So who's really to blame for the Roberts-Scalito court?

Comments

12 comments posted
Talk about doing the Republicans'

work for them. Hamsher, Kos (a year now of viral marketing against first NARAL and now others), and others who bat for the DSCC/DCCC/Etcetera are fool$, for a reason. And no friend to women, to choice, to freedom, autonomy.

Friends of Rahm Reid Schumer et al. Hillpac. And frankly pretty happy to aid and abet the Religious Right. Who else targets the old, if flabby, pro choice orgs? Politicians who want to leave abortion behind (Dems) or satisfy the hard right base (Repubs) and the fucked religious.

I don't have to support less than aggressive lobby/advocacy orgs (and I am not a financial contributer to any of he big three, NARAL, PPFA, NOW) to know bullshit, in massive truckloads, when it is being dumped on women.

Hamsher should go back to script doctoring, or whatever she did... Kos should out himself. I think the "important shit" sends invoices for work on the FP and on FPs of aligned blogs: Incestuous amplification. Bullshit x bullshit X Kos X Hamsher X the others (Atrios, Digby, MyDD, etcetera). It still is just truck loads of bullshit.

Jim Dean hit it when he said the Democratic party works very hard to protect its small 'bastard child of the Republicans' space at the end of the trough.

FOR SHAME.

Marisacat's picture
Posted by Marisacat on 25 February 2006 - 12:38am
online ward heelers

i'd find the party blogs© effort to paint NARAL, and Planned Parenthood, as being responsible for Alito's presence on the bench laughable, if it wasn't so sad.

i suspect hamster is a mouthpiece, spewing someone's blame-deflecting talking points, the only question is who's? who has the incentive to point the finger away from themselves?

its very easy to point the finger at those who are responsible for our anti-choice court; bush and his anti-choice republican senate, the senate democratic leadership who failed to mount a filibuster and the senate democrats who got out of line and voted for cloture. it's a very short list. as mediagirl says, neither NARAL or PP has a vote in the senate. the democratic party, with it's inept leadership and it's inability to mount a filibuster failed the women of this country.

yet the senate democrats and their leadership refuse to take responsibility for their failure and seek to assign it elsewhere. to them it seems to be just another fund-raising angle.

On Thursday, Sen. John Kerry sent out an appeal asking for Democratic campaign donations "if you want to prevent the next Samuel Alito from being confirmed to the Supreme Court."

i get how it works now. we're supposed to pony up, and then after they fail at that promised task and screw us again?

well NARAL is still around. yeah, that's the ticket.

lets blame NARAL.

laughable

As the states de-fund planned parenthood, leaving poor women less able to care for themselves, the party blogs© urge that we de-fund planned parenthood further. Is that how the (so-called) "progressive" left supports women? by defundunding their birth control and health services?

shameful.

bayprairie's picture
Posted by bayprairie on 25 February 2006 - 1:37pm
I am so glad to see someone

I am so glad to see someone tell kos and firedoglake the truth. NARAL and Planned Parenthood can lobby pro-choice senators until they are blue in the face, they can activate their base and they can scream from the mountain tops but with a majority of congress not only republican but anti-choice republican and weak democrats their efforts fall on deaf ears. It is now up to you and every other blogger out there to stop undermining Planned Parenthood and NARAL by stiring up crap and let them do their jobs. Now that the public is listening-they did not listen for years when they were told "Roe is Falling" they are outraged. Help get these Americans to the polls in Nov. 06 and especially 08 to actually vote in pro-choice officials-of either party-who will actually stand up for our reproductive freedoms.

Elaine's picture
Posted by Elaine (not verified) on 25 February 2006 - 7:37am
Abortion is too narrow a front for Women's Rights

The great generals learn that the best way to defeat a force of large number is to box them in. This is called, "defeating them in detail." For example, fight a large force that marches in single file, and thus a small force knocks them off one-by-one.

That's what the abortion issue has been. It has focused women on a narrow issue, but not the way Kos means it. We have been fighting one battle as if it is the only battle, thus trivializing the fight for equal rights for women.

The broad front is Female Liberation, reproductive rights being but one on the rights under assault.

What happens in such situations is that the opposition become an institution. What will an activist do if reproductive rights are swept in?

Surely I support a woman's right to choose, but the issue, for me at least, is too narrow.

On the other hand, with no one articulating the ERA, are we surprised that the right wing can tie us in knots over this issue?

The basic issue is not reproduction; it is women's rights, and so far I see no action by the progressives on this.

Sadly, we are losing the battle, because we aren't fighting the war.

Matsu's picture
Posted by Matsu on 25 February 2006 - 8:32am
Without entering into any b lanket

defense of the womens' political/tactical movement, it seems to me ''The War'' front was decimated long ago.

The religious right, and for tactical purposes we can count forward from Henry Hyde and the assualt on poor women, fractured the war and they concentrated on abortion. That was their tactic, to enrage and harden their base, to engage the so called religious (afaiac the hard right anti women groups are simply fascistic, religion is the horse they and Bush ride) warriors and the next 30 - 35 years is sad history.

Might the womens movement/rights movements have been smarter tactically, elevated better leaders had a more steadfast political partner (Dems undercut women over and over) had better advocacy groups, retreated never, and appeased not at all.. oh yes all better had it been that way..

The religious right and the anti-women fascists concentrated on abortion. It served them well. And many people in this country "agree" with Chris Matthews, all Democrats talk about is abortion. Daily Kos has been on a near year long tirade agaisnt women and first NARAL and now others, now with FDL, Atrios, Digby TalkLeft, various state blogs and others assisting. I credit the Democrats, as servants of the Republicans for despoiling the Big Box Blogs. Without a doubt. Reeled in early and, my best guess, compensated as product and policy "enhancers". Online whips and organisers. Operatives.

As Biden and Schumer and Hillpac amd their ilk sold out women, poor women, children and families - and their rights, over and over again.

And the Lotts and McCains, US Catholic Bishops (and their packaged lies) and Dobsons sat back and observed the inevitable failure, year after year.

There is blame, and shame, to go around.

Marisacat's picture
Posted by Marisacat on 25 February 2006 - 10:08am
Apartheid of women

Let's stop for a moment and ask some basic questions - why are women under-represented in the halls of power? Isn't this strange? A group that makes up half the population.

That people are not troubled by this speaks to a deep sexism that runs not only among men, but also among women.

Unless and until this policy of quasi-apartheid is addressed, I am not going to worry too much about which man wins what office.

The system and institutionalized discrimination and subjugation of women is a disgrace.

Matsu's picture
Posted by Matsu on 25 February 2006 - 9:03pm
Men electing each other - the Kos approach

Notice how women are asked to always throw in behind a cadre of men. The fact there is a woman or two is window dressing.

Who is making all the decisions? Men.

Yet women have to the vote and the fact that they accept the "Male Parties" slate of candidates and actually believe that these men care about women, makes me wonder.

Matsu's picture
Posted by Matsu on 25 February 2006 - 9:11pm
Let's Keep In Mind...

...that the Hyde Amendment passed under Jimmy Carter. I know we're all supposed to idolize certain Democrats, but anti-choice elements in the DP have been around all along.

Until we can look at history honestly, and acknowledge how often wolves in the fold have accomplished what enemies on the other team have not, there's no chance that things can change. Why push a distorted history that allows women's enemies to pretend that they have done nothing wrong ?

The truth is, even folks who wrap themselves in the pro-choice mantle when it suits them are only pro-choice for their own kind. The predatory market values endorsed by the DLC don't align all that well with the notion of poor and working women having bodily autonomy, education, and small families. Who will scrabble and struggle for crappy service jobs ? Who will go into the army ? Who will serve as easy prey for debt-based "financial services" if not a large permanent underclass ? Until we can attack the classism that is a basic M.O. of the top-tier Democrats, we cannot attack their hypocrisy on abortion because we will be required to pretend that deep down they are good people who are just "spineless." This approach absolves them of real responsibility for their actions and accomplishes nothing.

als's picture
Posted by als (not verified) on 26 February 2006 - 9:33am
The Ruling Class

Great comment, als.

Gore Vidal once said that the United States is run by "a tough ruling class." He may be right.

Indeed, the House and Senate are populated by millionaires on both sides of the aisle who may well have far more in common than they do with their constituencies.

Matsu's picture
Posted by Matsu on 26 February 2006 - 10:46am
Dems are permanently cutting off debate

Reading yet another blogger boy praise yet another vile anti-choice Dem (MyDD on Ritter) it is most painfully fucking clear that we have been sold out. Fuck the polls just another means of propoganda to sell their bullshit.

It is no coincidence that at a time when Democrats are favored to win back seats the Dem establishment is doing their damnest to shore up the unprogressive agenda of the GOP...Langevin, Kaine, Casey, Ritter, Massa...ect. The telltale sign was when Reid was more interested in "framing" a win on Alito as him holding to gether a meaningless vote after defeating the filibuster ... a one day lead in the news... rather than protecting women from dying in the coming YEARS.

There is no more Democratic party and the more this is evident the more hacks and hackettes bloggers will be paid to spew the party line. I've notice that people don't even bother to combat these blogholes any more... what is the use...they get paid by the word... Jane has a bright and lucrative career in front of her... I wager within three weeks she will be crowing Casey's praises.

postdated's picture
Posted by postdated (not verified) on 26 February 2006 - 10:21am
Thanks, Matsu

(And sorry for the name confusion. My mouse sticks sometimes.)

As terrible as all this is, I'm relieved to hear more feminists finally seeing the game for what it really is. I've been very influenced over the past few years by Socialist feminists like Sharon Smith and Brandy Baker and desperately want things shaken up by someone-- anyone. I guess I'm wondering if there's still a chance for women of good conscience to unite across class and gender lines, and take on the boy's club over its maltreatment of us. I've been spending some time on the blog Stop Me Before I Vote Again (where I seem to be the token feminist-- if not the token female :D) and they are passionate advocates of the "demolition" model. That is, Indy or 3rd Party candidates should seek out sell-out, pro-war Democratic candidates being peddled as "progressives" and hound them. I find this model pretty attractive, though there are few such races in my home state right now.

One great thing about this model is that it would be hard for the fellows to keep sweeping women's rights under the rug and demoting them to the status of "special interests." There'd be somebody out there shoving our issues in their smug faces all the time-- reminding them that all sorts of related barometers for social health hinge on women's health issues. It ain't crochet, you overgrown frat boys.

alsis39.5's picture
Posted by alsis39.5 (not verified) on 27 February 2006 - 9:11am
Sorry. :o

That should have read "unite across class and race lines." Too early. No coffee. :o

alsis39.5's picture
Posted by alsis39.5 (not verified) on 27 February 2006 - 9:12am