Tag Archives: Politics

Did you know that regulations limiting education on racism make it difficult for teachers to explain the Buffalo massacre?

On Saturday, a white shooter opened fire at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York, killing ten Black individuals.

Elizabeth Close spoke to her high school ethnic studies class in Austin, Texas, about the Buffalo shooting.Liz Moskowitz for NBC News

Elizabeth Close’s high school ethnic studies class was addressing a new state legislation mandating that she present balanced viewpoints on “widely disputed and politically contentious matters.” Texas is one of many states that have recently enacted legislation restricting how instructors may address racism. Teachers debated on social media and in essays how to discuss the massacre in Buffalo. A math instructor in Atlanta said that he was hesitant to respond when his pupils brought up the subject.

A teacher in east Texas wrote, “Legally, I cannot touch it.” They might equip pupils with historical background and media literacy skills on the history of racism in America. A teacher might use the massacre in Buffalo as a springboard to initiate a lesson on gun regulation. In the present context, however, these debates may potentially put teachers at danger, according to one expert. Terry Harris, executive director of student services for the Rockwood School District in the St. Louis suburbs, said that instructors are required to explain the historical background of contemporary events.

Harris observed, “Teachers are thinking, ‘I’m not prepared to risk that dialogue and lose my job because I need to feed my family.'” Sen. Bernie Feingold argues that legislation mandating a balanced viewpoint on contentious matters may be applied to the mass shooting in Buffalo, New York. A teacher in Texas informed her pupils that she was required to provide several viewpoints on the assault. Elizabeth Close said that she could not conceive of a method to approach the topic appropriately in a classroom with kids of color and immigrants.

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 Omicron BA.2 subvariant will soon dominate in the U.S., but Fauci doesn’t expect another surge?

According to data published this week by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Omicron’s more contagious subvariant, BA.2, has more than doubled in prevalence in the United States over the last two weeks and now accounts for more than 34% of Covid-19 infections that have undergone genetic sequencing. Since February 5, when it comprised roughly 1% of genetically analyzed viral samples in the United States, BA.2 has been progressively increasing as a fraction of Covid variants circulating in the country. BA.2 probably already accounts for 50% of new infections in the United States since many individuals do tests at home that are not included in official statistics, according to Ali Mokdad, an epidemiologist at the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. In addition, Walgreens data indicates that BA.2 is the leading variety, accounting for 51% of all positive Covid cases for the week ending March 19.

Reference

Omicron BA.2 subvariant will soon dominate in the U.S., but Fauci doesn’t expect another surge. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/23/covid-omicron-bapoint2-subvariant-will-soon-dominate-in-us-but-fauci-doesnt-expect-another-surge.html?fbclid=IwAR1PtlOWk2ebo9dnBoKtsqyiH_wbf5mMmWMnNjPqt03RYgVyEZ2HCwcjHtY

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

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

Did you know that Jackson pushes back at GOP critics, defends judicial record?

Brown, Ketanji Jackson vehemently defended her record as a judge Tuesday, rebutting Republican charges that she was soft on crime and stating that if confirmed as the first black woman on the Supreme Court, she would rule as an “independent jurist.”

Republicans aggressively questioned Jackson during a marathon hearing that lasted into the night about the sentences she handed down to sex offenders during her nine years as a federal judge, her advocacy on behalf of terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay, her views on critical race theory, and even her religious beliefs. In February, President Joe Biden appointed Jackson to the Supreme Court, completing a campaign commitment to nominate a black woman to the court for the first time in American history. Cruz pressed Jackson on her sentencing for child pornographers, bringing up a giant poster board and marking passages he believed were heinous. 

The White House has rejected the criticism as “toxic and weakly presented misinformation.” And sentencing expert Douglas Berman, an Ohio State law professor, noted on his blog that although Jackson’s record indicates she is suspicious of the range of prison sentences proposed in child pornography cases, “so were prosecutors in the majority of her cases and district judges nationally.” Jackson said that the notion does not arise in her job as a judge and “would not be anything I would depend on” if approved. Jackson’s answers bypassed a key point: the court weighs whether to overrule those cases that affirm a nationwide right to abortion.

Reference

Jackson pushes back at GOP critics, defends judicial record. https://apnews.com/article/ketanji-brown-jackson-hearing-day-2-live-updates-219ce62acd87ca205163781f5b6623a0?fbclid=IwAR3L5e1TdHHui49NkKb_LwHfhgscFcptsRgqGb9DmXc9Jqr7FA-BPYh1DkQ

Why have some of the officials of the Orthodox Church expressed opposition to Russia’s invasion?

Several officials of the Orthodox Church have expressed their opposition to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. With the noteworthy exception of the Orthodox patriarch of Moscow, the military intervention has been rejected by the majority of people.

Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew I, shown leading a service with at the Patriarchal Church of St. George in Istanbul on March 6, has said that Russia’s attack on Ukraine is a ‘violation of human rights.’ (photo: YASIN AKGUL / AFP via Getty Images)

The leader of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate has urged Russian President Vladimir Putin for an “early cessation of the fratricidal conflict.” According to Russian President Vladimir Putin, the Russian invasion of Ukraine was the greatest conventional military operation in Europe since World War II. With staunch defiance, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has resisted Russian military intervention in his nation since 2014. As a result, the death toll has risen to tens of thousands, with 2.5 million people fleeing to neighboring nations like Poland, Hungary, Moldova, Slovakia, and Romania.

Theodore II, the Orthodox patriarch of Alexandria and all of Africa, has said that Russian President Vladimir Putin is “drunk on power” and “the emperor of our times.” Patriarch Daniel of Romania, the patriarch of the Romanian Orthodox Church, has called for an “immediate cessation of hostilities” in Ukraine. On February 24, Georgian Patriarch Illia II issued a dire warning about a “global calamity” and remembered Russia’s invasion of his nation in 2008. In early March, more than 275 Russian Orthodox priests and deacons from all across the globe signed an open letter. The Russian Orthodox Church has produced a series of remarks in which it expresses implicit support for the Ukrainian invasion while refraining from condemning the Russian government in any manner.

After giving an anti-war sermon in Moscow, Father Ioann Burdin, a Russian Orthodox priest, was detained. He appealed for the restoration of peace and unity with Metropolitan Onufry in a sermon delivered on February 27. He did not mention the separatist Orthodox Church in Ukraine, which he described as “a schism.” Many of Putin’s justifications for invading Ukraine, particularly those related to NATO expansion, received backing from the Russian patriarch. According to reliable sources, Orthodox clergy and faithful in Ukraine have voiced their displeasure of Patriarch Kirill’s stance on the issue. Father Stefano Caprio said that the Ukrainian conflict generates a “deep divide” in the Orthodox Church in the United States.

Patriarch Kirill cannot break away from Putin because “he would bring the whole palace crashing down,” as he puts it. Some other autocephalous Orthodox churches, particularly those politically and ecclesiastically aligned with the patriarch, support the patriarch.

Reference
Kyiv Patriarch Rejects Property Seizures, Saying They’ll …. https://www.rferl.org/a/kyiv-patriarch-rejects-property-seizures-saying-they-ll-give-kremlin-pretext-for-incursions/29580539.html

Widespread Orthodox Church Backlash Unleashed Against Russia’s Aggression in Ukraine. https://www.ncregister.com/news/widespread-orthodox-church-backlash-unleashed-against-russia-s-aggression-in-ukraine?fbclid=IwAR3GpA1ftGo9LyZOllnPLt6aJ62Gez0LR6jeWNSo_nbmuSUq7vHmkcJNMMA

Did you know that three Russian billionaires have resigned from the board of directors of LetterOne, a $22 billion investment corporation, after the company barred two Russian oligarchs from participating due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine?

Three Russian billionaires have resigned from the board of directors of a $22-billion investment company during their country’s escalating invasion of Ukraine.

Russian President Vladimir Putin. 
MIKHAIL KLIMENTYEV/SPUTNIK/AFP via Getty Images

This follows LetterOne’s decision last week to freeze out Mikhail Fridman and Petr Aven, who are subject to Western-imposed sanctions, by barring access to their premises and prohibiting them from communicating with workers. German Khan, Alexei Kuzmichev, and Andrei Kosogov — none of whom are sanctioned – all resigned from their jobs at the business on Monday. “While none of these three people have been sanctioned, they think that taking this action is in the long-term best interests of LetterOne, its workers, and the many jobs supported by its portfolio firms,” the company stated in a statement to Insider. Khan, 60, a cofounder of LetterOne and a partner in Alpha Group, said in a statement that he backed the board’s decisions and urged an end to the fight. “The bulk of LetterOne’s founders have strong roots in Ukraine, and the devastation of the places where I spent my youth and which are now home to our forefathers’ graves is sad,” added Khan, who has a net worth of almost $6.9 billion, according to Bloomberg. Kuzmichev, 59, is a cofounder of Alfa-Bank, Russia’s largest private bank, and has an estimated net worth of around $5.2 billion, according to Bloomberg. Kosogov, 60, is a member of the Alpha Group’s board of directors and is worth $1.2 billion, according to Forbes.

Additionally, LetterOne said in Monday’s statement that Fridman and Aven, who stepped down from the company’s board of directors last Wednesday, had their shares “frozen permanently” and are no longer eligible to receive dividends or other financial funds from LetterOne. Mervyn Davies, the former chairman now CEO of LetterOne, told the Financial Times that they were shut out of offices, denied access to records, and prohibited from communicating with staff. LetterOne gives $150 million to aid those devastated by Ukraine’s conflict, and shareholders have decided that all dividends would go toward relief efforts, according to a corporate statement.

Reference
3 Russian billionaires resigned from the board of the $22 billion investment firm LetterOne after it locked out 2 Russian oligarchs over the invasion of Ukraine. https://www.businessinsider.com/russian-billionaires-oligarchs-letterone-resign-step-down-board-lock-out-2022-3?fbclid=IwAR2-aejj2I_yRuFdLYqmeybT9L8_pPHLzeUKdXbUrvwJBc720dCMUc70Edw