The repeal of Roe v. Wade or the state regulation of abortions to make them virtually impossible to obtain is almost certain to happen. And it is unlikely that Democrats can do anything to protect women’s rights to having this procedure performed. Even if Democrats can prevent Kavanaugh from being confirmed, Trump has a list of 25 or so Supreme Court candidates, vetted by the conservative Federalist Society, who all share the same views on women’s reproductive rights. Trump will simply submit the next name on the list and we can expect the same results. As is too often true of Democrats, we had our opportunity to effectively advocate for the issue but failed to do so. This fight is not the 2018 fight. If we wanted to protect the reproductive rights of women we should have done it in 2016.
Democrats need to wage a battle to reject Kavanagh for the Supreme Court. However, they make a serious mistake to turn it into a Roe v. Wade battle. Roe v. Wade denied states the right to prevent abortions, although states retain the right to regulate them. Those states that would prevent abortions, but for Roe v. Wade have already regulated access to them so that women face inexorable obstacles in obtaining them. For example, 23 states have regulations that apply to sites where abortions are performed (such as the width of corridors), unnecessary licensing requirements for providers, or restrictive proximity to hospital requirements. Some of these regulations are being litigated and may come before the Supreme Court.
The repeal of Roe v. Wade or the state regulation of abortions to make them virtually impossible to obtain is almost certain to happen. And it is unlikely that Democrats can do anything to protect women’s rights to having this procedure performed. Even if Democrats can prevent Kavanaugh from being confirmed, Trump has a list of 25 or so Supreme Court candidates, vetted by the conservative Federalist Society, who all share the same views on women’s reproductive rights. Trump will simply submit the next name on the list and we can expect the same results. As is too often true of Democrats, we had our opportunity to effectively advocate for the issue but failed to do so. This fight is not the 2018 fight. If we wanted to protect the reproductive rights of women we should have done it in 2016.
0 Comments
It has become an article of faith, either lamented or celebrated, to observe that Trump’s supporters are irreversibly bound to him. No matter what Trump does, doesn’t do, or has done, most people marvel at how loyal his voters remain. His support remains nationally at about 40 percent approval, with some ups and downs, and at about a steadfast 88 percent approval among Republicans.
For most of 18 or so months that Trump has been in office, prognosticators have found one sign or another that his supporters are finally breaking away. After Trump announced that the neo-Nazis marching in Charlottesville were as good as the those protesting them, some observers predicted Trump’s supporters would break away. They didn’t. When Democrats running for office in Georgia, Virginia, and Alabama showed surprising electoral strength, pundits again predicted Trump’s eroding strength. But Trump’s support bounced back. Indeed, some critics claimed Democratic voters lost heart. By the end of 2017 as the White House seemed in a state of perpetual chaos and Republican politicians announced their early retirement, onlookers once again predicted the awakening of Trump voters. But alas, his supporters did not retreat. Some commentators are once again predicting the erosion of support for Trump following the quickening pace of a tangible investigation by Robert Mueller; the burgeoning legal fallout of Trump’s sexual escapades; the scenes as horrific as those occurring at foreign concentration camps of kids being torn from their parents; and images of a U.S. President kowtowing to a Russian President at Helsinki. Other analysts warn us that Trump supporters will not leave him. Trump lovers, like all lovers, have emotional as well as logical reasons for their devotion. This is not the only time in history some people have marveled at the illogical persistence or stubbornness of supporters. During WWII the German population suffered severe bombing from the Allies. Yet, many Germans did not quiver nor lose morale and commitment. After the war social scientists, flabbergasted at the steadfastness of the German population, studied how the severity of bombings affected morale. They found that the impact of bombing had to be measured in terms of what psychologically affected the population rather than the physical extent of bombing. Germans’ resolve dropped when civil services (e.g., lighting, sanitation, transportation) were disrupted.
If the same logic applies to Trump voters, then it is unlikely that they will reject him unless his actions disrupt their lives. And the tariff war Trump started may just be the irrational act that is needed. Farmers and blue-collar workers in the mid-West are already being hurt by the war. More of the effects of the tariffs will be felt shortly as the Europeans, Chinese, Canadians, and others retaliate against U.S. goods. U.S. consumers will pay for Trump’s tariffs and Trump support may began to erode.
The Main Stream Media has persisted in asking why Trump acts as a wrecking ball against the interests of the U.S. and western democracies. Many people answer this question by citing Trump’s personal characteristics and are willing to believe that he has horrific characteristics such as dementia or drug addiction. Nonetheless, few in the political world were willing to consider the possibility that Trump was either a willing or unwilling Russian agent. Trump’s behavior with the NATO members in Brussels and at the Helsinki summit with Vladimir Putin has definitively answered this question.
First, due entirely to his decision to hold an unnecessary summit, Trump was demeaned from the beginning. Acceding to Putin, the summit was held on Putin’s home court, Helsinki, 250 miles from Russia. In addition to that, Putin kept Trump waiting for 45 minutes to start the meeting. Most people have wondered why Donald Trump behaves in such an unorthodox manner. He has, for example, defied the judgement of both U.S. foreign policy community and its closest allies by withdrawing from the Iran Nuclear deal. Cable television pundits pose many explanations – most of which rely on his personal dispositions rather than the external rewards or pressures he may be facing.
Some observers who favor this dispositional basis to explain and perhaps predict his future behavior have suggested that he is acting out of a sycophancy toward authoritarian leaders like Putin. Others have suggested that he is driven by a desire to denigrate Barack Obama’s accomplishments. And still others point to Trump’s lack of self-discipline and maturity as the reason for his behavior. Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller’s investigation is unlikely to remove Donald Trump from the Presidency. Despite the intensity of Progressive voters the Republican House and Senate votes needed to remove Trump are unlikely to be there in either 2018 or 2020. Democrats will probably win control of the House in 2018. The Democrats need 24 seats to gain control of the House. Since the end of World War II, the President’s party has lost an average of 26 House seats in midterm elections. The lower a President’s approval rating, the more seats his party is likely to lose. Trump’s approval rating is lower than any other U.S. President since the administration of Harry Truman. Further, nearly 40 Republican House members have announced their retirement so far. Republicans thus have the highest number of open seats since 1974. And open seats tend to be more vulnerable to Democratic take over than incumbent Republican seats. The only way to remove Trump and enablers from office is to vote them out.
We post this second of two articles about guns in America on a very sad day as a young man killed students in Florida today - marking the eighth school shooting with deaths or injuries in 2018 so far. The earlier article, Gun Rights and the Progressive Movement was posted in January.
Sign Up for FREE Email Updates
Receive FREE weekly newsletters from the Center for Social Policy Research.
Hostiles-Written and directed by Scott Cooper
A Critical Review Hostiles is about white supremacy. It is also about the price paid by those who fought to achieve it. The movie opens in New Mexico at the end of the Indian wars. The movie’s protagonist, Captain Joe Blocker (Christian Bale), is a professional soldier. He is not just any soldier. He reads Julius Caesar in the original Latin. He is a centurion. And, he fights to subjugate the Indian and perpetuate white supremacy. In his war against the Indians, Blocker has killed many and taken more scalps than Sitting Bull. Like many of the men he leads and fights with, he has paid a price. The price Blocker and his men have paid becomes clear on the last mission before his retirement. He is assigned to escort an old and dying Indian chief, Yellow Hawk, to Montana to die in his ancestral burial grounds. Yellow Hawk (Wes Studi) has killed many of Blocker’s friends, some in a horrible way. Blocker at first refuses the order, but is reminded that his pension—all he will have after 20 years’ service—is at stake. He relents and starts on the journey that will strip away the scar tissue from the last 20 years of his life. The Republican lawmakers seem to be planning to use the old legal strategy of TODDI to defend Donald Trump against allegations of conspiring with Russia to win the 2016 election. Specifically, their plan is to argue that Hillary Clinton hired Fusion GPS to obtain information on Trump’s business affairs in Russia. Fusion GPS, in turn, hired the former U.K. spy, Christopher Steele, who then prepared and delivered a dossier to the FBI. Thus, it wasn’t Trump; it was that other dude: Hillary.
Senator Dianne Feinstein damaged the Republican TODDI defense. After it was clear that the Chair of the Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley reneged on his promise to release the testimony of GPS Fusion owner, Glenn R. Simpson, Feinstein released it on her own. The testimony showed Republicans asking questions designed to support their TODDI narrative. Simpson’s answers refuted the Republican portrayal of him as a Democratic hitman who would concoct a story for money. In his testimony, both GPS Fusion and Steele appear to have professionally and legally gathered information, and honorably reported possible threats to the United States to the FBI. The GOP and Trump campaign both look selfish and unpatriotic in comparison. Along with TODDI, the President’s defenders are claiming that those investigating Trump are so corrupt that any evidence of wrongdoing uncovered must be disqualified. His minion, Representative Devin Nunes, orchestrated a memo alleging that the information used by the FBI to obtain a secret wiretapping (FISA) warrant was from a biased source—the Steel dossier. And, as a result, the FBI managers who requested the warrant must be so dishonest, they cannot investigate Trump. In fact, the information used to obtain the warrant did not come solely from the Steel dossier. Moreover, the court was told that the warrant was biased, as are most sources used to obtain warrants. Nonetheless, Republicans continue to stake their survival on the TODDI and corrupt investigators defenses. After all, it may be the only defense they have.
Sign Up for FREE Email Updates
Receive FREE weekly newsletters from the Center for Social Policy Research.
We are in a war. The war is between Republicans, an authoritarian party, and Democrats, a liberal party. Right wing authoritarians are coming for our democracy with jack boots and MAGA caps. Republicans want to overturn our democratic republic and replace it with an authoritarian regime. Democrats, on the other hand, want to maintain our democratic republic.
Jeff Flake is oblivious to this war. He seems to believe there are two equivalent parties, polarized only in their policy preferences. Efforts to “cleanse” the FBI and the Justice Department and to “purge” government agencies are not symptoms of polarization. They are the destruction of the pillars of our political system. In his book “The Conscience of a Conservative,” Flake acknowledges that the Republican Party has violated its principles by putting party over country and embracing a cult of personality. It is not the Democratic Party that has abandoned its egalitarian principles or raised an authoritarian personality over democratic norms. But, Jeff Flake and others seem to ignore differences between the parties and what those differences mean for the continuation of a democratic republic.
Sign Up for FREE Email Updates
Receive FREE weekly newsletters from the Center for Social Policy Research.
![]()
Steve Bannon, Trump’s previous White House political strategist, expressed some satisfaction when he was fired because “Now I’m free. I’ve got my hands back on my weapons” referring to his position at Breitbart.com. Bannon intended to support Trump’s populist or white supremacist agenda. Bannon failed in his first test when he supported Roy Moore to be Alabama’s Senator. Then Trump broke with Bannon after he was quoted extensively in Michael Wolff’s Fire and Fury as calling a meeting with Russians “treasonous” and accusing Trump of money laundering.
The cascade of failure for Bannon continues. He lost his financial support from the ultra-right-wing Mercer family, and was removed from Breitbart. Last week Bannon had the University of Chicago withdraw a speaking invitation due to student protests. And, Special Prosecutor, Robert Mueller subpoenaed Bannon on the same day he was testifying before the House Intelligence Committee. Mueller’s subpoena may have been a ploy to convince Mueller to be more forthcoming in future interviews. If so, it seems to have worked. Bannon agreed to Mueller’s conditions for an interview. Of course, Mueller will see if Bannon contradicts his House testimony. More importantly, expect Mueller to delve into the data firm, Cambridge Analytica that Bannon introduced to the Trump campaign. Data Analytica is owned by the Mercers and might have had connections with the Russians. And, Bannon can expect Mueller to ask about all the salacious information contained in Wolff’s book. |
Follow my substack
[email protected] Archives
August 2024
|