Adapted from Rachel's script Friday night:
There are places in this country that look from the outside like nondescript buildings, until you happen to notice that there are no windows facing the street and that guy hanging out at the front entrance is an armed, plain-clothes security officer and he is guarding the front door.
Once you get inside, there are security check points and metal detectors. The lobby is locked down from the rest of the building. There are key pads with secret codes, not just to get in, the first place, but even once you are inside to get from one wing of the building to the other. There are security cameras monitoring every corner of the building. The folks who work at these places sometimes come to work in disguise and when they come to work, they take a different route each day. Sometimes they park their cars off site and are driven into the office by a different person each week, who also takes a different route each time. Some of them use assumed names outside the office.
These places are not field offices of the NSA or the CIA or some cagey private military contractor. These are medical offices. This is the way that medicine is being practiced in one small segment of the medical field. It is unlike anything else in American medicine. It is unlike any other part of American life that is not national security or corrections or intelligence.
But it is how you live if you are an abortion provider in a part of the country where aggressive hostility to abortion rights sometimes manifests as violence. These are not temporary security measures people adopt during a lockdown or at a particular time of crisis. This is day-to-day, everyday life.
It is a very strange way to live or work. There are four states in this country where there is only one abortion clinic in the whole state, including Mississippi, which is facing the prospect of becoming the first state where abortion access is, effectively, gone.
After the jump, part one of Rebekah Dryden and Anthony Terrell's report: Kansas.
If you are the only abortion provider in your state, it turns out that that makes your one medical office and, therefore, the women who seek medical care there, it makes them really easy targets for people who would like to end abortion in that state through harassment, or intimidation or through state government.
Trying to understand the constitutional edge that we are on right now in terms of abortion rights existing on paper versus existing in reality, part one of our special report yesterday was about recovering and regaining access to abortion rights in a part of the country where that access was
ended three and a half years ago by murder. That was Kansas, where that constitutional right is being protected and regained by a very savvy and determined group.
Leave a Comment:
In some parts of America the Constitution is a smorgasbord, where you can chose which parts are to your liking. And which are not.
Right to keep and bear arms, EFF YES! Rove v Wade, not so much.
The Bible is also another smorgasbord.
don't forget things like voting rights and labor laws...
This is the Civil "Litigation" War...
and in some parts of America its the other way around...still your smorgasbord reference holds up....
The sinister irony of the smorgasbord should not be overlooked. Where alleged compassion for zygotes over people is strongest, that's where you'll find the most opposition to any controls on guns AND to contraception. Dragoon21b, infra, is correct, it's a question of power, a confluence of interests, but the interests are not just randomly conjoined.
Opposition to reproductive freedom (abortion and contraception) is about the power of religion (more specifically, fundamental Christianity) in our government and our civil and private lives. As science, technology, and objective thinking (about science and technology) lossen fundamental Christianity's hold on our beliefs and perspectives, those who are frightened by expanding possibilities and contracting absolute certainties seek to resort to violence, the one means any absolutist religion relies on when it's doctrines lose persuasiveness. The Taliban in Afghanistan are a prime example, the Inquisition is another. Their ability to force their fundamental theology on others through violence will be enhaced by weapons of war. It's a lot worse than laughable inconsistency, as Day-3905329 seems to imply.
Pro choice advocates are not coercing pregnat women to get abortions, or trying to pass laws mandating the use of contraception. They're not pushing a fundamental theological agenda, and, notwithstanding the passion of their beliefs, they don't manifest the kind of monomania that is typical of fundamentalists. Funding them will not cause them to ignore the predatory greed of those who fund them and superficially appear to agree with them. Zealous fundamentalists, on the other hand, seem quite willing to overlook the flaws of major donors, if the donors mouth pieties and enable the zealots to persue their obsession. The smorgasbord is a sinister confluence, and a clear and present danger.
painful
The more I think about this, the more I begin to see dots that need to be connected and I see a bigger picture in all of it. It is at it's base not about abortion no matter how much protesters would claim otherwise. It is about power. Pure, simple, raw, power and who gets to hold it.
I have said before that if you can control who, where and how a person can have sex then you can control that person. By creating these condition for women opponents of abortion are forcing them to make decisions about not just reproductive rights but where they live, what they do not just privately but in every aspect of their lives and who they do it with.
Consider the conversations that have gone on about Blue dots in Red states and whether or not living there is worth it. This is just another aspect of that question and if these kinds of policies make even one blue dot "Self Deport" or even just remain silent they they have made that state just a little bit redder and have given someone just that much more power and influence.
I am not suggesting that this is some kind of vast plot or conspiracy but more of a confluence of interests that create an effect of political, religious and cultural distillation. The question then becomes not even "How" but "Can" it even be stopped.
What you are saying is fully consistent with my webpage ConstitutionalChallenge.com. In fact I would say that there is a vast right wing conspiracy to favor the .1%, and I refer to this situation as "new age slave-masters".
How do we deal with this blatant? As a lawyer, just like Abraham Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson were, I would suggest the same way they did (as well as Susan B. Anthony). Follow the Constitution, stupid! In particular, compel everyone who is a public figure (politicians, lawyers, judges, police, teachers, military, etc.) who has taken their Constitutional oath to follow it. Be unashamed that we are in the right side of history in our fight against the corrupt .1%. As such, Federal court actions could be brought against legislators who make unconstitutional or unethical-one-sided laws. Federal court actions could be brought against judges and attorneys (officers of the court) who refuse to interpret the laws Constitutionally. Federal court actions could be brought against the executive (President, Governor, or mayors) who refuse to enforce the laws Constitutionally. Actually, all three of these type of things have to happen concurrently with a similar Constitutional Challenge of the press and the public figures in the private companies, banks, etc. that are acting unethically.
However, Dragoon21b, we are well on our way. After the last election, the vast majority of We the People know the system is corrupt (and many in positions of power also know it is corrupt as well). All we have to do now is confront them, and either allow them to follow their Constitutional Oath and act ethically; or realize as acting in the interest of the .1% and purposefully disregard their Constitutional oath that they are attempting to overthrow the U.S. Constitution, the Federal Government, and We the People (which is also known as treason). How do we do this Constitutional Challenge? This is the purpose of the webpage I am starting up ConstitutionalChallenge.org, which is largely based on the actions of Jefferson, Susan B. Anthony, Lincoln, and Twain.
Sadly the many members of the GOP cannot understand that 'Planned Parenthood' is just that. That 'Planned Parenthood allows women to plan for their parenthood and also 'Planned Parenthood has absolutely NOTHING to do with abortion. But does only give guidiance to women who would have servere health problems if they did decide to give birth. I have no ideal why that concept cannot be comprehended by those whom should know better, but do not. Which means, they do not really care about much of anything and all they want to do is cause a good organization as must trouble as possible because they just want to stick their noses into something they know nothing about?
Lupe, you are so correct that planned parenthood has so many functions. The reason that the GOP as the "party of no" cannot learn this is that they are attempting to demonize Democrats, pro-choice groups, etc. They are simply trying to justify their existence by being anti-Obama and really do not stand for anything any more that that can justify.
Of course, as you noted, what they really stand for is being the .1% sticking their noses in and trying to control the business of the 99.9%. This, of course, is the inverted Pyramid of Gaza problems, because as we recognize what they stand for, the situation will not last.
The Constitution, iron clad when it comes to the 2nd,, the rest, not so much,,,
OK, does Mississippi Missouri have the "Stand your ground" law?
Read the Supreme Court rulings and you'll find it's not as "ironclad" as you believe.
It IS actually "ironclad" in that it is guaranteed by the Constitution. It is NOT, however unlimited.
As a constitutional-based lawyer, I don't think the second Amendment is particularly ironclad. Even the "right to bear arms" is dependent upon being in a militia (like George Washington's forces at Valley Forge, or the minute men - corresponding to today's police and military). As such, It can be argued that the right to bear arms is indeed a privilege to bear arms for those of the remainder of us who are not in a militia. This does not mean that we should confront the gun owners (no one I arguing to take away your guns, but more likely reasonable regulation like banning assault rifles which have no use except in military) or the NRA now (though we have made this impression known to the NRA that they don't represent "We the People's" interests, only the guns manufacturers; and the NRA is having great difficulty dealing with this new reality that only people on their side are crazies). In short, saner gun regulations will come in because We the People are demanding them following Sandy Hook, based largely on the premise that those slaughtered schoolchildren, firefighters, teachers, theater goers, etc. had a much greater right to live (Constitutionally, equal protection, due process, right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness) than the NRA or these deranged shooters (who frankly look to me more like they are being targeted by the NRA) have to sell guns and get their jollies off by using children as target practice.
The NRA's techniques are just another of those "new age slave-master" actions that are becoming more pronounced. We have to proceed carefully though, give the NRA and everyone a right to provide their side. At the end of the day, the gun owners will discover that the Government is NOT out to get their arms (as FOX and NRA incorrectly advertises). With each of these future NRA shootings, it will appear that the NRA is the actual triggerman, and that the NRA has blood on its hands. The rest of us non-NRA grown-ups (reasonable gun owners and not) can now discuss reasonably gun regulation without as much of an assumption that there is a privilege or right to bear arms.
You see, when Democracy is allowed to work, such as by having these suitable discussions countering NRA tyranny, then We the People do pretty well. The NRA is NOT on the "We the People" or the "patriotic" side of history; since their ways are decidedly my way or the highway and really only represent the interest of the corrupt .1%. President Obama was entirely right in allowing the NRA to participate in the gun discussion, but not as the primary player.
The men doing battle against Planned Parenthood and other women's health service providers, (and if we all notice, it is men), are hoisting tragic misery upon large segments of law-abiding American women! Have they no shame, and how will this civil liberty issue (women having the power to make their own reproductive decisions) play itself out over the next few years? The quality of life issues faced everyday by women and men will be greatly impacted for the worse if States like Mississippi get to bypass the federal law of the land!
I can't help wonder if for these men who are pushing so much to curtail women's Constitutional rights are using their political power to make up for their bedroom impotence!
A legacy of scared men has been wrought by confident and competent women. and in the 21st century, we are witnessing a blossoming of such wonder! I think the men in power are not telling us the complete story as to why they are hiding behind "a Gothic mask of duty" to push such a war against women!-Kevo
From the viewpoint of a man strongly supporting Women's right to choose, the vast right wing conspiracy often appears to dole out jobs based on certain men (lawyers, judges, politicians) acting in a certain way. If a Republican U.S. Representative voted to support Roe v. Wade, for example, then they would not have their job for long. It is in the Republican political party agenda to pit men against women (particularly in the abortion and family law issues). This battle can be won by re-framing it as a battle between the discriminating .1% vs. the 99.9% of We the People. Note that Eric Cantor giving up on the debt ceiling today (as well as the prior financial cliff situation) makes me see that the Republicans in Congress now see that this is how President Obama (and many others of us) are VERY effectively reframing this issue, as an issue of New Age Slaves.
Fortunately, this New Age Slave-master discrimination that the Republicans have been relying on for the last 30 years with can be dealt with easily (once it is recognized by We the People). Since each Senator and Representative in Congress has taken a Constitutional oath (like I have as a lawyer), then we can try any U.S., State, and Local politician ON AN INDIVIDUAL basis who is placing themselves above the Constitution. Such attempts to overthrow the U.S. Constitution, the Federal Government, or We the People are what the Civil War was all about, and can be referred to as treason. Recall, the Supremacy Clause requires that no person, inconsistent law, nor organization (GOP, NRA, Haliburton, etc.) is above the U.S. Constitution.
Once on the stand, we can apply the same type of ridicule for their position that Rachel Maddow, President Obama, Abraham Lincoln, and myself (though not yet known for it yet) apply to these Republican "new age slave-masters". I have even mentioned the possibility in communications to the offices of the Governor of Washington and the President of the United States that we create a fourth branch of Government, "We the People", to provide oversight over the other three branches as well as the private sector.
You are entirely right in your emotion. There is blatant and purposeful discrimination in our Federal Government and many of our companies, just like there was during the first Civil War. Those so many of us We the People like you, me, Rachel Maddow, E. J. Dionne, Presidents Obama, Lincoln, and Jefferson who define this blatant sex-based or political discrimination will end up being the true patriots, and this change is coming quickly. Lets just re-direct it to the corrupt .1% who are planning and choreographing all of this discrimination for their political and financial benefit.
I believe the vast majority of those men who are spewing out this B.S. in the vast majority of We the People are doing this so they can have a job. This might even be the Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, and Rupert Murdock gang.
I am starting a legal function, (www.ConstitutionalChallenge.org) which is investigating bringing lawsuits against these anti-constitutional legislators. The idea is that no inconsistent law, person, or organization is above the Constitution, and if they act in this way, then they (perhaps Mississippi's Governor and State Legislators) are attempting to overthrow the U.S. Constitution, the Federal Government, and We the People. As such, I am convinced Mississippi's Governor and Republican legislators, for example, can be challenged (in an individual basis), and disbarred or removed from his position if they fail to abide by their Constitutional Oath.
If these political hacks (which often prepare what I am referring to as "New Age Slave" legislation, go against Federal law (for example trying to rig Presidential elections or interfere with Roe v. Wade), then I believe they can be challenged, individually, in Federal Court IN A DIFFERENT STATE IF NECESSARY. For example, those attempting to alter the elections in Florida or Pennsylvania could be brought to Federal Court in NYC or Seattle, because they have done damage there.
These Constitutional Challenges against politically discriminatory public figures such as lawyers, judges, or politicians are a new trend, but they are based on the first two Constitutional Challenges defined by Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln. These Challenges, just like those against slavery, challenge the politically corrupt .1%.
In seems in EACH of these New Age Slave legislations, the ones that end up favored are the politically discriminating .1%, certain attorneys, and certain judges. It appears that those attorneys and judges who over the past few years do not go along with this "new age slave" program often are not assigned any new cases. I have just gone through a family-law litigation in Washington State, there was absolutely NO due process as far as breaking up joint custody.
I have been in touch with numerous politicians (Office of the President, Washington Governor, U.S. Senators and Representatives), and many are very interested in how this will work out. Rachel, so many people (like yourself and myself) have given the President and Congress so many of these new ideas, and it will only become more politically dangerous for the Republicans to keep along with these anti-right for Women to choose fringe groups. You, me, and a large number of the remainder of We the People are leading this struggle for change, and the President is clearly following. These "new age slave" litigations against these public figures from the "vast right wing privatizing conspiracy" are simply not going to pass the test of time. The Civil War lasted four years, which coincides with the same amount of time of the first Obama Administration, and in both these periods those We the People who fought along with Presidents Lincoln and Obama (or all sexes, races, political parties, etc.) were really the ones that defined discrimination, and ultimately fought to save the Union.
These idiots are going to cause what happened in Ireland. A woman (who wnated her baby) couldn't get an abortion, and consequently died! These religious fanatics will cause, 12 and 14 year olds who are pregnant from rape or incest, "DEAL WITH IT"! they make me sick!
I live in Pensacola and this is a sad flashback to the '80s with the bombings, the shootings, the threats. The intimidation we see here isn't merely tolerated by the state. They are promoting it. Hell, they run campaigns for office on it. It's just a matter of time before someone gets killed. I used to have a store right around the corner from crowds of protesters, the FBI, ATF, local police and it was ugly. You got to know the people and they had that glassy, wild-eyed look of zealotry in their eyes. When a bombing or shooting occurred we would guess who did it? (Matt? Jimmy? 'Both'...Oh, wow...) After Dr. Gunn's murder, Pearl Jam made a special trip to perform in Pensacola in June of '84 to show support for those who opposed this madness. Eddie Vedder walked out on stage by himself. One spotlight picked him up and he half whispered, half growled, "We all know why we're here..." and played a solo version of Tom Petty's "I Won't Back Down." But we have to keep fighting the same battles over and over again.
I would like to thank TRMS for covering this very problematic issue. We, as a country, are 40 years past the specter of illegal abortion with its accompanying reports of damaged or dead teenage and adult women. At the same time, we have 40 years of emotional (and often false) language and imagery designed to equate abortion with the murder of babies. The idea of choice--that an abortion is ultimately a private and often anguishing decision that can be made only by a woman and her doctor based on multiple factors--is buried under the emotional jargon of the anti-abortion forces. Forty years ago it was not nearly so uncomfortable to support women's right to abortion. Today many of the voices that remain committed to that right have been muffled (but not completely silenced) in response to 'baby killer' imagery. Your coverage is more important than ever to combat the muffling effect--and I believe most women are very thankful that your show continues to support a woman's right to an abortion as a private and personal decision.
Additionally, the attack on abortion rights, as illustrated during the recent election, is just the beginning of the attack on women's health care rights. It seems frighteningly calculated and 'savvy' to start this attack with abortion (an option of last resort in the family planning tool kit) and then move quickly to use both the emotional confusion and the momentum established opposing abortion to move all family planning services outside the reach of most women by eliminating insurance coverage and free clinics and casting hormonal birth control as the 'slut pill.'
Thank you TRMS for your coverage of women's reproductive health rights. You are more appreciated than you can know.
If Corporations are people then shouldn't Medical Facilities be "people" too and can't these places get "Restraining Orders" to keep crazy people away --- or else, maybe they should hire some crazy NRA-rights folks and have armed guards to protect those that work there! We really need to turn these things around and make laws BeNEFIT women! Women NEED these doctors and clinics!
My local PP in Denver is like this. It freaked me out the first time I went there for my coozie/boobie check. The ones in the suburbs of Denver don't have to be as secure, which is even more sad to me. A bunch of old men standing outside the iron gate yelling their fool heads of at me not to kill my baby . . . I'm in menopause for f*cks sake!!! So disgusting.
I am delightfully flabbergasted at the logical and rational comments on this blog from all of you! I grew up in Sioux Falls, SD and am really alarmed that my hometown is under siege by those who think that we women shouldn't have control over our own bodies! I haven't lived in the Midwest for many years so guess I just assumed that Roe vs Wade should have solved the abortion issue forty years ago. And I guess I also assumed that these Planned Parenthood clinics were in place to serve women who have no health insurance and needed medical help and counseling which they couldn't afford because of our "no national health insurance" program for many years. Don't even get me started on that issue... Well, I guess we all know what "assume" means...sigh...
Thank you, gentlemen, for your challenges to this issue and I will surely follow up on "constitutionalchallange.org" to see if I can help in some way to get this thing going.
P.S. I'm 66 years old and went thru the challenge of whether or not to have an abortion. I did not, but I do not think I have any right to make a decision for another woman. And I certainly do not think a politician has any right over any woman's body!!!
If 4 states successfully stop access to abortions, that seems to be a direct slap to the United States Constitution by 8% of the states. How can individual states block a constitutional right? Are these states not being challenged because the conservative make-up of the Supreme Court practically guarantees Roe v. Wade would be overturned for the entire country?
That is certainly evidence of a much damaged government.... all three branches. When state legislators can ignore the constitution, the judicial branch is biased and the executive branch can't deal with either of the other two, a crisis is brewing. Seriously… think about what is going on here.
Women’s rights over their own bodies affects their entire life…. their health, their independence, their economic future. Legislators are ignoring the law and dictating how the women in their state will live. Women are supposed to quietly accept this.
Let’s compare this to the uproar over the Second Amendment. No one has suggested that people cannot own a gun. Proposals on banning certain assault weapons has sent the NRA and some individual gun owners into a frenzy claiming their constitutional rights are threatened.
This could be humorous, if it wasn’t so disturbing. The conservatives are the ones blocking access to constitutionally guaranteed access to abortion, while they are screaming that no one has the right to take away their AK47 assault rifles. Doesn’t that illustrate the fact that they are not dealing with a full deck?
When Alabama’s Governor George Wallace refused to integrate the schools, didn’t President Kennedy send in the National Guard to escort the children to class? Shouldn’t the federal government be providing protection at these health clinics? This is a guaranteed constitutional right. These clinics should be protected by the federal government. And the offending state should be charged for the services. It is crazy that it has gone this far.
BTW Rachel: in last night’s show you said that the new ruling in Mississippi stated that the doctor providing the abortions had to be on staff at a hospital. None of the Mississippi hospitals would accept him on staff. Does the new ruling specifically say it has to be a Mississippi hospital? Or is that just assumed? It would be great if there was a technicality loop hole where he could have staff privileges at a hospital out of state.
I'm waiting for the Rightwing nutz to accuse Obama of impregnating juveniles to drum up business for clinics.
In an attempt to reduce car accidents legislation should be introduced requiring all vehicles to have three wheels or less. To reduce fires all matches need to be equipped with "smart match" technology.
I couldn't even finish watching the segment or the article. At first I got so mad, then it kinda got depressing.
I really like the idea of the "We the People" that Glenn from Seattle was writing about yesterday. Glenn's overview and concrete ideas about being able to legally bring charges against state Republicans on an individual basis in Federal court who are attempting to overthrow the U.S. Constitution, the Federal Government, and We the People was a welcome eye opener. It is plausible and gave me a measure of hope of winning the fight against the far right Tea Party Republicans causing America so much grief on every major concern facing us in this country today. The miserable Republicans in states like Mississippi would soon be whistling a different tune as soon as they realized that they can't overthrow the constitution or fix an election and enjoy the anonymity their party once afforded them, instead, they'd be brought up on charges as indivduals to answer for their wrong doings and be prosecuted and punished in federal court. It's lovely that criminal charges wouldn't even have to be filed against them in the same state in which they did their crime (so they couldn't fix it). The idea of it had me laughing with glee and clapping my hands and smiling from ear to ear. I can hardly wait another minute for that to happen. I'd support legal actions like that 100%. So I'll be writing my newly elected congress person for my district as well as my state Senators regarding Glenn's site www.constitutionalchallenge.org. May I suggest that you think about writing your congress person and senator too. Its a great idea whose time has come (and none to soon).
Hi Rachel,
First... LOVE YOUR SHOW!
Next, just a thought... How about suggesting on air that the President order the Jackson VA to the attending rights to the MD's of this clinc....(if it qualifies as a hospital, that's something the custom law wouldn't have anticipated)? If the suggestion is valid (meaning I thought this through correctly and this is possible) please make the point NOW while the Pres is in maximum Mojo :)
Thanks
Yodo ( aka Yosef Dovid)
Possible Solution! (originally posted to wrong article..apologies)
To Eleborate... If the Jackson VA qualifies as a hospital and If the President could be nudged (perhaps on air by someone named Rachel for example) to issue as an executive order granting "Provisional Attending Rights" to the abortion clinic MD's, would that not give both the women's clinic and women's right's in Mississippi a needed respite for the next.. say four years?
Not to mention State leaders would never see this coming and being that the VA hospital is federally controlled, their only recourse will be to go to Federal Court which could eventually take it to the Supreme Court and after Obamacare... they may not want to do that.
If my thinking is on, I hope this helps!
Signed,
Yodo (aka Yosef Dovid)
PS Rachel.. LOVE YOUR SHOW
Statement by the #President .@BarackObama on #RoeVsWade Anniversary | The White House http://wh.gov/yXO2 via .@whitehouse
http://bismarcktribune.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/bill-bans-abortions-for-genetic-abnormalities/article_0b7cba6c-64cc-11e2-8a18-0019bb2963f4.html