Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Is it irresponsible to speculate? It is irresponsible not to.

Wow, I can’t imagine what it was like to comment in morse code.

We are builders in a constant struggle with destroyers. let’s win this.

But frankly mr. cole, I’ll be happier when you get back to telling us to go fuck ourselves.

The cruelty is the point; the law be damned.

Pessimism assures that nothing of any importance will change.

Reality always lies in wait for … Democrats.

Usually wrong but never in doubt

Good luck with your asparagus.

Sitting here in limbo waiting for the dice to roll

It’s always darkest before the other shoe drops.

Peak wingnut was a lie.

I’m going back to the respite thread.

Republican obstruction dressed up as bipartisanship. Again.

I can’t take this shit today. I just can’t.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

A last alliance of elves and men. also pet photos.

Optimism opens the door to great things.

Proof that we need a blogger ethics panel.

“But what about the lurkers?”

Battle won, war still ongoing.

This really is a full service blog.

Wow, you are pre-disappointed. How surprising.

This fight is for everything.

You are here: Home / Archives for Civil Rights / Women's Rights

Women's Rights

Friday Morning Open Thread: Readership Capture

by | 282 Comments

This post is in: , , , ,

Lookback to NBA Cares, February 2020:

Lots of serious, constructive topics I *want* to post about, but it’s too early in the morning for most of you and I’m on my way to bed…

Meanwhile: Our Failed Media Village Idiots…

Friday Morning Open Thread: Readership CapturePost + Comments (282)

Madam Vice President Open Thread: But Her Emails Headphones…

by | 30 Comments

This post is in: , , ,

show full post on front page

Madam Vice President Open Thread: <em>But Her <del>Emails</del> Headphones… </em>Post + Comments (30)

The SC(R)OTUS ‘Choices for Me, But Not for Thee’ Option: Brood ‘Em, Birth ‘Em, Drop ‘Em Off

by | 139 Comments

This post is in: , ,

It is a fact of life that no Republican can imagine a scenario that has not personally affected them, so it can be assumed that Judge Comey Barrett herself had uncomplicated pregnancies and ‘easy’ deliveries (not to mention the best prenatal care money could buy). Presumably she has been able to explain to the children she bore that they were never considered potentially disposable commodities, unlike the offspring of lesser vessels. And we have a pretty good idea how Judge Comey Barrett thinks about her adoptive children, because at her confirmation hearing she described them the way normal people talk about rescue puppies: The most pitiful, neglected little things — but see how loving & happy they are now!

But Chief Justice Roberts and his wife also have adoptive children, two adorable blonds who must be in their twenties now. At the time of his confirmation hearings, there was some public bitterness among his fellow CHUZ LYFE!!! believers that the Roberts were insufficiently committed to the cause of ensuring a steady market of healthy white newborns for eager adoptive parents, because that well-to-do lawyer couple ‘just happened’ to have found not one but two Irish nationals choosing to give birth in a Latin American country with lax cross-border adoption laws, avoiding the much more forbidding rules then in place on the Auld Sod. Perhaps the Roberts children take comfort in knowing that their parents were willing to go the extra mile(s) to obtain the closest purebred matches to build their happy family. If one must be a commodity, surely better to be an expensive, high-value commodity.

show full post on front page

The SC(R)OTUS <em>‘Choices for Me, But Not for Thee’</em> Option: Brood ‘Em, Birth ‘Em, Drop ‘Em OffPost + Comments (139)

Sure, it could work…

by | 187 Comments

This post is in: , ,

A CNN legal analyst asks a question:

John Roberts has a plan that would gut — yet save — Roe v. Wade. Can it work?

The answer is yes. We know because Roberts has done this before, “saving” the Voting Rights Act while extracting its teeth. An excerpt from the article:

By his questions during the intense session that ran nearly two hours, Roberts suggested the high court reverse a significant part of Roe v. Wade but preserve some constitutional right to abortion. Roberts would end the existing protection for a woman’s abortion decision before viability — that is when the fetus can survive outside the womb — at about 23 weeks. He suggested he would let states ban abortion at 15 weeks of pregnancy, as Mississippi has done in the case before the justices, but that he would not go further to completely ban abortion.

This is exactly how a reactionary “institutionalist” would approach it — strip away well-established rights and deliver a solid victory to the fanatics while leaving a fig leaf in place. The other five “conservatives” — including the three appointed by the twice-impeached, two-time popular vote loser who tried to overthrow the government — seem less inclined toward such fig leaves. But maybe they’ll come around.

Roberts should point out to them that “soft” autocracies like Orbán’s in Hungary (so admired by Fox News personalities) are generally less risky to those in power. They still have elections, and they generally maintain the trappings of democracy while concentrating real power in a single party’s hands. The question is, will Roberts’ more fanatical colleagues be able to resist spiking the ball. We’ll see.

Open thread.

Sure, it could work…Post + Comments (187)

Watching Roe Go (Open Thread)

by | 108 Comments

This post is in: , , ,

As you’re doubtless aware, the United States Supreme Court is hearing arguments in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case right now. If you’re an egg-bearer, chances are the court’s religious fanatics will remove your constitutional right to bodily autonomy this term.

My guess is they’ll strike down the insane Texas pregnancy bounty hunter law (which is in effect right now and drastically altering real people’s lives in all kinds of ways) as a ruse to make a decision to uphold the Mississippi law seem more “moderate.” This court’s conservative fanatics are exquisitely sensitive to suggestions that they’re activists who are using raw judicial power to overturn precedent when it benefits Republicans and drive an unpopular conservative agenda.

I look forward to Justice Sotomayor’s fiery dissent.

Open thread.

Watching Roe Go (Open Thread)Post + Comments (108)

Late Night Open Thread: Update From the Leopards Eating Peoples’ Faces Party

by | 62 Comments

This post is in: , ,


In the womens’ defense, we all did some stupid things when we were in college. (I mean, during my freshman year, I briefly hung around a feminist group planning to start a lesbian separatist commune, until they expelled me for not having the correct attitude… )

Late Night Open Thread: Update From the <em>Leopards Eating Peoples’ Faces</em> PartyPost + Comments (62)

Gosar the Gosarian (Open Thread)

by | 239 Comments

This post is in: , , , ,

Congresswoman Jackie Speier, who knows something about deadly cults, is introducing a resolution (cosponsored by several other Dems) to censure Rep. Paul Gosar, the raving kook who recently tweeted a cartoon meme depicting himself killing Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and attacking the POTUS. Here’s an excerpt from the announcement:

“For a Member of Congress to post a manipulated video on his social media accounts depicting himself killing Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and attacking President Biden is a clear cut case for censure. For that Member to post such a video on his official Instagram account and use his official congressional resources in the House of Representatives to further violence against elected officials goes beyond the pale, ” the Members said. “As the events of January 6th have shown, such vicious and vulgar messaging can and does foment actual violence. Violence against women in politics is a global phenomenon meant to silence women and discourage them from seeking positions of authority and participating in public life, with women of color disproportionately impacted. Minority Leader McCarthy’s silence is tacit approval and just as dangerous.”

Good, and I’m especially pleased they called out Minority “Leader” Kevin McCarthy, whose gutless toadying makes a mockery of his title. But I wonder what else can be done? I think it takes a 2/3rds majority to expel a member, and there aren’t that many (or maybe any) decent Republicans in the House. Perhaps it’s worth getting reps on the record with a vote to expel their squinty lunatic colleague anyway; I don’t know.

I’ve heard Congress is exempt from regulations that compel businesses to ensure a safe work environment for employees. That’s a pity.

Charlie Pierce wrote something the other day that rang true for me: “The level of violence humming barely below the surface of our politics is intensifying.” Do y’all feel it too?

Open thread.

 

Gosar the Gosarian (Open Thread)Post + Comments (239)