Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”).
This week on CounterSpin: Elon Musk reportedly told Tesla investors that he’ll be amping down his role with the Department of Government Efficiency to, one guesses, bring his big brain back into their service. Like the “War on Terror,” “DOGE” is a thing that was in part spoken into normalcy by the corporate press. Media seem ready to, if not embrace, to make respectful space for whatever hot nonsense is proffered—if it fits within their political template. In this case, it’s a thing—not officially a new Cabinet-level department, but acting like one—wildly powerful, yet utterly opaque and run by an unelected billionaire. DOGE sparked lawsuits about its legality from day one, but today’s news is about, legal or not, what it’s doing and how we can respond. The Revolving Door Project is tracking all of that; we hear from executive director Jeff Hauser.
Transcript: ‘There’s Never Been a More Blatant Corporate Incursion Into the Public Sector Than DOGE’
Also on the show: There’s no reason you need to know that Selena Chandler-Scott is a 24-year-old woman from Georgia who had a miscarriage last month; pregnant people lose those pregnancies routinely. You should know that Chandler-Scott was sent to jail for her miscarriage, and though later released, she won’t be the last. “Fetal personhood” may sound abstract or legalistic; but this case brings home vividly how granting legal rights to embryos and fetuses doesn’t “potentially” “open the door to,” but concretely, today, means undermining the rights of people who carry pregnancies, leaving them open to surveillance, suspicion and prosecution.
US media seem uninterested in Chandler-Scott’s story and its implications, but we hear from Karen Thompson, legal director at Pregnancy Justice.
Transcript: ‘The Fact That She Had That Miscarriage Was Enough to Justify Arresting Her’
Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at press coverage of Pope Francis.
For all the bigotry and hatred from the Right’s attacks on abortion access, the basic question seems incapable of being rationally debated, let alone answered: when does a foetus gain the human right to life and why? If it is at the moment of birth, why? Why not five minutes, or five hours, or a day beforehand? I’ve no personal input in this, not being a parent, but I’ve yet to be convinced by the arguments put forward by anyone.
“ Media seem ready to, if not embrace, to make respectful space for whatever hot nonsense is proffered by DOGE.”
Why would anyone make a point of this? For decades the mainstream media has been making “respectful space” for whatever hot nonsense Republicans have been serving up. For example Reagan’s magical self-funding tax cuts for the rich were always an obvious lie — so obvious Reagan’s own budget director openly admitted that fact — yet the media refused to debunk that claim even after Reagan’s, Dubya’s and Trump’s tax cuts for the wealthy added trillions to our national debt and deficit.
Despite decades of data showing that the economy almost always is better and the deficit decreases under Democrats the media still promotes the fairytale that Republicans are the fiscally and economically responsible party is still a media favorite.
Not that it makes a difference but googling the following:
“fetal personhood like corporate personhood before it subverts the rights of actual persons to have less legal standing”
Returned a google “A.I.” Overview that went:
“The analogy between fetal personhood and corporate personhood highlights a similar concern: that granting legal personhood to entities that are not human beings (corporations or fetuses) can undermine the rights and autonomy of actual, living people. By extending legal personhood, the state gains greater control over the bodies and lives of pregnant people, potentially leading to criminalization, surveillance, and reduced reproductive freedom.”
…and when refreshed again said something similar:
“The analogy comparing fetal personhood to corporate personhood suggests that granting legal rights to fetuses, like those granted to corporations, can undermine the rights of actual persons, particularly pregnant individuals. Fetal personhood laws, which grant legal rights to fetuses, embryos, and fertilized eggs, can lead to criminalization of pregnant individuals, limit their reproductive healthcare access, and potentially disrupt assisted reproduction techniques.”