Michigan Arabs and Muslim community work to beat Biden in 2024 race: Biden 'thinks we're bluffing'
- Off Topic
- 0 Replies
Arabs and Muslims in Michigan are working to beat President Biden in one of the most important swing states in the country, per a new report.
Michigan State Rep. Alabas Farhat is one of many Arab-American elected officials who refused a meeting with Biden campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez in January, according to a new Washington Post article.
Imam Omar Sulemain said during a sermon that Biden wants the vote of the Arab community in Michigan but suggested that Biden is not owed their support.
"And then your president wants to come to your community and make sure that you’re still going to vote with him and vote for him in November," Suleiman said to congregants. "I hope you’ve sent him the right message."
"After the sermon and prayer, Abandon Biden co-chairs Khalid Turaani and Samraa Luqman made an announcement about the effort, urging congregants to show up and vote in a way that ensures Biden does not retain the presidency," The Post reported. "Turaani told those gathered they had no right to complain if they did not make their voices heard."
"For decades, we’ve squandered the power that we have here because [Democrats] were stringing us along, saying, ‘Vote for me, we’re not the other guy,’" Michigan State University assistant professor Shireen Al-Adeimi told The Post. "This is such a dangerous time that we’re finally willing to use that card, and [Biden] thinks we’re bluffing."
The reported the Abandon Biden campaign does not support former President Trump, Biden's likely opponent in the 2024 election, and Biden's campaign is hopeful that if it comes down to a binary choice between the two, the Arab population that supported him strongly when he carried Michigan in 2020 will do so again.
Some polls indicate that Biden's support among Arab Americans is falling, including a survey conducted by Arab American Institute president James Zogby.
"Zogby conducted a poll in October that showed that support for Biden among Arab Americans had plummeted to 17 percent, down from 59 percent in 2020," The Post wrote.
Sami Baraka, who said his family has been displaced by the war in Gaza, claimed that he voted for Biden in 2020 because he was "the lesser of two evils," but he no longer believes that.
www.foxnews.com
Michigan State Rep. Alabas Farhat is one of many Arab-American elected officials who refused a meeting with Biden campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez in January, according to a new Washington Post article.
Imam Omar Sulemain said during a sermon that Biden wants the vote of the Arab community in Michigan but suggested that Biden is not owed their support.
"And then your president wants to come to your community and make sure that you’re still going to vote with him and vote for him in November," Suleiman said to congregants. "I hope you’ve sent him the right message."
"After the sermon and prayer, Abandon Biden co-chairs Khalid Turaani and Samraa Luqman made an announcement about the effort, urging congregants to show up and vote in a way that ensures Biden does not retain the presidency," The Post reported. "Turaani told those gathered they had no right to complain if they did not make their voices heard."
"For decades, we’ve squandered the power that we have here because [Democrats] were stringing us along, saying, ‘Vote for me, we’re not the other guy,’" Michigan State University assistant professor Shireen Al-Adeimi told The Post. "This is such a dangerous time that we’re finally willing to use that card, and [Biden] thinks we’re bluffing."
The reported the Abandon Biden campaign does not support former President Trump, Biden's likely opponent in the 2024 election, and Biden's campaign is hopeful that if it comes down to a binary choice between the two, the Arab population that supported him strongly when he carried Michigan in 2020 will do so again.
Some polls indicate that Biden's support among Arab Americans is falling, including a survey conducted by Arab American Institute president James Zogby.
"Zogby conducted a poll in October that showed that support for Biden among Arab Americans had plummeted to 17 percent, down from 59 percent in 2020," The Post wrote.
Sami Baraka, who said his family has been displaced by the war in Gaza, claimed that he voted for Biden in 2020 because he was "the lesser of two evils," but he no longer believes that.
Michigan Arabs and Muslim community work to beat Biden in 2024 race: Biden 'thinks we're bluffing'
Arabs and Muslims in Michigan are working to beat President Biden in one of the most important swing states in the country, per a recent report.
Developers eyeing new White Sox stadium at The 78 meet with state Democratic leaders
- By cigaretteman
- Off Topic
- 0 Replies
Democratic leaders in the Illinois General Assembly have met with Related Midwest, the developers in talks with the White Sox to build a new stadium on vacant South Loop land known as The 78.
It’s the next step in a process that is looking very different than the path the Chicago Bears have taken in their quest to get support for a property tax freeze to support an Arlington Heights stadium.
The Sun-Times on Jan. 17 first reported the Sox are in “serious negotiations” with Related Midwest , which owns the 62-acre site at Roosevelt and Clark — one of the city’s largest undeveloped tracts.
Related Midwest met with Illinois House Speaker Emanuel “Chris” Welch, D-Hillside, on Jan. 24, while Illinois Senate President Don Harmon, D-Oak Park, held meetings with the developers on Jan. 25, according to both offices.
Developers did not ask for state money, but instead said they want the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority (ISFA) to be granted authority to “rearrange existing bonds.” They were also aware of Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s disdain for using taxpayer funds for sports stadiums — which is viewed as politically unpopular despite its prevalence in other cities.
Pritzker had not been briefed by Related Midwest, or the White Sox, as of Wednesday, according to the governor’s office.
According to someone close to the talks, there have been no discussions about creating new revenue or tax increases to help fund the new stadium. The goal is to work creatively within the current system.
Sources familiar with the plan say the development would include residences, offices, a hotel and dozens of restaurants and bars.
Last week Mayor Brandon Johnson said he had a “very positive” conversation with White Sox Chairman Jerry Reinsdorf about the plan. He called the multi-billion-dollar development the new ballpark would anchor “the way new stadiums should and could look.”
State legislators left the spring session last year without any action on a Bears bid for “property tax certainty” for the Arlington Park project to move forward. A new stadium is estimated to cost at least $2.5 billion. The Bears and three northwest suburban school districts are also still far apart — $100 million to be exact — on their valuation of the former Arlington International Racecourse.
chicago.suntimes.com
It’s the next step in a process that is looking very different than the path the Chicago Bears have taken in their quest to get support for a property tax freeze to support an Arlington Heights stadium.
The Sun-Times on Jan. 17 first reported the Sox are in “serious negotiations” with Related Midwest , which owns the 62-acre site at Roosevelt and Clark — one of the city’s largest undeveloped tracts.
Related Midwest met with Illinois House Speaker Emanuel “Chris” Welch, D-Hillside, on Jan. 24, while Illinois Senate President Don Harmon, D-Oak Park, held meetings with the developers on Jan. 25, according to both offices.
Developers did not ask for state money, but instead said they want the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority (ISFA) to be granted authority to “rearrange existing bonds.” They were also aware of Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s disdain for using taxpayer funds for sports stadiums — which is viewed as politically unpopular despite its prevalence in other cities.
Pritzker had not been briefed by Related Midwest, or the White Sox, as of Wednesday, according to the governor’s office.
According to someone close to the talks, there have been no discussions about creating new revenue or tax increases to help fund the new stadium. The goal is to work creatively within the current system.
Sources familiar with the plan say the development would include residences, offices, a hotel and dozens of restaurants and bars.
Last week Mayor Brandon Johnson said he had a “very positive” conversation with White Sox Chairman Jerry Reinsdorf about the plan. He called the multi-billion-dollar development the new ballpark would anchor “the way new stadiums should and could look.”
State legislators left the spring session last year without any action on a Bears bid for “property tax certainty” for the Arlington Park project to move forward. A new stadium is estimated to cost at least $2.5 billion. The Bears and three northwest suburban school districts are also still far apart — $100 million to be exact — on their valuation of the former Arlington International Racecourse.
Developers eyeing new White Sox stadium at The 78 meet with state Democratic leaders
Developers did not ask for state money, but instead said they want the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority to rearrange existing bonds. They were also aware of Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s disdain for using taxpayer funds for sports stadiums — which is viewed as politically unpopular despite its…
chicago.suntimes.com
Iowa Republicans advance bill on religious liberty protections
- By cigaretteman
- Off Topic
- 10 Replies
Republican Iowa lawmakers advanced a bill Tuesday that would set a heightened legal standard in cases where religious freedom questions are at odds with state law.
The bill, titled the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” is modeled after federal legislation that was signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton in 1993.
Companion bills were passed by majority Republicans out of the Iowa House and Iowa Senate subcommittees Tuesday, making them eligible for a vote in the full committees. The lone Democrat on each subcommittee voted against the legislation.
"I've worked on this bill for many years, and I feel like this fleshes out the First Amendment protections that are in the Constitution," said Republican Sen. Sandy Salmon of Janesville during the subcommittee meeting.
Under the bill, courts would need to apply strict scrutiny, the highest legal standard, to claims that a law violates a person’s religious liberty. To survive the test, the law would need to serve a compelling state interest and be narrowly tailored to accomplish it.
The federal law applies only to the federal government, but at least two dozen states have passed state-level versions.
Civil rights groups and some business groups opposed to the bill, saying it would allow people and businesses to discriminate against people on religious grounds.
Connie Ryan, executive director of the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa, said the First Amendment already provides the necessary protections for religious freedom and the bill would allow broad exemptions to state laws for religious actions.
“The religious exemption legislation is broad and vague, leaving things open to abuse and potentially harming people,” she said. “The law could be used by anyone to claim that they don’t have to follow any other law, leading to legal chaos.”
Sign up for On Iowa Politics
Opponents said it could allow someone to refuse to allow a same-sex couple to adopt a child, a landlord to refuse to rent to an unmarried couple and a business owner to refuse to serve customers based on their religion.
Rep. Lindsay James, a Democrat from Dubuque, voted against the bill in the House. A Presbyterian minister, James said she cares deeply about religious freedom but that the bill "weaponizes religious beliefs to justify discrimination."
The federal law was invoked in a 2014 case involving Hobby Lobby, in which the U.S. Supreme Court decided the law allowed private corporations to deny employees insurance coverage of contraception on religious grounds. A federal judge in Utah, later that year, cited that decision in his decision to exempt testimony in a case in which a fundamentalist Mormon church was accused of using child labor.
Some top employers and business groups in Iowa, including Principal Financial Group and the Iowa Chamber Alliance, are registered against the bill, arguing it will make it more difficult to recruit employees and turn away potential business development.
Republican lawmakers have attempted to pass the legislation multiple times. They said the concerns about economic impact have subsided as the bill has been passed in several other states without them suffering economic setbacks.
The bill’s supporters, including religious organizations, said the legislation introduces a sensible check on the power of the state to impede on a person’s religious beliefs and actions. They said the policy has not been a pathway to discrimination.
“Opponents of this legislation can only list hypothetical situations because in federal law and in numerous states where this has been adopted, this legislation has not led to discrimination in the decades that we have lived under religious freedom laws such as this,” said Rep. Steve Holt, a Republican from Denison.
www.thegazette.com
The bill, titled the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” is modeled after federal legislation that was signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton in 1993.
Companion bills were passed by majority Republicans out of the Iowa House and Iowa Senate subcommittees Tuesday, making them eligible for a vote in the full committees. The lone Democrat on each subcommittee voted against the legislation.
"I've worked on this bill for many years, and I feel like this fleshes out the First Amendment protections that are in the Constitution," said Republican Sen. Sandy Salmon of Janesville during the subcommittee meeting.
Under the bill, courts would need to apply strict scrutiny, the highest legal standard, to claims that a law violates a person’s religious liberty. To survive the test, the law would need to serve a compelling state interest and be narrowly tailored to accomplish it.
The federal law applies only to the federal government, but at least two dozen states have passed state-level versions.
Civil rights groups and some business groups opposed to the bill, saying it would allow people and businesses to discriminate against people on religious grounds.
Connie Ryan, executive director of the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa, said the First Amendment already provides the necessary protections for religious freedom and the bill would allow broad exemptions to state laws for religious actions.
“The religious exemption legislation is broad and vague, leaving things open to abuse and potentially harming people,” she said. “The law could be used by anyone to claim that they don’t have to follow any other law, leading to legal chaos.”
Sign up for On Iowa Politics
Subscribe now and receive a roundup of Iowa politics news sent directly to your inbox.
Opponents said it could allow someone to refuse to allow a same-sex couple to adopt a child, a landlord to refuse to rent to an unmarried couple and a business owner to refuse to serve customers based on their religion.
Rep. Lindsay James, a Democrat from Dubuque, voted against the bill in the House. A Presbyterian minister, James said she cares deeply about religious freedom but that the bill "weaponizes religious beliefs to justify discrimination."
The federal law was invoked in a 2014 case involving Hobby Lobby, in which the U.S. Supreme Court decided the law allowed private corporations to deny employees insurance coverage of contraception on religious grounds. A federal judge in Utah, later that year, cited that decision in his decision to exempt testimony in a case in which a fundamentalist Mormon church was accused of using child labor.
Some top employers and business groups in Iowa, including Principal Financial Group and the Iowa Chamber Alliance, are registered against the bill, arguing it will make it more difficult to recruit employees and turn away potential business development.
Republican lawmakers have attempted to pass the legislation multiple times. They said the concerns about economic impact have subsided as the bill has been passed in several other states without them suffering economic setbacks.
The bill’s supporters, including religious organizations, said the legislation introduces a sensible check on the power of the state to impede on a person’s religious beliefs and actions. They said the policy has not been a pathway to discrimination.
“Opponents of this legislation can only list hypothetical situations because in federal law and in numerous states where this has been adopted, this legislation has not led to discrimination in the decades that we have lived under religious freedom laws such as this,” said Rep. Steve Holt, a Republican from Denison.
Iowa Republicans advance bill on religious liberty protections
Civil rights and some business groups oppose proposal, citing ‘legal chaos’ and economic consequences.
www.thegazette.com
