News Addiction

If you are depressed stop wallowing in the outrage culture. Think happy thoughts, you’ll feel better.

That was the gist of the suggestion offered to a friend who posted the image featured in yesterday’s article Depression. As if depression is something you can turn off, like a switch. It isn’t like that.

I do follow the news closely these days, as does my friend. I was a news hound for decades before Meniere’s took my joie de vivre. I was active in the Travis County Libertarian Party, taking a hands-on role in as much local politics as I could handle while still holding down a full-time architecture job. I listened to news and radio talk shows constantly while working on whatever architecture project was in front of me that day so as to keep informed of whatever the current trends were. It was crucial to know what was happening if you wanted to have a hand in changing it. I switched to podcasts for my news well before most other people even knew that podcasts existed. I read newspapers and news sites. I immersed myself in the political realities of Austin, of Texas, of the United States, and did my best to be the positive change that I thought the world needed. Just as every good citizen of the world should do.

But then I got sick, and I didn’t get better. I didn’t have a livelihood any longer and I couldn’t look forward to finding one again, probably ever. The constant stream of information about what was going on in the world became a distraction from what it was that I needed to deal with. The barrage of things that I couldn’t change externally just drove home how helpless I was to even be able to alter what was happening in my own body.

That was what was important. Figuring out what was wrong with me. Finding ways to cope with the new reality of my disabilities. I didn’t have time to spend on informing myself about things that weren’t directly impacting my health until I found a way to stabilize my own internal situation.

So I quit the news.

I quit listening in 2006-ish. I just quit, cold turkey. I’m not saying that I didn’t know what was happening in the world, I simply quit seeking out that information. There is no way to stay completely uninformed (a perfect idiot) so long as there are people who tell you things they think you want to hear. But I put science, medical and skeptical podcasts at the top of my queue starting at about that time and stopped even listening to news feeds that didn’t include other information that I might personally find useful.

I only started back listening to the news directly, for news content, when all the hatred for Barack Obama made me decide to find out what all the fuss was about. That was when I realized that the news culture had split into two camps that couldn’t even agree on basic facts. While I hadn’t been paying attention, FOX had lead conservatives and Republicans down a dark alley that lead to a thousand foot cliff and then expected all those lemmings following them to walk off the cliff in blind subservience.

In determining what the facts were I came to realize just how poor my understanding of the world was prior to that point, and just how poorly the average American, the average human, understands anything that isn’t forced into their stream of consciousness. I stopped seeing Rachel Maddow as someone who brought up questionable narratives about accepted truths and instead saw her as the accomplished storyteller that the current crop of news consumers clearly see her as today.

However, It’s going to take an American version of the Extinction Rebellion protests that have been taking place in London and New York to also take place in everytown, USA to wake the average FOX news watcher up to the requirement that we do something about climate change. I’m not even certain that anything short of re-education will make them understand just how scandalous their behavior and the behavior of their leaders are.

The Extinction Rebellion Returns | Jonathan Pie | 9 October 2019

But I remain hopeful, for the time being.

After all, the Wife was telling me “they won’t impeach Trump” just two weeks ago. Now Rachel Maddow has said it is a foregone conclusion that they will impeach him. I have to agree with Rachel. I don’t see any way for them to not impeach him given the crimes he has committed that we know of, to say nothing of the crimes we suspect him of but still don’t have the proof to convict him of. The sticking point remains the Senate and Trump’s co-conspirator, Moscow Mitch McConnell.

I’m reserving judgement until after the power hand-off that should occur in 2020-2021, impeachment or no impeachment. We’ll see just how bad things really are at that point. To draw this circular argument to a close and tie it in with the title, I quit listening to the news precisely because I felt that my health was suffering from spending so much time obsessing about what was going on in the world and what the proper solution to the problems were. I’m glad I stopped paying attention then. The solutions that I would have embraced back then are completely different than the ones I would embrace today. 180 degrees different.

So I improved my health by breaking the news addiction. I’ll break it again if I feel that following the news is negatively impacting my health. So long as the authoritarians that back the Orange Hate-Monkey lose power, I’m pretty sanguine with whatever else happens along with it. Which means, my depression isn’t based on my news consumption. But I do appreciate the suggestion.

Wildly expanded from Facebook comments.

Less OHM, more Real People

I just noticed a few days ago that Facebook had stopped prompting me that a real life friend had posted something I might want to look at. I figured the friend had stopped posting to Facebook, like so many other people with accounts have done. Turns out that they’re just as active as they ever have been, but Facebook doesn’t deem our relationship worth preserving. I’ve added them to the “see first” list. I’ll probably have to do that for other real life friends and their stuff. Real life friends take a back seat to the scandal of the moment here in the web 2.0. I really couldn’t care less about political scandals these days. Someone let me know when they finally get around to #ImpeachTrump would you? Until that point it’s just so much more BS that I don’t need to pay attention to.

This is an old argument between Facebook and me.

I am seriously beginning to despise Facebook. Once again, notifications I have asked for have been removed from my…

Posted by R. Anthony Steele on Thursday, October 2, 2014

Facebook.

Jeff Ward Out at KLBJ

“I’m honored to have given every ounce of intellectual honesty I’ve had for the past 20 years. To anyone who appreciates that, I appreciate you.

“Whether I made you laugh or scream, every day I thought about how to make that barstool the most entertaining place you could be. It’s all I ever wanted to do. That part of the job was fun. Thank you for letting me in. I admire you, and I hope you admire me.

“Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go play with my kids.”

Austin American-Statesman

Sinclair media has claimed another victim. I stopped listening to Jeff Ward ages ago. I stopped having enough in common with his brand of political and economic thought to be able to find him amusing anymore. That is not his fault, it is the fault of disability. The fault of poverty. But mutual success is how we all survive and thrive, and there is precious little success these days out here in radioland if you aren’t willing to fuck over your clients, your competitors and/or your funders.

This is the age of Trump, and that is how Trump does business. That is also how Sinclair media does business. If you want to know what is going on in the world, don’t get your news from a Sinclair source, because they will lead you astray everytime.

Sorry you lost your job Jeff. I’m sure you’ll find something else to do.

Nixon vs. Trump

Nixon only resigned (I suspect) because he knew he would be impeached and that meant that he couldn’t be pardoned. If he resigned there would be no problem with Ford pardoning him for any potential wrongdoing. Perhaps someone should take the time to draw up a picture book explaining these facts to Trump.

If Trump is impeached, you can count on Pence and the Republican leadership to throw him and his family under the bus in an attempt to prove that Trump’s corruption, Trump’s racism, was just Trump. This is why investigations into Mitch McConnell’s actions, Lindsey Graham’s flip-flops on his opinions about Trump and Pence’s actions covering for Trump all need to be started now. Now, so that they cannot just pretend that none of this was their idea.

Facebook comments posted to the blog.

I expect that the Republican party will turn on Trump — possibly as soon as next week. But however long it takes, it…

Posted by David Gerrold on Saturday, September 28, 2019

Perspective

George Bush got a pass from history that I will never understand. He starts a war for a completely fictionalized reason, which results in hundreds of thousands of people dying, and an entire generation of war vets coming home, damaged for the rest of their lives, and you can see them on the streets. Why are they on the streets? Because George Bush started a war for no reason. Right? And then not to mention the devastation that is left over in Iraq because we started a war for no reason. Right?

…And somehow this doesn’t matter and we’re obsessing about Trump’s tweets when there is a guy in Texas…

(Larry Wilmore: You know who was against that war? Your boy Trump.)

I don’t think Trump is nearly as egregious as George Bush. I don’t think it’s even close. He started a war on the basis of a lie. A complete falsehood which he told to the American people that had nothing to do with 9-11. Which devastated tens of thousands of lives, cost a trillion dollars, and left a generation of American soldiers devastated and wounded and somehow he’s perceived as this genial guy down in Texas painting pictures and giving speeches.

What is the matter with us? There is nothing Donald Trump has done that has come even close to the human devastation of George Bush’s time. Not even close. Not even close. I mean, Trump is a deeply objectionable figure, but he has not resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of people for no reason.

George Bush is a war criminal. That is what a war criminal is. Someone who enters into a disastrous conflict for no good reason. For worse than no good reason. For a completely trumped up, ridiculous reason. The choice of things that Americans get riled up about has always amazed me.

Malcolm Gladwell

Something I’ve pointed out a few dozen times myself. As much as Trump is an active threat to the proper functioning of the United States, and a fraudster that is duping us of millions of dollars for every day he is in office, he hasn’t yet descended to the level of war criminal that Bush, Cheney, et al occupy.

The Orange Hate-Monkey hasn’t gone that far down the scale of evil yet. Yet. The back and forth occurs at 40:45 in this episode of Larry Wilmore: Black on the Air.

Malcolm Gladwell on ‘Talking to Strangers’ (Live) | Larry Wilmore: Black on the Air

I also took the time to listen to It’s Been a Minute With Sam Sanders,  Best-Selling Author Malcolm Gladwell On ‘Talking To Strangers’: A Live Conversation. Both podcasts were worth the time, and you gain an insight into the personality of Sandra Bland that isn’t available anywhere else unless you just happened to run across her Youtube channel yourself, as well as why every time you call a racist a racist you are in some small way handing a victory to institutional racism.


It is worth noting that not prosecuting George W. Bush, Dick Cheney et al for their war crimes leads directly to Donald Trump becoming president. Which means that in some small part, Barack Obama is to blame for the predicament that we find ourselves in today. George W. Bush was not prosecuted for war crimes because the Obama justice department chose not to make a case of the conspiracies and lies that lead us into war in Iraq.

Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives lost, the foundation of DAESH (what the media in the US calls the Islamic State) hundreds of thousands of Syrian lives lost, thousands of American lives lost, more than a hundred thousand injured and disabled US veterans, trillions of dollars wasted. George Bush and his administration get a pass for all of that when all of that sprang directly from the lie that Iraq was somehow involved in the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. President Obama gave him that pass.

Had George Bush been prosecuted. Had the known crimes against humanity committed by the Bush administration been subjected to inquiry, justice and restitution, the Republican party would not have felt that they were still in the right when it comes to their delusions about foreign policy. Their delusions about christianity. The place of the US government as part of a whole world which requires governance. Requires justice.

They would have known that their beliefs were based on lies because the criminal proceedings would have made the truth of this blatantly clear. Whether they agreed with the verdicts or not, in the end, the trial of George W. Bush for war crimes would have altered the trajectory of the Republican party if not resulted in its destruction and reformation as a viable opposing party to the Democrats.

Instead we let George Bush off the hook. And what we got for letting him off the hook was transparently racist hatred of Barack Obama and an unrepentant Republican party willing to sacrifice everything on one last chance to get their beliefs enshrined as public policy, even if that meant they had to destroy everything they pretended to hold dear in the process.

What we got for our inaction on the crimes of the Bush administration was civil war in Syria and unrest across the entire region that we refer to as the Middle East. How many millions of lives will be negatively impacted by our unwillingness to get involved in the Syrian civil war?

Morning Edition – Survivor Of Torture In Syria’s Prisons Is Telling His Story

Climate change is a portion of the reason why Syria descended into civil war. Civil war is always more complex than any one group involved in the civil war ever wants to admit. An extended drought in the region lead to crop failures and the migration of the starving farmers into cities and towns where they demanded aid and assistance from the Assad government. Instead of responding with aid, Bashar al Assad imprisoned these protestors and forced the dissident groups within his country to ally with outside forces in order to topple his government. Topple his government so that the poor in his country could be given the assistance that they needed to weather the crisis brought on by climate change.

The conservatives here in the US deny that climate change is real, and they further deny that we have any reason to think that the human tragedies occurring in Syria and elsewhere around the world are our responsibility. All while we pump out more carbon dioxide than any other country as technically advanced as our own.

How many millions of people, if not billions of people, will suffer and possibly die because of the denialism that we allow to fester in our country, when it comes to climate change? Why do we allow these people who deny science to lead our country? Why do we think that they have a right to believe things which are demonstrably not true? Will flat earthers be given a seat at the leadership table next?

Morning Edition – We Are On The Front Line Of Climate Change, Marshall Islands President Says

That is perspective. Study it closely.

Politics Takes Time.

This was my mantra through eight years of Obama. Politics takes time. It’s too bad that the average citizen doesn’t have the attention span to handle this basic fact of life. If they had the patience to wait and see what the Democrats could have done, then we wouldn’t have had 6 years of Republican control of the legislature. We wouldn’t have had a guaranteed result of no progress for Obama’s agenda, since it takes a cooperative legislature to enact the policies that the administration wants to put in place.

After stymying Obama for six years, the citizenry, appalled by the dysfunction of the US government that they created, put a known con-artist in the White House with the help of a calcified election structure that should have been revamped a hundred years ago. So we have a con-artist for president, and a congress that was elected with him from the same party, just like Obama had. What did they achieve?

Apparently nothing, because almost nothing has been done in three years, which is amazingly less than was done with Obama in charge and a congress that hated him working against him. The Trump congress did manage to give themselves and their donor base handsome tax cuts. They did manage to do that.

The Republican party is wholly corrupt. If it wasn’t wholly corrupt the Republican congressional leadership would have started an impeachment inquiry on January 20, 2017. After all, Trump is a demonstrable con-artist, tax cheat, draft dodger, etc. Because they didn’t do that, and because the citizenry did not bring life to a standstill in revolt over Trump’s blatant abuses of power, we were forced to wait until 2018 when a new congress could be seated in order to get things to change.

A little less than a year later and the impeachment inquiry has finally, officially, started. It has started now that Robert Mueller has said in no uncertain terms Congress must act to remove the President. (paraphrasing) After Trump stonewalls every attempt to investigate the abuses of power that he openly admits to engaging in. Repeatedly, proudly admits to violating the laws of the land. Laws which he announces to the world don’t apply to him. Finally we are seeing action being taken.

Finally.

Nancy Pelosi has been tasked with the job of engaging in a coup without having it look like what she is doing is staging a coup. The entire Trump administration; his cabinet officials, his Vice President, all of his political appointees and all of the judges that have been seated on his recommendation, all of those people have to be investigated and removed from office if the conditions of them getting the job they now have in some way relates to the blatant criminal behavior of one Donald J. Trump. Mike Pence is every bit as complicit in Trump’s criminal dealings as Trump and McConnell are. Every one of them will have to go before this house cleaning session is over.

Thoroughly cleaning house in this fashion will put Nancy Pelosi in the office of the president. She is the third in line for the presidency, and with the President and Vice President removed from office because of their high crimes, she becomes President. How, exactly, is someone supposed to pull that off without looking like that was your goal all along? To become president? Half of the country will say she is staging a coup no matter what she does now. I don’t know anyone who could do the job that needs to be done now that won’t be resisted just because what they are doing is overturning what half of the people who voted in the 2016 election decided.


Coup d’etat. Can it be a coup d’etat when what’s occurring is required by law? The Orange Hate-Monkey will consider losing an election a coup, which makes any objection he might offer on being forced out of office prematurely irrelevant. Stormtrumpers on the other hand are the ideological descendants of the only successful coup in United States history. The one where white supremacists overthrew duly elected governments all across the South, governments put in place by black majorities that were finally liberated by the adoption of the fourteenth amendment to the US constitution by Southern states, a condition set on their re-entry into the United States after the end of the Civil War.

In Wilmington, I found a very remarkable condition of affairs. The city might have been preparing for a siege instead of an election … All shades of political beliefs were represented: but in the presence of what they believed to be an overwhelming crisis, they brushed aside the great principles that divide parties and individuals, and stood together as one man. When I emphasize the fact, that every block in every ward was thus organized, and that the precautionary meetings were attended by ministers, lawyers, doctors, merchants, railroad officials, cotton exporters, and, indeed, by the reputable, taxpaying, substantial men of the city, the extent and significance of this armed movement can, perhaps, be realized. It was not the wild and freakish organization of irresponsible men, but the deliberate action of determined citizens … Military preparations, so extensive as to suggest assault from some foreign foe, must have had unusual inspiration and definite purpose.

The fiat had gone forth; and it was expected that the Negroes, when they learned that the right of suffrage was to be denied them, would resist. From their churches and from their lodges had come reports of incendiary speeches, of impassioned appeals to the blacks to use the bullet that had no respect for color, and the kerosene and torch that would play havoc with the white man’s cotton in bale and ware house. It was this fear of the Negro uprising in defence of his electorate — of a forcible and revengeful retaliation — that offered an ostensible ground for the general display of arms; but if the truth be told, the reason thus offered was little more than a fortunate excuse. The whites had determined to regain their supremacy; and the wholesale armament was intended to convey to the blacks an earnest of this decision. There would have been rapid-fire guns and Winchester rifles if every church had held a silent pulpit, and every lodge-room where the Negroes met had been empty. White supremacy, therefore, was the magnet that attracted, the tie that bound, the one overwhelming force that dominated everything.

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

White supremacists took up arms and forced the poor people and the black people and other minorities back under their heels, at the point of a gun. White supremacists, what the press these days calls the alt-right or white nationalist, or what I refer to as stormtrumpers. They have enforced their will with violence, again and again, all while pointing to their victims as the instigators of the violence. “If you only did what I told you to do, I wouldn’t have to be hanging you right now.” Those people support Trump today. Will we let them win, again?


One thing is certain. Trump cannot be allowed to stand for election. Even allowing him to stand would be to concede that the laws do not apply to him and through him the presidency. If he is allowed to stand and even if he is defeated at the ballot box, the next president will go even farther than he has because there are no limits on what a president can or can’t do, unless we punish Trump to the fullest extent of the law. Impeach him, remove him from office, convict him of his crimes, convict his children of their crimes, seize the entirety of their wealth and distribute that wealth among his victims as restitution. Unless we make an example of Trump, the next president will point to Trump and say he got away with it, why can’t I?

I don’t see that happening. Do you?

Maybe it will happen. I don’t know. What I do know is that the United States that existed before Trump is dead. I mourn its loss, but it is well and truly gone now. What comes after Trump will be something that we have to make for ourselves. Here’s hoping that we are up to the task.

And if that better future means the politicians who demanded our trust, our support, our future are unable or unwilling to choose that better path, unwilling to risk their own safety or their careers or their political party, to save that future, then to hell with them.

Stonekettle Station

Wildly expanded from text typed and discarded and typed again as a comment to that Stonekettle Station post.

What Trump Can Teach Us About Constitutional Law

For any #MAGA out there. You know who you are.

Trumpconlaw is another podcast hosted by Roman Mars of 99% Invisible fame. When the show first started, I started tweeting out my own version of promos for each episode. The series of them can be found under the tag TrumpConLaw on this blog. This post should appear as the header for that series of tweets. As a consequence of this, it will move forward in time as new episodes are released. Here is the introductory episode of the series.

StitcherIntro to What Trump Can Teach Us About Con Law – 06.07.17

Twitter

So we’re going to learn the constitution together. Because of Trump. Because I need something to hold onto, and the constitution is the liferaft that our forefathers gave us. And dammit, I’m going to learn how it works.

Roman Mars

On a tangential track (or set of tracks) I am slowly working my way through the 99% Invisible archive. Sometimes I wonder if I’ll ever make it all the way through, but hope springs eternal. 99% Invisible is undoubtedly one of the best designed websites in existence. All Roman Mars podcasts and the podcasts that are presented through his distribution group, Radiotopia, are among the few podcasts out there that are easily shareable; easily shareable because the link to the hosting website is actually referenced in the feed address for the podcast you are listening to. I remain baffled as to why more podcasts do not design their feeds to be easily accessible in this way. In any case, give some of these podcasts a listen. It will take your mind off of the impending doom looming over the US today.


TED2015 Roman Mars Why city flags may be the worst-designed thing you’ve never noticed

09/22/19. I added the link to the introduction episode, the inspirational tweet, and Roman’s quote from that episode.

#33 Obstruction

If you think #MAGA means anything other than Misguided Appallingly Gullible Americans, you are the person these tweets were written for.

StitcherObstruction EP. 33 – 09.21.19

Intimate Terrorism

Anytime you put the word ‘domestic’ in front of anything; Domestic terrorism versus international terrorism? It has a softening to it.

Rachel Louise Snyder
On the Media – Understanding the Terror of Domestic Violence – September 13, 2019

Intimate terrorism is a better descriptive phrase for what occurs in an abusive relationship than domestic abuse or violence ever could be. This segment of On The Media was brought back to mind by this segment of Morning Edition, a podcast feed I only discovered after changing my preferred podcast player to player.fm from beyondpod. I’m not signing up for a subscription to player.fm, mind you, I just like the intuitive interface in player.fm‘s app. I don’t have enough money to allow me to give money to everyone who deserves to be paid. It is a failing in the monetary system that I don’t have enough to cover the costs of essentials. Essentials like easy access to the information that keeps you alive. But I digress.

Morning Edition – ‘We Don’t Want To Die’: Women In Turkey Decry Rise In Violence And Killings – September 15, 2019

Someone should probably engage in some counter-terrorism. Say, publish Youtube videos of these murderous men being tracked down and emasculated. A literal or actual emasculation, I don’t think it matters much which it is. Some of these men deserve to be physically emasculated, but I won’t call for harm being caused to anyone, not even those who so richly deserve it. These videos would serve as an example to other abusive men. An example of what will happen to the men who think they can get away with their behavior.

Intimate terrorism reminds me of this episode of The Stakes. A podcast series I started listening to because of On The Media‘s rebroadcasting of the three-part miniseries on A History of Persuasion. The Stakes deals with the fraught nature of modern American society, and what it is we stand to lose if we don’t take the threats represented in the Trump presidency seriously enough.

The Stakes – The Invention of ‘Sexual Harassment’ – July 16, 2019

The ERA, abortion, rape, you know, issues — women were organizing all over the place. But in some ways abortion and rape are more visible issues. This was sort of background noise. You know, the background hum that you get used to and you don’t notice anymore? That was the status of sexual harassment. Between 1960 and 1980 women’s participation in the workforce went from 38 percent to 51 percent. A huge jump. Men were threatened. They were women coming into the old boys club. They needed to assert their dominance, and make sure that women knew their place. And this was one of the ways to do that.

The Stakes

All of this is related. All of it. Male domination of society is coming to an end, and small-minded men are threatened by this fact. They hope to force women back into the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant. The rest of us should be properly outraged by this fact. The Trump presidency is a physical manifestation of this reflexive male panic. Don’t believe that? Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta resigned because he got caught giving a serial pedophile and rapist a free ride. A serial pedophile that Trump called a good friend and used hang out with extensively, to paraphrase Stonekettle Station.

Jeffrey Epstein, Bill Clinton and Donald Trump? Sure, go for broke.

Donald Trump is himself a sexual harasser, as well as being a confirmed con-artist, philanderer and pathological liar.

I have a solution to this problem. Men like Trump will not like it. In fact, it is probably their worst nightmare, the kind they wake up screaming from. We (the big we, we as a society or we as the world’s human population) we should train every girl in self defense. We should start this training when they are girls, not women, so that we can get a jump on the passive conditioning forced on most girls in most societies at an early age. Four or five years of age should be young enough. We should train them and then arm them with their weapon of choice. Guns, knives, whatever. Then you give these women one free pass on killing a man. Not two or three, just one. If you kill two or three men, you are probably one of those rare serial killing women. We don’t want to encourage that. Nope, they get one free pass, if… If they present themselves to a police officer or prosecutor and officially make the claim that a rape occurred.

No inquiries, no grand jury, no nothing. A free pass for killing rapists.

I predict that the problem of violence against women will be cleared up in a single generation if we were to install this anti-misogyny policy. If you just pissed yourself, you are probably one of the men that has nightmares about women you’ve mistreated tracking you down after the policy went into effect. Maybe you should try apologizing.

Roe v. Wade Was a Conservative Decision

The Republicans are poised to reverse Roe v. Wade! How can you be so cavalier about this?”

A question I posed to myself in 2006

My response in 2006 went something like “Republicans have no intention of reversing Roe v. Wade. They would be fools if they did reverse it.” I’m beginning to suspect that I overestimated their intelligence on this particular subject. There has been a veritable deluge of attempts to overturn Roe v. Wade in the last decade, not to mention the war that conservatives are waging on Planned Parenthood in the mistaken belief that Planned Parenthood is where all abortions occur in the US.

TwitterTrumpconlaw #26

As the writing appears on the wall in this final gasp of American conservatism, the soon to be disempowered Republican party continues to slice parts of itself off in an orgy of self-congratulation. It seems that throwing all their morals out the window and voting for a confirmed con-artist, philanderer and pathological liar requires them to double down on those demonstrably debunked claims to a moral high ground. They are convinced that if they only pass one more law they’ll finally be able to get rid of the medical procedure, abortion, by overturning Roe. They also seem to think that they’ll stop women from using birth control or morning after pills, but I personally think that they should stop while they are ahead.

You see, Roe was already a conservative decision based on science and the law back when it was decided in 1973. It was and is conservative because it represented a partial step towards granting women the same bodily autonomy that men enjoy, before there was a detectable change in the woman’s body, while protecting the state’s interest in making sure that the maximal number of new citizens is born to each new generation of women.

Access to healthcare is a woman’s right. There really isn’t any question about this because access to healthcare, a combined investment by the society at large as well as individuals caught up in the various healthcare systems across the globe, is every human’s right. This right is established through the fact that each person born came from someone who in some way contributed to the current status of medical knowledge and the existing medical infrastructure. People come from somewhere, and that somewhere is from other people. People created the healthcare system over generations, this grants later generations access to the combined knowledge of their forebears on an equal basis. An equality that is currently being denied to most people living today, but that observation is a digression from the specific point I’m trying to make with this article.

Abortion is a medical procedure, no if’s and’s or but’s about it. As a medical procedure, abortion should be available to anyone who wants one, end of story. Or rather; it would be the end of the story if men had to carry the next generation in their bodies in the same way women do. But that isn’t how nature set procreation up. Nature put the bearing of young on women’s backs, not the men’s. This left the women at home while the men formed hunting parties. It left them at home caring for children while the men created the first governments. It left the women at home changing and washing diapers while men learned professions and took jobs outside the house. And so men vy for access to women’s reproductive organs by violence if necessary, and then try to keep their unwanted progyny in the woman’s body by force of law since they, the men, set up that law through their control of government.

No one expects men to reveal whether they’ve had a vasectomy. No one wants to hold men accountable for wasting potential life every time they masturbate (no one who is sane does, anyway) their privacy is respected, even when it comes to making decisions about whether they will have children or not. This is not true of women.

Women’s health is fraught with demands to know things about their physical being that a man would never, ever, put up with. “She’s on the rag.” “You look fat.” “your tits are too small.” “When are you due?” the intrusions into their personal privacy defy any attempt at comparison to the way men are treated in public. The next time a man loses his shit in public, ask him if he’s played with himself recently. Go ahead, I dare you.

There is a right to privacy in the constitution, and the reason this right exists even though it isn’t enumerated is itself constitutional. Political pundits talk about how abortion is a litmus test for potential Supreme Court (SCOTUS) justices. If there really were a litmus test when it comes to abortion, it ought to be the constitution that forms it since the constitution is what they swear to uphold. The test could be formed of a single question with two possible answers. What is the meaning of the ninth and tenth amendments to the constitution? The answer to this question could be either unenumerated personal rights and/or limited government power. Any potential judge that does not concede the existence of a right to privacy, of a limit to state power, does not have a place on the bench within the US court system. They demonstrably do not understand the document that they will be sworn to protect.

Roe v. Wade establishes a right to privacy in jurisprudence. The findings of all of the cases that involve privacy since that case rely on the findings of Roe for their justification. The court will have to find some other basis for privacy as a right in any form if they hope to preserve privacy after reversing Roe. Yes, the prospect of reversal of that judicial precedent is that far-reaching. To reverse it is to make us all wards of the state and to make all claims to privacy by persons, including the multi-national corporations null and void. Pick one. Outlaw abortion or lose your ability to talk to your doctor or attorney in confidence.

Yes, dear reader. I hear you out there exclaiming “What about protecting life, dammit?”

That’s all fine and good. First you have to prove that there is a life, a life with a conscious mind, a will to live, and not just autonomic responses. You have to prove the presence of brainwaves denoting an active consciousness. After you do that you still aren’t done. You still have to show how you will preserve that life without harming the life of the mother-to-be, and by harm I mean economic as well as physical or emotional harm. If you did all of that, you might have a telling argument. Failing to do any one of those things will put you back at where we started this entire fiasco. Individual choice. The woman decides if she will have a child, and that means right up to the day before delivery, as far as a legal argument is concerned.

Without breath there is no voice to speak up in protest. Without breath there is no human life that medicine or science can document. Without breath there isn’t a soul, as your own religious document states. Settle for what you have now or potentially lose any remaining control you exert over women’s bodily choices. Pick one.

Keeping abortion legal does protect the life of the real, live woman whose body you want to use as a government mandated living incubator. Women die during pregnancy and childbirth, all the time. Savita Halappanavar died an unnecessary death in horrible pain due to Ireland’s (since repealed) ban on all abortions. This will happen here too, if abortion is banned. Underaged girls get pregnant. Rape and incest figure into these pregnancies. Will you inflict further harm on girls who have already been violated by someone close to them by forcing them to carry those pregnancies to term? Some of them will die during pregnancy and childbirth. Just exactly what limits will you set in your pursuit of protecting the life of the unborn? How many women will die because of your crusade? It should be your job to count them all. All of those lost lives will be the blood on your hands. May you have better luck than Pontius Pilate had in removing that blood.


I started this article while the Kavanaugh hearings were going on. I felt so miserable for most of that time that I limited myself to just re-editing the Witch Hunt post, never managing to get this article formed up into the finished work I wanted it to be. Reviewing the evidence revealed by the talking heads I listened to, talking heads endlessly discussing the hearings, I came away with the fact that Christine Blasey Ford, the prosecutor that the Senate Judiciary Committee had hired to cross-examine now Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh, got him to reveal his character by making him lose his cool. He had secrets he was hiding, and he wasn’t going to reveal them willingly. He probably should have played with himself before going into that hearing. It might have made him less of a raging asshole, but I doubt it.

After this groundbreaking revelation, that Kavanaugh was lying on the stand, an impeachable error for a sitting justice, the Republican leadership of the committee fired Christine Blasey Ford, burning another witch. They had two witch burnings in one Senate hearing, and they counted that as a success. I know that Lindsey Graham saw it that way. The Senate Republicans burned the witches and pretended none of that bad stuff that Justice Kavanaugh was accused of ever happened. Just as they did with Justice Thomas. #IBelieveHer and That Still Isn’t Enough People. The outcome of the hearings was preordained by the Republican leadership of the Senate. Holding the hearings were just a sham.

On top of that, justice Kavanaugh was drunk on the witness stand. Pull up the video of his Senate hearing. Look at the flush on his nose and cheeks. That man is one angry drunk. I pity his wife and children.

Only stupid people like the Orange Hate-Monkey and his MAGA supporters fell for the charade that the Senate performed that day. Now we have two people accused of sexual assault sitting on the SCOTUS and the stage is set for the drama that conservatives have been waiting breathlessly for ever since Roe was decided, convinced that they’ll be able to put women back in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant as often as they can put them there. They’ve got their pandering Trump card stacking the federal courts in conservative favor. A task that was made possible by a Senate Majority Leader who should have been removed from office for dereliction of duty in 2010 when he stated his plans to do nothing for Obama while he was president.

Why Is This Happening? Forecasting the future of Roe v. Wade with Nancy Northup

The stage is set for the final act of this farce. The farce that started when Christianists decided to make America a christian country and set about forcing their beliefs about the nature of existence on the rest of us. The problem for them remains the same problem that the United States Supreme Court faced back in 1973. Namely, if they force women to carry every pregnancy to term, who pays for that? Who pays for those children’s futures? Who makes sure that they have equal access to the benefits of society right alongside every wealthy, wanted child?

Who? Well, we all will.

Your taxes will be raised to cover those costs. Don’t bother to try to disagree, this is written into the constitution. Brown v. Board of Education outlines the bare bones of what will be required of the general public if women are forced to carry every pregnancy to term. Equal schools for all those children. Equal access to healthcare. Equal access to the courts will ensure that this prediction will play out as I describe. Trillions will be spent.

Not just on schools and medical facilities, things we should probably be investing in anyway, but also on police and investigative capacity. Every woman will have to be registered as soon as they have their first period. They will have to be registered as a potential mother so that they can be properly tracked. Sexual activity will have to be monitored to make sure that no one attempts to prevent a pregnancy. This task will require a police force the likes of which has never been seen before in history. The Handmaid’s Tale only hints at the depths of depravity that will be required to insure that no pregnancy is terminated, ever.

That is what reversing Roe will entail. But it only begins there. The current thinking for who will pick up the tab for all these new children amounts to making the men who father them pay for them. As if men are made of money and all you have to do is tap them like a Maple tree and they’ll ooze more money than any number of children will require. Most men are too shiftless to be willing to work to support the results of every orgasm they experience (considering the thousands of times the average male masturbates in a given lifetime, this is understandable) Most men are unwilling to devote themselves to raising children themselves. This has been my experience, speaking as a dad who spent two years at home raising his second child. Most men that I have revealed this fact to have been incredulous that I would waste my time in that fashion. As if crafting the minds and bodies of the next generation of humans was work that wasn’t of prime importance to every currently living person.

Equality will not be achieved by enslaving the men unlucky enough to be caught fathering children. They will never produce enough to pay the costs of raising those children properly. The failure to produce funds to guarantee equality will result in the taxpayer having to fund the shortfall. This means your taxes will go up, and up, and up… if you ban abortion. Someone has to pay for these children, and the full faith and credit of the US government will require that the taxpayer eventually pays that bill.

Should men carry their share of the weight? Certainly. Should we leave children in the hands of women who don’t believe they are people and don’t want them? No. Should we force the fathers to share the poverty with these women and their unwanted children? No. Shall we then confiscate children from parents that cannot raise them? Make them wards of the state and then task the state with making sure they have the best life possible? Seems to me we probably shouldn’t even begin to head down that road, the road that is labeled banning abortion. That’s the point that I’ve been trying to make since this subject was forced into my personal space as a teenager, witnessing the misfortune of people who didn’t pay attention in health class. Someone will pay for the stupidity, eventually.

If, on the other hand, I were trying to craft political positions for the movers and shakers on the issue of abortion. If I were asked to advise them on the subject of whether to support this or that bill limiting women’s access to healthcare (as far-fetched as that notion would be) I would tell them to insist on a quid pro quo arrangement.

“Fine, I’ll support your interference in the health and family decisions of the average woman in exchange for legislation that guarantees that there will be no homeless children in our state. Legislation that insures no children go without meals or beds to sleep in or whatever level of education they prove themselves capable of working towards. Either we agree on this equal exchange, or I will torpedo your bill with every legislative trick that I can muster.”

That would be my advice. Anti-abortionists claim to be pro-life. It should be beholden on them to prove that they really are pro-life by making every child a wanted child, every child a child with a home, every child a child who is not hungry. Either that, or they can just admit that abortion is sometimes necessary and give up the whole idea of interfering in a woman’s right to choose. They are, after all, the shiftless men I’m talking about.

Punishment is where the entire roller coaster ride of anti-abortion sentiment goes off the rails. The moment that anti-abortionists decided to punish women for their promiscuity with forcing them to raise children they don’t want, they crossed an unforgivable line in the sand. Children are not punishment, and we cannot afford to treat them as punishment. Infants become adults, people with rights they can assert for themselves, and those people will take their dissatisfaction with their unwanted lives out on the rest of us.

This experiment has been tried in recent history and the results are known. Ask Nicolae Ceaușescu how well that worked out for him (another dictator that Trump would have loved) You can’t, because all those unwanted children dragged him out of office and killed him. That is what has happened before when an authoritarian government attempted to make women raise children they didn’t want. If avoiding that fate means abortion is legal for the full term of a woman’s pregnancy, then so be it. As I said at the start of this article, anti-abortionists should have settled for what they already had, because all of the alternatives will be far less satisfying for them than the status quo is right now. Roe v. Wade was a conservative decision, far more conservative than what the status quo will be after the precedent is reversed, no matter which way the country goes after that. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

You demand this life be born to appease you miserable vengeful god, but you then abdicate any responsibility for it whatsoever. Life begins at conception and ends at birth, well, at least society’s responsibility for it. To you, “sacred” means life must be born, no matter the consequences, and then it can die in the dirt and it’s not your problem. You would force life into the world, but shrug off any responsibility to build a better world for it.

Stonekettle Station
George Carlin: Pro Life, Abortion, And The Sanctity Of Life

They aren’t pro-life, they are anti-woman.

George Carlin

Case history