Alejandro Caraballo was instrumental in getting me banned and removed from old Twitter (reinstated after Elon) and Instagram. My IG account had 986 followers when Caraballo used his tech skills to lock me out of my account and render it inaccessible since mid 2023. IG does not acknowledge my complaints. Because my old account was in my name I'm unable to start another account using it.
He despises women and goes out of his way to harm individual women.
The Caraballo story is soooo interesting. I wasn’t aware of it, so really appreciate that you pointed it out. I was sort of hoping Boise State would be today’s pick, but perhaps that will be another down the road. Those young women are magnificent, sacrificing so much in service of a larger goal, and I appreciated also the way the announcement was worded, too. Which brings me to Nancy Mace. I anticipate that I am going to be an outlier here, but I thought it unnecessary in order to achieve the goal (with which I do agree), and actually counterproductive, to put McBride, as an individual, on the spot to achieve the mission. My own view is, whenever possible, that it’s better not to do that.
I did, however, immediately write my Congressmembers, all of whom are Ds, in support of the result, as follows:
On the issue of the Democratic response on the Mace/McBride fracas, whatever you might think of her approach, Mace had a valid point. I am glad Speaker Johnson made the decision he did, and I also appreciate McBride’s measured response.
McBride appears to me to be a young person who has experienced difficult personal turmoil and worked hard to find inner peace. McBride is not, however, a woman, never will be, and in order to move forward constructively, we all do need to recognize that reality.
Women like Mace, particularly, who have been assaulted, deserve not only to be listened to—but also to be accorded priority—on concerns about incursions on women’s single-sex spaces. This is not a trivial issue. Men truly have no idea of the precautions women must take, always looking over their shoulders, to keep themselves safe from men with ill intent. The least we deserve is the comfort of knowing that single sex spaces on which we have long relied shall remain just that.
Helen Joyce recently noted—and I have observed similar things myself—that she has “seen a group of 8 [loos] in a pub with floor-to-ceiling doors, behind a self-closing fire door. Incredibly dangerous - all a predatory man has to do is hang around looking like he's waiting to use one, and push a woman back in when she comes out of one. Toilets are designed the way they are now for a reason - loads of thought has gone into making them as comfortable and safe as possible. Moreover, single cubicles are totally impractical in places like sports stadiums - take far too much space. Also, urinals are the most hygienic and best way to get lots of men through - cleaners really hate toilet cubicles that men use to pee. And women don't like having to sit on the seats after men have splashed all over them!”
I wish no ill will toward McBride, and I would have much preferred it if Mace had raised her voice independently of McBride’s arrival in Congress. That does not, however, mean that her concerns are not worthy. They absolutely are. I want my party to win in 2026. To do so, however, my party needs to stop its condescension toward the eminently reasonable requests of women for female privacy, dignity, and safety. If the party does not attend to this, you must not be surprised if women continue to desert the Democrats, which is the last thing any of us should want.
I strongly urge you to give your attention to this and change course. You are on the wrong track.
Kara, Thank you for an excellent tribute to Congresswoman Mace. You are absolutely correct, sex-based rights for women is a non-partisan issue. Or at least it should be. Appreciate you and all you do!
Let's face it – the Republicans will never ban abortions across our country. They need bad baby killers in blue states to fire up their base. And Democrats will never give us the federal right to an abortion. They want to wave the right to abortion in front of Dem women for the next 50 years to inspire us to vote for them every two years. They've waved that flag in front of us for decades, only to snatch it away claiming if we don't vote Dem the big bad Rs will take it away. But who's actually taking it away when we give the Dems a trifecta and they somehow neglect to codify the right to an abortion? They always wait until the Repubs take back the House or Senate and then claim they'd do it if only the Rs weren't stopping them.
Without the multi-decade fight over this issue, people both sides might start looking at what both parties agree on: Perpetual wars for profit and massive theft of middle and working class wealth on behalf of the ultra rich.
Democrats in the Supreme Court already gave us the federal right to abortion. It was in effect from the time I was a teenager until after I went through menopause: my entire reproductive life.
Republicans on the Supreme Court, who had lied to Congress about considering Roe v Wade settled law, destroyed our federal right to abortion. That was not the Democrats.
Roe was won on a right to privacy, and many believed it was going to be overturned. The Obama administration would likely have been able to get Congress to pass a federal abortion law, so consider why this wasn’t done. Both sides use this every election and most are fed up with the amount of oxygen it consumes. If a bill was presented to legalize abortion through the 28th trimester, most would support and then we could talk about other issues. But we’ll do it again next election, and the next, etc.
Um, a trifecta refers to having both sides of Congress and the presidency held by one party. The Supreme Court doesn't represent us the way elected members of Congress and the prez do. But I'll address your characterization of SCOTUS as if justices are bound to a Party instead of interpreting the Constitution.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg repeatedly told us to codify the right to an abortion because Roe v Wade was a very weak SC decision. I heard her tell us to encourage Democrats (the political party, not Justices who happen to be Democrats) numerous times. I've been voting for a half century. It's patently obvious that Democrats will forever wave the right to an abortion in front us to demand our vote but will not actually codify that right, even when we give them the power to do so. The most recent was Obama claiming he'd get it done. But he deliberately waited until Republicans had taken back the House, then blamed our Dems' inability to codify that right on the big bad Republicans. They think we're stupid.
And yes, the Rs are awful. But if you give Democrats the power and they don't take the opportunity, who is actually keeping us from having the right to an abortion? We're being played.
The good news is that Repubs won't ever ban abortion at the federal level. They also need their rubes to vote for them. Hence their unwavering support of states' rights with respect to the life of a fetus. They need to point at those terrible blue state baby killers to get their rabid base to vote against their own economic interests.
I have also been voting for half a century. I don't agree with your opinion on all of this, and it's not because of how long either of us has been voting.
Mace has also raised the issue of male prisoners in women's prisons. Here's hoping that gets addressed!
great pick!
Alejandro Caraballo was instrumental in getting me banned and removed from old Twitter (reinstated after Elon) and Instagram. My IG account had 986 followers when Caraballo used his tech skills to lock me out of my account and render it inaccessible since mid 2023. IG does not acknowledge my complaints. Because my old account was in my name I'm unable to start another account using it.
He despises women and goes out of his way to harm individual women.
Bastard!!
The Caraballo story is soooo interesting. I wasn’t aware of it, so really appreciate that you pointed it out. I was sort of hoping Boise State would be today’s pick, but perhaps that will be another down the road. Those young women are magnificent, sacrificing so much in service of a larger goal, and I appreciated also the way the announcement was worded, too. Which brings me to Nancy Mace. I anticipate that I am going to be an outlier here, but I thought it unnecessary in order to achieve the goal (with which I do agree), and actually counterproductive, to put McBride, as an individual, on the spot to achieve the mission. My own view is, whenever possible, that it’s better not to do that.
I did, however, immediately write my Congressmembers, all of whom are Ds, in support of the result, as follows:
On the issue of the Democratic response on the Mace/McBride fracas, whatever you might think of her approach, Mace had a valid point. I am glad Speaker Johnson made the decision he did, and I also appreciate McBride’s measured response.
McBride appears to me to be a young person who has experienced difficult personal turmoil and worked hard to find inner peace. McBride is not, however, a woman, never will be, and in order to move forward constructively, we all do need to recognize that reality.
Women like Mace, particularly, who have been assaulted, deserve not only to be listened to—but also to be accorded priority—on concerns about incursions on women’s single-sex spaces. This is not a trivial issue. Men truly have no idea of the precautions women must take, always looking over their shoulders, to keep themselves safe from men with ill intent. The least we deserve is the comfort of knowing that single sex spaces on which we have long relied shall remain just that.
Helen Joyce recently noted—and I have observed similar things myself—that she has “seen a group of 8 [loos] in a pub with floor-to-ceiling doors, behind a self-closing fire door. Incredibly dangerous - all a predatory man has to do is hang around looking like he's waiting to use one, and push a woman back in when she comes out of one. Toilets are designed the way they are now for a reason - loads of thought has gone into making them as comfortable and safe as possible. Moreover, single cubicles are totally impractical in places like sports stadiums - take far too much space. Also, urinals are the most hygienic and best way to get lots of men through - cleaners really hate toilet cubicles that men use to pee. And women don't like having to sit on the seats after men have splashed all over them!”
I wish no ill will toward McBride, and I would have much preferred it if Mace had raised her voice independently of McBride’s arrival in Congress. That does not, however, mean that her concerns are not worthy. They absolutely are. I want my party to win in 2026. To do so, however, my party needs to stop its condescension toward the eminently reasonable requests of women for female privacy, dignity, and safety. If the party does not attend to this, you must not be surprised if women continue to desert the Democrats, which is the last thing any of us should want.
I strongly urge you to give your attention to this and change course. You are on the wrong track.
Kara, Thank you for an excellent tribute to Congresswoman Mace. You are absolutely correct, sex-based rights for women is a non-partisan issue. Or at least it should be. Appreciate you and all you do!
Let's face it – the Republicans will never ban abortions across our country. They need bad baby killers in blue states to fire up their base. And Democrats will never give us the federal right to an abortion. They want to wave the right to abortion in front of Dem women for the next 50 years to inspire us to vote for them every two years. They've waved that flag in front of us for decades, only to snatch it away claiming if we don't vote Dem the big bad Rs will take it away. But who's actually taking it away when we give the Dems a trifecta and they somehow neglect to codify the right to an abortion? They always wait until the Repubs take back the House or Senate and then claim they'd do it if only the Rs weren't stopping them.
Without the multi-decade fight over this issue, people both sides might start looking at what both parties agree on: Perpetual wars for profit and massive theft of middle and working class wealth on behalf of the ultra rich.
Democrats in the Supreme Court already gave us the federal right to abortion. It was in effect from the time I was a teenager until after I went through menopause: my entire reproductive life.
Republicans on the Supreme Court, who had lied to Congress about considering Roe v Wade settled law, destroyed our federal right to abortion. That was not the Democrats.
Roe was won on a right to privacy, and many believed it was going to be overturned. The Obama administration would likely have been able to get Congress to pass a federal abortion law, so consider why this wasn’t done. Both sides use this every election and most are fed up with the amount of oxygen it consumes. If a bill was presented to legalize abortion through the 28th trimester, most would support and then we could talk about other issues. But we’ll do it again next election, and the next, etc.
Um, a trifecta refers to having both sides of Congress and the presidency held by one party. The Supreme Court doesn't represent us the way elected members of Congress and the prez do. But I'll address your characterization of SCOTUS as if justices are bound to a Party instead of interpreting the Constitution.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg repeatedly told us to codify the right to an abortion because Roe v Wade was a very weak SC decision. I heard her tell us to encourage Democrats (the political party, not Justices who happen to be Democrats) numerous times. I've been voting for a half century. It's patently obvious that Democrats will forever wave the right to an abortion in front us to demand our vote but will not actually codify that right, even when we give them the power to do so. The most recent was Obama claiming he'd get it done. But he deliberately waited until Republicans had taken back the House, then blamed our Dems' inability to codify that right on the big bad Republicans. They think we're stupid.
And yes, the Rs are awful. But if you give Democrats the power and they don't take the opportunity, who is actually keeping us from having the right to an abortion? We're being played.
The good news is that Repubs won't ever ban abortion at the federal level. They also need their rubes to vote for them. Hence their unwavering support of states' rights with respect to the life of a fetus. They need to point at those terrible blue state baby killers to get their rabid base to vote against their own economic interests.
I have also been voting for half a century. I don't agree with your opinion on all of this, and it's not because of how long either of us has been voting.
We stanned Nancy Mace...we love her.
That’s an interesting development, becoming federal.
That will have very widespread downstream effects since it can cause a lot of “outing”.