Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude: don't try to hold me hostage

5/05/2022

don't try to hold me hostage

the court possibly ending roe v. wade? Isaiah's latest THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "The Experts" addresses that.

marcia's writing about the same issue i am. we're both thrilled c.i. carried the conversation outside of the community newsletters and into the community sites.

i have a lot of anger about the whole thing, to be honest. politicians failed us. ruth bader failed us. so many to blame and yet christina pelosi wants to blame some voters? oh, no, miss entitled, that's not going to play. look at your pathetic mother if you're wanting to finger point. start with her.

i will also not be held hostage by the democractic party. let me be clear on that. c.i. is right: they can deliver on this and they need to. if they don't, i neithe4r want nor need their empty words.

do not give me that' vote for us in november and we will deliver.' your in office right now and your party controls both houses of congress, so stop being lazy and take care of this. if you can't, it's because you've decided not to. you can get all your ducks in a row right now - through horse trading or intimidation - if you don't address it, don't pretend that you want to. deliver and i have a reason to vote democrat in the mid-terms. fail to deliver and i can just stay home when it comes time to vvote.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Thursday, May 5, 2022. The preening and posturing of our Congress needs to stop and we need to stop being such huge "f**king idiots."

On Roe v Wade, a number of e-mails to the public account are coming in about how they are upset that I am not commenting on this or that.

First, I have addressed this issue with community members via HILDA'S MIX. Second, because Elaine's asking me to address it again this morning, I will. Be sure to read Jonathan Turley's take on the issue. Third, don't think that you want my commentary, don't make the mistake of thinking that. You probably wouldn't like it to begin with.

I am firmly pro-choice, full on board with privacy rights and support safe and legal abortions for any woman who needs one.

Other than that, you may not be pleased.

I actually know the law. I'm not going to pretend I don't to say something that will soothe you and make you feel better.

People can disagree on the law. I think Jonathan Turley should be sitting on the Supreme Court and yet I will even disagree with him from time to time. I think he's the finest legal mind in the country but I do not agree 100% of the time. That's because sometimes something new comes along that we have to address. There is no building solely on precedent and there may be other issues. So he may offer a learned and wise opinion on a topic but I might beg to differ. Doesn't mean he's right and I'm wrong or vice versa, just means that we are interpreting the law and there may be more than one way to come at it in some instances.

Yesterday (believe it was yesterday), White House spokesperson Jen Psaki was asked a question by a reporter in the press briefing. It was about how revelations from Hunter Biden's laptop make it very hard to continue the fairy tale that Joe Biden was not involved in his son's business practices. The FOX reporter was clear that she was asking about the past -- this would be when he was vice president -- time covered on e-mails found on the laptop.

What did Jen respond?

No one seems to have gotten it right. They've quoted her correctly but they don't seem to have actually listened.

That's a real problem with politics today. A lot of stupidity.

Donald Trump says X and we're supposed to be outraged because, if you look into the original Psaki is being asked about an issue regarding Joe's vice presidency and is responding about President Joe Biden. It's a doge and even FOX NEWS didn't seem to note that reality.

For years, professional dram a queen Matthew Rothschild told you at THE PROGRESSIVE -- and on THE PROGRESSIVE RADIO HOUR -- that Bully Boy Bush was going to lock away al dissidents, that this or that national alert or FEMA measure was about that. He wasted a great deal of time. If only he had poured that energy into Iraq. Was he really worried about US government abuse because, if he was, strange, just like NEW YORKER whore Jane Meyer, he gave up the topic the minute Barack Obama was elected president.

To point a finger at myself, Rahm Emanuel, who I've known for years through his brother, told me I was a "f**king idiot" and he was right. We'll come back to that.

But we do tend to write a lot of things to fit however we want to see things.

I'm not going to offer nonsense about this justice lied!!! No. Susan Collins is an idiot. She proved that in 2002. She's a dumb idiot who hears what she wants to hear. Excepting her support for the Iraq War, I'm really not that vested in her one way or the other. And it's not fair to pin all the blame on her. The Democrats have done a lousy job and their work has been worse than Susan's.

But, for the future, don't hear what you want to hear. Examine the response youre getting.

Roe v Wade is settled law?

Yes, it is. Up until the Court chooses to hear a case on it. At which point, it is any judge's role to figure out if there is a conflict in the law, if the law applies, if . . . So you were an idiot -- this goes to various Democrats in the Senate and not just Republican Susan Collins -- hearing what you wanted to hear.

Quit nyou're whiing.

And if you produce a tape recording where some one on the Court promised you that they would enver vote to overturn Roe, first off we'd have ethical issues regarding your own behavior.

Second off, whether you like it or not Christian beliefs have had a significant role in the history of the US and one of those beliefs is redemption. Meaning, you can change. So let's use Alito. Alito promised not to overturn Roe (he didn't, this is a hypothetical) and Chuck Schumer has a recording of that office visit and makes it public.

After the outcry against Chuck died down, the point would be that Alito made a promise before he was a sitting Justice and he can easily argue that his opinion changed as his faith was renewed, as his faith grew, as he discovered a new religion, etc, etc.

And he wouldn't even have to bring in religion (but Alito would). He could merely argue that at that date in time, he meant what he said but that his years on the Court had increased his knowledge base and his opinons had changed.

So stop whining that you were lied to. And stop insisting that you had some promise before the justice sat on the Court Again, it's the law of the land (anything) up until you're asked to rule on it and then it is your role to interpret it and analyze it.

Again, don't ask for opinions if you 're not sure you want them. I'm not going to offer easy, pleasing takes that are devoid of reality.

If we're going to talk about this, we need to talk reality.

First off, no ruling has come down yet. Drafts are circulated all the time. The Justices confer and discuss and debate and some change their minds as a result of the give-and-take.

This draft may be destined for the trash heap.

That is not offered to say, "Cease working on this issue."

That is offered to say: Work smart.

Christine Pelosi thinks she's a feminist. She's not. Nepotism is not a feminist value. She's got a ton of opinions and they're all the opinions of entitled woman who has garnered every break the rich can receive in this country. She is not a learned mind.

As Margaret Kimberely has documented on her Twitter thread, when people were rightly noting that Ruth Ginsberg should step down, Christine showed up screaming sexism and ageism.

She was a stupid bitch then and she remains one today. Shooting out of Nancy Pelosi's vagina did not make Christine an expert on anything and we really don't need her faux wisdom.

Ruth was ill and she should have retired. She gambled and WE LOST. A lot of today is on her.

But let's get to Rahm correctly calling me a "f**king idiot."

Nancy, Steny Hoyer and Rahm controlled the House back then. There was concern over the ongoing Iraq War. I was so sure that the Democrats -- who were using it as an election issue in 2006 -- would end it as they promised. Rahm told me I was an idiot and explained why. It was big talk and it was nothing but an effort to get votes. The votes that had taken place where someone made a grand stand of voting against a buget for the war? Nancy had signed off on that. She had done so only after she had secured enough votes for the itme to pass.

It was all posture and play.

Rahm was right. I was wrong. I've said here many tiems I can be the world's biggest idiot.

How does that apply to today?

Democrats had years to make this a law. They didn't. They've used abortion as a political football and attempted to use it to get out the vote.

No one should accept them at their word in an election year if they promise that, come January, they'll pass it into law if you just vote for them.

They control the House, the Senate and the White House right now. If they can't get it done now, they can't get it done.

Nancy can -- and has -- kept her party in line when it comes to the votes she wants. That can take place in the Senate and in the House. Yes, even Joe Manchin can be put into line.

If they want votes this November, they need to deliver right now.

If they're uanble to do so when they control both houses and the White House, don't believe them that they'll do it at some point in the near future.

They could have stopped the Iraq War before it started. They could have ended it after it started.

They didn't.

They ran in 2006 on the promise to end the war. But they won both houses. And suddenly the Iraq War -- that they waffled on in the 2005 election -- was something they saw as a vote getter in the upcoming 2008 election. So they didn't end it. Not when it could be used in an election.

And I'm not prepared for the same thing to happen over and over with regards to abortion.

This would be chipping away at privacy rights. But I do not buy into the claim that this would mean that we'd lose the right to interracial marriage or to same-sex marriage.

I don't believe there's enough support for that. Abortion is a different issue that has other implications. Those who are strongly against it will argue that they can't do the live-and-let-live option on this (because they believe it's murder). With regards to who marries whom, that's a different approach and America is not fond of being told what to do.

I think trying to build that argument at this time is wrong and a distraction.

I think the focus needs to be on how Congress must ask and must ack right now.

The draft might end up in the trash. That's not breathe a sigh of relief time. We need legislation that can prevent this from happening again. Our right to privacy should not be held hostage.

The legislation should have come a long time ago.

In addition, we need a Democratic Party that actually acts. Do you remember Barack's last years as president?

The Republicans refused to allow his Supreme Court pick to be confirmed. So why did Democrats allow Donald Trump's picks -- that they were all over the news objecting to -- to be confirmed?

The party wants votes, they better start fighting to win.

And votes better stop accepting 'someday' promises and demand that politicians deliver first and then they can win our votes.

Adding this from The Feminist Majority Foundation:

Dear Common Ills,

If you ever doubted that a vote for Republicans is a vote to endanger women’s lives, the leaked Supreme Court draft majority decision eliminated any doubt.

Although we await the final decision it now appears that 5 Republican-appointed Justices—three of them placed on the court by Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump—may reverse Roe v. Wade triggering the criminalization or banning of abortion in some 26 states.

It’s even worse. Not only would this decision outlaw abortion in many states, the anti-choice/anti-woman right-wing axis will now move aggressively to elect a Republican majority to both the House and Senate in November. Their number one goal: a federal law to outlaw abortion in every state.

The critical time to mobilize and organize is right now – the 183 days between now and Election Day in November.

That's why I'm rushing you the Feminist Majority's action plans to make sure you're on board for the critical months ahead and why I'm asking for your support.

We're counting on you.

You see, if we don’t fight like hell to help maintain Democratic control of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate everything we’ve fought for over the past 50 years could be lost—beginning with the right to safe, legal abortion. We’re focused on electing Democrats because the essence of today’s Republican party is profoundly anti-choice, anti-women and anti-democracy. This is not the time to be calm and neutral.

I'm not being alarmist when I tell you we’re in a political sprint for the survival of women’s rights and lives. Just look at what we face:

The loss of safe, legal access to abortion if Roe V. Wade is overturned and the draconian anti-abortion laws now pending in some 26 states go into effect while extremist assaults on the few remaining clinics are on the rise. Even birth control is now threatened.

Yet another hurdle for the Equal Rights Amendment. Today, 50 years after the ERA was approved by Congress (1972) and sent to the states for ratification, we now have met the two requirements for amending the Constitution—a 2/3 vote of Congress and ratification by ¾ of the states. (2020). But neither the House nor the Senate have taken final action to declare the ERA valid and ratified.

Remember: The ERA is a CONSTITUTIONAL Amendment—the only guarantee—insurance—against a denial of rights on the basis of sex.

Forget the Doomsayers

WE CAN prevail only if we organize like never before to maintain control of the House and Senate in the next 183 days.

This means defending all four toss-up Democratic seats and flipping 2 Republican seats for a solid 52-48 majority in the Senate. And holding a net of 4 House seats to maintain the Democrats’ majority.

Believe me, we can win. We’ve done it before –against equally immense odds – because when it comes to advancing women’s rights and equality it’s always been an uphill fight.

So, forget the naysaying of the cable pundits and political consultants who seem all too eager to pronounce a Democratic majority in Congress lost in the November midterms.

Here’s how we win. And why we will win.

Laser-like focus on key swing races to maintain the pro-women, pro-equality control of Congress.

That’s why we’re focusing our grassroots organizing and Get-Out-The-Vote teams on 51 college and university campuses that will determine the all-important young people’s vote. Our massive mobilization in 2018 and again in 2020 posted major wins that helped make the difference in gaining control of Congress.

That’s why we’re counting on you.

Laser-like focus on the Youth Vote. Make no mistake young women and men—those immediately affected by an abortion ban—will decide key races that are often decided by only a few percentage points and this is why we’re focused on key districts and states where young people can have a decisive impact on the outcome.

Just look at these recent and very encouraging poll numbers from the Institute of Politics at Harvard: 37% of voters ages 18-29 say they will definitely be voting in the midterms. In 2018 that number was 36% --a record-breaking level of turnout for a mid-term cycle.

Women and Young Voters give Dems a big lead in the race for Congress. That same Harvard poll found that 40% of young voters (18-29) want Democrats to hold onto control of Congress, while 28% prefer Republicans. The rest are unsure.

AND...a raft of prominent polls place the Gender Gap for the mid-terms at a WHOPPING 33%. Usually it’s between 8% and 11% so this year it’s really a “Gender Canyon” and the Feminist Majority has a 35-year history of widening and winning with the Gender Gap.

To help plan and budget for our major mid-term organizing effort I urge you to respond today to make sure you’re on board for the critical months ahead.

We’re counting on you.

Doing Your Part to Win

Together we can and will win with what is nothing less than a sprint for the survival of women’s rights and lives.

You have been with us when your support mattered. For this I’m most grateful. Today, your support means more than ever. The stakes have never been higher. May I count on you?

For Victory and Equality,

Eleanor Smeal
President

P.S. In a just-released national poll, half of women voters say that they are more likely to vote in this year's elections as a result of increased restrictions on abortion—one-third say they are "much more likely." And for young women 18-29, an even higher 56% say they are more likely to vote. Please contribute today.

Contributions to Feminist Majority are not tax deductible as charitable contributions for Federal income tax purposes because of our lobbying and electoral work for women's rights. Donations may be used for political purposes. By contributing you confirm that you are a citizen or permanent legal resident of the U.S. and are donating your own funds. Feminist Majority is solely responsible for this communication. Feminist Majority does not engage in any electoral activity or make political expenditures in cooperation or coordination with any candidate or candidate committee.