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/
Sunday, August 18, 2024
JD Vance and the return of the Know Nothing Party
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.
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
"Sex ed debate shifts to group's rights in cyberspace"
by Sean R. Sedam, Gazette
|
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,
We just listened to President Biden’s interview with George Stephanopoulos. The questioning was fair and sympathetic.
However, the President’s answers did not give us confidence that he is the best choice to lead us in the campaign to defeat Donald Trump and his MAGA crew. The stakes are too high to nominate someone who is much less likely to win than other Democrats, including Vice President Harris. We urge you to join with your colleagues in the Democratic Party Leadership to tell the President that, in the interest of the country, he should step aside as the nominee.
While the President correctly pointed out how much he has accomplished in the White House, he did not satisfactorily answer the relevant concern: Whether he is cognitively able to perform at the level we need if we are to be able to mobilize enough voters to defeat Trump.
The President did not give clear answers as to whether he had had a thorough medical examination regarding his cognitive abilities. Rather, he kept saying that he knows he can do the job. We have no doubt that he believes this in good faith. But this has been a big concern, particularly among those who have seen declines – often steep declines – of their elderly relatives and friends. This can be hard for the person in decline to admit. But in this situation, it is necessary.
The President turned every question about his ability to continue by talking about the job he had already done. That is understandable, but not useful. The point is whether he can CONTINUE to be an effective political leader in the current environment. Nothing he said assuaged our concern. Last week’s debate was not just a “poor performance.” It was a performance that leads voters to legitimately worry that he would not be able to be a 24/7 President.
The debate showed the country an incumbent President who could not complete thoughts and sentences and who was unable to effectively respond to Trump’s firehose of dangerous lies. As a result, many of us began to fear that he would not be able to be an effective candidate in the next four crucial months leading up to the November election. The President’s record has been very good. But there are others who have been part of the progress of the last several years who could pick up the banner and make a more effective case to the American voters. And, perhaps most significantly, the continuing discussion about the incumbent President’s cognitive situation is distracting from public focus on the existential threat the former President poses to the American Experiment. This distraction can only be eliminated if President Biden steps down from running.
We had hoped that the President’s “inner circle” would convince him to step aside. That does not appear to be happening. So it is the responsibility of our most respected Democratic leaders to jointly urge him to step aside. This may be an even more challenging act of patriotism than your brave and effective resistance to Trump. But it is necessary.
Stephanopoulos ended his interview by asking the President how he would feel in January 2025 if he ran and lost in November. The President responded that he would know that he did everything he could to prevent the loss. But he could not admit to the possibility that the most important thing he could do would be to step aside NOW. This crisis is not about him, but about the country.
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:
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.
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.
