Archives for category: Elections
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

North Carolina: The Bigotry of GOP Candidate for Governor

By dianeravitch
March 15, 2024 //
7

The Republican candidate for Governor in North Carolina is Mark Robinson, who is currently Lt. Governor. He just won the Republican primary, which says a lot about the state party. Robinson is a Black man, and there is a long list of groups that he is denounced.

Ja’han Jones of MSNBC writes:

When it comes to Republican gubernatorial nominee Mark Robinson, the question isn’t which of his bigoted remarks to mention, but when to stop.

Since he won the North Carolina primary earlier this month, the state’s one-term lieutenant governor has faced criticism for a long litany of comments in interviews, in sermons and on social media in which he quoted Hitler, referred to LGBTQ people as “filth,”depicted Muslims as terrorists and said certain Hollywood actresses were dressed as “whores.”

Faced with questions about whether he is antisemitic, homophobic, anti-Muslim and misogynistic, Robinson, who is Black, naturally responded by arguing that, actually, he is the real victim of bigotry.

Ironically, Robinson made this allegation on a podcast hosted by right-wing provocateur Charlie Kirk, who has called George Floyd “a scumbag,” said he wonders whether Black pilots are qualified and argued that Martin Luther King Jr. was “awful.”

When Kirk asked why Robinson believes he’s such a threat to the “MSNBC crowd,” the candidate cried racism. According to Robinson, liberals are only reminding people of his extremism because they fear a Black man holding power in the Republican Party might appeal to disaffected Black voters in the Democratic Party. 

He said: 

In my case, what they really see is they see a candidate that is able to reach out to those folks, bring common sense solutions to the problems they face, and then they see someone who looks like them and ultimately what happens there is we get into office and there’s success, and all of a sudden voting dynamics in North Carolina are changing for decades. And quite possibly, it starts across the nation. They’re very afraid of that. They don’t want that to happen. They cannot have a conservative Black man at the helm in North Carolina or in any state. Because it’s gonna show the great results of what president Trump did at the national level.

(Robinson has conceded at times that he wrote posts that were “poorly worded” but claims that they were not antisemitic.) 

null

As for Robinson’s supposed strategy, there’s no evidence he has any sort of broad appeal among Black voters. In his 2020 lieutenant governor’s race, his opponent won, by a large margin, all of the majority-Black counties in the state. Robinson is, however, the type of candidate Republicans like to prop up to give voters the impression that far-right ideals have valence among Black folks — Black men in particular. 

Robinson has denounced Martin Luther King Jr. as a “communist.” He’s called Michelle Obama a man and said other extremely offensive things about her. And he’s bemoaned the Civil Rights Movement because, he says, “so many freedoms were lost” during that period. So it seems highly unlikely he’ll win over a significant share of Black voters in North Carolina. Far from “Martin Luther King on steroids,” as Donald Trump has called him, he’s more like the self-hating Uncle Ruckus, of “The Boondocks” fame. 

But the fact that he’s shrouding himself in victimhood, portraying himself as some sort of Black icon under attack from leftists, suggests he recognizes that the remarks may be hurting him in the general election. And he’s looking for some way — any way — to get past them.

Categories Bigotry, Elections, North Carolina, Republicans

Mary Trump: The Hilarity of the Robert Hur Hearing

By dianeravitch
March 13, 2024 //
33

I watched clips of yesterday’s hearings about the report of Robert Hur, who was selected by Merrick Garland to be Special Counsel to investigate Biden and documents found in his home and offices. The big takeaway from his voluminous report was that he considered Biden’s memory to be weak and that a jury would treat him as a kindly old man with a poor memory.

Republicans wanted to use the hearings to demonstrate that Biden is senile. Democrats wanted to use the hearings to show that Trump has a worse memory than Biden and that—unlike Biden— he willfully retained top-secret documents and refused to return them.

Hur resigned from the Department of Justice the day before the hearing and hired a Trump insider to represent him.

Mary Trump includes in her post the video introduced by Eric Swalwell. It shows Trump in numerous gaffes, memory lapses, and moments of incoherence. Trump later claimed all the clips were generated by AI.

Not included is the question posed by Eric Swalwell that was shown last night on Laurence O’Donnell’s MSNBC show. Swallwell read the transcript of Hur’s interview and quoted it. At one point, the transcript says, Hur observed that Biden had “a photographic memory” of the layout of his home. Not a sign of a poor memory. Apparently the transcript portrayed Biden differently than Hur’s report.

One of the Republicans read the dictionary definition of senile and asked Hur if he believed Biden was senile. Hur did not.

The question I kept wondering was why Merrick Garland thought that it was a good idea to select a trusted Trump appointee to investigate Biden.

Categories Bias, Democrats, Elections, Justice, Republicans, Trump

The Do-Nothing Congress Has Done Nothing

By dianeravitch
March 13, 2024 //
3

You may have noticed that very few bills have been passed by Congress this past year. As of mid-December, only 27 bills made it through to enactment. That’s due to fractured control—a Democratic President, a Senate controlled by Democrats, and a House of Representatives controlled by a slim Republican majority. And in the House, the Republicans are bitterly split between angry members of the so-called Freedom Caucus and traditional Republicans. The Freedom Caucus is prepared to grind everything to a halt unless they get what they want.

Axios offered a chart showing that this is the least productive Congress since at least 1989. In a typical year, Congress passed between 300-400 laws. Open the link and see the stunning chart.

NPR explained:

Congress was in the news a lot this year, but mostly it was not for passing legislation. It left us wondering what they did actually manage to get signed into law. So we’ve called NPR congressional reporter Eric McDaniel, who has tracked it all. Hi, Eric.

ERIC MCDANIEL, BYLINE: Hey there.

SHAPIRO: All right. Underneath all of the fracas about the House Speaker and George Santos and on and on, was there much legislating happening?

MCDANIEL: No, basically not. I mean, there were only 27 bills passed through both chambers in the first year of this Congress, including three crisis bills, I guess I’d call them. These are the big ones, two short-term extensions of funding to keep the government open and one to raise the U.S. government’s borrowing limit – you may have heard it called the debt ceiling – essentially so the government could pay the credit card bills for the money Congress had already directed it to spend. So these are must-do stuff. But other than that, I mean, they named some Veterans Affairs clinics. They commissioned a commemorative coin for the 250th anniversary of the Marine Corps and not much else – way behind even previous years of divided government.

SHAPIRO: So you’re saying not only was the number of laws passed very low, but the laws that were passed were not exactly consequential. Why was this so much less productive than other times government has been divided between the parties?

MCDANIEL: Look. I mean, there are a couple ways to look at that, right? The first is divided government. Like we said, they do less. There’s a Democratic president, a Democratic Senate and a Republican House. That means it’s hard to get all three sets of relevant folks to agree.

But the problem’s a lot deeper than that. I mean, in a lot of ways, the House is working the way that you’d expect it to, given the incentives that are involved. State lawmakers often draw congressional districts, the places that representatives represent, in a way that maximizes their own party’s advantage. I mean, I imagine people have heard that called gerrymandering, and it helps to create a system in which just 30 of the 435 House districts really have a say in who represents them in Congress by the time the general election rolls around. Many of the other 400-whatever seats are decided by party primaries way earlier in the year, often just by the voters from that party. That means these places are set up to elect the most partisan person possible rather than lawmakers who have to win the support of lots of different kinds of people. And as you might imagine, that makes compromise and legislating really, really hard.

SHAPIRO: Well, if the system is designed to disincentivize compromise and make it unlikely that voters will punish people for being unproductive, that suggests Congress, in the years to come, is not likely to be much more productive than it’s been this year.

MCDANIEL: Yeah, I think that’s right. I mean, voters often can’t punish people because of the way these elections are decided. And it means that Congress won’t change without systemic reform. There’s good news, though, right? A lot of places are already trying things that can help. California uses a nonpartisan top-two primary system. That means voters pick between the top two most popular candidates no matter which party they’re from. Alaska uses something called ranked-choice voting, which lets voters rank their preferences rather than just picking one person. And that helps to find consensus picks and really reduces the incentives for candidates during the election season to attack each other. There’s also bigger changes on the table, like proportional representation. And I should say none of these actually require changes to the U.S. Constitution.

SHAPIRO: Well, that’s hopeful that there are some possible changes and improvements in the works. In the meantime, what does 2024 look like for Congress? What is likely to pass even this divided House and Senate?

MCDANIEL: Yeah, that’s all long-term stuff. In the near term, Senators are working on something that we’ve talked about on this show before, a foreign aid/national security deal. So they’re looking at aid to Ukraine, aid to Israel, aid to the Indo-Pacific – think Taiwan – and U.S. immigration reform. So senators have been negotiating over the holiday season, and as soon as they get back, both the House and the Senate have to deal with government funding deadlines to keep the government open. They’re trying to pass 12 budget bills for a full year, actual spending. But we could see more short-term resolutions. Those deadlines are January 19 and February 2.

Categories Democrats, Elections, Extremism, Republicans

Contrast Biden and Trump As They Campaign

By dianeravitch
March 12, 2024 //
20

This brief news clip provides a sharp contrast between Biden and Trump.

Biden talks about substance and issues. Trump mocks Biden’s stutter. We are reminded of the event in 2016 when Trump ridiculed a journalist with a disability.

Categories Biden, Cruelty, Democracy, Elections, Politics, Trump

Houston Chronicle Editorial: Greg Abbott is the Captain Ahab of Texas

By dianeravitch
March 12, 2024 //
18

The Houston Chronicle’s editorial board excoriated Texas Governor Greg Abbott for making war on Republican legislators who opposed Abbott’s voucher proposal, and at the same time failing to meet his constitutional obligation to fund public schools.

The editorial board wrote:

Our own Captain Ahab, otherwise known as Gov. Greg Abbott, managed to plunge his harpoon into the belly of the great whale last week. After Super Tuesday, our public-school leviathan lists but is not dead yet. 

The captain’s uber-wealthy allies — lWest Texas oilmen who are avowed Christian nationalists — must be giving thanks to God for Super Tuesday’s results and preparing for the death blow the next time the Texas Legislature meets. In 2022, they funded Abbott’s primary opponent and now their obsession with school vouchers has become the governor’s. 

The aim of these “tycoon evangelicals” — to borrow Bekah McNeel’s label, writing in Texas Monthly — is to get their grappling hooks into our public schools, bleed them out and redirect public resources into private Christian education. So what if our hemorrhaging public school system washes ashore, a blanched skeleton left to the screeching gulls? As long as West Texas billionaires Tim Dunn of Midlandand the Wilks brothers from Cisco are for knocking down the wall — the one between church and state, that is, not the border between Texas and Mexico — how could their agent in the governor’s office be against it?

Abbott is more than halfway there already. Vowing revenge on members of his own party who helped deep-six school vouchers last fall, he relied on a $6 million donation from a Philadelphia billionaire, as well as overlapping donations from Dunn and Wilks, to knock off nine mostly rural representatives of his own party who opposed his obsession. More were forced into a runoff. Based on votes for the House voucher bill during multiple special sessions last fall, he needed to pick up 11 pro-voucher votes. The captain’s likely to reach his ocean’s 11 in the November general election.

“Republican primary voters have once again sent an unmistakable message that parents deserve the freedom to choose the best education pathway for their child,” Abbott said in a statement Tuesday evening. “We will continue to help true conservative candidates on the ballot who stand with the majority of their constituents in supporting education freedom for every Texas family.”

You’ll forgive dedicated public school teachers and administrators, as well as parents of school-age children, if they forgo standing. While Abbott exults, schools around the state — large and small, urban and rural — are grappling with massive budget deficits, thanks to Abbott’s voucher obsession and a Legislature diverted during four sessions last year from meeting its constitutional obligation to adequately fund public schools. 

Remember January of last year? Lawmakers convened in Austin for their regular session almost giddy with the prospect of writing the 2024-25 state budget with an astounding cash balance to work with of $33 billion. They staggered home nearly a year later, having for the most part stiffed the school children of Texas (and by extension, the state as a whole). Rather than using that massive surplus to increase base-level funding, they approved $18 billion in property tax cuts. Meanwhile, school districts were left to grapple with inflation, the loss of federal funding designed to help schools weather the COVID-19 pandemic and no new monies to increase teacher pay, hire additional teachers and make needed investments. 

Nearly every school district in Harris County is underfunded and in crisis, a recent Kinder Institute study determined. Cypress-Fairbanks ISD, for example, is facing a budget shortfall of $73.6 million. For Spring ISD, the budget gap is an estimated $25 million. Spring Branch ISD announced recently that it plans to close two schools and charter programs in the face of a $35 million budget deficit.

Meanwhile, lawmakers continued their streak of penury last year: The last time they increased education funding was in 2019. 

They had the best of intentions, it seems, setting aside nearly $4 billion for public education, but those dollars were never allocated. The school finance bill passed by the House ended up in the drink when the Senate added Abbott’s (and the tycoon evangelicals’) voucher scheme, a scheme that would benefit a relative handful of students around the state (and practically none in rural and small-town Texas).

To be clear, school choice or vouchers or education savings accounts — whatever the label of choice — is a legitimate policy issue. It deserves vigorous debate. But we’ve had that debate. Abbott lost on the merits. Wide-scale voucher programs in other states, such as Arkansas, have failed to produce strong academic improvements while draining public schools of funding.

What’s disturbing about the governor’s voucher obsession is his naked obeisance to wealthy special interests who manifestly do not have the best interests of the people of Texas at heart. Their ultimate aim, even if it’s not necessarily the governor’s, is to transform Texas into a Christian-dominated, biblically based state. Those 21 House Republicans who joined with 63 Democrats to block last year’s voucher proposal understood who benefited and who didn’t. And on Tuesday, many paid the political price. It’s of little consolation, we realize, but we salute their courage. 

There will come a time when Texans have had enough of the mean-spiritedness and ideological narrowness of the current governor and his far-right cohorts, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and Attorney Gen. Ken Paxton. There will come a time when they demand more from their elected public servants (emphasis on servants). 

Given our long history with Abbott, it’s hard to imagine that other states do have elected governors, Republicans and Democrats, who acknowledge that they represent every citizen of their state, not only those who voted for them, who seek to unite not divide. In the words of New York Times columnist Frank Bruni, “they focus intently on the practical instead of the philosophical, emphasizing issues of broad relevance and not venturing needlessly onto the most divisive terrain.” 

Bruni was writing about Democratic governors, among them Andy Beshear of Kentucky, Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania and Gretchen “fix the damn roads” Whitmer of Michigan, but the inclination toward moderation and practicality describes a handful of Republican governors, as well. Phil Scott of Vermont and Spencer Cox of Utah come to mind. 

Of course, that’s not Texas — not today’s Texas, that is. Our obsessive Ahab remains at the helm, steering ever more to the starboard, ignoring the risk to his fellow Texans that he’ll one day run aground. We can do better.

Categories Accountability, Budget Cuts, Cruelty, Education Industry, Elections, Supporting public schools, Texas, Vouchers

Texas: Evangelical Billionaires Score Big Wins in State Elections

By dianeravitch
March 11, 2024 //
80

The oil-and-gas Christian nationalists swamped a number of Republican primary races in Texas with millions of dollars. One big issue was vouchers; the other was payback for trying to oust the state’s corrupt Attotney General, Ken Paxton.. They managed to defeat rural Republicans who are conservative but voted against vouchers for religious schools and/or voted to impeach the state’s corrupt Stste Attorney General. And of course, Pennsylvania billionaire Jeff Yass and Michigan billionaire Betsy DeVos tossed in more millions.

Having Trump’s name at the top of the ticket made have made a difference too.

The Texas Tribune reported that the billionaires won 11 of the 28 races they paid for:

West Texas oil billionaires Tim Dunn and Farris Wilks entered the 2024 primary election cycle wounded.

Their political network was in the middle of a scandal over its ties to white supremacists. Republicans were calling on each other to reject the billionaires’ campaign money. And their enemies believed they were vulnerable — one bad election day from losing their grip on the state.

Instead, Dunn and Wilks emerged from Tuesday perhaps stronger than ever — vanquishing old political foes, positioning their allies for a November takeover of the state Legislature, and leaving little doubt as to who is winning a vicious civil war to control the state party.

In race after race, more moderate conservative incumbents were trounced by candidates backed by Dunn and Wilks. Their political network made good on its vows for vengeance against House Republicans who voted to impeach their key state ally, Attorney General Ken Paxton, advancing more firebrands who campaigned against bipartisanship and backed anti-LGBTQ+ policies. Tuesday’s election also paved the way for the likely passage of legislation that would allow taxpayer money to fund private and religious schools — a key policy goal for a movement that seeks to infuse more Christianity into public life.

All told, 11 of the 28 House candidates supported by the two billionaires won their primaries outright, and another eight are headed to runoffs this May. And, in a sign of how much the state party has moved rightward, five of their candidates beat incumbents in rematches from 2022 or 2020 — with some House districts swinging by double-digits in their favor. Of the candidates they backed, they donated $75,000 or more to 11 of them — six who won, and four who went to runoffs.

Tuesday was a stark contrast from just two years ago, when Dunn and Wilks’ top political fundraising group poured $5.2 million into a host of longshot candidates — much more than what they spent in the current election cycle. They lost badly that year — 18 of the 19 challengers to Texas House members they backed were defeated. Their only successful House candidate that year was Stan Kitzman of Pattison, who toppled former Rep. Phil Stephenson of Wharton in a runoff.

Among the triumphant on Tuesday was Mitch Little, aided by at least $153,000 in Dunn and Wilks cash, who defeated Rep. Kronda Thimesch in a campaign that focused on Little’s defense of Paxton from impeachment charges in the Senate trial last summer. Three days before he won, Little appeared at an eventin Denton County with Paxton and, among others, Steve Bannon, the political operative who helped rally the far right behind then-candidate Donald Trump in 2016.

And another Dunn and Wilks candidate, David Covey, stunned the state by winning more votes than House Speaker Dade Phelan — the No. 1 target of the state’s far-right in part because of his role in the Paxton impeachment and refusal to ban Democrats from House leadership positions. Phelan now faces a runoff from Covey and the prospect of being the first Texas Speaker since 1972 to lose his primary.

Certainly, Tuesday’s dark-red wave can’t be attributed solely to Dunn and Wilks. Texas GOP primaries have historically been decided by small shares of voters, many of them further to the right of even the party’s mainstream. This election cycle, the billionaires’ targets also overlapped with an unlikely ally, Gov. Greg Abbott, who poured more than $6 million into his quest to rid the Texas House of Republicans who defied his calls for school voucher legislation last year. (Dunn and Wilks’ political groups supported Abbott’s opponent in his 2022 gubernatorial primary.)

Meanwhile, Paxton barnstormed the state as he sought retribution against incumbents who supported his impeachment. And, perhaps most importantly, former President Donald Trump was active in many contests — following the lead of Paxton and his other ally, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, and offering late endorsements that bolstered right-wing candidates.

Even so, the billionaires’ fingerprints appear all over the outcomes. Since January, they spent more than $3 million to support candidates through a new political action committee, Texans United For a Conservative Majority. That PAC is a rebrand of Defend Texas Liberty PAC, which has been at the center of a political maelstrom since early October…

Jonathan Stickland, then the president of Defend Texas Liberty, was caught hosting Nick Fuentes, a prominent antisemite and white supremacist, prompting Dunn to issue a rare public statement through the lieutenant governor. Stickland was quietly removed from his position with the PAC.

Subsequent reporting by The Texas Tribune revealed other ties between white supremacists and groups funded by Dunn and Wilks, prompting outcry from some Republicans and calls for the Texas GOP to distance itself from Stickland’s groups.

As votes continued to tally in the far right’s favor this week, Stickland returned from a post-scandal social media sabbatical to gloat.

“We warned them,” Stickland wrote Wednesday on X, one of the handful of posts he’s made since shrinking from the public eye after the Fuentes meeting. “They chose not to listen. Now many are gone.”

Dunn and Wilks both made their fortunes in West Texas oil and, in the last 15 years, have poured more than $100 million into a constellation of political action committees, dark money groups, nonprofits and media websites that they have used to push the state GOP further to the right.

Their strategy has been to incrementally move the party toward their hardline views by painting fellow conservatives as weak and ineffectual — as “RINOs,” or Republicans in name only — and promising well-funded primary challengers to lawmakers who defy their network and its aims. With almost endless wealth, they have poured millions of dollars into inexperienced candidates who often lose but advance the far right’s long-term goals by slowly normalizing once-fringe positions, bruising incumbents, depleting their campaign coffers and making them more vulnerable in the next election cycle.

For years, many Republicans have denounced the strategy, noting that the state Legislature is routinely ranked as the most conservative in the country and warning that Dunn and Wilks’ no-enemies-to-our-right approach to politics would eventually cost the party elections and open the doors to outright extremists.

This year’s elections show just how successful the billionaires have been in pulling the party toward their hardline views.

Open the link to finish the story and read about the extremists installed by the billionaires to promote “Christian values,” like no gun control.

Did Jesus advocate for open carry?

Categories Bigotry, Billionaires, Elections, Texas, Vouchers

Jay Kuo: Katie Britt’s Disgusting Lie about Border Security

By dianeravitch
March 11, 2024 //
33

Blogger Jay Kuo provides context and detail for Alabama Senator Katie Britt’s lie about a woman who was sex-trafficked in Mexico twenty years ago, which Senator Britt blamed on Biden. Kuo does not mention the irony of pinning sex crimes on President Biden when her own party’s nominee was convicted of sexual assault and accused of sexual assault by another twenty women. Trump just posted a bond of $100 million for the woman whom he sexually assaulted and repeatedly defamed.

Jay Kuo writes:

By now you’ve probably heard the news: Sen. Katie Britt’s rebuttal to President Joe Biden’s State of the Union was not just a painfully bad theatrical performance, one worthy of an SNL cold open by none other than Scarlett Johansson. It also contained at its core a bold-faced lie: that a sex trafficking victim, who was raped repeatedly at age 12, had met with Sen. Britt and was a stark example of Biden’s failed border policies.

The lie was surfaced quickly by freelance journalist Jonathan Katz, a reporter with “years of experience as an Associated Press foreign correspondent in Haiti and Mexico, where he covered things that would make Katie Britt cry real tears,” according to reporting by AL.com. Katz quickly proved that the sexual trafficking and rapes referenced by Senator Britt took place 20 years ago—during the George W. Bush administration. They also took place not in the United States, as Britt had all but declared, but rather in Mexico, and far from the border.

It took a bit of asking from folks online why mainstream media had not picked up such an important story, but in a report finally published on Saturday, the Washington Post was able to confirm the gist of Katz’s reporting. The woman whose story was relayed by Sen. Britt before the entire nation was Karla Jacinto Romero, according to a confirmation by Sean Ross, Britt’s communications director. 

Romero is a sexual trafficking victims’ rights advocate. Her story is widely known. In fact, she testified before Congress in 2015 about being forced to work in Mexican brothels from 2004 to 2008—again, back when George W. Bush was president. Yet Sen. Britt took that story and made it one about the border, which it most certainly was not.

In today’s piece, I’ll focus on three things: 

  • A breakdown of the dangerous deception perpetrated by Sen. Britt, following the analysis of Katz and the Washington Post;
  • The moral depravity it takes not just to lie this way but to actually exploit the story of a sexual trafficking victim for political gain; and
  • The deep irony at the heart of Sen. Britt’s emotional plea that we pay attention to stories like the one she told America.

Sen. Britt willfully scammed the American public

It’s hard to forget the moment when Sen. Britt first brought up the story of a woman who, at the age of 12, had been repeatedly raped by cartels. Here were her words on Thursday night before a national audience of millions, fake emotion crackling in her voice:

We know that President Biden didn’t just create this border crisis. He invited it with 94 executive actions in his first 100 days. When I took office, I took a different approach. I traveled to the Del Rio sector of Texas. That’s where I spoke to a woman who shared her story with me. She had been sex trafficked by the cartels starting at the age of 12. She told me not just that she was raped every day, but how many times a day she was raped. The cartels put her on a mattress in a shoe box of a room, and they sent men through that door over and over again for hours and hours on end. We wouldn’t be okay with this happening in a Third World country. This is the United States of America, and it is past time, in my opinion, that we start acting like it. President Biden’s border policies are a disgrace.

After Sen. Britt was called out for connecting this story somehow to President Biden, reporters began asking her office to confirm a few things. Even with some pressing, her communications director insisted in a written statement that the “story Senator Britt told was 100% correct.” 

That’s why we need to unpack the rhetorical jujitsu Sen. Britt deployed to achieve this deception.

As the Washington Post observed, the story above unfolds in five parts.

• She first blames Biden for the surge of migrants at the border.

• Then she says she visited the border shortly after she took office. That would be 2023.

• At length, she details the story of an unnamed victim that she says she met on her trip. The implication is that the woman recently crossed the border — because of “sex trafficking by the cartels.”

• She strongly suggests that her abuse took place in the United States: “We wouldn’t be okay with this happening in a Third World country. This is the United States of America, and it is past time, in my opinion, that we start acting like it.”

• She ends by reinforcing that such alleged trafficking is Biden’s fault: “President Biden’s border policies are a disgrace.”

And yet, Biden, the border and the cartels had nothing to do with Romero. According to her testimony, cited by the Post, after her mother threw her out of the house, a pimp took advantage of her, and she spent four years in a brothel, escaping at age 16. 

Nor was Romero ever trafficked across the border to the U.S. Instead, she was the victim of sexual tourism, with “foreigners visiting my city looking to have sexual interactions with minors like me.” That is horrifying in its own way, but decidedly not about the border.

As Jonathan Katz noted in his now viral TikTok video about Britt’s lies, the senator had made it seem like she had met the woman “sitting by the banks of the Rio Grande, … holding her hand … getting her to tell her the story that she won’t tell anyone else.” In fact, Britt met Romero at a press conference organized by three GOP women senators, including Britt, and a Fox News reporter known for inflammatory pieces on immigration.

Sen. Britt tried to scam the entire nation by trying to spin a story from two decades ago about a child victim of sexual tourism into a story today about Biden’s failed policies, sex trafficking across the border, and cartels. For that, the Washington Post gave her four Pinocchios—its worst rating, a real whopper.

Stolen pain and fear-mongering

It takes a complete absence of a moral compass to leverage someone else’s tragic story—one she has carried for decades and made her life’s mission to tell others—into a tool for raw and cynical political gain. But that’s what Sen. Britt did, perhaps because, as the New York Times observed in its follow-up piece, “As a rhetorical device, it would be hard [to] conjure up a more powerful and resonant example.”

The Times found Romero and interviewed her directly about how she felt knowing her story was being leveraged by Britt for entirely different, political purposes. Because we as a nation owe Romero an apology for allowing our dysfunctional politics to overtake and derail her important work, I want to highlight what she told the paper:

Ms. Jacinto, who spoke with the Times Saturday from Mexico, said she had not been informed ahead of time that Ms. Britt would be discussing her in the speech and only learned about it after a video pointing out the deceptive framing of the senator’s speech was posted by the independent journalist Jonathan Katz on TikTok on Friday.

“I only found out via social media,” said Ms. Jacinto, who continues to speak frequently about human trafficking and who is supported by a U.S.-based nonprofit, Reintegra, that provides educational grants to victims of sex trafficking in Latin America. “I thought it was very strange.”

She said she preferred to keep politics out of the question of human trafficking. “I am involved in the fight to stop trafficking and I don’t think it should be political,” she said. “The work I do is not a game.” 

Not a game, indeed. U.S. voters, particularly suburbanites who are looking at the question of immigration more closely now and assessing the positions of both parties, may begin to understand the extent to which the GOP is sensationalizing the issue. 

Already, the Republicans have pressed the tragic story of Georgia student Laken Riley, who was killed by a Venezuelan migrant, as far as they can, mentioning her at every opportunity and even inviting her family to meet with Trump at his recent rally in the state. The point of this is clear: The GOP now seeks to paint all migrants with the same broad unfair brush of criminality. This of course defies government statistics showing that migrants commit fewer crimes than non-migrants and that there is no evidence of the “migrant crime wave” that the Republicans and Fox have raised repeatedly. Instead, crime rates in cities where migrants have been heading are actually down, which would be an inconvenient fact for the GOP narrative if facts actually ever mattered to their base.

Republicans also appear to care far more about this one death, horrific as it is, than about the hundreds of thousands of deaths caused by their other policies, from vaccine denialism to their failure to enact sensible gun restrictions. It means, simply put, that they don’t really care about Riley. They just find her death at the hands of a migrant useful.

The cynicism and hypocrisy is breathtaking.

The ultimate irony

I want to close by highlighting a glaring contradiction within Sen. Britt’s rebuttal. On the one hand, she begs us to think of victims like Romero who are suffering, she claims, from being trafficked across our border and sexually assaulted and exploited.

But the logical conclusion of that plea is that we should show more compassion in our asylum laws for women like she described. Instead, Britt supports the kinds of draconian policies that would deny legal protection to sex trafficking victims. 

As former Congressmember Tom Malinowski noted,

It’s not just that Katie Britt’s story was false (since the woman she cited was trafficked by cartels within Mexico). 

It’s that the border policy she supports would be to send victims like that back to Mexico into the hands of the cartels, with no chance to seek asylum.

The recent House election in NY-3, where the positions of the parties on immigration were tested before voters, proved that Republicans don’t automatically have a winning hand when it comes to the border. This is especially true now that the GOP has rejected the only bipartisan solution to the issue, all because Donald Trump wants to keep wielding it as a political weapon. 

It is incumbent upon the media, the public, and our Democratic leaders to call out the cheap ploys and race-baiting that Trump, Britt and the rest of the GOP deploy to rile up the public, all while doing nothing to actually fix the problem.

As President Biden said in his State of the Union, we can fight about fixing the border, or we can fix it. All that GOP officials like Sen. Britt offer are more lies, rank hypocrisy and fear. And those have never led to sound policies or solutions, just more division and anxiety

Categories Biden, Elections, Lies, Trump

Thom Hartmann: Dark Brandon Proves He’s Strong and Sharp

By dianeravitch
March 10, 2024 //
37

I loved President Biden’s State of the Union speech. He was feisty and sharp. It eas gratifying to see President Biden engage the loud-mouth Republicans who interrupted him. That’s always a risky move in a nationally televised speech, because you never know how it will turn out. But Biden pounced at the opportunity to engage in repartee with his challengers from the Republican side. He showed his quick intelligence and mental sharpness. And did it with a smile.

Thom Hartman agreed. He wrote:

— State of the Union: Dark Brandon shows up & proves he’s still capable of kicking Republican ass. With the exception of rightwing hate media, reviews of President Biden’s SOTU speech Thursday night have been universally positive. He was on fire, filled with energy, and repeatedly went off-script to take on the classless Republicans who heckled and harassed him throughout the speech. Most amazing was how Republicans in the audience refused to applaud lines like, “We will not bow down to Putin” and his call for removing lead pipes to “stop the brain damage they’re causing our children.” The GOP has nearly totally become the party of Putin, and appears to even love lead poisoning America’s kids. They even booed their own legislation to secure the southern border! This is way beyond partisanship: something is really wrong, corrupt, rotten, and bizarre within the party now that it’s been completely taken over by a racist, hateful, orange-faced psychopath. And Senator Katie Britt’s effort to rehearse her tryout for the Scarlett O’Hara role in a high-school performance of Gone With The Wind just made the crisis within the party even clearer: did she really expect people to believe her “American carnage” riff and lies about the border? Now it’s up to us normal people to take our country back and restore sanity to our political processes. Double-check your voter registration, particularly if you live in a Red state, at vote.org. 

In case you missed the story, Alabama Senator Katie Britt was caught in a big fat lie when she gave the Republican response to Biden’s address. She claimed that she met a Mexican woman who had been the victim of sex-trafficking since she was 12, and this happened on Biden’s watch in the United States. An independent journalist named Jonathan Katz did the research on when Britt went to the border and whom she met with. He documented that the Mexican woman she met described events that happened in MEXICO, not the U.S., between 2004-2008, when George W. Bush was president. Why did she lie? She made no mention of the recent Alabama state court decision making it a crime to dispose of frozen IVF specimens, on the grounds that these embryos are unborn children.

— Russians are intervening in the election! The New York Times is reporting on a series of new “newspaper” sites that are popping up across America. With names like D.C. Weekly, the New York News Daily, the Chicago Chronicle and the Miami Chronicle, Russian disinformation experts have put up what are pretending to be American newspapers. They steal content from local papers and national news sites like Reuters, then toss in the occasional pro-Putin, anti-Ukraine, anti-Democrat articles. So far, there’s been no response from our government to this blatant attempt to influence the 2024 election by misleading American voters, and doing anything may be difficult as they’re hosted on Russian servers and outside the reach of US law. Putin was deeply involved in the 2016 election on behalf of Trump — to the point that Robert Mueller indicted nearly two dozen Russians for election interference — and they tried again with a major social media presence in 2020. With Ukraine in the balance (and Medvedev saying last week that they would be taking part of Poland next) expect Moscow to be vigorous in their efforts to get their agent, Trump, back into the White House. 

Categories Biden, Character, Democracy, Elections

Ruth Ben-Ghiat: Why Trump Humiliates Tim Scott and Lindsey Graham

By dianeravitch
March 10, 2024 //
17

Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a professor at New York University who specializes in the study of authoritarian leaders. Here she writes about how Trump enjoys humiliating those he has defeated. The more he insults them, the more they grovel. Cases in point: Tim Scott and Lindsey Graham.

She writes:

Authoritarian politicians are fragile and insecure creatures, always looking over their shoulders to see who is after them. To build themselves up and deter potential challengers, they take others down in public, letting them know exactly where they stand. They apply this same vicious treatment even to their most loyal collaborators, so that no one ever feels safe and thus everyone continues to act in a slavish manner. Throughout history, such leaders have never lacked a steady supply of opportunists and profiteers who are all too willing to play this game, even to the detriment of their dignity. The Donald Trump-era GOP is the latest example.

Trump has used ritual humiliation to make the GOP his personal tool, and the list of Republicans he has mocked publicly is long. In classic autocratic tradition, the more submissive Republican elites are with Trump — supporting him through impeachments, indictments and a coup attempt that sent them running for their lives — the more he openly scorns them, losing few opportunities to cut them down.

Scott has been performing self-abasement spontaneously, likely to Trump’s delight.

When Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., the former GOP presidential candidate, showed up at Trump’s victory rally after a January campaign stop in New Hampshire, he might have thought he would earn points. Instead, Trump scorned him: “Did you ever think [Haley] actually supported you, Tim?” a smirking Trump said, referring to Nikki Haley’s pledge to support Trump if he becomes the GOP nominee. “And you’re the senator of her state. … You must really hate her,” Scott’s response? “I just love you,” he told Trump.

“That’s why he’s a great politician,” Trump declared with a self-satisfied smile.

Since then, Scott has been performing self-abasement spontaneously, likely to Trump’s delight. “I’m far better encouraging and being excited and motivated for President Trump than I was for myself,” Scott said after voting in the South Carolina primary. And at the post-primary rally, he assured the audience that he would keep his speech short because “the longer I speak, the less you hear of him.”

Scott might seem to win the award for bowing and scraping. But his fellow senator from South Carolina, Lindsey Graham, is giving him some stiff competition. Graham is forever paying for the sin of criticizing Trump in 2016. “If we nominate Trump, we will get destroyed……and we will deserve it,” Grahamtweeted in May 2016; he also called Trump “a race-baiting, xenophobic religious bigot.”

Scholars use the term “hollowed out” to describe institutions that lose their independence in autocracies when they have been purged of anyone who is not loyal to the leader. But individuals who collaborate with authoritarians can end up hollowed out, too, bereft of their morals and their self-esteem. This is what has happened to Graham.

Graham is a former military lawyer and national security hawk (including on Russia), but his main cause now seems to be defending Trump, to the point of reversing his view expressed after Jan. 6 that presidential conduct is subject to American law. Since that opinion clashed with Trump’s claim that he should have presidential immunity for everything and anything he has done, including inciting an insurrection, Graham’s opinion could not stand.

Politicians who play the leader’s ritual humiliation game may think that if they show him enough public support, at the right moments, their past indiscretions will be forgotten. That is never the case. Even worse, the politician can find that he or she has become the enemy of the leader’s rabid followers, as well.

That’s the situation of Graham, booed regularly at Trump rallies by MAGA members, including in his home state, as though all of his slavish behavior to Trump has meant nothing to them. At a July rally with Trump, Graham was jeered and called a “traitor” by the crowd, prompting Trump to give him a halfhearted compliment (“he’s there when you need him”) while also promising the crowd he would get Graham “straightened up.”

And lest there be any doubts that Trump intended this display of debasement, he pulled the same move after Saturday’s South Carolina primary. Though Graham called Trump “the most qualified man to be president,” audience members booed him. The former president, playing the enlightened despot, once again assured his minions that “I love him, he’s a good man.” 

Scott may have mastered the philosophy of ritual humiliation — I am nothing, my leader is everything, and everyone should know it — but Graham’s journey provides the stuff of a morality tale.

Please open the link to finish reading the post.

Categories Cruelty, Elections, Trump

Chris Tomlinson: Houston’s Economy Needs Immigrants

By dianeravitch
March 10, 2024 //
14

Chris Tomlinson is a regular opinion writer for The Houston Chronicle. I tuned in to a zoom with him yesterday and learned that he is known for his fierce independence. I signed up for his column and discovered his thoughts about “the immigration crisis,” which Americans tell pollsters these days is the most serious problem facing the nation. Tomlinson thinks both parties have failed to tell the truth, so he did. Trump, in particular, has demagogued the issue with his fear-mongering.

Tomlinson writes:

The two-ring presidential circus performed along Texas’ border on Thursday, injecting cash into the local economy but adding little to the national debate over one of the year’s most consequential issues. 

President Joe Biden met with local officials in Brownsville and blamed Republicans in Congress for blocking new border security spending for political advantage. He correctly stated the broken asylum system encourages desperate people to gamble their life savings for a chance to live in the United States.

“If they get by the first day, they’ve got another five, seven, eight years before they have to do anything because they know (the immigration courts) cannot handle the caseloads quickly, and they’ll be able to stay in this country,” Biden said.

“With the new policies in this bill and the addition of 4,300 additional asylum officers, we’ll be able to reduce that process to less than six months,” he added.

Former President Donald Trump paraded before U.S. flags and uniformed National Guard troops in Eagle Pass. He renewed themes popularized by the Ku Klux Klan a century ago, sowing fear of foreigners and painting his opponent as a friend of dark-skinned criminals.

“They’re coming from jails, and they’re coming from prisons, and they’re coming from mental institutions and they’re coming from insane asylums. And they’re terrorists. They’re being let into our, our country,” Trump said in a rambling, bigoted speech. “It’s not just South America. It’s all over the world. The Congo, very big population coming in from jails from the Congo.”

Immigration is the most critical problem facing the nation, Americans told a recent Gallup poll. The issue was top of mind for 57% of Republicans, 22% of independents and 10% of Democrats.

“A separate question in the survey finds a record-high 55% of U.S. adults, up eight points from last year, saying that ‘large numbers of immigrants entering the United States illegally’ is a critical threat to U.S. vital interests,” Gallup added.

Most voters believe Trump would do a better job on border security, while only 28% of Americans approve of Biden’s immigration policies. Biden is in deep trouble, with only a 38% approval rating and a base already angry over his Middle East policies.

Anyone who’s spent time along the border will tell you most Americans don’t understand what goes on there. For example, asylum seekers are not invading the country; they turn themselves in as quickly as possible. Most of the $29 billion worth of drugs smuggled into the United States crosses at commercial entry points, which are the arterial roads keeping our economy going.

Migrants, documented or not, are critical for our workforce and society. I know people like to draw distinctions between documented and undocumented migrants, but both contribute more to the United States economy than they take. Most undocumented workers would happily pay a fine to get right with the government.

In Houston, immigrants make up almost a quarter of the population and 31% of the workforce, U.S. census data analyzed by the American Immigration Council, the Texas Association of Business and the Center for Houston’s Future found. Immigrants in the Houston statistical area earned $66.5 billion and paid $11.1 billion in federal taxes.

If Trump rounded these people up and deported them, as he promised, the construction, hospitality and hospital services would collapse.

Houston is home to more than 572,000 undocumented migrants whose households earned $13 billion in 2021. Most have fake documents and paid $794.8 million in federal taxes and $595.6 million in state and local taxes, the U.S. Congressional Budget Office reported.

Meanwhile, Biden must come up with a new approach to processing asylum seekers after Congress made it clear they will not help. But he must overcome opposition from within his party and federal courts.

Federal and international law requires the United States to grant asylum to anyone with a well-founded fear of persecution. However, establishing which claims meet that high standard under current policies can take years.

Opinions differ on what he can do without new laws. Seventy-seven Democratic lawmakers sent Biden a letter in January objecting to the deal he offered Republicans. A federal judge in San Diego has forbidden authorities from separating families at the border, and an earlier ruling limits how long Immigration and Customs Enforcement can detain families with children.

Trump’s speech on Thursday was craven but likely effective. Biden’s blame-shifting onto Republicans in Congress is disingenuous and ineffective.

While the campaigns play political games, though, people suffer, something too many overlook.

Award-winning opinion writer Chris Tomlinson writes commentary about money, politics and life in Texas. Sign up for his “Tomlinson’s Take” newsletter at houstonhchronicle.com/tomlinsonnewsletter or expressnews.com/tomlinsonnewsletter.

[Note from Diane: I added the bold emphasis.]

Categories Bigotry, Economy, Elections, Extremism, Houston, Immigration, Propaganda, Texas
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »