Category Archives: government

Would you like to know more about Critical Race Theory?

The term “critical race theory” refers to an interdisciplinary intellectual and social movement that originated with civil-rights activists and academics.

Illustration by Marcus Torres

Illustration by Marcus Torres

The mission of the Critical Race Theory (CRT) is to investigate the ways in which race, society, and the law interact in the United States and to contest the liberal mainstream American approach to racial justice. Along with other critical schools of thought, such as critical legal studies, which investigates the ways in which legal procedures maintain the status quo, it emerged for the first time in the 1970s. Theorists affiliated with the Critical Race Theory (CRT) contend that the social and legal construction of race serves to further the interests of white people at the detriment of people of color. Since the year 2020, conservative legislators in the United States have been attempting to outlaw or place restrictions on the teaching of CRT and other forms of anti-racism education in elementary and secondary schools. Those who support the imposition of such prohibitions believe that CRT is not only untrue but also anti-American, promotes extreme leftism, demonizes White people, and indoctrinates youngsters. However, this is a section of my dissertation study that I have completed on this subject. It is written in a way that is easy to comprehend for the lay reader who is interested in learning more about CRT. If you would to purchase a copy of my book on Amazon this is the link: https://www.amazon.com/Critical-Race-Theory-Addressing-Prejudice/dp/B096TJMS4Y/ref=sr_1_7?crid=31E5LGF2EAXTG&keywords=Kenneth+Dantzler+Corbin&qid=1660858504&sprefix=kenneth+dantzler+corbin%2Caps%2C1501&sr=8-7

Did you know that there will likely be further demonstrations this weekend in response to the agony and anger caused by the Supreme Court’s decision about abortion?

According to authorities, tear gas was deployed to disperse protesters outside the Arizona State Capitol. Numerous protestors gathered in New York City’s Washington Square Park to oppose the judgment. Anti-abortion protestors were there, although they maintained a low profile. Following the demonstration, at least 20 individuals were “taken into jail with charges pending” throughout the city. In 2019, the biggest proportion of abortions performed on women requesting the procedure were performed on black women.

According to the statistics, they also had the highest abortion rate, with 23,8 abortions per 1,000 women. Black women who are pregnant or have just given birth are three to four times more likely to die than White women in the same circumstances. Friday, after the Supreme Court reverses Roe v. Wade, anti-abortion groups protest in Washington, D.C. Champagne is consumed by anti-abortion activists in front of the Supreme Court. Rachel Herring, an anti-abortion campaigner, said, “According to Judaism, life starts with the first breath, when the soul enters the body.”

Following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, supporters for abortion rights pound on the doors of the Arizona State Senate. On Friday, June 24, anti-abortion demonstrators celebrate in front of the US Supreme Court in Washington, DC. An anti-abortion activist wears socks that proclaim “abortion is cruel” while arguing with an abortion rights activist. On Friday, Jill McElroy and her nine-year-old daughter Meriam joined in an abortion rights rally in front of the Supreme Court. She stated, “A lesson we have always taught our children is that they are the masters of their own bodies, and the Court’s ruling today goes against that, and as a family, we believe that’s wrong.”

Champagne is consumed by anti-abortion activists in front of the Supreme Court. I was there at the moment the decision was made. I am delighted. Earlier, I was walking on air, says pro-life activist Noah Slayter. Friday, the phrase “Our bodies, our choices” is spray-painted on a temporary wall in Washington, D.C.

Following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, pro-choice protestors pound on the doors of the Arizona State Senate on Friday. Outside the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday, an anti-abortion protester wears socks that proclaim “abortion is cruel.” In Arizona and Arkansas, abortion providers have began discontinuing their services. Dr. DeShawn Taylor remarked that she anticipates a period of darkness, albeit hopefully not for too long.

Approximately twenty abortion appointments originally planned for Friday through next week were canceled by Taylor’s facility. The head of Planned Parenthood said, “The majority of patients were desperate or scared” before to Friday’s Supreme Court ruling on abortion availability in certain states. A new legislation in California shields anybody conducting, helping, or receiving an abortion from any prospective civil action originating from outside the state. A clinic owner in Mississippi said that a woman should not have to leave the state to get medical treatment.

Why did Trump campaign records reveal that advisors were aware that the false electoral strategy was without foundation?

The convocation of the electoral college on December 14, 2020, was expected to herald the conclusion of that year’s tumultuous and protracted presidential election.

A rally outside the Georgia Capitol in Atlanta three weeks after the 2020 election. (Kevin D. Liles for The Washington Post)

In seven swing states won by Joe Biden, though, Trump supporters turned out ready to proclaim victory. Internal campaign emails and memoranda indicate it was part of a larger plot to provide Vice President Mike Pence with a cause to declare the election’s conclusion uncertain. Members of the committee have said that they would provide evidence that President Trump was engaged in an attempt to submit fraudulent electoral ballots for Vice President Joe Biden that failed. The committee got a court order telling Trump’s lawyer, John Eastman, to give the committee the papers.


The Justice Department and a prosecutor in the Atlanta region are also probing the voter fraud. Emails reveal that only days after the election, some Trump aides were planning on how to make a legal justification for promoting their own electors. They pondered whether state legislatures, which in a number of critical states were controlled by the GOP, could designate electors for Trump even if the certified results indicated that Biden had won. A legal consultant for Trump contended that the strict deadline for winning the election was January 6, not December 14. He drew attention to the fact that certain state legislation may be difficult to comply with.


The bogus Michigan electors were unable to convene in the state’s Senate chamber and instead decamped to the state party headquarters. Your tasks are vital. A campaign official wrote to Georgia’s fictitious electors that their efforts would be hindered unless absolute secrecy and discretion were maintained. Robert Spindell Jr., who signed an elector certificate for Donald Trump in Wisconsin, said the general consensus among the lawyers was that if Trump won any of these cases, something had to be done. The electors didn’t have any legal standing, and vice president-elect Mike Pence didn’t recognize them. This made him a target for the crowd that burned down the Capitol.

For more information about this read: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/20/trump-documents-fake-elector-plan/?fbclid=IwAR2-lGCprzKOhWX0tgYKw5fV1YBAeI0RpQKSjLNDU7g2dqdX9P9Dw8ZvzsM

Do you believe that Putin may soon officially declare war on Ukraine, the US, and Western?

Russian President Vladimir Putin may declare war on Ukraine as early as May 9, allowing Russia to fully mobilize its reserve troops if invasion plans stall. However, in Russia, May 9 is celebrated as “Victory Day” for defeating the Nazis in 1945. Officials in the West have long assumed that Putin would use the day’s symbolic and propaganda importance to proclaim a military victory in Ukraine or a massive escalation of hostilities. Officials have focused on one scenario: Putin launched a war on Ukraine on May 9. Putin refers to the months-long struggle as a “special military operation,” thereby barring terms like invasion and war. According to British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace, he will strive to shift from his special operation.’ “So he has been tossing the dice, preparing the groundwork for a battle against Nazis that requires more people. “More Russian artillery fodder.”” The invasion of Ukraine — a nation led by a Jewish president — has been described as “denazification” by historians and political analysts alike.

He would not be astonished if Putin said on May Day that ‘we are now at war with the world’s Nazis and need to mass organize the Russian people, Wallace continued. An official war declaration on May 9 might enhance popular support for the invasion. Officials claim Russia urgently needs conscripts due to a rising labor shortfall. Since Russia attacked a little over two months ago, authorities in the West and Ukraine believe 10,000 Russian troops have died.

Did you know that most Americans don’t support politicians punishing firms for their views, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds?

A Reuters/Ipsos survey revealed that a bipartisan majority of US voters reject governments penalizing firms for their social viewpoints, signaling a chilly response for campaigns like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ against Walt Disney Co.

Gov. Ron DeSantis speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Orlando, Fla. on Feb. 24, 2022.John Raoux / AP file

However, a two-day survey concluded on Thursday found that 62% of Americans — including 68% of Democrats and 55% of Republicans — said they were less inclined to support a politician who favors suing firms for their political beliefs. As a result, DeSantis signed a measure this week depriving Disney of self-governing power over its Orlando-area parks in punishment for the company’s objection to a new Florida legislation restricting the teaching of LGBTQ matters in schools. Though it was an effort by DeSantis, a rising star in the Republican Party, to enhance his conservative credentials as a cultural fighter in advance of a potential challenge for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024.

Do you believe that Republican senators kept their promise toward an African American woman after their line of questioning?

At the start of her Supreme Court confirmation hearings last week, Republican senators made a solemn promise to Ketanji Brown Jackson: They promised that they would not treat her as harshly as Democrats had treated Brett M. Kavanaugh during his 2018 confirmation hearings—a set of circumstances that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) described as “one of the lowest moments in the history of this [Senate Judiciary] committee.”
The reviews have been received. Americans favor Jackson’s confirmation substantially more than they support other recent candidates. Still, they also believe that Republicans handled Jackson’s confirmation roughly as severely as Democrats managed Kavanaugh, if not worse than Democrats dealt with Kavanaugh.
According to a survey conducted by Quinnipiac University last week, there is reasonably significant support for Jackson’s confirmation: 51 percent of respondents backed it, while just 30 percent opposed it. It is more popular than during the verification of Trump’s past two candidates, including Kavanaugh, whose nomination was rejected by the public. According to a CNN survey, Americans are vehemently opposed to it by as much as double digits.
However, it is also essential to consider how we arrived at that position.
Even as Americans opposed Kavanaugh’s confirmation, they were primarily dissatisfied with how Democrats handled his confirmation hearings—particularly their treatment of decades-old sexual misconduct claims, according to several. According to the CNN study, 56 percent of respondents gave unfavorable feedback, while just 36 percent gave them good reviews.
However, the Republican response to Jackson’s hearings — and, it seems, her track record on child pornography cases, which was the central line of attack — has received a mixed reception. According to polling, only 27 percent of Americans approve of their strategy, compared to 52 percent who are opposed to it, according to polling. According to the CNN survey, Democrats and Kavanaugh are separated by a 25-point margin, compared to a 20-point margin for Republicans and Kavanaugh. This time around, there are also more undecideds, which may be because Jackson’s hearings were not as well-publicized as they could have been.
Independents disapproved of the other party’s actions in both instances: on Kavanaugh, they disapproved of Democrats 58-30, and on Jackson, they disliked Republicans 54-25 in both cases, according to exit polls.
It is worth noting that, apart from the public’s support for the candidate, there was a significant difference between the two confirmations. Neither side walked away from the Kavanaugh hearings with glowing recommendations. Republicans’ handling of the situation was perceived in an unfavorable light on par with Democrats’ handling of it. When it comes to Jackson, Democrats, on the other hand, earned more favorable ratings (42 percent) than they received terrible reviews (34 percent). As a result, it is not just a case of people loathing all politicians.
The crucial issue that arises from this is: why did people express dissatisfaction with how the Republican Party handled Jackson’s hearings? After all, their negative vote margin is about 2-to-1, owing to many party members’ disapproval of their actions. Republicans are divided on the issue, with 52 percent supporting it and 26 percent opposing it.
That suggests that even Republican members of Congress felt their party went a little too far in criticizing Jackson’s record as a district judge in child pornography cases (when, in fact, her record was relatively ordinary) during the 2016 election.
The connection to the Democrats’ treatment of Kavanaugh is again illuminating. In that case, too, 26 percent of the opposing party expressed dissatisfaction with the way their side handled the situation. In contrast, approval was far higher – 67 percent. As a result, intraparty assessments of the Republican Party’s treatment of Jackson are, on the whole, more unfavorable than those of the Democratic Party’s handling of Kavanaugh.
Furthermore, Republicans supported Jackson more strongly than Democrats did Kavanaugh.
While Democrats overwhelmingly opposed Kavanaugh’s confirmation by 91-7, about 1 in 5 Republicans (21 percent) believe Jackson should be approved, with a comparatively small majority of 60 percent against. If people like Jackson over Kavanaugh, it is likely that their threshold for believing she was mistreated will be lower than it is for Kavanaugh.
However, many Republicans may wish their side had opposed Jackson even more aggressively than they did.
There are many unknowns in this set of data.
Overall, though, the American people do not believe that Republicans have elevated the level of conversation in the wake of Jackson’s hearings. As long as Republicans say they are the party of Abraham Lincoln, they would keep the principles of Lincoln’s time in office. But they would fall short of what Lincoln did,
From listening to the hearings and hearing all of the questions that were not connected to the judge’s credentials, it is clear that the Republican Party has regressed significantly. Because they treated an African-American woman who was well-qualified for the job, they show that they do not know the law.

Reference

Americans strongly disapprove of GOP pushback on Ketanji Brown Jackson. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/04/01/americans-disapprove-gop-jackson/?fbclid=IwAR0R1DXxA3QB5kHfs9ROkOimrD8gbkXdJl0OT9h1_xMaWwkaW6alQJW8Pwg

Did you know that Antony Blinken often cites his family’s Holocaust history? The Russia-Ukraine war has him stuck between the personal and the political.

When Secretary of State Antony Blinken cited his family’s Holocaust-era history in explaining a matter of U.S. foreign policy on Monday, it was far from the first time he has done so.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken speaks at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., March 21, 2022. (Kevin LaMarque/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)

“One of my responsibilities as Secretary is determining, on behalf of the United States, whether atrocities have been committed,” Blinken, who is Jewish, said Monday at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, where he announced that the Biden administration had determined that the Burmese military had committed genocide against the Rohingya. “It’s an immense responsibility that I take very seriously, particularly given my family’s history.”

That family history involves his stepfather, Samuel Pisar, the Holocaust survivor who became a renowned legal scholar and philosopher. Blinken has often described the late Pisar’s recounting of his rescue by American soldiers, saying it shaped his own idea of what the United States symbolizes worldwide.

“That’s the story that I grew up with, about what our country is and what it represents, and what it means when the United States is engaged and leading,” Blinken said.

Now America’s top diplomat contends with a conflict that puts these values to the test: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which has involved mass killings of civilians.

He is also dealing with appeals from Ukraine’s Jewish president, Volodymyr Zelensky — who similarly cites the Holocaust as shaping his outlook — to do more to stop Russia’s attacks.

Zelensky has additionally made direct comparisons between the Russian onslaught and the Holocaust, while Russian President Vladimir Putin has stated his goal is to “de-Nazify” Ukraine.

Talking to American Jewish leaders, Zelensky called Putin’s actions “pure Nazism;” talking to Israelis, he likened Russian tactics to the “final solution”; and in his address to the U.S. Congress, he called the Russian invasion “the worst war since World War II.”

The Biden administration has imposed crippling sanctions on Russia. In addition, it is funneling billions of dollars in defense and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine and deploying U.S. troops to NATO allies adjacent to Ukraine. But President Joe Biden will not accede to Zelensky’s top demands — including creating a no-fly zone over Ukraine to protect it — saying they could provoke a world war.’

On Wednesday, however, Blinken formally declared that the United States’ position is that Russian forces have committed war crimes.

“Many of the sites Russia’s forces have hit have been clearly identifiable as in-use by civilians,” he said. “This includes the Mariupol maternity hospital, as the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights expressly noted in a March 11 report. It also includes a strike that hit a Mariupol theater, clearly marked with ‘дeти’ — Russian for ‘children’ — in huge letters visible from the sky.”

Does Blinken feel the pressures of family history as he contemplates Ukraine? The State Department did not respond to multiple requests for an interview. But his speech at the Holocaust museum on Monday showed that it was on his mind.

“One of the unsettling truths of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum is that there’s never a time I visit here when its lessons do not feel deeply resonant,” he said. “But I have to tell you, I can recall a few times when that history felt so urgent or the responsibility it imparts on us so pressing. As we meet, the Russian Government continues to wage its unprovoked, brutal war on Ukraine. Each day brings more brutal attacks, more innocent men, women, and children killed.”

The war’s risk to Holocaust survivors in Ukraine was especially poignant in Blinken’s telling.

“Ukraine is home to nearly 10,000 Holocaust survivors, including an 88-year-old woman, Natalia Berezhnaya of Odesa,” he said. “Here’s what she said in a recent interview, and I quote: ‘It’s hard to wrap my mind around the fact that in 1941, I had to hide in the basement of this building, and that I’m going to have to do that again now.'”

Blinken stopped short of accusing Putin of genocide as he did the Burmese military. Instead, he cast Russia’s predations as part of a welter of human rights disasters now proliferating.

“Even as we are working to increase international pressure on the Kremlin to end this unjustified war, we know there are many other places where horrific atrocities are being committed,” Blinken said. “Over recent weeks, as I’ve spoken with diplomats worldwide about Ukraine, I’ve also heard a constant refrain. Many of them say, ‘Yes, we stand with the people of Ukraine. But we must also stand with the people suffering atrocities in other places.'”

On Wednesday, the move to accuse Russia of war crimes is notable; noted Jewish foreign policy experts had been frustrated with Blinken’s language.

Josh Rogin, an influential foreign policy opinion columnist for The Washington Post, wrote that the hesitancy in Ukraine is reflective of a West that has allowed atrocities to be committed in China, Syria, and Burma. “The Ukraine example shows that ignoring atrocities anywhere is morally and strategically bankrupt,” he said this week before Blinken announced his war crimes designation.

Aaron David Miller, a longtime Middle East peace negotiator and a scion of one of Cleveland’s most prominent Jewish families, sounded a despairing note on Twitter.

“Never Again is Ever Ever Again,” he said. “The International Community has failed to even try to prevent any of the planet’s genocides/mass killings over past 100 years; Armenians; Holocaust; Cambodia; Rwanda; Congo; Sudan; Darfur; Myanmar; Uighurs; Syria….. Ever ask yourself why.”

Asked to expand on the tweet on CNN, Miller, now a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment, a foreign policy think tank, admitted that he understood Blinken’s predicament.

“A president of the United States weighing the consequences of humanitarian intervention in the case of Ukraine has more than just moral factors to take into account and the consequences of an intervention or not an intervention at least for American interests, that could affect millions of humans in the United States and in Ukraine, so it’s it’s a moral hazard,” Miller said. “It’s a complicated problem. And frankly, I think Ukraine will be another example of confirmation of the rule.”

Abe Foxman, the retired national director of the Anti-Defamation League and a Holocaust survivor, argued that Blinken’s approach made sense: One’s views on the Holocaust may shape policy but should not necessarily determine what the procedure is.

He was pleased to see Blinken knows, understands, is informed and instructed by his family history, by his Jewish experience, Foxman said in an interview. It does make a difference, but it cannot be determinative of action. This is a war. It’s not a holocaust or genocide. And it’s very, very important that if you know your history, you see the difference.

Reference

Antony Blinken often cites his family’s Holocaust history. The Russia-Ukraine war has him stuck between the personal and the political. https://www.jta.org/2022/03/24/politics/antony-blinken-often-cites-his-familys-holocaust-history-the-russia-ukraine-war-has-him-stuck-between-the-personal-and-the-political?fbclid=IwAR0vj-Q7Oys1vWBpQYcJm7Y0kjH_8dp7HgXidygq51dBq-SV2-rFeN_-4mw

Did you know that Ginni Thomas, Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife, exchanged texts with Mark Meadows about efforts to overturn the 2020 election?

Following the 2020 presidential election, Virginia Thomas, a conservative activist married to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, urged White House chief of staff Mark Meadows in frantic text conversations during the crucial weeks following the vote to continue unrelenting efforts to reverse the result, according to copies of the texts obtained by CBS News top election and campaign reporter Robert Costa and Bob Woodward of The Washington Post.

This is what happens when individuals have a hidden agenda. Mrs. Thomas has not only gotten her husband into a pickle; she has gotten herself into one as well. Why would she jeopardize her status by doing such acts?

Reference

Ginni Thomas, Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife, exchanged texts with Mark Meadows about efforts to overturn the 2020 election. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/virginia-ginni-thomas-clarence-wife-mark-meadows-texts-2020-election/?fbclid=IwAR0WUTrGzb_8JHYuRc3lv3J4j1d9YbL7fNyMkfos-qagSeAZOaVEt5pkf3g

The United States will welcome up to 100,000 Ukrainians

A senior administration official says that the United States will welcome up to 100,000 Ukrainians and other people who have fled Russia’s aggression. There are now more than 3.5 million people who have fled Ukraine, says the UN refugee agency. They’ll also be able to get into the U.S. through other ways. Official’s words move will lessen the burden on the European countries already taking on so much of the responsibility. There have been more than 2 million refugees from Ukraine who have come to Poland from the west.

Reference

The United States will welcome up to 100,000 Ukrainians. https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/24/politics/us-to-accept-more-ukrainian-refugees/index.html?fbclid=IwAR18cf3_SgAHx7T4D1z7gaIRQ5A-QcwShtcYYwDQeKbNkMwQB43O47ZripM

Why did Mike Braun clarify his assertion that states should decide the legality of interracial marriage?

Sen. Mike Braun, a Republican from Indiana, told reporters in his state on Tuesday that states should determine whether interracial marriage is allowed before claiming he misunderstood the questions and condemning “racism in any form.”

Mike Braun is interviewed in Bekah’s Westside Cafe in Lebanon, Ind., in April 2018.


Inquired as to whether or not he thought “interracial marriage should be left to the states, Braun said, “Yes, I believe that’s something — if you don’t want the Supreme Court to weigh in on matters like that, you’re not going to be able to have both your cake and eat it.” But, honestly, I don’t believe that’s right.” In 1967, the Supreme Court ruled in Loving v. Virginia, allowing interracial marriage in the United States.
Afterward, Braun was quizzed on his thoughts on the 1965 case Griswold v. Connecticut, which established a constitutional right to sexual privacy and made the use of contraception for married couples permissible under federal law. The states, according to Braun, should be the ones to decide.
It’s possible to mention a wide range of difficulties, Braun said. But, as far as what they’re going to be, I’m going to suggest that they aren’t going to be all going to make you happy in a particular state but that we’re better off letting forms express their points of view rather than homogenizing it throughout the nation, as Roe v. Wade did.”

“Initially limiting” Braun’s contention that the Supreme Court had seized states’ powers in 1973 with Roe v. Wade, the Times of Northwest Indiana reports. However, he maintained his position when asked about other decisions, such as the Loving v. Virginia case.
Braun afterward issued a statement indicating that he had “misunderstood” the questions asked.
“I misread a line of inquiry earlier at a virtual news conference that turned out to be about interracial marriage. To be quite clear, the Constitution forbids all forms of discrimination based on race. So the issue of racism isn’t even up for question, and I firmly oppose it at every level, from the state to the person. It was Braun’s opinion.
In a short interview on Wednesday, Braun told CNN that he doesn’t think states should decide on interracial marriage.
That’s not the case, Braun said. Even though one may be forgivable, he exposed his true identity. We learn a lot about him through his reaction. When a racist is apprehended, they immediately attempt to paint themselves as victims of their own ignorance since it would be so handy.

Reference

Mike Braun clarifies his assertion that states should decide the legality of interracial marriage. https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/23/politics/mike-braun-interracial-marriage-comments/index.html?fbclid=IwAR0jpCRaI0ml0-B9YMxOUafjGrKhdb8fxcqJcMgqxLw7BywL4207X-0bq-s