The Roe Bombshell Drops (So Let The Resistance Begin)

 

<10:24 a.m.: It's On:

The Bombshell Has Landed, 6/24/22>

In the end, there were no surprises, when the bombshell dropped into my inbox ("BREAKING NEWS"). However, as expected, the 5-4 ruling held largely to the hectoring bluster of the infamous leaked draft opinion, as spelled out by its equally noxious author, "Supreme Court Justice" Sam Alito (“Like the infamous decision in Plessy v. Ferguson, Roe was also egregiously wrong, and on a collision course with the Constitution from the day it was decided," or so he said).

Also, as expected, the Trump-era court appointees, Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorusch, and Brett Kavanaugh, voted exactly as their opponents had feared, all along. 

To the end, though, Republican Senator Susan Collins, of Maine, apparently believed the meaningless, noncommittal reassurances of "respect for precedent" that Gorusch and Kavanaugh blandly trotted out to her, during their pre-confirmation interviews. (They lied, something that should be remembered if we survive the next turn in the election cycle.)

The same standard holds true for the Senate's other master of brow furrowing performance art, Joe Manchin ("D"-WV), whose stomach must also be spinning at the speed of sound -- since he was among three Democrats to vote for Gorusch's confirmation, and the only one who accepted Kavanaugh's ascension to the high court bench. A lonely place to be, isn't it? Especially in light of, how shall we put it, current events.

But, like his counterpart from Maine, Uncle Joe released a statement, voicing his troubles and concerns, as they like to call them in Washington: “I trusted Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh when they testified under oath that they also believed Roe v. Wade was settled legal precedent and I am alarmed they chose to reject the stability the ruling has provided for two generations of Americans."

As many wags observed at the time, such posturing is the equivalent of believing the 411 scammer's equally breezy reassurances that your Ponzi scheme check  is coming in the mail, after all. 

Presumably, Colllins, in particular, will have some "'splainin' to do" when her re-election comes up in 2026 -- that is, if the next couple of election cycles don't end up being our last ones. But I digress.

Also, as expected, "Chief Justice" John Roberts did his usual meaningless difference-splitting act, by voting to uphold the Mississippi law that triggered the final mortal blow to Roe, yet avoiding the itch to join his more deeply reactionary colleagues in overturning it, yielding the final 5-4 margin. Call this approach repression with a friendly face, if you will, as we do.

Meanwhile, over in Germany, the Bundestag has just overturned a Nazi-era law forbidding doctors from providing information on abortion. The procedure is technically illegal in Germany, but is permissible under certain conditions, so long as it's done within a 12-week window. The Bundestag's action means that all convictions handed out since October 1990 under the law are null and void, and any current prosecutions are scrapped.

"For almost a century, doctors have been forbidden and punishable by penalty from providing factual information about methods and possible risks to women who are considering terminating a pregnancy," Justice Minister Marco Buschmann said, in an official statement. "Today, this distrust in women and distrust in doctors is coming to an end."

As for the US? Well, after today, it looks like the Ship of Distrust has definitely left the dock, with 12 states expected to spring "trigger laws" anticipating the end of Roe, and an additional 10 prepared to revive pre-Roe restrictions that had lain silent, yet still remained on the books. Call them fellow travelers in Alito's war against the latter half of the 20th Century, if you must. And we do.

Prepare for the avalanche, as the Alito crew and their fellow reactionaries giddily pop their champagne corks, now that the dream they've worked so hard to achieve for 50 years has become an unwelcome, ugly reality. 

Because, make no mistake, this won't end today with Roe, regardless of Alito's reassurances that his draft language only applies there. If you believe that, well -- I'll let you fill in the appropriate metaphor here. As another old joke runs: right wingers always move on to the next thing they swear they'll never, never do.

And what's more, they're coming after all of it -- contraception, gay marriage, interracial marriage (though that might require "Justice" Clarence Thomas to declare his own union with his insurrectionist trophy wife illegal). 

You name it, it's all going up for grabs, as the Alito gang and its dominionist-minded allies mount their Final Full Court Press of Repression to outlaw anything and everything they don't accept, nor understand. Don't believe me? Thomas has already vowed as much, in his concurring opinion (see Business Insider link below).

Evidently, the same Sotomayor who showed such kind words on Thomas seems to feel a bit differently about him -- and, by implication, others like him -- lately, judging by the dissent she took, along with Justices Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson:

“And no one should be confident that this majority is done with its work. The right Roe and Casey recognized does not stand alone. To the contrary, the Court has linked it for decades to other settled freedoms involving bodily integrity, familial relationships, and procreation.

"Most obviously, the right to terminate a pregnancy arose straight out of the right to purchase and use contraception. In turn, those rights led, more recently, to rights of same-sex intimacy and marriage. They are all part of the same constitutional fabric, protecting autonomous decisionmaking over the most personal of life decisions.

“The majority could write just as long an opinion showing, for example, that until the mid-20th century, ‘there was no support in American law for a constitutional right to obtain [contraceptives].

"So one of two things must be true. Either the majority does not really believe in its own reasoning. Or if it does, all rights that have no history stretching back to the mid-19th century are insecure. Either the mass of the majority’s opinion is hypocrisy, or additional constitutional rights are under threat. It is one or the other.”

So what happens now? Well, in the short run, cry, 'n' yell, rant 'n' rave, scream 'n' rage -- get it out of your system, while it's still possible. And then, start figuring out how to make them regret the hornet's nest that they'll almost certainly stir up.

The outward confidence of these Supreme Court goons says one thing about themselves. However, the eight-foot, black, Berlin Wall of protective fencing that they've chosen to surround their marbled terrarium says something else. 

No matter. The goal should be to make them regret what they've done, publicly and privately, politically and personally, and most importantly, at the ballot box, while we still have that opportunity left, since it's never been more obvious how desperately we need a massive political realignment, something of the likes we haven't seen since 1932, or the post-Watergate era of 1974. 

That starts by sweeping out the eldercrats who've come to dominate our political lives, a moment that's long, long and looonnnggg overdue. We should not have nearly 90-year-old Senators -- Creepy Charles Grassley, come on down; Declining Dianne Feinstein, come on down -- running for re-election, plumping for policies they will never have to personally stare down. Our country should not remain in the grip of our entrenched grandfathers and great-grandfathers, plain and simple. That includes taming the Court, as well, which seems hellbent on taking a wrecking ball to our lives as we've known them.

And if there is a moment of solace to take from today's ruling, it's this: the war against abortion is essentially a war against nouns. And this much we know, and can say, with some kind of certainty. Like all previous wars against nouns, like Afghanistan and Iraq, Prohibition and pornography -- pick whatever example you like -- the outcome essentially remains the same, whether the warmongers understand that reality, or not.

The noun survives, stronger and more resilient than ever. Banning alcohol didn't stop anyone from drinking, and banning abortion won't stop those with the means and the money to continue getting them, including all those Republican mistresses that so many of these "family values"-minded Congressmen and Senators collect, as they grub their way up the ladders of power.

In any case, the old saying, "If you're not on the table, you're on the menu," has never felt more appropriate than it does now. Even so, what is done can always be undone, if the energy and the will exist to do it. Every effort to turn back the clock fails, at some point -- as King Canute discovered, when no pontoon boat arrived to pick him up, as he continued to rage against the tide.

So, with that being said, let's all take a deep breath, then a deeper one still, and think about what needs to happen next. And let the resistance begin this instant, this minute, this second. Because there's so much work to be done, and no time left to waste. --The Reckoner

Links To Go (Hurry, Hurry,
After The Statutory Moment Of Silence):

Bangor Daily News:
After Telling Susan Collins It Was "Settled Law,"
Brett Kavanaugh Calls It "Wrongly Decided":
https://www.bangordailynews.com/2022/06/24/politics/after-telling-susan-collins-that-roe-was-settled-law-brett-kavanaugh-calls-it-wrongly-decided/

Business Insider: Justice Thomas Says

The Supreme Court Should Reconsider Rulings 

That Protect Access To Contraception And Same-Sex Marriage...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/justice-thomas-says-the-supreme-court-should-reconsider-rulings-that-protect-access-to-contraception-and-same-sex-marriage-as-the-court-overturns-roe-v-wade/ar-AAYPDpt?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=baca76ddc17e4c658c6f4fbbd8f411e5

Newsweek:
Susan Collins' "Deep Concerns" Mocked

After Roe v. Wade Overturning:
https://www.newsweek.com/susan-collins-deep-concerns-mocked-after-roe-v-wade-overturning-1718959

The Roe Bombshell Drops (So Storm The Ballot Box)

 

<Not my image, but one I wish I'd created...

And will credit accordingly, 

if I recall the source./

The Reckoner>

<i.>

It's been a busy week of repression for Chief Justice Roberts and his unsavory crew at the Supreme Court -- or "The Frightful Five," as I call them (Sam Alito, Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorusch, Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas). As we've seen from today's big ruling -- one that essentially vaporizes New York's concealed carry law, and others like it -- Roberts and crew are wasting little time punching the bingo cards that their far right political patrons have eagerly teed up for them.

Even without the impending doom of Roe v. Wade, this particular term stands out as a ghastly one. Acting in lockstep predictability, Roberts and company have hammered out rulings that continue the dismantling of church/state separation (Cronkin v. Makin), lay the groundwork for the eventual revoking of Miranda rights (Vega v. Tekoh), make it virtually impossible to hold brutal cops accountable for excessive force (Egbert v. Boule), and support their reactionary Republican buddies' efforts to keep their voter suppression projects proudly intact (Berger et al v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP et al).

Wait, I almost forgot -- if you're a Death Row inmate whose lawyer failed to advocate for you properly in state court, you can't bring any of those up in federal court, even if that alleged new evidence might prove your innocence (please, please, read the Cronkite News link below for those grisly details). Among all the current term's mis-decisions, I'd rank this one right near the top, because it will surely result in some tragedies. Executing an innocent man or woman is horrific, because there's no luxury of a second mistake.

And we haven't even gotten to the "good stuff" yet -- not only the case that's expected to deal a hammer blow to Roe (Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization), but rulings that could cripple environmental regulatory authority (West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency), and force asylum seekers to remain parked in Mexico indefinitely while their cases snake their way through an already crowded legal pipeline (Biden v. Texas.).

On one hand, none of these outcomes should surprise anyone. This is the scenario that the radical right has geeked itself to achieve, thanks to the judicial allies it's cherry-picked, the cases it's never stopped winged their way, and the endless gusher of dark money that funds it all. (How did Kavanaugh suddenly become debt-free, just in time for his nomination in 2018? We all know, I think. Ah, never mind.)

Thanks to all the outsized advantages that the right has gamed for itself, and the (largely) feeble response of its so-called "responsible opposition," the Republic of Gilead -- coupled with those now-familiar images of muzzled women, and red bonnets -- is edging ever so closer to our doorsteps. It's one reason I've sworn off watching The Handmaid's Tale, for now, because I don't think it's necessary. 

As far as I'm concerned, the hit show's bleak dystopian reality is already unfolding in  laboratories for autocracy like Florida, Idaho, and Texas -- whose empty suit legislatures are furiously vying to outdo each other in repressing anyone that they deem their enemies (basically, anybody who isn't straight, while, and male, with a dominionist mindset).

Ran over a demonstrator with your car? Have a "get out of jail free" card on us. (Florida, Oklahoma). Want to carry a gun in public, without any of those pesky permit or training rules? We have your back (Georgia, Indiana, South Dakota). Worried  what your kids are learning? Cameras in classrooms are coming to close that loophole (Iowa).

Crazy or not, laws like these are gaining ground so rapidly, because real democracy doesn't exist in states like Idaho, where Democrats make up only seven of 35 State Senators, and 12 of the State House's 70 members. No Democrat has won the governor's office since 1995, nor any other statewide office since 2007. Whatever your political belief, it's not hard to imagine the abuses that result, when one side dominates so thoroughly. Without checks and balances, true democracy doesn't survive.

But even that rosy picture of red state dominance isn't enough for some Republicans. Much of the current repressive momentum is driven by simple numbers, as CNN reports: white Christians now make up just two-fifths of the US population. In contrast, one-fifth of Generation Z identifies as LGBTQ (plus 1 in 10 Millennials). You don't have to be a math whiz to understand the existential fury that such statistical realities arouse in those same white Christians.

Equally surreal, though, is seeing how many people continue to kid themselves, as Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor did recently -- when she tried to give a pep talk before the American Constitution Society. She voiced hope that the fatally polarized court could still "regain the public's confidence," and even offered encouraging words for Thomas: "He is a man who cares deeply about the court as an institution, about the people who work there."

When I read those words, I immediately found myself asking, "What the hell is she smoking? Whatever it is, I know folks who'd crave that same flavor."

This is the same Clarence Thomas whose insurrectionist wife, Ginni, has been deeply implicated in the conspiracy to keep Trump in power after his 2020 election loss. the same Clarence Thomas who refuses to recuse himself from cases involving his wife, when she's not trying to steer them in his direction. The same Clarence Thomas that he and his other half never discuss these matters personally.

If you believe any of those things, I have some Florida swampland you can help me drain. But presumably, the same Sotomayor who offered such mindlessly sunny assessments of one of the court's most malicious members isn't the same Sotormayor firing off blistering dissents about "a restless and newly constituted court." 

<ii.>

Whatever happens in the remaining cases, I only hope that people wake up and see these reactionary laws and rulings for what they are -- as a potentially fatal blow, if left unchecked and unanswered, to the freedoms they've taken for granted for so long. It's easy to ignore the crazy backwards alphabet that prevails in states like Idaho, if you don't live there -- until it lands on your doormat, and your state becomes the next one-party paradise.

Whatever you do, assume that democracy is on the ballot this fall -- as we've seen in Michigan, where Republicans nominated two 2020 election deniers for Attorney General and Secretary of State. It doesn't take much imagination to see whose bidding they'll do, if the right opportunity presents itself. We cannot assume that the "adults" will take care of things, or that the center will hold, simply because it always has in the past.

You only have to look at the final desperate months of Weimar Germany's democracy to see how that movie played out in the fall and winter of 1932, as its last Chancellor, Kurt von Schleicher, cobbled up increasingly unlikely coalitions and schemes, in a desperate bid to retain power -- only to see his right-wing allies welcome Adolf Hitler, under the delusion that they'd tamed him, somehow. We all know how that movie played out, too.

I leave the last word to Democratic Texas State Representative Trey Martinez Fischer, who strikes me as someone who does get it, who sees what's happening clearly, and has more than rhetorical action on his mind, as to what happens next:

"There is definitely a difference between action and words. Lamenting the state of affairs in the Republican Party at a cocktail reception is not the necessary action that we need... These folks are hoping they will wake up from this bad dream, but the better medicine is for them to pinch themselves that they are not dreaming."

I couldn't have said it better. Let those words ring out in our minds, and proceed accordingly. Because, at least in the short run, the ride doesn't look any smoother from here. --The Reckoner

<"Storm The Ballot Box"/Take II:

The Reckoner>

Links To Go (Red State Realtors,
You Might Want To Skip The Third One):

CNN: Red States Are Remaking 

The Civil Liberties Landscape:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/22/politics/republicans-civil-liberties-abortion-voting-race/index.html

Cronkite News: Supreme Court Rejects Appeals

Of Death Row Inmates In Two Arizona Killings:
https://cronkitenews.azpbs.org/2022/05/23/supreme-court-rejects-appeals-of-death-row-inmates-in-two-arizona-killings/

OPB.com: Marketing Idaho
As Conservative Paradise

Irks Some Longtime Locals:
https://www.opb.org/article/2022/03/09/realtors-to-conservatives-living-in-liberal-areas-try-idaho/

Politico.com: Supreme Court Allows

North Carolina State GOP

To Defend State Voter ID Law:
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/23/supreme-court-allows-gop-leaders-in-north-carolina-to-defend-state-voter-id-law-00041742

Rolling Stone: The Supreme Court

Has Just Fused Church And State --

And Has Even Uglier Plans Ahead:
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/supreme-court-carson-makin-maine-religious-school-1372103/

Slate.com: Alito's Attack 

On Miranda Warnings

Is Much Worse Than It Seems:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/06/miranda-warnings-supreme-court-alito-kagan.html

The Roe Bombshell Drops (So Shove It, Civility Cops)

<i.>

Here's a simple test we can all try at home. How do you know when anyone in a leadership position is no longer relevant anymore, has reached their sell-by date, so to speak? Simple. When they stop speaking truth to power, and tell us to do likewise.

I mean Dick Durbin, Illinois's senior US Senator, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whose responses to the Supreme Court's recently-dropped bombshell -- the now-infamous draft opinion that Roe v. Wade is dead, because it's not mentioned in the Constitution, meaning, we only have the rights they deign to grant us -- rank among the stupidest and most jaw-dropping.

Pelosi's faux pas came first, during the Aspen Climate Ideas Conference, on May 9, in Miami (the same city where they're starting to openly fret about sea level rise). Asked what it would take to move the Senate on climate legislation, with Republicans ruling out such measures, Madam Pelosi opined:

"Well, we have to defeat them, so let's just try to persuade them. I want the Republican party to take back the party, take it back to where you were when you cared about a woman's right to choose, you cared about the environment. Hey, here I am, Nancy Pelosi, saying this country needs a strong Republican Party, and we do, not a cult, but a strong Republican Party."

When I read this, I rolled my eyes, and sighed aloud: "Nance, not to be mean, but the GOP seems quite robust nationally. Six of the nine Justices essentially carry their water at the Supreme Court. They control 26 state delegations, thanks to varying combinations of gerrymandering, and pushing their voters' darkest, most primal buttons.

"Oh, yeah, and while we're at it, let's not forget that January 6 insurrection thing, for which our Attorney General, Merrick Garland, is spending endless amounts of time prosecuting the little guy who swipes a coat rack from the Senate cloakroom, yet so far, has left Trump and his inner circle of planners -- including the infamous lawyer, John Eastman, and far right Congressmen and women, like Louie Gohmert, Jim Jordan, and Marjorie Taylor Greene -- blissfully untouched."

This is the same Republican Party that's working overtime to subvert democracy, however and wherever they can -- from running conspiracist-minded candidates to seize control of the electoral machinery, to the increasingly authoritarian bent that states like Florida and Texas are taking, to suppress the vote, or take total control of it, even when the results say otherwise. To put it charitably, they've never looked less persuadable.

Judging by what I'm seeing on the Hill's Twitter thread, the suggestion isn't going down well: "So the guy who said we can't "bully" the Supreme Court to act a certain way is married to the woman who bullied Arizona lawmakers to fabricate a different set of electors and helped organize a mob to bully Congress into not certifying the duly chosen electors? Got it." (Tristan Snell)

Or we might go this response, from MeidasTouch.com: "Republicans are holding major events with Kyle Rittenhouse and Viktor Orban. Spare us the BS that it's the Democrats who have gotten too extreme." Suffice to say, Madam Pelosi's room reading skills have atrophied a tad, now that she's sat on top for so, so, so long. Godfather III-era Michael Corleone would know the feeling well, I'm sure.

<"Scenes From An ACA/Pro-Choice Picket"/

Take I/Photo: The Reckoner>

<ii.>

Yet Pelosi isn't the only senior Democratic leader stuck in some endless 1980s and 1990s-era feedback loop, when the Republicans recruited the Christian Right to help do their bidding, though few talked as openly as they do now, about subverting the wishes of the majority (the 80 million who turned out in 2020 to rid themselves of Trump) to the tyranny of an aggrieved minority (the 74 million who wanted to keep their Dear Leader around). 

Sadly, you can also count Durbin, the party's second-ranking Democrat, among those leaders unable to meet the moment, as he made all too clear, when asked how he viewed the protests that immediately surfaced outside the five most authoritarian-leaning Justices' homes: 

"I think it's reprehensible. Stay away from homes and families of elected officials and members of the court. You can express yourself, exercise your First Amendment, but to go after them at their homes, to do anything of a threatening nature, certainly anything violent, is absolutely reprehensible." 

Once again, I found myself asking: 

“Are you 

f#cking kidding me?”

First, nobody has been violent to any of the five reactionary Justices, judging from the clips I've seen of their activities, anyway. Hell, nobody's even said so much as "Boo!" Considering the unhinged authoritarian bent of the draft opinion, it's not hard to understand why it's freaking people out. As almost every mainstream legal scholar has already noted, the draft opinion comes across as though the Fourteenth Amendment had never happened. 

If Roe can be struck be down, on the basis that no constitutional right to privacy exists, what does that reasoning bode for other rights -- ranging from contraception access, to interracial marriage, gay marriage, and so on -- that were granted on similar grounds? Nothing good, let's put that way.

People have every reason to be alarmed, and honestly, if our chief concern is that Alito, and his equally tawdry, unsavory crew -- Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorusch, Brett Kavanagh, and Clarence Thomas -- aren't able to go about their repressive business blissfully undisturbed, then we've gone a lot farther off the rails than I could ever imagined.

To put it another way, they should have to face their handiwork, starting with those that they're angering. They should have to account for what they're contemplating. They should have to answer for the harm that they're potentially getting ready to inflict on a majority of Americans who have consistently sworn, in poll after poll -- for as long as I can remember, going back 30-odd years or so -- that they don't want Roe overturned.

Honestly, who takes the ethically-challenged likes of Thomas seriously, and his solemn vow that the court won't be "bullied?" Really? I guess the bully privilege only extends to himself and his infamous blonde trophy wife, who worked hand in hand with those scheming to keep Trump in power, the 80 million who wanted him swept out of the White House be damned. Their votes, of course, didn't rank among the "legal votes" that the GOP's senior mummies stoutly vowed to see counted. That didn't matter to them, then or now.

In all fairness, though, I can't blame Thomas for a tad feeling confused, given the dynamic he's seen since his ascension to the court, in 1992 -- the Dick Durbins of the world falling into their role of playing good cop to the GOP's bad cop. It must unsettle Thomas, I'd imagine, to see the hornet's nest that has already stirred in response. But if he didn't see it coming, that makes him even denser than I imagine him. Or how he already imagines himself.

<"Scenes From An ACA/Pro-Choice Picket"/ Take II/Photo: The Squawker>

<iii.>

At any rate, I no longer respect Durbin, nor anyone who talks along the same lines, like Bill Kristol, another card-carrying member of the commentariat who still seems to think it's 1996. Surely, they will see the light, because they'll listen to reason, right? Hence, his own equally stupid. wishy washy advice, dished out via his Twitter account: "Please don't protest at people's homes. Please don't intrude on people attending their houses of worship. Organize politically, be civil civically."

Jon Rosenberg's response strikes me as way more relevant: "No. Fuck this. Go to people's homes. Go to their places of worship. Make them as uncomfortable as they are trying to make you. This is not the time for civility, this is the time for mass resistance and demonstration."

Crudely stated, but well stated. If you prefer a more eloquent version, Arwa Madhawi's commentary in the Guardian (see link below) should suffice, as well, particularly this comment:

"Here’s the thing though: civil rights have never been won by groveling at the feet of people who hate you and saying, ‘Please sir, can I have a few more rights?’ You simply do not owe civility to people who don’t see you as a full citizen. It’s worrying how many people seem to think otherwise."

Of course, this doesn't faze the Civility Cops, as I call the likes of Durbin, Kristol, Pelosi, and others of their ilk, who are mentally trapped in various nostalgic time warps, depending on their ideology or inclination. To hear the mainstreamers tell it, the soccer moms they spend so much time courting put away their bad girl sides -- careful with the bong -- long ago, so why bother telling them, "You can't have it all?" This is the default response of a Democratic Party that's been negotiating against itself for way, way too long. But when you see people clutch their pearls, and tell you that power really might concede without a demand, if you just lobby long and hard enough, that's when you know the world has passed them by.

<"Scenes From An ACA/Pro-Choice Picket"/

Take III/Image: The Squawker>

<iv.>

Yet it's worth recalling these seven words, and writing them in fire, on every so-called Democratic centrist's brain: It...Didn't...Have...To....Be...This...Way. At a certain point, the Democratic Party got used to the idea of Roe serving as a bargaining chip, one it viewed as key to keeping the faithful happy, and in the fold, whenever an election rolled around.

Dangling Roe as an empire building device to raise money and lock in votes seemed a far easier path to take than, say, codifying it into law, beyond the reach of meddling politicians (read: Republicans). Vote for us, and don't forget to donate, the traditional midterm pitches reminded us. Otherwise, women will lose their right to choose.

Democrats largely gave up on codifying Roe after the collapse of a Clinton-era push to do it, in the 1990s. However, it's an oversight they surely could have rectified in 2008, when Obama won the Presidency, and his party enjoyed a virtual supermajority in the Senate (57-41), until the 2010 midterms, when it shrank to 51-47. That's before we get to other major sins, like the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg swatting aside suggestions that she step down during that time. Imagine what we might have been spared, if only she hadn't let hubris overtake common sense (see link below). And let's not forget the strategic malpractice of Obama's first chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, the foul-mouthed moron who infamously told a roomful of activists, "I don't give a f#ck about judicial appointments."

We all know who did, and how wonderfully that movie has played out for them. Emanuel's dimwitted outburst is the kind of stupidity that inspires the GOP's bad actors to toast him privately, and chuckle, "It shouldn't be this easy. But it is!" With opponents like this, who needs a fair fight? Not them, of course, since they'll never experience one. And this is what makes the hypocrisy of the Democratic Establishment such a bitter pill to swallow. They'll never have to face the consequences of their choices, or if they do, it won't be for long, given the ages of Durbin (77), or Pelosi (82) and her trusty sidekicks, James Clyburn (81) and Steny Hoyer (82), eternally content to play the malignant Robin to her equally toxic Batman. Their loved ones won't have to worry about getting abortions, nor losing any of the other rights that will presumably tumble to the wayside, like so many wayward dominoes. When in doubt, they'll move to another country, an escape hatch that's always been available to the celebs, and the swells. Those who don't fall into either social category simmer slowly in the pot, like the vast majority of Nazi persecution victims did in 1939.

Honestly, don't sign up for another tour of duty with the Civility Cops. Their indifference and lack of empathy brought us to this pass, so why let the Durbins and Kristols and Pelosis of the world dictate the terms of our fight?

What's the point of trusting them to wield power anymore, when they do so precious little with it, on those rare occasions when they finally wriggle out of the penalty box long enough to claw back some of it? They've had plenty of chances. What have they done with them lately? What have they done for any of us lately? (Cue the sound of crickets chirping.) Right, exactly.

So no, sorry, Uncle Dick, and sorry, Aunt Nancy, forgive me if I don't feel like breaking bread with our potential downpressors. We understand if you aren't up to the fight anymore. Please, go sit down, shut the f#ck up, and let the rest of us get on with it.

Go to the Supreme Court goons' homes, or their gala rubber chicken dinners, and those of their acolytes, whatever event, or unseemly setting that you may run across them, and let them know -- to coin a phrase from "Janie Jones":

"EXACTLY -- HOW -- YOU -- FEEL."

So yeah, as full-on dramatic as that first sign sounds -- by all means, rage, rage, rage against the lying of the right. Because our survival depends on it. And those who have to follow this particular dystopian act will curse us forever, if we get wrong. --The Reckoner

Declare yourself an unsafe building

Suffer the indignation of your world,

To climb the ladders 
you've gotta suss out the snakes

Remember your height 
remember to never look down.

'Cause now you've made your choice
you've gotta take your chance

Find a way out now
you're

Unsafe, unsafe
<The Alarm, "Unsafe Building">

Links To Go (Hurry, Hurry, Before 

They Start Passing Out The Handmaids' Uniforms)

ABC News: Election Experts  Warn Of "Emergency" As Trump-Backed Election Deniers Win Primary Races: https://www.yahoo.com/gma/trump-backed-election-deniers-could-205400544.html BIll Kristol 's Twitter Feed: https://twitter.com/BillKristol/status/1523288322671788033 Jon Rosenberg's Twitter Thread On Bill Kristol: https://twitter.com/jonrosenberg/status/1523311316089602051 NBC News: Election Deniers Running In 2020...: https://www.yahoo.com/news/election-deniers-trump-won-2020-132726637.htm Politico: "Extraordinarily Self-Centered": As A Roe Reversal Looms, RBG Admirers Wrestle With Her Legacy: https://www.yahoo.com/news/rbg-admirers-wrestle-regret-anger-083000049.html

Reddit: WhitePeopleTwitter: https://www.reddit.com/r/WhitePeopleTwitter/comments/ulu58j/this/ The Guardian: Overturning Roe V. Wade Will Destroy Our Civil Rights -- So Don't Ask Us To Be "Civil": https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/may/10/overturning-roe-v-wade-will-destroy-our-civil-rights-so-dont-ask-us-to-be-civil

Punk Rock Art Photos: "Still Life: Defunct Medical Clinic"

 

<The long view, 

from the parking lot...>

Hard to believe, once upon a time, but this now-silent medical clinic, Moonham & Associates played a major part in the rhythm of our lives, when we first moved to the town we currently call home. Even in its current condition, you can see it was a state of the art structure, for the mid-2000s (though it was built in the late '60s).

Thoughtfulness abounded in the design. Ample parking in an ample lot, including more spaces for people with disabilities than you normally see. Central, accessible location, off a major five-lane road.

Numerous amenities, like a patient drop-off area. (If you're looking at the first photo, you drove up a small path, behind the array of blue disability parking plates, and then left, up a small asphalted hill, and back down again.) Every detail...

<Constant exposure to wet, rainy weather 

hasn't worked wonders for these signs.>

...seemed carefully considered, even if the waiting rooms still seemed stuck in the mid-'70s Mike Brady Gothic era, as I call it, with all their color schemes, comically narrow armchairs, cramped, unforgiving waiting rooms, and splotchy, questionable color schemes.

Bit by bit, however, the various medical practices here shut down, and pulled out. As we later discovered, Moonham's slow fade revolved around the wishes of our local hospital, that had started building three outpatient clinics on the outskirts of town -- just past the south side, where we live. The gravitational pull of "one-stop shopping" proved irresistible...

<The weather has done a number 

on the wood finish here, too, 

as you can see here.>

...or so it seemed, at the time. The actual back story is more complicated, as I learned, when I started digging online into the history of Moonham. At its peak, the clinic employed roughly 35 doctors, and 200 employees, of whom 40 -- in the billing and collections departments, naturally -- followed their employers to the new location. (Everyone else, presumably, had to dust off their resumes.)

The one local news story I found, from 2011, suggested the reorganization hadn't been smooth. Millions of dollars in unpaid property taxes had piled up since 1999. An additional $10 million in bank loans for real estate and equipment, also loomed, though organizers waxed confident that Moonham had enough assets...

<Closeup view of the clinic's slow fade.

As you can see, the elements 

have really taken their toll.>

...to cover it all. Explanations for the clinic's demise ranged from greed, to inefficiency, though the sources quoted in the story pointed to independence as the big reason. Some doctors supported the closing, and some didn't, but they all wanted to run their own affairs. It's the hobgoblin that dogs any sort of collective arrangement, as the boys behind fabled enterprises like Apple Records will tell you (or Motown, or Stax, or... You get the picture).

With so many partners involved, I can see how that issue got tricky, although I'm assuming that they had to vote on everything, including monthly board meetings, and all the usual organizational folderol that accompanies them (annual and quarterly reports, for instance). The story mentions that the hospital already owned a portion of the property, although...

<This sign marked

the crest of 

the patient dropoff area.>

...nobody seems in any hurry to develop the 4.42-acre site, which has sat empty for over a decade now, and the Squawker and I had stopped visiting around 2010, as we followed our fellow patients to the new digs. 

The property itself was sold in December 2018, for an undisclosed sum, to an equally undisclosed owner (the hospital, I'm guessing, though without confirmation, we obviously can't say for sure). Its current market value is $1.066 million, which generated $31,000 in property taxes last year. I'm guessing they've long since caught up.

<The view from the outer left edge 

of the parking lot...>

So there you have it. A small town version, I suppose, of the territory covered on the VICE Network's ruin porn show, "Abandoned." With subjects ranging from Cold War-era fallout shelters, to decaying malls, and the remains of Route 66, it's enough to make you feel like small potatoes, indeed (though I'm not as enamored of the later episodes -- which seemed like an excuse for the host to indulge his skateboarding hobby). 

<...and a closeup shot 

of the signs, as faded as the rest.>

Truth to tell, I'm a little hesitant myself to feed anybody's ruin porn narrative. In many ways, the story here simply reflects a business transaction, one directed by a major player (our hospital). At that point, the players involved had two options: swim against the tide, and risk moving somewhere else, or joining it. Not surprisingly...

<I've heard of the "broken window theory," but even this snapshot seems like an extreme version, doesn't it?>

...most preferred the latter option. It reminds me of the old joke that you hear cynics drop among themselves: "You say it sucks to be alive? You're right. Most days, it does." Pause. "But it sure as hell beats the alternative." Ba-boomp! But seriously, folks, a funny thing happened to me on the way to seeing my offices, my practice, and my staff getting turned upside down. Even so, as the above photo suggests, there's no doubting...

<Nobody has had to worry about

following the instructions for quite some time.>

...that Moonham has definitely seen better days, and it definitely looks like worse for wear. The faded signs (above) scream of a stereotypical Abandoned 101 experience, and of course, no real movement to scavenge the bones of the property, from blacktop to bricktop, seems likely. Not immediately, anyway.

So what are the city fathers planning on doing about this gaping vacancy in our town's otherwise well-scrubbed back side? I haven't heard in a long time, and my Google walkin' fingers couldn't find a definitive answer, so your guess is as good as mine. 

Going on our latest drive-through, however, the Squawker and I agree on this much: if Mother Earth wants to reclaim the property, it's off to a flying start. Lack of urgency does things like that. Or maybe something's happening behind the scenes, but nobody's announced it yet. We'll see what how it looks in a year or two. --The Reckoner

<Words: The Reckoner>

<Images: The Squawker>