Didn’t want anybody to miss this very well done YouTube creation, utilizing America’s pioneering situation comedy, “The Honeymooners”.
Utah’s 72 Hour Waiting Period has marginal impact on abortion rates – it just makes things harder and more inconvenient for women
The lead paragraph pretty much says it all:
A new study of women seeking abortions in Utah has found that the state’s 72-hour waiting period didn’t dissuade the vast majority from going through with the procedure, though it did present them with additional financial and logistical difficulties.
Despite all the pious noise from politicians, the inconvenience was the point of the law – it’s a feature not a bug.
From the Tribune in 201
Sponsoring Rep. Steve Eliason, R-Sandy, believes the concerns are misplaced.
“I think it’s a positive change for women and children,” said Eliason. “At the end of the day, it’s a consumer-protection law.
“The focus of this bill is women having time to consider all of the information that is given to them when facing a life-altering decision that somebody else is making money off of,” he said.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – the whole point of these laws is the idea that women are too stupid to make their own choices and need counseling before making them – as if any woman who wants an abortion hasn’t thought though the issues.
And it turns out the law has done nothing other than make it harder for poor women to access abortions. Wealthy women of course will have no problems getting their counseling visit and getting back to the office. Middle class women will be able to do the same. The burden of Republican moralizing, once again, falls not on male, Republican legislators, but on poor women.
With the Hawaii caucus, there were some sketchy events that were happening. The most obvious one is that the election results were not posted until very late in the day.
Now one could argue that they needed time to count the votes, but if you look at the picture above, this clearly wasn’t the case. While Hawaiian voters kept track of the votes in their precinct, they put the results in a Google doc and called the election hours before the mainstream media did. Not only were they able to tally up the votes, they did so with great accuracy. Maybe this goes to show that the media doesn’t have as much power over the people who are inquisitive.
This deserves its own post. Presented without comment, except… GO BERNIE!
The 2016 election is different. Donald Trump is running as a Tea-GOP populist, and he has a lot of support from large numbers of Americans that elite politicians do their best to ignore in favor of the rich.
Via The Guardian:
Over the past 35 years the working class has been devalued, the result of an economic version of the Hunger Games. It has pitted everyone against each other, regardless of where they started…
…In Ohatchee, Alabama, Larry, taking a day off work to take his son fishing, is gracious but frustrated: “I have worked in foundries all my life, since I was 15. Hard work, and I don’t got a lot of money to show for it.”
The frustration isn’t just misplaced nostalgia – the economic statistics show the same thing.
Over the past 35 years, except for the very wealthy, incomes have stagnated, with more people looking for fewer jobs. Jobs for those who work with their hands, manufacturing employment, has been the hardest hit, falling from 18m in the late 1980s to 12m now.
The economic devaluation has been made more painful by the fraying of the social safety net, and more visceral by the vast increase at the top.
Earlier this month MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough (who I often disagree with) offered this simple explanation for Trump’s groundswell of support:
“The problem with the Republican Party over the past 30 years is they haven’t — and I’ll say, we haven’t — developed a message that appeals to the working class Americans economically in a way that Donald Trump’s does,” the former Republican lawmaker explained. “We talk about cutting capital gains taxes that the 10,000 people that in the crowd cheering for Donald Trump, they are never going to get a capital gains cut because it doesn’t apply.”
“We talk about getting rid of the death tax,” he continued. “The death tax is not going to impact the 10,000 people in the crowd for Donald Trump. We talk about how great free trade deals are. Those free trade deals never trickle down to those 10,000 people in Donald Trump’s rallies.”
“You sound like Bernie Sanders,” NBC’s Chuck Todd pointed out.
“But herein lies the problem with the Republican Party,” Scarborough complained. “It never trickles down! Those people in Trump’s crowds, those are all the ones that lost the jobs when they get moved to Mexico and elsewhere. The Republican donor class are the ones that got rich off of it because their capital moved overseas and they made higher profits.”
There it is. Bernie Sanders is leading a “political revolution” from the left. Trump is leading another revolution in the Tea-GOP.
As the party chairman, Corroon is automatically a superdelegate, meaning he can pick his favorite candidate regardless of the statewide vote. Not a fan of this process, Corroon had said he’d side with whichever candidate won Utah’s caucus and that is undeniably Sanders.
…Two of the state’s superdelegates — Patrice Arent, the national committeewoman, and Breanne Miller, the party’s vice chairwoman — are backing Clinton. National Committeeman Wayne Holland remains undecided.
The message is:
Bernie Sanders is our choice for President. Give people candidates they’re excited about, and they will show up. This is an opportunity to bring more Utahns into the democratic process. The Democratic Party establishment is too far to the right. The Gallup Poll indicates both parties are at historical low points in the percentage who identify themselves as core supporters of the party. We’re independents – you need us to win in November.
Peter Corroon (Thank him, he’s for Bernie): firstname.lastname@example.org
Wayne Holland (Undecided): email@example.com
Breanne Miller (Supporting Hillary): firstname.lastname@example.org
Rep. Patrice Arent (Supporting Hillary): email@example.com
[Democratic Party Executive Director Lauren] Littlefield called the big turnout, which included 20,000 new voters, “the largest growth opportunity for Utah Democrats in decades,” and yet she and Corroon criticized state leaders for not funding a full primary, instead of the party-run caucuses.
Instead of hundreds of polling locations statewide and the option for mail-in and absentee ballots, the party spent $20,000 to fund 90 voting locations, resulting in lines that stretched for city blocks. More than half of the precincts ran out of ballots and had to print more.
Utah’s last undecided Democratic superdelegate threw his support behind Bernie Sanders on Wednesday, and the state party finalized its tally from last week’s presidential caucuses, in which a high turnout led to a lengthy vote-counting process…
Wayne Holland, Utah’s Democratic committeeman, was the last holdout, and as such received a barrage of calls and emails…
The party announced his support for Sanders early Wednesday. In an interview, Holland said he’s more ideologically in tune with Sanders and he liked that his pick matched the caucus vote. While he says “the odds are long” that Sanders claims the party’s nomination, Holland, a union organizer, felt the senator was bringing in new voters with his populist message…
The current party chairman, Peter Corroon, is also backing Sanders, tying his vote to Utah’s caucus results. Clinton received the support of Utah Democratic Party Vice Chairwoman Breanne Miller and Democratic Committeewoman Patrice Arent, both saying she is the most qualified candidate, having previously served as secretary of state, a senator from New York and first lady. Miller and Arent have heard from Sanders supporters who want them to switch allegiances, but they are not budging.
Utah’s never seen anything this bizarre.
The republicans are turning out in “Huuge” numbers to vote AGAINST their presumed nominee, (Donald Trump), and democrats are turning out in “Huuge” numbers to vote AGAINST their presumed nominee also, (Hillary Clinton).
We won’t know until morning, but from what I’ve seen on my, (so far), republican-bias TV stations here, the democrats are voting for the person they actually want.
Guess we’ll find out in the morning. I saw a lot of Hillary supporters. My “Bernie” badge didn’t get any real opposition on my little walk.
Barack Obama on today’s attack in Brussels:
“We will do whatever is necessary to support our friend and ally Belgium in bringing to justice those who are responsible,” Obama said. “This is yet another reminder that the world must unite. We must be together regardless of nationality, or race, or faith, in fighting against the scourge of terrorism. We can and we will defeat those who threaten the safety and security of people all around the world.”
Updates from HuffPo here.
Story from MSNBC.
It’s worth noting that the same poll showed a comfortable victory in Utah for either Cruz or Kasich. IOW, at least according to this one poll, a Trump nomination has the potential to scramble the electoral map. If Trump puts Utah into play, then a Trump nomination has the potential to make Goldwater’s 1964 loss look like a pleasant walk in the park.
All that said, I will believe that Utah would vote Democratic against Trump when I see it.
The nearest analogy I can find is 1992 when George HW Bush came in first, Perot second and Clinton third. If (and I think this is likely) there’s a three way contest, whoever the Republican establishment puts up against Trump will win in Utah.
By now, you’ve probably seen the video of the Trump supporter who cold-cocked a protester as he was being led out of the rally.
The stunning part was not the punch itself – although an old white man hitting a black protester is loaded with meaning – it was his later comment:
And when asked why he punched the protester, he said: “Number one, we don’t know if he’s ISIS. We don’t know who he is, but we know he’s not acting like an American, cussing me… If he wants it laid out, I laid it out.”
He added: “Yes, he deserved it. The next time we see him, we might have to kill him. We don’t know who he is. He might be with a terrorist organization.”
We don’t know if he’s ISIS.
Think about that for a moment. Behind that statement lies a world class ignorance and mind-numbing fear. It’s the statement of a man so uninformed that it beggars the imagine.
“We don’t know if he’s ISIS.”
Nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror. That’s the breathtakingly stupid statement of a man who has next to no idea about the world. He only knows he’s been told for years to be afraid and he has faithfully obeyed.
I’m less shocked by the punch than the breathtaking ignorance that motivated it.
Last week, Hillary Clinton made a ridiculous gaffe in which she praised Nancy Reagan for her “low key” AIDS activism. She was immediately corrected by the gay community which pointed out that while she was First Lady, the Reagan administration didn’t do shit about AIDS and was often actively hostile to the gay community.