Who Needs Batman, When You’ve Got Greg Abbott?

Em Carpenter

Em was one of those argumentative children who was sarcastically encouraged to become a lawyer, so she did. She is a proud life-long West Virginian, and, paradoxically, a liberal. In addition to writing about society, politics and culture, she enjoys cooking, podcasts, reading, and pretending to be a runner. She will correct your grammar. You can find her on Twitter.

Related Post Roulette

24 Responses

  1. Oscar Gordon says:

    And here I though Uncle Joe was the gaffe machine. Seems Abbot wants the title.Report

  2. Pinky says:

    Em, I get your point, but that second-last paragraph is just too far. If it’s a balance between an innocent having to carry a child to term or an innocent dying, I’m going to go for the former every time.

    Personally, I think Abbott’s response fits the serial-rapist “stranger danger” framework, but not the “someone you know”. We could maybe reduce the incidence of the crime by increasing the penalty. Historically, it has been a capital crime.Report

    • Em Carpenter in reply to Pinky says:

      I can’t wrap my head around that argument when I hear it.
      It sounds like a complete denial or dismissal of the physical and emotional effects of doing so, like it’s just no big deal and no harm to the woman.Report

    • Chris in reply to Pinky says:

      Given how poorly police and the justice system do with sexual assault right now, both in terms of how often they arrest, how often they prosecute, and how often they get bad verdicts (in both directions), I can’t imagine increasing the penalties, much less making it a capital crime, is the answer. The answer is much more difficult and complex, and sociocultural, than throwing years or lethal drug cocktails at it.Report

  3. Chip Daniels says:

    Comments like Abbot’s, and the reaction to them, always make me think of that observation about how fascists use illogic and absurdity to their advantage.

    He wasn’t making a carefully constructed proposal for a policy. He wasn’t critiquing any existing condition. It was a jumble of gibberish and word salad meant to cynically defend the indefensible.

    Abbot and his supporters can indulge in absurdity and demand that we respond with careful reasoning and logic, because their underlying premise is that whenever they hold power, there is really only one logic at play, which is that those with power are protected, while those without are not.Report

  4. Chris says:

    I believe suicide rates were down in ’20, nationwide, but I could be misremembering.Report

  5. Obviously what Abbott said is a despicable lie that wouldn’t fool a 6-year-old, and what it really means is “I don’t care.”. But why would he say it? What audience is he playing to?Report