Conservatives Hate Women Because They Fear Them

When it comes to the mishmash of groups that make up the Democratic Party coalition, what's called "women's groups" tend to be one of the most salient-- and for good reason: conservatives tend to target women with particular vehemence, almost as much as racial minorities. Saturday night we ran a short documentary about the neo-Nazi wing of the Trump movement. One of the most popular "alt-right" (a polite way to say "Nazi" or "fascist") leaders, a Scottish clown who goes by the nom de guerre "Millennial Woes," after making reference to "the Jewish question; there are problems with the Jewish people" (who's the map, David Friedman?) was very blunt: "Women shouldn't have the vote." No, that wasn't Trumpist gay billionaire Peter Thiel-- it was Thumpist trash crackpot Millennial Woes. "Because if you do give them the vote, they will mess up your psychological defenses and your legal systems, your protocols, your culture-- and make it vulnerable." Trump may not know Millennial Woes per se but he has floated the possibility of giving a judgeship or a Cabinet position to equally unhinged misogynist Peter Thiel who once wrote that "Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women-- two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians-- have rendered the notion of 'capitalist democracy' into an oxymoron." One of Trump's best known gay supporters, the woman-hating Thiel has given millions and millions of dollars to extremist groups seeking to take away rights from women and-- to be fair-- from gays. Rational people who have met Thiel all say he's certifiably insane.



In any case, one of the best of the "women's groups" pushing back against Trumpism-- a counter-balance to the worst of them (EMILY's List) is NARAL Pro-Choice America. EMILY's List is about empire building, self-enrichment and power for the sake of power, while NARAL is a genuine policy-driven advocacy group for women's Choice. Last week NARAL's president warned the Democratic Party-- particularly, timid and conservative members of Congress-- that "Democrats should not learn the wrong lessons from 2016. If they do, they will be without our support in 2018." NARAL's president, Ilyse Hogue, continued by pointing out that Democrats shouldn't take part in the Republican game, which is to wreck Obamacare's functionality and then replacing it-- bipartisanly, of course-- some time in the future. "Democrats," she said, "fought hard to pass the law, and now millions of Americans are benefiting from those efforts."

Her comments were targeted at conservative Democrats up for reelection in 2018, all of whom tend to play footsie with the Republicans anyway. From bad to worst, they are: Bill Nelson (FL), Jon Tester (MT), Tom Carper (DE), Tim Kaine (VA), Claire McCaskill (MO), Joe Donnelly (IN), and two especially repulsive Trump-enablers, Joe Manchin (WV) and Heidi Heitkamp (ND).

And it isn't just the women's groups who are telling congressional Democrats that they want to see them stand up and fight. Late yesterday Shaughessey Naughton of 314 Action urged Democratic senators-- particularly the 8 mentioned just above-- to oppose Rick Perry as head of the Department of Energy.

A Doctor of Science in chemical engineering from MIT. A Nobel Laureate in physics. And a nuclear physicist who helped negotiate the Iran nuclear deal. These are the last three Secretaries of Energy. Each led a department responsible for overseeing critical laboratories and maintaining America’s nuclear arsenal.

Yet today, the new Secretary of Energy nominee is a man who couldn’t name this agency during a national debate. And this is no joke for the scientific community. Governor Rick Perry is a consistent climate denier, even claiming in 2010 that “we have been experiencing a cooling trend.” Instead of acknowledging the climate science consensus, Perry has lashed out at scientists, attacking "so-called science."

It's clear that Rick Perry isn’t qualified to lead the Department of Energy. Now we need to stop this nomination before it’s too late... As Governor of Texas, Perry and his appointees mounted a systematic effort to silence scientists, including censoring state reports. A Mother Jones investigation found that "environmental officials under Perry have gutted a recent report on sea level rise in Galveston Bay, removing all mentions of climate change."

At a time when scientists are being questioned about activities related to climate change, a climate denier like Rick Perry is the last person who should lead the Department of Energy. We can and must mobilize to stop this dangerous nomination... Rick Perry has the fossil fuel industry and the climate deniers on his side.

Naughton wants to, like Hogue, hold calculating, non-courageous Democratic senators to a set of values that many of them don't feel especially wedded to. Heidi Heitkamp? Joe Manchin? They stand for something? But as Burgess Everett pointed out at Politico Thursday, "As Republicans aim to make good on their years-long vow to quash Obamacare and replace it with their own health care vision, they’ll have to do something Democrats were never able to: Bring members of the opposing party on board. Enacting any substantive alternative will take at least eight Democratic votes in the Senate." Eight... a magic number. Consider Heitkamp and Manchin a done deal-- so that means six.

[T]he GOP will have powerful leverage that Democrats lacked in 2009-- namely, a huge number of members facing reelection in hostile territory.

Twenty-five Democrats are on the ballot in 2018, including 10 in states that Donald Trump just won. The GOP is betting that many or most in the latter group will be under irresistible pressure to back an Obamacare replacement, if the alternative is leaving millions of people in the lurch without insurance.

Interviews with more than a half-dozen Democratic senators spanning the party's ideological spectrum suggest the Republican strategy may not be far-fetched. As harshly partisan as the entire Obamacare experience has been, replacing it could draw bipartisan backing, as long as the changes are more adjustment than overhaul.

..Cory Gardner (R-CO), who will run the party’s Senate campaign arm next cycle, said “there are seven senators on the Democratic side that will have a political reason to work with us.” The challenge, he said, will be finding the eighth, since lawmakers will want to avoid being seen as the deciding vote-- a potentially career-defining scarlet letter.

Is that so? Does anyone in their right mind think Gardner, Miss McConnell and the DSCC will go softer on any Democrat who collaborates? That's patently absurd. It's more likely that they'll have third party groups attack collaborators for being collaborators!

And in the House, where Republicans don't even need Democratic votes, they already have plenty of conservaDems from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party-- the New Dems and Blue Dogs-- eager to work with the GOP. My best bets for the half dozen easiest sell-outs just among the freshman class:

• Tom O'Halleran (AZ)
• Josh Gottheimer (NJ)
• Vincente González (TX)
• Stephanie Murphy (FL)
• Darren Soto (FL)
• Lou Correa (CA)

And none of the 5 freshman Democratic senators. I'd keep an eye on Sherrod Brown though. He could turn out to be a big, unpleasant surprise. And will Bernie and his crowd still keep giving Trumpist Tulsi Gabbard a free pass if she sells out? It's only a matter of time.