Agree. 1 or 2 Ábrams break the impasse then we should do it. This is a “proxy” war. There is no question that the human cost is being borne by the Ukrainians. And we as the bastion of Democracy are providing the tools to ensure that Ukraine has a chance to defeat an aggressor. I get it there is some fear to “poke” the Russian bear, yet we have been here before. Russia is growing unstable and this would be a good time to send the counter balance of tools to push the Russia’s into instability. Some will say well then they will use NUKEs. I don’t think so. I think Russians will realize they want to live. Send the tanks.
What comes next for abortion: how about jailing women for taking abortion pills (Alabama), or forcing women to have a cesarean or vaginal delivery for even dead fetuses (Idaho)? Check out what's happening in the states. It's not some rational compromise sussing itself out, as some people have earlier commented: "Go make [pro-choice] arguments at your state capitols." Meanwhile pregnant women in some states have less rights to bodily autonomy than a corpse.
Will Saletan's question of what do they really want (more babies, more abortion laws, or fewer abortions?) is spot on. I'm having lunch with a arch-conservative Catholic friend in a couple of weeks. I'll ask her....should be interesting.
Thank so much for everything you & everyone @ the the bulwark (especially Tim Miller, JVL & Sarah Longwell) have done & are doing to fight against the authoritarian cult that has taken over the republican party. I am a Never Trumpet in a land of Maga Morons (Arkansas). You guys have literally helped to keep me from going completely nuts many, many times over the last 7 years. I would be watching something totally at odds with what I thought American democracy was all about.
From Stormy Daniels all the way through to the Big Lie I would what Trump was doing & I would think OK, there is no way anybody could think that (insert your own Trump scandal) could watch this play out & conclude, yeah that's OK, no big deal, or hey all politicians are liars so what Trump is doing is fair game. When anyone with half an IQ point could see how badly he is eroding everything America strives to live up to. I mean even my dad who is a college professor with a PHD in economics was all in on the Trump Train & I would just observe in amazement as he bought in lock, stock & barrell whatever BS right wing media would portray when Trump repeatedly showed us who he really was, a wanna be authoritarian/strong-man pick your label but there really was no denying it. Yet time after time after time after time my dad either didn't see or didn't want to admit that maybe, just maybe I had been right all along & Trump was only out for Trump everyone else be damned including the Republican party & even America. I do think the tide is beginning to shift a tiny bit since the disastrous midterms for the Republicans & especially any Trump endorsed candidates. I say this BC right after the midterms my dad told me that he thought the Republican party could no longer win with Trump to which I replied that's easier said than done, Trump will burn it all down before he names allows someone else to be the Orange God King.
*****just for context I am 40yrs old & my dad will be 80 in March.
As somebody who used to think rather highly of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, I'm outraged by their stance. If there's no 14th Amendment right to abortion, as Dobbs said and as I and presumably they have always believed, then there's NO FEDERAL JURISDICTION over abortion, either to authorize it or to outlaw it. The Federal Government only has the powers that the Constitution delegates to it. The "appropriate legislation" clause of the 14th Amendment either applies to abortion or it doesn't apply. If the Supreme Court has decided that it doesn't apply, than it doesn't apply for anybody. If SBAPLA is making supporting a federal abortion ban a condition for their support, then they're as lawless as anyone else in this dispute, and they certainly know better.
Her record on the subject of abortion is ambiguous. I doubt the organization's claim that she was anti, and their critics' claim that she wasn't. I'm not aware of any convincing evidence that she ever took a position. Her passions seem to have been very focused, and focused elsewhere.
When will PRO-LIFE men (Charlie & JVL) tell men they need to help prevent abortion by: NOT HAVING SEX WITH WOMEN YOU AREN'T MARRIED TO & ALWAYS USE A CONDOM IF YOU & YOUR PARTNER ARE NOT IN AGREEMENT YOU CAN AFFORD & WANT TO MAKE A BABY!!!
Why are men NEVER told what they can to do to reduce abortion?
If men didn't have sex unless they were making a wanted baby, there would be no abortion
--> THIS IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE!!!! Women can't get pregnant without sperm from men.
The truth is, men want to have sex 100% carefree.
Since men are not the one to get pregnant, to have to raise a child and even get out paying for the unwanted children (Herschel Walker) why would anything change?
There is ZERO peer pressure for men to stop having sex or always wear a condom to prevent abortion.
Even the "Christain's" (hello Pope!), who claim it is God's will that sex is only to be between married couple, REFUSE to tell men to follow their belief's, to follow God's will and STOP HAVING SEX WITH WOMEN YOU AREN'T MARRIED TO AND ALWAYS USE A CONDOM.
Clearly women can not be trusted to not have abortion, America men must step up and STOP HAVING SEX WITH WOMEN YOU AREN'T MARRIED TO AND ALWAYS USE A CONDOM
Not entirely fair to the Pope, who is pretty consistent in saying no sex for anyone outside marriage, but right on about putting responsibility on men.
Abortion opponents can have, logically, only one goal. If a fetus is a human life with all that entails, from the point of conception, to abort it is morally and legally the same as if I were to stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody. And the person who sold me the gun, or drove me there, knowing full well what I intended, would have very specific and known legal culpability.
If you believe abortion is murder, it seems reasonable to expect it to be treated *exactly* like that.
Do I like this? No. But the through line is exceedingly clear, and a sincere belief about this matter should be expected to be taken to its logical conclusion.
This is a classic conflict-of-rights situation. Whatever one's views on abortion in principle, there are real-world cases where an abortion may be the least bad outcome. Conflict-of-rights situations in this country are usually resolved at the state level, because that's where the power resides. That's a process that was working itself out in the states until the Supreme Court short-circuited it in Roe, and that's the process that should be able to continue now, until the majority in every state is satisfied that they've reached the compromises that they're most comfortable -- or least uncomfortable -- with.
And what of the women who will die from lack of care, while states settle on this "compromise"? Or the women who will be denied care, even if there are so-called exemptions for rape, incest, or health of the woman in such a settled compromise? NYT compiled a nice article about how this is routinely happening now. Abortion is a part of women's reproductive healthcare, and Dobbs is the most awful decision to come down from the court since Korematsu.
The anti-abortion crowd will state some version of "...these deaths and adverse outcomes are a cost of doing business and returning our country to system of laws and morality in agreement with traditional patriarchal Christian values".
And even if they don't include the "patriarchal", that's what they mean, because their actions and positions are totally at variance with genuine Christian values.
Tell Uncle Joe to get off his "F***in" Ass and just do it. So we can shut up those motor mouths in the DUMA with their big words. They aren't the only ones that have Nuclears!
Trump/Silk/Diamond - - - Who the hell are those three entities?
You have half begun to make a comment on something that apparently makes sense to the people who live next door to them, but to the other 99.9999999% of the world who live elsewhere, you just as well be writing about airconditioning in Alaska.
Regarding the "Pro-Life" movement, which for the most part is just anti-abortion and against a woman's right to choice:
Ralph Waldo Emerson said, “[a] foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." Unfortunately, the hard Right anti-abortion crowd can't even maintain a "foolish consistency" in light of their desires to impose their beliefs on others.
Prior to Dobbs overturning Roe, these people wanted to return the laws on abortion to the individual states to decide. They kept screaming about states' rights and the fed overreach in imposing national laws on allowing the procedure. Now that SCOTUS killed Roe and national rules, returning the decision on abortion to the states, these folk no longer believe it should be up to each state, and that a national ban *must* be enacted - for the good of the children and families.
These little people feel that their "religious" beliefs should supersede the rights of the majority, because, after all, isn't the US a "Christian Country?" (Or at least their interpretation of Christianity - which is anything but a monolithic religion.)
True consistency (and a true Christian ethos) is beyond these little ones.
In my opinion, these "Pro-Life" arguments were in the main NOT about state's rights, or fetal rights, etc. This political movement was conceived as a means of negating the potential power of independent women, who are seen as threats by the "traditional" white, "Christian moralistic patriarchy. The dark money funding the "Pro-Life" movement finds that a male, predominantly white, Christo-moralistic demographic easier to control and convince of the necessity of using dirty fossil fuels, crushing unions and any thoughts of opposing corporate or owner power and limiting the vote to this same demographic. "Others" like independent women, non-white men and women are harder to control by these elites and hence their power to vote, and to even have the ability to make their own medical decisions must be stamped out.
The pregnancy police and a wide net of informants and vigilantes empowered by government to make sure that if you get pregnant you stay pregnant. That is what comes next.
One of the worst parts of totalitarianism is that it enlists your neighbor as spy and enforcement agent.
I'd say that it doesn't actually matter but then I saw headline articles in my newsfeed on the subject- what I think Trump was saying at the eulogy was in the vein of a compliment of Silk's speech. Basically "I didn't know you had this in you", not "who the hell are you?"
It's one of those trivial headline of the day things that won't matter by 5pm, but we should all take a moment to allow for context before dogpiling a thing. It's like Boebert's "two words" tweet.
There is plenty of blatantly stupid, callous, self-serving stuff served up daily by Trump. No need to pluck every fruit as soon as you see it.
Right. Send a few Abrams tanks to force Germany to send the Leopards. Also the training excuse is not credible. The US will be taking months to train the Ukrainians on the Patriot Missile System.
My (very limited) understanding (shout out to Lucian Truscott) is that the problem is that the Abrams requires near constant maintenance and a warehouse full of spare parts. Might be more to do with the logistics of that than the Administration imposing some sort of red line. Maybe.
The next time the Rs go into full Slippery Slope mode at the mere mention of any commonsensical and truly effective gun safety measure, they have a brand-new tool in their kit to wield on that front if they choose to, and I really hope they avail themselves of it, though I doubt they will, since they aren't that stupid. Well, some of 'em aren't, anyway...
"You think the Ds won't come even harder for your guns if we don't stick to ours and end up giving even an inch on gun control? You think Slippery Slopes don't exist? Here! Look right here at what we're doing and where we're going post Dobbs. This is just what they look like. A *national* ban on abortions, 'cause we can't and won't leave it up to the states, 'cause we can't get 'em *all* to see everything exactly our way, and 'cause we know better than anyone on this! So, if *we* can - and will - put on the skis, you know damned well those evil Ds will do the same when it comes to your God given right to kill anyone you want with any weapon of your choosing anytime you want, just like they do with abortions."
Yeah, just let these authoritarian ass hats go ahead and keep waxing their skis and passin' out the litmus tests on the abortion issue on a national level. Let's see where that gets 'em. Hopefully to a place where they dearly, dearly wish they'd been a little more satisfied and stuck to their guns on "It's up to the states to decide."
Agree. 1 or 2 Ábrams break the impasse then we should do it. This is a “proxy” war. There is no question that the human cost is being borne by the Ukrainians. And we as the bastion of Democracy are providing the tools to ensure that Ukraine has a chance to defeat an aggressor. I get it there is some fear to “poke” the Russian bear, yet we have been here before. Russia is growing unstable and this would be a good time to send the counter balance of tools to push the Russia’s into instability. Some will say well then they will use NUKEs. I don’t think so. I think Russians will realize they want to live. Send the tanks.
What comes next for abortion: how about jailing women for taking abortion pills (Alabama), or forcing women to have a cesarean or vaginal delivery for even dead fetuses (Idaho)? Check out what's happening in the states. It's not some rational compromise sussing itself out, as some people have earlier commented: "Go make [pro-choice] arguments at your state capitols." Meanwhile pregnant women in some states have less rights to bodily autonomy than a corpse.
Will Saletan's question of what do they really want (more babies, more abortion laws, or fewer abortions?) is spot on. I'm having lunch with a arch-conservative Catholic friend in a couple of weeks. I'll ask her....should be interesting.
Thank so much for everything you & everyone @ the the bulwark (especially Tim Miller, JVL & Sarah Longwell) have done & are doing to fight against the authoritarian cult that has taken over the republican party. I am a Never Trumpet in a land of Maga Morons (Arkansas). You guys have literally helped to keep me from going completely nuts many, many times over the last 7 years. I would be watching something totally at odds with what I thought American democracy was all about.
From Stormy Daniels all the way through to the Big Lie I would what Trump was doing & I would think OK, there is no way anybody could think that (insert your own Trump scandal) could watch this play out & conclude, yeah that's OK, no big deal, or hey all politicians are liars so what Trump is doing is fair game. When anyone with half an IQ point could see how badly he is eroding everything America strives to live up to. I mean even my dad who is a college professor with a PHD in economics was all in on the Trump Train & I would just observe in amazement as he bought in lock, stock & barrell whatever BS right wing media would portray when Trump repeatedly showed us who he really was, a wanna be authoritarian/strong-man pick your label but there really was no denying it. Yet time after time after time after time my dad either didn't see or didn't want to admit that maybe, just maybe I had been right all along & Trump was only out for Trump everyone else be damned including the Republican party & even America. I do think the tide is beginning to shift a tiny bit since the disastrous midterms for the Republicans & especially any Trump endorsed candidates. I say this BC right after the midterms my dad told me that he thought the Republican party could no longer win with Trump to which I replied that's easier said than done, Trump will burn it all down before he names allows someone else to be the Orange God King.
*****just for context I am 40yrs old & my dad will be 80 in March.
As somebody who used to think rather highly of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, I'm outraged by their stance. If there's no 14th Amendment right to abortion, as Dobbs said and as I and presumably they have always believed, then there's NO FEDERAL JURISDICTION over abortion, either to authorize it or to outlaw it. The Federal Government only has the powers that the Constitution delegates to it. The "appropriate legislation" clause of the 14th Amendment either applies to abortion or it doesn't apply. If the Supreme Court has decided that it doesn't apply, than it doesn't apply for anybody. If SBAPLA is making supporting a federal abortion ban a condition for their support, then they're as lawless as anyone else in this dispute, and they certainly know better.
Susan B. Anthony would be appalled at an organization using her name that fights to strip women of their equality and autonomy.
Her record on the subject of abortion is ambiguous. I doubt the organization's claim that she was anti, and their critics' claim that she wasn't. I'm not aware of any convincing evidence that she ever took a position. Her passions seem to have been very focused, and focused elsewhere.
When will PRO-LIFE men (Charlie & JVL) tell men they need to help prevent abortion by: NOT HAVING SEX WITH WOMEN YOU AREN'T MARRIED TO & ALWAYS USE A CONDOM IF YOU & YOUR PARTNER ARE NOT IN AGREEMENT YOU CAN AFFORD & WANT TO MAKE A BABY!!!
Why are men NEVER told what they can to do to reduce abortion?
If men didn't have sex unless they were making a wanted baby, there would be no abortion
--> THIS IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE!!!! Women can't get pregnant without sperm from men.
The truth is, men want to have sex 100% carefree.
Since men are not the one to get pregnant, to have to raise a child and even get out paying for the unwanted children (Herschel Walker) why would anything change?
There is ZERO peer pressure for men to stop having sex or always wear a condom to prevent abortion.
Even the "Christain's" (hello Pope!), who claim it is God's will that sex is only to be between married couple, REFUSE to tell men to follow their belief's, to follow God's will and STOP HAVING SEX WITH WOMEN YOU AREN'T MARRIED TO AND ALWAYS USE A CONDOM.
Clearly women can not be trusted to not have abortion, America men must step up and STOP HAVING SEX WITH WOMEN YOU AREN'T MARRIED TO AND ALWAYS USE A CONDOM
Not entirely fair to the Pope, who is pretty consistent in saying no sex for anyone outside marriage, but right on about putting responsibility on men.
Abortion opponents can have, logically, only one goal. If a fetus is a human life with all that entails, from the point of conception, to abort it is morally and legally the same as if I were to stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody. And the person who sold me the gun, or drove me there, knowing full well what I intended, would have very specific and known legal culpability.
If you believe abortion is murder, it seems reasonable to expect it to be treated *exactly* like that.
Do I like this? No. But the through line is exceedingly clear, and a sincere belief about this matter should be expected to be taken to its logical conclusion.
This is a classic conflict-of-rights situation. Whatever one's views on abortion in principle, there are real-world cases where an abortion may be the least bad outcome. Conflict-of-rights situations in this country are usually resolved at the state level, because that's where the power resides. That's a process that was working itself out in the states until the Supreme Court short-circuited it in Roe, and that's the process that should be able to continue now, until the majority in every state is satisfied that they've reached the compromises that they're most comfortable -- or least uncomfortable -- with.
And what of the women who will die from lack of care, while states settle on this "compromise"? Or the women who will be denied care, even if there are so-called exemptions for rape, incest, or health of the woman in such a settled compromise? NYT compiled a nice article about how this is routinely happening now. Abortion is a part of women's reproductive healthcare, and Dobbs is the most awful decision to come down from the court since Korematsu.
The anti-abortion crowd will state some version of "...these deaths and adverse outcomes are a cost of doing business and returning our country to system of laws and morality in agreement with traditional patriarchal Christian values".
And even if they don't include the "patriarchal", that's what they mean, because their actions and positions are totally at variance with genuine Christian values.
Those are certainly arguments to try to make at your state capitol. That's where the decisions will be made.
Tell Uncle Joe to get off his "F***in" Ass and just do it. So we can shut up those motor mouths in the DUMA with their big words. They aren't the only ones that have Nuclears!
Trump/Silk/Diamond - - - Who the hell are those three entities?
You have half begun to make a comment on something that apparently makes sense to the people who live next door to them, but to the other 99.9999999% of the world who live elsewhere, you just as well be writing about airconditioning in Alaska.
You need to do better.
Regarding the "Pro-Life" movement, which for the most part is just anti-abortion and against a woman's right to choice:
Ralph Waldo Emerson said, “[a] foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." Unfortunately, the hard Right anti-abortion crowd can't even maintain a "foolish consistency" in light of their desires to impose their beliefs on others.
Prior to Dobbs overturning Roe, these people wanted to return the laws on abortion to the individual states to decide. They kept screaming about states' rights and the fed overreach in imposing national laws on allowing the procedure. Now that SCOTUS killed Roe and national rules, returning the decision on abortion to the states, these folk no longer believe it should be up to each state, and that a national ban *must* be enacted - for the good of the children and families.
These little people feel that their "religious" beliefs should supersede the rights of the majority, because, after all, isn't the US a "Christian Country?" (Or at least their interpretation of Christianity - which is anything but a monolithic religion.)
True consistency (and a true Christian ethos) is beyond these little ones.
In my opinion, these "Pro-Life" arguments were in the main NOT about state's rights, or fetal rights, etc. This political movement was conceived as a means of negating the potential power of independent women, who are seen as threats by the "traditional" white, "Christian moralistic patriarchy. The dark money funding the "Pro-Life" movement finds that a male, predominantly white, Christo-moralistic demographic easier to control and convince of the necessity of using dirty fossil fuels, crushing unions and any thoughts of opposing corporate or owner power and limiting the vote to this same demographic. "Others" like independent women, non-white men and women are harder to control by these elites and hence their power to vote, and to even have the ability to make their own medical decisions must be stamped out.
Abortion: What comes next?
The pregnancy police and a wide net of informants and vigilantes empowered by government to make sure that if you get pregnant you stay pregnant. That is what comes next.
One of the worst parts of totalitarianism is that it enlists your neighbor as spy and enforcement agent.
I'd say that it doesn't actually matter but then I saw headline articles in my newsfeed on the subject- what I think Trump was saying at the eulogy was in the vein of a compliment of Silk's speech. Basically "I didn't know you had this in you", not "who the hell are you?"
It's one of those trivial headline of the day things that won't matter by 5pm, but we should all take a moment to allow for context before dogpiling a thing. It's like Boebert's "two words" tweet.
There is plenty of blatantly stupid, callous, self-serving stuff served up daily by Trump. No need to pluck every fruit as soon as you see it.
Maybe it's time to horse trade. We'll ban abortion and guns at the same time.
And we know which one causes the most deaths.
Right. Send a few Abrams tanks to force Germany to send the Leopards. Also the training excuse is not credible. The US will be taking months to train the Ukrainians on the Patriot Missile System.
My (very limited) understanding (shout out to Lucian Truscott) is that the problem is that the Abrams requires near constant maintenance and a warehouse full of spare parts. Might be more to do with the logistics of that than the Administration imposing some sort of red line. Maybe.
RE: Slippery Slopes
The next time the Rs go into full Slippery Slope mode at the mere mention of any commonsensical and truly effective gun safety measure, they have a brand-new tool in their kit to wield on that front if they choose to, and I really hope they avail themselves of it, though I doubt they will, since they aren't that stupid. Well, some of 'em aren't, anyway...
"You think the Ds won't come even harder for your guns if we don't stick to ours and end up giving even an inch on gun control? You think Slippery Slopes don't exist? Here! Look right here at what we're doing and where we're going post Dobbs. This is just what they look like. A *national* ban on abortions, 'cause we can't and won't leave it up to the states, 'cause we can't get 'em *all* to see everything exactly our way, and 'cause we know better than anyone on this! So, if *we* can - and will - put on the skis, you know damned well those evil Ds will do the same when it comes to your God given right to kill anyone you want with any weapon of your choosing anytime you want, just like they do with abortions."
Yeah, just let these authoritarian ass hats go ahead and keep waxing their skis and passin' out the litmus tests on the abortion issue on a national level. Let's see where that gets 'em. Hopefully to a place where they dearly, dearly wish they'd been a little more satisfied and stuck to their guns on "It's up to the states to decide."
From your lips . . .
When you base your Party on a lie, you are caught forever in it.
Or at least until the next serviceable and effective lie comes along...