Category: Society

by Dave Mindeman

Alright, so it looks like we will have to live with Alito for the next 30 plus years. So, the Democrats have, again, withered on the vine. So, what do we do now? I imagine a lot of us will wring our hands and write angry e-mails to vent. Some of us will shake our heads and resign ourselves to a conservative court. But there is something else we should be doing. Action is required.

We need to anticipate the next move. We must take the opportunity to take back the future. And that future lies in the state legislatures.

A conservative court will have a difficult time overturning Roe directly. The Supreme Court, even in its new format, is not a change agent. But the new slant of the court will manifest itself by a slow weakening of Roe over time. Incrementally, cases will allow for more and more of abortion law to be determined by the states. That is where the next abortion debate will be.... and our progressive voices need to be heard there..now.

Here in Minnesota, we have a good chance to protect a woman's right to choose by turning the legislature over. Granted... there are a number of Democrats already in the legislature here, who do not support this right. But if Democrats are in the majority, one would hope the leadership would reflect its base and hold the line. The past year has led to a solidified Democratic hold on the Senate with 2 special election pick-ups. The House is still in Republican hands but with the narrowest of majorities. Get behind the Democratic House candidates because control of that chamber is crucial. Legislative initiatives come from the House and a Democratic speaker can be a powerful tool.

Finally, the Governor's mansion needs to be taken back. Pawlenty will morph himself into a centrist and pretend that the Republican scent of scandal could never affect him. But that notion must be refuted...that Republican veto power must be taken away. As Democrats, we must choose our candidates wisely.

Control of the state legislative machinery is our vaccination against that conservative court. Each state will need to ponder its direction... at least in Minnesota, the action we take now will determine Minnesota's voice on reproductive rights. Do not take it for granted... we have done just that in the past several election cycles. Don't let it happen again.

Category: US Politics

by Dave Mindeman

Let's talk impeachment. Up to this point, it hasn't had much effect because it hasn't had any reality linked to it. After all, Republicans control all the committees that would have to investigate and draw up the articles. No real chance of that....except....

The politics1 blog noted a significant article written in Insight Magazine. To understand the meaning of this, you have to know where this magazine comes from. Insight is published by the same corporation that owns the Washington Times... the conservative paper in D.C. Commentaries can come from Michael Barrone and Lawrence Kudlow...with the occasional piece from Bill O'Reilly and William Buckley, Jr. It claims to be balanced but its leanings aren't questioned.

That is why the article they feature on potential impeachment hearings rings so true. Here is what the politcs1 blogger had to say:

IMPEACHMENT? This story took me by surprise, as I'm rather jaded every time some liberal group talks about "impeaching President Bush for [fill-in-the-blank]." Then again, after impeaching President Clinton for lying about a blow job, Congress certainly lowered the bar for what constitutes an impeachable offense. Still, it's worth taking notice when Insight magazine --a sister publication of the pro-Bush Washington Times newspaper -- is writing about a possible impeachment of Bush. The purported charges would focus on the controversial secret electronic surveillance program that monitored domestic phone conversations and emails without any court authorization. The publication -- which has warm relations with the Administration -- quotes a few unnamed White House sources. One source said the "Bush administration is bracing for impeachment hearings in Congress" and a "prelude to the impeachment process could begin with hearings by the Senate Judiciary Committee in February." The article said Republicans -- including Committee Chair Arlen Specter (R-PA) -- are helping the Democrats by moving this probe forward. "Our arithmetic shows that a majority of the committee could vote against the President. If we work hard, there could be a tie," said a White House source. Specter, a critic of the secret program, told the magazine he is not seeking an impeachment vote -- but added it is a possible outcome of the hearings. "Impeachment is a remedy. After impeachment, you could have a criminal prosecution. But the principal remedy under our society is to pay a political price," said Specter. The magazine also notes conservative US Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) -- a likely Presidential candidate -- is another Republican who has openly rejected the President's position and is viewed as a possible pro-impeachment vote. According to a source, this will be the White House's defense: "the American people will never forgive any public official who knowingly hurts national security. We will tell the American people that while we have done everything we can to protect them, our policies are being endangered by a hypocritical Congress."

This could be an incredibly volatile issue going into the 2006 elections. The Republican coalition is on the verge of collapse -- the Alito confirmation will demoralize the moderate wing of the party who have long believed that despite all the rhetoric, Roe was still safe... but the newest crack in the Republican armour is the Libertarian wing revolt. The government's "big brother" act is the very thing Libertarians most fear. This could manifest itself into a growing block of Libertarian candidates and Republican defections to them.... case in point: Minnesota has its own in Governor Libertarian candidate Sue Jeffers.

When Alberto Gonzales appears in front of the judiciary committee, there may much more at stake than defending surveillance.

Category: US Politics

by Paul Bartlett

With Samuel Alito's Supreme Court confirmation all but certain, the alliance of self righteous evangelicals and hypocritical Republicans can now focus on the big prize: overturning Roe.

Let there be no confusion, overturning Roe will not prevent abortions and may not even reduce their frequency. Affluent Republicans will simply send their preppy daughters, and privileged spouses and partners, to some foreign spa for the procedure. Other women will do what women did pre-Roe: bloody back alley abortions performed by untrained quacks resulting in a staggering death rate.

I remember the pre-Roe days. It was ugly. If these hypocritical
Republicans get their way, any overturn of Roe had better include an enforceable method of preventing affluent women from receiving foreign abortions. Just for once, I'd like to see these hypocrites suffer the result of their own actions. Just for once, I'd like to see the same rules apply to everyone. Is the pro-life crowd so incredibly ignorant that they believe that Republican women do not also have unwanted pregnancies?

The fact is that the Republicans have been playing the pro-life'ers
like a cheap instrument. The Republicans control the White House, Congress, the Supreme Court and most state legislatures. If these
hypocrites want a federal ban on abortion, who's stopping them? They control every aspect of government. The Republicans don't want to overturn Roe; they want the issue. They want to pander to their ignorant base.

I wish the Democrats would call their bluff. Just like all of their
other constitutional amendment issues, this would fade into the night. But, if Roe were overturned, I would also expect these hypocrites to take a Pawlenty type pledge, and swear upon their mortal souls that no member of their God fearing family would ever have an abortion. Break the pledge, turn up the cooker!