
    belongs to Tucker Carlson and the Fox network.  But not exclusively.

    White male massacres multiple people (none / 0) (#126)
    by MO Blue on Sun May 15, 2022 at 05:39:17 PM EST
    lives to be portrayed as a poor guy that certainly suffers from severe mental illness. Black, unarmed male, who has not murdered anyone is a demonic threat to the cops and the entire population and must be shot down or otherwise killed immediately.

    Justice is not blind, it is non existent for non white people in this country. Makes me sick.


    Unfortunate (none / 0) (#125)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun May 15, 2022 at 04:57:09 PM EST

    Fetterman Says He Suffered a Stroke
    May 15, 2022 at 4:22 pm EDT By Taegan Goddard 134 Comments

    Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, a leading Democratic candidate vying for the state's open U.S. Senate seat, says he suffered a stroke on Friday but is on his way to a full recovery, the Philadelphia Inquirer reports.

    "Fetterman said doctors told him he suffered no cognitive damage and that he could return to the campaign trail after resting and recovering."

    The Democratic primary is on Tuesday.

    New York Times: "The development upended his ability to engage voters in-person during the most intense stretch of the race. Still, he has been leading his main Democratic rival, Representative Conor Lamb, by double digits in sparse public polling."

    Very Unfortunate (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by jmacWA on Mon May 16, 2022 at 05:00:30 AM EST
    BUT... he's still got my vote.

    I was diagnosed with Afib 3+ years ago.  I have never felt it, so the I guess Fetterman is lucky that he he felt his and had people around him who got him to investigate.  The most common treatment is blood thinners to help prevent strokes.


    He says he is feeling better. (none / 0) (#129)
    by Chuck0 on Mon May 16, 2022 at 09:10:29 AM EST
    And bouncing back. I've been on blood thinners for years since having a pulmonary embolism. (the blood thinners may have helped save my life when I got COVID).

    He'll get first hand knowledge of how god-awful expensive these drugs are. Hopefully will work to correct that.

    My vote has already been cast.


    I wonder (none / 0) (#133)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 16, 2022 at 09:49:55 AM EST
    if this will affect the primary and if he becomes the nominee if it will affect the general election.

    As I've seen other places (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by jmacWA on Mon May 16, 2022 at 10:41:43 AM EST
    Fetterman with half a brain is probably way beyond any of the dolts the GOP is serving up.

    @Chuck0:  I've been on blood thinners for 3 years now, but the cheap one. Warfarin.


    Doesn't Warfarin (none / 0) (#164)
    by Chuck0 on Wed May 18, 2022 at 10:29:27 AM EST
    require constant blood tests?

    YES, BUT (none / 0) (#168)
    by jmacWA on Wed May 18, 2022 at 10:51:46 AM EST
    I can do that with a finger prick, which I do once a week.  Medicare pays for the supplies.  There are several services the one I use now is Remote INR, in the past I used Lincare, but was not satisfied with them.

    I think this is very good news (none / 0) (#138)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue May 17, 2022 at 04:34:22 PM EST

    Justice Dept. Requests Transcripts From Jan. 6 Committee
    May 17, 2022 at 5:13 pm EDT By Taegan Goddard 41 Comments

    "The Justice Department has asked the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack for transcripts of interviews it is conducting, which have included discussions with associates of former President Donald Trump," the New York Times reports.

    "The move, coming as Attorney General Merrick Garland appears to be ramping up the pace of his painstaking investigation into the Capitol riot, is the clearest sign yet of a wide-ranging inquiry at the Justice Department."

    No need for a criminal referral (none / 0) (#139)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue May 17, 2022 at 04:53:06 PM EST
    The DOJ is asking them for information related to their ongoing criminal investigation.

    Yes, good (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue May 17, 2022 at 05:48:56 PM EST
    that is going this way instead of the house having to make a criminal referral.

    Madison Cawthorn (none / 0) (#141)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue May 17, 2022 at 07:46:10 PM EST
    is losing


    Personally, I can't fathom (5.00 / 2) (#144)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 17, 2022 at 08:45:25 PM EST
    how many people are still willing to vote for him. I know the bar for what is acceptable in a Republican candidate  is lower than low, but this is ridiculous.

    Is the other (none / 0) (#143)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue May 17, 2022 at 08:29:54 PM EST
    guy any better? My hope is we can flip the seat but I don't know much about that district.

    I don't think (none / 0) (#146)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue May 17, 2022 at 08:57:23 PM EST
    the seat is competitive.  I'm just glad Patton in Lace Panties is losing.

    Evidently conservative Republican voters (none / 0) (#149)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 17, 2022 at 09:24:00 PM EST
    in MO just love having perverts and men who physically abuse their wife and small child represent them in Congress. Eric Greitens, who fits this bill on all counts, leads in the primary race for the Senate here in MO. According to the polls, his support is the strongest among conservative voters.

    Another (none / 0) (#151)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue May 17, 2022 at 09:39:16 PM EST

    I would like to think so (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 17, 2022 at 10:01:34 PM EST
    Yet, Missouri has become so crazy that the only thing that might result in him losing is if he starts talking about Republican orgies and cocaine parties. I'm only half way being sarcastic.

    Playbook (none / 0) (#155)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 18, 2022 at 07:30:31 AM EST

    However, this could cut another way: With his re-election no longer a concern, could Cawthorn become even more of a loose cannon?"

    This seems likely to me.  Doesn't strike me as the "go quietly" type.

    So, who - exactly - invited you to the orgy?


    Fetterman is the (none / 0) (#142)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue May 17, 2022 at 07:52:20 PM EST
    projected winner.

    The Philadelphia Inquirer projects (none / 0) (#145)
    by Peter G on Tue May 17, 2022 at 08:50:54 PM EST
    Fetterman will have something like 60% of the votes in a 4-way Democratic primary, if I understand their election night coverage correctly. Nearly double the establishment darling candidate (Rep. Conor Lamb).

    Looks like Kenyatta (5.00 / 2) (#150)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 17, 2022 at 09:32:43 PM EST
    is getting about 9% of the vote. I think he will do well in the state after more exposure especially if he can help get Fetterman elected.

    The results show that PA's Republican primary (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by Peter G on Tue May 17, 2022 at 11:42:26 PM EST
    voters have real principles. Not good principles, of course, but still, principles. They selected the Tr*mp-endorsed, unabashed christofascist candidate (Doug Mastriano) to run for governor. (He will get crushed by the very bright, very charming, liberal (Jewish) Dem candidate (Josh Shapiro), I have to think.) Yet the Tr*mp-endorsed, faux-conservative, modern Muslim, publicity-hound candidate (Mehmet Oz) is within 750 votes of a 30.5%-each tie with the real-conservative millionaire candidate (McCormick) for Senate, with 95% of the vote counted.  The chrisofascist candidate for Senate is only getting 24% (could this be related to this particular menace/lunatic being a Black woman?), leaving the other four narcissists and nuts to divide the remaining 15% of the primary vote.

    It would (none / 0) (#154)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 18, 2022 at 05:03:47 AM EST
    seem the Trump endorsement only works for white men for the most part although here in GA the Trump endorsed black man has been polling ahead in the GOP primary and the Trump endorsed white man is losing but is losing to another white man. So who knows?

    Peter, I hope you are correct. (none / 0) (#163)
    by Chuck0 on Wed May 18, 2022 at 10:25:40 AM EST
    Mastriano CANNOT become governor of PA. He is a horror show. This commonwealth rejected Scott Wagner and Mastriano is 10 times worse. Wagner was just an a-hole, Mastriano is exactly what you described, a christofascist theocrat and top of being an a-hole. He wants to require all Pennsylvanians to re-register to vote. I read somewhere this may be a violation of federal law. Would the ACLU of PA spearhead a lawsuit against this? I would certainly sign on as a plaintiff.

    I am a certified atheist, but god help us against this lunatic.

    May have to start looking for property in Delaware or Maryland. My next door neighbor moved to Delaware last year, they seem to like it. I was born in Maryland.

    With Shapiro being Jewish, I think this race is going to get very ugly. Which hopefully will turn off many right leaning voters.


    For what it is worth (none / 0) (#165)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 18, 2022 at 10:38:34 AM EST
    The Cook Report just moved their rating from "toss up" to "leans Democratic" based on Mastriano winning the primary.

    This is Doug Mastriano. (none / 0) (#176)
    by Chuck0 on Wed May 18, 2022 at 03:05:42 PM EST
    "The forces of darkness are hitting us really hard right now; we're going to bring the state back to righteousness; this is our day, our hour to take our state back and renew the blessings of America," Mastriano said at a rally last month. He has also spoken at an event whose organizers pledged to "reestablish the kingdom of God in PA."

    This is Sons of Jacob stuff, right out of The Handmaid's Tale.


    Another example of Dem establishment (5.00 / 3) (#172)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 18, 2022 at 12:26:12 PM EST
    Stupidity. Way to tick off women and Hispanics and support the white male who had little support. Women and Hispanic turnout are both needed for the Dems to win elections. IMO, the Dems would win more elections if the establishment quit interfering and turning off whole blocks of voters.


    Another super PAC in Oregon, funded by a crypto fortune and organized around the project of pandemic prevention, Protect Our Future, spent some $10 million to boost Carrick Flynn, while the super PAC linked to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House Majority PAC, also dropped a million dollars into the race. It backfired, and local Democrats as well as national progressives - including the Congressional Progressive Caucus PAC and WFP - rallied behind state Rep. Andrea Salinas, who appears poised for a victory.

    House Dems super PAC draws Latino ire in Oregon as it endorses primary contender to Andrea Salinas

    Sen. Jeff Merkley
    I haven't endorsed in this race, but it's flat-out wrong for House Majority PAC to be weighing in when we have multiple strong candidates vying for the nomination.

    This is more of the same as needlessly backing Lamb against Fetterman, only worse.


    This is the candidate the Dems (5.00 / 3) (#173)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 18, 2022 at 01:44:17 PM EST
    had in PA, John Fetterman:


    In polling, his support cut across rural and urban settings, among moderates and liberals, and among people of all ages. The reality matched that: He was on track Tuesday to win almost every county in the state

    The Dems had an extremely popular candidate who had strong support among all demographic groups, yet the establishment felt the need to interfere to the point of running false ads claiming that Fetterman was a self-described Democratic Socialist.

    They are beyond stupid.


    You know (none / 0) (#178)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 18, 2022 at 03:36:15 PM EST
    if the party thinks Fetterman is a general election loser then they need to let the voters learn that lesson if in fact they are right. If the voters pick Fetterman and he loses they will learn not to pick that kind of candidate again if they want to win. Sometimes it is better to just stay out of the primaries.

    Not "almost every county" ... literally (none / 0) (#184)
    by Peter G on Wed May 18, 2022 at 07:57:32 PM EST
    every one of PA's 67 counties. Including Fetterman's three primary opponents' home counties. Even Philadelphia, even though Philly's Dem electorate consists largely of party loyalists and Black voters, and the party machinery favored Lamb, who came in a distant second, while another one of Fetterman's rivals (I don't really want to say opponents) was a Black (and gay) legislator from Philadelphia. He came in an even more distant third.  My wife pointed out at dinner that while the press didn't talk much about it, Fetterman has been very vocal for legalization of marijuana, and that may have accounted for a lot of his success.

    See this is what really aggravates (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 18, 2022 at 09:02:37 PM EST
    me to no end. Fetterman started early and did the work throughout PA. He clicked with the every demographic group. IMO, it was quite obvious early on that he was popular and was going to win the nomination and Lamb had little or no chance. The only thing the Dems were going to accomplish was to slightly (hopefully only slightly) weaken a Democratic candidate by labeling him a loser and using Republican false labels (some voters find scary) to define him; once again, alienate left leaning voters. IMO, the entire Dem ticket would have been stronger if Lamb had tried to win re-election to his house seat.

    Fetterman is not a raging leftist. In reality, he is only slightly left of center on some issues.I think I can speak for voters who lean left of center, since I'm definitely part of that political spectrum. When the powers that be in the Democratic Party go out of their way to needlessly try and sabotage extremely popular candidates that are just slightly left of center, it sends a real message that we are not considered a respected part of the party whose ideas and policy objectives are valued. The party is very public in its efforts to defeat popular candidates who they deem not moderate enough and loses voters that way.


    Marijuana probably played a part (5.00 / 1) (#192)
    by MO Blue on Thu May 19, 2022 at 09:02:37 AM EST
    but if people in PA were anything like me, they liked that he went after Republicans for their lies after the election. He looks and talks like someone who will aggressively fight for his constituents. Democratic politicians who tell you that they can successfully work across the aisle to get things done or either delusional or flat out lying to you. In this environment, the only compromise legislation the Dems could pass working across the aisle would be further tax cuts to corporations and billionaires, elimination of safety net programs, eliminating voters rights and banning abortion. IOW, the Republicans idea of compromise is pass all of their draconian agenda items.

    For gods sake, they just voted against House bills to help get baby formula to people.

    Please Dems give me people who will fight for what we need and not someone who feeds me BS about working across the aisle to get things done.


    What Armando (none / 0) (#193)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 19, 2022 at 09:19:56 AM EST
    called "High Broderism" which Obama was a major apostle of. The press loves that stuff too. The voters saw Obama spend years begging the GOP to vote for his legislation. I get it. When Biden pines for that type of thing I'm like it's just not possible right now or maybe not anytime in the near future.

    An astounding amount of money was spent on (none / 0) (#180)
    by Jack E Lope on Wed May 18, 2022 at 04:40:02 PM EST
    ...advertising for Oregon's primaries. It made me wonder which policies each of the heavily-promoted candidates were not talking about...but were planning to act upon.  I also wondered who was buying all the promotion. A number of candidates became names everyone knew - because media was saturated with their ads.

    The Carrick Flynn promotion - with one source paying $10 million - is a bit scary. He's kind of a blank slate, and there's not much info about his background, etc. The well-produced ads do not mention the billionaire funding them, or what he might expect from his candidate after buying the new House district.

    Some organizations may have targeted every state with an added House seat. Or some may have targeted Oregon because the redistricting could be a chance to elect a 2nd Republican House member from Oregon.

    Another, less-likely factor might be that Nick Kristof tried to run for Governor of Oregon this year, and his haters might have funded their PACs.

    Those ideas give me some hope that future elections won't be so noisy.


    While outside money spent the big bucks, (none / 0) (#190)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 18, 2022 at 09:22:18 PM EST
    Nancy Pelosi's PAC donated a million to a candidate, who you describe as a blank slate, in order to deny a Hispanic woman a chance to win a seat in the House. Her crime, she supports universal, affordable healthcare, $15 minimum wage, women's and workers rights. She is too progressive for the Democratic Party and must be defeated.

    From what I have (none / 0) (#191)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 19, 2022 at 08:52:02 AM EST
    read that was about a blue seat because now Cook Political Report has flipped the district from lean D to toss up due to the candidate being too far left for the district.

    Yep, the things she wants are really awful (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by MO Blue on Thu May 19, 2022 at 09:31:59 AM EST
    Who needs affordable healthcare, the ability to buy medication at a fair price, a living wage and for women to control their own bodies. Horrible, horrible leftist ideas which might just generate a lot of enthusiasm if the corporate Dems quite portraying them and the politicians who support them as too far left and out of the mainstream.

    Carrick Flynn has lived outside of the US for most of his adult life and has only taken the time to vote twice since he was 18. He couldn't even bother to vote in 2020 against Trump. His only issue is pandemic awareness which isn't something that is the top priority to moderate and conservative voters.

    Please explain to me why Democratic voters would be enthusiastic to take time to vote for him, especially after the party seriously ticked off women and Hispanic voters.  Almost all of his funding came from PACs and not from average voters. He was going to win this seat? Maybe in corporate Dems dreams.


    The healthcare (none / 0) (#196)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 19, 2022 at 10:16:53 AM EST
    stance of some candidates is a problem for voters. here is his stances. He appears to support some of the same issues. So it's not entirely an either or situation. To say that he doesn't support the right to choose is not being honest. Obviously he doesn't support all the same issues as his opponent. If the voters reject her in November then you'll know she was too far left.

    Did I say that he did not support a woman's (5.00 / 1) (#201)
    by MO Blue on Thu May 19, 2022 at 03:10:31 PM EST
    right to choose?  No, I did not. To indicate that my comment even referenced his position on the issue of a woman's right to choose is totally dishonest.

    If the she doesn't win  in November, that does not mean that Flynn had a chance in h£ll to win because he would be to her right. That is strictly a false premise. There is a very good chance he would lose by a larger margin since he has little support among Democratic voters.

    Flynn doesn't care enough to even vote. He out spent Andrea Salinas by millions of dollars and didn't even break 19% as of the last count. Democratic voters did not buy what he was selling in May. Why do you think that they were going to rush out to vote for him in November?


    Flynn's positions, as written (none / 0) (#197)
    by Jack E Lope on Thu May 19, 2022 at 01:51:28 PM EST
    ...appeared to be a collection of statements that polled best with Oregon voters.

    The early ads that were purchased on Flynn's behalf did not mention abortion at all, and the omission of the issue from his list made some wonder if the person spending so much has an agenda about abortion.  Once lots of people began to question that, a new round of ads came along to clarify his pro-choice stance. Plus, the issue was added to his website.

    Once I saw the map, I thought this new district gave Republicans a shot at another seat - not the guaranteed-Dem thing that Republicans were claiming.

    Most of the territory in this new Oregon district was part of Kurt Schrader's (Blue Dog D - OR) old district, and they kept re-electing the pro-choice, fiscally-conservative Schrader.

    That leads me to think that Salinas may not draw the voters to elect a Democrat as the first to be the House Representative of the 6th District of Oregon.


    Well (none / 0) (#199)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 19, 2022 at 02:30:15 PM EST
    her views would seem to not be a good fit with this district then. Salinas probably has a shot if the GOP nominates a Trumper not a liberal Republican.

    I think it means (none / 0) (#147)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue May 17, 2022 at 08:58:15 PM EST
    we pick up a seat.

    It looks like Oz (none / 0) (#156)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 18, 2022 at 07:32:04 AM EST
    That would be good, I think.  For us.

    Oz (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 18, 2022 at 08:40:52 AM EST
    with the Trump endorsement and with all his baggage definitely would be easier to beat than McCormick. With McCormick I worry he would cut into margins in the suburbs vs. Fetterman.

    It looks to me like recount territory (none / 0) (#157)
    by Peter G on Wed May 18, 2022 at 08:31:09 AM EST
    Too close to call. Can't wait for the evidence of vote fraud by the Tr*mpers to come out!

    This is another cliffhanger (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 18, 2022 at 09:50:36 AM EST
    With 93% of precincts reporting, Lee (PA 12)holds a 446-vote lead over Irwin.  AIPAC affiliated PAC spent big bucks to defeat her.

    I'm not a fan of AIPAC and really hope that Summer Lee pulls this off.


    We are (none / 0) (#159)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 18, 2022 at 08:41:56 AM EST
    not even done voting here in Ga and one candidate Candiss Taylor is already saying Brian Kemp stole the GOP nomination.

    Hopefully Mehmet (none / 0) (#160)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 18, 2022 at 08:51:33 AM EST
    will squeak by and that won't be necessary

    You mean (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by Peter G on Wed May 18, 2022 at 10:48:16 AM EST
    Mehmet Hussein Oz?

    I hope someone is working (5.00 / 3) (#169)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 18, 2022 at 10:57:00 AM EST
    on an "Oz - The Great And Powerful" political ad with Trump as the man behind the curtain.

    Actually, I think that cuts the wrong way (none / 0) (#171)
    by Peter G on Wed May 18, 2022 at 11:12:07 AM EST
    No significant number of Democrats would prefer him to Fetterman, all things being equal, that would need to be persuaded against voting for him because of the Tr*mp endorsement. But I figure that quite a lot of R-base voters would not want to vote for him over Fetterman (a "regular guy") because of any or all of several reasons (Oz not really being a Pennsylvanian, changed to professing "conservative" views only recently, Muslim) but could nevertheless be persuaded to do so because of the Tr*mp endorsement. So, all in all, that ad (while obviously clever) would be counter-productive, it seems to me.

    I'm sure there are states (none / 0) (#186)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 18, 2022 at 08:54:30 PM EST
    where Trump pulling the strings might be winning message statewide.  I don't think PA is one of them.

    But (none / 0) (#187)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 18, 2022 at 08:57:21 PM EST
    I absolutely do think last night's primary winner for the republican candidate for governor puts Trump on the ballot in the state

    My advise to Dems would be to lean into that message.


    Irony is not dead (none / 0) (#161)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 18, 2022 at 08:52:10 AM EST
    On the twitter machine

    stuart stevens
     · 10h
    So the Republican #PASen R primary will likely be decided by the late mail votes that all the Republican candidates say should not have been counted in 2020 and were the illegal votes Biden used to steal Pa.


    In Pennsylvania, a mail-in ballot is not valid (none / 0) (#166)
    by Peter G on Wed May 18, 2022 at 10:45:56 AM EST
    unless received by the Elections Office by the time the polls close on election day, with the sole exception of overseas military ballots (of which, of course, there are very few). The only potential delay is that the mail-ins get counted last. The two envelopes have to be opened, and all the mail-ins then fed manually into the scanners. So, at the latest, today some time.

    In the elaborate compromise legislation (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by Peter G on Wed May 18, 2022 at 07:47:16 PM EST
    that gave us mail-in voting in PA two and a half years ago, the envelopes cannot be opened, much less counted, until the polls open on election day. ACLU challenged these nonsense rules, but the state Supreme Court upheld them. Dumb is not necessarily illegal, much less unconstitutional, was the essence of their reasoning.

    In Oregon, this is the 1st statewide election (none / 0) (#175)
    by Jack E Lope on Wed May 18, 2022 at 03:02:55 PM EST
    ...with a grace period for mailed ballots. It was enacted in response to news stories about Louis DeJoy's management of USPS. Now, ballots must be postmarked by election day, and will be counted if received within 7 days after election day.  

    Oregon also opens mailed-in ballots before election day, but no counts are released. With early ballots, one county discovered that a lot of their ballots were not machine-readable due to printing problems, and they have a laborious process to perform for each one.  That county is split between two US House districts, and will delay the final counts for both.


    Oz ahead by 2500 votes, with (none / 0) (#185)
    by Peter G on Wed May 18, 2022 at 08:35:37 PM EST
    around 25,000 to 30,000 R votes left to count. It takes a margin of around 6000 votes (i.e., more than 1/2%) to avoid a recount, I am reading.

    Boy Bush just stepped in it (none / 0) (#188)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 18, 2022 at 09:00:01 PM EST
    If I (none / 0) (#194)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 19, 2022 at 09:23:56 AM EST
    never see or hear from George W. again it will be too soon. Same for the orange guy. Unfortunately conservatives are still in the thrall of the orange guy but seem to want nothing to do with Bush II the failure.

    Bill in cleanup mode (none / 0) (#200)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 19, 2022 at 03:04:16 PM EST

    Barr in Talks with January 6 Committee
    May 19, 2022 at 3:17 pm EDT By Taegan Goddard 28 Comments

    "President Trump's attorney general Bill Barr is in active discussions with the Jan. 6th investigative committee to appear for a formal transcribed interview," Axios reports.

    "Barr is likely to cooperate with the committee, according to a source familiar with his thinking."

    Monkeypox!!! Something new to befuddle us... (none / 0) (#202)
    by desertswine on Thu May 19, 2022 at 03:42:11 PM EST
    Jump up, bend down. Shake your arms all around. Jump up, bend down. Hands on your arms and turn around. Spin left. Spin right. Hands on your arms and hold on tight.