17 Comments

I love it when these ghouls like Rick Sanitarium say the quiet part out loud. W H O O P S I E!

Expand full comment

I love this. It’s particularly poetic given the pro-life movement’s original purpose of engaging Christian white supremacist types in politics and getting them voting Republican. And now abortion is saving Democracy from them. I hope! Yay.

Expand full comment

I ask this question a lot but...isn't the military supposed to be protecting our "freedoms?" And if we don't have access to our own bodies, then we aren't actually free? And don't we give these goons trillions of dollars? (These are all rhetorical questions, I know the military and police all exist to protect the interests of the wealthy and not, you know, us.)

Expand full comment

I think this Tom Lehrer song addresses your question head on. “To the shores of Tripoli, but not to Mississippoli.” https://youtu.be/HHhZF66C1Dc?si=I887gYBak0Hh7oj1

Expand full comment

Indeed! It's apparently a very controversial question to ask but honestly why should I support our military when I literally do not have access to my own body in TOO MANY STATES in this country? 🤷

Expand full comment

There is a precedent for sending in the National Guard to ensure that people are able to exercise their Constitutional rights. The problem is that unless we reform the Supreme Court through expansion of justices or limitation of their subject matter jurisdiction, we’re probably a few decades at least away from being able to regain national recognition of a right to abortion.

Expand full comment

I am totally for expanding the court. It is fair game. There is nothing in the Constitution that sets a number, and it's varied in our history. Why not make it tethered to the number of circuit courts -- 13 - and bring it more in line to the populace. The 3 new justices were put here with hardball tactics. Well, let's do it too!

Expand full comment
founding

I honestly don't know to whom or what the loyalties of the U.S. military are, but it's not inconceivable that we could get into a situation where a military coup would be preferable to what the government was doing. If Republicans win next year they'll have full control of all three branches of the federal government, in a way we haven't seen one party have since at least the '60s (I don't really think the circumstances of Carter's term apply even if Dems had numbers). But Democrats had huge popular vote majorities then that Republicans are unlikely to come close to matching next year. And unless these Republicans are not at all who I think they are, and govern completely differently from how I expect, they will become very unpopular very quickly. What happens when you're both extremely unpopular AND you have full control? I wouldn't expect them to relinquish power voluntarily, and then we as a country have to figure out what to do about that.

Expand full comment

How absolutely horrifying is that quote from Rick Santorum?! 🤬

Expand full comment
founding

When we're sifting through the rubble in a decade or so, at least they can't say we didn't warn them. Which is of absolutely no comfort at all.

Expand full comment

Yes, we've been here before, in 2016. You warn people what is at stake and they call you an "alarmist".

Expand full comment
founding

Yeah, Trump's first term in office will look like a walk in the park if he gets a second one. And that's even considering that what we write about here every day is a direct result of that first term. At least we're still allowed to write these things.

Expand full comment

Direct democracy is great except when it isn’t. California has a history of passing ballot initiatives that strip people of their rights. I might say that we need a rule prohibiting using the initiative process to strip people of their rights, but then that prohibition could be used to stop a gun control initiative.

Then there’s the problem of the way ballot initiatives are often required to address single issues, which can make them wildly irresponsible or irrelevant, such as initiatives that cut revenues or increase spending without addressing the budgetary shortfalls or initiatives like California’s Prop 65, which has resulted in a deluge of carcinogen warning, with no actual benefit to consumers.

I’m hopeful that the abortion issue will help save American democracy, not through a proliferation of initiatives, but through efforts to take control of state legislatures and draw districts that are pro-democratic.

Expand full comment
Nov 14, 2023Liked by Jessica Valenti

This is fascinating and thought-provoking. Gave me hope and ideas.

Expand full comment

What's interesting right now is that both Democrats and MAGA are angry about government interference in matters that don't 'belong' to them: what differs is the form those take. MAGA folks -- and I actually know a few of these and what they believe just continues to blow me away -- are enraged that BIDEN IS GOING TO TAKE AWAY OUR GAS STOVES AND OUR STEAK!! Stuff like that. Democrats are enraged because the GOP:MAGA:SCOTUS conglomerate has criminalized abortion and stuck their flag in the ground where it says, "This is OUR business to tell you what you can and cannot do with your body." I hope that creative messengers are using these kinds of stark contrasts to either let people know about them who are currently indifferent/too busy/exhausted or to remind others of how important it is to keep in mind the endgames involved...

Expand full comment

Well no wonder they're so upset. When he's not pigging out on fast food, Mr soon to be indicted likes a steak. It has to be well done though. WELL DONE STEAK CHEWS LIKE LEATHER AND PROBABLY TASTES LIKE IT TOO. MAGA Must stop bad bad evil Biden 😈 .

On the stove front, Indoor air quality wise, it might be best getting rid of them no matter what. Not that charcoal is good for the environment but... Now I want a charred burger, Damn the carcinogens!

Expand full comment

Look at you! Offering us hope! Thanks, Jessica. And I believe your thinking is sound. Timing is important, though.

Expand full comment