Tag Archives: Vox

Despite Racist Attacks From Opponent, Sri Kulkarni Runs Transformative Campaign for Congress

In Houston and other parts of Southeast Texas, Diversity is often considered a strength.  As home to both the most Diverse City and one of the most Diverse Counties in the United States, people in this Texas community are a window into the country’s future.

One person that may represent that future more than anyone in 2018 is Sri Kulkarni, Democratic nominee for Texas’ 22nd Congressional District.  As Ella Nilsen of Vox shares, Kulkarni is running a competitive race against incumbent Pete Olson, and doing it in a transformative way…

 

When Democrat Sri Kulkarni started campaigning in the deep-red Texas district once represented by Republican House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, consultants told him not to even bother trying to get the district’s Asian-American vote.

“I was told, ‘Don’t chase after Asian voters, they don’t vote,’” Kulkarni said in a recent interview with Vox, adding: “Maybe they don’t vote because we don’t bother.”

Kulkarni, a 40-year-old former foreign service official under the Bush and Obama administrations, is doing the opposite of what the consultants told him. “Why don’t we try reaching out in other languages, not just English?” Kulkarni thought. He’s running a campaign with volunteers speaking to voters in 16 languages — aggressively trying to convince the district’s Asian-American voters to cast their ballots for him.

[…]

It’s a simple premise: greeting a voter in his or her native language builds a relationship with that voter and opens a door to the community. Kulkarni already proved it worked in the primary, emerging on top in a field of five candidates. His campaign’s internal numbers suggested their outreach had dramatically increased Asian-American primary turnout, from 6 percent in 2014 to 28 percent in 2018.

“This thing that was a waste of time resulted in a 12-fold increase in people coming out in the Asian community,” Kulkarni told Vox.

 

That dramatic increase in turnout is key to a potential path to victory for Kulkarni.  Which is why it’s no surprise that his Republican opponent, like President Trump, is resorting to fear and racism as a response to this unique campaign.

Here’s more on that from India West

Rep. Pete Olson, a Texas Republican who is engrained in a contentious battle for the 22nd Congressional District, won’t say why he called his Indian American Democratic challenger, Sri Preston Kulkarni, an “Indo-American carpetbagger.”

In a video of an Oct. 23 campaign meet-and-greet obtained by HuffPost, Olson reminisced about a political rally President Donald Trump held in Texas.

“Out of nowhere Texans stood up and said, ‘CNN sucks, CNN sucks,’” Olson recalled, prompting laughs from his supporters.

Pressed by a voter on whether those shouts were appropriate, Olson shrugged. “Sometimes we have to have fun,” someone in attendance called out, the report said.

But in an era where voters are paying attention like never before, it’s quite possible that Olson’s shameful comments could backfire.  Kulkarni is not only working hard to reach out to the district, he’s  also not afraid to play hard ball with the incumbent’s disappointing legislative record.

As is the trend across Texas’ largest counties, those in Fort Bend are voting at historic highs for a Mid-Term election.  And part of that vote may just be motivated by Kulkarni’s wise campaign strategy, then Congressman Olson should be concerned.

Whatever the results, Texas is a better state for campaigns like the one being run by Sri Kulkarni.

After Heinous Russian Attack, UK Action Finally Drags Truth Out Of Trump White House

In an era filled with constant streams of misinformation, a coordinated response from the United States government is becoming a rare, precious commodity. Americans can barely keep with who is on the the Trump Administration payroll, much less any definitive policy stances.

But due to a tragic event overseas, the White House has finally seems to have gotten some of the message on Russia’s malicious actions.  As Alex Ward with Vox reports, Britain’s clear messages are shining a light that even Donald Trump’s Administration cannot run from… 

Donald Trump is one of the most Russia-friendly presidents in modern history. But in less than an hour on Thursday, he rebuked Russia harder than he has throughout his entire time in the White House.

[…]

On March 4, Sergei and Yulia Skripal were found on an outside bench in Salisbury, England. It turned out they had been poisoned with a highly toxic nerve agent.

Eight days later, UK Prime Minister Theresa May said it was “highly likely” that Russia was behind the attack on the Skripals. When asked about the event later that day, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders declined to directly blame Russia but said that “we offer the fullest condemnation” of the attack.

But on Thursday, the White House issued a joint statement with allies to support Britain’s claim, which said: “The United Kingdom thoroughly briefed its allies that it was highly likely that Russia was responsible for the attack. We share the United Kingdom’s assessment that there is no plausible alternative explanation.”

Moscow, however, denies it had any hand in the attack.

The sanctions that the US Treasury Department issued on Thursday have a bit more of a backstory. It all goes back to the January 2017 US intelligence community assessment that Russia did meddle in the election, and did so to help Trump win the White House.

 

So there you have it. After months of stalling, dragging their feet on Congressionally-mandated sanctions, and even defending Vladimir Putin, the Trump Administration has finally, officially admitted to some of the misdeeds that American Intelligence officials mentioned all along.

After thousands of documents, and hours of testimony from United States intelligence agencies coming under attack from the Trump Administration, they suddenly turn tail and stand in full solidarity with Theresa May and British Intelligence?

Where is the outrage among Trump supporters? Why does it take the actions of a foreign government to finally convince this White House that Russia is a threat?? This is exhibit A that they (and Fox News, Breitbart, the whole Right Wing média vortex) have been LYING to the American People. Any Trump supporters that have the audacity to be honest with themselves should have cause for concern. Instead of working for the American People, it seems more and more like the Trump Administration, is only working for itself.

Now that we all finally live in a “yes Russia did it” world, let’s sincerely hope that people take into account how many of their politicians have lied to them to protect these misdeeds. They are on record, including the House Intelligence Committee members that decided to just DROP their investigation the day before news of this UK attack broke. In light of the news from the UK, this makes House Republicans look at best like fools incapable of running the country. At worst?? Accomplices to Trump’s misdeeds. And yes… these are the same Republicans that have crowed for DECADES about the importance of National Security and a robust Military Defense, are leaving Americans and our National Security vulnerable to attack because they refuse to discover what methods of attack were used previously.

Whatever daily distractions and news cycle crises occur between now and November, let’s all  hope that voters pay attention to important developments like these, and use them to VOTE accordingly.

Washington is in dire need of some watchdogs. Here’s hoping that Democrats are up for the job.

Policing Issues– Cameras Will Help, But What Next??

In the wake of recent protests in Ferguson, MO., there has been new attention placed on law enforcement interactions with citizens across the nation.  The increased scrutiny is also causing organizations like the Houston Police Department to quicken some of changes that they may have had planned down the line.  For HPD, those changes start with body cameras.  Here’s more from James Pinkerton of the Houston Chronicle

Houston Police Chief Charles McClelland is asking City Hall for $8 million to equip 3,500 police officers over three years with small body cameras to record encounters between law enforcement and residents as a way of improving accountability and transparency.

Last December, McClelland announced a pilot program that fitted 100 officers with the recording devices at a cost of $2,500 per officer, explaining that body cameras were more likely to record officers’ contact with residents than dashboard cameras in patrol cars.

[…]

Proponents of body cameras – roughly the size of a pager that can be clipped to the front of a uniform shirt- say the technology can be key in lowering use of force by police and citizen complaints. However, the effort to equip additional officers with the devices faces uncertainty as Mayor Annise Parker’s administration acknowledged Wednesday it is having trouble finding money to pay for the project.

The addition of body cameras has had some dramatic effects on other police forces, some of which have seen as much as an 88 percent decrease in complaints filed against the force within one year of deploying the technology.  Perhaps the best part of camera use is that what is records is objective… protecting good the good parties and exposing the bad on both sides.  They don’t take sides between the officer or the person filing the complaint… but merely show the truth of all altercations.    After the horrific and wholly unnecessary assault of Chad Holley, Houstonians already know the difference that one camera can make.

Cameras are a big step in the right direction, but they won’t solve all of the issues with contemporary policing.  HPD, and all area law enforcement agencies can do much more to make the region safer.

There is much more examination to be done on how, when and why police officers engage in brutality, and/or make the decision to take a life.  Many citizens assume from basic gun training that the police know to prioritize non-lethal force when interacting with a possible assailant. But as Dara Lind of Vox recently discovered, this is simply not the case with most law enforcement interactions…

In principle, when a cop fires a gun at a citizen, it’s so the officer can neutralize the threat — he’s not shooting to kill, per se. But in the two seconds that a cop actually has to make a decision, the most certain way for him to neutralize a threat is to aim for “center mass” on the civilian’s body, which is likely to be a lethal shot.

Cops in Richmond, California, have to go through firearms training once a month. But Chief Magnus says that even with that much training, the conditions an officer faces — everything from the stress of a confrontation, to the weather and the lighting — make it impractical for an officer to aim a shot somewhere other than the center of the body. “The notion that it’s possible to shoot somebody just to the level that they’re debilitated — to shoot a gun out of somebody’s hand, to shoot them in the leg — that is the stuff of TV and movies. That’s wildly unrealistic.”

Magnus’ department has a good track record when it comes to lethal force — Richmond officers haven’t killed any civilians since 2008. (Officers shot five suspects during that period, but they all survived.) But he says that once an officer has decided to use a gun at all, he’s deciding to use lethal force — and he needs to accept the consequences thereof. Even if the goal isn’t to kill the civilian,  “you have to accept that that is a very real possibility.”

But the question is whether the officer is thinking about questions of responsibility. That’s not something the force continuum teaches — it just talks about what’s authorized, not if there’s a better way to do things. Nolan, the former union official turned criminologist, thinks there’s a second level of questions that department policies don’t ask — leaving it up to the public to make sure they get answered: “Not only was it authorized and justifiable, and do we support it. But was it, under the circumstances, appropriate and necessary and warranted?”

Of course the culture of police militarization is bolstered, even self-perpetuated by the over-abundance of guns in the United States. Police would not have to always assume the worst if the country’s lawmakers were brave enough to pass sensible gun reforms.  But until that occurs, there will continue to be intense pressure on police to make very difficult judgement calls when out on the streets.

As addressed above, it may be time for a culture change in how police administer the use of force so that they can account for the safety of all parties, instead of just assuming every interaction will escalate into a deadly threat.  For these changes to happen, citizens must first raise the issue repeatedly in public forum. No better time than now, as we approach election season, to shine the light on how to improve law enforcement.

For more on body cameras, see Off the Kuff and Hair Balls– the Houston Press Blog.