"Screaming and howling" against John Roberts

[eleny]

Yesterday, I was very disappointed when I listened to Guy James say on his weekly radio program that Democrats have to ask ourselves if it's worth it to fight the appointment of John Roberts to the SCOTUS. I posted my opposition to that position in the DU thread that follows along with his program. Guy responded asking if we knew for sure that Roberts would vote to overturn Roe. And I responded asking if he wanted to take that chance.

My position on Roberts is that he's the banana peel at the top of a slippery slope. When W gets to replace Rehnquist, he'll nominate an anti choice nominee and Roe will either be overturned or choice will be turned over to the states to each decide. I believe that this will be a disaster as the fundamentalists will then wage heavily funded campaigns to overturn the right of choice in pro choice states. In the meantime, women will die from back alley abortions. It will be too late for them.

Getting back to Guy James, I decided to withdraw my monthly subscription to his radio program. This morning I received an email of apology from him. In his email, he said "We can scream and howl all we want to but it will serve no purpose at all except to give more ammunition to the Right-Wing media machine to make us look like obstructionists." I took particular exception to the "scream and howl" characterization. It took a lot of screaming and howling to get the right to choose. And if it takes more screaming and howling to keep it then so be it. And if we lose it, the screaming and howling will have just begun. Aren't women's rights to privacy worth obstructing for?

I'm 58, never had an abortion and hubby and I don't have children. But I'm disgusted with Democrats who don't get it. Who don't get it that Roe was a step back (but not backwards) to a time when we women owned ourselves. I'm disgusted with anyone willing to sacrifice women's rights and very lives. Roberts is not supposed to be the one to fight against because we're supposed to fight the fights we know we can win? That's at the heart of it. To some, women aren't worth losing for - to go down fighting for. That attitude makes me want to scream and howl.

[efhmc]

1. We deserve the right to have control over our bodies and whatever it

takes to get and maintain that control should be done. That does not mean being quiet now for the fight later. We need to fight now and always because the results of not fighting are too scary to contemplate and is being quiet is what put us BACK in this fight AGAIN!!

[Ripley]

2. Just imagine the screaming and howling on Guy James, DU and

elsewhere if a SCOTUS nominee had a long record of anti-pornography and supported not only censorship, or roll-backs, but bans on porn? And his wife was Executive Director of Moral Women Against Pornography?

I'm disgusted too that once again we find out how most liberal men really don't give a shit about women's rights and women's medical privacy issues.

When push comes to shove, they're in this for themselves baby and their right to access all porn would be protested in the streets while they chuck female reproductive autonomy as "no biggie."

:nuke:

[efhmc]

3. As usual, you are unhappily correct. We can be sold down the river so

so easily and cheaply simply because of our reproductive systems.

[MuseRider]

4. The simple fact

as I see it is that NO man really gives a shit about women's rights when it comes right down to it. (to clarify, there are some who care but not nearly enough to count on)

They do not have to care, they have all the power and right now we seem to have gained enough power to threaten the worst among them and bring out the worst in the best among them.

Eye opening isn't it?

[Ripley]

7. Eye opening indeed.

And for another fine example...Look at the OUTRAGE by men right now in the LBN thread about a new tax on the adult industry (PORN, so quit with the euphemisms already). I've never seen that kind of male outrage in threads about women being not being able to get their BCP prescriptions filled at pharmacies, or restrictive abortion legislation or wacko things like the guy in Virginia who wanted women to register with the POLICE when they had a miscarriage.

Frankly, I bet 99% of the guys in the porn thread NEVER post in any women's issues threads. Because they don't care about women as people, but only as fuckable things. And even then, they don't want to be bothered to consider what might happen as a consequence of the fuck.

No wonder they need to use so much porn. Asshats usually can't get laid in real life. Duh... :dunce:

[Hello_Kitty]

11. Uh huh

And that tax will put most of 'em in the poorhouse! :rofl:

[Lars39]

5. Knowing that the Bush White House groomed and pushed him

to the fundie base for a year makes it very clear to me that he is a stealth candidate.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

6. Even beyond that...

it's another example of chicken shit Democrats saying, "Let's not fight if we feel we can't win."

What was it that somebody quoted on another thread a few days back? "You'll miss 100% of the targets you fail to shoot at."

[spooky3]

8. Why are people like Guy James so comfortable when they know nothing

or next-to-nothing about Roberts' stands on important issues?

Keeping an open mind, I'd say that AFTER the hearings is when Democrats should decide how much energy and $ and political capital they want to spend to fight this battle. It makes you wonder why some people don't want any more information than they currently have.

I don't get why some DUers are more upset over whether Roberts was too oppressive of people who want to eat French fries on public transit than they are about what he would do about abortion or other aspects of civil rights.

[eleny]

9. Guy James wrote that he already spoke with 3 Dem senators...

...about Roberts' confirmation. He wrote in his email to me: "I am convinced that there is no way we can stop it". And also "But I don't see any advantage to entering a fray we know we will lose." And also "We have been getting our hats handed to us in one election after another and unless we start playing to win instead of worrying about single issues we will continue to fade into oblivion."

So it sounds like women's privacy and right to choose is some "single issue" to be tossed away for the good of the Party.And defeat is an accepted done deal among certain Dem senators.

I'm just now writing my response to Guy and might sleep on it in case I have other thoughts to share with him. When I first saw his mail this morning I blew my stack. I'd like to just post his email in its entirety here but don't know if it's legal to do that. I will say that he also lectured me about how Dems wind up letting the Republicans win on issues when we fight among ourselves. That made my blood boil.

And to think that people like him believe that they're liberal Democrats. It's delusional.

[spooky3]

10. thanks, but I would still reply to him that these 3 Senators

have not heard Roberts' answers to any questions. I am not predicting that Roberts will say anything outrageously inflammatory but I do think it's wrong to prejudge someone with such a limited public record. Maybe he'll sound very reassuring and even we would agree later that Dems shouldn't battle but I don't see how a reasonable person could feel reassured at this point nor be able to assess the likelihood of winning.

I'm sorry he said these things to you and I agree he doesn't sound too liberal. He also seems to be drawing conclusions that have nothing to do with Roberts--what does the Roberts hearing have to do with strategies for winning elections and what evidence is there that "worrying about single issues" had anything to do with the Dems' fate in the last election? Seems that "terra" or "gay marriage" was enough for about 30% of Americans to vote for Bush and the other votes he got probably didn't have many more than one issue on their minds. I also wonder how Guy James would feel if an issue HE thought was important was at stake. The Dems I know have a lot of hypotheses about what would make Dems more effective in future elections, and one of them is that Dems must stand on principle and articulate their message more forcefully than they have in the past. If they're right, then deciding now that they should cave on Roberts accomplishes just the opposite.

Guy James is just a radio guy and not one that most Americans listen to.

[MuseRider]

12. I am not certain I understand

how not fighting and just giving in is not part of getting our hats handed to us. I, for one, would rather be on a team that fights for the right things even if they lose 100% of the time. I am not likely to support one that drops the ball and walks off the field.

[Eloriel]

20. Amen, amen, amen

You never know what you CAN win, or what points you can score, or how you might be able to weaken your enemy for future battles if you DON'T fight. Fighting also helps generate PRESS COVERAGE which helps educate VOTERS. Sheesh, what does it take to get thru to these people?

Sure, there's a downside to losing, politically, but not near as down as not even fucking fighting because you're too chicken shit to do so. (My adrenalin is flowing, can ya tell?)

They should be fighting nearly EVERYthing, all the time.

[MuseRider]

23. You could not be more correct.

Nobody wants to support losers but people love to support scrappers. We are now underdog scrappers (if we fight that is) and everyone loves that position. It shows guts, courage, all the things they say we do not have. It is much easier to be looked upon as civil if you are civil and still fighting. Right now we are looking very lackluster. On the field with our heads hung down throwing our hands around like it doesn't matter.

This issue matters to over half the population. Why do they not get that?

Wow, you must be fired up. You said "fuck" and "chicken shit" in the same sentence! LOL....sorry, just teasing.

[Eloriel]

27. I finally realized the other day why they DON'T get that

This issue matters to over half the population. Why do they not get that?

Edit: I covered this in brief in a post downthread.

It was quite an epiphany. They don't "get that," about how important this is to women, because WOMEN DON'T MATTER (and also because they don't HAVE to get it).

That's not news to you, of course, or any number of other DU women. But I have to confess I reached a new level of understanding about it as I contemplated the reaction -- or LACK of it -- to my loud and urgent pleas on several sexist threads reacently that sexism results in actual women's actual deaths. I was curious as to why those pleas of mine fell on such fucking deaf ears. And then it hit me:

The deaths of people that don't matter -- don't MATTER.

It doesn't MATTER if women die seeking illegal abortions; women in general don't matter, so illegal abortion deaths don't matter. It doesn't MATTER if women die as a result of domestic violence or other violence against women because women as a class don't matter. Apparently, too many male DUers (at least on those threads) apparently have no individual women they love to be able to commiserate with the specter of illegal abortion and the potential for their deaths due to that or domestic violence or other life-threatening outcomes of institutionalized sexism.

It was a stark and bitter realization, and an all too-perfect demonstration of the very point I was making: that disrespectful and demaning LANGUAGE and disrespectful and demeaning visual images of women (pornography) result in the kind of climate in our culture which perpetuates the oppression of women and even death for many women.

But I couldn't get any traction for my argument precisely because women's lives mean so little -- okay, basically nothing -- to these men who just want to hang onto their ability to oogle women and call them ugly, crude and/or lewd names when they don't LIKE those women or what they're doing (that is, their male privilege which automatically grans them superiority over half the human race, just by virtue of their gender).

As I said, it was a stark and bitter realization.

[MuseRider]

28. Exactly.

They do not have to care and then there are those who simply don't care. I mean really. If a man would impregnate a woman and then leave her and never offer support of any kind, even to his very own child, well what else can you say? They do not care.

I have spent my life around mostly men, my family and my husbands family. Mostly men surrounded by weak women who NEVER sit down and are called from their sick beds to make a bowl of cereal. Just because her husband makes a buttload of money and allows her furs and diamonds does not mean he cares.

So there are those that leave and don't care and those that stay and don't care. Then there are the few who are honest, good, caring men and thank goodness for them.

If we so much as step out of line and in the way of what they consider their right of sexual machoness (I could not come up with anything better in this moment) look out. All that matters is them. Ego baby, it is the ego.

Like a slap up the side of the head. Reality bites.

For you :hug:

[eleny]

29. Furthermore....

The right wing fundamentalists will cheer when women die from illegal and dangerous abortions. This will embolden the anti feminists. "See? Women who take charge of their own bodies are bad. They get what they deserve."

When I wanted to create an image on this subject to add to my postings, I chose a vintage postcard theme. And the results disturbed me because it turned out to be the representation of the fundamentalist's celebration of illegal abortions. Mark my words. When abortion is limited to the states as a first step to its eradication - the first nationally publicized death from a back alley abortion will be greeted with cheers by the far religious right. This will be an affirmation for anti feminists. But it's not 1955. I anticipate a lot of hell breaking loose. Anti feminists and fundamentalists are going to have their 'come to Jesus' mmoment.

[Misunderestimator]

13. I would have taken EXTREME exception to the "scream and howl"

characterization. Good for you for cancelling your subscription. Why pay people who work against us? Very, very disappointing.

I, like you, have never been pregnant, have no children, never will... I could be like so many progressive men on this subject and say, what the hell, it doesn't affect ME! What asses. It DOES affect men, just as much as it affects me. It affects them MORE in fact, since they will be the ones contributing to the unwanted pregnancies that will be one day illegal to abort. They will be the ones with girlfriends and wives who die from their sperm, because they are forced to get an illegal abortion. They will be the ones whose daughters and sisters die because they won't be able to get a safe abortion. They will be the ones whose sons and daughters and sisters drop out of school to have and raise babies they don't want.

[eleny]

14. I just heard back from Guy James

He said that my reply of yesterday was insulting to him as he has held elected office. He told me that he knows better when to fight and when to lay in the weeds.

I responded and it will be my last. IMO, he has the DLC talking points of this week down pat. Sit down, shut up and tow the party line. (Roberts is in and he won't reverse Roe v Wade.)

.............................................

No, I won't sit down and shut up. Yes, I will scream and howl about it so that women won't have to scream and howl in the throes of death from a botched, illegal abortion.

[Ripley]

15. You do know he is a DUer don't you?

He's Beachbuckeye - I think that is his handle. Not that I have ever seen him post anything here other than his one thread a week announcing his show.

I am in no way saying you should not drop your subscription or have your beef with him! There are folks on DU who also have problems with Randi, Al and especially Ed what's his name, and they talk about them all the time in GD.

I'm kind of torn. I don't agree with the message and the methods or style of some of the liberal radio talk show hosts at one time or another. But dammit we are SO GETTING OUR BUTTS KICKED ON RADIO that I guess I feel like we have to put up with some of this moderate crap in order to get SOME liberal points out there.

However, I am sorry to hear that Guy didn't seem to understand why this issue is one to fight for. I thought he always mentioned DU on his show, so I think he is aware how Left this place is.

But you are right about the defeatist attitude. DLCers seem to think we lose because we fight nominations or bills or whatever. I think it's pretty obvious we lose because we roll over, make sacrifices, refuse to talk tough and call a spade a spade and admit defeat before anything even happens!

[eleny]

17. Yes I'm aware of him here posting about his weekly program

As far as I'm concerned, he can come here and debate me in this thread if he wishes. But I doubt that he reads DU much until Saturdays when his show is on. I never see him posting until then although I may have missed his weighing in.

[Eloriel]

22. Uh, no

I know of no way to get his attention, since WORDS -- nice, reasonable discussion and pleas -- failed (miserably) than to cut off funding. Snap. Wakes them up and quick. Hell, makes me wish I was a donator so I too could help wake him up.

We are in this situation because we kept supporting men and a few women who don't adequately support us back. When will it end, ever? It's been one long series of Phyrric victories, hasn't it? And it's actually one type of codependence: going back again and again for what we never got the first time.

But then, I have absolutely ZERO tolerance for sexists. Zero. And even less when they're purportedly Democrats or others on the left.

[jmm]

16. Don't you just love paternalism?

I love it when a man knows better than me what I should fight for because then I don't have to think about what is best for me.

Besides women should offer their bodies up as guinea pigs to test political theories that state overturning Roe is a good thing.

[eleny]

18. The image of laying in the weeds turned my stomach

I couldn't help but get an image of dead women laying in the weeds after back alley abortions.

And yes - about the paternalism. I've only had a uterus all my life. And I should never be told to sacrifice my rights over it for a political party.

[Eloriel]

21. Insulting to him as he had held elective office?

Oh, my goodness. Poor baby.

What an absolutely hilarious, utterly narcissistic response. (Did I have him nailed, or what?)

[eleny]

25. I imagne holding office was supposed to be a trump card

No doubt, I've had a uterus longer than he's held office.

[Eloriel]

19. And the Democrats who don't get it are overwhelmingly male

I wish I could find some "truth serum" or something, SOME way to get them to really, viscerally understand the level of sheer desperation some women will reach -- enough to put their very LIVES at serious and immediate risk -- in order to end a crisis pregnancy. Jesus, that says it all to me. Why doesn't it reach them?

Well, a flash of inspiration -- to answer my own question: if women don't matter, then why would a woman's life matter, or a woman RISKING her own life matter?

I think you did right to withdraw support. I'd have done the same, 'cept I never did support him -- found him a little blowhard-ish for my taste from the get-go.

[eleny]

24. At one time he was about the only Dem voice in Florida...

....on the radio, that is. And I had no idea that he would fall to a compromise position where choice is concerned. Now that the chips are down it's clear where he stands.

[BlueIris]

26. Call you senators, my fellow feminists.

I might just do it everyday for awhile, see what happens.