Saturday, May 07, 2022


Isaiah's latest THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Biden's Last Remaining Supporter" just went up a little while ago.

bidens last supporter

Grasp that the yellow dogs are all that Joe has left at this point.  Everyone else has walked away -- as the polls demonstrate.  

For good reason, they've walked away for good reason.

Changing topics . . . 

This is from Jonathan Turley's latest column about the leak of the Supreme Court's draft opinion:

The message has been repeated like a drumbeat: The ends justify the means.

Recently, Roberts even went public with a warning over “inappropriate political influence” affecting the court. Yet, the day before this leak, the court itself defied critics who portrayed it as hopelessly and dysfunctionally divided with another unanimous decision. It ruled in a major case on speech that Boston could not discriminate against a religious organization that wanted to hoist a flag outside of its city hall. It spoke with one voice in defense of shared constitutional values.

Given the relentless calls from political leaders, we may have been naive to think that a staff member or clerk would not yield to the same “ends justify the means” rationale. Former Justice Louis Brandeis once warned that “Our government … teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.”

With our leaders continually expressing utter contempt for the court and its traditions, it is hardly surprising that such traditions lose meaning for some working in the court itself. That did not happen overnight, and it really cannot be dismissed as the act of a single rogue employee. It was a collective effort by those who bred contempt for our legal institutions and values. This is not a crisis of the court. It is a crisis of faith.

It's interesting to wonder what the long term impact of the leak will be on the Court.

I don't think we can gauge the impact right now, but I do think it will have a strong and lasting impact.

"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):

 Friday, May 6, 2022.  Another severe sandstorm hits Iraq as it still struggles with the political stalemate, Margaret Kimberley and Ajamu Barack ask serious questions about intent and purpose in their latest commentaries, and much more.

Let's open with this from Margaret Kimberley's latest at BLACK AGENDA REPORT:

On April 4, 1967 Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. gave one of the most significant speeches of his career. In “Beyond Vietnam - Time to Break Silence ” King declared his unequivocal opposition to the war in Vietnam. His very public break with Lyndon Johnson was greeted with derision, including from his own allies, who believed that the president was an ally who should not be attacked. The NAACP board passed a resolution calling King’s statement a “serious tactical mistake” that would neither “serve the cause of civil rights nor of peace.” The media joined in the condemnation, with the New York Times characterizing his comments as “facile” and “slander.” Even Black newspapers such as The Pittsburgh Courier judged his remarks to be “tragically misleading.”

It is important to remember this speech in which he declared that the United States was “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today.” There are individuals and organizations who routinely claim King’s mantle until they fall prey to the war propaganda promoted by the present day purveyors of violence.

The Rev. Dr. William Barber is sadly one such person. In an April 30, 2022 email on the subject Moral Clarity About Our Own Atrocities he made many specious arguments on the issue of war as it pertains to U.S. policy in Ukraine.

“To see the butchery at Bucha or the massacre at Mariupol and do nothing would be to forfeit any claim to moral authority. We know this instinctively. It is why, despite the political gridlock on Capitol Hill, Republicans and Democrats have acted swiftly to approve historic military aid to Ukraine. In the face of such a moral imperative, it would be anathema for either party to ask, “How are we going to pay for it?”

There is no independent investigation of what the Biden administration and corporate media label as “massacres.” No one who claims to act in the interests of humanity should praise the historic levels of military aid to Ukraine, an oligarchic kleptocracy under U.S. control which depends upon military and police support from openly neo-Nazi formations. So blatant are the connections that in past years members of congress have moved to ensure that these groups are denied U.S. aid .

Furthermore, Rev. Barber ought to know that questions of funding for domestic needs must always be raised. Joe Biden is requesting $33 billion in aid to Ukraine, which means money for the military industrial complex, after ending stimulus payments and other support for struggling people in this country. Barber opens his email with the story of a woman who lost children in her care to a child welfare agency after the termination of the child tax credit program plunged her into poverty. It is disturbing to see Barber’s attempt to have it both ways, demanding help for the poor while also supporting the system that keeps them in their condition.

The child tax credit which kept families afloat disappeared, along with enhanced unemployment benefits, anti-eviction protection, and free covid related treatments to the uninsured. The much vaunted Build Back Better bill is dead and Biden seems uninterested in resurrecting it. It is reasonable to ask the Biden administration for a monetary accounting  and for an explanation of how their actions led to a humanitarian disaster for the Ukrainian people, mass theft from Americans’ public resources, and a risk of hot war with the Russian Federation.

Barber and the Poor People’s Campaign are preparing for a  Poor People’s and Low-Wage Workers Assembly and Moral March on Washington and to the Polls taking place on June 18, 2022. His ill conceived email was meant to bring attention to this event but instead he brought attention to the deep connections that liberal politics has with right wing forces. 

Another severe sandstorm has hit Iraq.

There have already been two severe sandstorms in Iraq in the last five weeks -- see "AFP needs to learn to count -- over 429 is not 'dozens'"  and "Iraq snapshot."   Their frequency is on the rise and this is not by chance but an effect of climate change. Sandstorms "increased from 243 to 272 days per year over the past two decades, and is expected to reach 300 dusty days annually in 2050."  Louise Franco (NATURE WORLD NEWS) notes:

Although sand storms are common in Iraq, they have become more frequent over the years due to various weather and climatic factors, such as declining rainfall, desertification, and drought, according to Amer al-Jabri, director of Iraq's meteorological office, as cited by France 24 news.

And PHYS.ORG adds, "In November, the World Bank warned that Iraq could suffer a 20 percent drop in water resources by 2050 due to climate change."

BBC notes:

One person has died and more than 5,000 people have been admitted to hospitals with breathing problems in Iraq after a seventh severe dust storm in a month.

A health ministry spokesman said 2,000 of the cases of "suffocation" had been reported in Baghdad province, according to the official Iraqi News Agency.

He advised people with asthma and other chronic diseases to stay indoors.

AFP observes, "Residents of six of Iraq's 18 provinces, including Baghdad and the vast western region of Al-Anbar, awoke once again to a thick cloud of dust blanketing the sky.  As the storm swept across Iraq, it shrouded the capital Baghdad and the holy city of Najaf in ghostly orange clouds of choking dust."  Click here for a photo essay.  Australia's ABC adds, "State media reported Thursday's sandstorm was the seventh to hit the country in the past month."  Isabella Kwai files a report for THE NEW YORK TIMES which includes:

Although it is difficult to directly link individual weather events with climate change, experts say it is one driver behind sandstorms that are growing in frequency and intensifying. And climate change will likely compound the challenges ahead for a country like Iraq, which is already facing water shortages after low rainfalls and increasing temperature.

Twenty years ago, Iraq could expect about two sandstorms each year, said Professor Jaafar Jotheri, a geoarcheologist at the University of Al-Qadisiyah. This year, it is expected that about 20 sandstorms will hit Iraq, he said.

Visibility was so poor during a sandstorm this week that flights from the Baghdad and Najaf airports had to be grounded, according to the Iraqi Civil Aviation Authority.

“It is a disaster,” Professor Jotheri said, adding that sandstorms were becoming a regular feature of TV weather forecasts in Iraq. The increase in sandstorms could cause respiratory problems, road accidents and changes to the economy — pushing people to consider migrating away from the country’s drier west, he said. “The sandstorms are changing the Iraqi way of life.”

Mary Gilbert (ACCUWEATHER) explains:

In April, environment ministry official Issa al-Fayad warned Iraq could face "272 days of dust" per year in the coming decades, according to INA, the Iraqi state news agency.

This projected increase in the overall number of dusty days is due to Iraq and much of the surrounding areas becoming hotter and drier over time due to climate change. A lack of rainfall has led to a lack of moisture in the area soils and sands for Iraq. 

And PRESS TV points out, "The World Bank has already warned that Iraq - a country of 41 million people - could suffer a 20 percent drop in water resources by 2050. "

Iraq is no different from most countries in the world when it comes to not dealing seriously with climate change.  Around the world, citizens lives are devalued and the earth destroyed by faux actions and outright ignorance on the part of their so-called representatives.

In Iraq, a country still at war and still occupied by the US, it may be a little worse because (a)  they are predicted to be one of the fie most harmed countries in the world by climate change over the coming decades and (b) they really don't have a government.

October 10th.  That's when the country held elections.  Since then, the only high level position filled was Speaker of Parliament with the same person who held the office before the election).  They have yet to name a president or a prime minister-designate.

In four days, it will be seven months since the election.  As we speak to students, they ask how does this not get huge coverage?

The answer can be found in 2010.  The western press bent over backwards to ignore what was taking place.  In the US that was to protect the administration.  A cable news friend explained at the time that they couldn't cover it too prominently because it would look like they were attacking Barack Obama, the sitting president.

In march 2010, Iraqis had voted.  The western press had whored for Nouri al-Maliki who was the incumbent seeking a second term.  They did that despire the fact that it was already known he was running secret prisons and torture chambers and despite the fact that it was clear the CIA's projection that Nouri's paranoia would make him easy to control was not the case.  

That political stalemate lasted eight months with Nouri refusing to tep down and Barack -- on the advice of Samantha Power and Susan Rice -- deciding that demoncracy sidn't matter, toss out the Iraqi votes and give Nouri a second term.  He lost the election.  But the US government crafted a contract, The Erbil Agreement, that they got various political parties and blocs to sign off on which gave Nouri a second term.  The day after that contract was signed, Parliament held a session and named a president who immediately named a prime minister-designate (which was Nouri).

Now when THE GUARDIAN did an editorial calling out the comments by Barack about what a success the election was, a cable network finally felt that they could seriously cover what was gongon.

That's who a 'free' press works in the US.

As bad as the coverage in the US was prior to THE GUARDIAN editorial, it did get a tiny bit of attention.  Thats really not the case with this stalemate which, again, hits seven months in four days.

The Iraqi people are suffering and there is no government assembled all this time later.  That's a detail that the western press  is normalizing -- again normalizing.

Harry Istepanian Tweets:

#Iraq - The local media reports: the name of Abdul Latif Rashid, the former Minister of Water Resources is emerging as compromise candidate for Iraq presidency.

Another topic the western press loves to ignore is the way Turkey is committing Acts of War in northern Iraq as they continue to bomb the Kurdistan, continue to maintain ground troops and bases in the Kurdistan and continue to violate Iraq's national sovereignty.   PERSECUTION.ORG notes:

As a result of the Turkish offensive and conflict with the PKK, at least eight predominantly Christian villages in the Amedi region of Duhok province have been completely abandoned. Turkey announced its latest air and ground offensive, Operation Claw Lock on April 18, which follows twin offensives in 2021 and 2022.

Though the PKK is also dubbed a terrorist group by the United States and the European Union, Turkey’s indiscriminate bombing of Iraqi Kurdistan has led to the displacement of residents of many Christian villages. As reported by Rudaw, more than 500 villages have been emptied in the Kurdistan Region in the past three decades of Turkey-PKK fighting.

Simultaneously, the Iraqi army is combatting the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and its affiliates, resulting in the displacement of over three thousand residents as of earlier this week from Sinjar. The majority of the displaced fled to Duhok. The army later declared control of a Sinjar village that had been controlled by armed groups post-Islamic State.

We'll wind down with this from Ajamu Baraka's latest column (BLACK AGENDA REPORT):

Rev. William Barber, an indisputable champion of the poor and a consistent voice demanding an end to poverty, may have made a serious moral and ethical error that effectively placed him outside of the “Kingian” framework that informed Dr. King’s work especially during the last year of his life.  

In an attempt to make a point about the flawed priorities of the duopoly, Dr. Barber wrote in an email to the “movement family” on Saturday, April 30, 2022 that, “despite the political gridlock on Capitol Hill, Republicans and Democrats have acted swiftly to approve historic military aid to Ukraine. In the face of such a moral imperative, it would be anathema for either party to ask, “How are we going to pay for it?”

He then went on to suggest that the “moral clarity” that informed the decision to provide military support to Ukraine was contradicted by the lack of moral clarity or support for addressing the pressing needs of the poor. He identified those two contradictory policy orientations – money for war but no money to pass “Build Back Better” legislation, for example, as representing the moral and ethical contradiction at the heart of U.S. politics.

I will give our dear brother the benefit of the doubt. He was making the point that the duopoly will support in a bipartisan manner those items that it deems a priority. For Rev. Barber and the Campaign, the issue of poverty and its devastating social consequences should be a priority for the U.S. state. However, in trying to make that point Rev Barber seemed to support the Biden’s administration’s war policies which as a follower of Dr. King would seem like a major contradiction. It would seem that to equate a moral imperative for providing military aid to Ukraine to wage war, no matter if it is claimed to be defensive, would be a dramatic departure from the non-violence ethos at the center of Dr. King's worldview.

Dr. King said himself that it was his silence on the war that presented a moral contradiction that could only be ultimately resolved by him speaking out in opposition to the Vietnam war . It is unimaginable that Dr. King would give his blessings to a military aid package that Rev. Barber’s language appears to do while simultaneously not demanding an end to the conflict as Rev Barber clearly failed to do in his communication to the movement family. We must now ask Rev Barber if his characterization of the military aid package as a moral imperative was just a clumsy use of words or does he actually support the ultimate expression of violence – war?  

We all know the history. After the student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and all the radical Black liberation and socialist organizations had condemned the war in Vietnam, Dr. King finally broke his silence, as he framed it, and began to speak out against the war in early 1967 with the most extensive and important speech on April 4, 1967, at the Riverside Church in New York. The capitalist rulers understand symbols and so on April 4, 1968, Dr. King was murdered in Memphis where he was supporting a strike of Black sanitation workers against the Memphis city government.

Rev. Barber claims that “King was gunned down for his efforts to build a Poor People’s Campaign.” There is no doubt that the poor people’s campaign was a significant factor. The rulers understood the danger of Dr. King venturing into class politics, especially with his social democratic positions becoming more evident. But what Barber glosses over is that while the poor people’s campaign was seen as a threat, it was King’s break with the democratic party establishment, and at that time the majority position of the U.S. public who supported the war effort, that made Dr. King the most hated man in the country.

Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "The Experts" went up last night and his "21 DUMPSTER" the night before.  He's planning on posting one tonight and one Saturday as well. The following sites updated:

Friday, May 06, 2022

Free speech

From a few hours ago, Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "The Experts"


If you believe in free speech, you really need to read Jonathan Turley's latest:

According to reports, Elon Musk is now expected to take over as the temporary CEO of Twitter as soon as his financing of purchase is finalized. It is good news because buying Twitter may prove a mere skirmish in comparison to the coming battle. Political forces in the United States and abroad are already aligning to resist his effort to restore free speech to social media.

If history has shown one thing, it is that it is easier to lose rights than to regain them. Musk has a product in demand but neither governments nor many of his own employees want to be sold. If Musk is to fulfill his pledge, he will need to take five specific steps to secure free speech protections.  Given the interests allied against him, Musk must move quickly if he wants to not only reintroduce but to maintain free speech on Twitter.

1. Adopt the First Amendment standard.

Pundits and politicians, including President Joe Biden and former President Barack Obama, have justified their calls for censorship (or “content moderation” for polite company) by stressing that the First Amendment only applies to the government, not private companies. That distinction allows Obama to declare himself last week to be “pretty close to a First Amendment absolutist.” He did not call himself a “free speech absolutist” because he favors censorship for views that he considers to be “lies,” “disinformation,” or “quackery.”

The distinction has always been a disingenuous evasion. The First Amendment is not the sole or exclusive definition of free speech. Censorship on social media is equally, if not more, damaging for free speech. However, Musk can call this bluff. He could order Twitter to apply the First Amendment standard that applies to the government for speech in a public forum. In doing so, Musk would instantly eliminate most of the censorship currently imposed on the site. He would, however, have to stipulate that the standards for “government speech” (which allows for greater speech regulation) would not apply. Twitter will be treated as “the digital town square” that he has long embraced.

That's the opening.  Free speech needs to be encouraged, fostered and supported.

"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):

Thursday, May 5, 2022.  The preening and posturing of our Congress needs to stop and we need to stop being such huge "f**king idiots."

On Roe v Wade, a number of e-mails to the public account are coming in about how they are upset that I am not commenting on this or that.  

First, I have addressed this issue with community members via HILDA'S MIX.  Second, because Elaine's asking me to address it again this morning, I will.  Be sure to read Jonathan Turley's take on the issue.  Third, don't think that you want my commentary, don't make the mistake of thinking that.  You probably wouldn't like it to begin with.

I am firmly pro-choice, full on board with privacy rights and support safe and legal abortions for any woman who needs one.  

Other than that, you may not be pleased.

I actually know the law.  I'm not going to pretend I don't to say something that will soothe you and make you feel better.

People can disagree on the law.  I think Jonathan Turley should be sitting on the Supreme Court and yet I will even disagree with him from time to time.  I think he's the finest legal mind in the country but I do not agree 100% of the time.  That's because sometimes something new comes along that we have to address.  There is no building solely on precedent and there may be other issues.  So he may offer a learned and wise opinion on a topic but I might beg to differ.  Doesn't mean he's right and I'm wrong or vice versa, just means that we are interpreting the law and there may be more than one way to come at it in some  instances.

Yesterday (believe it was yesterday), White House spokesperson Jen Psaki was asked a question by a reporter in the press briefing.  It was about how revelations from Hunter Biden's laptop make it very hard to continue the fairy tale that Joe Biden was not involved in his son's business practices.  The FOX reporter was clear that she was asking about the past -- this would be when he was vice president -- time covered on e-mails found on the laptop.

What did Jen respond?

No one seems to have gotten it right.  They've quoted her correctly but they don't seem to have actually listened.

That's a real problem with politics today.  A lot of stupidity.

Donald Trump says X and we're supposed to be outraged because, if you look into the original Psaki is being asked about an issue regarding Joe's vice presidency and is responding about President Joe Biden.  It's a doge and even FOX NEWS didn't seem to note that reality.

For years, professional dram a queen Matthew Rothschild told you at THE PROGRESSIVE -- and on THE PROGRESSIVE RADIO HOUR -- that Bully Boy Bush was going to lock away al dissidents, that this or that national alert or FEMA measure was about that.  He wasted a great deal of time.  If only he had poured that energy into Iraq.  Was he really worried about US government abuse because, if he was, strange, just like NEW YORKER whore Jane Meyer, he gave up the topic the minute Barack Obama was elected president.

To point a finger at myself, Rahm Emanuel, who I've known for years through his brother, told me I was a "f**king idiot" and he was right.  We'll come back to that.

But we do tend to write a lot of things to fit however we want to see things.

I'm not going to offer nonsense about this justice lied!!!  No.  Susan Collins is an idiot.  She proved that in 2002.  She's a dumb idiot who hears what she wants to hear.  Excepting her support for the Iraq War, I'm really not that vested in her one way or the other.  And it's not fair to pin all the blame on her.  The Democrats have done a lousy job and their work has been worse than Susan's.

But, for the future, don't hear what you want to hear.  Examine the response youre getting.

Roe v Wade is settled law?

Yes, it is.  Up until the Court chooses to hear a case on it.  At which point, it is any judge's role to figure out if there is a conflict in the law, if the law applies, if . . .  So you were an idiot -- this goes to various Democrats in the Senate and not just Republican Susan Collins -- hearing what you wanted to hear.

Quit nyou're whiing.

And if you produce a tape recording where some one on the Court promised you that they would enver vote to overturn Roe, first off we'd have ethical issues regarding your own behavior.

Second off, whether you like it or not Christian beliefs have had a significant role in the history of the US and one of those beliefs is redemption.  Meaning, you can change.  So let's use Alito.  Alito promised not to overturn Roe (he didn't, this is a hypothetical) and Chuck Schumer has a recording of that office visit and makes it public.

After the outcry against Chuck died down, the point would be that Alito made a promise before he was a sitting Justice and he can easily argue that his opinion changed as his faith was renewed, as his faith grew, as he discovered a new religion, etc, etc.

And he wouldn't even have to bring in religion (but Alito would).  He could merely argue that at that date in time, he meant what he said but that his years on the Court had increased his knowledge base and his opinons had changed.

So stop whining that you were lied to.  And stop insisting that you had some promise before the justice sat on the Court  Again, it's the law of the land (anything) up until you're asked to rule on it and then it is your role to interpret it and analyze it.

Again, don't ask for opinions if you 're not sure you want them.  I'm not going to offer easy, pleasing takes that are devoid of reality.  

If we're going to talk about this, we need to talk reality.

First off, no ruling has come down yet.  Drafts are circulated all the time.  The Justices confer and discuss and debate and some change their minds as a result of the give-and-take.

This draft may be destined for the trash heap.

That is not offered to say, "Cease working on this issue."

That is offered to say: Work smart.

Christine Pelosi thinks  she's a feminist.  She's not.  Nepotism is not a feminist value.  She's got a ton of opinions and they're all the opinions of entitled woman who has garnered every break the rich can receive in this country.  She is not a learned mind.

As Margaret Kimberely has documented on her Twitter thread, when people were rightly noting that Ruth Ginsberg should step down, Christine showed up screaming sexism and ageism.

She was a stupid bitch then and she remains one today.  Shooting out of Nancy Pelosi's vagina did not make Christine an expert on anything and we really don't need her faux wisdom.

Ruth was ill and she should have retired.  She gambled and WE LOST.  A lot of today is on her.

But let's get to Rahm correctly calling me a "f**king idiot."  

Nancy, Steny Hoyer and Rahm controlled the House back then.  There was concern over the ongoing Iraq War.  I was so sure that the Democrats -- who were using it as an election issue in 2006 -- would end it as they promised.  Rahm told me I was an idiot and explained why.  It was big talk and it was nothing but an effort to get votes.  The votes that had taken place where someone made a grand stand of voting against a buget for the war?  Nancy had signed off on that.  She had done so only after she had secured enough votes for the itme to pass.

It was all posture and play.  

Rahm was right.  I was wrong.  I've said here many tiems I can be the world's biggest idiot.  

How does that apply to today?

Democrats had years to make this a law.  They didn't.  They've used abortion as a political football and attempted to use it to get out the vote.

No one should accept them at their word in an election year if they promise that, come January, they'll pass it into law if you just vote for them.

They control the House, the Senate and the White House right now.  If they can't get it done now, they can't get it done.

Nancy can -- and has -- kept her party in line when it comes to the votes she wants.  That can take place in the Senate and in the House.  Yes, even Joe Manchin can be put into line.

If they want votes this November, they need to deliver right now.

If they're uanble to do so when they control both houses and the White House, don't believe them that they'll do it at some point in the near future.

They could have stopped the Iraq War before it started.  They could have ended it after it started. 

They didn't.

They ran in 2006 on the promise to end the war.  But they won both houses.  And suddenly the Iraq War -- that they waffled on in the 2005 election -- was something they saw as a vote getter in the upcoming 2008 election.  So they didn't end it.  Not when it could be used in an election.

And I'm not prepared for the same thing to happen over and over with regards to abortion.

This would  be chipping away at privacy rights.  But I do not buy into the claim that this would mean that we'd lose the right to interracial marriage or to same-sex marriage.  

I don't believe there's enough support for that.  Abortion is a different issue that has other implications.  Those who are strongly against it will argue that they can't do the live-and-let-live option on this (because they believe it's murder).  With regards to who marries whom, that's a different approach and America is not fond of being told what to do.

I think trying to build that argument at this time is wrong and a distraction.  

I think the focus needs to be on how Congress must ask and must ack right now.

The draft might end up in the trash.  That's not breathe a sigh of relief time.  We need legislation that can prevent this from happening again.  Our right to privacy should not be held hostage.

The legislation should have come a long time ago.

In addition, we need a Democratic Party that actually acts.  Do you remember Barack's last years as president?

The Republicans refused to allow his Supreme Court pick to be confirmed.  So why did Democrats allow Donald Trump's picks -- that they were all over the news objecting to -- to be confirmed?

The party wants votes, they better start fighting to win.

And votes better stop accepting 'someday' promises and demand that politicians deliver first and then they can win our votes.

Adding this from The Feminist Majority Foundation:

Feminist Majority Foundation


Dear Common Ills,

If you ever doubted that a vote for Republicans is a vote to endanger women’s lives, the leaked Supreme Court draft majority decision eliminated any doubt.


Although we await the final decision it now appears that 5 Republican-appointed Justices—three of them placed on the court by Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump—may reverse Roe v. Wade triggering the criminalization or banning of abortion in some 26 states.


It’s even worse. Not only would this decision outlaw abortion in many states, the anti-choice/anti-woman right-wing axis will now move aggressively to elect a Republican majority to both the House and Senate in November. Their number one goal: a federal law to outlaw abortion in every state. 


The critical time to mobilize and organize is right now – the 183 days between now and Election Day in November.


That's why I'm rushing you the Feminist Majority's action plans to make sure you're on board for the critical months ahead and why I'm asking for your support.


We're counting on you.



You see, if we don’t fight like hell to help maintain Democratic control of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate everything we’ve fought for over the past 50 years could be lost—beginning with the right to safe, legal abortion. We’re focused on electing Democrats because the essence of today’s Republican party is profoundly anti-choice, anti-women and anti-democracy. This is not the time to be calm and neutral.


I'm not being alarmist when I tell you we’re in a political sprint for the  survival of women’s rights and lives. Just look at what we face:


The loss of safe, legal access to abortion if Roe V. Wade is overturned and the draconian anti-abortion laws now pending in some 26 states go into effect while extremist assaults on the few remaining clinics are on the rise. Even birth control is now threatened.


Yet another hurdle for the Equal Rights Amendment. Today, 50 years after the ERA was approved by Congress (1972) and sent to the states for ratification, we now have met the two requirements for amending the Constitution—a 2/3 vote of Congress and ratification by ¾ of the states. (2020). But neither the House nor the Senate have taken final action to declare the ERA valid and ratified.


Remember: The ERA is a CONSTITUTIONAL Amendment—the only guarantee—insurance—against a denial of rights on the basis of sex.

Forget the Doomsayers

WE CAN prevail only if we organize like never before to maintain control of the House and Senate in the next 183 days.


This means defending all four toss-up Democratic seats and flipping 2 Republican seats for a solid 52-48 majority in the Senate. And holding a net of 4 House seats to maintain the Democrats’ majority.


Believe me, we can win. We’ve done it before –against equally immense odds – because when it comes to advancing women’s rights and equality it’s always been an uphill fight.


So, forget the naysaying of the cable pundits and political consultants who seem all too eager to pronounce a Democratic majority in Congress lost in the November midterms. 


Here’s how we win. And why we will win.


Laser-like focus on key swing races to maintain the pro-women, pro-equality control of Congress.


That’s why we’re focusing our grassroots organizing and Get-Out-The-Vote teams on 51 college and university campuses that will determine the all-important young people’s vote. Our massive mobilization in 2018 and again in 2020 posted major wins that helped make the difference in gaining control of Congress.


That’s why we’re counting on you.



Laser-like focus on the Youth Vote. Make no mistake young women and men—those immediately affected by an abortion ban—will decide key races that are often decided by only a few percentage points and this is why we’re focused on key districts and states where young people can have a decisive impact on the outcome.


Just look at these recent and very encouraging poll numbers from the Institute of Politics at Harvard:  37% of voters ages 18-29 say they will definitely be voting in the midterms. In 2018 that number was 36% --a record-breaking level of turnout for a mid-term cycle.


Women and Young Voters give Dems a big lead in the race for Congress. That same Harvard poll found that 40% of young voters (18-29) want Democrats to hold onto control of Congress, while 28% prefer Republicans. The rest are unsure.


AND...a raft of prominent polls place the Gender Gap for the mid-terms at a WHOPPING  33%. Usually it’s between 8% and 11% so this year it’s really a “Gender Canyon” and the Feminist Majority has a 35-year history of widening and winning with the Gender Gap.


To help plan and budget for our major mid-term organizing effort I urge you to respond today to make sure you’re on board for the critical months ahead.


We’re counting on you.



Doing Your Part to Win


Together we can and will win with what is nothing less than a sprint for the survival of women’s rights and lives.


You have been with us when your support mattered. For this I’m most grateful. Today, your support means more than ever. The stakes have never been higher. May I count on you?


For Victory and Equality,

Ellie Smeal Signature
Eleanor Smeal

P.S. In a just-released national poll, half of women voters say that they are more likely to vote in this year's elections as a result of increased restrictions on abortion—one-third say they are "much more likely." And for young women 18-29, an even higher 56% say they are more likely to vote. Please contribute today.

Contributions to Feminist Majority are not tax deductible as charitable contributions for Federal income tax purposes because of our lobbying and electoral work for women's rights. Donations may be used for political purposes. By contributing you confirm that you are a citizen or permanent legal resident of the U.S. and are donating your own funds. Feminist Majority is solely responsible for this communication. Feminist Majority does not engage in any electoral activity or make political expenditures in cooperation or coordination with any candidate or candidate committee. 



Feminist Majority
1600 Wilson Blvd
Arlington, VA 22209
United States

The following sites updated: