Lindsey v. Women

The thing about the tantrums we saw last week, both from Brett Kavanaugh and Lindsey Graham, was that they both sounded like men who had been spending way too much time with the "president."  It makes sense, doesn't it, that if he can get away with it, they can too.  And they did.

Women like Susan Collins, who pretend to be pro-women, are really throwbacks, as are any republican women who will tolerate and make excuses for raging men, and minimize the assaults on women.  I guess because she is a women, successful in the republican party, she knew to keep her head down, study the notes she was given, and act like she was taking the high road.

The double-talk we heard last week may have taken us by surprise, but shouldn't have.  It was the same double-talk we heard during the Clarence Thomas hearing.  The woman was confused; the woman allowed herself to be put in that position; the woman waited until she had something to gain (?!) by coming forward when she did; while we sympathize with the woman, we don't believe her.  The man is having his reputation destroyed; his family and career are being harmed; his sincerity cannot be doubted.  Lies excused, attacks rationalized.

Why wouldn't Kavanaugh stick it out?  He had powerful and loud men on his side.  Donald Trump has insulted every-damn-body in the world, and knows that they will stand by him as long as he has power to wield.  And, like Clarence Thomas in 1991, Kavanaugh ends up not having his family and career destroyed:  he ends up with a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court.

And then there is Lindsey.  He has been taken for a ride -- and not just on the golf course -- more than once by Trump.  But he has what Trump preys on:  ambition.  So he has been strung along since November of 2016, at first tentatively throwing his support, and then with more fervor, no, fever.  What we witnessed from Graham last week was nothing short of hysteria.  He was indeed crazed.

Like Kavanaugh, he had been spending a lot of time listening to presidential rants and invective, to the point where reason was a distant memory, calm was no longer even in the repertoire.

So it was no surprise that after Graham's rant, women -- and good men -- across the country rose up with outrage.  We need to do something NOW, and the passion and determination is NOW.

I was not surprised to receive an email during that time from the South Carolina Democratic Party.  What did surprise me was that they were promoting past chair and bombast Jaime Harrison as their choice to oppose Lindsey Graham in 2020.

First of all, I have heard Harrison speak just a few times, including a couple of appearances on Rachel Maddow before the 2016 SC primaries.  I may be wrong, but it seems that whatever question he is asked, Harrison will respond with a long-winded replay of who he is and how he got here.  Harrison's success as chair can only be summed up by the Democrats' losses in local, state and national government during his reign.

That said, the most important thing about where the party stands today is that they are not RIGHT NOW promoting a woman to run against Lindsey Graham in 2020.  With the successes of women running for office across the country, with the rage and determination that resulted from the mockery of a Senate Supreme Court nomination hearing, it never occurred to our state party that Graham's assault was an invitation.

Had the situation been reversed -- and I am happy to say that wouldn't have ever happened -- but if it had -- by the end of the tirade, there would have been meetings and "bindersful of women" to parade in front of the electorate; fund raising emails promising the revenge of victimized women would have gone out in minutes.

While republicans disdain women, they know how to use us.  That is why we had a Nikki Haley as governor, but we can't seem to promote and elect a Democratic woman governor.  It pains me to say it, but they will use Nikki all the way to the presidency, and she will be happy to be used.

We do have fantastic women on the political stage in South Carolina.  While the party might jump on board when they smell success, they don't put their money or their mouth into finding and promoting women that are right here for the running.

We don't just have smart and motivated women, we have organizations right here in South Carolina that will help.

Right off the top, we have South Carolina Democratic Women's Council, and local chapters, including Charleston County Democratic Women.  I wish I could say women were well represented on the Democratic Party websites, but you have to look hard to find them.  If you want to hook up with the Women's Council or CCDW, your best bet is to look on Facebook.

Then there are the women's action networks that have grown HUGE since 2016.  WREN -- Women's Rights and Empowerment Network -- is fighting for women's issues across the state, from wage equality to healthcare to empowering women to seek leadership roles in business and, yes, politics.  Emerge America opened its doors in South Carolina in 2017.   I can't speak highly enough about the work they are doing to encourage and train women to run for political office.  Thinking you can do a better job than the jackasses now in office?  Get in touch with Emerge SC.  Want to help women who have decided to run?  Contact Emerge SC.

And of course we have great groups here in South Carolina like Planned Parenthood Action Fund and the American Association of University Women, both of which can be counted on to promote women in government as well as women's issues in healthcare and education.

Then there are all the women right here, right now, that we should be persuading to take on Lindsey Graham.  Just a few names come to mind; I'm sure we can put our heads together and think of lots more:

SC Representative Gilda Cobb-Hunter from Orangeburg 

Linda Ketner, who in 2008 nearly defeated 4-term incumbent Henry Brown for US Congress District 1 

Margie Bright Matthews, SC state Senator for District 45

State Senator Mia McLeod from Richmond County, 

So, here we are.  Do we jump up and down and wave our hands so that our Democratic Party will listen to us?  Do we -- both women and men -- insist on being represented equally in government and especially in the Democratic Party?

And most important TODAY, after Lindsey Graham invited us to step up and challenge him, do we find a woman who will fight for us, so that a misogynist like Lindsey will not be holding down that seat and voting against our interests in Congress after 2020?

Write, call, email your state and local Democratic Party.  They won't take this step unless it is absolutely clear we will accept no less.  Spread the word on Facebook, at home, at work, community meetings.

Finding and supporting a woman to step up and take on Lindsey Graham for Senate in 2020 needs to start now.  And it should really be a no-brainer.

It is time for Lindsey to go.  And he seems to agree.

"I hope the American people can see through this sham."

When Money Just Isn't Enough

The Ironic Cherry reads...

Ratf**ked:

The True Story Behind the

Secret Plan to Steal America's Democracy

by David Daley

I continue to wait for Democrats to create a catchy (memorable) phrase for "emoluments clause."  You know, like republicans renamed the "estate tax" the unforgettable and terrifying "death tax."  Something that would put Trump's obscene conflicts of interest front and center in the mind of the American people.

David Daley realized that the most important threat to democracy today is the redistricting that happened in 2010.  But not even its more apt term, "gerrymandering" is enough to cause us to bolt upright from a sound political sleep.  That's why he titled his book "Ratfucked."  He defines it as "a dirty deed done dirt cheap" and places it originally, and not surprisingly, in the Nixon White House, where the term was used to describe operatives in Nixon's inner circle.

The plot to steal America once and for all for the republican party began with the gift by the Supreme Court of Citizens United.  One clever and far-sighted republican realized that it really wouldn't take a lot of money in a lot of races to turn the tide; a study of the states where legislatures would control the redistricting after the 2010 census showed which states would gain or lose seats after reapportionment and would then be redrawing maps from scratch.  A fairly modest amount of money (by today's standards) poured into a few critical state races.  Sleepy Dems would wake up to find blue and purple states suddenly controlled by republicans, states like Pennsylvania, Michigan and North Carolina.  (Remember when NC used to be the smarter of the Carolinas?)

The gerrymander goes way back, but these days it is done with computer programs and the enormous amounts of personal data collected on each of us resulting in stunningly bizarre district maps.  With chapters about several of the more fascinating and dysfunctional gerrymanders, he describes the process and the result in a way that makes this a true page-turner.  For one instance, he takes us into Michigan's District 14:

He takes a day to drive the entire 170 miles of the border, in order to "understand those juts, notches and tangrams and to see what, if anything, is different from one side of the street to the other."

What he finds is a surgical precision wherein poor, mostly African American communities are forced into the district, including boarded up houses and a completely closed national park.  On the other side, even right across the street, are the affluent neighborhoods.  This is part of his description:

"The mapmaker draws his first joke farther down Michigan Avenue.  Tiger Stadium used to sit at the corner of Michigan and Trumbull; the site is now a park.  It would have been in the 14th.  The baseball team's new home, Comerica Park, is just a mile away, as is Ford Field, where the Detroit Lions play.  Both are outside the lines.  This may be the mapmaker's favorite dig:  time and again, whenever the 14th might include a local landmark -- Faygo soda's headquarters, the Detroit Zoo, a major General Motors plant -- it contorts itself in another direction.  There will be no easy campaign cash and no famous constituency for the member of Congress from the 14th."

What he describes as "the growth atop the snake's head" is on a street that cuts in and out across three districts.  Turns out that that strange growth at the top of the 14th is an actual dump.

There are two critical aspects to this national redistricting.  First, you want to pack a couple of districts in the state with minorities.  Which leads to races, as in my own District 6 in South Carolina, that resulted in 2016 in a victory for Jim Clyburn with over 70% of the vote.  I then lost the ability to vote against Mark Sanford in my former district, District 1.  Sanford won with a more modest 58.6 % of the vote.  Which is part two of this devious scheme.  Not only do you want to pack a few districts with Democrats, you want to spread a few out over primarily republican districts, so you can have more of those majority republican districts that will nonetheless be safe.

Here is the gerrymandered District 1:

Sadly, republicans have been able to use the part of the Voting Rights Act which mandated the opportunity for minorities "to elect representatives of their choice" to advance their own power grab.  In 1990 the then head of the Republican National Committee made a proposal to the Congressional Black Caucus.  It was an unholy alliance that gave African Americans more representation in Congress by packing a few districts so that republicans could spread their constituencies across more districts.  In retrospect, this turned out not to increase the representation of the black communities in Congress, merely to assure them a few seats.  And those districts continue to be poor and powerless, with failing schools, crumbling infrastructure, and polluted drinking water.

The result of all this trickery is mind blowing.  Democrats consistently receive more votes for congress, but republicans walk away with a crazy but untouchable majority in the House.

While Democrats are agonizing over how to reach Trump voters, even though Hillary got three million more votes (and how many more presidential elections are we going to lose before we figure out a way to get rid of the electoral college?), we really, really need to take a smart look at the process.  If you pack Democratic voters in a couple of districts, giving them 80% majorities, spread out the rest in majority republican districts with more modest but reliable majorities, it doesn't matter how many $3 donations, how much door-knocking, how relevant the message.

Some states are actually moving toward fixing this abomination, including our own state of South Carolina.  A bill sponsored by Dems Nikki Seltzer, Mia McLeod, and Mike Fanning proposes establishing an independent, bipartisan commission to redraw districts.  Unfortunately, those in power have no incentive to support such a bill.  But a recent Winthrop Poll shows that 63% of South Carolina voters support such a commission.  We need to raise the same ruckus over this issue as we have over the ACA and Trump's taxes, because it is the issue on which the future of our democracy depends.

I hate to say it, but this book is an entertaining way to become more informed, and more passionate, about redistricting.  The number crunching, the map-making, the incredible amount of information about each of us that has gone into this bastardization of the democratic process, isn't just important.  It is really a gripping story.  And it is too bad that in our pseudo genteel society the Dems haven't come up with a more attention grabbing word than "gerrymander."  Because what it really is, is ratfucking.

The Lee Bright Method

In the interest of bringing the country, or at least the state of South Carolina together, let me extend my admiration to some of our more persistent legislators.  Regardless of how many of us are living below the minimum wage, how many children go hungry, how many pregnant women have inadequate heath care, how many of us are killed by guns and die on bad roads, these admirable politicians always have time to dig up another anti-abortion bill.

And it doesn't matter whether the words make sense, or not.  They copy those bills right from the national playbook of organizations for which truth has no meaning, like the Life Education Council, that wants to keep facts from pregnant teens and women.  Or the National Right to Life Committee, whose website provides "information" on partial-birth abortion and fetal development.  Or the Pro-Life Action League, which "saves women" as well as "babies."  Not a single one of which organizations promotes better health and education for pregnant women, only the words to prevent them from making their own well-informed decision.

So kudos to Wendy Nanney, whose mission in life has been to force women to carry pregnancies to term after 20-weeks, under the misinformation that fetuses feel pain at twenty weeks.  The pain aspect doesn't seem to matter to Wendy when it comes to a woman having to give birth to a severely defective baby that dies minutes after birth, at enormous emotional cost.  And financial cost as well, because Wendy Nanney voted against the Affordable Care Act and is against the federal expansion of Medicaid.

Lee Bright may be a dull reflection of his name, but he stays up nights thinking about women and girls having sex and then getting abortions.  I'm not sure which of those images -- the sex or the abortion -- turns him on more, but we do know that he is obsessed with the topic.  He, as well as fellow obsessives Larry Grooms and Kevin Bryant, can always be counted on to send in another bill, even if it is exactly the same bill as one he submitted weeks or months earlier.  I imagine he gets so excited he forgets.

What we end up with is a stunning fifteen or more anti-abortion bills in our legislature for 2016.  The absurdly titled "Pain-capable Unborn Child Protection Act" continues to take up space this year, but we have new bills with excruciating titles.  There is the "dismemberment abortion" bill.  And the blood-curdling "Defunding the Abortion Industry and Advancing Women's Health Act".  The most recent insult is the "Women's Ultrasound Right to Know Act."  This in a state with high rates of death by guns, including that of children shooting themselves and others.  And in spite of a serious upswing in traffic fatalities as the price of gas goes down and people like Lee Bright refuse to raise the gas tax to repair roads and bridges.  A state that in 2014 ranked 41 in teen pregnancy, despite the national trend of lowered teen pregnancy -- hey, somebody's got to hold down the bottom, right?  And we can be sure that when Lee gets his way, the rate of infant mortality in South Carolina (currently the 14th highest in the nation), will go even higher.

But I would like to, again, look at the positive.  Anti-abortion advocates are ignorant and small-minded, misogynistic and -- have I said ignorant?  They may be all that, but they can focus.  And I believe that the rest of us (the silent majority) should take our cue from that.

Mia McLeod has introduced an important new bill that speaks volumes to the issue, which is an overabundance of bills focusing on women's bodies.  Her bill has caused some republicans to squeal, claiming that, unlike the thousands of bills that have invaded women's reproductive systems, it is a waste of time, "entertaining but kind of sad."  I take umbrage at that.  This is the legislature that has been investigating Planned Parenthood for a non-existent donor tissue program, and even though no state dollars fund Planned Parenthood.  So we would have to go a long way to find a bill that wastes more time than our esteemed republican legislators are willing to waste.

Mia's bill makes a great deal of sense, and could lead to less of a need for all those anti-abortion bills, saving the state lots of time and dollars.

First of all, it is important to make sure that, before taking such drugs, erectile dysfunction is not a psychosomatic problem, so the bill requires a referral to a sex therapist.  Just common sense.  Along with this, though, it will be important for the therapist to provide information about how erectile dysfunction drugs might lead to unwanted pregnancy.

Also, in order to protect the patient, the bill would require a cardiac stress test, which is critical in light of serious possible side effects, and necessary if our legislators indeed want to protect us from sexually caused problems, like heart attacks, oh, and pregnancy.  So it is obvious that along with the stress test, a physician would be required to notify the patient of all potential side effects.  I would also add a waiting period so the patient will have time to think about his responsibility when agreeing to take ED drugs.

Finally, the bill requires a notarized affidavit from at least one sexual partner stating that the patient has experienced erectile dysfunction in the last ninety days.  I believe, however, that the affidavit should also require that the partner state that having sex with the patient is agreeable to her.  After all, how many unwanted sex acts as well as unwanted pregnancies have been caused by men using erectile dysfunction drugs?

Our SC legislators know that, as important as the will of God is to us, it is a no-no for them to bring that up as a reason to pass a bill.  So what they do is bring in witnesses to testify that the bill is the will of God; for example, when the mother-and-daughter team testified that God had intervened to prevent mom from having that 20-week abortion, making it obvious that no other woman should have the right to one.

So let me take it upon myself to state the obvious.  Men should know that if God wanted them to have erections, He would have given them erections.  Erectile dysfunction is a message from God, just as our legislators contend is true of pregnancy.  We have no right to mess with God's intention to keep men from having sex by allowing them to have boner drugs.

The most important thing about this bill is that it should open an until-now closed floodgate.  Not only should all reasonable legislators in the House run to co-sponsor that bill, but there should be a version of that bill in the Senate.  With co-sponsors.

There should be dozens of bills in both House and Senate that truly protect women.  I'm talking about bills called the "Women's Medical Privacy Bill," and "Preventing Government Surveillance of Women Act."  The "Doctor-Patient Privacy Bill."  "Equal Rights for Medicaid Patients."  The "Keeping Government Out of the Doctor's Office Act."  "Government Interference in Medical Procedures Ban."

You get the idea.  So, legislators, we women are fighting for the right to the best medical treatment available, and for privacy in that treatment.  It is up to you to step up with Mia McLeod and get some bills introduced.

If it were Lee Bright, that's what he would do.  

Gun Fantasies

Holiday time, and neither the anti-abortion nuts nor the guns rights idiots could take time off.  Weeks before the start of the South Carolina 2015 legislative session, bills were being pre-filed to make sure they were right in the front of the line to trample on our desire for peace and civil liberty.

As far as gun rights and the NRA are concerned, don't ever think you've heard it all.  And, as with the anti-abortion war, any recent victory -- or defeat -- will result in more attacks on more fronts.

Since his not-quite-stunning defeat in the US Senate primary against Lindsey Graham, not-so-bright state senator Lee Bright has redoubled his efforts to be South Carolina's most formidable gun nut.  If you recall, in the last legislative session, he attempted to top the "guns and liquor" bill by offering up his "guns everywhere" bill.  Supporters of the "Constitutional Carry" bill claim that South Carolina is one of the most restrictive states in terms of allowing folks to tote guns, interpreting the lack of express restrictions in most states to mean that gun-toting is allowed, and not that it should be so obvious that guns aren't allowed that there has been no need for express laws banning them in specific situations.  The "Firearms Freedom Act"  would have kept South Carolina gun manufacturers and owners safe from all those pesky federal laws.

Neither bill passed, but we can count on Bright to come back energized and ready to take up the mantle once again like a warped Don Quixote.  And he has been joined by fellow gun nut, Alan Clemmons, who has proposed a required three week Second Amendment curriculum in all public schools, ending in a Second Amendment Awareness Day, with the festivities closing with a poster/essay contest on "The Right to Bear Arms: One American Right Protecting All Others."  That's right, because in the America we all grew up in, it's guns that have protected our freedom of speech and our individual rights.  Oh, irony, since it's these same goofballs that are continually attacking individual rights.  Maybe if we had weapons, women would be free to have private reproductive health care and gays could marry, anyone could vote and poor people would be given a living wage....

Anyway, obviously, the NRA has its hands all over this one.

But wait!  Here are some of the other less-than-delectable tidbits from the gun nuts in our state legislature:

Again, the "constitutional carry" bill, which would change breaking the law from carrying a gun to carrying a gun with intent to commit a crime.  So, as long as our police officers can spot a crime before it's committed, we're okay.

And because having all South Carolina residents carrying just isn't enough, there is a bill which would allow reciprocity for citizens from other states.  Now, here's the thing about this.  South Carolina does not allow reciprocity with other states for licensed professionals.  South Carolina does not even allow persons from other states with motor vehicle learners permits to drive with licensed SC drivers.  But:  "Got a gun?  Come on in!"

Last year, gun nuts had a resounding success with passage of the bill that allows guns in restaurants and bars.  Because you never know when a gunfight will break out at the saloon, and we should all be ready to defend our honor and our shrimp 'n' grits.  If you don't look too closely at the numbers of shootings in and around South Carolina, you might think that hasn't been a problem.  And if you like the idea of protecting yourself when you take the family out to dinner, you will love the bill that will allow guns to be carried at any college.  Because we'll all rest easier knowing our kids are getting their secondary education in a place where there will never be anyone who is stressed out and unstable and feeling the need to bring a gun to school.

The topping on that deadly cake are bills that would remove the fees for applying for, renewing or replacing one's concealed weapons permit, and of course, allowing it to be used as Voter ID.

To end on a more optimistic note, Democrats Gilda Cobb-Hunter and Mia McLeod have filed H 3034 that would require a person to surrender firearms if the courts have determined that he (or she) presents an imminent danger in a domestic abuse situation, with comparable bill S 3 in the Senate; and H 3033,  requiring national criminal background checks.  I believe I also saw a bill that would create penalties for adults when a child is endangered by a weapon in the home, but I haven't been able to find it again.

Now this is all very confusing for me, as I am sure it is intended.  But I did my best, and apologize for any mistakes.  The important thing is that we know these bills are up there, and they are going to move forward as long as we don't oppose them.  That's how Georgia ended up with its "guns everywhere" law.  Our state restaurant association claims not to have know about the bill allowing guns in bars and restaurants.  So it will take more than occasional disgruntlement to fight this tsunami.  The gun nuts in our legislature know how to rally the gun nuts in the populace.  There really aren't as many of them as there are of us, but, as with the fight for reproductive rights, they are loud and persistent, and we need to keep up, and keep shouting.  So find out who your legislators are, and let them know, today, tomorrow, and next week, how you feel about people walking around in our communities with deadly weapons, and how you feel about our children being forced to learn untruths about the Second Amendment.

It's not just a matter of quality of life, it's a matter of life and death.