Archives for category: Stupid
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Trump Vows to Cut Federal Funding to Any School That Mandates Vaccines or Masks

By dianeravitch
March 7, 2024 //
69

The political landscape of American politics gets weirder by the moment, if you pay attention to what one former President is saying on the campaign trail.

In a campaign appearance in Richmond, Virginia, Trump promised that “I will not give one penny to any school that has a vaccine mandate or a mask mandate.” He is obviously appealing to the anti-vaxxers who refused to take the vaccine that Trump himself rushed to completion and that Trump and his family did take while in the White House.

Assuming that he is serious about his threat, he is promising to eliminate public health measures that are now the law in every state. It is now commonplace (and has been for decades) to require children to be vaccinated for various diseases before they enter school—measles, chickenpox, mumps, polio, diphtheria, etc.

Even Florida, which is officially opposed to vaccine mandates, requires students to be vaccinated before they start public school. As of July 12, 2023:

What immunizations are required for a child to attend school in Florida?

  • 5 doses DTaP (diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis).
  • 4-5 doses Polio (Kindergarten). … 
  • 2 doses MMR (measles-mumps-rubella).
  • 3 doses Hepatitis B.
  • 2 doses Varicella (chickenpox).

Despite this mandate, Florida is currently experiencing an outbreak of measles. The surgeon general of the state has told parents that it’s up to them to decide whether to send their sick child to school.

A number of contagious diseases are reappearing, according to WebMD. Among them are tuberculosis, scarlet fever, measles, mumps, and whooping cough. Some come back because the vaccines are not as effective as the bacteria evolves, and some return because people are not vaccinated.

Michael Hiltzik, columnist for the Los Angeles Times, wrote that Trump and RFK Jr. are competing for the anti-vaccine vote. If Trump is re-elected and follows through on his threats, we can expect to see a resurgence of diseases like polio that were eliminated decades ago.

Hiltzik’s column is titled: “Trump and RFK Jr. want to make the world safe again for polio and measles. You should be terrified.”

People will die from diseases that were conquered by science decades ago.

Hiltzik wrote:

Trump’s words elicited febrile cheers from his Virginia audience, which may be a sign of what I earlier identified as the phenomenon of “herd stupidity” connected with the anti-vaccine movement. 

Did these people have any conception of what they were cheering? (We can assume that Trump didn’t.) Did they cotton on to the fact that Trump was advocating depriving all Virginia public and private K-12 schools, nursery schools, child care centers and home schools of federal funding?

We know that would be the consequence of his pledge, because we know that Virginia requires children attending any of those institutions to be vaccinated against 15 diseases, with boosters where appropriate. Virginia’s mandated schedule, like those of every other state, follows the recommendations of the CDC, which calls for some vaccinations within a month or two of birth.

Trump issued his ukase against vaccine mandates right after declaring at the Richmond rally that he would “sign a new executive order to cut federal funding for any school pushing critical race theory, transgender insanity, and any other inappropriate racial, sexual, or political content onto our children,” thus covering pretty much the entire right-wing culture battleground, almost all of which is based on manufactured outrage.

In context, Trump’s opposition to vaccine mandates falls into the category of glorifying individual “freedom” over the communal interest. As I’ve written before, opposing vaccine mandates as a substitute for opposing vaccination itself is a fundamentally incoherent position — little more than garden variety small-government Republican ideology almost invariably invoked to protect the interests of the “haves” over the “have-nots.”

What makes it incoherent is that mandates do work. They’ve saved the lives of millions of schoolchildren who would otherwise be exposed to deadly diseases at school and play.

Categories Elections, Extremism, Health, Ignorance, Science, Stupid, Trump

John Thompson: How Should the Press Cover Extremism?

By dianeravitch
February 27, 2024 //
8

John Thompson, historian in Oklahoma, chronicles the always interesting events in the Sooner State. He asks in this post about the role of the media in covering extremism and gross stupidity.

Since I wrote about the “Strange Irresponsible Behavior” of Oklahoma’s Republican extremists, I’ve been conversing with neighbors, reporters, and politicians, wrestling with the ways the press should be handling this issue. Will we look back on such weird stories as just “wacky” distractions from the legislative issues that reporters should be covering in a conventional manner? Or will these seemingly nutty narratives come to dwarf in terms of historical significance the narratives that the press typically focuses on? When, for instance, Gov. Kevin Stitt speaks out of both sides of his mouth about “a potential ‘force-on-force’ conflict between the South and the Biden Administration,” and joining other governors to “send our National Guard to help and to support the efforts of Governor Abbott,” was he implicitly supporting those who are calling for a civil war? 

Shouldn’t the press follow the lead of The Independent and ask Stitt what he meant when he called “the clash between Texas authorities and the federal government a ‘powder keg of tension?’” So, should Stitt reveal what he meant when saying, “We certainly stand with Texas on the right to defend themselves.” And, surely the press should seek clarification as to what Stitt meant regarding the National Guard when saying, “I think they would be in a difficult situation: to protect their homeland or to follow what Biden’s saying,” and then promising that Oklahoma, along with other states, “would send our National Guard to help and to support the efforts of Governor Abbott.” 

Fortunately, the rally for supporting Abbott didn’t attract the 700,000 or more persons that were sought, and didn’t respond to the Texas Proud Boys’ call for followers to “grab your guns” to stop “brown immigrant invaders.” But, the Washington Post explains, “Whether the rallies erupt or fizzle, extremism researchers say, the consequences will outlast the weekend.” Shouldn’t Stitt be pressured to comment on that appraisal? I certainly believe reporters need to explicitly ask whether saving our democracy must be our top priority. 

Who knows? Had those questions been asked, maybe the press could have followed up by asking Stitt which side he would support if Vladimir Putin accepts Trump’s invitation to attack NATO?

A first step toward that goal would be to read Jill Lepore’s The Deadline, and wrestle with what would have happened if Dorothy Thompson hadn’t started the originally atypical coverage of Adolf Hitler, or if Edward R. Murrow hadn’t challenged Joe McCarthy. Lepore, the historian who writes for the New Yorker, further cited the “Golden Age” of the press in the 1960s and 70s which was started when David Halberstam ignored charges of liberal bias and reached “the high mark” of journalism when “interpretation replaced transmission, and adversarialism replaced deference,” even though it meant a writer could no longer “shake hands the next day with the man whom he had just written about.” 

Led by the New York Times, the Washington Post, and a few other institutions, the national press now focuses more on the interpretation of MAGA antics. It would be more risky for local journalists to place  irrational assertions and legislative actions into a broader context, but since our democracy is in jeopardy, its time to move beyond coverage of routine bills as they move out of committee.  

After a conversation on that subject, I got into my car and listened to NPR’s coverage of the Taylor Swift Super Bowl stories – which seemed to be the model for how reporters should cover rightwing absurdities.  It began, “Swift’s popularity is being twisted into a threat by a contingent of far-right, Donald Trump-supporting conservatives who have started circulating conspiracy theories about the singer, the Super Bowl, and the 2024 election.” Supposedly, “the NFL had ‘RIGGED’ a Chiefs victory” so “Swift comes out at the halftime show and ‘endorses’ Joe Biden with Kelce at midfield.”

NPR then placed this obviously false narrative in the context of Fox news, and “Jack Posobiec, who pushed the baseless Pizzagate conspiracy theory.” It further explained how such memes can endanger women’s health. 

On the other hand, who knows? Maybe Swift would have led a halftime coup for Biden if the press hadn’t blown the whistle?

Seriously, why can’t all types of news outlets routinely interrogate legislative sponsors about such lies, pushing them to go on record or publicly refuse to answer questions about where did they learn about furries and the reason for wanting to use animal control to keep them out of school. Or, why the “Common Sense Freedom of Press Control Act” should “require criminal background checks of every member of the news media;” the “licensing of journalists through the Oklahoma Corporation Commission;” the completion of a “propaganda free” training course by PragerU; and a $1 million liability insurance policy; and quarterly drug tests.

When legislators defend corporal punishment of disabled students because it’s the will of God, and requiring the teaching of creationism in classes where evolution is taught, they should have to explain the sources of their legislation, and why they think they are constitutional. Similarly, why would a legislator seek to ban “no-fault divorce,” even though the vast majority of the state’s divorces are based on that law. If every such bill would receive such scrutiny, wouldn’t the public become better prepared to vote for or against political leaders who won’t take a stand opposing the MAGA-driven divisiveness?

Or, conversely, if these bills are dismissed as merely “wacky” and allowed to spread, what will happen to the trust required for a democracy to function?    

Categories Democracy, Elections, Extremism, History, Media, Oklahoma, Stupid

Steve Ruis: How Many People Died of COVID Because They Took Trump’s Advice?

By dianeravitch
February 5, 2024 //
44

Steve Ruis has been wondering how many people died of COVID because they followed Trump’s advice? Early on in the pandemic, as people’s fears were high, Trump suggested two treatments to ward off the deadly virus: injecting yourself with bleach or taking a drug called hydroxychloroquine, which usually prescribed for malaria, rheumatoid arthritis and lupus.

He found a recent scientific study that estimated the number of people who took hydroxychloroquine and died, in five countries. Were they following Trump’s advice? Very likely. How would they have learned about this drug if he had not touted it?

We don’t know yet how many people injected bleach.

Ruis notes that Trump got the best medical treatment when he had COVID. It did not include bleach or hydroxychloroquine.

Categories Elections, Health, Hoax, Research, Science, Stupid, Trump

Study: Trump’s Favorite COVID Remedy Was Deadly

By dianeravitch
January 7, 2024 //
62

Politico reports on a new European study of the efficacy of hydroxycholoroquine, a drug recommended to the public by President Trump at the height of the pandemic. Note: Neither he nor his family took that drug. Instead they received FDA-approved vaccinations. .

Politico EU reports:

Nearly 17,000 people may have died after taking hydroxycholoroquine during the first wave of Covid-19, according to a study by French researchers.

The anti-malaria drug was prescribed to some patients hospitalized with Covid-19 during the first wave of the pandemic, “despite the absence of evidence documenting its clinical benefits,” the researchers point out in their paper, published in the February issue of Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy.

Now, researchers have estimated that some 16,990 people in six countries — France, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Turkey and the U.S. — may have died as a result.

That figure stems from a study published in the Nature scientific journal in 2021 which reported an 11 percent increase in the mortality rate, linked to its prescription against Covid-19, because of the potential adverse effects like heart rhythm disorders, and its use instead of other effective treatments.

Researchers from universities in Lyon, France, and Québec, Canada, used that figure to analyze hospitalization data for Covid in each of the six countries, exposure to hydroxychloroquine and the increase in the relative risk of death linked to the drug.

As President, Trump recommended the drug and said, “What do you have to lose? Take it.”

Categories Health, Lies, Science, Stupid, Trump

Dana Milbank: The 3 Stooges Plan to Impeach Biden

By dianeravitch
December 11, 2023 //
49

Jim Jordan and his fellow MAGA-ts are determined to impeach President Biden as payback for Trump’s two impeachments. They have no reason for impeachment; Biden has committed no crime, unlike Trump, who invited an insurrection. Dana Milbank says that Jordan and his crew are the Three Stooges of American politics.

He writes:

After House Republicans’ caucus meeting in the Capitol basement this week, Speaker Mike Johnson gave the media an update on his release of thousands of hours of security footage of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.


The release had been slowed, Johnson explained, because “we have to blur some of the faces of persons who participated in the events of that day, because we don’t want them to be retaliated against — and to be charged by the DOJ and to have other, you know, concerns and problems.”


It was as clear a statement as there could be on where the new speaker’s allegiance lies: protecting those who sacked the Capitol from being brought to justice for their crimes. Johnson (La.) was openly siding with the insurrectionists and against the United States government he swore an oath to defend.


The Justice Department already has the undoctored footage, as Johnson’s spokesman later acknowledged, so, presumably, the speaker is trying to prevent members of the public from identifying anyone in the violent mob (“persons who participated in the events of that day”) that law enforcement might have overlooked. Sure, they attacked the seat of government in their bloody attempt to overthrow a free and fair election, but let us respect their privacy! After all the yammering from the right about transparency, Johnson is manipulating the footage — not to protect the Capitol’s security but to protect the attackers.


Hours after aligning himself with the insurrectionists, Johnson went to break bread with the Christian nationalists. At the Museum of the Bible, he gave the keynote address to the National Association of Christian Lawmakers, a group whose founder and leader, Jason Rapert, has said, “I reject that being a Christian nationalist is somehow unseemly or wrong.”

At the group’s meeting in June, one of the speakers noted with approval that “the American colonies imposed the death penalty for sodomy.” Confirmed speakers and award recipients for the gathering Johnson addressed included: a man who proposed that gay people should wear “a label across their forehead, ‘This can be hazardous to your health’”; a woman who blames gay marriage for Noah’s flood; and, as the liberal watchdog Media Matters reported, various adherents of “dominionist” theology, which holds that the United States should be governed under biblical law by Christians.
Reporters were kicked out of this week’s event before Johnson spoke but, before the event, Rapert called Johnson “an answer to prayer,” the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette’s Alex Thomas reported.


Err, was that a prayer for the branding of gay people?


Rapert’s organization also promotes the pine-tree “Appeal to Heaven” flag, which has been embraced by Christian nationalists, was among the banners flown at the “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6, 2021 — and, by total and remarkable coincidence, is proudly displayed outside Johnson’s congressional office.

Former speaker Kevin McCarthy this week became the 31st lawmaker in the House to announce his retirement, as members of both parties stampede to exit the woefully dysfunctional chamber. McCarthy, the California Republican who spent most of 2023 saying “I do not quit,” will quit this month, with a year left in his term.


Freshman Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.) decried the “brain drain” in his party — veteran Republicans Patrick McHenry (N.C.), Michael Burgess (Tex.) and Brad Wenstrup (Ohio) are among those on the way out — although, in fairness, there wasn’t a whole lot of brain in the first place. Of more immediate concern to Republicans is a vote drain: After the expulsion of George Santos (N.Y.) and McCarthy’s resignation, the GOP, paralyzed with a four-vote majority throughout this year, will have just a two-vote majority.

McCarthy, announcing his departure in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, reflected: “It often seems that the more Washington does, the worse America gets.” By this standard, he should be delighted with the current Congress. Famously unproductive during his tenure as speaker, it is now doing almost nothing.


U.S. funds for Ukraine’s defense will run dry by the end of the month, leaving the invaded country vulnerable to a Russian takeover. But Johnson said he won’t take up Ukraine support in the House unless Democrats pay a ransom: a nonnegotiable demand that they swallow House Republicans’ entire wish list of border policies. That obstinance has blown up negotiations in the Senate, where Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) calls Johnson’s position “not rational,” Punchbowl News reported.
Johnson has likewise stalled military aid to Israel, which commands overwhelming bipartisan support, by making another unrelated ransom demand: Democrats must repeal legislation that gave the IRS more clout to go after wealthy tax cheats. Johnson has also bottled up attempts to fund the government after next month by failing to agree to the overall spending number that Senate Republicans and House and Senate Democrats have all accepted.


In rare cases when Johnson does try to do something productive, his fellow Republicans denounce him. After a double flip-flop, the speaker finally blessed a compromise with Senate Democrats on the annual National Defense Authorization Act, including a temporary extension of the 9/11-era FISA 702 surveillance authority. “Outrageous … a total sell-out,” protested Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.). Rep. Chip Roy (Tex.) told the Messenger’s Lindsey McPherson this was “strike two and a half — if not more” against Johnson.

The new speaker has even managed to divide the chamber on a matter where there had been virtually no disagreement: the need to denounce the recent rise in antisemitism. The House Education Committee held one of the best hearings of the year this week, in which the presidents of Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania and MIT disgraced themselves by suggesting, in response to questions by Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) and others, that their students should feel free to run around calling for the genocide of Jews.


It was an entirely different picture on the House floor, where Republicans brought up the latest of several resolutions condemning antisemitism. This resolution, however, declared that “anti-Zionism is antisemitism,” a dubious proposition equating criticism of Israel with hatred of Jews. A group of Jewish Democrats, arguing that “the safety of Jewish lives is not a game,” urged colleagues to vote “present” in protest — and 92 of them did. But for Republicans, it was a game: After the vote, the National Republican Campaign Committee, the House GOP’s political arm, put out a statement saying “extreme House Democrats just refused to denounce the … drastic rise of antisemitism.”
Alas, for the NRCC, the one genuinely antisemitic act from the episode came from Republican Rep. Tom Massie (Ky.), who suggested in a post on X that Congress placed “Zionism” above “American patriotism.”


Still, it would be unfair to suggest that House Republicans have been entirely unproductive during Johnson’s tenure. They have continued to censure each other at a record-setting pace. This week, it was Rep. Jamaal Bowman’s turn. What grave constitutional offense had been committed this time? The New York Democrat had pulled a fire alarm in one of the House office buildings in September.

“If extreme MAGA Republicans are going to continue to try to weaponize the censure,” Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) said on the House floor on Wednesday, “going after Democrats repeatedly, week after week after week because you have nothing better to do, then I volunteer: Censure me next! … That’s how worthless your censure effort is.”


The race to censure has become a competitive sport among Republicans. After McCormick recently got a vote on his motion to censure Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) before Greene got a vote on her motion to censure Tlaib, Greene accused her fellow Georgian of “assault,” Politico’s Olivia Beavers reports. McCormick said he shook Greene by the shoulders in a “friendly” gesture.
And censure is just a warm-up for the main event. Next week, House Republicans plan to vote to authorize a formal impeachment inquiry into President Biden. You see, they believe they have finally found the smoking gun that proves Biden guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors: He helped his son buy a pickup truck in 2018.

They have become the Three Stooges of the House’s Biden investigations: Jim, Jason and James, stepping on rakes and getting hit by falling flowerpots as they try to make a case for their predetermined outcome of impeaching the president. Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan is Moe, thundering and blundering in his repeated failures to prove Biden’s “weaponization” of the government. Jason Smith, the in-over-his-head chairman of Ways and Means, is Larry, brainlessly reciting whatever script is in front of him. And Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer is Curly, perpetually getting a pie in the face when the “evidence” he produces is immediately debunked.

“BREAKING,” Comer announced on social media this week, with two siren emojis. “Hunter Biden’s business entity, Owasco PC, made direct monthly payments to Joe Biden.” This was evidence that the president “knew & benefitted from his family’s business schemes.” But it turned out the payments, for all of $1,380 each, were repayments for a 2018 Ford Raptor truck Biden helped his son Hunter buy at a time when the younger Biden was broke because of his drug addiction.


Their act is so weak that these stooges have already gone into reruns. Last week, Jordan’s “weaponization” panel held a hearing on supposed censorship at Twitter — the same topic of a hearing he had in March, with two of the same witnesses. This week, Smith’s committee had a hearing with the same two IRS “whistleblowers” who already testified about the Hunter Biden case before that panel, as well as before the Oversight Committee, earlier this year.


Comer, after seeing his allegations refuted in hearing after disastrous hearing, has said he doesn’t want to have any additional public sessions. He prefers the safety of closed-door depositions, from which he can selectively leak misleading tidbits.


Last week, Hunter Biden’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, said his client would be happy to testify publicly before Congress. “We have seen you use closed-door sessions to manipulate, even distort the facts and misinform the public,” he wrote. “We therefore propose opening the door.” But Comer immediately rejected the offer, and he and Jordan are now threatening to hold Hunter Biden in contempt of Congress for insisting on public, rather than closed-door, testimony.

Their desire for secrecy is perfectly understandable, given the absence of evidence against the president. Last week, Fox Business Network’s Maria Bartiromo asked a Republican member of Comer’s Oversight panel, Lisa McClain (Mich.), whether investigators had been able to “identify any actual policy changes” that Biden made related to his family’s business dealings. “The short answer is no,” McClain replied.


Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk.


This week, the three stooges assembled in the echoey lobby of the Longworth House Office Building for a “media availability” on the impeachment inquiry. Smith alleged that the Bidens moved “an unimaginable sum of money” (actually, between $10 million and $20 million, compared with multiple billions of dollars similarly received by Trump family members from foreign interests). Comer repeated his allegation about the “monthly payments” made to Biden, again omitting that they were for Hunter’s pickup truck.


The three suddenly hustled away. “No questions?” Washington Examiner’s Reese Gorman called after them. “I thought this was a press conference.”
Smith then gaveled in the Ways and Means Committee to hear once more from his “whistleblowers.” His first order of business: to close the meeting to the public and the media.
The ranking Democrat, Richard Neal (Mass.), made a motion for the hearing to remain open to the public. “You’re not recognized,” Smith replied.
Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Tex.) asked to debate the Republicans’ motion to kick out the public. “It’s not debatable,” Smith shot back.

Republicans repelled the Democratic attempts at transparency in party-line votes; Smith ordered the room cleared of journalists and spectators. Republicans said they would release a transcript “upon completion of our meeting,” but it didn’t come out that day, or the next.


Their fevered efforts to hide from the public make it clear House Republicans have lost the plot in their attempt to implicate Biden. But will they impeach him anyway? Certainly! Woop, woop, woop, woop, woop, woop.

Categories Accountability, Bias, Biden, Republicans, Stupid, Trump

Alexandra Petri: If You Need Medical Advice in Texas, Call State Atty-General Ken Paxton

By dianeravitch
December 9, 2023 //
13

Kate Cox of Dallas, Texas, learned recently that the baby she is carrying has a genetic condition that is typically deadly, trisomy 18. She asked a court to allow her to have an abortion, and the judge agreed to permit the abortion (the judge is female).

But Ken Paxton, the State Attorney General, has threatened to punish any doctor and hospital that participate in the abortion. The Texas Supreme Court issued a temporary injunction blocking an abortion. Fox has had two caesarean births and fears that she may never be able to conceive again if forced to deliver a baby that has little chance of survival.

Who decides? Kate Cox’s doctor? Ken Paxton? The Texas Supreme Court?

Alexandra Petri, humorist for The Washington Post, comments on Paxton’s intervention:

“Judge Guerra Gamble is not medically qualified to make this determination and it should not be relied upon. A TRO is no substitute for medical judgment.”

— Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, writing to doctors who have received a court order allowing an abortion to end a nonviable pregnancy

There is no substitute for medical judgment, except the judgment of me, Ken Paxton.

Am I a doctor? No. I’m something better than a doctor: a Ken. My accessories include: no medical expertise and a boundless reservoir of cruelty. And one time, I saw a horse. I have also been told that my handwriting is bad and that I am not patient. This all screams “doctor” to me.

If we were on a plane or in a theater and someone yelled, “There is an emergency! Is there a doctor in the house?” I would absolutely raise my hand. “I am a man in a position of political authority in Texas happy to make life hell for all pregnant people. In the state of Texas, that’s better than a doctor!”

Indeed, the process for obtaining an abortion in Texas is simple. All you have to do is get a recommendation from your doctor that one is medically necessary, hire a legal team, get your case in front of a judge and obtain a court order! And then a man named Ken gets to say, “No! Let’s take this to the Supreme Court. Also, if you proceed, I will threaten your doctors!” And then the Texas Supreme Court gets to affirm Ken’s preference and halt your order. Simple. Routine. Elegant.

Texas Supreme Court temporarily halts order that allows pregnant woman to have an abortion

“This seems like a horrible, ghoulish way to behave when a person needs to access emergency medical care,” you might say. Sure! But we are not talking about a person in this case. We are talking about a woman. Totally different, in my medical opinion.

Am I a doctor? Look, I’ve always felt that nothing should limit what you can be or do, except the objections of a man named Ken in the state of Texas. Well, I’m a man named Ken in the state of Texas, and I think I am probably a doctor. And the state Supreme Court agrees.

I mean, of course, in all ways that count (chiefly, I get to make medical decisions for you), I am a doctor. Actually, maybe it would even be better if I weren’t! That would keep me from being unduly hidebound and unimaginative when faced with questions like: Which pregnancies are viable? Which are life-threatening? For too long, we’ve been constrained by what was medically possible. No more. I always try to bring an open mind and lots of questions. Should blood really be inside the body rather than outside? Maybe, instead of an epidural, we should try prayer? If a body has a uterus, then is there any room in it for legal rights? Questions of that kind!

What I don’t know about women’s health could fill a book! A book that I would refuse to read, on principle.

I am a small-government conservative. I believe that the government should be so small that it can fit into your uterus and make all medical decisions for you. Don’t try to expel it! That’s not allowed. Not in Texas! I am not a doctor, but, as a doctor, I will tell you: It is not medically safe.

I can’t believe that these judges are trying to interfere in a medical decision, as we have forced them to do under Texas state law. The effrontery! The gall! A substance I believe that I know a lot about, from my years practicing medicine! It’s what the brain is made of!

TO BE CLEAR, I AM TECHNICALLY NOT A DOCTOR, but I do get mad when people call Jill Biden one. I am only not a doctor in the sense that I haven’t been to medical school, was never a resident and think that there is a strong chance babies are carried by storks. Teach the controversy! I also have not read an anatomy book. (I hear they contain inappropriate pictures! More information requested from those in the know!) But in every other sense, I am a doctor: I am a male Republican Texan in a position of authority.

Want an abortion? In Texas, we believe in bodily autonomy and control over your medical choices. For me, Ken. Not for you, yourself. You can’t be trusted with it! But don’t worry. In Texas, there is no substitute for medical judgment. Oh, sorry! Typo. In Texas, there is no (substitute for medical judgment). The “No!” is from me, Ken Paxton.

Categories Gender, Health, Stupid, Texas

Scott Maxwell: Politicians Don’t Want You to Vote—Except for Them

By dianeravitch
December 5, 2023 //
27

It’s worth subscribing to the Orlando Sentinel just to read Scott Maxwell. His commentary on Florida politics is priceless. This one asks: “Why not ban voting altogether?”

He writes:

A common trait among Florida legislators, especially those in positions of power, is that they think they’re really smart. Usually smarter than they are. And definitely smarter than you.

It’s not completely their fault. Many live inside bubbles filled with staffers and lobbyists who constantly tell them they’re brilliant. (And attractive. And hilarious joke-tellers.) Plus, they’re surrounded by a bunch of other politicians. So it’s a low bar.

I mention all this because Republican legislators are resuming one of their long-running crusades, trying to make it harder for you to set the policies and priorities you want in the state in which you live. And they do so because they think you’re too dumb to be trusted — at least when it comes to changing state laws.

See, if 50.1% of voters put a politician into office, that politician usually believes voters have demonstrated the wisdom of Solomon.

But if 60% of you vote for something they dislike — like medical marijuana or a higher minimum wage — then they’re convinced you don’t understand what you’re doing. You’re an idiot. So the politicians want to protect you from yourself.

Republican lawmakers began this crusade about two decades ago. Florida voters had already used the constitutional amendment process to demand things like smaller class sizes — and it really ticked off lawmakers.

So the politicians teamed up with deep-pocketed donors, like Publix and the Florida Association of Realtors, to fund a campaign to raise the threshold for future amendments from 50% to 60%. And it worked.

But the politicians and special interests had a problem: You people — the annoying voters — kept on voting for things they disliked by margins of 60% or more.

So now GOP lawmakers want to raise the bar to 66.7%.

You already live in a state where the minority rules. Now they want to make it the superminority.

This is why I think it would be simpler if these guys were just honest about what they really want — for you people not to vote at all.

Just let them run the show. They’re smarter. And they will protect you from your own bad ideas … like quality pre-K programs for all.

Voters should play as little of a role as possible in democracy. That’s the basic idea from Rep. Rick Roth, a Republican from Palm Beach, perhaps by way of Pyongyang or Havana.

Roth is the sponsor of the bill to raise the amendment threshold to 66.67%. And he has a lot of support within his party. Almost all of the Republicans in the State House supported Roth’s bill last year. It was the Senate that said no.

House Republicans called their 67% bill an effort to demand “broader support.” Yet would you like to guess who didn’t receive “broader support” at the polls? Most of the legislators who supported this bill.

Local reps Doug Bankson, Tom Leek, Rachel Plakon, Susan Plasencia, Tyler Sirois and David Smith were all among the House Republicans who voted for the supermajority requirement for issues but fell short of that in their own personal campaigns. They, of course, still felt quite comfortable taking office.

Give those guys a 51% victory, and they consider it a mandate. But a 63% vote for Fair Districts? Well, you dumb voters just didn’t understand what you were doing.

Many lawmakers also claim the amendment process should be tougher because the Florida Constitution is some sort of sacred document whose hallowed words should not be altered by mortal men — an argument that is a total crock. The Florida Constitution wasn’t handed down to Moses on a mountaintop thousands of years ago. It was last ratified in 1968 when the Beverly Hillbillies was still on TV.

And lawmakers themselves have tried to ram all sorts of half-baked ideas into the constitution in recent years,  including a non-binding rant against Obamacare they wanted to insert in 2012.

That they find worthy of inserting into our state’s supposedly sacred constitution. But not restoring civil rights to former felons.

The reason Roth’s push to make the amendment process tougher is getting extra attention this year is that GOP lawmakers are extra nervous about abortion. All over America, moderate Republicans are uniting with Democrats and independents to pass laws guaranteeing the right to abortion access.

Kansas particularly freaked these guys out. When they saw that nearly 60% of voters in that very conservative state supported abortion rights, they knew they needed to change the rules in Florida so that 60% would no longer be considered a victory.

If you can’t win the game on the field, move the goal posts.

But again, it seems like it’d be simpler for these politicians just to ban voting altogether.

Instead of moving the threshold of victory from 50% plus one — which it’s been since the beginning of time — to 60% and then 67% and then who-knows-what later on, just tell citizens they can’t vote anymore.

After all, the politicians are obviously smarter than the rest of us. Just look at the deft way they’ve handled property insurance and things like unemployment benefits.

Citizens, with their silly notions about democracy, fairness, civil rights and quality education, just tend to get in the way.

smaxwell@orlandosentinel.com

Categories Democracy, Elections, Florida, Stupid

Chris Tomlinson: Texas Oilmen Spreading Hate and Lies

By dianeravitch
December 1, 2023 //
5

Chris Tomlinson is an award-winning columnist for the Houston Chronicle. He uses his space to combat bigotry, stupidity, and lies. He is not a “both sides” kind of journalist.

He writes here about the infamous oil billionaires who use their money to spread their religious views, attack public schools, and encourage indoctrination.

He writes:

Texas oilman H.L. Hunt may have been the first to spend millions to promote right-wing media and extremist ideas, but he was far from the last.

Most Texans, let alone Americans, had never heard of Farris and Dan Wilks or Tim Dunn before this year. But journalists have revealed them as key supporters of some of the most controversial figures in Texas politics and bankrollers of political action committees staffed by Christian nationalists and antisemites.

The reclusive billionaires and their allies rarely respond to requests for comment from mainstream media and did not respond to my messages.

Farris Wilks, fracking billionaire and pastor of the Assembly of Yahweh (7th Day) Church, preaches that the Bible is “true and correct in every scientific and historical detail” and that abortion, homosexuality and drunkenness are serious crimes, according to the church’s doctrinal statement, the Reuters news agency reported.

Dan Wilks attends church with his brother, with whom he co-founded Frac Tech, a company they sold for $3.5 billion. They have since become some of the largest donors in Texas GOP politics, giving $15 million in 2016 to a political action committee backing Sen. Ted Cruz.

Like Hunt, who broadcast his extremist commentary on radio stations nationwide, the Wilks brothers have also invested in media, supporting conservative mouthpieces like The Daily Wire and Prager University. Their PAC bought ads disguised as articles in the Metric Media news network, which includes 59 pseudo-local news sites in Texas, the Columbia Journalism Review reported.

The Wilks brothers have enjoyed their greatest success by joining Dunn to move the Republican Party of Texas as far right as possible through Empower Texans, one of the most influential dark-money political action committees.

Empower Texans shuttered in 2020 after spinning off operations into Texans for Fiscal Responsibility and Texas Scorecard, which rank politicians by their adherence to the group’s ideology. Dunn and the Wilks brothers have provided most of the financing and set the agenda for conservative activist Michael Quinn Sullivan, who has led all three organizations.

In 2016, the groups opposed Texas House Speaker Joe Straus, whom they considered too moderate. They also ran ultra-conservative candidates against Republicans who ranked poorly on their scorecard. When Straus, who is Jewish, invited Dunn for a breakfast meeting, he reportedly said only Christians should have leadership positions, Texas Monthly reported in 2018. This is a sentiment he’d previously expressed in a 2016 Christian radio interview.

Republicans have long struggled with antisemitism. In 2010, State Republican Executive Chairman John Cooke wrote an email proclaiming, “We elected a house with Christian, conservative values. We now want a true Christian, conservative running it,” the Texas Observer reported.

Dunn and the Wilkses also finance special interest PACs. In 2017, Empower Texans supported and advised Texans for Vaccine Choice, an early anti-vaccination movement, former state Rep. Jonathan Stickland told the Washington Post.

Stickland left elected office to start Pale Horse Strategies, a political consulting firm that ran a new Dunn and Wilks PAC, Defend Texas Liberty. The PAC defended Attorney General Ken Paxton against corruption allegations and provided $3 million to Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick weeks before he presided over Paxton’s impeachment trial, where he was acquitted.

Fresh from that victory, a Texas Tribune reporter observed Stickland, Republican Party of Texas chair Matt Rinaldi, prominent white supremacist Nick Fuentes and Black Lives Matter shooter Kyle Rittenhouse enter the Pale Horse Strategies office in Fort Worth on Oct. 6.

Fuentes was driven to the meeting by Chris Russo, who used Dunn and Wilks money to found Texans For Strong Borders PAC. Russo has past ties to Fuentes, the Tribune reported.

When current GOP House Speaker Dade Phelan demanded Patrick give away the $3 million donation, Patrick said Dunn had called him to apologize.

Dunn “is certain that Mr. Stickland and all PAC personnel will not have any future contact with Mr. Fuentes,” Patrick explained.

Yet, when the Tribune’s Robert Downen kept digging, he found that Pale Horse’s social media manager, Elle Maulding, had called Fuentes the “greatest civil rights leader in history” and shared photos of them together. Shelby Griesinger, Defend Texas Liberty’s treasurer, has said Jews worship a false god and depicted them as the enemy on social media.

Dunn and the Wilks brothers have spent $100 million on ultra-conservative candidates, political action committees in Texas, and radical nonprofits. They finance a movement staffed by publicly antisemitic foot soldiers.

Conservatives considered H.L. Hunt a crackpot in his day. But this new generation has the GOP falling into a goose step.

Categories Accountability, Bigotry, Billionaires, Democracy, Education Industry, Elections, Ignorance, Lies, Religion, Stupid, Texas

Houston: Teachers of Special Ed and Bilingual Ed Object to Standardized Curriculum

By dianeravitch
October 31, 2023 //
15

In Houston, the backlash against the authoritarianism of state-imposed superintendent Mike Miles continues to grow. Teachers of special education and bilingual education don’t like the standardized curriculum.

If I’m focused on what’s happening in Houston, there are two reasons:

1. I’m a graduate of the Houston Independent School District, and I don’t like to see it under siege by a know-nothing Governor and his puppet state superintendent.

2. This state takeover demonstrates the utter bankruptcy of state takeovers. It was concocted out of whole cloth, on the claim that one school in the entire district was “failing.” Before the takeover, that school—Wheatley High School—received a higher score (based on state tests) and was no longer “failing,” but the state took over the entire district anyway. So Houston is a national example of the vapidness of “education reform,” meaning non-educators like Miles, Governor Abbott, and State Chief Mike Morath telling professional educators how to do their jobs.

Anna Bauman of The Houston Chronicle writes:

A cornerstone of the New Education System introduced by Superintendent Mike Miles is a highly specific and rigorous instructional model.

As many students and teachers know by now, the system includes a standardized curriculum provided by the district, frequent classroom observations and grade level materials. Each day, teachers in core classes provide direct instruction for 45 minutes, give students a timed quiz and then split the children into groups based on their understanding of the lesson, with struggling learners getting more help from their teacher.

Miles says the model is meant to improve academic achievement, especially among student populations whose standardized test scores often lag behind their peers, and has disputed any claims that the system fails to accommodate the diverse needs of students.

In conversations over recent weeks, however, seven teachers at five different schools told me they are struggling to meet the needs of children with disabilities or emergent bilingual studentsbecause the model is too rigid, fast-paced and inflexible to provide accommodations for these learners.

For example, one teacher at an NES-aligned campus told me she cannot realistically give students extra time, a common accommodation for special education students, on the timed Demonstration of Learning. If she lags behind schedule, administrators will enter her classroom and demand: “Why aren’t we where we’re supposed to be?”

A teacher at Las Americas Newcomer School, home to many refugee and immigrant students, said district officials instructed educators to remove alphabet posters from their classrooms and limit the use of dictionaries, which many non-native English speakers rely on during class.

“Many of them, it’s their first year being in school. They don’t know the language. I have a classroom with at times four different languages spoken. And we’re forced to do the same slides and the same work as a regular, general education school,” the teacher said.

Only time will tell whether the new system will boost academic achievement as Miles intends, but for now, teachers are speaking out because they are concerned about doing what is right for their most vulnerable students.

“When I go home at night, I want to know when I put my head down on my pillow that I did the best I could by my kids,” said Brian Tucker, a special education teacher at Sugar Grove Academy.

You can read more in-depth about these issues in separate stories published this week about special education students and English language learners.

 

Categories Accountability, Corporate Reform, Curriculum, Education Industry, Education Reform, English Language Learners, Extremism, Failure, Houston, Special Education, Stupid, Teachers, Texas

Thank You, General Mark Milley, for Saving the Constitution from Trump!

By dianeravitch
September 28, 2023 //
11

Jeffrey Goldberg wrote in The Atlantic about how General Mark Milley saved the country and the Constitution from the ignorance of former President Donald Trump. I’m a subscriber to The Atlantic, and I can attest that it’s a great magazine, with articles like this one. It is titled “The Patriot.” I have followed the discussion of this article on Twitter. Trump supporters say that Milley was obliged to follow the orders of the President; Trump critics say that Milley took an oath to defend the country and the Constitution “from all enemies, foreign and domestic.” And he upheld his oath of office.

The missiles that comprise the land component of America’s nuclear triad are scattered across thousands of square miles of prairie and farmland, mainly in North Dakota, Montana, and Wyoming. About 150 of the roughly 400 Minuteman III inter­continental ballistic missiles currently on alert are dispersed in a wide circle around Minot Air Force Base, in the upper reaches of North Dakota. From Minot, it would take an ICBM about 25 minutes to reach Moscow.

These nuclear weapons are under the control of the 91st Missile Wing of the Air Force Global Strike Command, and it was to the 91st—the “Rough Riders”—that General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, paid a visit in March 2021. I accompanied him on the trip. A little more than two months had passed since the January 6 attack on the Capitol, and America’s nuclear arsenal was on Milley’s mind.

In normal times, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the principal military adviser to the president, is supposed to focus his attention on America’s national-security challenges, and on the readiness and lethality of its armed forces. But the first 16 months of Milley’s term, a period that ended when Joe Biden succeeded Donald Trump as president, were not normal, because Trump was exceptionally unfit to serve. “For more than 200 years, the assumption in this country was that we would have a stable person as president,” one of Milley’s mentors, the retired three-star general James Dubik, told me. That this assumption did not hold true during the Trump administration presented a “unique challenge” for Milley, Dubik said.

Milley was careful to refrain from commenting publicly on Trump’s cognitive unfitness and moral derangement. In interviews, he would say that it is not the place of the nation’s flag officers to discuss the performance of the nation’s civilian leaders.

But his views emerged in a number of books published after Trump left office, written by authors who had spoken with Milley, and many other civilian and military officials, on background. In The Divider, Peter Baker and Susan Glasser write that Milley believed that Trump was “shameful,” and “complicit” in the January 6 attack. They also reported that Milley feared that Trump’s “ ‘Hitler-like’ embrace of the big lie about the election would prompt the president to seek out a ‘Reichstag moment.’ ”

These views of Trump align with those of many officials who served in his administration. Trump’s first secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, considered Trump to be a “fucking moron.” John Kelly, the retired Marine general who served as Trump’s chief of staff in 2017 and 2018, has said that Trump is the “most flawed person” he’s ever met. James Mattis, who is also a retired Marine general and served as Trump’s first secretary of defense, has told friends and colleagues that the 45th president was “more dangerous than anyone could ever imagine.” It is widely known that Trump’s second secretary of defense, Mark Esper, believed that the president didn’t understand his own duties, much less the oath that officers swear to the Constitution, or military ethics, or the history of America.

Twenty men have served as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs since the position was created after World War II. Until Milley, none had been forced to confront the possibility that a president would try to foment or provoke a coup in order to illegally remain in office. A plain reading of the record shows that in the chaotic period before and after the 2020 election, Milley did as much as, or more than, any other American to defend the constitutional order, to prevent the military from being deployed against the American people, and to forestall the eruption of wars with America’s nuclear-armed adversaries. Along the way, Milley deflected Trump’s exhortations to have the U.S. military ignore, and even on occasion commit, war crimes. Milley and other military officers deserve praise for protecting democracy, but their actions should also cause deep unease. In the American system, it is the voters, the courts, and Congress that are meant to serve as checks on a president’s behavior, not the generals. Civilians provide direction, funding, and oversight; the military then follows lawful orders.

For the actions he took in the last months of the Trump presidency, Milley, whose four-year term as chairman, and 43-year career as an Army officer, will conclude at the end of September, has been condemned by elements of the far right. Kash Patel, whom Trump installed in a senior Pentagon role in the final days of his administration, refers to Milley as “the Kraken of the swamp.” Trump himself has accused Milley of treason. Sebastian Gorka, a former Trump White House official, has said that Milley deserves to be placed in “shackles and leg irons.” If a second Trump administration were to attempt this, however, the Trumpist faction would be opposed by the large group of ex-Trump-administration officials who believe that the former president continues to pose a unique threat to American democracy, and who believe that Milley is a hero for what he did to protect the country and the Constitution.

“Mark Milley had to contain the impulses of people who wanted to use the United States military in very dangerous ways,” Kelly told me. “Mark had a very, very difficult reality to deal with in his first two years as chairman, and he served honorably and well. The president couldn’t fathom people who served their nation honorably.” Kelly, along with other former administration officials, has argued that Trump has a contemptuous view of the military, and that this contempt made it extraordinarily difficult to explain to Trump such concepts as honor, sacrifice, and duty….

Joseph Dunford, the Marine general who preceded Milley as chairman of the Joint Chiefs, had also faced onerous and unusual challenges. But during the first two years of the Trump presidency, Dunford had been supported by officials such as Kelly, Mattis, Tillerson, and McMaster. These men attempted, with intermittent success, to keep the president’s most dangerous impulses in check. (According to the Associated Press, Kelly and Mattis made a pact with each other that one of them would remain in the country at all times, so the president would never be left unmonitored.) By the time Milley assumed the chairman’s role, all of those officials were gone—driven out or fired.

At the top of the list of worries for these officials was the manage­ment of America’s nuclear arsenal. Early in Trump’s term, when Milley was serving as chief of staff of the Army, Trump entered a cycle of rhetorical warfare with the North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un. At certain points, Trump raised the possibility of attacking North Korea with nuclear weapons, according to the New York Times reporter Michael S. Schmidt’s book, Donald Trump v. The United States. Kelly, Dunford, and others tried to convince Trump that his rhetoric—publicly mocking Kim as “Little Rocket Man,” for instance—could trigger nuclear war. “If you keep pushing this clown, he could do something with nuclear weapons,” Kelly told him, explaining that Kim, though a dictator, could be pressured by his own military elites to attack American interests in response to Trump’s provocations. When that argument failed to work, Kelly spelled out for the president that a nuclear exchange could cost the lives of millions of Koreans and Japanese, as well as those of Americans throughout the Pacific. Guam, Kelly told him, falls within range of North Korean missiles. “Guam isn’t America,” Trump responded…

Shortly after the assault on the Capitol on January 6, Pelosi, who was then the speaker of the House, called Milley to ask if the nation’s nuclear weapons were secure. “He’s crazy,” she said of Trump. “You know he’s crazy. He’s been crazy for a long time. So don’t say you don’t know what his state of mind is.” According to Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, who recounted this conversation in their book, Peril, Milley replied, “Madam Speaker, I agree with you on everything.” He then said, according to the authors, “I want you to know this in your heart of hearts, I can guarantee you 110 percent that the military, use of military power, whether it’s nuclear or a strike in a foreign country of any kind, we’re not going to do anything illegal or crazy….”

At his welcome ceremony at Joint Base Myer–Henderson Hall, across the Potomac River from the capital, Milley gained an early, and disturbing, insight into Trump’s attitude toward soldiers. Milley had chosen a severely wounded Army captain, Luis Avila, to sing “God Bless America.” Avila, who had completed five combat tours, had lost a leg in an IED attack in Afghanistan, and had suffered two heart attacks, two strokes, and brain damage as a result of his injuries. To Milley, and to four-star generals across the Army, Avila and his wife, Claudia, represented the heroism, sacrifice, and dignity of wounded soldiers.

It had rained that day, and the ground was soft; at one point Avila’s wheelchair threatened to topple over. Milley’s wife, Holly­anne, ran to help Avila, as did Vice President Mike Pence. After Avila’s performance, Trump walked over to congratulate him, but then said to Milley, within earshot of several witnesses, “Why do you bring people like that here? No one wants to see that, the wounded.” Never let Avila appear in public again, Trump told Milley. (Recently, Milley invited Avila to sing at his retirement ceremony.)

There is much more in the story about the lengths that top military brass went to protect the nation from a seriously ignorant and mentally unstable president.

I suggest that you read it in full. You won’t be sorry, but you will be very grateful that the top ranks of the military put the Constitution above their obedience to an unqualified President.

Categories Accountability, Courage, Democracy, Evil, Freedom, Stupid, Trump
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »