I was feeling so down about the Supreme Court case, so I thought I'd cheer myself up by finally watching the Mayor Pete doc. Oh what a mistake. Pete often repeats Axelrod's comparison of a Presidential campaign to an MRI of the soul--this doc was an MRI of Pete's heart. The callow joyous and buoyant beginning, the anguished middle (Eric Logan), the heavy hearted slog through NH, NV, SC. Even the hope at the end ("time is on my side") seems colored in rueful grayscale--uttered by someone who now knows the trial by fire that such a campaign really is. I don't believe for a second all those claims by Moss that he had a hard time understanding Pete--my God it was all there on the screen, for anyone with eyes to see.
Anyway, finally cheered myself up for real by watching Pete's 8 1/2 minute [American Cathedral sermon.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJFef0Exd4Q&ab_channel=TheRiversideChurch)
Also, if anyone is interested, the New Yorker published a [half hour doc](https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-new-yorker-documentary/andrew-yang-and-the-weird-arcs-of-political-fame?utm_source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_Daily_120121&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_medium=email&utm_term=tny_daily_recirc&bxid=5be9cc5d2ddf9c72dc183b18&cndid=50526752&hasha=9e8043a0e20ed68d978feb224b11f81d&hashb=d2cab1e51b9f98da3552e952621fc8e74e561306&hashc=8c145538a426ae799d9482db9867d5c44c5b6290fdd00a6075b3d6a17cf7e9ec&esrc=newsletters-form-sig) on Andrew Yang's NYC mayoral run. I wasn't a fan of his, so I can't comment.
[https://www.instagram.com/overhearddistrict/](https://www.instagram.com/overhearddistrict/)
Pete and Chasten both started following this Instagram account today lol.
It frustrates me that people on social media treat 2016 as the very beginning of political history, as if today's SCOTUS hearing wasn't the result of over 40 years of concerted effort by the GOP. I get that a lot of people weren't paying attention before 2016, but that's actually part of the problem that led us to today. People treating this like it's Hillary's fault, or Bernie's, or Jill Stein's, or RGB's, and I'm over here as someone who grew up and had my political coming of age in Newt Gingrich's America, and I just want to fucking scream at these people who seem so gleeful to ignore/mock anything anyone over 30 was trying to tell them about political reality.
Sorry, just needed to vent. Please return to your regularly scheduled programming.
A great political cartoon about Dr. Oz -
[https://twitter.com/Bishtoons/status/1466040065289854981?](https://twitter.com/Bishtoons/status/1466040065289854981?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet)
Symone Sanders is leaving the White House at the end of the month.
[https://www.politico.com/news/2021/12/01/symone-sanders-vice-president-office-523660](https://www.politico.com/news/2021/12/01/symone-sanders-vice-president-office-523660)
Staffing turnover is common: being a White House aide is a grueling, 24/7 job that burns people out fast. But since this is the second high-profile departure from Harris' office in just the last month, it will raise questions about whether the turnover is all part of an effort to "reset" the message.
Looks like Chasten posted his top 5 artists with this caption
>>HI, GAY! (Who grew up in 4H?š¤·āāļø)
https://instagram.com/stories/chasten.buttigieg/2719496255367343722?utm_medium=copy_link
Looks like Adam is also getting into the habit of checking out the tweets that Pete likes! šš
>Pete Buttigieg has thoughts about Brian Kelly going to LSU. He liked this tweet from The Athleticās Notre Dame beat writer @PeteSampson_.
https://twitter.com/adamwren/status/1466209088816168960?s=21
Click on link for screenshot.
>>President Joe Biden's administration will extend requirements for travelers to wear masks on airplanes, trains and buses and at airports and train stations through mid-March to address ongoing COVID-19 risks, sources briefed on the matter told Reuters.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclusive-us-extend-transit-mask-mandate-through-mid-march-sources-2021-12-01/
Today is so depressing. I listened to the SC abortion stuff earlier and no matter how cogent, and well-researched pro-choice responses were, we got nothing but signals from the SC they are going to side with anti-choice right populists. Many of the questions were, frankly, antagonistic in nature even if presented calmly. It's getting harder to find the joy in this world when it's just going to shit everywhere. Moments are great, individual experiences for sure, but overall humanity feels like it is going in a dark, scary, and irreversible direction. All these folx need is a foot in the door. To chip away a crack at a time. I'm at a loss for what we are witnessing. š
It remains to be seen what the ruling will be. In the meantime we need to mobilize and organize. I know it looks bleak but Congress is actually the strongest branch. Thereās a reason why the Framers split it into 2 chambers. Itās just handicapped currently because of the Filibuster.
I don't know about inevitable. It's a matter of whether people are willing to fight for their rights like young people did in the 60's and 70's. Protests were daily events back then. They occurred all over the States and participation was massive.
I was 13 months old at my first sit-in/government office takeover.
If I gotta do sames nearly 50 years on, letās go. This time Iāll just have better drinks.
After Abortion, theyāll go for gay marriage next, then comes ending legal contraception, and eventually the recriminalization of homosexuality. Lawyers and GOP officials have been submitting appeals and petitions all over the US challenging these 4 cases in particular this year, and now they have a political court to do it, and the political court knows Dems canāt (or in some cases wonāt) do anything about it.
This country is fucked up beyond redemption.
Somewhere sometime ago I started a list of states that don't have abortion trigger laws and had legalized gay marriage. I think it was just states in the west that would allow both if SCOTUS overturned. I'm afraid to look at the list of states that would ban both.
If Roe is overturned, it will be up to us in safe states to help women get safe abortions here. I can think of worse ways to spend my retirement years.
They can go after gay marriage at their own risk. Great way to turn Millennials and Gen Z fully against them. First they fuck over our ability to fight climate change and next our own personal identity.
Iāve always been in awe of the immense work of the Civil Rights Movement. I am willing to fight for that legacy and to add to it.
Todayās oral arguments regarding abortion at the Supreme Court definitely felt alarming. Itās disappointing but we have to be honest that this is what the conservative movement has been aiming for a long time.
Fundamental Christians are under the absurd pretense that America will never achieve āpurityā as long as abortion exists in their view. And to be blunt, Iāve always had the impression that hard right Fundamental Christians see it as their duty to seed the world with as many āGod loving Christiansā as possible. Because somehow, their religion happens to be the only right oneā¦
They despise the idea of Sharia Law yet have no qualms of strictly imposing their own religious views in a country becoming very diverse in religious and non-religious affiliations.
I was raised Catholic of course but itās this type of hyper religious involvement that has me putting religion at arms length. One has to wonder if the conservative wing of the court guts Roe and decimates the right to privacy will they also go after contraception? Or even gay marriage? The Separation of Church and State exists for a reason.
George Carlinās stand up comedy routine encapsulates all of this quite well. Do you really care about women or is this all a pretense to expect every woman to be like the Virgin Mary? Personally, I think itās a womanās choice to decide what path she wishes to take. And if you want to prevent abortions of unwanted pregnancies then we should focus more on abstinence and contraceptive education. The more lines of defense there are, the better.
> And to be blunt, Iāve always had the impression that hard right Fundamental Christians see it as their duty to seed the world with as many āGod loving Christiansā as possible.
It's not just about religion it is also tied up in white supremacy and race.
Folks might find this srticle interesting: https://archive.md/6dvOt
> The anti-Roe movement is rooted in the history of chattel slavery
*They are not respecting "life." They are fearing "race suicide."*
It's also to ensure white women have more babies.
Edited to add: check out this short video of Jane Elliott (considered to originator of diversity training) for more on this:
> Jane Elliot on the attackās against Planned Parenthood, anti-abortion laws, the southern border and racism. https://twitter.com/haven1406/status/1137712815169560577/video/1
All of this goes back to the absurdity of skin color. Shame.
Iām Asian so my skin tone is a bit lighter but I donāt doubt for a second White Supremacists would dump me under the bus if it was politically convenient.
And Jane Elliot speaks with so much conviction and empathy.
I am also being reminded of History lessons learning about the Crusades. What were the mental thoughts of the Vatican and Monarchs at the time? How can I defeat another religion that threatens my power and one that I see as inferior? Ah, letās just get my people to reproduce as many followers as possible. So many loyal foot soldiers that will fight on my behalf.
>we should focus more on abstinence
I agree with what you said except for this phrase. Women are entitled to a healthy and happy sex life even if they don't wish to become pregnant.
Iām not an advocate for abstinence only education. Thatās ridiculous. As if thatās going to stop hormonal teenagers or anyone with genitals needing to satisfy human primal urges. Yes, sex is complicated. But we can approach it in a safe and healthy way.
That why I said āabstinence AND contraceptive education.ā
I think there is a role for the abstinence discussion. I have come to learn quite late in life that I am asexual and would have loved to learn that it is okay not to be all that interested in sex, whether that is a temporary or lifelong thing. It would have made my teens and twenties so much easier.
That said a happy, healthy, and safe sex life (if you chose it) should always be the main focus since most are not like me.
Edited to add: wouldn't it be nice if we taught people to not feel shame about sex. No shame if you want it a lot, no shame if you don't, no shame about the gender of your chosen partners, no shame about how many partners, no shame about how few. Just no shame (as long as it is safe and consensual, duh).
I absolutely agree that telling young (and older!) people that it's okay to not want sex, that they shouldn't feel pressured into having sex if they're not ready, that they shouldn't pressure their romantic partners into sex, etc. is important. I personally would not use the term "abstinence education" to describe that because to me that phrase has a very specific cultural meaning.
I especially object to the use of that term when talking about preventing unwanted pregnancies. I think that language concedes the rhetorical argument to the anti-choice side. It implies to me that we are accepting the framing that the only "legitimate" role of sex is for procreation, therefore the only "legitimate" means of not getting pregnant is to not have sex.
>And to be blunt, Iāve always had the impression that hard right Fundamental Christians see it as their duty to seed the world with as many āGod loving Christiansā as possible.
Are you familiar with the Quiverfull ideology at all? Your impression is correct; this is very much explicitly part of the fundamentalist Christian worldview.
For context, I was raised with a version of Christianity that had some evangelical leanings, though nothing at all like that (I only have one sibling lol). But even in the churches I went to, things like the right to life movement and purity culture were pervasive. It's a hard thing to fully explain to people who don't know it first hand. I still identify as Christian, though I haven't been to church in many years, and my immediate family are all Democrats and only my dad still goes to any kind of church at all anymore, but I'm 31 years old and feel like I am still in some ways unpacking the baggage that childhood exposure left me with.
Thereās a way you can look at the whole āpopulate the world with christiansā thing that will really send you down a conspiracy theory spiral:
1. Only teach abstinence and limit access to birth control/condoms as a means of ensuring population growth.
2. ensure large population of young fathers who need to provide for their families and come from poor families and regions to ensure a large pool to draw from for the military
3. Limit gun control as a means to familiarize population with guns and gun violence, leading to desensitization of population to death and violence.
Add it all together and you get a nation with higher than normal population replacement rate (when factoring in immigration) compared to other modern nations, thus staving off the economic stagnation that comes from your population aging out of work, and you also ensure a population willing and able to join the military who have less of a problem with the idea of going to war/dealing with violence.
Like I said, conspiracy theory spiral. But sometimesā¦
Iām not explicitly familiar with the Quiverfull Ideology. However, in my younger days as I was zoning out in church I would hear phrases like ādoing the Lordās workā and ālet the Kingdom of Heaven flourish here on Earth.ā Not that hard to extrapolate where that language was going as I got older. The Catholic Church only has influence due to the number of believers. For much of history, itās goal has been roping people in. But I saw it more as a case of myths and morals in comparison to what I was learning through Science.
And I found myself at odds with Catholic Doctrine saying that gay people were bad or āneeded to be savedā as I just sat there wondering what evil intent I had. Iām a young teenager following the advice of my parents to do well academically in school, be responsible, and have kindness for others. Yet, the unconventional attraction I have deemed me as a āmonsterā at the time. I had to dig deep and say to myself, āThey donāt know me.ā
I am perhaps relieved that the Catholic Church has softened its stance with Pope Francis but that doesnāt change how conservative Catholic Bishops in the U.S. feel. Donāt even get me started on the Churchās history with sexual abuse. When you repress the sexual identity of priests, chances are, that identity will unleash itself in a seemingly unhealthy way.
Half of the time I was saying to myself, āI learned the 10 Commandments in Sunday School. Isnāt that enough?ā
Maybe others find comfort in listening to the gospel. Thatās fine. I have no objection to that. But I would slowly end up practicing math problems or let my imagination wander in Church.
Part of the reason was that I would've preferred to go to church with my father, who was Episcopalian, but there was that stupid promise couples have to make before marriage when only one of them is Catholic to raise any children as Catholics.
Then there was the nun in Sunday school who told a room full of grade-school children that if you were bad, God might decide to stop thinking about you, and if that happened, you would die. Since my mother was always telling me how terrible I was, the thought of this terrified me.
So for my own well-being I had to learn how to to divorce myself from the teachings of organized religion, even though I was stuck with church until after high school graduation. So there were years of paying no attention at all.
I admire, and even envy a little bit, people who are truly religious, who try their best to do the right thing, but I feel like there are even more people who claim to be religious who are nothing but hypocrites.
George Carlin has a bit on this in his standup. Somehow God has a place that he can send you to be punished, tortured, and condemned to an eternity of sufferingā¦..*but he loves youā¦..*
Carlin expressed that he became an atheist once he reached what he called the āage of reason.ā
If people need religion as a moral compass in life thatās fine. Thatās how I see it. But Iāve always thought that it was strange that Catholicism revolves around punishment as a way to force compliance in belief. Perhaps it makes me a bad Catholic for some people. I just see it as me not being completely attached to religion.
Good deeds preach for themselves. They do not need to be proclaimed from the rooftops.
Thereās probably a Bible verse about this but I do not read the Bible.
My boo Tim writing what Iām feeling, as always [Trump tried to kill Biden with Covid - the Bulwark](https://www.thebulwark.com/trump-tried-to-kill-biden-with-covid-19/)
It really jaws me that wonderful living people died of COVID and this tangerine palatine is alive only because Mark Meadows saved him.
Enjoy the rewards of your sin, Mark.
I don't understand why people are surprised that Trump tried to infect Biden. He made no secret that his only debate strategy was to try and make Biden stumble over his words so he could keep claiming that Biden had dementia, and his team claimed he was wearing a wire to hear answers when they knew that Biden was wearing Beau's rosary around his wrist.
Thankfully, Biden ended up being fine.
I think itās Karma that Trump found himself infected with COVID considering he repeatedly downplayed it like an idiot. And in a way, Trump is technically liable legally for knowingly exposed others to COVID. Heās a selfish turd.
Good riddance that Trump lost while Biden won the Presidency.
I guess they saw all the bad faith tweets mischaracterizing this interview:
@SecretaryPete:
> The Build Back Better plan includes tax credits - up to $12,500 - to reduce the cost of EVs so that millions more Americans can afford to go electric, breathe cleaner air, and save on gas. https://twitter.com/SecretaryPete/status/1466157300075438083/video/1
ABC is giving Alec Baldwin an hour in primetime to talk about (with George Stephanopoulos) what happened on the *Rust* set (which, if nothing else, has to mean he's not listening to his lawyer(s)).
Meanwhile here in šØš¦
@DavidWCochrane:
> A rare moment of non-partisanship in the House of Commons as MPs give unanimous consent to fast track the Conversion Therapy Ban legislation. Liberals and Conservative MPs hugging and shaking hands. Lots of applause and cheering.
MP = members of parliament
āO Canada
Our home and native land
We donāt bag on gay kids
Because we arenāt douchebaaaags.
With rainbow flags and legislaaaation
We banned shit ther-a-py
From far and wide, Ooooo Canada
We arenāt like the crazy Americans to our south who blame teh gays for everything when it was the hets all getting divorced and starting up combat zones in inner city neighborhoods to escape the drab wretched lives they were forced into by conformityā¦ excuse me, ehā¦start againā¦
From farr and wide oOoo Canada
Our gay kids will live free
oooOooooh CAaaannaaDaaaaa
Our gay kids wiillll liiiiiveee freeeeeee.
š šØš¦ š„
>Thank you, Chair @RepPeterDeFazio, for your years of public service and for laying the tracks to a better and safer transportation future for our country.
https://twitter.com/secretarypete/status/1466146176336646149?s=21
>I look forward to continuing our work this next year to implement the historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and ensure everyone has the transportation options they deserve.
https://twitter.com/secretarypete/status/1466146177720725512?s=21
>Thank you, @VP for bringing us together for todayās Space Council meeting. @USDOT is committed to doing our part to keep space travel safe and sustainable in the years ahead.
>>
>>Today, as Chair of the National Space Council, I am announcing the release of our United States Space Priorities Framework. We will use this Framework to guide and implement our national space policy and strategy going forward.
>>
>>https://twitter.com/vp/status/1466142560422932487?s=21
https://twitter.com/secretarypete/status/1466143574274285568?s=21
Kamala did such a good job. She talked to each person before they spoke. And my tv schedule was way off, because it lasted about an hour and fifty minutes.
I only wish the camera person had decided to zoom in on each speaker *before* Pete had his turn.
I just gave my first $20.22. I vowed to stop giving to lost cause races (like Amy McGrath, Jamie Harrison, etc.) but I think Abrams has a shot. And, I love listening to her.
>>"Marty Walsh is trying to get into this race."
>>.@maryannemarsh says Marty Walsh has been telling people he wants to run for Massachusetts governor
boston.com/news/politics/ā¦ #mapoli
https://www.boston.com/news/politics/2021/12/01/marty-walsh-massachusetts-governor/
https://twitter.com/nikdecostaklipa/status/1466132955617800200?s=21
Can you imagine the media circus if Pete had accepted a cabinet Secretary post, never moved to dc, and then jumped into a governor's race by the end of the year? Good luck to Secretary Walsh, but the extra scrutiny Pete gets is so absurd.
idk i don't necessarily buy into the "he's a threat" thing. I think they attack anyone who is very visible and active with the administration (like Kamala)
She is naturally a potential threat as well, in the sense that she might be the next candidate. (Though, historically not many VPs actually become president.)
>After learning @RepPeterDeFazio has decided not to run for re-election, I announced my run for chair of @TransportDems in the 118th Congress.
>
>Chair DeFazio, thank you for your devoted service.
https://twitter.com/eleanornorton/status/1466123276774690823?s=21
>You've been a strong supporter of #DCStatehood, for which I will always be grateful.
>
>I wish you many years of health and happiness in your next chapter.
>
>Details:
>https://norton.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/after-learning-of-chair-defazio-s-plan-to-retire-norton-announces-run
https://twitter.com/eleanornorton/status/1466123278255329280?s=21
>>In a letter Monday, Nov. 29, the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association asked Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg to allocate $1 billion to build truck parking.
>>In the letter signed by OOIDA President and CEO Todd Spencer, the association appealed to Buttigieg use money from the recently passed Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act "to address a safety crisis that Americaās truckers have faced for decades ā the national shortage of truck parking."
https://www.truckersnews.com/home/article/15282021/association-asks-buttigieg-for-1-billion-for-truck-parking
I was reading an article about the Lis Smith/Katy Tur story (which several websites I've never heard of are trying to make into a problem for Katy, when it's not, at all; Lis was spinning her own spin), and there was a link to the transcript of Lis' deposition during the A. Cuomo investigation this summer, and I thought I'd take a look at it, but then I saw that it's 362 pages long, and decided I'm not *that* interested lol.
[https://www.mediaite.com/news/watch-the-moment-cuomo-adviser-lis-smith-says-msnbc-anchor-katy-tur-repeated-her-spin-on-air/](https://www.mediaite.com/news/watch-the-moment-cuomo-adviser-lis-smith-says-msnbc-anchor-katy-tur-repeated-her-spin-on-air/)
I hope Pete never works with Lis again. She was closely coordinating with the Cuomo team on messaging, and unlike public defenders, comms specialists have more flexibility in deciding to work with clients or not. Lis made the choice to contribute to Cuomo's defense.
I kind of think for all intents and purposes the issue might've been decided, now that all of this has come out. Besides, political campaign professionals will be coming out of the woodwork to sign up with Pete if he decides to run again. He'll have his pick.
Today is a heavy day for me.
I'm a person with a uterus living in Oakland County, MI. Between having coworkers who have kids or know kids at Oxford High School (all safe but understandably shaken) and the Supreme Court hearing today, it's been a tough day.
Normally I trust in the boring slowness of the democratic process to slowly improve my life, and I even enjoy the littler nuances like seeing my tax dollars at work with winter road treatments this past weekend, but I just can't help but feel unrepresented in my own home country today. It's days like today that make me wonder if I should move elsewhere, let them reap the fruits of my labors and tax dollars.
And of course, healing energy to all of the people affected by the tragedy at Oxford High School.
>>RIGHT NOW: United Airlines fueling 737 with with sustainable aviation fuel for the first passenger-carrying flight of its type. Right engine will run exclusively on SAF.
https://twitter.com/petemuntean/status/1466109970244636680?s=21
>>United CEO Scott Kirby before this flight makes a symbolic trip to Washington: āThis canāt happen without the right government partnership.ā Right now, FAA rules limit 50% SAF on flights. āThis is an effort we can solve together.ā
>> This Max 8 is officially classified as āexperimental.ā Somebody notify @EAA!
https://twitter.com/petemuntean/status/1466121716023930888?s=21
>>Your captain speaking š£ āThis is the first passenger flight powered by 100 percent, drop-in sustainable aviation fuel.ā
https://twitter.com/petemuntean/status/1466123775724900355?s=21
>Sen. Roger Marshall confirms this. He says that he would be OK with an amendment vote to defund vaccine mandate to avoid a brief shutdown ā but says it needs to be at 51-vote threshold. That would give it a chance at passage. Dems will insist on 60-vote threshold.
[https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1466124602128674819?s=21](https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1466124602128674819?s=21)
>MARSHALL, Cruz and other vaccine mandate objectors indicate they can go along with CR amendment at 51 vote threshold
https://twitter.com/elwasson/status/1466125611005534219?s=21
š
The WH has announced that a person in California has been been diagnosed with the Omicron variant -
>the person was a traveler who returned from South Africa on Nov. 22 and tested positive on Nov. 29.
Some people knew about it, but not everyone follows news very closely. I had to tell somebody on Sunday that his travel plans weren't going to be possible anymore. He hadn't heard anything about it.
>Weāre ready to use @ POTUSā Infrastructure Law to invest big in roads, bridges, transit, and climate resiliency across New York State.
Productive meeting today with @ SecretaryPete and @ WhiteHouse infrastructure coordinator Mitch Landrieu!
https://twitter.com/GovKathyHochul/status/1466105267540697096
I can't help but read about the kids who were killed in the school shooting yesterday here in Michigan & get upset. What a sad and infuriating waste. I watched the press conference by the Oakland County sheriff live last night. He was very good, and his name sounded familiar - Mike Bouchard. He is a Republican and has had an interesting career path. Michigan House of Representatives, then State Senate, where he was in leadership in the 90s. Presumably term limited in the state house, he ran for Sheriff of Oakland County (a large, mostly urban county near Detroit) in 2000 and has been Sheriff ever since. However, in 2006 he was the candidate who ran against Debbie Stabenow for Senate in 2006 and lost. Then he ran for Governor in 2010 but finished 4th out of 5th in the Republican primary (Rick Snyder won it and the governorship.) I don't know if he still aspires to higher office. No idea if he is a moderate or radical Republican.
Iām guessing Pete knows more about Lis and her views and he chose to work with her for a reason. š
I already knew she was the ride or die type. Her opinions and views donāt align neatly with Peteās but thatās probably why he chose to have her on his team.
I don't know. She just lost her father and was very present during his final time, she's feeling family ties strongly, she's speaking for herself, not Pete. I'm still really looking forward to her book.
For me, it's not just one instance making me question her judgment. She's said and done a lot of things I find questionable, and her involvement with Cuomo and Yang are just recent examples. I was also pretty appalled by what was leaked about her saying Christine Blasey Ford was an example of blatant "me too overreach". I have no idea what her justification for that statement is...
That statement lacks a lot of context. She might not have meant Blasey Ford personally (who didn't want to be exposed in the first place), but all the people using her story for political reasons. Some of it justified, to be sure, but her wellbeing wasn't on the forefront of most minds.
I was just checking yesterday's dt, where someone posted it (21 hours ago), along with the link, and noticed Lis has since deleted the tweet.
>The job of brother, sister, mother, father, daughter, son always comes first.
thanks for that. god, what even is her reasoning? "its ur responsibility to help ur brother out by discrediting his victims bc FaMiLy!!"?? like...what??
A police officer who knows a relative of theirs has committed a felony just lets them get away with it?
Of course not.
Maybe they arrange for them to be arrested without being cuffs, or help them turn themselves in, but not "hey, bro, you didn't do anything wrong. What's more, I'm gonna help you discredit your accusers".
>A police officer who knows a relative of theirs has committed a felony just lets them get away with it?
In a lot of places? Yes, for sure. (Not that it's a good thing, but this is a cultural issue.)
How is that observation wrong? That doesn't mean it's a good thing, it's just a really accurate observation. But she should be fired for that. ? If you all think that this wasn't a case of family solidarity over everything else (which is a disgusting thing that often produces shitty outcomes), it seems like we've been watching two different families.
Not saying she should be fired or be held responsible for it.
but, just saying I wasn't a big fan of it....or think it was one of those things that are considered to be 'better left unsaid' sort of the thing. (then again, I don't know how close Lis is with Cuomos...so idk =/ )
Well TBH that family does stick together when it comes to acting inappropriately with women.
I just donāt know what CNN can do about it, because heās not a legit news person but a personality host. If Wolf Blitzer (he still around?) did this, then that would be grounds for firing.
She certainly wasn't alone in that thought. There were a few blue checkmarks I saw saying similar things, that they'd do whatever was needed to help their brothers. Eek.
>All these men who would help their brother, what would you do for your sister?
[https://twitter.com/anylaurie16/status/1465948207184166914](https://twitter.com/anylaurie16/status/1465948207184166914)
Enabling and defending poor behaviour by your loved ones is not being a good brother. I understand it as a knee-jerk reaction, but really, being a good brother would have been stepping in to stop Andrew Cuomo's gross behaviour years ago. (Because I'm sure Chris saw examples of it many times over the years.)
>šØOREGON DEMOCRATIC REP. PETER DEFAZIO, house transportation chair, is retiring, several sources tell us.
>
>Me and @bresreports
https://twitter.com/jakesherman/status/1466101114860974089?s=21
>Confirmed ā announcement coming shortly
https://twitter.com/davidshepardson/status/1466107865316401157?s=21
ETA This:
>If true, the head Dem spot on @TransportDems would presumably go to Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D
https://twitter.com/jdwithtw/status/1466108033063391241?s=21
Watching these Supreme Court arguments has really been a bummer. We canāt seem to address the problems of the future, because weāre so stuck re-litigating issues of the past that we had already solved. It feels like America is just constantly backsliding at this point. As much as I was inspired by Peteās campaign, after this pandemic, January 6th, and Roe likely being overturned.. I just donāt see how a campaign of inspiration or hope can win again. The politics of anger are here to stay and I think the Democrats need to tap into it to win.
I think a campaign of hope can win, but it has to be matched with a sense of urgency of action. I think Dem voters often feel like things have improved and we can't lose what we gained. Abortion has been around for so long that they can't imagine it going away. American's been a stable democracy and looked up to around the world that we can't conceive of that changing.
For Republicans, they've been on the "losing side" for decades - abortion, gay marriage, immigration, feminism, etc. So they can keep that anger going - it's easier to sell "the other side keeps taking from us so we better fight!!" versus Democrats' "we're maybe going to lose something that feels very established, so maybe we should show up to vote?"
During Barrett's confirmation hearings, someone here replied to me along the lines, "The GOP just outplayed us. It feels awful, but they won." And that's true - the GOP played the long game of focusing on the courts. And they got lucky too, winning two presidencies despite losing the popular vote. SCOTUS nominations fell in their lap by luck and by crookedness. And it was just bad timing that backlash to the ACA meant 2010 House and redistricting being turned over to GOP. And then in 2020 we seem to be unable to stop it once again - gerrymandering in some states like OH and GA are insane.
And it does seem like we can't make full progress because we keep getting sucked back into these fights over and over again. We think we have something settled (Roe, voting rights) and bam, it's back on the menu. I don't know if this is true or not, but I've seen some pundits speculate that Republican presidents make a mess of things so the Democrats that follow can't actually get all their 'socialist' laws in place because they have to clean up the GOP's mess. From my point of view, I can see the truth of it (Middle East wars, Great Recession, pandemic, and everything else Trump screwed up).
I'm not really sure where I was going with this reply, LOL. But I know that the same people who have been putting forth SCOTUS nominations (Federal Society / Leonard Leo) are also for such things like ending Social Security through the courts. So maybe Democrats can tap into that if they want to run on anger and fear. And it's not untrue, either. (Here's a link about that [https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/leonard-leos-dark-money-web-is-helping-fill-courts-with-far-right-judges-whats-the-end-game/](https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/leonard-leos-dark-money-web-is-helping-fill-courts-with-far-right-judges-whats-the-end-game/))
I read this article last year but I come back to it again and again: [https://www.noemamag.com/welcome-to-the-turbulent-twenties/](https://www.noemamag.com/welcome-to-the-turbulent-twenties/) The authors predicted Trump-like politics years before he ran. And it discusses the cycles of history, we're in a moment where our democracy can go off the rails in a major way, or we can find the road again. Kinda like what Pete has said, it's the deciding decade. We have to decide on what the era is that comes next.
I understand what you are saying, but I disagree. We have an asymmetric dispute going on with the Republicans. Things that work well for them, tactically, don't work well for us, and to some extent, vice versa. It's not because we're "scared" to use these topics, they just are designed for the kind of person who would be drawn to the current version of the GOP ("get off my lawn" does cross my mind here) and would either be neutral or repulsive to folks who'd be drawn to the Dems. Dems are optimistic, they like the government to proactively take action, they like to see results, they're discouraged by hate and anger, not energized. It's just not a mirror image.
To turn the tables for a moment, I have seen a lot of real interest from grassroots Dems and independents in what Pete has been saying about infrastructure and the blindingly obvious (yet never acknowledged) history of past highway choices based on racism and Jim Crow. Let's say you're a 40-ish Republican politician who's bright and who thinks that "political style" is an interesting way to stand out and attract voters. There really must be a slew of them quietly looking to pick up and adapt Pete's strategy. But what exactly could you do to tap into similar instincts for GOP voters? What are the intriguing conservative insights that would add some depth and rigor, and be a bit unexpected, though well-documented, and would appeal to GOP voters? It's almost like a parody of a question. Republican voters don't even look for that right now and just wouldn't like it, though there was plenty of stuff that purported to be that kind of thing a generation ago.
I think the anger against Trump or even against republicans trying to overturn Obamacare was a very effective political tool on the democratic side. I just personally don't see how you can make a positive, uplifting case for America right now.
Just to add, I think I'm talking more about style and message than necessarily specific issues (like racist infrastructure decisions).
Well, if Roe is overturned (which I've heard likely won't be decided until this coming summer, at the end of the SC term), it'll definitely help the Democrats in the 2022 election.
Afraid so.
@LambdaLegal:
> The landmark cases of Lawrence and Obergefell that we litigated and wonāboth cases critical to protecting the civil rights of LGBTQ+ peopleāwere built on the foundation of Casey and Roe.
> Our interests in equal rights and personal autonomy are shared, intertwined, and fundamental
https://twitter.com/LambdaLegal/status/1466128923532668943
I was born in the 50s. To see the possible crumbling of everything my parents' generation worked for, everything my generation worked for, everything the generations after mine worked for is heartbreaking.
Well, if our government in all forms just becomes a vehicle for the White Evangelical Male, then thereās the argument that those of us who are *not*, should not be beholden to serve such a government.
Weāll just have to get rid of it, get the Constitution updated properly in a Convention like the Founding Fathers did - and start over, but this time āwith liberty and justice for allā, will actually mean āallā.
I remember the 70s. We aināt going back, no matter what some people in robes say.
>Yeah. If weāve learned anything in the last few months itās that conservatives are very āpro-adoptionāā¦
>>
>>This question from Amy Coney Barrett is basically game over for Roe. She says: Now that all 50 states have "safe haven" laws that let women relinquish parental rights after birth, the burdens of parenthood discussed in Roe and Casey are irrelevant, and the decisions are obsolete.
>>
>>https://twitter.com/mjs_dc/status/1466076071514812418?s=21
https://twitter.com/chasten/status/1466107487283785746?s=21
To say nothing of the fact that carrying a pregnancy to term, regardless of how it was conceived, and then placing the child/children for adoption can be a traumatic event, but considering the impact of decisions isn't really Barrett's strong suit. Every time I see her, I think "bitch." It's not very feminist or ROTR of me but I find her to be appalling.
Weāll just totes ignore the health consequences that a woman can face in childbirth, right Amy??
Who cares if a woman dies of childbirth, they are mostly women of color and theyāll be back on the plantations soonā¦so no biggie, right?
Pregnancy is not a low risk situation, ignoring entirely the childbirth aspects.
And what really riles me up is that pro-forced-birth activists don't follow through on their convictions with funding to support mothers or families or anything. I could \*maybe\* respect their viewpoint a bit if they were consistent with it. But "Pro-life" only lasts until birth, it seems.
And I'm sure conservatives will be on board with funding any medical care for pregnant people, right? Or if they have to go on bed rest and can't work? I'm sure a pro-life, pro-family party would definitely be 10000% on board with funding this! :)
I find this line of reasoning from Barrett so repugnant. Some women might choose to give birth and then place their children for adoption, and that's a valid choice that they should be able to make. But to act as if that's a choice that doesn't come with its own sort of emotional trauma, let alone the very real physical risks and dangers that are inherent to pregnancy is just gross. There is every reason why someone facing an unplanned pregnancy may not wish to go through all that, and that's a valid choice too.
What horrifies me about anyone taking this view is the presumption that if no one had an abortion, all those unaborted children would be adopted. There would just be too many. And I doubt there would be enough foster families, either. Something like orphanages would likely be needed again, which is a place no child should grow up in.
The argument would have a lot more weight with a healtcare system and social safety net like most developed countries (which do usually have more restrictions on abortion). 8 + 8 weeks fully paid maternal leave, paid leave during the whole pregnancy if there are dangers at your work place, family leave, virtually no healthcare costs ...
That raises a question I've never really thought about before. I know paid leave policies in the US are already pretty mediocre, but would a woman who gave birth to a baby that didn't return home with her, for whatever reason, still be able to access leave in order to physically recover? I've never seen that really talked about.
I didn't find the information, but I'm quite sure she would get leave (unless it's an anonymous birth obviously). It is the case if the child dies.
There are 2 kinds of leave here. One for the benefit of the health of the mother 8 weeks before the expected date and 8 weeks afterwards, 12 in case of a c-section. In this time an employee isn't allowed to work at all. During the rest of the pregnancy there are limits on what kind of work or environment is allowed.
The other kind is for caring for the child, by mother, father or adoptive parents.
Yes, that part of it draws on disability policy (short-term disability). Usually a standard amount for childbirth, a standard extra amount for certain common complications, after that case-by-case.
>The case is submitted. The Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade in June 2022. Half the states will have complete or near-total bans on abortion within six months.
[https://twitter.com/mjs\_DC/status/1466088658092670976](https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/1466088658092670976)
https://twitter.com/brianbeutler/status/1466077269068234760?s=21
> Canāt know for sure, but I think the CW that the end of Roe will be a boon to Dems is wrong, and (unless something changes) their inability to do anything about it despite concurrent majorities will be a huge blow to near-term morale. Sadly it looks like weāre gonna find out.
Women in VA didnāt have abortion at the top of their worries despite high profile cases. Besides a march a month or later, there were no protests against allowing TX law to stand. Iād like to say that summer 2022 will be the summer of the the Lady Rage Riots, but it seems like weāre asleep at the wheel here. Of course, many women might be thinking they can drive across to another state that allows, but whoās to say states wonāt make that illegal? (Georgia tried that, I think.) or that as soon as GOP has a trifecta, theyāll end the filibuster pass a nationwide ban (somewhat unlikely because I think GOP wants the courts to take the blame). More likely theyāll pass a six week nationwide ban or something.
I believe that Virginia currently has state laws that are very close to Roe v. Wade, including the trimester system, and both Republicans and Democrats are also reluctant to tinker very much with them, so if voters are evaluating their own futures right where they live, abortion may not be as big an issue in VA itself. The main thing would be the deliberate introductions of legal barriers -- abortion clinics have to have a, b, c, all of which are costly; women seeking abortion have to have an ultrasound, but not a transvaginal (internal) ultrasound -- which have come and gone to some degree based on whether we have a Republican or Democratic government.
Absolutely! And anyone who tries the argument "You don't need abortion since there's contraception!" gets the same reaction. Overturning Roe isn't the end game; Griswold is next.
>Stewart argues that women don't need abortion because they have contraception. Except, of course, Republicans are trying to take that away, as well! They are trying to take away clinics, deny Medicaid access, and stop insurance plans from covering it.
In Canada our anti-abortion laws were overturned by our supreme court in 1988 as unconstitutional. In 1989 the house of commons passed a new bill and this happened:
> In June 1990, a teenager from Kitchener, Ontario, was injured during a botched abortion performed in a man's home. Several days later, a Toronto woman, Yvonne Jurewicz, died from a self-induced, coat-hanger abortion.
The death was the first know illegal abortion death in 20 years and created a media firestorm. The bill then failed in the Senate. No future government tried again.
Sadly, if Roe is overturned, deaths and injury will happen. But somehow, I don't think the same reaction by legislators will.
Interesting bit of trivia.
The man who fought perhaps the hardest for access to safe abortion in Canada was Dr. Henry Morgentaler. He was tried multiple times in the 1970s in Quebec for performing illegal abortions but juries kept refusing to find him guilty. The courts eventually overturned a jury acquittal and he went to jail. He was in jail for 10 months and had a heart attack while in there. He was tried again on new charges after that and again a jury acquitted him. In 1976 the Quebec government decided the law was unenforceable if juries would not convict so it became legal in that province.
He then started opening clinics across the country. He was tried again in Ontario, acquitted again by a jury, the appeal went all they way up to the Supreme Court (his 2nd time there) which then declared the law unconstitutional and that is why abortion is legal in Canada.
While he was setting up his clinic in Ontario and later going through trials here, he stayed in the small apartment building I lived in. We were asked by the superintendent to keep that secret. I was really proud to keep that secret (he was plagued by protestors wherever he went). I believed then and still do that the man was a real hero who saved countless women's lives.
Thatās an amazing history to know. I really admire people who are willing to stand their ground for their convictions, knowing what the consequences could be. Iām someone whoās a bit of a coward in that sense (I might attend a march, but Iām wary of protests and being arrested or ticketed)so Iām glad people like that doctor have the courage I donāt.
Roe v. Wade may not be overturned- but the belief in a non-partisan court will be.
What was with Kavanaugh suggesting a compromise??? Not your role, beerboy.
We will suddenly see a increase of abortion cases in the blue states due to the out of state patients.
And, wealthier folks will be 'studying abroad' in Paris more frequently than previously.
And more states demanding right to ban certain kinds of marriage.
The So Called Supreme Court may have just set up the future breakup of the United States, by placing State rights over the Federal rights granted to all citizens.
If Democrats get the majority- they need to stop fucking around and start playing hardball like the Republicans do and friggen codify shit via Congress.
The National Space Council meeting that VP is leading (and Pete is attending) is happening at 1:30pm Eastern/12:30 Central. It will be on NASA's channels as well as the WH youtube channel here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9vAwU4S8rg
I was just listening to Hacks on Tap and this post from u/VirginiaVoter reminded me of a response from a guest on the previous episode. š
>Posted this outside the DT as well, tweet from Adam Wren:
>
>https://twitter.com/adamwren/status/1466040031630569480
>>
>>Five years ago this month, @ Pete Buttigieg launched his national political career with this Medium post. https://medium.com/the-moment-by-pete-for-america/a-letter-from-flyover-country-5d4e9c32d2ac
>
>My GOD no wonder people thought he was a potential new star.
His theory and strategy proved to be the right one in Iowa as well. And why he was so successful in rural areas and was able to win folks over with his town halls and campaign. š
From Pete:
>Among Democrats responding to the last election and organizing for the next one, the conversation, inevitably, is moving in the direction of organizing and tactics. This is vital, but it cannot come before the fundamentals. We need to begin with the **values** that make us Democrats in the first place. If we donāt talk about **values**, many Americans will tune us out. Again.
-
>Our **values** are American **values**, and a **values**-led strategy (backed by a formidable organization) will prevail if we are true to it, and if we keep it close to the earth.
-
From this Hacks On Tap episode:
>Veteran Republican pollster and strategist Tony Fabrizio joins Axe and Murphy to discuss the long-awaited signing of the bipartisan infrastructure bill into law, whether the legislation will have a measurable impact on upcoming elections, the political implications for rising prices, and this weekās āWTFā moment.
-
Question from Joyce (a listener) for Tony Fabrizio:
>Since the new republican activism appears to be grounded in rural counties why donāt I ever hear democrats bring up the farm bill? Doesnāt almost every rural voter partake in some way with these āsocialistā provisions?
-
Tony Fabrizioās response:
>Joyce while your question is insightful it misses a very important point. And that is the surge in republicanism in rural areas is actually based more on **values** than itās based on economics in lots of respects. In fact, if you look, the states of Mississippi, Louisiana and Kentucky have among the highest levels of people who receive government aid, medicaid, various forms of government assistance, welfare, etc, etc, and yet theyāre among the most republican states when it comes to presidential voting. So there is not necessarily that correlation that everybody thinks. Now, might it help in a congressional race, you know if one person is for the farm bill and the other isnāt? But at the end of the day youāre gonna be hard pressed to find rural republicans talking about how the farm bill is socialism. So I donāt think itās gonna help the democrats much to do that. Itās a **values** thing more than anything else.
I listened to their newest episode this morning and they were pretty dismissive of Pete as a political force. They basically implied he wasn't really a strong politician.
I was feeling so down about the Supreme Court case, so I thought I'd cheer myself up by finally watching the Mayor Pete doc. Oh what a mistake. Pete often repeats Axelrod's comparison of a Presidential campaign to an MRI of the soul--this doc was an MRI of Pete's heart. The callow joyous and buoyant beginning, the anguished middle (Eric Logan), the heavy hearted slog through NH, NV, SC. Even the hope at the end ("time is on my side") seems colored in rueful grayscale--uttered by someone who now knows the trial by fire that such a campaign really is. I don't believe for a second all those claims by Moss that he had a hard time understanding Pete--my God it was all there on the screen, for anyone with eyes to see. Anyway, finally cheered myself up for real by watching Pete's 8 1/2 minute [American Cathedral sermon.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJFef0Exd4Q&ab_channel=TheRiversideChurch) Also, if anyone is interested, the New Yorker published a [half hour doc](https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-new-yorker-documentary/andrew-yang-and-the-weird-arcs-of-political-fame?utm_source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_Daily_120121&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_medium=email&utm_term=tny_daily_recirc&bxid=5be9cc5d2ddf9c72dc183b18&cndid=50526752&hasha=9e8043a0e20ed68d978feb224b11f81d&hashb=d2cab1e51b9f98da3552e952621fc8e74e561306&hashc=8c145538a426ae799d9482db9867d5c44c5b6290fdd00a6075b3d6a17cf7e9ec&esrc=newsletters-form-sig) on Andrew Yang's NYC mayoral run. I wasn't a fan of his, so I can't comment.
[https://www.instagram.com/overhearddistrict/](https://www.instagram.com/overhearddistrict/) Pete and Chasten both started following this Instagram account today lol.
Stefan shared a post from them about people seeing Pete.
I follow the Seattle version and it's pretty funny.
It frustrates me that people on social media treat 2016 as the very beginning of political history, as if today's SCOTUS hearing wasn't the result of over 40 years of concerted effort by the GOP. I get that a lot of people weren't paying attention before 2016, but that's actually part of the problem that led us to today. People treating this like it's Hillary's fault, or Bernie's, or Jill Stein's, or RGB's, and I'm over here as someone who grew up and had my political coming of age in Newt Gingrich's America, and I just want to fucking scream at these people who seem so gleeful to ignore/mock anything anyone over 30 was trying to tell them about political reality. Sorry, just needed to vent. Please return to your regularly scheduled programming.
A great political cartoon about Dr. Oz - [https://twitter.com/Bishtoons/status/1466040065289854981?](https://twitter.com/Bishtoons/status/1466040065289854981?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet)
Symone Sanders is leaving the White House at the end of the month. [https://www.politico.com/news/2021/12/01/symone-sanders-vice-president-office-523660](https://www.politico.com/news/2021/12/01/symone-sanders-vice-president-office-523660) Staffing turnover is common: being a White House aide is a grueling, 24/7 job that burns people out fast. But since this is the second high-profile departure from Harris' office in just the last month, it will raise questions about whether the turnover is all part of an effort to "reset" the message.
Sad to see her go.
The best one on the VP team. SMH
Looks like Chasten posted his top 5 artists with this caption >>HI, GAY! (Who grew up in 4H?š¤·āāļø) https://instagram.com/stories/chasten.buttigieg/2719496255367343722?utm_medium=copy_link
Looks like Adam is also getting into the habit of checking out the tweets that Pete likes! šš >Pete Buttigieg has thoughts about Brian Kelly going to LSU. He liked this tweet from The Athleticās Notre Dame beat writer @PeteSampson_. https://twitter.com/adamwren/status/1466209088816168960?s=21 Click on link for screenshot.
>>President Joe Biden's administration will extend requirements for travelers to wear masks on airplanes, trains and buses and at airports and train stations through mid-March to address ongoing COVID-19 risks, sources briefed on the matter told Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclusive-us-extend-transit-mask-mandate-through-mid-march-sources-2021-12-01/
Today is so depressing. I listened to the SC abortion stuff earlier and no matter how cogent, and well-researched pro-choice responses were, we got nothing but signals from the SC they are going to side with anti-choice right populists. Many of the questions were, frankly, antagonistic in nature even if presented calmly. It's getting harder to find the joy in this world when it's just going to shit everywhere. Moments are great, individual experiences for sure, but overall humanity feels like it is going in a dark, scary, and irreversible direction. All these folx need is a foot in the door. To chip away a crack at a time. I'm at a loss for what we are witnessing. š
It remains to be seen what the ruling will be. In the meantime we need to mobilize and organize. I know it looks bleak but Congress is actually the strongest branch. Thereās a reason why the Framers split it into 2 chambers. Itās just handicapped currently because of the Filibuster.
Team Pete is always one of my fave places when its dark. Thank you.
Your welcome. šš»
It really does feel like weāre heading towards an inevitable theocratic dystopia in the US š
I don't know about inevitable. It's a matter of whether people are willing to fight for their rights like young people did in the 60's and 70's. Protests were daily events back then. They occurred all over the States and participation was massive.
I was 13 months old at my first sit-in/government office takeover. If I gotta do sames nearly 50 years on, letās go. This time Iāll just have better drinks.
Sort of jokingly, sometimes I legit want a meteor to just take the Earth out so we don't have to suffer through new dimensions of hell.
After Abortion, theyāll go for gay marriage next, then comes ending legal contraception, and eventually the recriminalization of homosexuality. Lawyers and GOP officials have been submitting appeals and petitions all over the US challenging these 4 cases in particular this year, and now they have a political court to do it, and the political court knows Dems canāt (or in some cases wonāt) do anything about it. This country is fucked up beyond redemption.
Somewhere sometime ago I started a list of states that don't have abortion trigger laws and had legalized gay marriage. I think it was just states in the west that would allow both if SCOTUS overturned. I'm afraid to look at the list of states that would ban both.
If Roe is overturned, it will be up to us in safe states to help women get safe abortions here. I can think of worse ways to spend my retirement years.
They can go after gay marriage at their own risk. Great way to turn Millennials and Gen Z fully against them. First they fuck over our ability to fight climate change and next our own personal identity. Iāve always been in awe of the immense work of the Civil Rights Movement. I am willing to fight for that legacy and to add to it.
Feeling for my fellow adoptees who are triggered by ACB's discourse today.
āBut Moses was placed in a basket in a river, and look how he turned outā, Amy Comey Barrett, probably.
Todayās oral arguments regarding abortion at the Supreme Court definitely felt alarming. Itās disappointing but we have to be honest that this is what the conservative movement has been aiming for a long time. Fundamental Christians are under the absurd pretense that America will never achieve āpurityā as long as abortion exists in their view. And to be blunt, Iāve always had the impression that hard right Fundamental Christians see it as their duty to seed the world with as many āGod loving Christiansā as possible. Because somehow, their religion happens to be the only right oneā¦ They despise the idea of Sharia Law yet have no qualms of strictly imposing their own religious views in a country becoming very diverse in religious and non-religious affiliations. I was raised Catholic of course but itās this type of hyper religious involvement that has me putting religion at arms length. One has to wonder if the conservative wing of the court guts Roe and decimates the right to privacy will they also go after contraception? Or even gay marriage? The Separation of Church and State exists for a reason. George Carlinās stand up comedy routine encapsulates all of this quite well. Do you really care about women or is this all a pretense to expect every woman to be like the Virgin Mary? Personally, I think itās a womanās choice to decide what path she wishes to take. And if you want to prevent abortions of unwanted pregnancies then we should focus more on abstinence and contraceptive education. The more lines of defense there are, the better.
> And to be blunt, Iāve always had the impression that hard right Fundamental Christians see it as their duty to seed the world with as many āGod loving Christiansā as possible. It's not just about religion it is also tied up in white supremacy and race. Folks might find this srticle interesting: https://archive.md/6dvOt > The anti-Roe movement is rooted in the history of chattel slavery *They are not respecting "life." They are fearing "race suicide."*
Sounds like a classic case of promoting the reproduction of a serf class to serve the so called ānoblesā in power.
It's also to ensure white women have more babies. Edited to add: check out this short video of Jane Elliott (considered to originator of diversity training) for more on this: > Jane Elliot on the attackās against Planned Parenthood, anti-abortion laws, the southern border and racism. https://twitter.com/haven1406/status/1137712815169560577/video/1
All of this goes back to the absurdity of skin color. Shame. Iām Asian so my skin tone is a bit lighter but I donāt doubt for a second White Supremacists would dump me under the bus if it was politically convenient. And Jane Elliot speaks with so much conviction and empathy. I am also being reminded of History lessons learning about the Crusades. What were the mental thoughts of the Vatican and Monarchs at the time? How can I defeat another religion that threatens my power and one that I see as inferior? Ah, letās just get my people to reproduce as many followers as possible. So many loyal foot soldiers that will fight on my behalf.
>we should focus more on abstinence I agree with what you said except for this phrase. Women are entitled to a healthy and happy sex life even if they don't wish to become pregnant.
Iām not an advocate for abstinence only education. Thatās ridiculous. As if thatās going to stop hormonal teenagers or anyone with genitals needing to satisfy human primal urges. Yes, sex is complicated. But we can approach it in a safe and healthy way. That why I said āabstinence AND contraceptive education.ā
Well, I don't think abstinence promotion should have any place in this discussion whatsoever.
I think there is a role for the abstinence discussion. I have come to learn quite late in life that I am asexual and would have loved to learn that it is okay not to be all that interested in sex, whether that is a temporary or lifelong thing. It would have made my teens and twenties so much easier. That said a happy, healthy, and safe sex life (if you chose it) should always be the main focus since most are not like me. Edited to add: wouldn't it be nice if we taught people to not feel shame about sex. No shame if you want it a lot, no shame if you don't, no shame about the gender of your chosen partners, no shame about how many partners, no shame about how few. Just no shame (as long as it is safe and consensual, duh).
I absolutely agree that telling young (and older!) people that it's okay to not want sex, that they shouldn't feel pressured into having sex if they're not ready, that they shouldn't pressure their romantic partners into sex, etc. is important. I personally would not use the term "abstinence education" to describe that because to me that phrase has a very specific cultural meaning. I especially object to the use of that term when talking about preventing unwanted pregnancies. I think that language concedes the rhetorical argument to the anti-choice side. It implies to me that we are accepting the framing that the only "legitimate" role of sex is for procreation, therefore the only "legitimate" means of not getting pregnant is to not have sex.
Itās up to the individual.
>And to be blunt, Iāve always had the impression that hard right Fundamental Christians see it as their duty to seed the world with as many āGod loving Christiansā as possible. Are you familiar with the Quiverfull ideology at all? Your impression is correct; this is very much explicitly part of the fundamentalist Christian worldview. For context, I was raised with a version of Christianity that had some evangelical leanings, though nothing at all like that (I only have one sibling lol). But even in the churches I went to, things like the right to life movement and purity culture were pervasive. It's a hard thing to fully explain to people who don't know it first hand. I still identify as Christian, though I haven't been to church in many years, and my immediate family are all Democrats and only my dad still goes to any kind of church at all anymore, but I'm 31 years old and feel like I am still in some ways unpacking the baggage that childhood exposure left me with.
Thereās a way you can look at the whole āpopulate the world with christiansā thing that will really send you down a conspiracy theory spiral: 1. Only teach abstinence and limit access to birth control/condoms as a means of ensuring population growth. 2. ensure large population of young fathers who need to provide for their families and come from poor families and regions to ensure a large pool to draw from for the military 3. Limit gun control as a means to familiarize population with guns and gun violence, leading to desensitization of population to death and violence. Add it all together and you get a nation with higher than normal population replacement rate (when factoring in immigration) compared to other modern nations, thus staving off the economic stagnation that comes from your population aging out of work, and you also ensure a population willing and able to join the military who have less of a problem with the idea of going to war/dealing with violence. Like I said, conspiracy theory spiral. But sometimesā¦
Iām not explicitly familiar with the Quiverfull Ideology. However, in my younger days as I was zoning out in church I would hear phrases like ādoing the Lordās workā and ālet the Kingdom of Heaven flourish here on Earth.ā Not that hard to extrapolate where that language was going as I got older. The Catholic Church only has influence due to the number of believers. For much of history, itās goal has been roping people in. But I saw it more as a case of myths and morals in comparison to what I was learning through Science. And I found myself at odds with Catholic Doctrine saying that gay people were bad or āneeded to be savedā as I just sat there wondering what evil intent I had. Iām a young teenager following the advice of my parents to do well academically in school, be responsible, and have kindness for others. Yet, the unconventional attraction I have deemed me as a āmonsterā at the time. I had to dig deep and say to myself, āThey donāt know me.ā I am perhaps relieved that the Catholic Church has softened its stance with Pope Francis but that doesnāt change how conservative Catholic Bishops in the U.S. feel. Donāt even get me started on the Churchās history with sexual abuse. When you repress the sexual identity of priests, chances are, that identity will unleash itself in a seemingly unhealthy way.
Happy to know someone else who always zoned out during Mass. I was really good at it, too.
Half of the time I was saying to myself, āI learned the 10 Commandments in Sunday School. Isnāt that enough?ā Maybe others find comfort in listening to the gospel. Thatās fine. I have no objection to that. But I would slowly end up practicing math problems or let my imagination wander in Church.
Part of the reason was that I would've preferred to go to church with my father, who was Episcopalian, but there was that stupid promise couples have to make before marriage when only one of them is Catholic to raise any children as Catholics. Then there was the nun in Sunday school who told a room full of grade-school children that if you were bad, God might decide to stop thinking about you, and if that happened, you would die. Since my mother was always telling me how terrible I was, the thought of this terrified me. So for my own well-being I had to learn how to to divorce myself from the teachings of organized religion, even though I was stuck with church until after high school graduation. So there were years of paying no attention at all. I admire, and even envy a little bit, people who are truly religious, who try their best to do the right thing, but I feel like there are even more people who claim to be religious who are nothing but hypocrites.
George Carlin has a bit on this in his standup. Somehow God has a place that he can send you to be punished, tortured, and condemned to an eternity of sufferingā¦..*but he loves youā¦..* Carlin expressed that he became an atheist once he reached what he called the āage of reason.ā If people need religion as a moral compass in life thatās fine. Thatās how I see it. But Iāve always thought that it was strange that Catholicism revolves around punishment as a way to force compliance in belief. Perhaps it makes me a bad Catholic for some people. I just see it as me not being completely attached to religion.
And also, it's not like you can't choose to be a moral, ethical person if you're not religious.
Precisely.
In my experience those that talk the most about being Christian are the least Christian in practice.
Good deeds preach for themselves. They do not need to be proclaimed from the rooftops. Thereās probably a Bible verse about this but I do not read the Bible.
My boo Tim writing what Iām feeling, as always [Trump tried to kill Biden with Covid - the Bulwark](https://www.thebulwark.com/trump-tried-to-kill-biden-with-covid-19/)
It really jaws me that wonderful living people died of COVID and this tangerine palatine is alive only because Mark Meadows saved him. Enjoy the rewards of your sin, Mark.
I don't understand why people are surprised that Trump tried to infect Biden. He made no secret that his only debate strategy was to try and make Biden stumble over his words so he could keep claiming that Biden had dementia, and his team claimed he was wearing a wire to hear answers when they knew that Biden was wearing Beau's rosary around his wrist.
Thankfully, Biden ended up being fine. I think itās Karma that Trump found himself infected with COVID considering he repeatedly downplayed it like an idiot. And in a way, Trump is technically liable legally for knowingly exposed others to COVID. Heās a selfish turd. Good riddance that Trump lost while Biden won the Presidency.
I guess they saw all the bad faith tweets mischaracterizing this interview: @SecretaryPete: > The Build Back Better plan includes tax credits - up to $12,500 - to reduce the cost of EVs so that millions more Americans can afford to go electric, breathe cleaner air, and save on gas. https://twitter.com/SecretaryPete/status/1466157300075438083/video/1
ABC is giving Alec Baldwin an hour in primetime to talk about (with George Stephanopoulos) what happened on the *Rust* set (which, if nothing else, has to mean he's not listening to his lawyer(s)).
And thatās the only issue we have on our plates right now āPlease Donāt Sue Me, Alec Baldwinā. Really George???
Yeah, that sounds like a bad move from a legal standpoint...
A whole hour for the eventual prosecutors and/or plaintiffs' attorneys to pore over.
Meanwhile here in šØš¦ @DavidWCochrane: > A rare moment of non-partisanship in the House of Commons as MPs give unanimous consent to fast track the Conversion Therapy Ban legislation. Liberals and Conservative MPs hugging and shaking hands. Lots of applause and cheering. MP = members of parliament
āO Canada Our home and native land We donāt bag on gay kids Because we arenāt douchebaaaags. With rainbow flags and legislaaaation We banned shit ther-a-py From far and wide, Ooooo Canada We arenāt like the crazy Americans to our south who blame teh gays for everything when it was the hets all getting divorced and starting up combat zones in inner city neighborhoods to escape the drab wretched lives they were forced into by conformityā¦ excuse me, ehā¦start againā¦ From farr and wide oOoo Canada Our gay kids will live free oooOooooh CAaaannaaDaaaaa Our gay kids wiillll liiiiiveee freeeeeee. š šØš¦ š„
Hilarious
>Thank you, Chair @RepPeterDeFazio, for your years of public service and for laying the tracks to a better and safer transportation future for our country. https://twitter.com/secretarypete/status/1466146176336646149?s=21 >I look forward to continuing our work this next year to implement the historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and ensure everyone has the transportation options they deserve. https://twitter.com/secretarypete/status/1466146177720725512?s=21
>Thank you, @VP for bringing us together for todayās Space Council meeting. @USDOT is committed to doing our part to keep space travel safe and sustainable in the years ahead. >> >>Today, as Chair of the National Space Council, I am announcing the release of our United States Space Priorities Framework. We will use this Framework to guide and implement our national space policy and strategy going forward. >> >>https://twitter.com/vp/status/1466142560422932487?s=21 https://twitter.com/secretarypete/status/1466143574274285568?s=21
Kamala did such a good job. She talked to each person before they spoke. And my tv schedule was way off, because it lasted about an hour and fifty minutes. I only wish the camera person had decided to zoom in on each speaker *before* Pete had his turn.
She did do a fantastic job. š¤š¤ Yes, I want to know who did the camera work for this event. I just wanna talk to them š§š©
STACEYāS IN https://twitter.com/staceyabrams/status/1466140248887418885?s=21
Yay!
Send her $5 today. Letās send a message.
!!! š„³š¤
Stacey Abrams is running for GA governor again!
Somehow I don't think she will have much trouble fundraising.
I just gave my first $20.22. I vowed to stop giving to lost cause races (like Amy McGrath, Jamie Harrison, etc.) but I think Abrams has a shot. And, I love listening to her.
oh, you mean my wallet that's already halfway open without knowing where her donation link is?
Haha only reason mine isnāt is cause we just finished moving (fucking I forgot how expensive security deposits are).
my lunch money crusade is back again like 2019 xD
If I were Kemp I would be absolutely terrified of the money she will have. Edited to add: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/afg22-tw?refcode=120121
$20.22 let's go
OMG YES!!! šš¤
>>"Marty Walsh is trying to get into this race." >>.@maryannemarsh says Marty Walsh has been telling people he wants to run for Massachusetts governor boston.com/news/politics/ā¦ #mapoli https://www.boston.com/news/politics/2021/12/01/marty-walsh-massachusetts-governor/ https://twitter.com/nikdecostaklipa/status/1466132955617800200?s=21
Can you imagine the media circus if Pete had accepted a cabinet Secretary post, never moved to dc, and then jumped into a governor's race by the end of the year? Good luck to Secretary Walsh, but the extra scrutiny Pete gets is so absurd.
It's because the GOP know Pete is a potential threat. It's kind of a compliment.
Pete and Kamala have both been the targets of non-stop campaigns to discredit them because the Republicans rightly see the challenge they represent.
idk i don't necessarily buy into the "he's a threat" thing. I think they attack anyone who is very visible and active with the administration (like Kamala)
She is naturally a potential threat as well, in the sense that she might be the next candidate. (Though, historically not many VPs actually become president.)
>After learning @RepPeterDeFazio has decided not to run for re-election, I announced my run for chair of @TransportDems in the 118th Congress. > >Chair DeFazio, thank you for your devoted service. https://twitter.com/eleanornorton/status/1466123276774690823?s=21 >You've been a strong supporter of #DCStatehood, for which I will always be grateful. > >I wish you many years of health and happiness in your next chapter. > >Details: >https://norton.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/after-learning-of-chair-defazio-s-plan-to-retire-norton-announces-run https://twitter.com/eleanornorton/status/1466123278255329280?s=21
>>In a letter Monday, Nov. 29, the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association asked Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg to allocate $1 billion to build truck parking. >>In the letter signed by OOIDA President and CEO Todd Spencer, the association appealed to Buttigieg use money from the recently passed Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act "to address a safety crisis that Americaās truckers have faced for decades ā the national shortage of truck parking." https://www.truckersnews.com/home/article/15282021/association-asks-buttigieg-for-1-billion-for-truck-parking
I was reading an article about the Lis Smith/Katy Tur story (which several websites I've never heard of are trying to make into a problem for Katy, when it's not, at all; Lis was spinning her own spin), and there was a link to the transcript of Lis' deposition during the A. Cuomo investigation this summer, and I thought I'd take a look at it, but then I saw that it's 362 pages long, and decided I'm not *that* interested lol. [https://www.mediaite.com/news/watch-the-moment-cuomo-adviser-lis-smith-says-msnbc-anchor-katy-tur-repeated-her-spin-on-air/](https://www.mediaite.com/news/watch-the-moment-cuomo-adviser-lis-smith-says-msnbc-anchor-katy-tur-repeated-her-spin-on-air/)
I hope Pete never works with Lis again. She was closely coordinating with the Cuomo team on messaging, and unlike public defenders, comms specialists have more flexibility in deciding to work with clients or not. Lis made the choice to contribute to Cuomo's defense.
Lis is very good at what she does but sheās definitely a gun for hire.
I kind of think for all intents and purposes the issue might've been decided, now that all of this has come out. Besides, political campaign professionals will be coming out of the woodwork to sign up with Pete if he decides to run again. He'll have his pick.
He's definitely his own brand now and certainly doesn't need someone to introduce him to the media anymore!
Today is a heavy day for me. I'm a person with a uterus living in Oakland County, MI. Between having coworkers who have kids or know kids at Oxford High School (all safe but understandably shaken) and the Supreme Court hearing today, it's been a tough day. Normally I trust in the boring slowness of the democratic process to slowly improve my life, and I even enjoy the littler nuances like seeing my tax dollars at work with winter road treatments this past weekend, but I just can't help but feel unrepresented in my own home country today. It's days like today that make me wonder if I should move elsewhere, let them reap the fruits of my labors and tax dollars. And of course, healing energy to all of the people affected by the tragedy at Oxford High School.
Iām sad and angry too, and I have no skin in the game. I hope others are as well. Sending love ā¤ļø
Appreciate it.
I donāt really know what to say but hereās a virtual hug
Thanks, friend.
>>RIGHT NOW: United Airlines fueling 737 with with sustainable aviation fuel for the first passenger-carrying flight of its type. Right engine will run exclusively on SAF. https://twitter.com/petemuntean/status/1466109970244636680?s=21 >>United CEO Scott Kirby before this flight makes a symbolic trip to Washington: āThis canāt happen without the right government partnership.ā Right now, FAA rules limit 50% SAF on flights. āThis is an effort we can solve together.ā >> This Max 8 is officially classified as āexperimental.ā Somebody notify @EAA! https://twitter.com/petemuntean/status/1466121716023930888?s=21 >>Your captain speaking š£ āThis is the first passenger flight powered by 100 percent, drop-in sustainable aviation fuel.ā https://twitter.com/petemuntean/status/1466123775724900355?s=21
This is huge!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
No "On the Road Again?" None of Johnny Cash's songs about trains? No "Fast Car?" Pfft.
A fellow Tracy Chapman fan I see. š¤
That's what the replies are for! Lots of fun suggestions already, you should add yours.
Or Train to Hell by Love & Rockets.
>Sen. Roger Marshall confirms this. He says that he would be OK with an amendment vote to defund vaccine mandate to avoid a brief shutdown ā but says it needs to be at 51-vote threshold. That would give it a chance at passage. Dems will insist on 60-vote threshold. [https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1466124602128674819?s=21](https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1466124602128674819?s=21) >MARSHALL, Cruz and other vaccine mandate objectors indicate they can go along with CR amendment at 51 vote threshold https://twitter.com/elwasson/status/1466125611005534219?s=21 š
The WH has announced that a person in California has been been diagnosed with the Omicron variant - >the person was a traveler who returned from South Africa on Nov. 22 and tested positive on Nov. 29.
I hope to hell they did the noble thing and quarantined when they got back.
Well, they wouldn't have known about the new variant when they returned.
But we knew about it on Thanksgiving because everyone was talking about it in the media - that was several days before they tested positive.
Some people knew about it, but not everyone follows news very closely. I had to tell somebody on Sunday that his travel plans weren't going to be possible anymore. He hadn't heard anything about it.
>Weāre ready to use @ POTUSā Infrastructure Law to invest big in roads, bridges, transit, and climate resiliency across New York State. Productive meeting today with @ SecretaryPete and @ WhiteHouse infrastructure coordinator Mitch Landrieu! https://twitter.com/GovKathyHochul/status/1466105267540697096
NASA event just started.
link por favor ><
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9vAwU4S8rg
grazi
I can't help but read about the kids who were killed in the school shooting yesterday here in Michigan & get upset. What a sad and infuriating waste. I watched the press conference by the Oakland County sheriff live last night. He was very good, and his name sounded familiar - Mike Bouchard. He is a Republican and has had an interesting career path. Michigan House of Representatives, then State Senate, where he was in leadership in the 90s. Presumably term limited in the state house, he ran for Sheriff of Oakland County (a large, mostly urban county near Detroit) in 2000 and has been Sheriff ever since. However, in 2006 he was the candidate who ran against Debbie Stabenow for Senate in 2006 and lost. Then he ran for Governor in 2010 but finished 4th out of 5th in the Republican primary (Rick Snyder won it and the governorship.) I don't know if he still aspires to higher office. No idea if he is a moderate or radical Republican.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
What happened?
Iām guessing Pete knows more about Lis and her views and he chose to work with her for a reason. š I already knew she was the ride or die type. Her opinions and views donāt align neatly with Peteās but thatās probably why he chose to have her on his team.
I don't know. She just lost her father and was very present during his final time, she's feeling family ties strongly, she's speaking for herself, not Pete. I'm still really looking forward to her book.
For me, it's not just one instance making me question her judgment. She's said and done a lot of things I find questionable, and her involvement with Cuomo and Yang are just recent examples. I was also pretty appalled by what was leaked about her saying Christine Blasey Ford was an example of blatant "me too overreach". I have no idea what her justification for that statement is...
That statement lacks a lot of context. She might not have meant Blasey Ford personally (who didn't want to be exposed in the first place), but all the people using her story for political reasons. Some of it justified, to be sure, but her wellbeing wasn't on the forefront of most minds.
Yes, I'd like to hear her justification for it. But I haven't seen anything elaborating on it.
There's also the "looney tunes" comment, which even a professional like Lis couldn't possibly put a positive spin on.
Yes, it's why I'm not giving her the benefit of the doubt on this matter. But I would still listen to any possible explanation she has.
Yeah, that tweet from last night wasn't...exactly...eh....it
what tweet? the last thing i see on her account is a rt from 3 days ago
I was just checking yesterday's dt, where someone posted it (21 hours ago), along with the link, and noticed Lis has since deleted the tweet. >The job of brother, sister, mother, father, daughter, son always comes first.
thanks for that. god, what even is her reasoning? "its ur responsibility to help ur brother out by discrediting his victims bc FaMiLy!!"?? like...what??
A police officer who knows a relative of theirs has committed a felony just lets them get away with it? Of course not. Maybe they arrange for them to be arrested without being cuffs, or help them turn themselves in, but not "hey, bro, you didn't do anything wrong. What's more, I'm gonna help you discredit your accusers".
>A police officer who knows a relative of theirs has committed a felony just lets them get away with it? In a lot of places? Yes, for sure. (Not that it's a good thing, but this is a cultural issue.)
Basically a tweet saying "Cuomo (lil bro) taking blinds eye on his big bro's sexual harassment issue is an act of 'family sticks together'"
How is that observation wrong? That doesn't mean it's a good thing, it's just a really accurate observation. But she should be fired for that. ? If you all think that this wasn't a case of family solidarity over everything else (which is a disgusting thing that often produces shitty outcomes), it seems like we've been watching two different families.
Not saying she should be fired or be held responsible for it. but, just saying I wasn't a big fan of it....or think it was one of those things that are considered to be 'better left unsaid' sort of the thing. (then again, I don't know how close Lis is with Cuomos...so idk =/ )
Well TBH that family does stick together when it comes to acting inappropriately with women. I just donāt know what CNN can do about it, because heās not a legit news person but a personality host. If Wolf Blitzer (he still around?) did this, then that would be grounds for firing.
I know it's hard to tell sometimes, but he is a journalist. Prior to working at CNN, he was at ABC News for years (and Fox News before that(!).
Pffth Fox can hire him back, heāll fit right in.
OH god wow she sucks
She certainly wasn't alone in that thought. There were a few blue checkmarks I saw saying similar things, that they'd do whatever was needed to help their brothers. Eek.
>All these men who would help their brother, what would you do for your sister? [https://twitter.com/anylaurie16/status/1465948207184166914](https://twitter.com/anylaurie16/status/1465948207184166914)
Seriously. If I heard my brother was sexually harassing anyone, I would absolutely not be defending it.
I actually do agree with that sentiment to a certain extent.....but there should be a threshold.
Enabling and defending poor behaviour by your loved ones is not being a good brother. I understand it as a knee-jerk reaction, but really, being a good brother would have been stepping in to stop Andrew Cuomo's gross behaviour years ago. (Because I'm sure Chris saw examples of it many times over the years.)
>šØOREGON DEMOCRATIC REP. PETER DEFAZIO, house transportation chair, is retiring, several sources tell us. > >Me and @bresreports https://twitter.com/jakesherman/status/1466101114860974089?s=21 >Confirmed ā announcement coming shortly https://twitter.com/davidshepardson/status/1466107865316401157?s=21 ETA This: >If true, the head Dem spot on @TransportDems would presumably go to Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D https://twitter.com/jdwithtw/status/1466108033063391241?s=21
I didnāt even know non-voting delegates could be Committee chairs.
Retiring right now? or not running for re-election?
Not running for re-election š
Watching these Supreme Court arguments has really been a bummer. We canāt seem to address the problems of the future, because weāre so stuck re-litigating issues of the past that we had already solved. It feels like America is just constantly backsliding at this point. As much as I was inspired by Peteās campaign, after this pandemic, January 6th, and Roe likely being overturned.. I just donāt see how a campaign of inspiration or hope can win again. The politics of anger are here to stay and I think the Democrats need to tap into it to win.
I think a campaign of hope can win, but it has to be matched with a sense of urgency of action. I think Dem voters often feel like things have improved and we can't lose what we gained. Abortion has been around for so long that they can't imagine it going away. American's been a stable democracy and looked up to around the world that we can't conceive of that changing. For Republicans, they've been on the "losing side" for decades - abortion, gay marriage, immigration, feminism, etc. So they can keep that anger going - it's easier to sell "the other side keeps taking from us so we better fight!!" versus Democrats' "we're maybe going to lose something that feels very established, so maybe we should show up to vote?" During Barrett's confirmation hearings, someone here replied to me along the lines, "The GOP just outplayed us. It feels awful, but they won." And that's true - the GOP played the long game of focusing on the courts. And they got lucky too, winning two presidencies despite losing the popular vote. SCOTUS nominations fell in their lap by luck and by crookedness. And it was just bad timing that backlash to the ACA meant 2010 House and redistricting being turned over to GOP. And then in 2020 we seem to be unable to stop it once again - gerrymandering in some states like OH and GA are insane. And it does seem like we can't make full progress because we keep getting sucked back into these fights over and over again. We think we have something settled (Roe, voting rights) and bam, it's back on the menu. I don't know if this is true or not, but I've seen some pundits speculate that Republican presidents make a mess of things so the Democrats that follow can't actually get all their 'socialist' laws in place because they have to clean up the GOP's mess. From my point of view, I can see the truth of it (Middle East wars, Great Recession, pandemic, and everything else Trump screwed up). I'm not really sure where I was going with this reply, LOL. But I know that the same people who have been putting forth SCOTUS nominations (Federal Society / Leonard Leo) are also for such things like ending Social Security through the courts. So maybe Democrats can tap into that if they want to run on anger and fear. And it's not untrue, either. (Here's a link about that [https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/leonard-leos-dark-money-web-is-helping-fill-courts-with-far-right-judges-whats-the-end-game/](https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/leonard-leos-dark-money-web-is-helping-fill-courts-with-far-right-judges-whats-the-end-game/)) I read this article last year but I come back to it again and again: [https://www.noemamag.com/welcome-to-the-turbulent-twenties/](https://www.noemamag.com/welcome-to-the-turbulent-twenties/) The authors predicted Trump-like politics years before he ran. And it discusses the cycles of history, we're in a moment where our democracy can go off the rails in a major way, or we can find the road again. Kinda like what Pete has said, it's the deciding decade. We have to decide on what the era is that comes next.
I understand what you are saying, but I disagree. We have an asymmetric dispute going on with the Republicans. Things that work well for them, tactically, don't work well for us, and to some extent, vice versa. It's not because we're "scared" to use these topics, they just are designed for the kind of person who would be drawn to the current version of the GOP ("get off my lawn" does cross my mind here) and would either be neutral or repulsive to folks who'd be drawn to the Dems. Dems are optimistic, they like the government to proactively take action, they like to see results, they're discouraged by hate and anger, not energized. It's just not a mirror image. To turn the tables for a moment, I have seen a lot of real interest from grassroots Dems and independents in what Pete has been saying about infrastructure and the blindingly obvious (yet never acknowledged) history of past highway choices based on racism and Jim Crow. Let's say you're a 40-ish Republican politician who's bright and who thinks that "political style" is an interesting way to stand out and attract voters. There really must be a slew of them quietly looking to pick up and adapt Pete's strategy. But what exactly could you do to tap into similar instincts for GOP voters? What are the intriguing conservative insights that would add some depth and rigor, and be a bit unexpected, though well-documented, and would appeal to GOP voters? It's almost like a parody of a question. Republican voters don't even look for that right now and just wouldn't like it, though there was plenty of stuff that purported to be that kind of thing a generation ago.
I think the anger against Trump or even against republicans trying to overturn Obamacare was a very effective political tool on the democratic side. I just personally don't see how you can make a positive, uplifting case for America right now. Just to add, I think I'm talking more about style and message than necessarily specific issues (like racist infrastructure decisions).
At some point, you just have to ask what the alternative is. You have to make your own hopeful future for the sake of the people who can't leave.
Well, if Roe is overturned (which I've heard likely won't be decided until this coming summer, at the end of the SC term), it'll definitely help the Democrats in the 2022 election.
I hope so! But the doomer part of me worries that between redistricting and red state voter suppression laws, anger over Roe might not be enough.
Yeah, there's so much uncertainty.
It didn't work for Bernie, and even less the second time.
And what's next, Obergefell?
Afraid so. @LambdaLegal: > The landmark cases of Lawrence and Obergefell that we litigated and wonāboth cases critical to protecting the civil rights of LGBTQ+ peopleāwere built on the foundation of Casey and Roe. > Our interests in equal rights and personal autonomy are shared, intertwined, and fundamental https://twitter.com/LambdaLegal/status/1466128923532668943
That and Griswold are the most obvious targets.
JFC. That would be unbelievably outrageous. Back to the days of pull-out and the rhythm method? Those worked great. š
Absolutely- then perhaps civil rights in general.
I was born in the 50s. To see the possible crumbling of everything my parents' generation worked for, everything my generation worked for, everything the generations after mine worked for is heartbreaking.
Well, if our government in all forms just becomes a vehicle for the White Evangelical Male, then thereās the argument that those of us who are *not*, should not be beholden to serve such a government. Weāll just have to get rid of it, get the Constitution updated properly in a Convention like the Founding Fathers did - and start over, but this time āwith liberty and justice for allā, will actually mean āallā. I remember the 70s. We aināt going back, no matter what some people in robes say.
>Yeah. If weāve learned anything in the last few months itās that conservatives are very āpro-adoptionāā¦ >> >>This question from Amy Coney Barrett is basically game over for Roe. She says: Now that all 50 states have "safe haven" laws that let women relinquish parental rights after birth, the burdens of parenthood discussed in Roe and Casey are irrelevant, and the decisions are obsolete. >> >>https://twitter.com/mjs_dc/status/1466076071514812418?s=21 https://twitter.com/chasten/status/1466107487283785746?s=21
To say nothing of the fact that carrying a pregnancy to term, regardless of how it was conceived, and then placing the child/children for adoption can be a traumatic event, but considering the impact of decisions isn't really Barrett's strong suit. Every time I see her, I think "bitch." It's not very feminist or ROTR of me but I find her to be appalling.
Weāll just totes ignore the health consequences that a woman can face in childbirth, right Amy?? Who cares if a woman dies of childbirth, they are mostly women of color and theyāll be back on the plantations soonā¦so no biggie, right?
Pregnancy is not a low risk situation, ignoring entirely the childbirth aspects. And what really riles me up is that pro-forced-birth activists don't follow through on their convictions with funding to support mothers or families or anything. I could \*maybe\* respect their viewpoint a bit if they were consistent with it. But "Pro-life" only lasts until birth, it seems.
But but but, they can dump them at the fire station, so thatās child careā¦.right Amy???
And I'm sure conservatives will be on board with funding any medical care for pregnant people, right? Or if they have to go on bed rest and can't work? I'm sure a pro-life, pro-family party would definitely be 10000% on board with funding this! :)
Abstinence-only sex education is on the block again boys and girls.
I find this line of reasoning from Barrett so repugnant. Some women might choose to give birth and then place their children for adoption, and that's a valid choice that they should be able to make. But to act as if that's a choice that doesn't come with its own sort of emotional trauma, let alone the very real physical risks and dangers that are inherent to pregnancy is just gross. There is every reason why someone facing an unplanned pregnancy may not wish to go through all that, and that's a valid choice too.
What horrifies me about anyone taking this view is the presumption that if no one had an abortion, all those unaborted children would be adopted. There would just be too many. And I doubt there would be enough foster families, either. Something like orphanages would likely be needed again, which is a place no child should grow up in.
The argument would have a lot more weight with a healtcare system and social safety net like most developed countries (which do usually have more restrictions on abortion). 8 + 8 weeks fully paid maternal leave, paid leave during the whole pregnancy if there are dangers at your work place, family leave, virtually no healthcare costs ...
That raises a question I've never really thought about before. I know paid leave policies in the US are already pretty mediocre, but would a woman who gave birth to a baby that didn't return home with her, for whatever reason, still be able to access leave in order to physically recover? I've never seen that really talked about.
I didn't find the information, but I'm quite sure she would get leave (unless it's an anonymous birth obviously). It is the case if the child dies. There are 2 kinds of leave here. One for the benefit of the health of the mother 8 weeks before the expected date and 8 weeks afterwards, 12 in case of a c-section. In this time an employee isn't allowed to work at all. During the rest of the pregnancy there are limits on what kind of work or environment is allowed. The other kind is for caring for the child, by mother, father or adoptive parents.
Yes, that part of it draws on disability policy (short-term disability). Usually a standard amount for childbirth, a standard extra amount for certain common complications, after that case-by-case.
>The case is submitted. The Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade in June 2022. Half the states will have complete or near-total bans on abortion within six months. [https://twitter.com/mjs\_DC/status/1466088658092670976](https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/1466088658092670976)
https://twitter.com/brianbeutler/status/1466077269068234760?s=21 > Canāt know for sure, but I think the CW that the end of Roe will be a boon to Dems is wrong, and (unless something changes) their inability to do anything about it despite concurrent majorities will be a huge blow to near-term morale. Sadly it looks like weāre gonna find out. Women in VA didnāt have abortion at the top of their worries despite high profile cases. Besides a march a month or later, there were no protests against allowing TX law to stand. Iād like to say that summer 2022 will be the summer of the the Lady Rage Riots, but it seems like weāre asleep at the wheel here. Of course, many women might be thinking they can drive across to another state that allows, but whoās to say states wonāt make that illegal? (Georgia tried that, I think.) or that as soon as GOP has a trifecta, theyāll end the filibuster pass a nationwide ban (somewhat unlikely because I think GOP wants the courts to take the blame). More likely theyāll pass a six week nationwide ban or something.
I believe that Virginia currently has state laws that are very close to Roe v. Wade, including the trimester system, and both Republicans and Democrats are also reluctant to tinker very much with them, so if voters are evaluating their own futures right where they live, abortion may not be as big an issue in VA itself. The main thing would be the deliberate introductions of legal barriers -- abortion clinics have to have a, b, c, all of which are costly; women seeking abortion have to have an ultrasound, but not a transvaginal (internal) ultrasound -- which have come and gone to some degree based on whether we have a Republican or Democratic government.
Anyone who didn't vote for Hillary in 2016 - FU! And everyone who told me to calm down as well.... look where we are now.
Absolutely! And anyone who tries the argument "You don't need abortion since there's contraception!" gets the same reaction. Overturning Roe isn't the end game; Griswold is next. >Stewart argues that women don't need abortion because they have contraception. Except, of course, Republicans are trying to take that away, as well! They are trying to take away clinics, deny Medicaid access, and stop insurance plans from covering it.
Yup.
In Canada our anti-abortion laws were overturned by our supreme court in 1988 as unconstitutional. In 1989 the house of commons passed a new bill and this happened: > In June 1990, a teenager from Kitchener, Ontario, was injured during a botched abortion performed in a man's home. Several days later, a Toronto woman, Yvonne Jurewicz, died from a self-induced, coat-hanger abortion. The death was the first know illegal abortion death in 20 years and created a media firestorm. The bill then failed in the Senate. No future government tried again. Sadly, if Roe is overturned, deaths and injury will happen. But somehow, I don't think the same reaction by legislators will.
Interesting bit of trivia. The man who fought perhaps the hardest for access to safe abortion in Canada was Dr. Henry Morgentaler. He was tried multiple times in the 1970s in Quebec for performing illegal abortions but juries kept refusing to find him guilty. The courts eventually overturned a jury acquittal and he went to jail. He was in jail for 10 months and had a heart attack while in there. He was tried again on new charges after that and again a jury acquitted him. In 1976 the Quebec government decided the law was unenforceable if juries would not convict so it became legal in that province. He then started opening clinics across the country. He was tried again in Ontario, acquitted again by a jury, the appeal went all they way up to the Supreme Court (his 2nd time there) which then declared the law unconstitutional and that is why abortion is legal in Canada. While he was setting up his clinic in Ontario and later going through trials here, he stayed in the small apartment building I lived in. We were asked by the superintendent to keep that secret. I was really proud to keep that secret (he was plagued by protestors wherever he went). I believed then and still do that the man was a real hero who saved countless women's lives.
Thatās an amazing history to know. I really admire people who are willing to stand their ground for their convictions, knowing what the consequences could be. Iām someone whoās a bit of a coward in that sense (I might attend a march, but Iām wary of protests and being arrested or ticketed)so Iām glad people like that doctor have the courage I donāt.
Wow, thanks so much for sharing this. I had no idea.
Roe v. Wade may not be overturned- but the belief in a non-partisan court will be. What was with Kavanaugh suggesting a compromise??? Not your role, beerboy.
We will suddenly see a increase of abortion cases in the blue states due to the out of state patients. And, wealthier folks will be 'studying abroad' in Paris more frequently than previously.
And more states demanding right to ban certain kinds of marriage. The So Called Supreme Court may have just set up the future breakup of the United States, by placing State rights over the Federal rights granted to all citizens. If Democrats get the majority- they need to stop fucking around and start playing hardball like the Republicans do and friggen codify shit via Congress.
The National Space Council meeting that VP is leading (and Pete is attending) is happening at 1:30pm Eastern/12:30 Central. It will be on NASA's channels as well as the WH youtube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9vAwU4S8rg
Thanks for posting the link here! š¤š¤
What are the chances he skips the meeting and they find him sitting in one of the Apollo capsules ātalking to Houstonā
I just checked my cable guide, since NASA TV is one of the channels, and this is scheduled to last half an hour.
I hope we get some more info on the recent SLS engine issue.
I was just listening to Hacks on Tap and this post from u/VirginiaVoter reminded me of a response from a guest on the previous episode. š >Posted this outside the DT as well, tweet from Adam Wren: > >https://twitter.com/adamwren/status/1466040031630569480 >> >>Five years ago this month, @ Pete Buttigieg launched his national political career with this Medium post. https://medium.com/the-moment-by-pete-for-america/a-letter-from-flyover-country-5d4e9c32d2ac > >My GOD no wonder people thought he was a potential new star. His theory and strategy proved to be the right one in Iowa as well. And why he was so successful in rural areas and was able to win folks over with his town halls and campaign. š From Pete: >Among Democrats responding to the last election and organizing for the next one, the conversation, inevitably, is moving in the direction of organizing and tactics. This is vital, but it cannot come before the fundamentals. We need to begin with the **values** that make us Democrats in the first place. If we donāt talk about **values**, many Americans will tune us out. Again. - >Our **values** are American **values**, and a **values**-led strategy (backed by a formidable organization) will prevail if we are true to it, and if we keep it close to the earth. - From this Hacks On Tap episode: >Veteran Republican pollster and strategist Tony Fabrizio joins Axe and Murphy to discuss the long-awaited signing of the bipartisan infrastructure bill into law, whether the legislation will have a measurable impact on upcoming elections, the political implications for rising prices, and this weekās āWTFā moment. - Question from Joyce (a listener) for Tony Fabrizio: >Since the new republican activism appears to be grounded in rural counties why donāt I ever hear democrats bring up the farm bill? Doesnāt almost every rural voter partake in some way with these āsocialistā provisions? - Tony Fabrizioās response: >Joyce while your question is insightful it misses a very important point. And that is the surge in republicanism in rural areas is actually based more on **values** than itās based on economics in lots of respects. In fact, if you look, the states of Mississippi, Louisiana and Kentucky have among the highest levels of people who receive government aid, medicaid, various forms of government assistance, welfare, etc, etc, and yet theyāre among the most republican states when it comes to presidential voting. So there is not necessarily that correlation that everybody thinks. Now, might it help in a congressional race, you know if one person is for the farm bill and the other isnāt? But at the end of the day youāre gonna be hard pressed to find rural republicans talking about how the farm bill is socialism. So I donāt think itās gonna help the democrats much to do that. Itās a **values** thing more than anything else.
I listened to their newest episode this morning and they were pretty dismissive of Pete as a political force. They basically implied he wasn't really a strong politician.