Connect with us

Politics

The political world reacts to Rush Limbaugh's death – NBC News

Published

 on


Republicans from across the political spectrum heaped praise on conservative talk radio giant Rush Limbaugh following the news of his death Wednesday from complications of lung cancer.

Lead among them was former President Donald Trump, who called Limbaugh a “legend” and “fantastic” in an interview with Fox News.

“He would just talk for two hours, three hours, just talk and that’s not an easy thing to do,” Trump said. “And I once asked him, I said do you study for the show? And he said actually, ‘I study very hard. … That, a little bit, surprised me. But he was a fantastic man, a fantastic talent.”

The former president also took the occasion to spread the falsehood that he actually won the last election, saying that Limbaugh thought so, too.

“Well, Rush thought we won, and so do I, by the way,” Trump said, adding Limbaugh “was quite angry about it, quite angry.”

Limbaugh’s death marked the end of a three-decade career leading the conservative talk radio scene and serving as a defining voice on the right. Limbaugh, who Trump honored last year by awarding him the Presidential Medal of Freedom, was long condemned as a bigot by critics for his lengthy history of sexist, homophobic and racist remarks about public figures like Chelsea Clinton and former President Barack Obama, among others.

In his last months, Limbaugh also spread various conspiracies about Covid-19 and the 2020 presidential election.

To his fans, who called themselves “dittoheads” and numbered in the millions, Limbaugh provided an outlet for right-wing discourse that was not presented in mainstream media.

“While he was brash, at times controversial, and always opinionated, he spoke his mind as a voice for millions of Americans and approached each day with gusto,” former President George W. Bush said in a statement. “As he battled hearing loss and cancer late in life, he was sustained by the support of friends and family, his love of sports and rock ‘n’ roll, and his belief in God and country. Rush Limbaugh was an indomitable spirit with a big heart, and he will be missed.”

Feb. 17, 202103:01

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., called Limbaugh a “generational media trailblazer.”

“He gave a voice to millions of conservative Americans whom the mainstream media had not even tried to represent,” McConnell said. “His impact is impossible to overstate. May he rest in peace.”

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., said Limbaugh “revolutionized American radio.”

“His voice guided the conservative movement for millions every day,” he wrote. “Rest In Peace, Rush.”

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., called Limbaugh, a native Missourian, “a voice for the voiceless.”

“He changed talk radio, but more importantly, Rush changed the conversation to speak up for the forgotten, and challenge the establishment,” he said. “He lived the First Amendment and told hard truths that made the elite uncomfortable, but made sure working men and women had a seat at the table.”

There was little reaction from Democrats to news of Limbaugh’s death. White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Biden’s “condolences go out to the family and friends of Rush Limbaugh.”

Progressive figures online also sought to ensure that Limbaugh’s history of incendiary remarks was not set aside in discussion of his death.

“Rush Limbaugh helped create today’s polarized America by normalizing racism, bigotry, misogyny and mockery,” tweeted Shannon Watts, founder of the gun control group Moms Demand Action. “He was a demagogue who got rich off of hate speech, division, lies and toxicity. That is his legacy.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Politics

The empty, performative politics of Marjorie Taylor Greene – CNN

Published

 on


She tweeted this along with the video: “Our neighbor, @RepMarieNewman, wants to pass the so-called ‘Equality’ Act to destroy women’s rights and religious freedoms,” she tweeted. “Thought we’d put up ours so she can look at it every time she opens her door.” Greene added a winking face emoji and an American flag.
Greene’s move was prompted by Newman, a Democratic member of Congress from Illinois whose office is across from Greene’s, putting up a transgender flag outside her office and tweeting this: “Our neighbor, @RepMTG tried to block the Equality Act because she believes prohibiting discrimination against trans Americans is ‘disgusting, immoral, and evil.’ Thought we’d put up our Transgender flag so she can look at it every time she opens her door.”
Newman put a winky face emoji and a transgender flag emoji with her tweet.
Newman, whose daughter is transgender, was supporting the Equality Act that aims to ban discrimination based on sex, gender identity and sexual preference. In an emotional speech on the House floor earlier in the day Tuesday, Newman said this of the act: “The right time to pass this act was decades ago. The second best time is right now. I’m voting yes on the Equality Act for Evie Newman, my daughter and the strongest, bravest person I know.”
The back-and-forth between Newman and Greene is a reminder of an increasingly common strain in the Republican Party in the Trump age: Performative politics as an end in and of itself.
See, Greene isn’t putting that sign up because she thinks it might have some sort of actual effect on the debate over the Equality Act. The bill has support among the Democratic House majority and is likely to pass. Greene knows that. All she is doing is rallying her political base by putting on a performance with zero actual effect on how or whether this bill will become a law or not.
And of course, it worked. Greene’s video had 4.3 million views on Twitter as of Thursday morning, double the number that Newman’s video had gathered. It will further cement her status as a Trumpian cultural warrior, battling the forces of “woke” culture and standing up for traditional values.
“Rep. Newmans daughter is transgender, and this video and tweet represents the hate and fame driven politics of self-promotion at all evil costs,” tweeted Illinois Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger. “This garbage must end, in order to #RestoreOurGOP.”
That’s exactly right. For Greene, the performance and the controversy is the point. She has zero interest in actually legislating or even trying to build relationships with colleagues with whom she may not agree. Her sole interest is in building her Twitter followers, her small-dollar donor base and her profile on Fox News. That’s success for Greene. That’s how she views the job of representing the people of the 14th district of Georgia.
And she might be the most extreme example but she won’t be the only one. Donald Trump’s presidency (and his post-presidency) tilled the soil for candidates just like Greene to succeed. No longer is going to Washington to do something considered of value to the Republican base. Now the goal is to troll Democrats (and the media) with outlandish — and, in this case, intolerant — behavior. And of course to document and share it as widely as possible, because if a tree falls in the forest and all that.
Greene will view the back-and-forth with Newman as a major success. Her video will continue to accumulate views. More people will know her name. She’ll raise more money off it. Win, win, win for her.
And a loss for anyone who believes that politics is about relationships and actually trying to find common ground to get things done for the American people.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

How to make African politics less costly – The Economist

Published

 on


AYISHA OSORI, a Nigerian lawyer and author, has vividly described running for political office in her country. She twists the arms of party elders, flatters their wives and hands over wads of banknotes—the cleaner the better. “Without money”, she concludes, “most aspirations would evaporate like steam.”

Politics costs money everywhere, but the link between cash and power is especially corrosive in Nigeria and across much of Africa. In rich democracies parties choose candidates and subsidise their campaigns. In many African ones aspiring politicians pay vast sums to run on a party ticket and then shell out even more to cover their own costs. They give voters handouts, which serve both as bribes and as hints of future generosity. Once in office, they keep spending: on constituents’ school fees, medical bills, funeral costs and construction projects (see article). Individual politicians, in effect, act as mini welfare states. Some 40% of ambulances in Uganda are owned by MPs. Their spending often dwarfs their official salaries.

This is bad for Africa. When a life in politics costs so much, the impecunious and honest will be excluded. Many MPs will either be rich to begin with, or feel the need to abuse power to recoup their expenses, or both. Even if they are not corrupt, MPs are a poor substitute for a genuine welfare state. Their largesse may go to those who ask loudest, or to a favoured ethnic group.

So long as states are weak, it makes sense for voters to ask their MPs for handouts, rather than for better laws or help to navigate the bureaucracy. It is also rational for MPs to neglect legislative work in favour of gifts and pork, if this is what voters say they want. But as Africa develops, this should change. As voters grow richer, they will be harder to buy. As governments grow more effective, MPs will have fewer gaps to fill. Alas, these shifts could take decades.

Africans need something better, sooner. Outsiders often suggest tougher campaign-finance laws, but these seldom work. They are often ignored. And laws copied from the West tend to miss the point, by regulating spending by parties before elections, rather than by sitting MPs.

Better would be to take a different approach. One aim would be to strengthen institutions that expose and punish corruption. Last year Malawians booted out the graft-ridden regime of Peter Mutharika thanks, in large part, to independent judges. Politicians who see graft punished are more likely to stay clean.

Another aim would be to encourage parties to run on policies, rather than ethnicity or patronage. African NGOs, trade unions and business groups should nudge them in this direction—or help set up alternatives. New parties, such as Bobi Wine’s National Unity Platform in Uganda, are gaining popularity partly because they oppose the old rot. Philanthropists could give them money—and ask nothing in return.

The essential thing is to curb MPs’ informal role as sources of welfare. The long-term fix would be to make local governments work properly. A stopgap is to improve Constituency Development Funds. These are pots of public money to be spent largely at the discretion of MPs. More than a dozen African countries have them. They are not as grubby as they sound. Research from Kenya finds that voters judge MPs on how they use these funds, so they offer some accountability. With greater transparency, they would offer more.

Africa has grown more democratic in the past 30 years. Multi-party elections are common, albeit often flawed. Opposition parties are gaining ground. Most leaders leave office peacefully, rather than in coups. Politics is becoming more competitive. The next step is to make it less costly.

This article appeared in the Leaders section of the print edition under the headline “Fixing Africa’s pricey politics”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

ICRC Humanitarian Law & Policy blog: The grand scheme: power and politics in the climate crisis – World – ReliefWeb

Published

 on


Even in the midst of a pandemic, during a seemingly endless cascade of events, climate change remains a defining issue. Its effects are even more severe for people affected by conflict and violence, who find themselves navigating the collision of war and environmental crises. How can the humanitarian community work with affected people to design policies and practices that have an impact?

In this post, Malvika Verma, a project development officer for ACTED Sri Lanka and India, argues that to strengthen climate action in conflict settings, a solid understanding of people’s vulnerabilities and adaptive capacities must be informed by the bigger picture – an analysis of pre-existing circuits of power and political relationships.

Read the full blog post here

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending