Mediaboss Marketing

In 2021, each branch of the United States government has met or exceeded the record number of women in prominent government roles. In addition, 2021 marks several firsts for women in United States politics. These accomplishments manifest the dreams and desires of the early advocates and pioneers for women's rights.

In the early twentieth century, women's suffrage was the movement that paved the way for women in government. Among the women who were instrumental in the suffrage movement include Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, Virginia Minor, Ida B. Wells, Alice Paul, and Lucretia Mott. The early fight for women's rights culminated in the passing of the 19th Amendment in 1920 that granted women the right to vote.

Even before the 19th Amendment was passed, Jeanette Rankin of Montana was the first woman elected to the House of Representatives in 1916. After women gained the right to vote, women continued to push for their place at the proverbial table. Rebecca Latimer Felton of Georgia was appointed the first women in the Senate in 1922 but the first elected woman senator was Hattie Wyatt Caraway in 1932. Bella Abzug, elected to Congress in 1971, who advocated for women's rights, notably said "This woman's place is in the House the House of Representatives." Only in recent years have women legislators grown exponentially. Of the total 410 women ever elected to Congress, two thirds (274 congresswomen) were elected from 1992 to present.

Other notable firsts for the legislature include Margaret Chase Smith who became the first woman to serve in both the House (1940 1949) and Senate (1949 1973), Stacey Abrams who became the first woman and first African American woman to hold positions in both state and national politics, and Nancy Pelosi who became the first woman to serve as Speaker of the House starting in 2007.

Women have also broken barriers in obtaining positions in the executive branch. Beginning in 1933, Frances Perkins became the first woman to serve in the president's Cabinet when she was appointed President Franklin D. Roosevelt's Secretary of Labor. Then, women began their journey to major elected executive positions. In 1972, Shirley Chisholm was the first woman and African American to run for presidential candidate of one of the two major parties paving the way for future candidates. She famously said, "I ran because somebody had to do it first." Twelve years later in 1984, Geraldine Ferraro made it on a major election ballot as the first woman to be nominated for vice president. Next, in 2016 Hillary Clinton was the first female nominated by a major party for president, ultimately gaining the popular vote but losing the election. Finally, in 2020, Kamala Harris was elected the first woman, Southeast Asian American, and African American to serve as Vice President of the United States.

All the while, women were also striving for a position on the bench. The first woman named to a federal court was Genevieve Rose Cline appointed to the U.S. Customs Court in 1928. Florence Allen was the first woman appointed to an Article III appellate court in 1934 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

As federal judges are appointed positions, the Supreme Court of the United States arrived late to the movement for women in prominent positions. In 1981, Sandra Day O'Connor became the first woman to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States with her appointment by President Ronald Reagan. Where O'Connor opened the door for women, Ruth Bader Ginsburg took the door off its hinges. Before serving as Justice, Ginsburg co-founded the American Civil Liberties Union and was instrumental in creating the Women's Rights Project. Ginsburg became the second woman to serve as a Justice of the Supreme Court in 1993. During her tenure as Justice, Ginsberg penned the majority opinions for groundbreaking cases like United States v. Virginia, finding it unconstitutional for taxpayer funded schools to exclude women. Her dissents were equally transformative for women, such as her dissent in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. where her call to action against pay discrimination paved the way for legislative equal pay protection. Even at her passing in September 2020, she made history as the first woman to lie in state in the U.S. Capitol.

These women laid the pavement, destroyed barriers, and shattered glass ceilings so that the women of today could run in and win elections, make meaningful contributions in government, and climb the ladder to become prominent political figures. Their dreams became the reality for a record number women in government in 2021.

2021: A Record Setting Year for Women in Government

In 2021, Congress is comprised of a record 27 percent of women representatives and senators with 141 women holding seats in the House of Representatives and Senate. In state legislatures, there are a record 1,684 women representatives and 552 women senators. This means for the first time in history women make up more than 30 percent of state legislatures. Women are the majority in six state legislatures with Nevada being the only state with more than 50 percent women legislators. Also, for the first time in history the leaders of the House and Senate are both women, Speaker Nancy Pelosi leading the House and Vice President Kamala Harris leading the senate.

Women make up 27 percent of federal judges. The Supreme Court of the United States maintains its record of three women serving as Supreme Court Justices with Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Justice Elena Kagan, and Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

Besides the historical election of Vice President Kamala Harris as the first woman vice president, women comprise 44 percent of the presidential cabinet. The cabinet consists of 11 women out of 25 total positions and includes Debra Haaland, the first Native American woman appointed to a cabinet position. Women also hold a record 30.3 percent of state executive seats.

While these percentages have a long way to go before women have equal representation in government, the upward trajectory is promising. Such record setting numbers show the movement that started in the early twentieth century with women's suffrage is ongoing and includes room for improvement. Nonetheless, these women's achievements serve as an inspiration for the next generation and as a testament to the women who came before them.

More:
The Rise of Women in Politics | Baker Donelson - JDSupra - JD Supra

Ex-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, hyping the gravity of the US Capitol riot after Republicans blocked a special probe, falsely claimed the mob killed a police officer. Twitter users quickly set the record straight.

An angry mob attacked our Capitol, our lawmakers and our election, Clinton tweeted on Friday, after Senate Republicans blocked a vote on legislation that would create a commission to investigate the January 6 riot. They killed a policeman. And Republican leaders would rather we all not know more about what happened.

Clinton is far from the only high-profile Democrat who has dramatized the Capitol attack to demonize former-president Donald Trump, whom they accused of inciting the insurrection, and portrayed support for him as domestic terrorism. In fact, President Joe Biden has repeatedly called the incident the worst attack on the American democracy since the Civil War.

However, her statement was perhaps one of the most blatantly false. The rioters were initially blamed for the deaths of five people, but four of those including three Trump supporters and US Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick died of medical conditions.

Contrary to early media reports claiming he was bludgeoned to death, Sicknick died after suffering two strokes in his office, hours after the riot ended. After months of delay in investigating his death, Washingtons chief medical examiner said in April that the officer had died of natural causes.

As Twitter commenters pointed out to Clinton, the only person whose life was taken during the riot was Trump supporter Ashli Babbitt, who was shot by a still-unidentified police officer as she tried to climb through a broken window into the Speakers Lobby, a room near the House chamber.

You are flat-out lying about the murder of a police officer, Arizona congressional candidate Josh Barnett told Clinton. Thats not what happened. You disgrace yourself with more lies.

Los Angeles mayoral candidate Kevin Dalton argued that while those who stormed the Capitol were idiots, Clintons continuing to perpetuate a lie that has been debunked numerous times was only slightly stupider.

Max Abrahms, an author and professor of political science, noted that a police officer was killed during an attack on the Capitol, but it happened on April 2, not January 6, and was perpetrated by a follower of Louis Farrakhan, not the Republican Party. He was referring to an incident in which Noah Green whose actions were disavowed by the Nation of Islam plowed his car into a barricade at the Capitol complex, striking and killing Officer William Evans.

Clinton supporters tried to defend her statement, arguing that Sicknick died as a consequence of the riot, even though investigators determined that a clot in an artery had caused the fatal strokes.

Others lamented that the minority party was able to block an independent investigation into the riot for what they claimed were political reasons. Podcast host Greg Hyde quipped that if it had happened in Benghazi, maybe theyd do something about it, alluding to the GOP-led probes of the 2012 attack on US diplomatic facilities in Libya, during Clintons watch as secretary of state, when two diplomats and two security contractors were killed.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

Continue reading here:
Hillary Clinton claims Capitol mob killed cop... Twitter reminds her that only person KILLED was Trump supporter - RT

What are we learning about the American political-media establishment now that the origin story of the coronavirus pandemic appears to be radically changing?

The Wall Street Journal has been reporting on new developments out of Chinas Wuhan Institute of Virology. Theres more on those researchers who became sick enough in November 2019 that they sought hospital care, according to a previously undisclosed U.S. intelligence report. The newspapers reporting boosts efforts supporting a deeper investigation into the origins of the coronavirus illness.

Were also learning, and relearning, about institutional rot and the triumph of political ideology over analysis.

But will the political-media establishment of Washington use this moment to reexamine itself and reflect?

As we wait, more facts come out daily about the origins of the pandemic that led to the deaths of 3.4 million people worldwide, including some 500,000 in the U.S. It is without doubt the most important story of our time. And part of the job of citizens, of journalists and responsible political leaders, is to question assumptions.

Yet until quite recently, anyone who dared suggest that the virus may have leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, China a theory that ran counter to the approved version of the Chinese Communist Party that someone ate or came in contact with an infected bat from a wet market were dismissed as dangerous, perhaps insane.

Some, such as Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, were smeared by Washington media as wild-eyed Republican conspiracy theorists infected with a highly contagious political virus that had to be stamped out lest others catch it.

Senator Tom Cotton Repeats Fringe Theory of Coronavirus Origins, blared a New York Times headline in February 2020, saying such theories gain traction among those who see China as a threat.

And there were many others just like it, including in The Washington Post, with the headline Experts debunk fringe theory linking Chinas coronavirus to weapons research.

Experts. Lazy reporting is what that word should connote when readers see it.

But now the worm is turning with reporting from The Wall Street Journal that three researchers became ill, sparking questions as to whether the COVID-19 virus that crushed lives and economies had escaped from that lab.

A May 5 essay in a science journal by Nicholas Wade, a former science writer from The New York Times, deals with the origin story and asks: Did people or nature open Pandoras box at Wuhan?

Why was it so important to cling to the wet market theory and demonize others? Was it that former President Donald Trump and Mike Pompeo, Trumps secretary of state, hinted that intelligence led them to believe it came from a lab?

The pandemic was the story of the election year. And the Democrats used it to hammer Trumps campaign. COVID-19, said Jane Fonda, was Gods gift to the left.

The other day, a talking head on CNN explained things:

When this first was being reported and discussed, a few months after the pandemic had begun, then-President Donald Trump and Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state, both suggested they had seen evidence that this was formed in a lab. And they also suggested that it was not released on purpose. But they refused to release the evidence showing what it was. And because of that, that made this instantly political. I think this was, you know, example 1,000 when the Trump administration learned that when you have burned your credibility over and over again, people are not immediately going to believe you, especially in an election year. However, that does not mean its not worth discussing.

That was Maggie Haberman of The New York Times twisting her way out of explaining why she, along with most other journalists, dismissed the possibility of a different origin story.

President Joe Biden insists he has a good personal relationship with China, though hes somewhat compromised by his son Hunters business relationships there. Whether all this gives leverage to the president to reshape U.S.-China relations is something best left to foreign policy analysts.

But theres something else to consider:

The virus origin reset offers an extraordinary opportunity to the Washington establishment press a chance to reflect, reconsider and reassess its role as Kemalist guardians. But will the establishment political media culture take advantage of this reset?

This is the same media that treated President Barack Obama as something of a demigod. Many gushed over his Nobel Peace Prize in 2009, though hed been on the job for only months. Besotted by Hopium, all the better to adore Obama, the establishment was shocked to its core when Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in 2016.

That was the year of the anti-establishment insurgency. I knew she would not win. But I wasnt standing in Washington where it is impossible to see clearly.

The New York Times might no longer be the newspaper of record, but it is the newspaper of the establishment. Its editor, Dean Baquet, realized the papers mistake on missing what was going on in the country following Trumps win.

If I have a mea culpa for journalists and journalism, its that weve got to do a much better job of being on the road, out in the country, talking to different kinds of people than the people we talk to especially if you happen to be a New York-based news organization and remind ourselves that New York is not the real world.

Such critical self-examination lasted only a few weeks. Because rather than explore it and understand the nation and the disconnect between the establishment Washington press and millions of Americans, the Democratic Party gave the media fresh meat to sink their teeth into:

Hillary Clinton was unfairly defeated because Trump was a tool of the Russians! The Russia collusion fantasy was beaten like a drum for years, and though it fizzled as a criminal matter, it was politically effective. Pulitzer Prizes were awarded and in general, those who perpetuated that Big Lie never really wanted to examine how they got played.

And then came COVID-19, which couldnt have come from a Chinese lab, we were assured. That story line might have helped Trump and the Republicans by shifting the focus to who was really at fault, China. That couldnt be allowed.

So, will the American political-media establishment use this as a moment of reflection?

Dont hold your breath.

See the rest here:
John Kass: The Wuhan story that finally has legs, now that Trump is gone - TwinCities.com-Pioneer Press

Former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonThe curious case of the COVID-19 origin Harris headlining Asian American Democratic PAC's summit Congress won't end the wars, so states must MORE will address the inauguralAsian Pacific American Heritage Month Unity Summit this month amid a rise in violence and hate crimes against members of the Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPI) community in the U.S.

The virtual event, dubbedFrom Victory to Unity, will be hosted by theAAPI Victory Fund. It is slated to take place Wednesday.

"AAPI electoral power is on the rise and its time AAPI communities get the same recognition, resources, and support as every other ethnic group," Clinton said in a statement. "AAPIs are diverse and growing communities with their own set of challenges and opportunities, and we need to acknowledge that and work to empower them in diverse ways.

Hate crimes against Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders have skyrocketed amid the coronavirus pandemic. Anti-Asian hate incidents increased from3,795 to 6,603 in the period between March 2020 and March 2021, according to Stop AAPI Hate.

At the same time, more Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders are becoming politically active in the U.S.

Rep. Andy Kim, a Democrat from New Jersey, last month launched In Our Hands PAC, which will recruit and support Asian American and Pacific Islander candidates and other candidates of color.

Vice President Harris also became the first South Asian person and first Black person to hold thenation's second-highest executive officeearlier this year, whileReps. Young Kim (R-Calif.) and Michelle Steel (R-Calif.) became some of the first Korean American women to serve in Congress.

Asian American and Pacific Islandervoters turned out in record numbers in the 2020 election cycle, playing a crucial role in states such as Georgia, where some counts show their voter participation doubling, helping Democrats flip the Republican stronghold.

Continued here:
Hillary Clinton to speak at Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders summit | TheHill - The Hill

Today we answer questions and comments from readers and others wondering who thought it was a good idea to let this guy write a column?

You recently claimed the California exodus is a bunch of hooey.

True.

Then the state lost a congressional seat and it was announced that California is losing population for the first time in history.

Also true.

How do you feel now?

Like the state has a little bit more elbow room.

Seriously.

The column explored why so many folks are so eager to write Californias obituary.

The decades-old phenomenon is a product of jealousy and, more recently, the competition between the blue-America capital of California and the red-America capital of Texas. If California and its progressive policies are seen as failing by driving hordes of residents to head for the exits some consider that proof that Texas and its conservative approach offers a better way.

In short, the narrative is driven more by politics than reality.

But what about the population decline?

Demographers said deaths related to COVID-19, a falling birth rate and federal immigration restrictions were key drivers of the states population loss. And while Californias crazy-high cost of housing and comparatively steep tax rate have doubtless caused some to leave the state, those were not the primary reasons that California lost population.

More significantly, experts dont see the falling numbers as the start of a long-term pattern. They expect the state to resume its growth, albeit not at the booming levels of old, as early as this year.

But you flat-out called the exodus a myth.

And it is.

To read some of the apocalyptic coverage, you would think Californians were kicking and gouging each others eyes out as they overran the border with Nevada, Oregon and Arizona. Youd think the states population had fallen in half. Actually, California gained residents over the last decade, though the states population dipped by 0.46% in the last 12 months.

If you think 0.46% is a huge number, youd best not consider a career as a financial advisor.

You recently compared California in 2003, the last time there was a gubernatorial recall, to 2021.

Yes. A number of statistics, including the states dramatic political and cultural shift toward the Democratic Party, suggest Gov. Gavin Newsom is well-positioned to survive this current attempt.

So youre predicting Newsom prevails.

I make no predictions. Im smart enough to know what Im not smart enough to know.

You failed to include a comparison of the states homeless population then and now.

Its a big issue and definitely a political weight on Newsom.

According to the most recent data from the federal Department of Housing and Urban Developments point-in-time count, there were roughly 162,000 homeless residents living in California in 2020. Comparisons are inexact because HUD records go back only to 2005; at that time, the number was about 188,000.

In a recent column about sore losers you failed to mention Democrats Hillary Clinton and Stacey Abrams.

The old Oh, yeah? Well, what about ...

Excuse me, Im asking the questions.

OK.

Well, what about Clinton and Abrams?

Clinton has harshly criticized former President Trump on a number of occasions and even referred to him more than once as an illegitimate president who stole the election. But theres a world of difference between a private citizen even one as famous as Clinton venting on a book tour and Trumps actions before and after leaving the White House.

She didnt vigorously seek to overturn the outcome of the 2016 contest, conceding to Trump hours after the polls closed. Clinton attended his inauguration, as is customary.

Trump skipped President Bidens swearing-in, an event that has long highlighted and celebrated the nations traditionally peaceful transfer of power, and continues almost daily to publicly press the falsehood that he beat Biden and the election was rigged.

More importantly, Clinton didnt help incite a deadly siege on the U.S. Capitol by supporters seeking to reverse the results of a demonstrably free and fair election.

What about Abrams?

After accusing Republican Brian Kemp of using his position as the states chief election officer to interfere with the 2018 gubernatorial contest, Abrams issued a carefully worded statement acknowledging that Kemp would be certified as the victor. But she was not, Abrams said, delivering a speech of concession. From a practical standpoint, it was a distinction without any difference.

Kemp vehemently denied the allegation of misconduct and a USA Today analysis found not much empirical evidence supporting the assertion that Kemp either suppressed the vote or stole the election from Abrams.

While some may find Abrams behavior ungracious, she didnt then set out as Republicans legislators across the country have to pass laws making it harder for people to vote or, more crucially, empowering lawmakers to overturn elections results they dont like.

Thats a big difference.

What about the Russia hoax and widespread 2020 election fraud?

No one from Trumps campaign was charged with conspiring with Russians during the 2016 election, and theres no proof that Moscow tipped the election away from Clinton. However, theres incontrovertible evidence that Trump and his campaign aides welcomed and even invited Russias support, which involved the release of hacked emails from Clintons campaign and spreading disinformation on social media.

As for allegations of widespread voter fraud, maybe theyll find millions of uncounted Trump ballots when they drain the Loch Ness and find the monster that lives there. Or up in the trees where unicorns fly.

But I wouldnt count on it.

So youre always right about everything?

Ask my wife. Shell certainly disabuse you of that notion. Or if youd rather, search for barabak, presidential and long shots to see just how badly I can flub things.

Meantime, keep the cards and letters coming.

Link:
Debunking Russia hoax, California exodus and other myths - Los Angeles Times