Sunday, August 18, 2024

JD Vance and the return of the Know Nothing Party

JD Vance spouts prejudices about immigrant crime as the basis for his nativist view of immigration policy, citing as evidence the movie Gangs of New York.  https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/18/us/politics/vance-immigration-gangs-of-new-york.html?smid=url-share

These are precisely the views that launched the Know Nothing Party in the 1850s.  That party, whose presidential candidate former President Millard Fillmore came in third in the 1856 election, was based on opposition to Catholic immigrants, who were central (along with white Protestant gangs) to the story told in Gangs of New York.  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1856_United_States_presidential_election  It is ironic that Mr. Vance is a recent convert to Catholicism

It is also worth noting that the once-patron saint of the Republican Party Abraham Lincoln vigorously opposed the Know Nothings, as set forth in this 1855 letter to his law partner Joshua Speed:

I am not a Know-Nothing– That is certain– How could I be? How can any one who abhors the oppression of negroes, be in favor of degrading classes of white people? Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid– As a nation, we began by declaring that “all men are created equal”. We now practically read it “all men are created equal, except negroes” When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read “all men are created equal, except negroes, and  foreignersand catholics”. When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty– to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.

Russia.  This brings us back to the Tsar’s spiritual and political descendant, Vladimir Putin, so admired by Donald Trump and the homophobic Right in the United States today. 

Yes, America, we have a choice in November.  May we choose wisely. 

Tuesday, July 16, 2024

Hogan Senatorial Campaign uses a tactic from the right-wing playbook to attack Angela Alsobrooks.

Today, Maryland Matters reported that the Hogan senatorial campaign is using a bogus website to attack Angela Alsobrooks.

This is a standard right-wing tactic in Maryland, if not elsewhere, as well. The tactic was tried 

by anti-LGBTQ+ people in Montgomery County in 2005.  

https://davidfishback.blogspot.com/2024/07/sex-ed-debate-shifts-to-groups-rights.html

 

We defeated such underhanded tactics then, and will do so again.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/64067f4d4c57f005dc417877/t/665fc1e9630e9a55e9ca33b4/1717551593664/Curriculum+Victory+in+Montgomery+County-vf-2024.pdf


FOR SOME REASON, THE FB ALGORITHM THOUGHT THIS WAS SPAM.  I HAVE APPEALED.  IN ANY EVENT, I AM POSTING IT IN MY BLOG AND WILL DISTRIBUTE THIS WAY.



"Sex ed debate shifts to group's rights in cyberspace" Gazette, March 2, 2005

 


WEDNESDAY, MARCH 02, 2005

Sex ed debate shifts to group's rights in cyberspace

"Sex ed debate shifts to group's rights in cyberspace"

by Sean R. Sedam, Gazette



WEDNESDAY, MARCH 02, 2005

by

Sex ed debate shifts to group's rights in cyberspace

From Gazette.net, by Sean R. Sedam
People visiting www.teachthefacts.com may expect to find the site for a group supporting the health curriculum recently approved by the Montgomery County school board.

What they get instead is a link to the site of Citizens for Responsible Curriculum, a group opposed to the new curriculum.

In November, the board approved a video for 10th-graders demonstrating the proper way to put on a condom and the inclusion of a discussion of sexual orientation in eighth- and 10th-grade health classes.

The group supporting the board's decision is TeachTheFacts.org. Citizens for Responsible Curriculum operates a site at mcpscurriculum.
com and recently created a link to that site at teachthefacts.com.

The move may further muddy the waters in a debate between two groups that both claim to want the same thing: health courses that teach students mainstream, scientifically accurate information about sex. But read the rival Web sites and you realize that the groups disagree on what is mainstream and accurate.

At first the link to the CRC site at teachthefacts.com seemed trivial, said David Fishback, who heads the school system's Citizens Advisory Committee for Family Life and Human Development, which recommended the new curriculum.

Then, Fishback said, he thought about the campaign for Maryland's 8th Congressional District seat last year, in which Republican challenger Charles R. "Chuck" Floyd created a Web site -- www.vanhollen2004.com -- lampooning incumbent Democrat Christopher Van Hollen Jr. The Floyd-created site claimed that Van Hollen supported "mood arousal and sexual risk taking" and a "study of the sexual habits of older men." (Turns out Van Hollen supported a National Institutes of Health-backed study of mood arousal and sexual risk taking, intended to develop intervention efforts that prevented said risk taking.)

It is a common practice for organizations to buy up similar domain names to protect their own sites or to head off competition from rivals.

"Those Internet guys, they look at getting all different kinds of ways to maximize exposure," said Steve Fisher, who handles media and public relations for CRC.

But Fishback sees the move by CRC as going a step too far, he said.

"To link that to a different Web site that has a totally different point of view, in light of what went on with Chuck Floyd and the Chris Van Hollen campaign, I thought that might be something you wanted to be made aware of," he told The Gazette.

Christine Grewell, a TeachTheFacts.org co-founder, criticized CRC's tactics.

"I live here in Montgomery County where we have well-educated people, where we pride ourselves on being able to have open and honest discourse," she said. "So I was a bit disappointed when I heard about their, shall we say, childish behavior."

Fisher said CRC organizers have encouraged supporters to keep the discourse civil.

"We told them, 'Do not engage in tit for tat,'" he said. "The blogosphere can get very nasty."

Fisher said the group cautioned its members against taking after a group from another recent campaign.

"Don't get into these verbal exchanges like the Swift Boat people," he said.

Friday, July 5, 2024

Email to Congressman Jamie Raskin in the wake of President Biden's interview with George Stephanopoulos

On July 2, Thomas Friedman published a thoughtful and persuasive op-ed in the New York Times explaining why Joe Biden should step aside from the 2024 Democratic Presidential Nomination.  It seemed quite persuasive.

President Biden is now seeking to convince people that he is, in fact, up to being the standard bearer of the Democratic Party (and thus the forces who want to continue the American Experiment as envisioned by Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, Martin Luther King, and Barack Obama) against Donald Trump's Republican Party.  

So I watched with interest George Stephanopoulos' interview with President Biden this evening.  Afterwards, Bobbi and I wrote this to our Congressman, the great and good Jamie Raskin.


Dear Congressman Raskin,




Wednesday, May 22, 2024

Metro DC PFLAG Board of Education Candidate Questionnaires and Responses, 2018-2024

Since 2018, the Metro DC Chapter of PFLAG has sent questionnaires to all candidates for the Montgomery County Board of Education.  These responses helped to educate candidates, to find out which candidates were LGBTQ+ allies, and to identify which candidates did not support the advances we had achieved. 

2024

At Large and District 2 and 4 (links to all in these posts)

https://davidfishback.blogspot.com/2024/03/metro-dc-pflag-montgomery-county_19.html or https://pflagdc.org/advocate/metro-dc-pflag-blog/metro-dc-pflag-montgomery-county-maryland-board-of-education-candidate-questionnaires-2024


2022

At Large

https://davidfishback.blogspot.com/2022/05/metro-dc-pflag-montgomery-county-at.html


District 1

https://davidfishback.blogspot.com/2022/05/metro-dc-pflag-montgomery-county_55.html


District 3

https://davidfishback.blogspot.com/2022/05/metro-dc-pflag-montgomery-county_7.html

 

District 5

https://davidfishback.blogspot.com/2022/05/metro-dc-pflag-montgomery-county.html


2020

At-Large

https://davidfishback.blogspot.com/2020/03/metro-dc-pflag-montgomery-county-at_22.html 


District 2 and 4

https://davidfishback.blogspot.com/2020/03/metro-dc-pflag-montgomery-county.html

 

2018

At-Large

https://davidfishback.blogspot.com/2018/05/metro-dc-pflag-montgomery-county-at.html


Districts 1, 3, and 5

https://davidfishback.blogspot.com/2018/05/metro-dc-pflag-montgomery-county.html

 


Thursday, May 2, 2024

Congressman Nadler is right about the dangers of the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act of 2023

Warning: The House passage yesterday of the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act of 2023, a bill codifying the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance “working definition” of antisemitism, notwithstanding its name, is very dangerous, as Congressman Jerry Nadler explained on the floor of the House yesterday. I strongly urge that people read Congressman Nadler's statement.

We would be far better off with HB 7910, the Countering Anti-Semitism Act. I suspect the MAGA Republican Speaker would not let HB 7910 come to a vote. The Senate version of HB 7910 was endorsed by Rabbi Jonah Pesner, Executive Director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism.

In 2022, there was a controversy in Montgomery County (Maryland) over the County Council’s proposed resolution to adopt the IHRA definition of anti-semitism. After considerable discussion, Paragraphs 11 and 12 were added to the Montgomery County resolution that passed. They did not go far enough, in my view, but they did ameliorate some of the dangers I and others warned about:

11. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s Working Definition is intended to be a non-legally binding statement of guidance and educational tool to help combat antisemitism in Montgomery County, Maryland. Nothing in this resolution should be construed to limit anyone’s right to free speech or political debate, which are protected under the First Amendment.

12. Modern forms of antisemitism can manifest through anti-Zionism when denying the Jewish right to existence and self-determination or employing an antisemitic trope. However, criticism of Israeli government policies or actions does not constitute antisemitism.

But, as Congressman Nadler correctly notes, HB 6090 would bar consideration of such perspectives.

Ranking Member Nadler Floor Statement on H.R. 6090, the “Antisemitism Awareness Act of 2023”

Sunday, April 28, 2024

Endorsements of LAURA STEWART, NATALIE ZIMMERMAN, and RITA MONTOYA for the Montgomery County Board of Education

Endorsements of LAURA STEWART, NATALIE ZIMMERMAN, and RITA MONTOYA for the Montgomery County Board of Education 

In 1996, in the aftermath of Bill Clinton’s reelection as president, right-wing anti-LGBTQ+ political operative Ralph Reed said, “I would rather have a thousand school board members than one president and no school board members."  The right-wing has targeted Montgomery County in the past, without success.   We are a progressive community when it comes to LGBTQ+ matters, including caring for and embracing all of our students.  So it is vital that the electorate knows which candidates are supportive of this diversity, and which are not.[1]


There are three seats up for election on the May 14 primary ballot: One At-Large seat, and the seats for District 2 and District 4.  While the District candidates must live in those districts, everyone in the County may vote in all three contests.  The top two vote-getters in each contest will proceed to the general election in November.


The last year has been a tumultuous one for MCPS.  Problems emerged within the MCPS bureaucracy regarding the selection of a new high school principal who apparently had a long history of sexual harassment complaints. This system breakdown led to the separation of the Superintendent, and has raised questions as to the effectiveness of the current Board members in providing effective oversight of MCPS administration.


At the same time, a different controversy arose from MCPS's (and the Board of Education's) wise ongoing efforts to provide curriculum and educational materials, like storybooks, which support the diverse groups who make up the school system -- and, indeed, our wider community in Montgomery County.  The extremist group Moms for Liberty sought to make a cause celebre of these efforts, and right-wing groups like the Becket Fund for Religious Freedom Liberty and America First Legal (an organization led by former President Trump's close advisor Stephen Miller) brought lawsuits against MCPS. The principal lawsuit alleged that MCPS's decision to not allow parents to opt-out of such materials was illegal. In July, I co-authored a Guest Commentary in Maryland Matters, explaining why the MCPS decision was sound and why the suit had no merit.  Plaintiffs sought an injunction to block the no-opt-out policy, but in August the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland rejected the injunction in a 60-page decision.  (Plaintiff filed an appeal, which is pending in the U.S Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.)  


So, in my view, there are two fundamental issues in the primary election:  


1.  Which candidates fully support the wise diversity policies developed by the Board and MCPS over the past decade.  


2.  And of those candidates, which candidates are best able to oversee and guide the administration of the bureaucracy which serves the 160,554 students in 211 public schools in Montgomery County. 

 

After reviewing the responses to the detailed candidate questionnaire developed by the Metro DC Chapter of PFLAG, listening to candidate forums, and having conversations with some candidates,  I am convinced that the following candidates would continue to support the wise diversity policies:


District 4:  Shebra Evans (incumbent) and Laura Stewart.  

District 2:  Rebecca Smondrowski (incumbent) and Natalie Zimmerman.

At-Large:  Lynne Harris (incumbent), Melissa Kim, Jeffrey Long, and Rita Montoya. (I do note that Ms. Kim did not respond to the Metro DC PFLAG questionnaire until April 17, and before that time gave problematic answers to questions that it turned out she did not understand.) 

 

The other candidates are problematic, at the least. See this footnote.[2]


For the reasons set forth below, I endorse Laura Stewart, Natalie Zimmerman, and Rita Montoya


NOTE:  THESE ENDORSEMENTS ARE IN MY PERSONAL CAPACITY, AND NOT AS REPRESENTATIVE OF ANY ORGANIZATION.


I endorsed Ms. Smondrowski and Ms. Evans in their earlier successful runs for the BOE, and I have been very happy with their actions on, and commitment to, LGBTQ+ matters.  I have likewise been please with Ms. Harris.  I endorsed Ms. Harris' November 2020 competitor, not because of any doubts about her qualifications or substantive views, but because I thought her competitor was particularly exceptional. 


Being a member of the Board of Education is challenging.  One could make a very strong case that bringing in new blood (four of the seven elected non-student members are not up for re-election this year).   Ms. Smondrowski has served for nearly 12 years, and Ms. Evans has served for nearly 8.  Ms. Harris has served for nearly 4.  In the campaign forums, I have not heard persuasive, concrete arguments about how the present members of the Board would do a better job of oversight, so that disasters like the one involving the promotion of a principal who had a long history of sexual harassment, that was known to many in the system, could not happen again.  I fear that this incident has led many people to question the competence of the incumbents.  I, personally, am not in a position to judge, but it is significant that the the teachers' union, the Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA) has endorsed challengers in all three races:  Ms. Stewart, Ms. Zimmerman, and Ms. Montoya. (On the other hand, the union representing support staff at MCPS, SEIU Local 500, has endorsed the incumbents.)  All things being at least equal, I believe it would be best to bring in new people.


DISTRICT 4:  I am confident that the best choice for District 4 is Laura Stewart.  This is not because I have any specific criticism of Ms. Evans, but because Ms. Stewart provides an energy that would be very helpful to the Board, and very possibly make it more effective.  Ms. Stewart's years of MCPS and PTSA advocacy, both at the local and state levels, have shown energy, wisdom, and commitment, which led to her endorsement by the MCEA and a range of other groups.  I have been particularly impressed with her dogged, public advocacy in support of sound BOE/MCPS policies that have been under attack from outside right-wing advocacy groups.  Along with former BOE member Jill Ortman-Fouse, Ms. Stewart spearheaded the effort to mobilize people to back MCPS when it was under attack, and, to be frank, MCPS was not doing a very good job explaining the wisdom of its policy.  The letter signed by more than 3,000 residents of Montgomery County helped to turn the tide of public opinion when demonstrations in front of MCPS headquarters threatened to monopolize the conversation.  Similarly, her participation in drafting and signing the above-referenced Guest Commentary in Maryland Matters ("We can't opt out of diversity in our schools and communities") helped advance the discussion, and dispelled, I believe, some of the misconceptions that were creeping into local media.


DISTRICT 2:  I agree with the MCEA's endorsement of elementary school teacher Natalie Zimmerman.  While the current BOE members have a range of experiences that complement each other, at the moment there are no BOE members with experience (and current experience, at that) as an MCPS elementary school classroom teacher.  Ms. Zimmerman has that experience.  And she has been thoughtful and impressive at campaign forums. Her perspective could be  extremely useful going forward.  Twelve years is a long time, and Ms. Smondrowski has made some very good contributions as a BOE member.  But I believe it is time for newer people who share similar values in these positions.


AT-LARGE:  I find this one the most difficult.  Incumbent Lynne Harris has a wealth of useful experience, and is less likely to be burned out after one term.  On the other hand, her handling of the storybook controversy could have been less confrontational.  And it might be better to have three, not just two, new BOE members.  Significant is the MCEA endorsement of challenger Rita Montoya, who has useful personal and professional experiences as a PTA president, parent of elementary school children, juvenile public defender, and work with underserved communities, and thus could add useful perspectives to the BOE. Neither Ms. Kim nor Mr. Long appear to me to be viable candidates. For me, this is a close call, but, on balance, I think Rita Montoya would be the best choice.

 



[1] Every two years, around this time, I get questions about for whom to vote for the Montgomery County Board of Education. This is where I am coming from on MCPS issues: I have been involved in MCPS matters since 1984, when I was co-president of the Rosemary Hills Primary School PTA, working for needed resources for this magnet integration school. Later, I was public affairs director for the Gifted and Talented Association of Montgomery County, working to secure appropriate education for students and seeking ways to widen the net with respect to GT identification and opportunities; I subsequently, as a PTSA Board member at Richard Montgomery High School, I worked to protect needed resources for the Blair, Richard Montgomery, Takoma Park, and Eastern signature secondary schools. Beginning in 2002, after my children graduated from MCPS, I became active in working to secure appropriate health education and other MCPS policies regarding LGBT+ issues, and continue in this area (in which MCPS has made great progress) to this day.

A list of my related BOE election-related posts going back to 2016 may be found here.

 

[2]  

At-Large candidate Sharif Hidyat stated in his thoughtful responses to the Metro DC PFLAG questionnaire that he opposed the no-opt-out policy for storybooks in the general curriculum, but hoped a satisfactory resolution could be found that would satisfy both the interests advanced by MCPS and parents who wished to have that option; he has not, however, suggested any such resolution.  Significantly, in the campaign forums I have seen, he has not indicated any appreciation for the perspectives of those who support the existing policy, even though I discussed with him these perspectives thoroughly in a phone conversation he initiated after he read the Guest Commentary I co-authored in Maryland Matters. 

  

At-Large candidate Fitzgerald Mofor has given jumbled and often contradictory responses both to the Metro DC PFLAG questionnaire and in candidate forums.  For example, he states his belief that all mentions of LGBTQ+ people should be limited to the Family Life and Human Sexuality unit of the health education curriculum (as to which there is an opt-out), but then states that he fully supports DEI initiatives.  Of course, if you cannot discuss LGBTQ+ matters, or even the existence of LGBTQ+ people outside of the opt-out available human sexuality curriculum, the it seems he would not include LGBTQ+ people in DEI initiatives.  Mr. Mofor also recently asserted that the current school board has “spent over a million dollars litigating a case on inclusive curriculum, shoving and ramming ideology down the throats of parents and students.” 


District 2 candidate Brenda Diaz also opposes the MCPS policy. In her response to Metro DC PFLAG questionnaire, she asserted that  Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg's characterization of the Florida "Don't Say Gay" law is "disingenuous"; that is certainly a red flag.  

 

District 2 candidate Ricky Mui, who also opposes the MCPS policy, provided wordy responses to the Metro DC PFLAG questionnaire that, at best, portrayed a lack of understanding of the issues and what MCPS policies and actions are.  

 

District 2 candidate Aby Thioye strongly expresses her opposition to the opt-out policy, and declined to even respond to the Metro DC PFLAG questionnaire.


District 4 candidate Bethany Mandel, like Ms. Thioye, declined to respond the Metro DC PFLAG questionnaire, which typically is a sure sign that she is not supportive of LGBTQ+ students. In campaign forums, Ms. Mandel has vigorously expressed her opposition to the MCPS storybook policy regarding opt-out, and goesfurther, attacking what she refers to as "woke" approaches to education.  She has six children, and home-schools those who are school age; she has no experience with MCPS.  In one forum, she said that she wants MCPS to follow her advice about education because her children will someday have to deal with children who have graduated from MCPS.  Ms. Mandel, who has the support of the right-wing Moms for Liberty was active in the 2023 Moms for Liberty rally in Philadelphia featuring Donald Trump and Ron De Santis, and is a fairly well-known commentator in right-wing circles, as recently documented here