Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

“You are doing nothing”: Republicans erupt after Beto O’Rourke interrupts Texas Gov. Greg Abbott

Texas gubernatorial candidate Beto O’Rourke, a Democrat, interrupted Republican Gov. Greg Abbott’s press conference on Wednesday, publicly admonishing Abbott for offering “nothing” to his constituency after a school shooting in Uvalde left nineteen children and two teachers dead. 

“You are doing nothing,” O’Rourke said to Abbott’s face after walking up to the stage. “You said this was not predictable, this was totally predictable, and you choose not to do anything.”

Uvalde Mayor Don McLaughlin immediately attempted to shout the interruption down, telling O’Rourke “Sir, you are out of line. Please leave this auditorium.”

“The time to stop the next shooting is now, and you are doing nothing,” O’Rourke, who is challenging Abbott, pressed on.

McLaughlin later called the gubernatorial candidate “a sick son of a b**ch who would come to a deal like this to make a political issue.”


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


At one point, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Tex., who was also in attendance, told O’Rourke to “sit down.”

O’Rourke was shortly escorted out of the event.

RELATED: At least 21 dead in Texas school shooting: “They f**king failed our kids”

Later, in a widely shared video from outside the presser, the Texas Democrat castigated Abbott for attributing the shooting to mental health problems while refusing to expand Medicaid, which includes mental health coverage. O’Rourke also brought up the need for Texas to institute red flag laws, which allow the police to temporarily confiscate firearms from gun owners if they present a danger to themselves or their communities. 

“Why are we letting this happen in this country?” he asked a crowd. “Year after year, city after city. This is on all of us – if we do not do something. I’m going to do something, and I’m not alone. The people of Texas are with us.”

“These massacres are not natural disasters, acts of God, or random. They are totally predictable, direct consequences of the choices made by Greg Abbott and the majority of those in the Texas legislature,” O’Rourke wrote to supporters in a Wednesday email.

O’Rourke’s interruption was met with swift rebuke from Republicans. 

“Beto danced on the dead bodies of children,” far-right personality Mike Cernovich tweeted. “He’ll be celebrated by the regime media for this. They have no decency.”

During the presser, the governor said that Ramos had no known mental health issues. But according to The Washington Post, Ramos was well-known for his reclusion and aggressive outbursts. As Ramos grew older, friends said, his condition sharply deteriorated. The troubled teen reportedly developed a fixation with guns and would shoot his BB gun at random strangers. 

“He posted videos on his Instagram where the cops were there and he’d call his mom a b*** and say she wanted to kick him out,” one former friend said. “He’d be screaming and talking to his mom really aggressively.”

RELATED: Republicans don’t care about kids — just imaginary children

The 4 essential cooks I turn to again and again

I have a cookbook collection that numbers well over 1,000 volumes. Seriously. And I use them. Not every single one every day, it’s true. But I read all of them — for inspiration, for facts, for specific recipes, for styles, for ingredient information, for techniques, and just for fun. But there are a handful of books and writers that I go back to constantly. These are the ones I call “The Essentials.”

The Essentials are the friends I can’t do without. Whether it’s for the philosophy of food, or the basics of making a vinaigrette, these are my daily go-tos. I’ve been in professional kitchens my whole adult life, but these writers are as helpful and necessary to me as they are to someone just starting to cook at home. Though I believe that technique is essential when preparing food, there are other things that are equally essential. And my “essentials” remind us what those other things are.

M.F.K. Fisher

Mary Frances Kennedy Fisher cannot really be called a cookbook writer. She was a philosopher who used food as her way of explaining, understanding, and coming to terms with life. Though her many books do contain the occasional recipe, I’d urge you to read her more for your soul than for your stomach. She will engage all of your senses as she talks about life-changing meals, and the pleasures to be had at table. And she’ll engage your heart when she reminds you that cooking for people, or even for yourself, is one of the greatest gifts we can give. But be prepared: Acerbic doesn’t even come close to describing her. She never suffered fools gladly, yet her understanding of people, and our need to gather and share food, will fill you with wonder. And you may even be a bit more mindful when cooking for, and sharing food with, your loved ones.

Julia Child

It’s next to impossible to cook or write about food without including Julia. As has been said by greater minds than mine, she completely changed the way Americans approach food. But I’d like to suggest that we reclaim her from the cute, old fashioned box that many put her in today. While you might not plan to spend days making puff pastry from scratch, or spend countless hours on a Boeuf Bourguignon, Child’s exactitude and specificity, as well as flawless recipes, should serve as an inspiration to everyone who steps into a kitchen. If you truly like to cook, or really want to know how, you can’t do any better than reaching for one of her many books. They tell you the what, the why, and especially the how. And everything she teaches you, and make no mistake she is a great teacher, will impact whatever you’re making. Even if it’s not some elaborate French concoction. After all, one of her favorite dinners was a hamburger!

Julie Sahni

From the first moment I tasted Indian food, I was a goner. I fell head over heels for the deep, savory, spicy, and, to me, totally confusing layers of flavor. This food was so far out of my wheelhouse that I hardly knew what to do. But I knew I wanted more.

But the notion of making it myself at home never occurred to me. Until that magical Christmas in 1986 when the man who is now my husband gave me a Julie Sahni cookbook. Suffice it to say, as I read and cooked my way through “Classic Indian Cooking,” I discovered that Sahni had the rare gift of making a complex, deeply nuanced cuisine as easy and straightforward as any food I had ever made. She is a great teacher (are you sensing a theme here?) who knew how to put a novice like me at ease. It was a revelation to me that the most difficult thing about learning to cook this glorious cuisine was . . . shopping. And now, 36 years after I began that journey, the world has changed so completely that even shopping for the right spices is now as easy as pie. The next Christmas, I was given “Classic Indian Vegetarian and Grain Cooking” (yes, he knows what he’s doing with Christmas gifts!). And off I went on another deep dive. And even for nonvegetarians, this book bursts open a whole new world. Her food is delicious, the recipes are faultless, the instructions are eminently doable, and the results will amaze. Though I now cook this food at least twice to four times a month, I still go back to her every time.

Edna Lewis

Edna Lewis was born in Freetown, Va., a small community founded by three former slaves, one of whom was her grandfather. She learned to cook from necessity and ended up a true celebrity chef when she took NYC by storm. Cafe Nicholson and Brooklyn’s legendary Gage and Tollner were two of her famed eateries.

Ms. Lewis’ cooking hardly ever strayed from her rural Virginia roots. But her honest voice and honest cooking caused Manhattan and Brooklyn sophisticates to clamor for her beautifully prepared Southern food. Humble ingredients, respectfully prepared, caused people to rediscover what she always knew-that American cuisine could stand proudly alongside the other great cuisines of the world.

At a time when women, and most especially Black women, were uncommon sights in major kitchens in this country, Ms. Lewis was standing proudly center stage, extolling the legitimate greatness of collards, fried chicken, and sweet potato pie. And her championing of fresh vegetables helped lead the way for our ability to get those vegetables everywhere today. Her cookbooks are a clear roadmap for making simple country food that is the equal of anything deemed “fancy” or “upscale.” The recipes are so direct and clear that anyone, novice or chef, need but follow her instructions and delicious, soul satisfying food is assured. American cuisine owes her a great debt, not only for the fight she fought and the life she lived, but for the glorious food she returned to its rightful place.

Matthew McConaughey issues a “call to action” following school shooting in hometown of Uvalde

Matthew McConaughey took to social media to address the Texas school shooting — which left at least 21 individuals dead, including 19 students, a teacher and one other adult, on Tuesday — that took place in his native town of Uvalde.

In a statement posted on Wednesday, McConaughey offered prayers to those affected by the recent tragedies and called Americans to question how they can individually protect their neighborhoods, communities and country, stating “we cannot exhale once again, make excuses, and accept these tragic realities as the status quo.”

RELATED: Are mass shootings an American epidemic?

The true call to action now is for every American to take a longer and deeper look in the mirror, and ask ourselves, ‘What is it that we truly value? How do we repair the problem? What small sacrifices can we individually take today, to preserve a healthier and safer nation, state, and neighborhood tomorrow?’ We cannot exhale once again, make excuses, and accept these tragic realities as the status quo.

The “Interstellar” actor then described gun violence as “an epidemic we can control” but refrained from explicitly using the term “guns” or mentioning the need for gun control reforms within his message. McConaughey also issued a call to action, saying society as a whole “must do better” and that “action must be taken so that no parent has to experience what the parents in Uvalde and the others before them have endured.”

This is an epidemic we can control, and whichever side of the aisle we may stand on, we all know we can do better. We must do better. Action must be taken so that no parent has to experience what the parents in Uvalde and the others before them have endured.

“To those who dropped their loved ones off to school not knowing that today was goodbye, no words can comprehend or heal your loss, but if prayers can provide comfort, we will keep them coming,” he concluded.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


McConaughey has long expressed great pride for his home state and recently considered running for Texas governor. He later explained his decision to opt out of the race in a November video message and said he would find other ways to give back.

“As a simple kid born in the little town of Uvalde, Texas, it never occurred to me that I would one day be considered for political leadership,” McConaughey said, per CNN. “It’s a humbling and inspiring path to ponder. It is also a path that I’m choosing not to take at this moment.”

More stories you might like:

“He kept getting worse”: Friend says Salvador Ramos became “different person” after being bullied

Friends grew increasingly concerned about the behavior of an 18-year-old who gunned down at least 19 children and two teachers at a Texas elementary school, but they were still shocked to learn of his brutal actions.

Salvador Rolando Ramos shot and critically wounded his grandmother before going on a rampage at Robb Elementary School with weapons he legally purchased this month, just after turning 18 years old, before he was fatally shot by police, and former friends struggled to process the news after the shooter’s identity went public, reported the Washington Post.

“I couldn’t even think, I couldn’t even talk to anyone,” said Stephen Garcia, who had been Ramos’ best friend in eighth grade. “I just walked out of class, really upset, you know, bawling my eyes out, because I never expected him to hurt people.”

“I think he needed mental help,” Garcia added, “and more closure with his family, and love.”

Ramos was frequently bullied by classmates for his stutter and pronounced lisp, said Garcia, who moved to another part of Texas when his mother relocated for her job.

“He just started being a different person,” Garcia said. “He kept getting worse and worse, and I don’t even know.”

Ramos dropped out of school, started wearing all black clothing and military boots, and longtime friend Santos Valdez Jr. noticed similar changes, such as the time he showed up to a park to play basketball with cuts all over his face, which he initially blamed on a cat.

“Then he told me the truth, that he’d cut up his face with knives over and over and over,” Valdez said. “I was like, ‘You’re crazy, bro, why would you do that?'”

Ramos told him he’d done it for fun, and Valdez said Ramos drove around sometimes at night with another friend and shot at random people with a BB gun and egged cars, and he started posting photos of automatic rifles on social media — including a pair posted four days ago — and accounts of his troubled home life.

“He posted videos on his Instagram where the cops were there and he’d call his mom a b*tch and say she wanted to kick him out,” said classmate Nadia Reyes. “He’d be screaming and talking to his mom really aggressively.”

Multiple individuals close to the family, including Reyes, told the newspaper that Ramos’ mother used drugs, and he had moved to his grandmother’s home several months ago, and the grandmother was in the process of evicting the mother from a home that she rented to her.

Just give up on your sheet pans

Clean Like You Mean It shows you how to tackle the trickiest spots in your home — whether they’re just plain gross or need some elbow grease. You’ll get the cleaning secrets we’ve learned from grandma, a guide to our handiest tools and helpers, and so much more. Pull on those rubber gloves and queue up the tunes: It’s scour hour!

I am not, by any standard, a neat person. I try to corral my chaos into various acceptable containers — junk drawer, closet, under the bed, giant plastic tubs of doom — and when guests come over, maintain the illusion that I have a handle on my life. I’m not a slob, but I am a maximalist, and my whole life, I have felt deep shame about it. Particularly when it comes to my kitchen.

I am a food writer and I love having people over to eat dinner, so my friends and acquaintances see a fair amount of my kitchen. And until pretty recently, that kitchen was the size of a tiny closet in a Brooklyn apartment, where I have stuffed all my equipment and various salts. I use sheet pans for everything: spare counter space, serving dishes, places to organize my ingredients. And as a result, they are far from sparkling silver.

No matter how much I scrub at them, no matter what method — baking soda and vinegar, Bar Keepers Friend, industrial-grade oven cleaner — they accumulate along with the telltale grime of use at the corners. Every time a new article pops up with a brilliant, no-fail cleaning method for making baking sheets look brand new, I click. And every single time, my baking sheets, though perfectly clean, would not look anything like new. They look used because I use them.

Aside from throwing out my sheet pans every six months, a practice that seems environmentally catastrophic, expensive, and just plain silly, there is not a great solution. So this is what I have learned to do: Make peace with your sheet pans. Make peace with your well-loved Dutch Oven and your scratched utensils. Maybe it’s fine for things not to look brand new out of the box when, in fact, you use them to make meals every week. I promise you that in the back of every incredibly fancy restaurant on earth, there is a share of dinged-up pots and spattered sheet pans, well-used knives and stained kitchen towels. They’re all perfectly clean and functional, but they just have acquired the aesthetic of wear and tear. (Plus, food photographers and stylists tell me, used and dented sheet pans make for the most gorgeous backdrops.)

We are, as Americans in 2022, generally positioned to appreciate novelty over maintenance, new things over old ones. Who could blame us? Social media and advertising continues to pump out images of beautiful, impossible Nancy Meyers-esque kitchens, full of glinting copper pots and double-wide countertops. People in Silicon Valley keep accidentally inventing the bus over and over. I keep putting caftans in my cart even though I have a closet full of perfectly serviceable caftans.

That’s something that’s hard to change in a sweeping structural sense. But in a small way, in my own kitchen, I have come to appreciate equipment that shows the marks of use. Yeah, this sheet pan might have marks I can’t get out, and it also was the receptacle of a sheet cake I made to surprise a neighbor. Sure, this pan has a few scratches and imperfections in it, but I still use it to cook eggs every morning.

Some kitchen items are appreciated with age — cast-iron pans, that comfy wooden spoon that you slowly break in until it fits your hand just-so. Every item in my kitchen has a story because I use it. It’s my kitchen, not an anonymous, perfect, glossy Instagram one. My kitchen towels have stains on them from sopping up sauces and averting curry catastrophes. My old, spattered, inherited Dutch oven has spots that won’t come off for love nor money, but it still bakes an incredible loaf of bread. The pastry cutter my dad gave me is slightly bent from over-enthusiastic biscuit making. Who cares? I’m going to keep trying to keep things as clean as I can, but I’m going to let go of that shame. My sheet pans are perfectly good as they are. So are yours.

Florida Republican threatens Biden after school shooting in Texas

Florida state Rep. Randy Fine, a Republican, appeared to level a threat against the Biden administration on Wednesday in the wake of a fatal school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, cautioning the president against infringing on the 2nd Amendment as Democrats call for tighter gun regulations. 

“I have news for the embarrassment that claims to be our President – try to take our guns and you’ll learn why the Second Amendment was written in the first place,” Fine tweeted, without any further explanation. 

RELATED: “Astounding”: Texas GOP repeatedly responded to mass shootings by loosening gun laws

Fine’s tweet immediately went viral online, with numerous commentators expressing concern that the lawmaker might be threatening the president. 

“We don’t talk enough about how common it is for some folks to casually assert that they have the right to kill elected officials with whom they disagree,” wrote New Republic writer Matt Ford.  

“Further evidence that the Republican Party has completely lost its way,” echoed Rep. Jamaal Bowman, D-N.Y. “They are now the party of death, the party of the Great Replacement Theory, the party of Q’Anon, the party of lies and fear, and the party of fascism. Are there any [sic] principaled Republican left anywhere?”

Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., said that Fine’s tweet was “exactly why we need gun discipline in America.”


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


“This MAGA-Republican argues we don’t need violent history checks on firearms by violently threatening the President.”

RELATED: Texas school shooting: The right responds to massacre by calling for more guns

Fine’s remarks come as the nation continues to reel from the massacre in Uvalde, where a suspected 18-year-old gunman stormed Robb Elementary School, killing 19 children and two teachers on Tuesday.

Shortly after the shooting, President Biden made several calls for tighter gun control laws. 

“I spent my career as a senator and as Vice President working to pass common sense gun laws,” he said in a press conference this week. “We can’t and won’t prevent every tragedy. But we know they work and have a positive impact. When we passed the assault weapons ban, mass shootings went down. When the law expired, mass shootings tripled.”

Uvalde is just one among dozens of cities to be targeted by school shootings this year, according to NPR. Within the last year alone, reports the Gun Violence Archive, the U.S. saw 693 mass shootings total.

Criminology experts: Here’s what we know about school shootings — and the gunmen who carry them out

When the Columbine High School massacre took place in 1999 it was seen as a watershed moment in the United States – the worst mass shooting at a school in the country’s history.

Now, it ranks fourth. The three school shootings to surpass its death toll of 13 – 12 students, one teacher – have all taken place within the last decade: 2012’s Sandy Hook Elementary attack, in which a gunman killed 26 children and school staff; the 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, which claimed the lives of 17 people; and now the Robb Elementary School assault in Uvalde, Texas, where on May 24, 2022, at least 19 children and two adults were murdered.

We are criminologists who study the life histories of public mass shooters in the U.S. As part of that research, we built a comprehensive database of mass public shootings using public data, with the shooters coded on over 200 different variables, including location and racial profile. For the purposes of our database, mass public shootings are defined as incidents in which four or more victims are murdered with at least one of those homicides taking place in a public location and with no connection to underlying criminal activity, such as gangs or drugs.

Our database shows that since 1966, when our database timeline begins, there have been 13 such shootings at schools across the U.S – the first in Stockton, California, in 1989.

Four of those shootings – including the one at Robb Elementary School – involved a killing at another location, always a family member at a residence. There have been reports the most recent perpetrator shot his grandmother prior to going to the school in Uvalde, although that has yet to be officially confirmed.

The majority of mass school shootings were carried out by a lone gunman, with just two – Columbine and the 1998 shooting at Westside School in Jonesboro, Arkansas – carried out by two gunmen. In all, some 146 people were killed in the attacks and at least 182 victims injured.

The choice of “gunmen” to describe the perpetrators is accurate – all of the mass school shootings in our database were carried out by men or boys. And the average age of those involved in carrying out the attacks was 18.

This fits with the picture that has emerged of the shooter in the Robb Elementary School attack. He turned 18 just days ago and purchased two military-style weapons thought to be the ones used in the attack.

Police have yet to release key information on the shooter, including what motivated him to kill the children and adults at Robb Elementary School. The picture of the shooter that has emerged conforms to the profile we have built up from past perpetrators in some ways, but diverges in others.

We know that most school shooters have a connection to the school they target. Twelve of the 14 school shooters in our database prior to the most recent attack in Texas were either current or former students of the school. Any prior connection between the latest shooter and Robb Elementary School has not been released to the public.

Our research and dozens of interviews with incarcerated perpetrators of mass shootings suggests that for most perpetrators, the mass shooting event is intended to be a final act. The majority of school mass shooters die in the attack. Of the 15 mass school shooters in our database, just seven were apprehended. The rest died on the scene, nearly all by suicide – the lone exception being the Robb Elementary shooter, who was shot dead by police.

And school shooters tend to preempt their attacks by leaving posts, messages or videos warning of their intent.

Inspired by past school shooters, some perpetrators are seeking fame and notoriety. However, most school shooters are motivated by a generalized anger. Their path to violence involves self-hate and despair turned outward at the world, and our research finds they often communicate their intent to do harm in advance as a final, desperate cry for help. The key to stopping these tragedies is for society to be alert to these warning signs and act on them immediately.

 

Editor’s note: This article has been updated to correct the year of the 1998 shooting at Westside School in Jonesboro, Arkansas.

James Densley, Professor of Criminal Justice, Metropolitan State University and Jillian Peterson, Professor of Criminal Justice, Hamline University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Lax laws allowed Uvalde gunman to legally buy AR rifles after his 18th birthday — days before attack

The gunman in the deadliest school shooting in Texas history bought two AR-style rifles legally just after his 18th birthday — days before his assault on Robb Elementary School in Uvalde.

[Students, teachers in Uvalde elementary school shooting were in one classroom, law enforcement says]

He legally purchased two AR platform rifles from a federally licensed gun store on two days: May 17 — just a day after his birthday — and May 20, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said, according to a briefing that state Sen. John Whitmire, chair of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee, received from state authorities late Tuesday. The gunman bought 375 rounds of 5.56-caliber ammunition on May 18.

In Texas, you must be at least 18 years old to buy a rifle, and the state does not require a license to openly carry one in public.

The gunman reportedly barricaded himself in a classroom Tuesday afternoon after allegedly shooting and critically wounding his grandmother. He crashed his truck near the school, and once inside, he shot and killed 19 children and two adults and wounded several more.

He brought only one of the rifles with him into the elementary school, one manufactured by the Georgia-based arms manufacturer Daniel Defense, according to the briefing, details of which Whitmire shared with The Texas Tribune. The other was left in the truck he crashed nearby.

Some initial reports stated that the Uvalde Police Department was pursuing the suspect before he crashed and entered the school. However, authorities say that wasn’t true, and the first calls the police department received were from someone reporting the crash and seeing a man with a gun exit the vehicle.

According to the briefing, the shooter dropped a backpack with several magazines full of ammunition near the entrance of the school. Authorities counted at least seven of what appeared to be 30-round magazines, but it won’t be known whether they were emptied or still contained bullets until the crime scene is processed.

It was reported earlier that the suspect was wearing body armor, but it appears he was wearing a plate carrier vest with no ballistic armor inside, authorities said.

The Texas Rangers were still in the process of attempting to identify victims late Tuesday. Crime scene processing was planned to begin Wednesday.

The Texas Rangers found that the grandmother appeared to work at the elementary school until 2020, with more recent records showing she worked at a local coffee shop. She was still alive as of Tuesday night.

A U.S. Border Patrol agent sustained a grazing gunshot wound but has since been released from the hospital, according to the briefing.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/25/uvalde-shooter-bought-gun-legally/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

Republicans don’t care about kids — just imaginary children

In the aftermath of the latest mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas — which left 19 small children and two adults dead — Republicans are working through their usual playbook to buy time until the shooting fades from the headlines. So there’s lots of “mental health” talk from the same politicians and pundits who want to gut our already paltry social services. And there’s lots of whining about how the real victims here are Republicans being criticized for their sociopathic policies, and not the dead kids and their families. Lots of fantasizing about how the solution is a “good guy with a gun,” even though multiple officers were on the scene and exchanged fire with the shooter before he entered the school, to no avail. (All these self-appointed gun experts of the GOP refuse to understand unarmed school teachers and 10-year-olds make easier targets than a shooter armed with an assault rifle.)

The script Republicans roll out is predictable and nonsensical. It’s meant to be. Meaningless noise is a useful political tactic. It exhausts people, leaving them too demoralized to fight for a better world.

RELATED: Texas school shooting: The right responds to massacre by calling for more guns

As with the Sandy Hook shooting before it, the GOP strategy of burying the public’s ability to muster outrage under a thick blanket of bullshit is harder than usual because this time the victims are little kids. But of course, there is no number of murdered little children that is too many for Republicans. Nothing will shake Republicans from their politically cynical allegiance to guns. Some — like Tucker Carlson of Fox News — seem downright stoked about the opportunity to use this shooting as grist for another self-pity party.

Make-believe children get all the concern. Real children don’t matter at all.

The soullessness and contempt for humanity are only more illuminated by the fact that these are the same people who just spent months justifying abortion bans by glibly pretending to be “pro-life.” Like every other pretext that spills out of Republican mouths, that too is a lie. Opposition to abortion rights is about gender and sexuality, as evidenced by the sprawling sexism that reaches every corner of conservativism. The contrast between the theatrical sentimentality over an embryo versus the lack of any true concern over actual child murder really drives home the point.


Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter Standing Room Only.


Republicans only care about children that are imaginary. Real children have needs: Food, shelter, safety, emotional support, education, love. Imaginary children, however, want for nothing. The fictional threats to imaginary children are useful for political rhetoric and for bashing your opponents, with no real cost. Providing for real children cuts into resources Republicans would rather see spent on yacht improvements for their donor base. Keeping real children safe means embracing policies, like gun control, that offend the easily bruised egos of their voting base of child-men and their wives. 

The examples extend far beyond the melodramatic affection for the theoretical child seen in an embryo versus the indifference to the actual children gunned down in a classroom.

On Tuesday, before the shooting, Paul Waldman of the Washington Post wrote about Republicans ignoring the brutal report released over the weekend that chronicled decades of sexual abuse and cover-ups in the Southern Baptist Convention. As Waldman notes, Republicans are forever talking about “their deep commitment to protecting children — particularly when it comes to the threat of sexual abuse.” Preventing sexual abuse is invoked as the pretext for book bans and classroom talk acknowledging the existence of LGBTQ people, even though there’s no actual link between queer identities and sexual abuse. In QAnon and QAnon-influenced circles, false accusations of pedophilia are used to justify a violent hatred of Democrats. 

RELATED: Southern Baptist scandal: It’s no coincidence that anti-abortion churches protect sexual abusers

But all of these threats to children — from blood-drinking Democrats to books that say “gay” — are entirely imaginary. As such, they get Republicans whipped into a frenzy. However the second that a threat to children is substantive — which is the case when it comes to sexual abuse in churches — there’s silence. Make-believe children get all the concern. Real children don’t matter at all. The cavalier use of the word “groomer” to insult LGBTQ people and their allies underscores this. No one who flings that word around actually cares about children being abused. In fact, by doing that, they’re making life harder for real victims. And all the fake concern that LGBTQ rights somehow lead to child abuse? In the real world, LGBTQ kids are being abused because of Republican bigotry

They are using imaginary kids as a weapon to harm real kids. 

The same game is played out with the fake concerns over “critical race theory.” Republicans love to go on and on about fictional curricula in imaginary classrooms where dreamed-up white kids are being told that they’re personally responsible for systemic racism. In reality, the whole “critical race theory” hysteria is a hoax designed to give cover to a larger agenda meant to bully teachers into quitting, ban books, and ultimately, gut public education


Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter Standing Room Only.


Needless to say, kids aren’t being harmed by imaginary lessons in white guilt. But kids are being harmed by losing good teachers, good books, and access to a decent public education. This isn’t just about Republicans caring more about fictional kids than real ones. They are using imaginary kids as a weapon to harm real kids. 

Of course, these are the same Republicans who, just recently, were demanding that President Joe Biden stop feeding infants in the care of the Border Patrol. The hostility to actual children doesn’t get more concrete than calling for the literal starvation of children. 

RELATED: Salon investigates: The war on public schools is being fought from Hillsdale College

This shooting happened in the real world, to real children. The unfathomable nature of the horror is such that it actually makes a dark sort of sense that conservatives would like to look away. It probably is easier to focus on the fantasy dangers to imaginary children. Unfortunately, Republicans have an entire propaganda ecosystem on hand to offer up such distractions. They talk endlessly about “the unborn” and “groomers” and “critical race theory” and all these fabricated threats, instead of dealing with our traumatic realities. And the propaganda also helpfully tells conservatives they’re the real victims, of all those “woke” liberals begging them to look at reality instead of hiding in their Fox News fantasies.

The Republican solution to school shootings is to keep ignoring the growing pile of dead bodies caused by their total refusal to live with the rest of us in reality. 

I wish this shooting was the shock to the system needed to bring right-wing America back to reality, but we can already see the opposite happening. They’re digging deeper and deeper into their preposterous world of kids pooping in litterboxes and QAnon-style “groomer” accusations.

The Republican solution to school shootings is to keep ignoring the growing pile of dead bodies caused by their total refusal to live with the rest of us in reality. 

“Disgusting and predictable” hypocrisy: NRA bans guns at Houston Trump speech after Texas shooting

This Friday, May 27, former President Donald Trump is scheduled to speak at the National Rifle Association’s “leadership forum” — which will be part of its three-day convention in Houston, Texas. Guns will be allowed during other parts of the convention, but not during the leadership forum — an “irony” that journalist Lauren Tousignant slams as “almost too disgusting and predictable to even bother pointing out” in an article published by the feminist website Jezebel on Tuesday night, May 24.

Tousignant’s article was written the day on which yet another horrific mass shooting occurred in the United States. Earlier on May 24, at least 19 children, along with two adults (including 4th Grade teacher Eva Mireles), were fatally shot at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. The gunman was identified by police as 18-year-old Salvador Ramos, who was also killed.

The massacre in Uvalde — which is about 80 miles west of San Antonio — came only ten days after a mass shooting on May 14 at a supermarket in a heavily Black area of Buffalo, New York, where ten people were killed. In that massacre, according to law enforcement, the suspect was motivated by white supremacist ideology and targeted his victims simply because they were Black. A possible motive in the Texas rampage, however, remains unclear.

Tousignant, commenting on the carnage in Uvalde and the NRA’s “leadership forum” event with Trump, writes, “Here we are again: another mass shooting, a million more worthless thoughts and prayers, and a bunch of hypocritical politicians who don’t want firearms allowed inside an event that’s being held by the very organization that lobbies said politicians to pass laws that make it easy for anyone to buy a gun and bring it wherever the hell they want. Like a shopping center. Or an elementary school.”

post on the NRA convention’s website notes that “per the U.S. SECRET SERVICE, firearms, firearm accessories, knives, and other items WILL NOT BE PERMITTED in the General Assembly Hall.”

“For the record, the NRA also banned guns when Trump and Mike Pence were scheduled to speak at their 2018 convention, again citing the Secret Service’s wishes,” Tousignant explains. “Seems to me like a true, gun-toting American wouldn’t let the Secret Service bully their precious gun rights — guns don’t kill people, people kill people — but what do I know?”

Tousignant adds, “In addition to Trump, confirmed speakers include Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R), who, in June 2021, signed into law a bill that now allows Texans to carry a handgun without training or a background check or a license. Next on the roster is South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R), who, in March, signed into law a bill that gets rid of fees for concealed gun permits. And of course, Ted Cruz is slated to be there — the Texas senator who, in the aftermath of Tuesday’s massacre, tweeted ‘fervent’ prayers for the bereaved and told reporters that, obviously, “Democrats will try to politicize this by limiting guns.”

The fact that guns are banned from the “leadership forum,” according to Tousignant, underscores the hypocrisy of the NRA and the Republican politicians who support the organization.

“When the aforementioned policies are the very thing that keeps allowing these atrocities to take place, what other fucking option do Democrats, or really anyone, have other than to look to the politicians who are refusing to do anything about it?” Tousignant writes. “If the NRA really believe guns were not the problem, they would allow anyone to carry them at their own fucking events.”

“Astounding”: Texas GOP repeatedly responded to mass shootings by loosening gun laws

In the past few years, Texas Republicans have been quick to consider a crackdown on gun violence after a mass shooting.

They did so in 2018 after a 17-year-old entered Santa Fe High School and killed 10 people. Then again in 2019, when two mass shootings weeks apart occurred in El Paso at a Walmart and then in Midland and Odessa after a dismissed worker opened fire.

But when lawmakers have reconvened in Austin in the months after a mass shooting, those same leaders tend to fall silent on any restrictive measures when it comes to guns. In the last two legislative sessions, Texas legislators have loosened gun laws, most notably by passing permitless carry in 2021, less than two years after mass shootings in El Paso and Odessa took the lives of 30 people.

Now, after 19 children and two adults were killed Tuesday in a shooting at an elementary school in Uvalde, lawmakers are again facing the same questions: Could this have been prevented and how can the state avoid yet another mass shooting?

The gruesome attack is the deadliest school shooting in Texas history and occurred a little less than seven months ahead of the 10-year anniversary of a similarly horrific shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut, where 20 first graders and six adults were killed, the largest mass shooting at a K-12 school ever.

“It’s astounding to me,” said state Sen. Roland Gutierrez, a Democrat from San Antonio whose district includes Uvalde. “We’re supposed to create things. We’re supposed to create legislation to keep people safe. By God, to keep children safe. And here we’ve done exactly the opposite.”

[21 killed at Uvalde elementary in Texas’ deadliest school shooting ever]

Many details remain unknown about this particular tragedy, which has kept some officials from immediately suggesting policy changes or asking to call lawmakers in for a special legislative session. But the political reaction after previous mass shootings in the state has followed a repetitive pattern.

When a then-17-year-old student killed 10 people and injured 13 more in an art classroom in Santa Fe, near Houston, in 2018, Abbott called on state lawmakers to consider a “red flag” law that would allow state courts to take firearms away from a person who presents a danger to themselves or others.

[Texas has had eight mass shootings in the past 13 years, while lawmakers have steadily loosened restrictions on carrying firearms]

A few months later, he backed away from the idea after Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and gun rights activists drew a hard line against it. The state ended up passing laws more focused on boosting mental health resources and giving teachers more access to guns on public school campuses.

In August 2019, after 23 people were killed by an avowed racist at an El Paso Walmart, and a few weeks later, seven more people were killed in a shooting spree in Midland and Odessa, Abbott and Patrick discussed expanding background checks to include stranger-to-stranger gun sales.

By the end of the next legislative session in 2021, Patrick had gone silent on the issue. And the Legislature instead passed a bill long sought by gun rights advocates that allows Texans to openly carry a handgun without a permit.

Patrick did not immediately respond to questions about potential policy changes after the slaying in Uvalde. But appearing on Fox News on Tuesday evening, he told host Tucker Carlson that more could be done.

“We have to harden these targets so that no one can get in ever except through one entrance,” he said. “Maybe that would help. Maybe that would stop someone.”

In a statement released Tuesday afternoon, Abbott called for unity. His office did not immediately answer questions about bringing lawmakers back into a legislative session early to tackle issues related to mass shootings.

“Texans across the state are grieving for the victims of this senseless crime and for the community of Uvalde,” he said. “Cecilia and I mourn this horrific loss and we urge all Texans to come together to show our unwavering support to all who are suffering.​​”

Education advocates are yet again calling for the state to take a different path in response to this attack.

“We don’t need another round table of safety experts. We don’t need more active-shooter drills,” said Zeph Capo, president of the Texas chapter of the American Federation of Teachers. “We need legislation that addresses some of the most basic requirements for ensuring that unstable people don’t take the lives of our children and teachers.”

But Democrats in the Capitol are already skeptical that even the death of 19 children in a Texas public school will bring about any meaningful change to Texas’ gun laws.

“You’re not gonna get a majority of people in the Legislature to ever vote for gun control,” said state Rep. Harold Dutton, the chair of the House Public Education Committee. “I’m not sure we’ll ever have a legislative response to it. And I know, in Texas, it’s probably not going to happen. We’re simply going to wait for the next crisis to occur.”

40 ways to increase school safety

Just days after the May 18, 2018, shooting at Santa Fe High School, Abbott quickly convened a series of roundtable discussions with school leaders, parents, teachers, students and advocacy groups at the Capitol to discuss ways to improve safety in Texas’ public schools.

By the end of the month, the governor had unveiled his School and Firearm Safety Action Plan that included 40 recommendations to improve school safety and pledged to put $110 million toward implementing the suggestions.

“This plan is a starting point, not an ending place,” Abbott said at the time. “It provides strategies that can be used before the next school year begins to keep our students safe when they return to school. This plan will make our schools safer and our communities safer.”

Most of the recommendations centered around “hardening” schools with more training for school marshals and better security infrastructure in campus buildings. There were also suggestions to prevent future threats, including increased mental health evaluations and a behavior threat assessment program in schools.

When Abbott asked lawmakers to also consider a “red flag” law, he claimed in the plan that similar protective orders restricting gun possession could have prevented the mass shootings in Sutherland Springs, southeast of San Antonio, and Parkland, Florida.

Yet months after the proposal, Abbott abandoned the idea, stating the suggestion wasn’t meant to be a personal endorsement as hardline gun rights activists and the lieutenant governor came out against the idea. While a “red law” flag was filed that session, it never got a hearing.

A handful of the other proposals unrelated to gun restrictions from that plan were written into a sweeping school safety bill that the Legislature passed in 2019.

“​​Our goal is that no child will ever feel afraid at school and no Texas family will ever experience the grief that followed the horrible school shooting at Santa Fe High School,” Patrick said. “The safety of our children remains paramount — the future of Texas depends on it.”

The law required certain training for school resource officers and emergency response training for school employees, as well as established a threat assessment team to identify potentially dangerous students and determine the best way to intervene before they become violent. It also created a Texas Mental Health Consortium to bring psychiatric professionals together.

Lawmakers also passed a bill giving more teachers access to guns.

As Abbott signed that legislation at the end of the 2019 legislative session, reporters asked if he still supported a “red flag” law.

Abbott said such a measure wasn’t necessary in Texas “right now.”

After mass shootings, permitless carry passes

A few months later, after lawmakers went home from that 2019 legislative session, Texas was again rocked by a racist attack that killed 23 people and injured dozens more at an El Paso Walmart. The shooter told police at the time he had chosen the location specifically because of its location near the border and that he was targeting Mexicans. He has been charged with a federal hate crime but has yet to be tried.

State leaders again quickly came together yet again to discuss possible solutions.

But before lawmakers could even make suggestions, a gunman killed seven people and wounded 22 others while driving through Odessa and Midland a few weeks later.

The back-to-back tragedies moved Texas’ Republican leaders at the time to show an uncharacteristic willingness to some gun restrictions typically backed only by Democrats.

Abbott swore to do “everything we can to make sure a crime like this doesn’t happen again,” proposing a slew of policies to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and other people who should not possess them. Patrick famously said he was “willing to take an arrow” from the National Rifle Association in order to pursue stronger background check laws.

But the governor didn’t bring lawmakers back to address the situation right away. So, when state policy makers reconvened for the first time after the pair of shootings in January 2021, priorities had again shifted. And measures which Abbott and Patrick had previously expressed support for, including bills to tighten the state’s background check laws and crack down on lost or stolen guns, stalled.

By the end of the session, the Legislature passed only two of the key gun safety bills written by Midland-Odessa and El Paso lawmakers — one to create a statewide active shooter alert system and another measure called the “lie and try” bill that makes it a state crime to lie to on a background check form to illegally buy a gun.

One high-profile bill on gun access did pass though: a permitless carry bill that Texas conservatives had long sought for and failed to achieve. The law allows most Texans to carry handguns openly in public without going through training or having to get permits. Long guns, like rifles and shotguns, had already been allowed to be carried without a permit.

“You could say that I signed into law today some laws that protect gun rights,” Abbott said at the bill signing last June. “But today, I signed documents that instilled freedom in the Lone Star State.”

On the chamber floor of the Texas House of Representatives, state Rep. Joe Moody lamented the bill’s passage. An El Paso Democrat, the lawmaker had aggressively pushed for gun restrictions in the aftermath of the slaying in his hometown. He also championed attempts to pass red-flag laws in the years before and after the Santa Fe shooting.

“I wish this was something that’s going to go away but it’s not,” Moody said Tuesday, echoing the sentiment he expressed in the state Capitol last year.

“It’s something that is going to visit every one of our communities, and until we take an approach to solving the problems that are solvable, then we’re going to continue to have this,” he said. “And it’s going to be a story that every person in every corner of the state will be telling, and that’s incredibly sad.”

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/24/texas-gun-laws-uvalde-mass-shootings/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

House Republican deletes tweet claiming Texas school shooter was “transsexual leftist illegal alien”

In the wake of a deadly school shooting in Texas, Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., the far-right dentist with ties to white nationalist groups, baselessly claimed on Tuesday that the suspected gunman was a “transsexual leftist illegal alien.”

Gosar’s tweet, which has since been deleted, came just hours after 18-year-old suspected gunman Salvatore Ramos opened fire on Tuesday at Robb Elementary in Uvalde, Texas, killing nineteen students and two teachers. As of this writing, there is no evidence that Ramos, who was killed by law enforcement, was left-wing, undocumented, or a member of the LGBTQ+ community. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has said that Ramos was an American citizen.

RELATED: Texas school shooting: The right responds to massacre by calling for more guns

The claim that Ramos was transgender appears to have its roots in online chatter from 4chan, according to Vice. Users reportedly converged on photos of a Reddit account belonging to an artist whom they believed to be the Texas shooter. 

One of the posters on 4chan reportedly acknowledged that the Reddit account is not connected to Ramos but said that “this was good optics,” just as reports of the suspect’s history of misogyny emerged. 

“Let’s just call every one of these school shooters trannies,” they said. “No glory for degenerate losers.”


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


That claim seems to have percolated through right-wing channels of misinformation on other platforms, like Telegram and Gab, until being picked up by Gosar’s office, as Vice noted. 

propervideotag.push(function(){
propervideo_display(“salon_instream_1”, “salon”)
})

RELATED: Democrat rips “useless f**king baby killer” Ted Cruz for offering prayers while fighting gun safety

On Tuesday, the artist attempted to set the record straight over Reddit, posting a picture of herself, captioned: “It’s not me, I don’t even live in texas.”

“They are my pics,” she wrote. “People are using [them] to make trans people look like murderers and blaming me for the shooting.” 

Shortly after Gosar’s tweet, numerous Twitter users came forward to warn others about misinformation.  

“I’m not even surprised that Republicans are spreading a false claim that the shooter in Texas is trans,” tweeted journalist Cassandra Roxburgh. “It tracks with their policies which villify and harm trans people in the USA. The problem is never gun safety – it’s always something else.”

“Many are posting photos of a young male in women’s clothing claiming it is the #Uvalde, Texas mass shooter. Those images are unconfirmed & unverified,” cautioned Andy Gno, writer at the right-wing website The Post Millennial. “Please stop sharing them because in the event they aren’t Ramos, you’re harming someone who had nothing to do with the shooting.

“Good reminder,” said Christina Pushaw, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ press secretary, in response to Ngo’s tweet. “And some of the pics of trans people they’re posting are obviously not Ramos.

AOC calls out Democratic leaders for backing “pro-NRA” Texas candidate after Uvalde shooting

In the wake of the horrific massacre at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas on Tuesday, Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez blasted her party’s leadership for supporting an incumbent in the state whose record and policy positions earned him an “A” rating from the National Rifle Association.

“On the day of a mass shooting and weeks after news of [the Supreme Court’s impending decision to overturn Roe v. Wade], Democratic Party leadership rallied for a pro-NRA, anti-choice incumbent under investigation in a close primary. Robocalls, fundraisers, all of it,” Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., wrote in a series of tweets.

The New York Democrat was referring to Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, whose campaign for a 10th term in the U.S. House was boosted by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, D-S.C.

“Accountability isn’t partisan,” she added. “This was an utter failure of leadership. Congress should not be an incumbent protection racket and sadly it is treated as such by far too many. The fact is those who fail their communities deserve to lose. They don’t need rescuing from powerful leaders who state they fight for gun safety, the right to choose, and more.”

The New York Democrat’s scathing message came as the results of Cuellar’s runoff contest against progressive challenger Jessica Cisneros rolled in late Tuesday. As of this writing, Cuellar leads by fewer than 180 votes and has declared victory while Cisneros—whose campaign had the backing of Ocasio-Cortez and other progressives—noted that the race remains too close to formally call.

Given the razor-thin margins of the runoff, Ocasio-Cortez argued Tuesday that “if Cuellar wins, leadership’s decision to go to the mat for a pro-NRA incumbent will be the reason why.”

Cuellar and Cisneros both condemned the shooting in Uvalde, where a gunman killed at least 19 children and two teachers in the deadliest school massacre since Sandy Hook. Since that 2012 atrocity, there have been more than 3,500 mass shootings in the U.S. as Congress has repeatedly failed to pass meaningful reforms to the nation’s gun laws.

“I am heartbroken over the mass shooting at Robb Elementary School,” Cuellar tweeted Tuesday. “Families, the South Texas community, and the entire nation are in mourning. Let us pray for peace. Let us come together for our neighbors that need support. And let us remember the bright lives we lost today.”

In response, Cuellar’s critics pointed to his past donations from the NRA and favorable rating from the gun lobby, which aggressively fights even the most basic gun-safety regulations. As CNBC reported, Cuellar “has received thousands of dollars in donations from the group since he was elected to Congress over a decade ago.”

“Cuellar received $6,950 in donations from the NRA Political Victory Fund during his reelection campaign [in 2018,]” the outlet noted.

In 2019, Cuellar’s campaign rebuffed calls to return the NRA donations or give them to charity following mass shootings in Texas and other states that year.

Since Sandy Hook, the nation has experienced more than 3,500 mass shootings, according to the Gun Violence Archive, a nonprofit organization that tracks gun violence and defines a mass shooting as an incident in which four or more people are killed or injured.

Manchin declares he’d do “anything” to address guns after Texas shooting — except filibuster reform

Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., has vowed to do “anything” he can to help pass “common sense” legislation after a gunman opened fire and claimed the lives of more than 20 victims at a Uvalde, Texas elementary school.

“It makes no sense at all why we can’t do common sense things and try to prevent some of this from happening. It’s all just unbelievable how we’ve gotten as a society that someone could be that deranged and this sick,” Manchin lamented.

However, there is just one problem with that promise. According to HuffPost, Manchin’s efforts do not include eliminating the filibuster which would open the door for more opportunities to pass pieces of legislation. When asked if he would consider supporting the possible elimination of the filibuster, Manchin made it clear he’d stop short of doing so.

“The filibuster is the only thing that prevents us from total insanity,” Manchin told reporters as he reiterated the arguments he’s posed regarding other key issues.

“You would think there would be enough common sense” among Senate Republicans to pass sound legislation on gun control, Manchin also added. However, that does not appear to be the case. Since passing legislation with the filibuster in place requires a total of 60 votes, that means 10 Republicans would have to cast votes in favor of the proposed initiative.

Most Republican lawmakers have argued that Congress should not have a considerable role in addressing gun rights and the violence that ensued as a result of the United States’ lacking restrictions on gun control. HuffPost pointed to remarks made by Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., as an example of opposing Republican views.

“These people who say guns are a problem? I feel sorry for them, I really do,” said Tuberville.

However, Democrats argue otherwise as many are calling for heightened gun control measures. “It’s one thing to say that, regardless of the facts, you should just do something,” Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., said in agreement with the demands for more gun control legislation. “The question is whether something you would do would actually make a difference.”

The reignited calls for gun control legislation came shortly after the shooting took place at Robb Elementary in Uvalde, Texas. Reports have revealed the gunman opened fire on a school campus where certain staff members are allowed to be armed under Texas state law. However, being armed did not prevent the shooting.

“Bankrupt conscience”: Houston Chronicle torches Greg Abbott’s “cowardice” after Texas shooting

The Houston Chronicle’s editorial board is pushing back against Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s (R) remarks in response to the tragic mass shooting that claimed the lives of 21 victims at a Uvalde, Texas elementary school on Tuesday, May 24.

Abbott on Tuesday addressed the shooting as he vowed to use the state’s resources to “do everything that is necessary to make sure that crime scenes like this are not going to be repeated in the future.”

Although Abbott described the shooting as “horrifically, incomprehensibly” and vowed that “never again” would such tragedy happen in his state, the editorial board isn’t convinced he’ll do his part to prevent a repeat of this from happening. Dissecting the governor’s speech, the Chronicle offered a blistering assessment after carefully reviewing his words.

Highlighting the governor’s use of the word “horrific,” the board wrote, “The first word is apt — especially for the moms and dads who dropped off their little ones at school Tuesday morning, maybe lingering a little bit in the car line, just to crane their necks back and watch as that precious little body, that floppy ponytail or that lanky little string bean frame, laden with backpack and lunch box, made it safely through the schoolhouse door, where, it seemed, they would be safe.”

The board added, “Horrific was the moment they got the news. Horrific will be their nights of endless tears. Horrific will be the bright, sunny mornings when they remember it wasn’t a dream. The bed is empty, no little lump beneath the blankets, waiting to be awoken.”

However, his use of the word “incomprehensibly” was described as a “bald-faced lie.” “The second word Abbott used — “incomprehensibly” — is just as much cowardice as it is a bald-faced lie,” the editorial board wrote.

According to the board, the state’s Republican-run legislature has contributed to the gun problem due to the lenient laws in place when it comes to acquiring firearms.

“Whether it’s a handgun, rifle or semi-automatic invented for war, the governor has supported and the Legislature has passed law after law that have obliterated any semblance of good sense regulation — laws so permissive that they’ve even defied the objections of police chiefs and gun safety instructors, including the 2021 permitless carry bill that the governor bragged on Twitter allows any eligible Texan to carry a gun in public with ‘no license or training’ needed. As though that were progress,” the editorial board wrote.

It continued, “Texas lawmakers won’t even pass universal background checks to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people even though about 80 percent of Texans support them.”

“Texas had 1 million registered weapons in 2021, more than second-place Florida and third-place Virginia combined. The United States leads all wealthy nations with its gun murder rate, and all nations in the rate of suicide by gun. And since September 2018, Texas has far more than its fair share of victims of mass shootings. Of the 2,000 such deaths recorded, 195 happened in Texas, far more than any other state.”

The board concluded with a challenge for the Republican governor. The board wrote, “We call on Abbott, whose campaign war chest is comfortably overflowing in his reelection bid against Democrat Beto O’Rourke, to replenish his bankrupt conscience and do something, anything, to stop the blood of children and the tears of parents.”

Democrat rips “useless f**king baby killer” Ted Cruz for offering prayers while fighting gun safety

Democrats lashed out on Tuesday after Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and other Republican officials offered prayers and called for more guns in schools following the deadly shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, even though police say law enforcement engaged the gunman but could not stop the teenage shooter from killing at least 19 children and two teachers.

Many Republicans who have supported the National Rifle Association offered typical “thoughts” and “prayers” after police said 18-year-old Salvador Ramos killed at least 21 people using an AR-15-style rifle he reportedly purchased online after his birthday. Cruz and other Texas officials, who have vehemently resisted any gun safety legislation, offered alternative solutions to gun control after the massacre.

“We know from past experience that the most effective tool for keeping kids safe is armed law enforcement on the campus,” Cruz told reporters after the shooting. “Inevitably after a murder of this kind you see politicians try to politicize it. You see Democrats and a lot of folks in the media whose immediate solution is to try to restrict the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. That doesn’t work,” he argued.

Other Texas officials had similar proposals. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick called to “harden targets” like schools. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who won his primary runoff hours after the shooting, called for arming teachers.

“We can’t stop bad people from doing bad things,” he told Fox News. “We can potentially arm and prepare and train teachers and other administrators to respond quickly. That, in my opinion, is the best answer.”

But police say that armed cops engaged the shooter but failed to stop the massacre. Police say Ramos shot his grandmother and drove to the school, crashing his pickup truck, before he was engaged by officers.

“The suspect did crash near a ditch nearby the school. That’s where he exited his vehicle with what I believe was a rifle and that’s when he attempted to enter the school where he was engaged by law enforcement,” Texas Department of Public Safety Sgt. Erick Estrada told CNN. But officers were unable to stop the gunman, who Estrada said was wearing body armor, from entering the school to shoot young children. Houston’s KPRC later reported that the shooter actually appeared only to wear a plate carrier with no ballistic armor inside when he exchanged gunfire with officers.

The suspect, who was armed with an AR-15-style rifle, appears to have “outgunned” the armed officers before making his way into the school, ABC News reported.

Cruz, whose solution clearly did not work at Uvalde — the site of the deadliest mass shooting in Texas history and the second-deadliest school shooting in U.S. history — offered little else than prayers for the victims and praise for law enforcement for “acting so swiftly” before his scheduled appearance at an NRA convention in Houston on Friday.

“Aren’t you slated to headline a speaking gig for the NRA in three days — in Houston, no less?,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez, D-N.Y., tweeted in response to Cruz’s prayers. “You can do more than pray. Faith without works is dead.”

Rep. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., had a more forceful response.

“Fuck you @ted cruz you care about a fetus but you will let our children get slaughtered. Just get your ass to Cancun. You are useless,” he tweeted. “Just to be clear fuck you @tedcruz you fucking baby killer,” he added.

RELATED: Texas school shooting: The right responds to massacre by calling for more guns

The comments underscored frustration among Democrats who have unsuccessfully called for gun safety legislation for years following mass shootings, only to be blocked by lawmakers aligned with the gun lobby. Meanwhile, an FBI report released Monday showed that the number of active shooter attacks increased to 61 last year, a 52% increase from 2020 and a 97% increase from 2017. An analysis released earlier this month showed that guns now kill more children and young adults than car crashes for the first time.

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., a leading proponent of gun legislation since the Sandy Hook massacre in his state in 2012, literally begged Republicans to compromise on gun safety during a Senate speech shortly after the shooting.

“What are we doing?” Murphy said. “Why are we here if not to try and make sure fewer schools and few communities go through what Sandy Hook has gone through, what Uvalde is going through. … I am here on this floor to beg, to literally get down on my hands and knees and beg my colleagues: Find a path forward here. Work with us to find a way to pass laws that make this less likely.”

President Joe Biden, in a speech after the massacre, called out gun rights groups’ hold over the GOP and conservative members of the Democratic Party.

“When in God’s name are we going to stand up to the gun lobby? When in God’s name will we do what we know in our gut needs to be done?” he demanded, noting that mass shootings “tripled” after the federal assault weapons ban expired without action from Congress.

Biden, who just returned from a trip to Asia, added that these kinds of mass shootings “rarely happen anywhere else in the world.”

“Why? They have mental health problems. They have domestic disputes in other countries. They have people who are lost. But these kinds of mass shootings never happen with the kind of frequency that they happen in America. Why?” he said. “Why are we willing to live with this carnage? Why do we keep letting this happen? Where in God’s name is our backbone to have the courage to deal with it and stand up to the lobbies?”

Murphy told CBS News that he spoke with Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., about a potential bipartisan solution on “red flag” laws and background check proposals. But the GOP and Manchin, who have received ample contributions from the gun lobby, have long resisted more aggressive measures. Democrats have called for repeal or reform of the Senate filibuster to pass gun legislation, but Manchin rejected the idea despite the school shooting.

“You all know where I stand; I’ll do anything I can,” he told reporters before moments later acknowledging he would not budge on the filibuster to pass gun legislation. “The filibuster is the only thing that prevents us from total insanity,” he said. “Total insanity.”

Read more:

In Myanmar, lessons for life after Roe v. Wade

If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade in the coming weeks, as a leaked draft of the majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization suggests it will, the decision will thrust the country into legal terrain that has largely remained uncharted for the past half century. As many as 32 states are likely to ban or severely restrict abortions. But the laws won’t change the fact that many residents in those states will still want or need abortions. Absent the long-held constitutional right to exercise control over their own bodies, to what lengths will people go to secure access to reproductive care, and who will help them?

To get a sense of what the post-Roe era might look like, one place we can look to is Myanmar. I have been reporting on the country since a coup overthrew the nation’s government last year, and I have spoken to activists and anti-coup rebels about the role reproductive rights play in the struggle for democracy there.

In Myanmar, abortion is illegal unless the pregnancy can be proven to be a risk to the life of the birth parent. The laws governing abortion have not changed since they were first enacted in the 19th century, when Myanmar (also known as Burma) was under British colonial rule. In 2013, the country began developing a new law in order to meet international norms on gender and sexual-based violence, providing activists with some hope that the country might update its outdated laws on abortion.

Yet according to advocates, who pushed for better protection of reproductive rights, the bill fell short of meeting those standards. And after eight years in limbo, deliberation on the bill was derailed by a 2021 military coup that precipitated the collapse of the nation’s health care system. Certainly, if the post-coup conflict is anything to go by, the international standards the law was initially intended to address have been ignored completely by the military junta, which routinely uses rape as a weapon of war and form of punishment. Seen in this context, a ban on abortion is just another form of violence used by a repressive state.

The threat of significant jail time for people in Myanmar who have an abortion has given rise to a network of black market abortion pills and providers. Some of the resulting underground abortions are dangerous, and because of the looming threat of strict sentences, people who undergo them likely choose not to seek post-abortion care, exposing themselves to potential long-term medical and psychological consequences. According to the United Nations Population Fund – Myanmar, complications arising from unsafe abortions are a leading cause of death for pregnant people in Myanmar.

Since the 2021 coup, a new generation of young people have risen up in protest, and they are attempting to do away with many of the ethnic and gender divisions that previously served as barriers to intersectional solidarity in the country. In order to counter a status quo that perpetuates sexism in legal and cultural codes, some activists and grassroots organizations are using organizing methods inspired by a concept known as mutual aid.

The practice of mutual aid is an old one, first conceptualized as an organizing theory by Russian anarchist Pëtr Kropotkin in 1902. Mutual aid, unlike charity, seeks to give help without reinforcing hierarchy; it is often described using the phrase “solidarity, not charity.” Mutual aid groups are generally collectives of people giving what they can and getting what they need. The reciprocity in mutual aid need not be direct; the goal is to create a system in which needs are fulfilled for everyone, not just those with resources.

Mutual aid groups have often sprung up around the world to address disasters, like Hurricane Katrina and the Covid-19 pandemic. They are commonly used to provide health care in parts of the world where access to care is limited by rules or resources. In neighboring Thailand, thousands of people receive free medical care from the Mae Tao Clinic, established by doctor and pro-democracy activist Cynthia Maung.

Although the group doesn’t explicitly describe itself as a mutual aid group, it functions much like one. Medics provide reproductive care and even birth certificates to people, allowing children of migrants to access Thai public services. Meanwhile, a separate team associated with the clinic sends backpack medics to remote villages and other underserved areas. Other groups provide care in cities and areas where government control is stronger, and they have supported black markets for drugs like misoprostol, an over-the-counter treatment for ulcers that is commonly prescribed in the U.S., off-label, to induce abortions, in combination with another drug, mifepristone.

Now that the Supreme Court seems poised to overturn Roe v. Wade, mutual aid groups and other grassroots networks that follow a similar model may become more popular stateside.

 

Such networks existed before Roe. Between 1965 and 1972, an underground group known as the Jane Collective facilitated some 11,000 abortions in the Chicago area. Whereas the women of the Jane Collective performed abortions themselves — which they openly acknowledged involved risk — today, a new wave of underground networks aims to facilitate reproductive care by sharing knowledge. One group, the Four Thieves Vinegar Collective, recently published a recipe for a homemade medical abortion pill online. Like the Jane Collective’s underground procedures, these do-it-yourself abortion pills can carry serious risks. They could have dangerous interactions with other medications or conditions, and they are by no means a viable substitute for safe, legal abortions. But for people who feel like they have no other options, the groups provide one — and the kind of knowledge they are disseminating can’t be stopped at borders or legislated out of existence. The days of powerful people having a monopoly on information are gone.

Ideally, everyone, everywhere would have access to safe, legal, and affordable abortions. But the last few years have repeatedly shown us that merely voting is insufficient to protect marginalized people from state violence and control. Hopefully, states that enshrine the right to reproductive autonomy in law will also consider protecting and giving sanctuary to people who help facilitate abortions in states where those rights have been rescinded.

During the pandemic, people across the country supported their communities when the unequal power structures of government failed them. Although facilitating safe abortion is more complicated and riskier than going shopping for elderly neighbors, the same principles apply. Throughout history and across the globe, from Myanmar to the U.S., people marginalized by a callous system have found ways to step up to protect each other. And in a post-Roe world, they will continue to do so.


James Stout is a historian of anti-fascism and a freelance journalist. He has covered the Spring Revolution in Myanmar for the iHeartRadio podcast “It Could Happen Here.”

This article was originally published on Undark. Read the original article.

Texas school shooting: The right responds to massacre by calling for more guns

10 days after an 18-year-old male, clad in body armor and wielding a semi-automatic weapon, walked into a grocery store in Buffalo and killed 11 people, targeting ten Black patrons, another 18-year-old male, wielding a fully loaded weapon walked into an elementary school in Uvalde Texas and killed 22 people, 19 of them children under the age of 10.

The echoes of the Charleston massacre in 2015 and the Sandy Hook massacre in 2012 are deafening. Yet it just keeps happening.

There was a time when we might have thought that the mass shooting of an elementary school would have been the final straw. Targeting tiny children in their classrooms, randomly gunning them down in front of their friends who had to witness the carnage, the horror endured by the families of the victims would seem to be the sort of thing that would shock the collective conscience. And back in 2012, it did. But just for a little while. There was bipartisan agreement on Capitol Hill, law enforcement and right-wing media were in accord, and even the NRA’s board understood that this had crossed a line. A teenage boy had obtained a semi-automatic rifle, killed his mother, and gunned down 20 first-graders and six teachers in an elementary school. Something had to be done.

Then Wayne LaPierre, the undisputed leader of the gun rights movement and then the head of the National Rifle Association (NRA), put his foot down. He appeared at a press conference in Washington at which everyone expected him to offer a compromise on the NRA’s rigid refusal to contemplate any gun reform measures at all. But he didn’t. Instead, he gave a barn burner of a speech in which rather than offering some concessions, he doubled down. He famously proclaimed:

The only way — the only way — to stop a monster from killing our kids is to be personally involved and invested in a plan of absolute protection. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. What if, when Adam Lanza started shooting his way into Sandy Hook elementary school last Friday, he’d been confronted by qualified armed security?

All reforms of the gun laws stalled from that point forward. The right, completely in the clutches of the gun lobby, never engaged in good faith again. Even the horrifying image of grade school kids being sprayed with semi-automatic gunfire didn’t move them.

RELATED: After Buffalo, Trump threatens “civil war”: Mainstream media refuses to connect the dots

The NRA and LaPierre have since been disgraced in a series of financial scandals but as is so common on the right, their dishonesty and corruption haven’t reduced their clout with the GOP. As a matter of fact, they are holding their annual meeting in Texas on Friday:

LaPierre’s “good guy with a gun” speech laid down the law that the only acceptable response to mass gun violence was to call for more guns — arming teachers, armed security in public buildings, arming parishioners in churches etc. And it remains in effect today. They speak of “hardening targets” and recommending open carry laws that allow average “good guys” to be armed and ready at all times to try to stop a committed mass murderer. Yesterday, in the wake of the shooting they all dutifully spouted the party line:


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


When asked why people are opposed to this supposed solution, Fox News’ Jeanine PIrro said it’s because they are “triggered if there is someone with a gun, they are frightened, that is this new narrative. You see a gun, you should be frightened as opposed to appreciating what they are doing for you!” People being afraid of guns. Imagine that.

As it happens, this fatuous “good guy with a gun” nonsense has been fully refuted by the recent mass killings. The murderers in New York and Texas encountered armed police and security guards and were able to thwart them by wearing body armor, one successfully killing the ex-police officer guarding the store in Buffalo, the other injuring several officers with whom he exchanged fire in Uvalde. It took a SWAT team to finally bring Tuesday’s shooter down.

One would think that banning body armor for personal use would be a no-brainer but it’s widely considered by the gun activists to fall under the 2nd Amendment, so any hope of banning its use is probably also off-limits. Gun proliferation zealots say they need it for when the civil war comes and the snowflake libs come knocking on their door. Breaking a filibuster for any gun-related legislation is impossible and the far-right judiciary probably wouldn’t uphold it anyway.

RELATED: Supreme Court set to give the most extremist movement in the US a big win — and it’s not abortion

Ever since 2008 when the Supreme Court declared for the first time in District of Columbia v. Heller that the 2nd Amendment provides an individual right to bear arms, Republican-run states have been loosening their gun laws to the point they really don’t exist in some places like Texas. The killer apparently went out on his 18th birthday and bought himself two semi-automatic rifles, no muss, no fuss. (The law that had been in place in Texas barring anyone under 21 from owning and possessing firearms was repealed in 2019.) New York doesn’t bar 18year olds from buying guns either and for reasons that are unclear, the red flag laws designed to alert authorities to a potential shooter with mental illness didn’t work before the Buffalo massacre. 

Just this week, a federal three-judge panel ruled that it’s unconstitutional to deny 18-year-olds the right to own guns.

“America would not exist without the heroism of the young adults who fought and died in our revolutionary army,” Judge Ryan Nelson wrote. “Today we reaffirm that our Constitution still protects the right that enabled their sacrifice: the right of young adults to keep and bear arms.”

One can’t help but think of another 18-year-old mass killer, Kyle Rittenhouse, last seen hobnobbing at Mar-a-Lago with Donald Trump, feted by everyone on the right for his heroic killing of three unarmed protesters.

As I wrote a couple of weeks ago, the Supreme Court will be handing down a decision backed by the extremist gun rights movement this term that will likely hobble any state that currently has gun restrictions on the books. If the Court goes all the way under a new “text, history and tradition” test, they will declare that public safety is no longer the proper rationale for any gun regulation. You have to wonder if they will take into account whether the American “history and tradition” of young men armed with semi-automatic weapons mowing down masses of innocent people should be considered instead.

President Biden spoke to the nation last night in his capacity of mourner-in-chief. He’s always effective at that. And he asked an important question:

“As a nation we have to ask, ‘When in God’s name are we going to stand up to the gun lobby? When in God’s name do we do what we all know in our gut needs to be done?”

The Democrats are more than willing to stand up to the gun lobby. The question is rightfully asked of Republicans who consistently block all gun safety legislation and are prepared to use the courts to unleash a free-for-all of gun violence in the name of “freedom.” If repeated massacres, even of tiny children, automatically evoke calls to put more guns in schools and on the streets I think we know the answer: Never.

I can’t think of anything that illustrates Republican nihilism more starkly than that. 

Why won’t more older Americans get their COVID booster?

Even as top U.S. health officials say it’s time America learns to live with the coronavirus, a chorus of leading researchers say faulty messaging on booster shots has left millions of older people at serious risk.

Approximately 1 in 3 Americans 65 and older who completed their initial vaccination round still have not received a first booster shot, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The numbers have dismayed researchers, who note this age group continues to be at the highest risk for serious illness and death from covid-19.

People 65 and older account for about 75% of U.S. covid deaths. And some risk persists, even for seniors who have completed an initial two-dose series of the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine or gotten one dose of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. Among older people who died of covid in January, 31% had completed a first vaccination round but had not been boosted, according to a KFF analysis of CDC data.

The failure to boost more of this group has resulted in the loss of tens of thousands of lives, said Dr. Eric Topol, founder and director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute. “The booster program has been botched from day one,” Topol said. “This is one of the most important issues for the American pandemic, and it has been mismanaged.”

“If the CDC would say, ‘This could save your life,'” he added, “that would help a lot.”

Although the initial one- or two-dose vaccination course is effective at preventing hospitalization and death, immunity fades over time. Boosters, which renew that protection, are especially important for older people now that covid cases are rising again, more transmissible omicron subvariants are proliferating, and Americans are dropping their masks, Topol said.

Some older people, who were prioritized for initial vaccination in January 2021, are now more than a year from their last shot. Adding to the confusion: The CDC defines “fully vaccinated” as people who have completed an initial one- or two-dose course even though a first booster is considered crucial to extending covid immunity.

Numerous studies have confirmed that the first booster shot is a critical weapon against covid. A study of older veterans published in April found that those who received a third dose of an mRNA vaccine were as much as 79% less likely to die from covid than those who received only two shots.

A central question for scientists championing boosters is why rates have stalled among people 65 and older. Surveys have found politics and misinformation play a role in vaccine hesitancy in the population at large, but that’s not been the case among older people, who have the highest initial vaccination rate of any age group. More than 90% of older Americans had completed an initial one- or two-dose course as of May 8.

By contrast, 69% of those vaccinated older Americans have gotten their first booster shot.

Overall, fewer than half of eligible Americans of all ages have received a booster.

The discrepancy for seniors is likely due to changes in the way the federal government has distributed vaccines, said David Grabowski, a professor of health care policy at Harvard Medical School. Although the Biden administration coordinated vaccine delivery to nursing homes, football stadiums, and other targeted venues early last year, the federal government has played a far less central role in delivering boosters, Grabowski noted.

Today, nursing homes are largely responsible for boosting their residents, relying on pharmacies they traditionally hire to administer flu shots, Grabowski said. And outside of nursing homes, people generally must find their own boosters, either through clinics, local pharmacies, or primary care providers.

Dr. Thomas Frieden, a former CDC director, said that, in theory, shifting responsibility for ongoing covid immunization from government-sponsored clinics to individual providers might seem logical, given the privatized design of U.S. health care. In reality, Frieden said, that approach is not working because “our primary health care system is life-threateningly anemic” and not set up to readily take on a public health mission.

Most health care providers don’t have the technology to securely track which patients have been vaccinated and schedule follow-up shots, Frieden said. Nor are there financial incentives for doctors to get their patients vaccinated and boosted.

Even before the pandemic, 28% of Americans didn’t have a regular source of medical care.

Grabowski said nursing homes in particular need more support. Although fewer than 1% of Americans live in nursing homes or assisted living facilities, they represent more than 20% of covid deaths. He would like the Biden administration to resume coordinating booster delivery at nursing homes through mass vaccination efforts. “I would have these centralized clinics go back to get residents and staff boosted all at once,” Grabowski said. “That strikes me as a no-brainer.”

The Biden administration has touted its continuing efforts to vaccinate older people. For example, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has sent quality improvement teams to advise nursing homes with low vaccination rates. The Medicare program has mailed letters to all 63 million beneficiaries to encourage them to get boosters and has sent millions of emails and text message reminders.

Still, many health advocates agree that the country has lost the momentum it had during the first months of the covid vaccination campaign.

“There doesn’t seem to be the urgency that we saw with the initial shots,” said Lori Smetanka, executive director of the National Consumer Voice for Quality Long-Term Care, an advocacy group.

Some researchers attributed the slowdown to the initial disagreement among health leaders over the value of boosters, followed by a staggered rollout. Boosters were approved in stages for different age groups, without the fanfare that typically comes with a single major policy change. The CDC recommended booster shots for people with weakened immune systems in August; then for older people in October; for all adults in November; and for kids 12 and up in January.

In addition, although advertisements for vaccines seemed to be everywhere a year ago, government agencies have been less vocal about encouraging boosters. “I felt like we were all getting hit over the head originally and all roads led to vaccines,” Grabowski said. “Now, you have to find your own way.”

For many older people, the barriers that can make private health care difficult to access in non-pandemic times also exist for boosters. For example, many seniors prefer to walk in to receive a vaccination, without an appointment, or to make appointments by phone, even as pharmacies increasingly turn to online-only scheduling that requires customers to navigate a multilayered system. Some seniors also lack ready transportation, a sometimes-towering obstacle in rural areas where health clinics can be 20 to 30 miles apart.

“If people have to take two buses or take time off from work or caregiving for their family, people are less likely to be vaccinated,” Smetanka said.

Dr. LaTasha Perkins, a family physician in Washington, D.C., said she has worked hard to persuade her family in Mississippi to get vaccinated. Her grandmother agreed to get her first shots in the fall, just as the CDC approved boosters for all adults.

“We finally got to a place where we got people to get two shots, and then we said, ‘Oh, by the way, you need a third one,'” said Perkins. “That was jarring for a lot of communities. They would say, ‘You convinced me to buy in, and now you’re saying that two shots aren’t good enough.'”

Although national leadership is important, Perkins said, local connections can be more powerful. Perkins has given talks about vaccines at her church. Congregants are more likely to trust her medical advice, she said, because she’s a tithing member whom they see every Sunday.

Some communities have done a better job of overcoming reluctance than others. Minnesota has boosted 83% of vaccinated residents ages 65 and older, a larger share than in any other state, according to the CDC.

Minnesota’s Dakota County has boosted a greater percentage of vaccinated people 65 and older than any other U.S. county with at least 50,000 seniors, according to a KHN analysis of CDC data.

Christine Lees, an epidemiologist and public health supervisor for Dakota County, said her department hired an agency to provide booster shots to residents and staffers in nursing homes and assisted living facilities. The health department runs vaccine clinics at lunchtime and some evenings to accommodate working people.

The department drew on money from the federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security, or CARES, Act to purchase a mobile vaccine clinic to bring boosters into neighborhoods and mobile home parks. “We ran it all last summer, and we’ve started it back up again,” Lees said. “We went to food shelters and libraries. We went out at least once a week to keep those numbers high.”

Community health workers paved the way for vaccine clinics by visiting residents in advance and answering questions, Lees said.

Dakota County also used funds from the American Rescue Plan Act to provide $50 incentives to people receiving initial vaccines and boosters, Lees said. The incentives “were really important for people who might have to pay a little extra to travel to a vaccine site,” Lees said.

Topol, at Scripps, said it’s not too late for federal leaders to look at what’s working — and not — and to relaunch the booster effort.   

“It will be hard to reboot now. But an aggressive, all-out campaign for seniors — whatever it takes — is certainly indicated,” Topol said. “These people are the sitting ducks.”

Phillip Reese, an assistant professor of journalism at California State University-Sacramento, contributed to this report.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

Subscribe to KHN’s free Morning Briefing.

After Buffalo, Trump threatens “civil war”: Mainstream media refuses to connect the dots

Last Saturday, Donald Trump endorsed a post on Truth Social — his own social media network — by a user who was either calling for or predicting a “civil war” in response to “enemies within” the United States. Exactly a week earlier, an apparent white supremacist terrorist killed 10 Black people in Buffalo. His “manifesto” channels the same basic values and beliefs as the Trump and the contemporary Republican Party.

Even after that event, America’s mainstream news media and other public voices, for the most part, still refuse to tell the unfiltered truth about the dangers to American society and freedom represented by Trump and the Republicans. 

Within hours of the Buffalo attack, Donald Trump told a rally audience in Austin, Texas: “I think they had a tragic event in Buffalo … with numerous people being killed.” He followed that up with the narcissistic claim that “in 18 months in Afghanistan, we lost nobody.” That is not true. For Trump, claiming credit for his imaginary successes as president is clearly more important than paying respect to innocent people killed in a domestic terror attack. Trump said nothing that resembled condolences and did not appear to be sad about the loss of life.

RELATED: Buffalo: This is where Donald Trump’s race-war fantasies lead

Earlier in the Austin rally, aging right-wing rock star Ted Nugent told the audience: “I love you people madly, but I’d love you more if you went forward and just went berserk on the skulls of the Democrats and the Marxists and the communists.” He also described Democrats as “enemies of America.”

This is part of a larger pattern of stochastic terrorism and outright threats of political violence.

At Donald Trump’s rallies, he has said that nonwhite migrants and refugees are “invaders” coming to America to take over and commit crimes against real (i.e., white) Americans. He often says the “traditional family” (meaning white right-wing Christians) is under siege from the “woke” or “politically correct” Democrats and other “un-American” forces. He has encouraged right-wing political violence with his race-war fantasies, suggesting that his followers should descend upon major cities to wreak vengeance if he is prosecuted for his crimes.

Trump repeats the Big Lie that he is still president, claiming that the 2020 presidential election was “stolen” from him by Black and brown voters and their Democratic enablers. Trump praises the Jan. 6 terrorists who participated in his coup attempt by launching a lethal attack on the Capitol. He channels the antisemitic QAnon conspiracy theory and makes threats against Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and other leading Democrats.

Trump has now embraced the Confederate “Lost Cause” mythology, and tells his followers they may need to kill or die to resist “critical race theory.”

He has embraced the neo-Confederate Lost Cause ideology and its fiction that the South was engaged in a noble and honorable cause in launching a catastrophic civil war to keep Black people in bondage as human property forever. He has told his followers that they may need to kill and die to protect their families and children from the white supremacist bogeyman known as “critical race theory.”

During one recent rally, Trump joked about the familiar racial slur used against black people — the same one the Buffalo shooter shouted as he murdered 10 Black people.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Donald Trump’s language, values and beliefs are drawn from the same white supremacist imagination that led to the Buffalo massacre, and also spawned the massacres in El Paso and Pittsburgh as well as the 2017 rampage in Charlottesville.

In not-unrelated news, many leading figures of the “conservative” movement gathered in Hungary last week for the first Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) session ever held in Europe. They made common cause with members of the neofascist global right from Europe and around the globe. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has become the far right’s hero and role model, having increasingly suppressed free expression and imposed a pseudo-democratic system often called “competitive authoritarianism.” The Republican-fascists and their movement are working feverishly — and so far, quite successfully — to apply Orbán’s lessons in the United States.

At the New Republic, Michael Tomasky writes:

This event was the American right wing stating as openly as it ever has that fascism is its goal for the United States of America…. Hungary is a one-party, right-wing state where the ruling ideology encourages racial hatred of minorities (Jews and the Roma). And that is where American conservatives decided to have a party….

Tucker Carlson spoke at this conference, of course, as did Mark Meadows, and via video, Donald Trump himself. Trump beamed that he and Orbán were “very close” and said: “He’s a great leader, a great gentleman, and he just had a very big election result. I was very honored to have endorsed him. A little unusual endorsement. Usually, I’m looking at the 50 states but here we went a little bit astray — and I did that only because he really is a good man and he has done a fantastic job for his country.”

Orbán cut right to the chase. He said that Hungary had been “completely healed” of anything smacking of liberalism, and he was crystal clear about how to do it: Control the media….

The American right, from Trump to CPAC Jefe Matt Schlapp on down the line, celebrates and seeks to emulate a racist, neofascist anti-democracy. They want to turn the United States into Hungary.

In a recent report for Salon, Kathryn Joyce highlighted how the “great replacement” conspiracy theory, which inspired the Buffalo shooter, was both echoed and amplified at CPAC Hungary:

The second day of CPAC Hungary was marked by vitriolic denunciations of immigration, declarations that leftists are seeking to eradicate “white Western nations” and that mass migration is being used as a “weapon of mass destruction” worse than a nuclear bomb. Less than a week after a mass killing in Buffalo motivated largely by the racist “replacement theory,” speakers at CPAC didn’t shy away from reiterating its key argument: There is a concerted effort underway to “replace” the white majorities of countries in Europe, North America and elsewhere with nonwhite immigrants.

Already in the lead-up to the conference, which concluded Friday evening in Budapest, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán had doubled down on his frequent invocation of replacement theory, which in Hungary is effectively treated as a matter of state policy. In a speech last Monday, as he was sworn into his fourth consecutive term in office, the Guardian reported, Orbán charged that “the great European population exchange [is] a suicidal attempt to replace the lack of European, Christian children with adults from other civilizations — migrants.”

Again, the mainstream news media has been reluctant to warn the American public in any consistent way about the escalating fascist threat to democracy, which is now global in nature. If “blowback” is the term used in foreign policy and intelligence to describe “the unintended consequences of the U.S. government’s international activities that have been kept secret from the American people,” the growth and spread of right-wing terrorism in the Age of Trump is the exact opposite. These events are obvious, public and easily predicted, indeed almost inevitable. They are happening right now, in real time.

RELATED: CPAC Hungary: Global right doubles down on “replacement” theory: “This is what tyrants do”

Because of a desperate desire for “normalcy” and no small amount of self-delusion, America’s mainstream news media and much of the political class has deliberately downplayed the existential danger to American society and democracy represented by Donald Trump, the Republican-fascist movement and the larger white right. In fact, the public is to blame as well, for having chosen willful ignorance and denial, and defaulting to the helpless belief or hope that someone, somewhere — but definitely not them — will solve America’s problems.

Many Americans feel disconnected from politics and society, and view democracy is a meaningless idea. It’s not an unreasonable view, under the circumstances.

Here is another uncomfortable truth: many Americans feel disconnected and alienated from both politics and the larger society. To them, democracy is just an empty idea, relatively meaningless in their lives. That conclusion is not entirely unreasonable: Incomes and wages have been stagnant or falling for decades; the American Dream is on the critical list. Future generations will be worse off than previous ones. The COVID pandemic has killed more than a million Americans, with no clear end in sight. The social safety net is in tatters, and America’s social and political institutions are experiencing a legitimacy crisis.

That disconnect is made even worse by the fact that money rules American politics and that corporate leaders and oligarchs have more impact on the day-to-day lives of the average American than does representative government and democracy.

If many Americans are asking what democracy has done for them lately, the Democratic Party and its leaders have not offered a clear and compelling answer. Trump and the Republican-fascists are working to fill that void.

Yet in the face of this existential threat, leading news media figures and other political elites rely on obsolete, insufficient or failed narratives and conceptual frames when they try to interpret this escalating disaster. So we get horserace journalism, an obsession with endorsements and whether Trump’s chosen candidates are winning or losing, the fight of the day, or the controversy of the minute. The 24/7 news cycle is filled with tedium and minutiae elevated as crises or “breaking news,” with little effort to provide the information, context and framework needed to understand the fascist calamity.

In a much-cited essay from 2011, media critic and scholar Jay Rosen explained these failings as a function of the “savvy” style in political journalism:

In the United States, most of the people who report on politics aren’t trying to advance an ideology. But I think they have an ideology, a belief system that holds their world together and tells them what to report about. It’s not left, or right, or center, really. It’s trickier than that. The name I’ve given to the ideology of our political press is savviness.

In politics, our journalists believe, it is better to be savvy than it is to be honest or correct on the facts. It’s better to be savvy than it is to be just, good, fair, decent, strictly lawful, civilized, sincere, thoughtful or humane. Savviness is what journalists admire in others. Savvy is what they themselves dearly wish to be. (And to be unsavvy is far worse than being wrong.)

Savviness is that quality of being shrewd, practical, hyper-informed, perceptive, ironic, “with it,” and unsentimental in all things political. And what is the truest mark of savviness? Winning, of course! Or knowing who the winners are.

In 2020, Rosen returned to this topic, observing that the “savvy” style was even more inadequate to America’s altered circumstances and state of malignant normalcy:

You might not like it, but it’s smart politics … was helpless to describe a party “unmoved by conventional understanding of facts.” Strategy coverage, both sides do it, who’s up and who’s down, winners and losers, controversy of the day, access journalism, “we’ll have to leave it there” … all these forms were spectacularly ill-matched to Donald Trump when he emerged as a threat to American democracy. 

The press had drifted too far off course. It still identified with the pros who knew how the game was played. But the pros were themselves under attack in Trump’s style of resentment politics. Journalists trying to cover him discovered they were hate objects, useful for keeping his supporters in a state of pop-eyed rage. Nothing in their playbook had prepared them for that; they are still trying to recover from the shock of it.  

Rosen concluded that it was possible for political journalism to recover a sense of mission, if it began to understand that the “defense of democracy” was “basic to the job,” rejected “symmetrical accounts of asymmetrical realities,” abandoned the frame of politics as a “strategic game,” and stopped using “bad actors with a history of misinforming the public” as sources.

That’s a tall order when so many in the media and the punditry appear addicted to the drama of “who’s up and who’s down,” in Rosen’s words. 

As a class, the American mainstream news media, the pundits, and too many other members of the commentariot see politics as a type of horserace and are choosing to ignore that one of the horses is death, petulance, chaos, destruction, and evil. The horserace itself and the stakes of winning and losing are fundamentally different in the Age of Trump and beyond. Yet too many of the country’s public voices, in the news media and the political class as a whole, are continuing to operate as though things are all more or less OK and this is all just a slightly more stressful version of business as usual.

As matters devolve in America, the everyday people, those regular folks, will not have the ability to delude themselves or somehow insulate themselves from the reality of this new American nightmare.

Read more on the age of Trump and the rise of fascism:

Putin’s real goal in Ukraine isn’t territory

On March 6, 2022, 14 days into Russia’s war against Ukraine, a video was shared on Facebook showing seven-year-old Amelia Anisovych singing “Let it Go,” the hit song from the Disney musical “Frozen,” inside a crammed Kyiv bunker. A sign of beauty, resilience and hope, it was viewed more than eight million times within days of posting.

The video was noteworthy as an anomaly. Most images of the war in Ukraine have logically focused on death, destruction and devastation. President Volodomyr Zelenskyy has made a point of trying to counter these negative images on his personal Telegram account where he posts photos of hope and strength with the caption, “Life must win the war.”

Yet for many of us — especially those of us with little direct knowledge of the nation — the horror, pain and damage overshadow anything else we know about the country. The endless sea of disturbing images emerging from the Russian war in Ukraine has made it hard to think about Ukrainian beauty, brilliance, intellect and art. 

RELATED: Has Russia been beaten? This military expert says that moment is coming soon

The problem is that we can’t process the scale of loss in Ukraine if we aren’t fully aware of what has been lost.

And that is exactly the way that Vladimir Putin wants it.

As Peter Pomerantsev, author of “This is Not Propaganda: Adventures in the War Against Reality,” has explained, Putin isn’t just trying to take over territory; he wants to obliterate any sense of Ukrainian identity. “History, reality, memory are being destroyed and rewritten,” he writes in an essay for TIME. “Putin and his spin doctors propose rewriting the story of Ukraine, its people, their lives and their right to define their own meaning.”

A Fragmented Story

Putin’s efforts are aided by the unique history of Ukraine, a region that has suffered efforts at foreign domination since the 13th century in a way that has made it difficult for the extraordinary intellectual and artistic heritage of this nation to be easily legible.  

The territory we know as Ukraine today has been repeatedly occupied, overtaken and subjected to power disputes from foreign interests. These historical upheavals have led to the fragmentation of the story of Ukraine.

Joseph Conrad, for example, was born in Ukraine. For nearly two centuries his family lived there and he spent a year in Kyiv at the age of nine for health reasons, but his ties to Ukraine are rarely noticed due to the fact that during his lifetime “Ukraine” referred only to the Kyiv province.

Similarly, Andy Warhol’s parents were Rusyn peasants who were born in modern-day Slovakia. Tracing the ethnic ties of the Rusyn community is tricky since they lived on the borders of what is now Poland, Slovakia and Ukraine. This has led to speculation on Warhol’s ethnic background with debates over whether he is best understood as Hungarian, Ukrainian, Polish, Czech or Slovak. But the real point is that the complex history of the region has frustrated the connection of historical figures to contemporary national cultures. Whether we understand Warhol as specifically Ukrainian or not, there is little doubt that Warhol, who lived in a cloistered Rusyn-speaking community in Pittsburgh until he was 21 years old, was influenced by his history of ties to the region.

The real damage to the cohesive story of Ukraine was done deliberately.

A Repressed Cultural Identity

The vicissitudes of the history of Ukrainian culture is at least, in part, a consequence of the region’s complex ethnic history. But the real damage to the cohesive story of Ukraine was done deliberately. In the 19th century, when the territory was under the rule of the Russian Empire, there was a rise in the development of Ukrainian culture, education and research. This surge of cultural expression coincided with Russia’s decision to ban the Ukrainian language in its own territory.

In fact, there has been a pattern whereby the growth and flourishing of Ukrainian cultural identity has been met with repression. Especially significant in today’s context is the Ukrainian Revolution of 1917-21 when the nation struggled for independence and worked to establish statehood, including advancing Ukrainian culture through education and the arts.

This nascent national development was quickly disrupted when the Bolsheviks took over. But, importantly, even though they were under foreign rule, the Ukrainian people refused to relinquish their own national culture, leading to a “golden era” of literature and the arts and to the use of the Ukrainian language at all levels of government.

That cultural resistance was then met with brute force. Joseph Stalin implemented a plan to literally starve the nation, when he forced farmers off of their lands and caused the Great Famine of 1932-33, also known as the Holodomor (death by starvation). But the critical point is that he didn’t just starve the Ukrainians of food; he also tried to starve them of their culture. During that period, most of the intellectual elite was either executed or exiled. Public icons of cultural identity — churches, historical landmarks, cultural spaces — were also destroyed.

What got lost wasn’t just that entire generation. In addition, the cultural and artistic narrative arc of the nation was either erased or subsumed within a narrative that conscripted Ukrainians into Russian and/or Soviet cultural narratives. This is why, for example, a composer like Sergei Prokofiev, who was born in 1891 in a region of the Russian Empire that is now Ukraine and whose work referenced Ukraine directly, is often simply considered to have been a Soviet composer. It is also why a highly influential artist like Kazimir Malevich, who was born in 1878 in Kyiv, is also often described simply as “Russian,” even though he first studied art in 1895 at the Kyiv Art School and referred to himself as Ukrainian.

The deliberate erasure of Ukrainian culture by the Soviets is also why Ukrainian-born and -educated Sergei Korolev, who directed the Soviet space program and designed Sputnik, is read principally within the Soviet historical playbook. Or why the iconic Odessa steps sequence from Sergei Eisenstein’s “Battleship Potemkin” (1925) is typically viewed within Soviet culture alone. As Volodymyr Kravchenko notes in the Harvard Ukrainian Studies journal, “Historically, Ukraine played a very important role in the process of building the Soviet nation-state.” Yet, Ukraine never was considered an authentic nation-state within the USSR. “For most Russians,” he explains, “Ukraine continued to remain de facto as Little Russia.”

A sovereign nation needs more than the integrity and security of its borders; it also needs its culture.

This explains why few are aware of the fact that three Soviet general secretaries — Nikita Khrushchev, Leonid Brezhnev and Konstantin Chernenko — were either born or raised in Ukraine. In fact, Ukrainian leaders led the Soviet Union for more than half of its history. But to the extent that Ukrainian contributions are formally noted in Russia today, they are done so only within an aggressive narrative of “unity.” Putin, himself, noted the importance of Ukrainians to Soviet history in an essay published in July of last year. “Incidentally,” he wrote, “during the Soviet period, natives of Ukraine held major, including the highest, posts in the leadership of the unified state.” These accolades, though, were offered only to erase their Ukrainian identity. Putin writes that “true sovereignty of Ukraine is possible only in partnership with Russia” — a statement that belies the concept of sovereignty itself.

Setting the Story Straight

A sovereign nation needs more than the integrity and security of its borders; it also needs its culture, a fact that leads us to yet another powerful legacy of Ukrainian culture. As Pomerantsev puts it, “by virtue of being such a concentration of cataclysms, the place where the world’s evils can coagulate, Ukraine is the place which gives birth to its antidotes.”

As I’ve said, Ukraine is not just a place of chaos and suffering; it is also a place of innovation and beauty. But perhaps even more powerful to its story is the fact that two legal concepts central to the fight for human rights and international law came from lawyers educated in Lviv, Ukraine. Hersh Lauterpacht coined the concept of “crimes against humanity” in reaction to his experiences witnessing the violence of pogroms and the Holocaust. Raphael Lemkin defined “genocide” in response to his experiences of the Holodomor caused by Stalin’s imposed famine. Both men, according to Philippe Sands in his book “East West Street,” studied at the same university and had the same professors. While they never met, they were both deeply influenced by Lviv — what was then referred to as “the Paris of Ukraine.”

Crimes against humanity refer to a state that has practiced exceptionally harsh wartime behavior. Genocide, in contrast, focuses on the notion of attempting to eradicate an entire group of people. It is no small irony that these Ukrainian-borne concepts will be used to debate which of these two grotesque acts is more apt to describe what Russia is doing in Ukraine today.

To that end, today’s efforts to document the war crimes in Ukraine are taking a decidedly different turn beyond the documenting of the facts of the atrocities. Pomerantsev is working with Ukrainian journalists to launch “The Reckoning Project,” which will go beyond recording testimony and offering evidence of war crimes. Pomerantsev explains that it is clear that the project needs “to tell not just the stories of people hurt and killed by the war, but also the culture and everyday life Putin is trying to wipe out.” The goal is to produce material for transitional justice but also material that will allow others to tell the story further.

To truly see Ukraine we need to see the whole story, not just the images of the ravages of war.

Being Seen

When “Frozen” star and “Let It Go” vocalist Idina Menzel retweeted the video of Amelia Anisovych singing in a Kyiv bunker, she wrote, “We see you. We really, really see you.” Pomerantsev, too, commented during a lecture at Penn State in April that the war had led many Ukrainians to feel they were being seen for the first time.

But to truly see Ukraine we need to see the whole story, not just the images of the ravages of war. When we look at footage of destroyed churches, schools and public buildings, it means less if we don’t know what they looked like and what they offered their communities before their destruction. And when we note the lives lost and the families disrupted we value them less if we don’t know the stories behind them.

What makes the video of Anisovych especially touching is the fact that she sings the well-known “Let it Go” in Ukrainian, a reminder that she watched the Disney film in her own language, and a sign of how culture can both be universal and local.

The Russian war in Ukraine isn’t just for territory or even sovereignty; it is a battle over the right to tell your own story in your own words and in your own language and in the way you want. It’s a battle to have your story seen and heard. And, if Anisovich’s singing is any indication, it’s a battle Putin may well lose.

Read more analysis of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine: 

How will laws against abortion be enforced? Other countries offer chilling examples

Within the next month it is very likely the Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade and eliminate the federal constitutional right to an abortion. When that happens, dormant trigger laws in many states will immediately go into effect and abortion will become a crime. Because abortion will be regulated at the state level, enforcement and penalties will vary greatly. Kentucky, South Dakota, North Dakota, Tennessee, South Carolina and Missouri are just some of the states that would make providing an abortion a felony, with penalties including jail time up to 20 years. Other states, too impatient to wait for the court decision, have already moved to increase penalties for either having or providing an abortion. Louisiana attempted to classify abortion as a homicide, although lawmakers there have since walked back the effort. Texas is uniquely punitive, criminalizing abortion after six weeks and incentivizing enforcement through the private sector by offering bounties of $10,000 cash to deputized ordinary citizens who can sue anyone involved in providing an abortion.

All of which raises the question of how criminal abortion laws will be enforced in this country once Roe falls. We already have some idea. Today in the United States, several women are in jail, and some have been charged with murder, for a loss of pregnancy. In a 2013 peer-reviewed study, National Advocates for Pregnant Women documented 413 cases of arrests, detentions and forced interventions on pregnant people from 1973 to 2005. As recently as April, a Texas woman was arrested and detained on murder charges for self-inducing an abortion. Those charges were eventually dropped, but these cases all raise the specter that with the removal of federal protections, enforcement will only increase.

RELATED: Here’s what it was like trying to get an abortion in the U.S. before 1973

To get a sense of where we’re heading, it is instructive to look at law enforcement in countries with restrictive abortion laws.

My organization, Ipas, conducted two studies on the enforcement of abortion laws in Latin America (Argentina, Bolivia and Brazil) and Rwanda, and its impact on women and their families. Our findings show that women generally enter the criminal justice system in two ways: through community reporting or through the medical sector. That is, a community member may be aware that a woman has had an abortion and then reports that woman to law enforcement. Or a health care worker might be treating a woman for complications from an unsafe abortion, and then reports her to the police.  

But sometimes the provider or health care worker is the target of law enforcement. In Argentina, the Center for the Study of State and Society (CEDES) has documented that between 1990 to 2008 there were 417 cases of women or providers who were found guilty for the crime of illegal abortion, and based on national-level data from 2006 to 2008, more than 80 percent of the convictions were against midwives.

In Brazil, enforcement comes in the form of raids on private clinics. In 2007, police raided a clinic suspected of providing illegal abortions. In violation of the country’s law protecting privacy and the right to confidentiality in health care, police have confiscated the medical records of almost 10,000 female patients. In 2009, the police raided four clinics in Rio de Janeiro. Police raids on clandestine abortion clinics in Brazil have led to the arrest and prosecution of women and providers. 


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


In Rwanda, women, and young girls in particular, are the targets of law enforcement. A study from Ipas and the Great Lakes Initiative on Human Development (GLIHD) found that over a one-year period, from 2013 to 2014, 313 women and girls were incarcerated for illegal abortions in five prisons in Rwanda.

While each country has a different legal, political and social context, we can extrapolate several trends that contribute to high rates of enforcement in any country with restrictive abortion laws, either of women or health care workers: a misunderstanding of the law, over-policing of marginalized communities and stigmatization of women and providers. 

Brazilian police confiscated the medical records of nearly 10,000 women. Within just one year in Rwanda, 313 women and girls were incarcerated for illegal abortions. 

If the point of criminalizing abortion is to present a deterrent to pregnant people, we know it doesn’t work. Even Republicans know this isn’t a winning strategy, particularly from a PR perspective. In a classic case of gaslighting, a recently circulated memo by the National Republican Senatorial Committee encouraged members to push the talking point that “Republicans DO NOT want to throw doctors and women in jail.” 

Yet arresting, prosecuting and putting women and providers in jail is exactly what will happen when Roe is rolled back. Indeed, it’s already happening in states like Texas.

As the U.S. barrels backwards on women’s health and women’s rights, we can look to some of the same countries where abortion was restricted, and arrests and prosecutions were high, to see how they addressed these issues. In 2020, Argentina liberalized its restrictive abortion laws, and the procedure is now legal on demand in the first 14 weeks of gestation. In Rwanda, in a significant and unprecedented gesture, President Paul Kagame — who is hardly a champion of human rights in general — pardoned dozens of girls and young women imprisoned for abortion-related crimes.

While it is heartening that some local prosecutors in the U.S. have already pledged not to enforce abortion laws, that will not stem the tide of arrests and prosecutions that will inevitably come in the wake of Roe’s dismemberment. We can prepare by educating the public, law enforcement and the health sector not just about the parameters of abortion in each state, but also about their human rights obligations to ensure access to health care, information and privacy.

Read more on the likely fall of Roe v. Wade, and the consequences:

Trump scheduled to speak at NRA convention in Houston days after Texas school shooting

Donald Trump is scheduled to address the National Rifle Association (NRA) national meeting in Houston only days after a school shooting massacre in Uvalde, Texas.

On Tuesday, a gunman killed 14 children and a teacher in Robb Elementary School. Police reportedly killed the suspect, an 18-year-old man.

The shooting occurred only ten days after the mass shooting at a supermarket in Buffalo, New York.

On Friday, Trump is scheduled to address the NRA’s annual meeting for the 6th time, posting a video of Trump discussing his “love” for the organization.

The group says the exhibit hall “will showcase over 14 acres of the latest guns and gear from the most popular companies in the industry.”

“From entertainment to special events, it’s all happening in Houston over Memorial Day weekend. Make plans now to join fellow Second Amendment patriots for a freedom-filled weekend for the entire family as we celebrate Freedom, Firearms, and the Second Amendment!” the NRA says.

In a video hyping the event, NRA chief Wayne LaPierre says Lee Greenwood and Don McLean will provide musical entertainment.

Watch below or at this link.

Protestants and the pill: How Christians helped make birth control mainstream

Since May 3, 2022, when Politico reported that the Supreme Court was planning to strike down Roe v. Wade, many Christians have celebrated the prospect of an America where abortion is not a constitutionally protected right – or is someday banned entirely.

Meanwhile, other conservative Christians have been working on a related target: limiting access to some contraceptives.

In July 2020, when the Supreme Court ruled that organizations with “sincerely held religious or moral objection” are not obligated to provide contraceptive coverage to their employees, many conservative Christians applauded. Six years before, the evangelical owners of crafting chain Hobby Lobby took their objections to covering the IUD in their health insurance plans all the way to the Supreme Court. Hobby Lobby argued – incorrectly, according to most medical authorities – that it was a form of abortion, and therefore they should not have to cover employees’ health insurance for it. The justices sided with the chain’s owners.

Yet as access to both abortion and contraception comes under threat, the vast majority of Protestants use or have used some form of contraception. Their actions are supported by almost 100 years of pastoral advocacy on the issue. In my work as a scholar of religous studies, gender and sexuality, I have researched the Protestant leaders who campaigned to make contraception respectable, and therefore widely acceptable, in the mid-20th century.

History, I have found, provides a different story about the relationship between Protestants and birth control.

‘Responsible parenthood’

As new contraceptive options emerged in the first two-thirds of the 20th century, from the diaphragm to the birth control pill, Christian leaders wrestled with what to think. Many came to see birth control as a moral good that would allow married couples to have satisfying sex lives, while protecting women from the health risks of frequent pregnancies. They hoped it could ensure that couples would not have more children than they could care for, emotionally and economically.

A black and white photograph shows women with baby carriages lined up on a street.

Women with children stand outside Sanger Clinic, the first birth control clinic in United States, in Brooklyn, New York in 1916. Circa Images/GHI/Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

They looked inward, considering the consequences of birth control for their own communities, and hoped that “planned” or “responsible” sex would create healthy families and decrease divorce. They also looked outward, thinking about birth control’s wider implications, at a time of widespread concern that the global population was rising too quickly to handle.

By the time the pill came on the market in the 1960s, liberal and even some conservative Protestants were advocating for birth control using new theological ideas about “responsible parenthood.”

“Responsible parenthood” reframed debates about family size around “Christian duty.” To be responsible in parenting was not only to avoid having more children than you could afford, nurture and educate. It also meant considering responsibilities outside the home toward churches, society and humanity.

Protestant leaders supporting contraception argued that the best kind of family was a father with a steady job and a homemaker mother, and that birth control could encourage this model, because smaller families could maintain a comfortable lifestyle on one income. They also hoped that contraception would help couples stay together by allowing them to have satisfying sex lives.

Multiple denominations endorsed birth control. In 1958, for example, the Anglican Communion stated that family planning was a “primary obligation of Christian marriage,” and chastised parents “who carelessly and improvidently bring children into the world, trusting in an unknown future or a generous society to care for them.”

The big picture

Religious leaders’ support for “responsible parenthood” was not just about deliberately creating the kind of Christian families they approved of. It was also about heading off the horrors of population explosion – a fear very much front of mind in mid-century America.

In the middle of the 20th century, with increased access to vaccines and antibiotics, more children were living to adulthood and life expectancies were rising. Protestant leaders feared this so-called population bomb would outstrip the Earth’s food supply, leading to famine and war.

In 1954, when the global population stood at about 2.5 billion, Rev. Harry Emerson Fosdick, one of the most prominent Protestant voices of the age, framed overpopulation as one of the world’s “basic problems,” and the birth control pill, which was then being developed, as the best potential solution.

Richard Fagley, a minister who served on the World Council of Church’s Commission of the Churches on International Affairs, argued that in family planning, science had provided Christians with a new venue for moral responsibility. Medical knowledge, Fagley wrote, is “a liberating gift from God, to be used to the glory of God, in accordance with his will for men.”

These “responsible parenthood” ideas held that religious couples had a responsibility to be good stewards of the earth by not having more children than the planet could support. In the context of marriage, contraception was viewed as moral, shoring up a particular form of Christian values.

Yesterday’s arguments

These ideas about “good” and “bad” families often rested on assumptions about race and gender that reproductive rights advocates find troubling today.

Early in the 20th century, predominantly white, Protestant clergy were very interested in increasing access to contraception for the poor, who were often Catholic or Jewish immigrants or people of color. Some scholars have argued that early support for contraception was predominantly about eugenics, particularly before World War II. Among some white leaders, there was concern about so-called race suicide: the racist fear that “they” would be overwhelmed.

Apart from some eugenicists, however, most of these clergy wanted to give people access to contraception in order to create “healthy” families, regardless of income level. Yet many were unable or unwilling to see how they were promoting a narrow view of the ideal family, and how that marginalized poor communities and people of color – themes I am studying in my current book project.

Moreover, many proponents were advocating for women’s health, but not reproductive freedom. Their priority was setting women up for success to attain their ideal of the middle-class, Christian motherhood. With fewer children, some hoped, families would be able to get by on just a husband’s salary, meaning more women at home raising children.

A battle won – and lost?

Over the decades, Protestant leaders have, in large part, disappeared from pro-birth control arguments.

There are many reasons. Mid-century agricultural technologies reduced fears of overpopulation – which have only recently been reawoken by the climate crisis. Meanwhile, mainline Protestant churches, and their public influence, are shrinking. Conservative leaders eventually grew concerned that birth control would lead to more working women, not fewer. And since the 1970s, evangelicals have grown increasingly opposed to abortion, which was increasingly linked to birth control through the broad term “family planning.”

In other words, since the “population bomb” was no longer ticking, contraception no longer seemed like such an urgent necessity – and some of its other implications troubled conservatives, breaking an almost pan-Protestant alliance.

Meanwhile, liberal Protestants had so embraced contraception that they no longer viewed it as turf that needed defending. Today, 99% of American girls and women between the ages of 15 and 44 who have ever had sex use or have used a contraceptive method. Reproductive rights advocates turned their attention to abortion rights – largely leaving religious views on birth control to their opponents.

 

Samira Mehta, Assistant Professor of Women and Gender Studies & Jewish Studies, University of Colorado Boulder

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.