Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) on Wednesday made a reference to “the good old days of segregation.”
Graham opened the third day of Amy Comey Barrett’s confirmation hearing by defending the Supreme Court nominee’s refusal to answer questions. However, the South Carolina senator pointed out that Barrett could express an opinion about Brown v. Board of Education because it was not currently being challenged in the courts.
“One of the reasons you can’t tell us how you would rule is because there’s active litigation coming to the court,” Graham said. “And one of the reasons you can say with confidence that you think Brown v. Board of Education is super-precedent is you’re not aware of any effort to go back to the good old days of segregation.”
Viewers immediately expressed shock on Twitter.
“Is he not even trying to hide his racism anymore?” one commenter asked.
Watch the video and read some of the tweets below.
Lindsey Graham, “the Good Ol’ Days of Segregation.” Those words left his mouth today
— muhcuhlin (they/them) 🐛🏳️🌈 (@enbytheyby) October 14, 2020
Lindsey Graham just used the term “good old days of segregation by the legislature”… is he not even trying to hide his racism anymore?
— Vikram Pandit (@VikPan13) October 14, 2020
— GiselAceves (@GiselAceves) October 14, 2020
“The good ol’ days of segregation” – Senator Lindsey Graham 10/14/2020 9:17 am
Never forgot the day and exact time he said that…ON the record! Hold the tape!
— Had Enough Yet? (@MaynardLeeRoth1) October 14, 2020
did lindsey graham really just call segregation the “good ol’ days”? pls tell me i heard that wrong.
— shel ☁️ (@shelmarie_) October 14, 2020
Did this idiot @LindseyGrahamSC just say “The Good Old Days of Segregation”?…. WTF?
— Angel Rodriguez (@arodriguezjr52) October 14, 2020
…did lindsey graham just say “the good old days of segregation” or am I just losing my gd mind
— Devon (@devon_con) October 14, 2020
— Mae Margaret Hays (@MaeMargaretHays) October 14, 2020
‘So, so cruel’: Rights advocates sound alarm about immigration agenda Stephen Miller is crafting for Trump’s 2nd term
Immigrant rights advocates along with Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and his supporters responded with alarm to reporting this week that Stephen Miller, a senior adviser to President Donald Trump, is plotting how to "rev up Trump's restrictive immigration agenda" and is ready to "unleash executive orders deemed too extreme for a president seeking reelection" in the event of a Biden loss next week.
NBC News reported Friday that Miller, speaking as an adviser to the president's campaign, laid out four top priorities in a 30-minute call Thursday: "limiting asylum grants, punishing and outlawing 'sanctuary cities,' expanding the so-called travel ban with tougher screening for visa applicants, and slapping new limits on work visas." Implementing these policies would require a mix of legislation and executive action.
REVEALED: Far-right extremists are circulating plans to lock down Arizona streets if Trump is re-elected
On Saturday, The Arizona Republic reported that far-right paramilitary groups are circulating plans to lock down neighborhoods in the Phoenix, Arizona metropolitan area in the event that President Donald Trump is re-elected, supposedly to police left-wing protesters.
"In Arizona, the head of the Prescott-area chapter of the Oath Keepers group, which recruits military and law enforcement officers, has warned residents to be prepared to protect their neighborhoods from feared extreme left-wing protesters who would be upset should President Donald Trump be re-elected," reported Richard Ruelas. "Part of that the pro-Trump group'splan involved closing streets and assigning monitors to control access, according to a planning document shared with The Republic."
America’s crimes against humanity aren’t on the ballot this year — but they should be
The 2020 presidential election is a life-and-death decision for thousands of people vulnerable to COVID-19, for a globe under the assault from the climate crisis, and for the future of American democracy. And yet for all the urgency, the political campaign still suffers under the weight and stench of bullshit.
This article first appeared in Salon.
Philosopher Harry Frankfurt warns in his bestselling pamphlet "On Bullshit" that "bullshit" is more injurious than the blatant lie. One reason among many is that bullshit blurs the line between reality and fiction, offering a manipulative incorporation of truth to strengthen its own capacity to persuade. Absolute falsity, in contrast, is obvious to anyone with minimal awareness of the facts. When the Trump administration recently declared that one of its grand achievements was "ending the pandemic," most people laughed in disbelief. This is a lie fit for consumption only from inhabitants of a collective similar to the Rev. Jim Jones' notorious People's Temple settlement in Guyana.