Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News

Drudge Retort

User Info


Subscribe to gal_tuesday's blog Subscribe


Special Features

Thursday, May 05, 2022

Barry Friedman, Dahlia Lithwick and Stephen I. Vladeck : All this leaked draft opinion is, then, is a naked power grab ... .Do not mistake principled decision-making for what in reality is the opportunistic and intensely partisan manipulation of circumstance ... .This is a political opinion from a political court, one that doesn't pretend to be anything else. read more

Wednesday, May 04, 2022

the transfer of power. Stewart Rhodes, the Oath Keepers militia group leader charged with seditious conspiracy over the January 6 attack on the Capitol, tried to get a Donald Trump confidant to ask the former US president to allow his group to forcibly stop the peaceful transfer of power, the justice department has alleged in court papers.

Adam Serwer: If the conservative justice's draft opinion is adopted by the Court, key advances of the past hundred years could be rolled back. read more

As abortion bans proliferate in states around the US, some state legislatures are likely to go even further than just ending abortion in their jurisdictions " taking aim at the growing numbers of people seeking procedures and medications out of state, experts warn.

Tuesday, May 03, 2022

The justice's scathing condemnation of abortion pretends not to imperil other rights. Don't believe it.


J.D. Vance wants to eliminate abortion with no exceptions for rape or ------. He says rape is "inconvenient."

Karma would dictate someone needs to violently rape JD so he can see how inconvenient it is, despite the fact he can't get pregnant.

This article is both well-written and insightful:

Long ago, before J. D. Vance started doing his best to sound like every other MAGA candidate in the country, he had an ear for a metaphor.

Reflecting on how heroin and prescription opioids had ravaged his home state of Ohio, Vance worried that a certain Republican candidate for president would have a similar effect. "[Donald] Trump is cultural heroin. He makes some feel better for a bit. But he cannot fix what ails them, and one day they'll realize it," he wrote in The Atlantic in July 2016.

Instead, it's Vance who has had a realization: He's decided that Trump's cultural heroin is too powerful to resist, so he might as well become a dealer.

And what drug is Vance now pushing? Unfulfilled promises, simple solutions, cultural war issues and owning the libs:
Even if the men agreed on the problems facing America, Trump's term in office showed"just as Vance predicted"that he was unable to address them. "What Trump offers is an easy escape from the pain. To every complex problem, he promises a simple solution," Vance wrote. "He never offers details for how these plans will work, because he can't."

Trump didn't produce the manufacturing bounce-back he promised. He didn't build the wall, and it didn't stop overdoses. His economic policies mostly favored the wealthy, not the working class. And he botched the response to a pandemic that has disproportionately killed people in places that voted for him. He then ended his term by fomenting a violent insurrection. It was a catastrophe.

On the campaign trail, however, Vance has adopted Trump's stump style. He has blamed Mark Zuckerberg for Trump's loss in 2020, flirted with election-fraud conspiracy theories, charged into culture-war attacks on Alec Baldwin and LeBron James, and found a steadfast ally in Marjorie Taylor Greene. None of this will help left-behind Ohioans, as he knows. They may or may not realize it; many may be cynical about their futures but happy to just have someone sticking it to their cultural enemies. That may be understandable, but it's the sort of nihilist scapegoating that 2016-era Vance would probably have rejected.

"Trump's promises are the needle in America's collective vein," Vance wrote back then. Today, he's happy to help you get a fix.

This conservative SC that is willing to "burn it all down"* is a dream come true for the radical rightwing of the Republican party:

As Kathryn Joyce has extensively reported for Salon, the long term goal of the radical right " of which Abbott has strenuously tried to demonstrate he is a member " has been the total destruction of public education. It makes sense, of course, that the same people who think that government should play no role in providing health care also object to the government providing education. Those cards have been traditionally held close to the chest, concealed by stalking horses such as "charter schools." But lately, more conservatives have been forthright about their ideological opposition to the concept of public education.

Just last week, Fox News host Lisa Kennedy argued that another Supreme Court case challenging the secularism of public schools offers an opportunity to "rethink whether or not we have public schools." She added, "Maybe we should not have the government involved in education at all." And, as Joyce reported last week:

In 2021, Florida Commissioner of Education Richard Corcoran declared that Republicans would win the political "war" in education, while sketching out a plan to lure so many students out of public schools that the damage to the system would be permanent. This month, Chris Rufo, the Manhattan Institute fellow who turned "critical race theory" into an amazingly effective political scapegoat, bluntly explained that "to get universal school choice you really need to operate from a premise of universal public school distrust."


My friend recently posted a photo of her mother and her three sisters. She wrote something to the effect of: I am remembering my mother and her sisters who have all died now [her last surviving aunt died a few weeks ago at the age of 103]. They are not mentioned in the US Constitution, except for the 19th Amendment where they were given the right to vote. That's why abortion isn't in the Constitution--women aren't in aren't in there at all.

It's hard not to see this draft decision as harkening back to the "established history and tradition" that allowed our forefathers to write: "All men are created equal." Not "All men and women are created equal." Not "All people are created equal." And then, in an even more brazenly patriarchal move, Alito takes us back to the 17th century by quoting Matthew Hale, a persecutor of "witches" and a champion of both marital rape and wife-beating:

Justice Alito's invocation of Sir Matthew Hale in his leaked majority opinion is so, so much more ------ up than people realize. I'm a professor with a PhD, and my area of expertise happens to be women and gender in the early modern era (1500-1700). Here is what you need to know.

But, ironically, if that wasn't enough mind-bending stupidity, we hear this:

Alito's Roe attack betrays a medieval ignorance of ancient history

Historian John M. Riddle believes some women actually may have had more access to reproductive care in the actual Dark Ages than they have in parts of the U.S. today.

What in the holy hell is happening in this country?

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2022 World Readable