deerstalker

Day two of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court has come to an end and it was just as harrowing as Day 1.

There were a lot of big moments out of Tuesday’s hearing. For example:

.@maziehirono letting Coney Barrett have it over her very deliberate use of the term “sexual preference” rather than “sexual orientation,” tying it to Scalia’s similar usage and the way he voted on cases like Obergfell. pic.twitter.com/YN4BX19jGe

— Joy JUST VOTE & MASK UP!! Reid 😷) (@JoyAnnReid) October 13, 2020

But a major contender for the worst part of the day was every moment Ted Cruz was speaking–especially the one in which he chose to refer to birth control as “abortion-inducing drugs.”

ted cruz just called birth control, “abortion inducing drugs” so yeah they are coming for your birth control and your IVF.

— Caroline Reilly (@ms_creilly) October 13, 2020

This isn’t new, by the way. Cruz has been using this term for at least half a decade.

5 years later and Ted Cruz hasn’t learned. Again, he incorrectly referred to birth control as “abortion inducing drugs”

But the facts remain: Birth control can’t cause an abortion. But both abortion and birth control ARE health care. https://t.co/cK36LP2ade

— Planned Parenthood Action – Text VOTE to 22422 (@PPact) October 13, 2020

During his questioning, Cruz brought up the Little Sisters of the Poor, a group of Catholic nuns who went to court with the Obama administration over the Affordable Care Act’s mandate that employers pay for their employees’ birth control.

Here’s what Cruz said today about “religious liberty”:

The Little Sisters of the Poor are a Catholic convent of nuns who take oaths of poverty, who devote their lives to caring for the sick, caring for the needy, caring for the elderly. The Obama administration litigated against the Little Sisters of the Poor, seeking to fine them in order to force them to pay for abortion-inducing drugs among others. Truly a stunning situation when you have the federal government litigating against nuns.

I don’t know, personally, I was really glad to know that the federal government wasn’t going to let nuns discriminate their employees. I miss those days.

Also, by the way, the Obama administration tried to give the nuns an out. As The Atlantic wrote back in 2015:

A three-member panel of judges ruled that the Obama administration has come up with a sufficient accommodation for religious organizations like the Little Sisters: If they object to providing insurance coverage to employees who want to buy birth control, organizations can sign a two-page form stating that objection. That’s it—from there, the administration will arrange for a third-party provider to make sure the employee can get coverage. But the Little Sisters, along with schools like Notre Dame and other religious organizations, claimed that signing that piece of paper was the moral equivalent of condoning birth control.

And obviously, the biggest red flag in Cruz’s depiction of this case is that contraception isn’t “abortion-inducing.” Even if Cruz was referring to Plan B, which some are speculating he is, that drug prevents fertilization or stops a fertilized egg from attaching to the womb. Neither of those things have anything to do with abortion.

But this kind of gross misinformation is to be expected from Cruz, who has made it clear that he thinks condoms should be the only acceptable form of birth control. He once “joked” that there is no conservative war on women or on contraception because “Last I checked, we don’t have a rubber shortage in America.” Classy.

Senate Republicans, Cruz included, have claimed that Democrats are opposed to Barrett’s confirmation because of her faith. That’s simply not true. There are already five Catholics on the Supreme Court so to oppose Barrett on those grounds would be strange. But Barrett has made comments in the past about using her Catholicism to guide her judicial decisions, which is incredibly worrying. And when lawmakers like Cruz make it clear that they want our laws to be shaped by those religious beliefs (which is very different from protecting religious beliefs), we should absolutely express some concern over that!

(image: Patrick Semansky-Pool/Getty Images)
Want more stories like this? Become a subscriber and support the site!

—The Mary Sue has a strict comment policy that forbids, but is not limited to, personal insults toward anyone, hate speech, and trolling.—

Emily’s pitch on the champagne came in clutch when she sent the champagne to her favorite bar in Chicago. The patron’s celebrated the Cubs’ win by spraying the champagne. Team Savoir will be meeting Camille’s family at a gallery event tonight. Sylvie is avoiding Antoine even though there is campaign that needs work, and Emily is wanted by one Judith Robertson (Faith Prince) from the American Friends of the Louvre aka AFL. Julien is always on point with his suits. Judith requests assistance in getting Pierre to donate a clothing item at an auction she’s holding. Let’s see if Emily can spin this to a marketable event for Pierre. 

Mathieu is available to discuss business tonight and invites himself to the gallery showing. Camille finally meets Luc and Sylvie who is joined by Mathieu. Did anyone else notice Gabriel’s eyes on Mathieu’s hands that were on Emily’s hip? Boy needs to choose a team already. Luc points out how a painting is sexual but it is lost on sweet, innocent Emily. Luc is always talking about sex, though. Once Sylvie whisks Mathieu away, Camille points out the way the man is looking at Emily, how successful he is, and he is heir to Pierre Cadault. Gabriel scoffs at Camille’s insistence that Emily date Mathieu just because he is rich and famous. Their bickering over money is annoying and repetitive. Mathieu saves Emily by suggesting they go for dinner. Aww, Gabriel is upset. 

While out with Emily, Mathieu discusses pancakes, fashion week, and growing up with Pierre. She’s able to get a donation for AFL and is surprised with a sweet kiss on the hand. Ah, a gentleman. The next day, bitter Sylvie points out that she saw Mathieu leaving with Emily, which is against corporate commandments. Emily insists that it was all business, but the girl was checking the man out on the internet just moments before. Antoine sends Sylvie a gift, but Sylvie tells Julien to return it. Emily refuses to open it but Luc does, to find beautiful nipple rings in the box. 

Auction night is invaded by Grey Space (Isaiah Hodges and Christophe Tek), a streetwear duo design team from America. Emily tries to get them as clients but no dice on that one. AFL loses their billionaire model for the dress by Pierre Cadault, Mathieu overhears and suggests that Emily model it. She is a sight in the piece, which is bought by none other than Grey Space. That’s suspect. The boys spray her while she is on stage. It was all a publicity stunt. Terrible. 

Everyone is concerned for Emily; even Gabriel pops up after seeing it in the newspaper. Sylvie is highly unimpressed despite the new followers. Grey Space has the dress up on showcase already, which prompts Emily to see the duo at their shop. They claim it all to be performance art and are fans of Pierre’s work; so obviously Emily wants them to prove it. Pierre is crushing crème brûlée when Emily comes by. He is sad that his clothing is loved by dying old women. However, Emily has a hoodie from Grey Space with Pierre’s name on it. The collaboration can bring more attention to Pierre’s brand. He refuses to have his name on something so ringarde. Mathieu awaits to hear how his uncle took it, but Pierre is at his darkest hour. He tells Emily that at the darkest hour, the French make love, then kisses Emily. She claims not to be that French; he says just wait. Okay daddy. 

Emily has more love affairs in a short few months than I do in a year. Now, I’m with Camille when it comes to Mathieu. He is single and a fashion heir. So much easier to be with him. With only one episode left, I do wonder what type of ending we will be getting: French or American?

A lot of states are coming up against their voter registration deadlines right now, so it’s a great time to remind everyone that if your state’s deadline hasn’t yet passed, make sure to register to vote. It’s also a great time for a reminder that voter registration is a form of voter suppression, and that’s by design.

Voter registration didn’t exist until the early 19th Century, when some states, mostly in New England, wanted to find ways to keep their growing immigrant populations from voting. Early official voter registration programs tended to be limited to states’ urban, Democrat districts like Philadelphia. Assessors travelled door to door to register voters, and they did so during work hours when poor people and POC, who are more likely to vote Democrat, were less likely to be at home.

This laid the groundwork for the literacy tests, poll taxes, housing requirements and other voter registration restrictions of Jim Crow. And after the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was passed, outlawing those discriminatory practices, voter registration among Black voters in southern states shot up but that was not the end of the disenfranchisement caused by voter registration, which still, even now, wildly disproportionately affects poor people and BIPOC.

Over the years, we’ve come to think of voter registration as a natural part of the voting process even though in many states, like Texas, it was created as a direct response to the abolishment of other, more overt suppression tactics like poll taxes. We’re told that voter registration–like voter ID laws and other practices meant to restrict access to voting–are necessary to keep voter fraud out of our elections.

In reality, these restrictive policies are addressing problems that don’t really exist–at least not on any scale deserving of this kind of institutional response. In 2016, Last Week Tonight did a great deep dive into how disenfranchising voter ID laws are. Here’s what he said then about individual voter fraud:

While American history is littered with vote-buying, vote tampering, and ballot-box stuffing, voter ID doesn’t prevent those crimes. The only crime it prevents is voter impersonation—one person showing up to the polls, pretending to be someone they’re not. Which is a pretty stupid crime, because you have to stand in line at a polling place and risk five years in prison and a $10,000 fine all to cast one probably not-consequential extra vote. … The truth here is voter impersonation fraud is incredibly rare.

Voter registration doesn’t really fix the problem of voter impersonation because, as John Oliver says, that problem is rare. But it does keep a lot of eligible voters from being able to vote. Here are just a few examples:

–In 2011, Kansas’ Secretary of State Kris Kobach pushed legislation requiring potential voters to provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote. As the ACLU writes, “Most people don’t carry the required documents on hand — like a passport, or a birth certificate — and as a result, the law blocked over 30,000 Kansans from voting. The ACLU sued and defeated the law in 2018.”

–Voter ID laws disproportionately affect voters of color. In that episode of Last Week Tonight, for example, Oliver notes that in Texas, Black voters are nearly twice as likely as white voters not to have an acceptable form of ID, while Latinx voters are nearly two and a half times as likely.

–Indigenous people are hit incredibly hard by voter registration practices. In many states, a physical address is required to register to vote and/or to cast a ballot. But reservations tend not to use addressing systems and residents get their mail at P.O. boxes or cluster mailboxes, which are not recognized as an acceptable address for voter registration in most states.

–Indigenous voters face other obstacles to voting as well. According to the American Bar Association, “Numerous roads on reservations are unimproved dirt or gravel roads in poor quality and are often unnamed. After storms, many roads are impassable. Due to these poor conditions, the U.S. Postal Service does not deliver mail to the majority of the reservation residents at their homes. … Some reservation residents have to travel up to 70 miles in one direction to receive mail.”

–Additionally, “Less than half of the homes on tribal lands have reliable broadband access,” writes the ABA. “Even if a voter has access to broadband on the reservation, most online voter registration systems require a state ID to register to vote and do not accept tribal IDs.”

–Even innocuous-seeming policies like voter registration deadlines can have restrictive effects and no useful purpose in the internet age. Again, from the ACLU:

For example, New York requires voters to register at least 25 days before the election, which imposes an unnecessary burden on the right to vote. By forcing voters to register before the election even becomes salient to the public, it discourages people from registering in the first place. These outdated restrictions — which were designed for a time when registration forms were exclusively completed with pen and paper, and transmitted via snail mail — can significantly impact voter participation. In the 2016 presidential election, over 90,000 New Yorkers were unable to vote because their applications did not meet the 25-day cutoff, and the state had the eighth-worst turnout rate in the country.

So for now, voter registration is, in nearly every state, a necessary evil. There are a lot of really great activists and organizations out there working hard to make sure everyone has access to voting, although it shouldn’t be on them to circumvent these kinds of institutional suppression tactics.

Hopefully someday soon there will be automatic registration at a federal level, but in the meantime, keep an eye on legislation in your area and which of your elected officials are trying to make it harder or easier for you and your community to vote.

(image: Mario Tama/Getty Images)
Want more stories like this? Become a subscriber and support the site!

—The Mary Sue has a strict comment policy that forbids, but is not limited to, personal insults toward anyone, hate speech, and trolling.—

Fargo‘s fourth season has roughly 700 characters. Not an easy group to keep track of. So you might be unaware of a potentially huge and telling connection with the show’s second season that some fans are speculating about. The Irishman, the one taking care of Loy Cannon’s youngest son Satchel, is Rabbi Milligan. That’s the same surname as Bokeem Woodbine’s Mike Milligan from season two. He was also an unlikely outsider who served in Kansas City’s Italian mafia. Since there are no coincidences on Fargo, the possible connection is obvious.

And if the future Mike Milligan is really Loy’s child, the Cannon crime family seems destined for a bleak end at the hands of the son it traded to another team. A team that will never truly accept him.

FX

The show’s second season took place in 1979. It featured Kansas City’s Italian mafia executing a hostile takeover of the Gerhardt crime family in North Dakota. Regardless of what happens this season, set in 1950, an Italian crime syndicate will still be a powerful force in Kansas City 29 years later. And they will have a Black associate named Mike Milligan.

We don’t know how Mike Milligan came to serve the Italian mafia. But he played an important role for them in their violent power grab. They sent him north to take care of some very bloody business. He was no stranger to force, and not above murdering to survive and thrive. For a Black man to have that position in 1979, he clearly did something major to earn the trust of the Italian mob.

FX

Ben Whishaw’s Rabbi Milligan earned that type of trust by betraying his own family. He secured his standing with the Faddas by shooting his own father.

We don’t know exactly why Rabbi Milligan murdered his dad. He told Loy Cannon it’s a “dog-eat-dog world.” He might have decided to join the winning team when he realized how the game would end for the Irish. Or he might have hated his father for trading him twice, even though he knew his son could be killed in the exchange. It’s also possible Rabbi Milligan resented his father who forced him to shoot the innocent Jewish boy who traded places with him. Likely it’s a combination of all those things and more.

No matter, we know an Irishman earned a spot alongside the head of an Italian family through blood. Now, all these years later, he is the one responsible for Satchel. And Rabbi Milligan knows better than anyone how it feels to be used as a pawn in a deadly game by power hungry fathers.

FX

It’s not hard to see how Satchel could follow his protector’s path. The young boy is mad at his father for sending him away. It’s the kind of act that builds resentment. And keep in mind that it’s also 1950 in America. If you had to bet on a “winning team” in a war between white and Black Americans, you know who will come out on top. And if Loy Cannon asks his son to do something awful like murder another innocent youngster, the way Rabbi Milligan had to, Satchel might decide he’d rather point a gun at a guilty man instead. Even if that guilty man his own dad.

And once he’s no longer a part of the Cannon family, Satchel might take up the name of the person who guided him. He might honor the man who taught him the way the world works, Rabbi Milligan, as he takes his spot in the Italian mafia.

It would be a bleak ending for Loy Cannon. But it’s an ending he’s already worried about.

FX

Loy knows Rabbi Milligan murdered his father when he was in the same situation as Satchel. And Loy also knows both his sons resent him. (He’s trying to stop his oldest from being a musician.) Getting his child home and away from a person who betrayed his family is as much about keeping Loy safe as it is his son. That might sound harsh. But that’s why Loy patted Satchel down when they met outside the funeral home. He didn’t hug his son when he first saw him. He checked to make sure his boy didn’t have a weapon he could use against his own father. But such an ending might be unavoidable for Loy.

The Cannons are fighting a group we know will be in power 29 years later. And losing contenders for Kansas City’s crime throne go away for good. Save for one Irishman who did the seemingly unthinkable to survive. That could be how Satchel survives his own family’s extinction too before he becomes Mike Milligan.

FX

But that doesn’t mean Satchel will have a happy ending either. What did either man get from being members of another team? As Loy told him, Rabbi Milligan is as an outsider in a family that doesn’t respect him. And Fargo‘s second season ends with Mike Milligan having proven himself reliable and ready for a new position of power. His reward was a banal desk job.

Rabbi Milligan is teaching Satchel Cannon it’s a dog-eat-dog world. But just because you run with a different pack doesn’t mean you’re a part of it.

Featured Image: FX

Mikey Walsh is a staff writer at Nerdist. You can follow him on Twitter at @burgermike, and also anywhere someone is ranking the Targaryen kings.

The post This FARGO Theory Spells Doom for Loy appeared first on Nerdist.