Rubio: Attacking public officials for their religious beliefs is beyond the pale.
Unless,
of course,
that person
is a Democrat.
Here, Marsha Blackburn is attacking a reverend for the religious content of his sermon.
Beginning to think these people aren't legitimately concerned about religion but use it opportunistically as a partisan wedge.
Conservative media who published story after story about the supposed religious intolerance are now going through the sermons and acquaintances of a reverend to look for gotcha material.
Take the National Review, whose editorial team called Warnock "radical".
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It's November, COVID is the worst it has ever been, and the WI state legislature has no specific plans, just calling pressers to describe ideas they like, which, y'know might become law somehow one of these days when we figure out how that whole deal works
This is really just an amazing statement. We are seeing the results of the legislature doing nothing except blocking the Governor, which is that WI has uncontrolled spread. Do something!
Other countries have historically had higher turnout than the US. We should be learning what they do better, not get rid of one thing that helped to raise US turnout this year. 1/
Take a look at this graph - the US a) lags other country in turnout, and b) it's largely a registration problem. Most states make it unnecessarily difficult to register. Some have learned from other countries like Germany and automatically register voters when they turn 18.
What else do other countries do? Well, because they do not have electoral college, the vast majority of voters actually have a reason to believe their vote might have some impact on who leads their country. Maybe we should try that crazy idea! 3/
One can make complaints of cross-group equity, and whether a targeted approach would be better. But as a factual matter, this is not how revenues and expenditures for this policy would work which the *checks notes* WI Assembly Majority Leader surely nows.
Cross-subsidization for a debt forgiveness policy would come largely from wealthier tax payers to a broad pool of people w diff incomes but where low income beneficiaries would esp. benefit. You might not like that (or debt-financed expenditures) but its a more accurate summary.
My personal policy preference would be a more targeted approach to help low income groups. But the US has done dismally with conditional loan forgiveness programs (see public service loan) and so I currently have low confidence that a means-tested approach would be effective.
The US State Dept and GOP leaders have told Nicaraguan political activists they are with them. Those activists clearly qualify for political asylum under US law. But when they sought asylum in the US they were deported back to Nicaragua w/o even a hearing. washingtonpost.com/world/the_amer…
These are not marginal cases. They are visible opponents of the Ortega regime who in some cases have been tortured. But the US has used COVID as an excuse to stop the asylum process and turn them back to the government that tortured them. washingtonpost.com/world/the_amer…
You can hear a short radio documentary about a family who applied here. The saddest part is that they applied in Texas b/c they heard a Ted Cruz speech praising activists like them. After being deported back to Nicaragua they went into hiding in an attic. thisamericanlife.org/721/the-walls-…
A video of a guy getting decked at DC protests has gone viral. Longer clip shows the same guy initiating violence, & kicking someone on the ground before being sucker-punched. The point is that a clip designed to tell a story may not tell the whole story.
Here is the longer clip. This is in no way condoning what happened, but as a factual matter I don’t want to see bad faith actors like Andy Ngo pushing false narratives that go unanswered.
Trump himself posted the misleading clip, while labeling counter-protestors as "scum" and "human garbage" praising his supporters for "fighting back" and telling police "don't hold back." He is actively encouraging this sort of street violence.
Stanford is both a) trying to hire 10 new scholars to study race in America and b) not allowing staff training to mention systemic racism because of a Trump executive order.
More context: This EO applies to federal contractors - which you can consider universities to be - not using *federal funds* for training related to topics of race. So why not use non-federal fund?. Why raise the white flag for an EO that will be rescinded in a couple of months?
It also seems pretty obvious that a government order that forces universities to flag forbidden words like "critical race theory" or "systemic racism" is a first amendment violation. Why not fight back?