|
BUSH WATCH...PROGRESSIVE NEWS AND OPINION papers | most mailed | archives | yesterday | today | today's earlybird | today's update | home | contact MAINSTREAM FEEDS TO BUSH WATCH: | Opinion | New York Times | Washington Post | Los Angeles Times | Boston Globe | USA Today | Christian Science Monitor | Baltimore Sun | Chicago Tribune | San Francisco Chronicle | Lehrer Newshour | Slate | ABC Politics | Reuters Politics | Google | Toronto Star | Guardian (UK) | Independent (UK) | Internation Herald Tribune | Deutsche Welle | Der Spiegel | PROGRESSIVE FEEDS TO BUSH WATCH: | Common Dreams Opinion | Common Dreams News | The Nation | Village Voice | Salon | Mother Jones | Working For Change | AlterNet | Tom Paine | Crooks and Liars | Daily Kos | In These Times | Democracy Now! | Huffington Post |COLUMNISTS' FEEDS TO BUSH WATCH: | Benedetto | Broder | Cohen | Dionne, Jr. | Durst | Froomkin | Gonsalves | Goodwin | Hightower | Hoagland | Huffington | Ignatius | Ivins | Jackson | Kamen | King | Kinsley | Margolis | Meyerson | Milbank | Minbiot | Morsford | Scheer | Solomon | tba | If your favorite columnist is unlisted and has an rss feed, please provide details. |
[CaRP] XML error: Mismatched tag at line 287
AlterNet Blogs: Speakeasy Democracy Now! MoJo Articles | Mother Jones It's a classic move by an industry player feeling the squeeze of pending regulation: Hire a lobbying firm to create the appearance of widespread opposition via a carefully stage-managed astroturf campaign. One of the latest outfits to give this strategy a try: Education Management Corporation (EDMC), a multibillion-dollar heavyweight in the for-profit higher education industry that's the subject of multiple lawsuits and ample criticism from investors, lawmakers, and government officials who accuse the company of a range of deceptive business practices. The company, whose majority stockholder is Goldman Sachs, recently hired a GOP-linked lobbying shop known for its astroturfing prowess to fight a proposed federal rule that has the entire industry fretting about its future. Education Management Corporation operates Argosy University, Brown Mackie College, South University, and various Art Institutes. On August 24, EDMC CEO Todd Nelson blasted out an internal email, first reported on by the New America Foundation's Higher Ed Watch blog, saying that the company had hired DCI Group, a Washington-based lobbying and public relations firm with a controversial history, to coordinate a campaign against the Education Department's proposed "gainful employment" rule. The rule would establish metrics for assessing graduates' ability to repay their student loans as a way of judging whether an academic program is truly fulfilling its mandate: preparing graduates for "gainful employment." For-profit colleges have made no secret of their opposition to this rule; Harris Miller, president of the Career College Association, the industry's top trade group, described it as "unwise, unnecessary, unproven." And for-profit colleges have let the Education Department know their displeasure in a major way. Little wonder why: Education Department officials say the new rule would disqualify 5 percent of programs from receiving federal student aid money, and 55 percent would face limits on growth and mandates to warn students about the risks of excessive borrowing. Continue Reading » Kettleman City's Toxic Web by Titania Kumeh 2 Sep 2010 at 6:00am In the small Latino farmworker community of Kettleman City, California, at least 11 babies in the past three years have been born with serious birth defects, and several infants have died. Residents blame the recent spate of tragedy on the vast hazardous-waste dump three miles from town. But Kettleman City has numerous environmental villains, including contaminated tap water, heavy air pollution, and daily toxic pesticide exposure. In fact, residents' health is compromised in so many ways that Rachel Morello-Frosch, an environmental health researcher at UC-Berkeley, calls Kettleman City "a poster child for cumulative impacts." You can read the full story here, or view a photo essay exploring the tragic impact of cumulative pollutants on Kettleman City families. Interstate 5 and State Route 41 Each day up to 400 semitrucks pass within 4 miles of residential homes in Kettleman City. Nearly 100 trucks, some of them bearing toxic waste, roll directly through town on State Route 41. Farms The state of California is investigating possible links between pesticide exposure and Kettleman City's birth defects. Waste Management landfill The largest hazardous-waste dump west of the Mississippi stores asbestos, pesticides, and petroleum products, as well as PCB-contaminated wastes, which the EPA suspects may be linked to birth defects. A recent EPA investigation found PCBs in the soil (PDF) outside a storage building and concluded that Waste Management had improperly disposed (PDF) of waste. Gas fumes The California EPA says pollution from gas stations—there are 5 in the town of 1,500—could be linked to the birth defects. Petroleum deposits Potential contamination from oil and gas drilling in the Kettleman Hills includes toluene, which has been linked to birth defects. Food desert Cleft palates and neural tube defects are associated with deficiency in the vitamin folic acid, which is found in leafy green vegetables as well as fortified baked goods and cereals. Some researchers suspect diet might be a factor in the Kettleman City mystery. Contaminated tap water Kettleman City's two municipal wells contain what the California EPA calls "elevated levels" of arsenic and benzene, both carcinogens that are also suspected of causing birth defects. California Aqueduct The state Department of Toxic Substances Control is testing the aqueduct for toxic chemicals; some Kettleman residents eat fish (PDF) from the waterway. No Comments | Post CommentWhat's Killing the Babies of Kettleman City? by Jacques Leslie 2 Sep 2010 at 6:00am [Editor's Note: See a related photo essay here.] THE FIRST BABY'S NAME was America. She was born in September 2007, with Down syndrome, two heart murmurs, and part of her upper lip missing. She couldn't suck from a nipple, so her mother, Magdalena Romero, would stay up through the night to feed her with a special tube. America showed pleasure in music and delighted in being held by her four siblings. Magdalena thinks they felt a special tenderness for her because of her vulnerability. Hospital officials told Magdalena that the baby wouldn't live a year, but she didn't want to believe it. Then, one morning when America was nearly five months old, her lips turned purple. Concluding that paramedics would consider a rescue futile, Magdalena drove the baby to the hospital herself and insisted that all efforts be made to save her. For a few days, America survived, tethered to machines. Then she died in her mother's arms. Continue Reading » No Comments | Post CommentGlenn Beck's George Washington Whopper by Stephanie Mencimer 1 Sep 2010 at 6:00am During his much-ballyhooed "Restoring Honor" rally on Saturday, Glenn Beck told a whopper involving the founding father who was supposedly unable to tell a lie: George Washington. Speechifying at the foot of the Lincoln Memorial, the controversial Fox News host highlighted the legacy of the nation's first president to drive home his claim that encouraging honesty and integrity was a main aim of the event. Beck even told attendees that "the next George Washington" was "in this crowd. He may be 8 years old, but this is the moment. This is the moment that he dedicates his life, that he sees giants around him. And 25 years from now, he will come not to this stair, but to those stairs. And he can proclaim, 'I have a new dream.'" Beck also invoked Washington while describing the inspiring experience of visiting famous tourist destinations around the nation's capital. "I have been going to Mt. Vernon," he explained. Holding out his hands for emphasis, he declared with emotion, "I went to the National Archives, and I held the first inaugural address written in his own hand by George Washington." Continue Reading » Are Swing District Dems Toast? by David Corn 1 Sep 2010 at 6:00am As he walks the quiet Main Street of Farmville, Virginia, Rep. Tom Perriello has his work cut out for him. Wearing khakis, brown boots, and an open-collar shirt in the 100-degree heat, the freshman Democrat pops into stores and offices—he's not always recognized—and asks how business is going and what he can do to help. He tells his constituents that America needs to "make things," and "the elites" in Washington don't get this. At Key Office Supply, owner Jim Ailsworth thanks Perriello for his health care reform vote, noting that he plans to use the law's small-business tax credit for his staff. At Davenport & Company, an independent stock brokerage, manager Brad Watson says he's worried that the stimulus (which Perriello also supported) won't yield long-lasting public works. Perriello points out that he argued "for a stimulus that is focused on 10 years—not 18 months." After Perriello leaves, Watson points to campaign literature on his desk for state Sen. Robert Hurt, who vanquished several tea party candidates to become Perriello's Republican challenger. "Hurt's a nice, moderate Republican," Watson says; he intends to vote for him. Some 175 miles away in Washington, Republican strategists would be heartened to hear Watson talk. Defeating Perriello is one of the GOP's top priorities as the party fights to gain the 39 seats it needs to seize control of the House and create an anti-Obama fire wall. These few sleepy blocks in central Virginia constitute one of the front lines in this fight. (Before the campaign even began, Perriello was already the target of $1 million in attack ads.) Given that political handicappers estimate the GOP is likely to bag at least 30 House seats, the Dems' fate could depend on whether Perriello manages to hold on. Continue Reading » No Comments | Post CommentWe Are Not Invisible by Matteen Mokalla 31 Aug 2010 at 6:00am As Fox News, the New York Post, and other right-wing media outlets are stirring up emotions over the so-called "terror mosque" planned near the site of the World Trade Center, I can't help but think back to the few days I spent in southern Ohio as a volunteer for the Obama campaign in November 2008. It was there, in Fairfield County, that I committed one of the greatest acts of cowardice in my life. I allowed myself to stand by and say nothing while an entire creed was deemed violent, hateful, and un-American. At the time, the Obama team was already concerned about the false rumor that their candidate, a self-identified Christian, was a closet Muslim. (According to a recent survey, nearly one-fifth of Americans continue to believe this). When approaching potential voters who believed the rumor, volunteers were instructed not to get in an argument over Muslims, their rights, much less what Islam really stands for. Instead, we were given pamphlets about Obama's faith in Christ and were told to talk about the then-senator's churchgoing habits. On one campaign stop I knocked on the door of a middle-aged woman who was shocked to see her son's name on my list of potential Obama voters. "He had better not vote for Obama," she declared to me on her doorstep. When I asked her why, she leaned towards me and whispered in my ear, "Well, for one, he's a Muslim and I have the proof." Continue Reading » Jules Feiffer, Sketchy Character by Clara Jeffery 30 Aug 2010 at 1:25pm In his new memoir, Backing Into Forward, Jules Feiffer describes channeling dyslexia, anxiety, and a troubled childhood into a prolific career. "There's some brain damage," he jokes, "but I've never met a cartoonist who isn't quirky or weird in some ways." Fortunately, the Oscar-, Pulitzer-, Obie-, and Polk-winning author and illustrator's quirks remain in full bloom. The 81-year-old is still cranking out political cartoons and working on kids' books with his daughter and—after a 50-year hiatus—The Phantom Tollbooth author Norton Juster. Not that he's gone soft; his satire remains as sharp as ever: "The grown-ups, or the ones I choose to go after, deserve everything they get." Mother Jones: I should start by confessing that I named my son after Milo in The Phantom Tollbooth and, like a lot of people, became familiar with you through your children's books. How does it feel to have that be the way into people's hearts—the softer side of Jules? Jules Feiffer: [Laughs.] As long as they pay attention, why should I care? I love doing the children's books as much as anything else I've done. As a matter of fact, just coming back from the audiologist because the hearing aids I've just spent $7,000 on weren't worth a goddam thing, I wrote new picture book on the bus just to cheer myself up. MJ: Do the kids' books feel like they're on a continuum to the very dark social satire that you've done? JF: No, no. It's a different part of me. Until kids' books, I was never able to show the more playful side, the sillier side, and just be out-and-out goofy. MJ: In your book, you say that the best cartoons or comics are when one person does all the writing and the drawing. I found it interesting in context of The Phantom Tollbooth, because I can't imagine a better pairing of text and image. JF: Well Norton [Juster] and I have for the first time in 50 years just done another book, which is coming out in the fall. It's a picture book for younger kids, called The Odious Ogre, which will be in color. What I've tried to do is kind of get inside the author's head and do a presentation that he or she might want to do if they could draw. It's all about telling the story, and telling the story from the inside. What I've always done with the cartoons, in terms of my art, is try to get inside the characters I'm talking about. You know, the character who is speaking, is showing us through body language and through facial expression what he or she is thinking, what the struggle is that's going on, and visualize it as much as verbalize it, and that's what I try to do in the kids' books. MJ: Your kids' books do such a wonderful job of capturing loneliness and other emotional states that we think of, falsely, as adult concepts. JF: I couldn't actually write kids books and go on the attack the way I do with grownups. The grownups, or the ones I choose to go after, deserve everything they get. But kids are in ongoing need of support, and they get various versions of it from grownups which aren't legitimate—a grownup's version of what we think you should have. We tell you what creativity is, and we even tell you what you're thinking. What I try to get at in my books is akin to that sense that Holden Caulfield felt when he reads a writer and wants to call him up in the middle of the night—to be a friend to the reader. Continue Reading » No Comments | Post CommentThe Hardest Job in Washington by David Corn 30 Aug 2010 at 6:00am The office might be that of a regional sales director for a midsize company—a modest space, adorned by little more than family photos, a "Fightin' Phillies" banner, and a shelf of binders bearing labels like "Northeast" and "Midwest." Four blocks from the Capitol, it has a view not of Washington's grand buildings, but of an elevated highway. Yet this room is the command center for a titanic fight that could determine the future of the nation. It's the office of Jon Vogel, the man tasked with one of the toughest jobs in politics: stopping what appears to be a tidal wave heading toward Congress. Vogel, 35, is the executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, a.k.a. "D-Trip" (even "D-Triple C" is now passé), the party unit in charge of raising money and providing other support for House races. It's a tall order: Since Abraham Lincoln, the party of a first-term president has always lost House seats in the midterm election, with two exceptions—the year after FDR was inaugurated during the Great Depression, and the year after 9/11. If the pattern holds true this year, Republicans might ride popular discontent, Tea Party anger, and sky-high unemployment to regain control of the House. Vogel's job is to stop that from happening. Continue Reading » No Comments | Post Comment
In These Times Daily Kos After a two-week absence, the Senate Snapshot is back. The charts are a lot cooler, but the news is grim: Senate Snapshot, September 2nd, With Rasmussen Polls Thanks to user Dbug, the snapshot now comes with a chart displaying the odds of each possible seat outcome: The chances of 50 and 51 Democratic seats are almost identical, with 50 Democratic seats slightly more likely (and those totals include Sanders and Lieberman). Republicans have an 18.7% of taking control of the chamber. Senate Snapshot, September 2nd, Without Rasmussen Polls Without Rasmussen polls included in the averages, the picture is not much better. In fact, it is only about as good as the snapshot was one month ago, with Rasmussen polling included. A narrow Democratic majority of 52 seats is the most likely outcome: Looking desperately for good news? President Obama's job approval is back in positive territory, according to Gallup. If the situation is going to turn around for Democrats, that positive trend will have to be more than a blip. Notes --If a campaign isn't listed here, then it is not as close as any of the campaigns listed here. --A * indicates that the candidate has a primary challenger, but is the favorite to win the nomination. --All polls used in the averages are taken from Pollster.com. --A complete description of the methodology behind this forecast, along with all the research and a FAQ, can be found here.
Veterans call for Simpson's removal by Joan McCarter 2 Sep 2010 at 10:10pm Add VoteVets to the growing list of organizations calling for Simpson's ouster from the catfood commission. You'll recall that this week Simpson aimed his fire at disabled veterans who are "not helping us to save the country in this fiscal mess." See, the benefits they receive in return for having sacrificed their health to defend the country cost too much. One veterans' group, VoteVets, is demanding Simpson's removal on behalf of the millions of veterans who receive Social Security and the millions of disabled vets Simpson blames for the deficit. Via e-mail: Washington DC – The nation’s largest progressive veterans organization, VoteVets.org, is calling on President Obama to relieve former Senator Alan Simpson from his chairmanship of a deficit reduction commission for defamatory comments about veterans. In a letter to the President, Jon Soltz, Iraq War Veteran and Chairman of VoteVets.org, wrote, "On Tuesday, Senator Simpson actually put veteran's benefits on the chopping block... blaming disabled veterans for the country's fiscal situation. And for us, that is the final straw." Soltz says, "President Obama, this week you called for all Americans to honor and thank our troops. I know you agree that honoring our troops can't just be lip service. And the best way to honor those who serve our country is to make sure that we take care of them once they return home. That means strengthening the vital programs we rely on, including Social Security and veterans' health care, not undermining them as Senator Simpson seems intent on doing." The full letter is below the fold.
Undocumented immigration on the wane by kos 2 Sep 2010 at 9:26pm Again, facts get in the way of scary wingnut hate rhetoric. The number of illegal immigrants entering the United States has plunged by almost two-thirds in the past decade, a dramatic shift after years of growth in the population, according to a new report by the Pew Hispanic Center. Between 2000 and 2005, an average of 850,000 people a year entered the United States without authorization, according to the report released Wednesday. As the economy plunged into recession between 2007 and 2009, that number fell to 300,000. Undocumented immigration is not on the rise. Crime is not up in border areas. Immigrants do not fuel what crime exists. Dishwashers and landscapers have nothing to do with the drug cartels. Etc. The entire xenophobic case is built on a foundation of lies and fear mongering.
Republican victories means higher deficits, fewer jobs by kos 2 Sep 2010 at 8:40pm We'd be even more fucked. Nothing is more important to Republican politicians these days than jobs and the deficit—at least according to Republican politicians. As House Minority Leader John Boehner put it in a "major economic address" on Tuesday, President Obama is "doing everything possible to prevent jobs from being created" while refusing to do anything at all "about bringing down the deficits that threaten our economy." Elect Republicans in November, Boehner assured his audience, and we will put an end to this insanity. There's only one problem with Boehner's message: so far, the things that Republicans have said they want to do won't actually boost employment or reduce deficits. In fact, much the opposite. By combing through a variety of studies and projections from nonpartisan economic sources, we here at Gaggle headquarters have found that if Republicans were in charge from January 2009 onward—and if they were now given carte blanche to enact the proposals they want to—the projected 2010–2020 deficits would be larger than they are under Obama, and fewer people would probably be employed. Follow the link to the math, but the synopsis is this -- the stimulus created or saved between 1.4 and 3.3 million jobs. While the health care reform bill and letting tax cuts lapse for the wealthiest Americans actually lower the deficit. Republicans opposed all those things, hence, we'd have fewer people employed, and we'd be suffering from even higher deficits. Not that Republicans care. All the talk about "deficits" is empty rhetoric. It's time Republican candidates are pressed on exactly how they'll balance the budget. Because given the reality of their proposals (like Boehner's), it's clear the math simply doesn't add up.
Late afternoon/early evening open thread by Barbara Morrill 2 Sep 2010 at 8:02pm
House Dems to Obama: No Social Security cuts by Joan McCarter 2 Sep 2010 at 7:20pm House Democrats, led by Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Raul Grijalva, are pledging to stand against any recommendation from the catfood commission to cut Social Security. In a letter obtained by TPM's Brian Beutler, they write: We write today to express our strong support for Social Security and our view that it should be strengthened. We oppose any cuts to Social Security benefits, including raising the retirement age. We also oppose any effort to privatize Social Security, in whole or in part. You have charged the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform with proposing recommendations that improve the long-term fiscal outlook and address the growth of entitlement spending. It is our view that Social Security--which is prohibited by law from adding to the national budget deficit--does not belong as part of those recommendations.... If any of the Commission's recommendations cut or diminish Social Security in any way, we will stand firmly against them. We urge you to join us in protecting and strengthening Social Security rather than letting it fall victim to a misguided attempt to reduce budget deficits on the backs of working families. The full text of the letter is below the fold. The original co-signers of the letter are Grijalva, John Conyers (D-MI), Dan Maffei (D-NY), Mary Jo Kilroy (D-OH), Chellie Pingree (D-ME), and CPC co-chair Lynn Woolsey (D-CA). Beutler reports that "Democrats and advocates are rounding up signers, and will deliver the letter to Obama once the numbers climb, likely after Congress returns later this month." As Beutler notes, the CPC has drawn such lines in the sand previously, most notably with the public option in health reform. This time is different, though, in that it's not pushing uphill to establish a new policy but in defense of the most popular and effective long-standing programs in the nation's history, with a massive constituency, and it's probably not just going to be the CPC in this fight. If you have a Democratic representative, call (the Capitol Switchboard number is (202) 224-3121) or write and ask them to sign on to the letter.
AK-Sen: Joe Miller says no Social Security for you by Joan McCarter 2 Sep 2010 at 6:36pm At the risk of sounding too shrill about the extremism of the Republicans nominated to run for Senate this year, let's take a look at Alaska's Joe Miller Washington (CNN) - Joe Miller calls President Obama "bad for America" and suggests he is leading the nation on a path to socialism. But the newly minted GOP Senate nominee from Alaska also has a message for the Republican Leadership. Not to mention unapologetic views on cutting federal spending and even possibly phasing out Social Security.... "There is an opportunity to lead this country out of the crisis its in and I believe the Republican Party is well suited to take up that mantle," Miller said in an interview for Wednesday's "John King, USA." which will air at 7pm. "The question is whether or not there's the courage and leadership in that party to seize the moment and to recognize that the only way out of this is to get out of the age of the entitlement state to return power back to the states and recognize that central government is broken and see what we can do about fixing things and getting the government focused on those areas the enumerated powers that it should be doing. And the Republican Party can do it but it does require courage." .... KING: "It is an issue that you well know can be easily demagogued, so I want to deliver a statement. You tell me if it's fair or not: That anybody in the [Social Security] system or close to the system is fine. We won't do anything significant to change your benefits. But how about an American born tomorrow or born the day after Joe Miller was sworn in in Washington? Would that person perhaps grow up in an America where there is not a federal Social Security program if you got your way? MILLER: "Absolutely." KING: "That's a fair statement?" MILLER: "No demagoguery there at all." Miller, like Rand Paul before he was advised to keep his mouth shut, is saying out loud what the Republican ethos is. Returning "power back to the states" and limiting the "central" government (with that hint of creeping socialism) to its "enumerated powers" is the quiet fight in which the Republicans have been engaged since the New Deal. When I wrote that post about Paul, I included this from a 2004 post by DavidNYC: I'm hardly the first person to make this point, but it's one that bears repeating: While conservatives are preparing to pack the Supreme Court and the rest of the federal judiciary with right-wing judges who will seek to overturn Roe v. Wade, their real aim is a stealth campaign against the New Deal interpretation of the Interstate Commerce Clause (ICC). Don't get me wrong: Roe and other hot-button social issues matter a great deal. But the power to destroy the ICC has much more far-reaching consequences.... Every time someone like this comes up for a nomination, we need to say that they want to make Social Security illegal. Not get rid of it - make it illegal. They want to make the minimum wage illegal. They want to make clean water laws illegal. This is not a mis-statement or exaggeration of their position. This is exactly what they propose. That was in the context of Supreme Court nominations, but it's what Joe Miller is articulating as the conservative governing philosophy.
Losing Latinos by kos 2 Sep 2010 at 5:50pm Failure to act on Comprehensive Immigration Reform, despite overwhelming (and all-partisan) public support, isn't just bad policy, it's terrible politics for Democrats. More than a third of Latino voters blame both parties in Congress for not trying hard enough to pass immigration reform, and Latino enthusiasm for voting in this year's mid-term elections is down, a new poll shows. Those findings of an election-year tracking poll by Latino Decisions -- released this week and to be updated weekly -- underscore Latino voter dismay over the lack of progress on immigration, an issue that ranks second in importance to them, behind the economy, says one analyst. "They are frustrated with both parties, and it would appear from the goings-on in D.C. that they are right - both parties are ignoring or avoiding the issue," said Matt Barreto, director of the poll and a political science professor at the University of Washington, Seattle. The telephone poll of Latino registered voters in 21 states -- which comprised 94% of the Latino electorate in '08 -- was conducted from Aug. 13 to Aug. 26, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 5%. Given that Latinos are now a 2-1 Democratic constituency, and a fast-growing one at that, the lack of action and anti-Democratic blowback will be deadly at the polls. Right now, most of the voters surveyed said they planned to vote Democratic. But a high percent remain uncommitted two months out, even though about 64% described themselves as Democrat, and only 24% said they were Republican. Still, right now, only 52% said they planned to vote for Democrats in the upcoming House and Senate races, 23% plan to vote Republican, and 25% say they remain undecided. Spanish-language media has been brutal against Obama and the Dems. They have pointed to the 60-vote Senate threshold as an excuse for inaction, but that has been an empty excuse. Had they put forward a bill, it would show a commitment to Latinos to the issue. And if it was defeated? So what? It would then be clear to Latinos who stood in the way of progress, and who was their real enemy. Dithering and inaction are the GOP's best friends. But here's the thing -- there are several Democrats who also didn't want to see this bill introduced. Whether it's genuine electoral fear (even though the issue polls at over 60% for Republicans, Democrats, and Independents), or whether it's substantive hostility toward reform, the fact is that both internal and external pressures paralyzed Dems on the issue. That weakness isn't going unnoticed by Latinos. And for a party struggling to survive what is shaping up to be a cataclysmic year, that inaction will only compound their problems.
| ||