Over the past several months the news has been full of stories about police violence and protests against it. Ferguson, and Michael Brown. Cleveland and Tamir Rice. New York and Eric Garner. There have been protests around the country, and a lot of discussion about not just police racism, but racism in society as a whole. We can point to the amount of use of deadly force by police around the country, often as a first resort, not a last. The protests and discussions have finally made it clear that “Things aren’t right,” even though they haven’t been all along. People are fed up, and they have every right to be. The protests are a first step. They’ve called attention to the problem, made it clear that it’s not just a “fringe issue,” and that action is required.
Tag Archives: Rights
The recent Supreme Court decision about Hobby Lobby being able to deny contraceptive coverage to its employees, because of … religious beliefs … has caused a major uproar. My opinion is that it’s probably the most weasel-worded, constitutionally questionable decision the Supreme Court has reached in quite some time. As a concept, the idea of a corporation as a person has any number of good features. The way conservatives, and in particular this Supreme Court, have extended that to the realms of free speech and religion are not among them. But, if corporations want to claim religious beliefs as a reason not to provide a benefit for their workers, I have an idea for making them regret it: Make them live up to it.
Over the past few months, federal and state courts have been finding that state bans on marriage equality or recognizing LGBT marriages are unconstitutional. Utah was the first, and it’s since been followed by Texas, Oklahoma, Virginia, Kentucky, and New Mexico. While most of these are being appealed, Virginia’s is not, and in Kentucky, the Attorney General has refused to appeal, so an outside counsel will be used. In reaction, several states are attempting “religious freedom” bills to allow people to refuse LGBT’s on the basis of “religious objections.” Arizona, Kansas, and Indiana have all attempted it, with … poor results. Arizona’s governor vetoed the bill after massive backlash, while Kansas and Indiana allowed their bills to die in the legislatures. It’s not unexpected that there is going to be this sort of reaction, particularly in the “Red States,” where Republicans hold control and are acting on their base’s demands.
Early last year, I discussed the Republican Party’s “Growth and Opportunity Project,” and spent some time on their recognition that they needed to reach out to women voters. They were, and still are, very upset that the Democratic Party was able to paint them as conducting “a war on women.”
5. Republicans should develop a more aggressive response to Democrat rhetoric regarding a so-called “war on women.” In 2012, the Republican response to this attack was muddled, and too often the attack went undefended altogether. We need to actively combat this, better prepare our surrogates, and not stand idly by while the Democrats pigeonhole us using false attacks. There are plenty of liberal policies that negatively impact women, and it is incumbent upon the party to expose those and relentlessly attack Democrats using that framework.
They’ve been doing that, and in the past month have been vigorously conducting aggressive responses explaining how liberal policies negatively impact women, and then explaining the Republican position.