Apr 07

Will A 'Justice Gorsuch' Let Us Fix Our Flawed Democracy?

Posted in: Today's Chili

Co-authored by Scott Greytak, Represent.Us Senior Counsel

Plenty of important news stories have failed to break through the media’s hyperfixation on the Trump presidency. The removal of South Korea’s president. The weakening of net neutrality. Seven Earth-size planets. But as our national attention turns to the most important Senate confirmation of the year—that of Judge Neil Gorsuch, President Donald Trump’s nominee to the United States Supreme Court—one worthy news story that died in the shadow of Trump must be resurrected.

The United States is no longer a “full democracy,” according to the Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index, a yearly metric that captures the health of democracy in nearly 170 countries. It is, instead, a “flawed democracy,” a demotion that the Index’s designers attribute not to the rise of President Trump, but to a “continued erosion of trust in government and elected officials.” In essence, the public’s waning faith in government has evolved from a third-rate gripe into a true threat to American democracy.

Not coincidentally, this crisis of confidence comes at the end of a national election cycle where $7 billion was spent on American elections. An election cycle where half of the money pushed through super PACs—political groups that can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money—came from just 50 families. Where the flood of money in judicial races continued to reach new heights. Where foreign corporations—and foreign governments—worked hard to purchase our democratic process.

All these problems began—and could end—at the U.S. Supreme Court. So the question is clear: Will the judicial philosophy of a “Justice Gorsuch” allow—and even encourage—the American public to restore their government to a full democracy? Or will it further enshrine a defective legal doctrine that undermines the rule of law?

Three in four Americans believe that money has a greater influence on politics and elected officials than ever before.

The strongest rationale for reining in the power that money has in our politics, for ending a pay-to-play culture where politicians give special access to their supporters, and for striking at the very core of the public’s ever-increasing distrust in our government has always been the prevention of corruption or the appearance of corruption. Whereas corruption itself has no easy metric, the appearance of corruption in the public eye—which has the particularly pernicious power to sap our faith in the rule of law—is undeniable today: Three in four Americans believe that money has a greater influence on politics and elected officials than ever before, and that widespread corruption exists in our government.

The importance of preventing the appearance or reality of corruption was made clear by the Supreme Court more than 40 years ago, on the heels of the Watergate scandals that shattered the public’s confidence in good government. The idea of corruption, the Court said then, was not just the “giving and taking of bribes” by politicians. Such obvious examples of corruption were “only the most blatant and specific attempts of those with money to influence governmental action.” Instead, as the Court saw it, corruption involved a much broader dynamic. It was “inherent in a system permitting unlimited financial contributions.” This logic could easily extend to the dynamics that define campaign finance today, including the surge of spending by supposedly “independent” super PACs.

But the high court that Judge Gorsuch may soon join has changed course on corruption. Through a series of recent decisions, including Citizens United v. FEC, the Court has essentially narrowed its definition of corruption to mean the quid pro quo (“this for that”) sale of official action. In its ugliest form, the exchange of money for votes. With some exceptions, then, anything beyond the quid pro quo pale walks a precarious path. Laws that can’t be neatly threaded through the Court’s definition of corruption—for example, laws aimed at limiting the outsized influence that wealthy donors have via super PACs—will continue to be short-circuited by the Court’s narrow constitutional guardrails.

Yet Americans still want change. Despite the high court’s hamstringing of meaningful reforms, voters continue to register their outrage directly by approving ballot measures that target perceived government corruption. From South Dakota to Maine, California to Missouri, voters have circumvented recalcitrant lawmakers by passing pro-democracy initiatives in cities and states across the country. In this way, a truly bipartisan effort to “drain the swamp” of political corruption is taking shape, and concerns over corruption are already becoming central to the 2018 midterm narrative. As a result, the Court’s ever-shrinking conception of corruption appears to be on a collision course with the will of the American people.

Judge Gorsuch now finds himself at the center of this debate. And if he’s confirmed, he’ll join a far more consequential conversation about our democracy as one of the nine most powerful people in the country. So will a “Justice Gorsuch” continue to cabin the Court’s understanding of corruption? Or will he empower the American people to restore their government to a full democracy that is truly of, by, and for the people?

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

No Comments
Apr 07

Why Miss Rizos Decided To Empower Dominican Women To Love Their Curls

Posted in: Today's Chili

Carolina Contreras, also known as Miss Rizos, has spent years fighting the notion that naturally curly hair is inherently bad. 

“In the Dominican Republic, having kinky or coarse hair is perceived as something that is unclean, unkept, something that is simply not beautiful,” Contreras, who owns the Miss Rizos Salon in Santo Domingo, said in a profile posted by the Great Big Story video network via Facebook on Monday.

“The salon really cares about the way curly hair is perceived in society and we want to be a part of that change fully,” she added.   

In the video, Contreras describes the discrimination she faced when she first decided to embrace her natural curls in 2010 and how that inevitably led her to other women who were looking for a place where they could celebrate their natural hair. 

“Some of the things I would hear back then is like, ‘Did you forget your comb at home? Did you put your fingers [in] a socket?’” Contreras said. “I mean, all sorts of really mean things. But I had all these women stop me and ask me how to curl [my hair], how to do it, where did I cut it? There was this huge thirst and hunger for a space where women would be validated.”  

The natural hair advocate first began a Spanish-language blog to help others take care of their curls. In 2011, she opened her salon in the country’s capital and has since been empowering young girls and women to say “Yo amo mi pajón!” (“I love my natural hair!”). 

“To think that with a brush, a pick or a comb ― I could empower someone,” she said. 

Learn more about Miss Rizos in the video above. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

No Comments
Apr 07

What Is Steve Bannon Hiding Under All Of Those Shirts?

Posted in: Today's Chili

If layering is an art form, we wouldn’t exactly call Steve Bannon a modern day Picasso. 

Donald Trump’s embattled chief strategist has a habit of layering multiple shirts on top of one another. And we don’t mean something normal, like an undershirt and a sweater. We mean two button-down collared shirts. Over one another. 

Bannon, who was reportedly just pushed off the National Security Council in part by the president’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and may have even threatened to quit the White House, has been called out for this strange style habit, both on Twitter… 

…and in horrified headlines:

That got us wondering, though: Does anyone else actually do this? After a bit of digging and trying to wrap our minds around the whole thing, we did find at least one other iteration of this look: On J.Crew’s website, no less!

For what it’s worth, even in its trendiest form, the whole buttoned shirt over a buttoned shirt still looks pretty ridiculous. Plus, the shirt from J.Crew is “sherpa lined,” more like a jacket-type garment and therefore slightly less offensive.

Esquire expertly compared Bannon’s look to a famous scene from “Friends,” in which Joey puts on all of Chandler’s clothes. Here’s hoping Bannon isn’t also going commando, eh?

The mag also assured its readers that this is not a trend they need to worry about adopting anytime soon.

“This is not something that anyone except for Steve Bannon does,” they wrote.

Fashion blogger Ryan Dziadul expressed a similar, if not slightly less judgmental sentiment. “I’m all for fashion experimentation, breaking the so-called rules, and wearing what you want to wear,” he told The Huffington Post. “But wearing two button-down shirts at the same time is just weird. It just seems so…uncomfortable, and not to mention time-consuming.”

Dziadul’s advice to Bannon?

“If you’re desperate to layer, add a scarf,” he said. “But then again, Steve Bannon doesn’t seem like the kind of guy who minds weirding people out.”

All in all, the style just seems incredibly unnecessary, unless Bannon is hiding something under all those layers. Like, say, information about Russia? A dart board with Kushner’s face on it? 

Like many other things in the Trump administration, the world may never know the truth. 

type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related… + articlesList=58e5a8d1e4b0fe4ce0882c8c,58e50efbe4b0917d347605ca,588f4b90e4b0176377956409

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

No Comments
Apr 07

10 Cheeky Wedding Ring Engravings That Speak Volumes

Posted in: Today's Chili

Couples typically engrave their anniversary date, a cute nickname or a romantic message inside their wedding bands. 

But some husbands and wives are taking things up a notch by getting a tongue-in-cheek message inscribed instead of the usual, “You’re my everything, honey!” Below, we’ve compiled 10 unconventional wedding ring engravings you’ll get a kick out of. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

No Comments
Apr 07

Environmental Groups Take Trump EPA To Court To Force Ban Of Brain-Draining Pesticide

Posted in: Today's Chili

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_1’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

WASHINGTON — Three environmental organizations have asked a federal appeals court to force the Environmental Protection Agency to ban a widely used pesticide linked to brain damage in children.

A motion filed Wednesday by Earthjustice on behalf of two other organizations challenges EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt’s decision last week to reject the scientific findings of his own agency and allow chlorpyrifos, an organophosphate insecticide used on fruits, vegetables and nuts, to remain on the market for agricultural use. The groups asked the court to require EPA to ban the pesticide within 30 days.

Patti Goldman, an Earthjustice attorney, told The Huffington Post that the Trump administration is failing to protect the public from a chemical its own scientists found to be dangerous.

“If the head of the EPA isn’t respecting, following the law or the science, that will be of great concern across the board,” Goldman said. 

Earthjustice is representing the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Pesticide Action Network North America, which in 2007 petitioned the EPA to ban the chemical.

“The Trump administration is not above the law — and we will not let them put our kids at risk,” Erik Olson, a senior attorney at NRDC, said in a statement. “The science is clear that this chemical is dangerous, yet Administrator Pruitt is ignoring findings from EPA’s own experts and brushing off the courts to keep it on the market.”

In November 2015, under the Obama administration, the EPA proposed permanently banning the chemical on food crops, citing potential risks to human health. In announcing his reversal last week, Pruitt said the proposed ban relied largely on studies “whose application is novel and uncertain.” He called for additional study and claimed his decision was about “returning to using sound science in decision-making — rather than predetermined results.”

Goldman said Pruitt is “obviously following the industry line on this.” Dow Chemical Co., which produces the insecticide, said it “remains confident that authorized uses of chlorpyrifos products offer wide margins of protection for human health and safety.”

Chlorpyrifos, also known by its trade name Lorsban, is used in nearly 100 countries on more than 50 crops, including corn, soybeans, cranberries, apples, almonds and broccoli. It was largely banned for at-home use in the U.S. in 2000, but continues to be widely used on thousands of American farms. Even low-dose exposure to organophosphates, particularly in the womb, has been found to harm brain development in children, leading to higher risk of disorders like autism.

Pruitt’s order has been met with a outrage from environmental groups, medical professionals and lawmakers.

Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) this week requested all documents related to EPA’s decision, which Carper said “could undermine the trust the public has in the agency to keep its food, water and air safe.” And four Democratic members of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce wrote a letter to the committee’s chairman, Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.), urging him to investigate.

Pruitt’s decision, the congressmen wrote, “increases our concern that the Trump Administration is failing to properly implement the Food Quality Protection Act.” They added that the “action seems to be part of an emerging pattern” of ignoring health risks of pesticides.

In an apparent attempt to quell the unrest, the EPA website posted a press release that includes numerous statements from agricultural entities praising Pruitt’s decision. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

No Comments
Apr 07

World Quakes As Legislative Body Opts For Majority Rule

Posted in: Today's Chili

It’s Spring in Washington, so leaves are sprouting, flowers are blooming and the Pentagon is drawing up plans for a beautiful new war. Jared Kushner had to talk down a confused Trump, who was about to launch airstrikes against cereal today. And Devin Nunes stepped down from the House’s Russia probe, saying he wanted to try his hand at haplessly failing to do other things. This is HUFFPOST HILL for Thursday, April 6th, 2017:

Like what you read below? Sign up for HUFFPOST HILL and get a cheeky dose of political news every evening!

WASHINGTON PREPARES TO UNBOX SHINY NEW ARMED CONFLICT – Michael Gordon: “Senior Defense Department officials are developing options for a military strike in response to the Syrian government’s chemical weapons attack that killed dozens of civilians on Tuesday, officials said on Thursday. The top-level consultations about military options involve Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as well as military officers at the United States Central Command.” [NYT]

TUFF TALK – Nick Robins-Early: “U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said on Thursday he sees no role for Syrian President Bashar Assad in Syria’s future. Tillerson’s comments came two days after warplanes dropped toxic gas over the Syrian town of Khan Sheikhoun, killing at least 70 civilians. ‘There is no doubt in our minds, and the information we have supports that Syria, the Syria regime under the leadership of President Bashar al-Assad, are responsible for this attack,’ Tillerson told reporters…. President Donald Trump stopped short of calling for Assad’s removal on Thursday, but said that ‘something should happen’ with the Syrian president. ‘I think what Assad did is terrible,’ Trump told reporters traveling with him on Air Force One. ‘I think what happened in Syria is a disgrace to humanity and he’s there, and I guess he’s running things, so something should happen.’” [HuffPost]

Chris Hayes joins this week’s HuffPost Politics podcast to talk about his new book, “A Colony in a Nation.”

SENATE…ASPLODES!!! Michael McAuliff and Jennifer Bendery: “Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and his fellow Republicans pulled the nuclear rules trigger Thursday, gutting the filibuster rule for Supreme Court nominees after Democrats blocked President Donald Trump’s conservative pick, Neil Gorsuch. Democrats argued that Gorsuch, a Colorado federal appeals court judge, was simply too conservative, and were nearly united in filibustering his nomination. They also criticized Republicans for the way they treated President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, who was denied both a hearing and a vote last year. ‘That name is the reason we are in this spot today,’ Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said of Garland. ‘For the first time in the history of the Senate, for the first time ever, this Republican-led Senate refused to give this nominee a hearing and a vote. It had never, underline the word never, happened before.’ Republicans said the other side was making history of their own by carrying out the first partisan filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee. ‘We need to restore the norms and traditions of the Senate and get past this unprecedented partisan filibuster,’ McConnell said, moments before rattling off procedural speak that set the rules change in motion.” [HuffPost]

NO-NUKES DEAL HAD BEEN IN THE WORKS – Sam Stein: “[I]f the chamber had just waited another week or so, it could have been avoided. That’s according to one senator who was trying to broker a deal to stave off the nuclear option as recently as this week. In an interview with The Huffington Post, Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) said he had talks with about 12 to 15 fellow senators about preserving the filibuster in some form for Supreme Court nominees. While Republicans and Democrats couldn’t settle on the right formula for an agreement, he believed the impasse had more to do with scheduling than substance. ‘I think if you’d put 10 of us on a plane and sent us on a CODEL [congressional delegation] together to Afghanistan, by the time you came back you’d have had an agreement,’ Coons said. ‘Maybe that just proves I’m an optimist.’” [HuffPost]

WE HARDLY NUNE YE – Jessica Schulberg and Paige Lavender: “House Intelligence Committee Chair Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) will step down, for the time being, from leading the panel’s investigation into possible ties between President Donald Trump’s team and the Russian government, he said in a statement Thursday. Nunes said he will have Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas), with assistance from Reps. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) and Tom Rooney (R-Fla.), lead the investigation in his place. The California Republican’s decision to step aside marks a victory for Democrats, who have alleged that Nunes, a close ally of the president, was unfit to oversee the probe. While Nunes described his recusal as temporary on Thursday, it’s not clear how he would return to the role.” [HuffPost]

Like HuffPost Hill? Then order Eliot’s book, The Beltway Bible: A Totally Serious A-Z Guide To Our No-Good, Corrupt, Incompetent, Terrible, Depressing, and Sometimes Hilarious Government

THESE TWO TEAMS JUST DON’T LIKE EACH OTHER – Oops! They’re on the same team. Rachael Bade and Josh Dawsey: “A Wednesday evening meeting between top aides to President Donald Trump and House Republican leaders turned heated when the White House officials exhorted Speaker Paul Ryan to show immediate progress on the GOP’s stalled plan to repeal and replace Obamacare. The meeting was tense. At one point, according to three sources briefed on the meeting, White House chief of staff Reince Priebus suggested it could be detrimental to Ryan’s speakership if Republicans fail to pass a bill. Others disputed that characterization, saying the comments were not aimed specifically at Ryan but more broadly, as in: All Republican lawmakers’ jobs are in jeopardy if they don’t deliver.” [Politico]

Does somebody keep forwarding you this newsletter? Get your own copy. It’s free! Sign up here. Send tips/stories/photos/events/fundraisers/job movement/juicy miscellanea to eliot@huffingtonpost.com. Follow us on Twitter – @HuffPostHill

STEVE BANNON MIGHT BE RIGHT ABOUT THIS – Team Jared, though. Asawin Suebsaeng: Donald Trump’s chief strategist Stephen Bannon has called the president’s senior advisor and son-in-law Jared Kushner a ‘cuck’ and a ‘globalist’ during a time of high tension between the two top aides, several Trump administration officials told The Daily Beast. The fighting between Kushner and Bannon has been ‘nonstop’ in recent weeks, according to sources who spoke on condition of anonymity. It’s been an ‘open secret’ that Bannon and Kushner often clash ‘face-to-face,’ according to senior officials. One official said Bannon has lately complained about Kushner trying to ‘shiv him and push him out the door’ and likened him to a fifth column in the White House. ‘[Steve] recently vented to us about Jared being a ‘globalist’ and a ‘cuck’…He actually said ‘cuck,’ as in ‘cuckservative,’’ the administration official told The Daily Beast.” [Daily Beast]

CAN THE BANNON MYTH DIE NOW? Reihan Salam: “Far from the evil genius invoked in various breathless magazine profiles, Bannon has proven hapless and flat-footed. His dreams of spearheading a bold challenge to America’s neoliberal globalist elite have been dashed, and he keeps losing ground to establishment favorites like Gary Cohn and H.R. McMaster, who might not be world-changing visionaries but do know how to get things done.” [Slate]

Mitt Romney to ride Rafalca all the way to the Senate!

IVANKA TRUMP MET WITH PLANNED PARENTHOOD – Apparently Ivanka Trump forgot that she is the daughter of the current head of the Republican Party. Annie Karni: “The first daughter requested a sit-down with Cecile Richards, the head of Planned Parenthood and a vocal surrogate for Hillary Clinton on the 2016 campaign trail, to talk about an organization that is being targeted by Republicans seeking to defund it because it provides abortions, among other women’s health services like cancer screenings…. But the strategic outreach hasn’t seemed to earn Ivanka Trump much public goodwill. Since Ivanka Trump’s sit-down with Richards, what started as a cordial relationship has soured — and any effort on the part of the politically savvy first daughter to back-channel to the nonprofit has transformed into a bitter battle since Ivanka Trump assumed an official administration post.” [Politico]

PREET-Y BRUTAL STUFF HERE – Hell hath no fury like a prosecutor scorned. Benjamin Weiser and William K. Rashbaum: “Nearly a month after he was fired by the Trump administration, Preet Bharara, the former United States attorney in Manhattan, remains mystified by the circumstances of his ouster, saying he had never been told why President Trump changed his mind about wanting him to stay on. In his first interview since he was forced out, Mr. Bharara said this week that his firing was part and parcel of what he characterized as the chaos that has defined some of the administration’s decisions. He called it ‘a direct example of the kind of uncertain helter-skelter incompetence, when it comes to personnel decisions and executive actions, that was in people’s minds when this out-of-the-blue call for everyone’s resignation letter came.’” [NYT]

THE SECRET SERVICE CAN’T AFFORD THE TRUMPS – Nicholas Fandos: “Eleven weeks into the Trump presidency, the Secret Service is grappling with how to constrain the rising costs and unexpected strain that have come with protecting a new first family as large, mobile and high-profile as any in modern American history. To keep up, dozens of agents from New York and field offices across the country are being temporarily pulled off criminal investigations to serve two-week stints protecting members of the Trump family, including the first lady and the youngest son in Manhattan’s Trump Tower…. And in Washington, agency leaders are already negotiating for tens of millions of dollars in supplemental funding to help offset the sky-high costs of securing Trump Tower and other high-profile family assets like Mar-a-Lago in Florida. It is a figure that will only continue to rise.” [NYT]

HOW TO TEACH YOUR KIDS ABOUT THE BIRDS AND THE BEES AND THE ‘ACCESS HOLLYWOOD’ TAPE – Katherine Rosman: “Presidential biographies are a staple of children’s book publishing, and of classrooms across the country. Nonfiction for children is a surging category, particularly in light of a Common Core mandate that schools put greater emphasis on it in their curriculum. Publishers like Penguin Young Readers, Scholastic and Time for Kids chronicle stories like the rise of Mr. Obama from Illinois state senator to president, or the political legacy of the Bush family, interspersing those accounts with facts about presidential history. The books hit bookshelves every four years, usually long before historians and writers of nonfiction for adults weigh in. But the story of Donald J. Trump posed a unique set of challenges.” [NYT]

BECAUSE YOU’VE READ THIS FAR – Check out Jared Kushner wearing a flak jacket and also the children’s book about his trip to Iraq.

MIKE COFFMAN IS AFRAID – HuffPost’s Matt Fuller: “Rep. Mike Coffman asks what outlet I’m from. I tell him Huffington Post. He refuses to talk to me and says I’m ‘not a legit journalist.’” [Twitter]

COMFORT FOOD

– Baseball player has very bad day.

– Stalker Spider-Man menaces his ex-girlfriend.

– America’s only touring black rodeo

– Who said it: my soulcycle instructor or an existential nihilist?

TWITTERAMA

@FanSince09: Your middle name plus the last name of the person responsible for 9/11 is your Bush family name

@joshgondelman:

NEWSPAPERS: “But have you even heard the perspective of Trump supporters?”

ME: “I have a Jewish last name and am on the internet, so yes.”

@robinthede: America is on a four-year walk of shame from what we did late at night on November 8, 2016.

@HayesBrown: Back in my day a filibuster used to mean you had to hold the floor

hold the floor

hold the floor

hold floor

holdfloor

holdfloor

hodor

 

Got something to add? Send tips/quotes/stories/photos/events/fundraisers/job movement/juicy miscellanea to Eliot Nelson (eliot@huffingtonpost.com)

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

No Comments
Apr 07

Airbnb Bans Host Who Dumped Guest Because She's Asian

Posted in: Today's Chili

This ski trip went downhill and took a racist turn fast.

Airbnb says it has permanently banned a host from the platform after she canceled a guest’s reservation minutes before her arrival because the guest was Asian. And we know that was the host’s reason, because she said so.

“One word says it all,” the host wrote in a text message to the would-be guest. “Asian.”

Airbnb told The Huffington Post the incident happened in February near Big Bear, California. It has gained traction now after a video taken of the tearful guest the night of the racist exchange has gone viral. Airbnb declined to identify either the guest or the host to HuffPost, citing company privacy policy.

“The four of us made a reservation on Airbnb about a month ago,” the denied guest says in the video as snow falls around her, “and I asked the woman who is the host if two more friends would be OK … she said that’s fine, we just have to pay more money.

I wouldn’t rent to u if u were the last person on earth.

“So we’re driving up, we think everything is fine, we’re ready for this ski trip in Big Bear … there were flash flood warnings all day, [and] I asked the woman again, is it OK if my two friends come, like, should we give you cash, or how much did you say it was again?

“And she says, ‘Absolutely not…. You must be high if you think that that would be OK in the busiest weekend in Big Bear.’ Then she said, ‘No, we’re done,’ and she canceled the trip.”

Taken aback, the guest responded by informing the woman her actions would be reported to Airbnb, to which she replied in a text: “Go ahead. I wouldn’t rent to u if u were the last person on earth.” Then she texted, “One word says it all. Asian.”

One word says it all. Asian.

In additional screenshots of the conversation, provided by the guest as proof, the host wrote, “And I will not allow this country to be told what to do by foreigners. It’s why we have trump.”

In the video, the distraught guest says she’s an American citizen. Not that that mattered to the host, who apparently deemed her a foreigner based only on her profile picture.

“What they see is that I’m Asian. What they see is my race,” she said, sobbing, “and this is how we get treated. It stings.”

In a statement to The Huffington Post, Airbnb spokesman Christopher Nulty called the host’s behavior “abhorrent and unacceptable.” Nulty added the company reached out to the guest as soon as it learned of the incident and offered to rebook her somewhere else, but she’d already made other plans.

“We have worked to provide the guest with our full support” Nulty said, “and in line with our non-discrimination policy, this host has been permanently removed from the Airbnb platform.”

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

No Comments
Apr 07

Latrice Royale Opens About Life After 'Drag Race' And Her New Show

Posted in: Today's Chili

It’s hard to believe that it’s been five years since drag superstar Latrice Royale first graced our television screens on the fourth season of “RuPaul’s Drag Race.”

In the years since, Royale has made a name for herself internationally, traveling to virtually ever corner of the world, “except Canada, but we’re working on that,” she jokes. She’s also launched her own management agency, among other accomplishments.

Royale is now performing at New York City’s Laurie Beechman theater in a new show called “Life Goes On,” the follow up to her show “Here’s To Life,” which she debuted in 2016. The Huffington Post chatted with the drag star about life-post “Drag Race,” the political implications of drag with President Trump in power and what we can expect in the future.

What have you been up to since your days on “Drag Race”? 

Well as everyone knows, I have been touring not only the country but the world. I have continued to do what I have always done, which is challenge myself to newer and greater goals and to grow as an artist. Being on “Drag Race” clearly afforded me the opportunity to develop my craft at a world class level, and I have been enjoying every minute of trying to live up to my own expectations!

Because of the way my story resonated with certain “Drag Race” viewers, I felt very quickly like I had become a role model or a spokesperson of sorts. Not only for “the big girls,” but for ex-convicts and anyone really who had ever made any kind of mistake that cost them something. So I began to realize that I was going to have to find a way to communicate my story more directly to my audience. Developing my one-queen shows has given me the opportunity to speak into the hearts of people who need to believe that they can make it through whatever they are going through. So I’ve tried to use my platform to tell my truth, hoping that it helps someone else find theirs.

I’ve also tried to share my platform not only by creating LRI Talent and Management, which represents many other talented queens from the ”Drag Race” and pageant worlds, but also by purchasing and continuing to promote the Mr. and Miss Pride South Florida Pageant. I won the pageant in 2004 and have very much enjoyed getting to invest in the careers of queens who aspire to get to the next level. I know what it’s like to be out there on your own in this business, and I am happy to share my experience and knowledge with younger queens.

What do you want audiences to take away from “Life Goes On”?

“Life Goes On” is a continuation of “Here’s to Life.” In my last show, I really went into great detail about my life growing up in Compton, discovering drag, and of course my incarceration. I shared a lot of details about my family life, and I’m happy to say that there has been much progress there.

Telling my story really helped me and the people in my life heal and move on from a lot of our past, and that’s what this show is about. It’s about keeping your head up when it seems like everything is going wrong. It’s reminding yourself and everyone else that these are not actually the worst times we’ve ever seen, and remembering that we can make it through together. I’ve got some new songs, some silly stuff, and some more jazz standards to share with everyone as well. So you can expect to be motivated and uplifted. I’m taking the kids to church like I always do, baby!!!

Why is drag so important during times of political turmoil?

Drag queens have been at the forefront of our community for decades. Since the beginning. And in these times, when you need somewhere and somehow to forget your troubles and get a good laugh, drag has a way of making you forget your troubles. Some people feel that drag queens are empowering. And they look to us for strength. And if we can be the voice and the muscle of our community to make a movement happen, then sign me up!

What can we expect to see from you in the future?

Well hopefully you’ll see me on the big screen! That’s what I’m aspiring to. They keep telling me to write a book as well, so I will probably listen to them at some point. But with my travel schedule sometimes it’s even hard to find time to sit down for an interview, much less write a book, so that’s gonna be a while.

I’m also getting married next year, so I’m sure that there will be a lot of planning and meetings and all that to come. I’m really looking forward to this next chapter of my life and seeing where my career and love life take me.

Head here for more information about “Life Goes On.”

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

No Comments
Apr 07

'Black-ish' Star Yara Shahidi Dishes On Her Forthcoming Spinoff Show

Posted in: Today's Chili

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_1’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

Yara Shahidi has landed her own spinoff show.

The actress talked to Jacques Morel for AOL’s Build Series about what viewers should expect from her “Black-ish” character, Zoey, who’s going off to college in the ABC hit show. The 17-year-old said the spinoff will explore Zoey’s new life at college and her growth along the way.

“While Zoey has taken so many steps as a young woman and young woman of color to become an independent and to become an activist and to become socially aware, I think this is the most growth we’ve see from her just in that she has lived under the guise of a family household,” she said.

Her forthcoming show will not only address race, but also the intersectionality of race and other factors. 

“One thing that I had noticed in reading the script is that … while she is a young black girl in this political climate, she does have the privilege of being socioeconomically well-off,” she said. “College, at least for Zoey, is no longer a factor she can hide under or hide with. And so we’re no longer talking about race but the intersection of race and gender and sexuality and the intersection of race and politics. And she finally has to kind of deal on her own.”

Though production recently filmed the pilot, as mentioned during the interview, the network has yet to release many details about the show, including the name. 

The actress’s on-screen life parallels her real life: Shahidi is currently preparing for college. She’s been accepted into every school she’s applied to, including four Ivy Leagues, two state schools and one historically black college or university (she told The Huffington Post that she was interested in Spelman College last year).

Michelle Obama, who wrote four of Shahidi’s recommendation letters, helped inspire the actress to study sociology. Shahidi described the field as “history in action,” and she said it will help her in her journey to become a professional activist. She’ll also be majoring in African American studies.

“So many times, our history is not included in mainstream history and I mean, it’s not anything new or anything surprising but I felt as if I wanted to make sure I had the major to supplement what I was missing in sociology and what did really account for my experience and the experience of my community and help go be a liaison for whatever I am doing,” she said.

Shahidi didn’t reveal which school is her top pick, but whichever she chooses, we know she’ll thrive. 

Watch the full interview in the video above. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

No Comments
Apr 07

Family Immigrant Detention Centers Struggle To Get Child Care Licenses

Posted in: Today's Chili

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_1’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

AUSTIN, Texas ― A Republican-led effort to give child care facility licenses to family immigrant detention centers appeared to falter on Wednesday, after the Trump administration said it wouldn’t routinely separate mothers from their children when they’re apprehended crossing the U.S.-Mexico border without visas.

The Texas legislature is considering a bill that would lower the state’s standards for what constitutes a child care facility. This would allow the state’s two family detention centers to qualify for licenses. Supporters of the legislation ― including GEO Group, the private prison contractor that owns the family detention center in Karnes City and runs it as a for-profit enterprise ― argued last week that the change was necessary to avoid the possibility of separating immigrant mothers and children at the border.

But Department of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly undercut that logic Wednesday morning, telling Congress that DHS wouldn’t split mothers from their kids to discourage immigration.

It was unclear how much of an impact Kelly’s words in Washington had on Texas legislators. But the state’s Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs and Border Security declined to vote on the proposal when it met on Wednesday. A committee in the lower house heard public testimony on the proposal, but also left the bill pending.

The bill’s sponsor, Republican state Sen. Bryan Hughes, did not respond to requests for comment.

Immigrant rights groups and child care advocates have long decried the resurrection of the family detention policy, which the Obama administration hastily expanded in 2014 to deter an influx of tens of thousands of Central American migrants. El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala are among the world’s most violent countries, and the families fleeing them routinely apply for asylum.

Opponents say licensing the family detention centers would allow Immigration and Customs Enforcement to detain kids indefinitely, despite a court ruling limiting how long children can remain locked up.

“I’m glad they’re reconsidering this baby jail bill,” Astrid Dominguez, an immigration expert with the American Civil Liberties Union, told The Huffington Post. “These centers, at the end of the day, don’t need to exist.”

It’s too early to tell if the bill will eventually pass, said Bob Libal, executive director of Grassroots Leadership, an Austin-based group that sued to keep the detention centers from receiving state licenses.

“The fact they didn’t vote on it yesterday is a good sign,” Libal told HuffPost. “The detention of children is always traumatic and harmful. These facilities should be closed … There has been really overwhelming opposition to the bill. But at the same time, I don’t think we’re in a position to celebrate yet.”

The fact they didn’t vote on it yesterday is a good sign. The detention of children is always traumatic and harmful.
Bob Libal, Grassroots Leadership

The family detention policy has repeatedly run into legal hurdles. U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee ruled in 2015 that detaining kids for longer than three weeks violates the Flores Agreement, a settlement that requires the government to generally release children from detention. To comply with the ruling, Texas issued emergency rules to reclassify its two family detention centers as child care facilities.

But a state judge ruled last year that the centers don’t meet the minimum standards required to receive a child care license. Unlike true child care facilities, kids locked up at the family detention centers can’t leave and are sometimes required to sleep in pods with adults they don’t know. The bill before the Texas legislature would exempt the state’s two family detention centers from such requirements.  

GEO Group’s regional vice president, Reed Smith, said at the House Committee hearing on Wednesday that without the child care license, his company would likely be forced to stop housing families at the Karnes County Residential Center.

“We could be converted back to an adult detention facility,” Smith said. “And it would result in perhaps 200 job losses in Karnes City.”

Opponents countered that the facility continues to operate even without a license and questioned the need for the centers at all. In practice, many families who have crossed into the United States over the last three years seeking asylum weren’t detained. Instead, they were released with an order to appear in immigration court.

The two centers have a combined capacity of more than 3,000 beds, but only 325 people were detained at both centers combined as of Thursday, according to ICE ― which may reflect broader immigration trends.

The number of unauthorized immigrants crossing the border has dropped precipitously since President Donald Trump took office. Border Patrol agent Chris Cabrera credited Trump’s strict attitude toward enforcement. “People realize this president is serious,” Cabrera said in a radio interview with The Texas Standard on Thursday. “Our agents are getting back to work … They’ve got pep in their step and they’re out there getting the job done.”

But legal groups say U.S. Customs and Border Protection has also been dissuading Central American families from crossing into the United States at legal ports of entry to ask for asylum.

“We’re still hearing stories of people getting turned away at the border,” Amy Fisher, whose group RAICES provides legal services to people locked in family detention, told HuffPost.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

No Comments