Conservatives May Get Roe Reversal, But Public Is Mighty Angry At GOP


I have been closely following the huge waves resulting from the explosive news of the leaked Supreme Court draft regarding an attempt to destroy Roe v. Wade. Each day, there is a raft of truly well-thought-out articles and analyses about the story first reported in Politico. Such information about a legal matter that was settled law for 50 years regarding women being in control of their own reproductive health care had to be reported. Once the information was made known to a reporter(s) and able to be authenticated by the news operation there was a professional duty to report such a powerful development to the nation.

As I make my way through the news reports what most intrigues me is the larger questions at play. First, is the matter of additional strain on our democracy that this highly-combustible and seemingly open-ended eruption will have on a nation that is already so fraught with division and open rancor.

Second, is the way the Supreme Court, and perhaps the justice system as a whole will be viewed as a corrupt bargain struck by powerful conservative players in partisan positions.

The third reason I am pressed closely to this news is how the ramifications of undermining privacy within the framework of Roe will potentially impact the strides this nation has made with gay rights. To pretend that Justice Alito is any more sincere about not undermining my marriage than he is about the precedent with women’s health rights would be laughable if not so damn serious.

What we do know is the calculations of a political and legal strategy conservatives have schemed over and blatantly exercised has likely born fruit with the undermining of Roe. Where this mindset moves next is the issue that has generated much coverage since Monday.

Roxane Gay wrote a strongly worded Op-Ed piece in today’s New York Times.

I do not know where this retraction of civil rights will end, but I do know it will go down as a milestone in a decades-long conservative campaign to force a country of 330 million people to abide by a bigoted set of ideologies. This movement seeks to rule by hollow theocracy, despite our constitutional separation of church and state. The people behind this campaign do not represent the majority of this country, and they know it, so they consistently try to undermine the democratic process. They attack voting rights, gerrymander voting districts and shove unpopular legislation through so that they can live in a world of their choosing and hoard as much power and wealth as possible.

Conservative columnist S. E. Cupp wrote a perfectly toned article about the ramifications for the court and the nation this week.

Whatever you think of the leak, and however you come down on abortion, this news is deeply troubling and has vast implications, not just for women but all American voters. And it’s just another in a long line of chilling consequences from one election in 2016, an election that in so many unforgivable and irreparable ways, shredded the democratic institutions that hold this country up.

Make no mistake about her final paragraph in the column.

The Republican partisan strike on the Supreme Court in 2016 was nothing less than the weaponizing of the judiciary. To have ‘conservatives’ pretend they still have any true claim to that word is bizarre. When Senate Majority Leader McConnell, in the face of an open seat on the Court, stated that “people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme court justice” conservative principles of governing were discarded and replaced by raw power.

For those who are true conservatives, the actions of their Republican senators in 2016, must have been painful as stated principles gave way to partisan moves. To not have a hearing on a nominee named in March of 2016 and then wait for almost a year for a new justice to be seated–after an election season had passed–is just what it looks like.

A partisan power play of the most damaging kind to the nation.

During a recent 28-year period in this nation–or to put that into the lingo of politicos–seven presidential election cycles–Republican presidential candidates had won the popular vote only once. Yet those white men appointed six of the nine justices. Then the GOP senate majority cast their votes for conservative nominees against a vastly changing nation demographically, socially, and culturally.

The nation is now royally ticked off.

The folly and pure hubris of conservatives taking reckless actions with our democracy are now coming home to roost. Beware what one seeks, the old saying goes, as you may actually get it.

And so it goes.

12 thoughts on “Conservatives May Get Roe Reversal, But Public Is Mighty Angry At GOP

  1. Dekerivers wrote, “The folly and pure hubris of conservatives taking reckless actions with our democracy are now coming home to roost.”

    FACT: Conservatives haven’t actually take any reckless action in this regard, it’s a draft!!!

    It’s likely that it’s not a conservative that leaked the draft opinion and that leaked draft opinion is what is causing people to flush their collective brains and irrationally freak out. In this age of rage, these pro-abortion activists can’t even wait for a final opinion from the court, they freak out because of a damn draft, a draft that’s over two months old!

    This whole leak thing appears to be an unethical political ploy from the puppet masters to politicize the Supreme Court and gin up hate and get their sheeple to take to the streets and the hive minded fools are more than welcome to accommodate their puppet masters and spew tons of over-the-edge irrational emotional garbage.

    This freak out is really sad and I think it’s immature, as in childish.

    1. Read the post again. The folly and hubris, as I noted, was the 2016 power play in the Senate by conservatives. Have you missed the possibility a conservative leaked the draft to bring back into the fold a justice who was perhaps trekking towards a possible Roberts draft that would be more moderate? I repeat from Monday, “I can imagine how conservative media will be apoplectic today and feverishly disdainful of this news story, and how it was obtained.” Meanwhile, the nation is angry at the conservative Republicans who brought this mess.

      1. Sorry for the length of this comment but I think it’s all reasonably relevant to the conversation.

        Dekerivers wrote, “To pretend that Justice Alito is any more sincere about not undermining my marriage than he is about the precedent with women’s health rights would be laughable if not so damn serious.”

        I think that is an extrapolation to absurdity, there is absolutely no correlation between the two. One is using the privacy rights of a pregnant female to literally stomp on the human right to life of an unborn human being and the other is a marriage which is literally a legal civil contract between two adults, just like mine is, and that is covered by the Constitution of the United States of America. Put your marriage fears to rest, that faux argument is being unethically hyped to gin up fear and it appears to be working.

        Dekerivers wrote, “Read the post again. The folly and hubris, as I noted, was the 2016 power play in the Senate by conservatives.”

        Yes I’m well aware of what you were trying to emphasize. It was crystal clear that you seem to think that anything Republicans do when they are in the majority in Washington is wrong if it opposes the Democratic Party’s point of view, but that doesn’t change what I wrote about the leaked draft or the irrational reactions to the draft itself.

        Side Note: Under the Senate rules, the Republicans had every right to do what they did in 2016 but I opposed the Senate Republicans denying hearings for President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Judge Merrick Garland, I considered what they did to be an uncivil political maneuver. Here is what I wrote immediately after Justice Ginsber died, “I think that President Trump should immediately nominate Judge Merrick Garland, if he’s available, to fill the empty seat on the Supreme Court.”, of course my opinion didn’t sway DC Republicans.

        Have you considered that maybe the growing opposition to the continuous folly and hubris from the Democratic Party and extreme progressives since 2008 is really what’s coming home to roost right now? Don’t the choices of Democrats, both politically and socially, have consequences too?

        Dekerivers wrote, “During a recent 28-year period in this nation–or to put that into the lingo of politicos–seven presidential election cycles–Republican presidential candidates had won the popular vote only once. Yet those white men appointed six of the nine justices. Then the GOP senate majority cast their votes for conservative nominees against a vastly changing nation demographically, socially, and culturally.”

        Republican President candidates didn’t win the “popular” vote, Republican presidents have appointed six justices, Republicans are all “white men”, GOP majority Senate voted for Republican nominated justices and Democrats far and wide didn’t like it. The elected Republican politicians in DC use their political power to push Conservative ideology – THE HORROR!!! This is not a good sign; you’re parroting Democratic Party talking points, the really whining ones, it’s pure propaganda¹. How dare the Republicans do what their constituents elected them to do! I get it, Democrats seem to think that “everything” Republicans do is somehow evil if it opposes the Democrats point of view.

        Dekerivers wrote, “Have you missed the possibility a conservative leaked the draft to bring back into the fold a justice who was perhaps trekking towards a possible Roberts draft that would be more moderate?”

        Nope I haven’t missed that point and since you bothered to ask the question I’ve got to ask if you noticed that I’ve mentioned multiple times over the last few days that I don’t care what the ideology or motivation of the leaker is, the action was morally and ethically wrong!!! Furthermore, so what if I happen to think at this point in time, based on my own observations, that it’s an irrational ends justifies the means social justice warrior that leaked the draft; I’m welcome to my opinion on that point until facts prove otherwise just like you are, isn’t that how a classic liberal² should think?

        Dekerivers wrote, “Meanwhile, the nation is angry at the conservative Republicans who brought this mess.”

        People are angry at Republicans, THE HORROR!!!

        SO WHAT!?

        Again; have you considered that maybe growing opposition to the continuous folly and hubris from the Democratic Party and extreme progressives since 2008 is really what’s coming home to roost right now?

        Is the anger from Democrats aimed at Republicans pure as the driven snow and the only anger that’s valid?

        Who’s anger is valid? Is it the anger of the ones that think that abortion is exterminating an utterly helpless human being or is it the anger of the those that want to be free from responsibility for their actions (or lack thereof) and be given a free choice to exterminate an unwanted parasite clump of cells?

        Who’s anger is valid? Is it the anger of the ones supporting the Constitution, Liberty and reasonable cultural status quo or is it the anger of the extreme anti-Constitution, anti-Liberty, anti-culture, aka anti-American, movement?

        Dekerivers wrote, “vastly changing nation demographically, socially, and culturally”

        What about the anger from Republicans aimed at Democrats for pushing what they perceive as irrational social and cultural agendas and their extreme shifting towards totalitarianism in the 21st century?

        Will the USA survive the 21st century cultural shift? I think the irrational reaction to the leaked draft from the political left is signature significant³ and should be a prophetic predictor of more of their ends justifies the means “mostly peaceful” things yet to come. In my opinion, if the extreme political left (that hates the USA) gets their way, the USA will not survive the 21st century cultural shift.

        People have been indoctrinated into hating the United States, yes they literally hate (feel intense or passionate dislike for) the United States and everything it stands for. They hate that the 1st Amendment applies to everyone and they’ll go out of their way to socially silence the free speech of those they disagree with, they hate ethical journalism that presents all the facts and lets the people decide and instead promote activist journalism that only supports one ideological viewpoint, they hate the concept of innocent until proven guilty and actively argue against it – it’s guilt by accusation and guilty until proven innocent for them, they hate the justice system and anyone or anything that supports it because it doesn’t support their belief of guilt by accusation, they hate civility and are clearly in favor of social chaos, they hate the police and want to smear them and defund them, they hate anyone that opposes their ideological hive mind and try to socially cancel all opposition, they hate a Constitution that dares to allow others to oppose their hive mind, they hate that our basic freedoms allow some people to make more money than others – they want to take money from the rich and give to the poor, they hate equality in favor of equity, they hate that their opposition has any rights whatsoever – they believe in rights for me but not for thee, they hate the fact that equal opportunity doesn’t equate to equal outcomes, they hate our system of education and are actively doing everything they can to bastardize it into ideological indoctrination training, they hate that all our history (both good and bad) make us what we are today, they hate, Hate, HATE and they want you to hate right along with them and if you don’t then you’re considered evil. The goal of these chaotic hate filled anti-America extremists is to fundamentally change this nation into a hive minded totalitarian nation where the immoral totalitarians control nearly every aspect of your life and thoughts. These immoral totalitarians are no longer hiding in the dark sub-culture outcast corners of our nation, they’re out in the mainstream of society controlling everything from our teachers and school boards to local, state and national politics.

        These people that I’m talking about (not all Democrats but an apparent progressive leaning majority) are an irrational totalitarian horde of rather stupid people. You wrote above, “beware what one seeks, the old saying goes, as you may actually get it”, that goes two ways. Seriously; what happens to liberty if this irrational totalitarian horde of stupid people get their way? When you drop a rock it falls, the irrational totalitarian horde of stupid people have slipped off their slippery slope and are free falling into an abyss of Orwellian totalitarianism and socially canceled brown shirt styled fascism. The public needs to recognize this movement for what it really is. This is not going to end well.

        “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety” Benjamin Franklin

        ¹Propaganda: The expression of opinions or actions carried out deliberately by individuals or groups with a view to influencing the opinions or actions of other individuals or groups for predetermined ends and through psychological manipulations. Harold Lasswell

        ²liberal: adjective 1. willing to respect or accept behavior or opinions different from one’s own; open to new ideas. 2. relating to or denoting a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.

        ³Signature Significance: Signature significance posits that a single act can be so remarkable that it has predictive and analytical value, and should not be dismissed as statistically insignificant.

        1. I only have time to respond to one part of your comment, a part that simply demands feedback. You write that “a marriage which is literally a legal civil contract between two adults” and then add, “Put your marriage fears to rest”. I am stunned. You could not have taken the long years of uphill fighting that gay Americans engaged in for marriage rights seriously to be so airy about an abortion draft ruling that is based on undermining privacy. Privacy, which in part grounded Obergefell. At the time of that court case and the resulting decision, I was most heartened that the gay marriage decision was also connected to equal protection and liberty. But there is no way to strike at the foundations of Roe and not think of how the same conservative element will not work next to strike at gay marriage. You need to know that roughly half of the states today still have some prohibition on gay marriage in their statutes. Now those laws could be an impetus for conservatives to challenge privacy interest rulings. In my very Republican hometown area, I drove about in 2006 and saw the number of yard signs in favor of an anti-gay marriage amendment slated for a then statewide ballot. No one needs to remind me that conservatives statewide were not interested in marriage being “literally a legal civil contract between two adults”. What they were wanting was a blunt tool designed to foment bigotry and hate. And denying every gay person the right to marry. So it is simply galling to read your words “Put your marriage fears to rest”. I was born on a Saturday, but not last Saturday.

          1. Dekerivers,
            Of course you’re welcome to your opinion on all of that even if I think you’re wrong.

            Sometimes there’s a foul stench encompassing your bias against conservatives, but seriously, don’t you hope I’m right that your marriage is a contract between adults, just like mine, and therefore covered under the constitution and you’re wrong on this? Personally, I hope I’m right and your wrong, but time will tell us who’s correct in this ridiculous 21st century age of rage.

            I stand by my statement “Put your marriage fears to rest” whether you like it or not, no one is going to take that away from you. If by chance some ignorant bigot challenges gay marriage in the courts and it comes down to a fight in court to maintain your marriage, I’ll contribute everything I can to help fund your fight all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States if that’s what it takes. That’s how strongly I feel about it.

            1. Having spent decades walking uphill against bigotry and well-financed and partisan moves to deny gay people their civil rights and humanity, I am not about to think the national conservative legal and stridently right-wing movements are now interested in my interests about laws of the land. Having said that, we certainly need more voices like yours from within the conservative movement to steer the GOP back to the shores of sanity. Gerald Ford and Alan Simpson should be the models for the party.

            2. I write on the basis of facts and my views of conservatives are based on their actions. For instance, Justice Alito wrote a dissent in the gay marriage case, that used almost the exact same reasoning as he used in the leaked draft concerning abortion. In addition, is the real threat that comes with any court that is eager to roll back a previously granted individual constitutional right. It is very much appropriate to discuss how abortion is but the first of what conservative justices have in mind for the nation. So, yes, I am honest about conservatives on my blog. But I only write about what they are doing right in front of our eyes.

              1. Points of fact…

                Abortion was and is not a “granted individual constitutional right”, period.

                Marriage was and is not a “granted individual constitutional right”, period.

                Those are not Constitutionally enumerated rights or even innate human rights, they are assumed rights based on the legal interruption of other Constitutionally enumerated rights.

                There are rights that far supersede the Constitution, innate human rights.

                Human rights are innate i.e. every human being has them, and they can neither be given to you nor taken away from you. They are universal, i.e. they are valid world-wide. In spite of different traditions and cultural diversity, they form a core of rights which apply to all human beings.

                There is no human right more innate than the right to life. Without the right to life as the most basic and primary right of a human being all morals are a facade; this is where abortion completely fails morality, it is literally eliminating the right to life and exterminating a completely helpless human being.

                Marriage does not fall within innate human rights. We can love whom ever we choose but we cannot marry whom ever we choose. Marriage is a societal construct, created by humans and religions, limited by humans, governed by society, restricted by both society and religions, and becoming more equal in the eyes of the law and society in the United States as we progress through time. In fact, marriage has never been more legally equal in our history than it is right now and guess what Dekerivers Liberals and Conservatives alike have supported the progress of marriage equality, the same can be said on both sides of the abortion controversy. If you’re basing your bias against all conservatives on only a few conservatives you’re being unfairly biased and ignoring that FACT that these controversies cross the political divide, only partisan hacks are making them pure partisan.

                1. I found it interesting to note on NPR today that most women in Israel can get an abortion on demand, and do so with government aid. So would you then also say of that nation, morals are a facade, too? Second, my point in most of my comments deals with privacy in the many court cases that have been handed down in our lifetimes—you seem about my age. While I do think abortion is important health care right for women, it is the unwinding of other spools that also concerns me. That concern is already being shown with conservatives talking about cases that challenge state restrictions on morning-after pills, and even lawsuits about whether or not states can restrict their citizens from crossing state lines for an abortion. Privacy is under attack with contraceptives, as Mississippi Gov. Reeves signaled on Sunday that a ban on contraceptives wasn’t off the table. This is why my focus has been on the consequences of undoing this 50-year-old law. Abortions will not end, we know that, and the pill will be the means to allowing women access to abortions. But the far wider ramifications of this dangerous attack on precedent and privacy will have lasting scars.

                  1. Dekerivers wrote, “I found it interesting to note on NPR today that most women in Israel can get an abortion on demand, and do so with government aid. So would you then also say of that nation, morals are a facade, too?”

                    To be honest, I don’t put a lot of stock in the narratives that NPR has push anymore, over the last 6 to 8 years they’ve got nearly as bad a record of being wrong as CNN & MSNBC’s narratives. For instance, they said “most women”, what exactly does that mean in this context? Who can, who can’t? Is it anyone in Israel no matter what their age? What about Arabs and the rights of the fathers under Muslim law? What are the details of that “most women” statement? The statement is far too open for bias interpretation.

                    If the government of Israel is actually paying for abortions then, yes I would say that of the government. I’d go one step further; I’d say that the Israeli government is being rather hypocritical after what the Nazi government did to what they called “parasite” Jews.

                    I repeat…

                    “There is no human right more innate than the right to life. Without the right to life as the most basic and primary right of a human being all morals are a facade; this is where abortion completely fails morality, it is literally eliminating the right to life and exterminating a completely helpless human being.”

                    The need for an abortion is nearly always a complete failure of responsibility from both the male and the female, this lack of personal responsibility needs to stop!

                    I have absolutely no problem with the morning after pill and I would advocate for that to be available as an over the counter medication in every pharmacy in the USA and it should be available (no prescription needed but require a personal private consult with a professional pharmacist) to any female that’s 14 years old or older that askes for it. I do think that verified in-person parental knowledge (notice I didn’t say consent) should be required for any female under the age of 14. The morning after pill should be immediately offered to any rape victim as long as they come in within 72 hours after sex. I also think that all students, both male and female, should be taught their personal responsibilities with regards to sex from 7th grade on and that this morning after pill is available prevent a pregnancy right after sex, it should be reinforced multiple times every school year until they graduate High School. Additional reinforcement of this knowledge for students in undergraduate college would also be very helpful.

                    Preventing pregnancy is the key.

                    1. Actually, NPR is very fact-based and accurate with its reporting. Isreal does have a very expansive abortion policy. Only if you wish, could you give me a shortlist of where you do get your news. You have commented that you do not like much of the media nor trust reporters, so it just piques my curiosity as to what you consider objective enough to gain your reading and watching.

                    2. Dekerivers wrote, “Only if you wish, could you give me a shortlist of where you do get your news. You have commented that you do not like much of the media nor trust reporters, so it just piques my curiosity as to what you consider objective enough to gain your reading and watching.”

                      Even though I don’t trust any of it anymore because its damn near all advocacy journalism and a LOT of propaganda, I still browse most of the major news outlets on a topic basis to get varying viewpoints on the topic and I do browse some opinions but stay away from pure pundits. Watch, listen to the news and switch channels when they start giving me their opinions, I don’t care what they think, just tell me the facts.

                      Dekerivers wrote, “my focus has been on the consequences of undoing this 50-year-old law”

                      Be really careful, consequentialism is almost always unethical.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s