I

n Rick Santorum, Sean 
Duffy and every other 
commentator 
on 
cable 
news, there is a politician. More 
importantly, there is content. 
The outrage cycle is just a part 
of that content, and as long as 
there is more content, everyone 
is happy. Duffy, formerly of 
“The Real World” fame, was 
elected as part of the 2010 
Tea Party wave to Congress, 
where he remained for almost 
ten years until resigning in 
September of 2019.
After, he opted to head 
where most former politicians 
do — cable news. He made his 
CNN debut in October 2019 by 
smearing an Iraq war veteran 
with a Purple Heart — Lt. 
Col. Alexander Vindman — as 
someone with possible dual 
loyalties toward the Ukraine. 
Duffy’s shameless guesswork 
predictably resulted in outrage, 
and much of it was justified. 
Condemnation reigned down 
from members of the Republican 
leadership like Rep. Liz Cheney, 
R-Wyo., and Sen. John Thune, 
R-S.D., on Duffy’s idea. 
There 
was 
another 
kind 
of 
condemnation 
that 
was 
far more interesting. CNN’s 
Brianna Keilar went out of 
her way to push back on anti-
immigrant bigotry — a good 
thing, no doubt. She was not 
the only CNN anchor to do this; 
others went out of their way to 
prove that Duffy’s ideas were 
reprehensible, and that kind of 
behavior and rhetoric had no 
place in public discourse. 
These 
stances 
may 
have 
had no place in the discourse; 
however, that didn’t stop CNN 
from handing Duffy an obscene 
contract 
worth 
countless 
millions for exactly that rhetoric 
and behavior. Duffy backed the 
Muslim Ban and was hired with 

an entire history of problematic 
actions. And yet, CNN is now 
surprised he is a bigot. Was 
the entire hiring department 
recently hit over the head with 
a two-by-four?
Duffy is a more egregious 
offender than most, but he is by 
no means alone. The entire Lt. 
Col. Alexander Vindman cycle 
with him is almost identical to 
the conflict between former Sen. 
Rick Santorum, R-Pa., and the 
Parkland teenagers in early 2018. 
The Parkland students were 
asking for gun safety laws, and 
Rick Santorum said that students 
from the high school should 
learn CPR instead of marching. 

Of course, there was outrage — 
there were panelists who were 
offended and hosts who took 
shots at Santorum. However, 
Santorum behaving like this 
should 
not 
have 
surprised 
anyone actually paying attention 
to his long career.
Santorum wrote a book in 
2006 that angrily denounced 
what 
he 
saw 
as 
“radical 
feminists” undermining families 
among other claims that would 
make Don Draper blush as far 
as women in the workplace 
are concerned. Again: Here is 
a guy with a history of making 
outlandish comments, and here 
is CNN ready and willing to put 
him back on your TV.

Santorum will continue to 
say idiotic things on TV and 
continue to get rewarded for it 
with bigger contribution deals. 
The cycle then feeds off itself, 
because with more people 
saying bigoted things, there is 
more of a need to send out other 
people and contributors to cut 
down the nonsense. Rather 
than shoveling this garbage 
into the atmosphere and then 
sending out the cleanup crew, 
perhaps CNN could skip the 
first step.
CNN 
is 
not 
the 
only 
offender in this arena. Many 
stations have signed former 
politicians; it’s good to get 
expertise. But that’s not what 
CNN is getting when they 
give a platform to people like 
Duffy and Santorum. Duffy 
was 
never 
a 
particularly 
important member — one of 
his more famous projects was 
a push to end endangered 
protections for grey wolves. 
Furthermore, one can question 
Santorum’s political chops; his 
Senatorial race in 2006 ended 
with the 25th worst defeat by 
an incumbent senator in the 
history of the institution.
The endless outrage cycles 
ought to end. President Donald 
Trump sucks all the oxygen 
out of the room, but still 
leaves space for outrage, and 
the American people deserve 
better than that. TV journalism 
was left a sparkling legacy 
by journalists like Edward 
Murrow and Michigan’s own 
Mike Wallace. Returning to 
their craft and practice will 
take more than firing the 
Duffys and Santorums of the 
world, but it’s a damn good 
start.

Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A — Wednesday, January 29, 2020

Alanna Berger
Zack Blumberg 
Brittany Bowman
Emily Considine
Cheryn Hong

Krystal Hur
Ethan Kessler
Mary Rolfes
Michael Russo

Timothy Spurlin
Miles Stephenson
Joel Weiner
Erin White 
Lola Yang

ERIN WHITE
Managing Editor

Stanford Lipsey Student Publications Building
420 Maynard St. 
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.

ELIZABETH LAWRENCE
Editor in Chief
EMILY CONSIDINE AND 
MILES STEPHENSON
Editorial Page Editors

Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of The Daily’s Editorial Board. 
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

KIANNA MARQUEZ | COLUMN

Urban development should be inclusive and proactive
T

he 
way 
we 
think 
reflects the way we 
live. 
Some 
people 
live their lives with more 
logical setups, others with 
more free-spirited attitudes, 
but the ability to live with a 
balance of logic and naiveté 
are 
essential 
for 
a 
well-
rounded, stable life.
In the same way, effective 
sustainable 
development 
in urban planning should 
come with both logic and 
abstraction 
in 
its 
design. 
We should logically address 
the 
existing 
technical 
problems while thoughtfully 
anticipating 
the 
possible 
issues in our future society, 
including how we imagine 
our 
future 
infrastructure 
and how we interact with 
infrastructure 
today. 
University 
of 
Michigan 
alum Kristin Baja, with her 
involvement in the Urban 
Sustainability 
Directors 
Network, 
has 
crusaded 
a 
constant focus on using the 
present to address existing 
problems from the past and 
build for the future. Baja, 
among others on the USDN 
staff, has capitalized on the 
idea of resilience to construct 
a type of infrastructure that 
addresses the climate issue 
in a fast-paced and evolving 
world: Resilience Hubs. 
Resilience Hubs are public 
facilities made to support 
communication 
among 
residents of disadvantaged 
communities, 
distribute 
resources 
and 
power 
to 
them 
and 
reduce 
carbon 
emissions to enhance their 
quality of life. Similar to 
standard community centers, 
they are created to develop 
social equity and community 
resilience, 
which 
is 
the 
general term used to refer to 
the measure of a community’s 
resources, 
connections, 
health and mental outlook, as 
well as other factors.
However, these Resilience 
Hubs 
also 
prioritize 
emergency 
management 
and 
climate 
change 
mitigation while providing 
opportunities 
for 
the 
community to become more 
self-sufficient. Though the 
performance of these hubs has 
yet to be evaluated in any case 
studies, they aim to compile 
both tangible and abstract 

components of resilience that 
make for the well-rounded 
function of a community: 
programming, 
structure, 
power, communication and 
operations. As the Director 
of 
Climate 
Resilience 
for 
the USDN, Baja works to 
connect local governments 
and 
community-based 
organizations 
for 
urban 
planning, leading the effort 
to 
make 
these 
Resilience 
Hubs a reality for interested 
communities 
in 
North 
America.
One of the main benefits 
Resilience 
Hubs 
aim 
to 
create 
for 
disadvantaged 
communities is a restoration 
of equity. In response to the 
over-extraction of resources 
and 
racial 
inequity 
that 
causes people of color and 
indigenous 
populations 
to 
face the worst of climate 
change, these hubs are meant 
to solve systemic inequity 
crises 
by 
acknowledging 
and repairing these systems 
on an administrative level. 

In 
supporting 
Resilience 
Hubs, local governments can 
demonstrate 
their 
concern 
for meeting a community’s 
needs and involving it in 
future decision-making. As 
community directors of the 
hubs gain financial support 
and interest from their local 
governments, the hubs can 
become a central mechanism 
by 
which 
authorities 
can 
enhance community cohesion 
and build trust with a fair 
distribution of power.
In other words, the hubs 
make an effort to address 
what 
each 
community 
needs 
while 
maintaining 
their 
infrastructural 
and 
cultural integrity rather than 
implementing a solution that is 
not usable in that community. 
In using this approach, a 
community can receive the 

specific type of help it needs in 
order to flourish. In addition, 
the purpose of the hubs is to 
harbor collaboration among 
multiple 
disciplines 
and 
achieve the goals of more than 
one 
stakeholder 
involved. 
In upholding awareness of 
the needs of communities 
along with the needs of local 
governments, the hubs uphold 
an all-encompassing approach 
to 
solving 
community 
problems in an adaptive and 
proactive way.
Here at the University, 
we have a responsibility to 
pursue efforts that benefit all 
walks of life on our campus. 
Whether we take part in 
leading community reform 
efforts or simply advocate 
for 
them 
indirectly, 
it’s 
important 
that 
everyone 
on 
our 
campus 
upholds 
our reputation of being the 
Leaders and the Best by 
working to implement and 
support fair and restorative 
policies for all groups of 
people. With that said, I 
urge University authorities 
to pursue the purpose of 
Resilience Hubs, if not the 
facilities 
themselves. 
This 
is especially salient as we 
continue 
to 
boast 
about 
the positive impacts of our 
outreach efforts, including 
those 
we 
implement 
in 
Detroit.
In 
terms 
of 
urban 
development, we owe it to the 
future of this campus and the 
future of Ann Arbor to begin 
constructing 
sustainable 
infrastructure 
with 
the 
mentality of appealing to all 
who interact with it. Besides 
the trivial initiatives we have 
executed for our city, we 
should be focusing on how 
we can make it multifaceted 
and adaptable to the evolving 
needs of our population. We 
should ignore the seeming 
importance of focusing on one 
person’s benefit and instead 
be thinking about how we 
can self-determine together 
as a city. We could mold our 
city into one that exemplifies 
our 
lifestyles: 
sustainable, 
inclusive and proactive. In 
doing so, we will create a 
reality that is respectable and 
one that we can relish.

Kianna Marquez can be reached 

at kmarquez@umich.edu.

ISABELLE SCHINDLER | COLUMN

T

he beginning of 2020 
has been defined by 
international 
turmoil, 
ranging from our escalating 
conflict with Iran to sustained 
tensions with North Korea. As 
the United States grapples with 
these issues and many others, 
it is more important than ever 
that there are experienced and 
competent leaders in critical 
diplomatic posts.
During 
his 
presidential 
campaign, 
Donald 
Trump 
promised to “drain the swamp” 
and rid Washington of career 
politicians. Consequently, once 
elected, Trump failed to fill many 
important diplomatic positions 
or nominated people who lack 
critical international relations 
experience. One of the clearest 
examples of an underqualified 
diplomat is Kelly Craft, the 
current U.S. Ambassador to the 
United Nations. Craft’s husband 
is a coal baron who donated 
heavily 
to 
GOP 
candidates, 
including over $2 million to 
Trump’s campaign. After his 
election, 
Trump 
nominated 
Craft to be the U.S. Ambassador 
to Canada. She served in this 
role for 20 months, but came 
under fire for not being present 
in Canada for nearly half her 
time as Ambassador.
The role of a U.S. Ambassador 
to the U.N. is one of great 
importance as the ambassador 
represents America on a world 
stage and helps facilitate the 
resolution of important global 
issues 
through 
diplomacy. 
Whether it is imposing sanctions 
on North Korea, advocating for 
an arms embargo to prevent 
weapons being sent to a war-torn 
region or helping to organize 
the international response to 
the Ebola crisis, this is a vitally 
important position. 
Craft 
is 
particularly 
concerning due to her ties to 
the fossil fuel industry. She has 

made 
concerning 
comments 
in the past about how she sees 
“both sides” in the climate 
change debate — remarks which 
she was later forced to retract. 
Although she agreed to recuse 
herself on any coal-related U.N. 
discussions due to her husband’s 
business, there is still concern 
about how her ties to the fossil 
fuel industry will impact her 
work. 
The U.N. is on the front lines of 
the fight against climate change, 
from hosting Greta Thunberg at 
the 2019 Climate Action Summit 
to commissioning reports that 
emphasize the true magnitude 
of the issue. Given Craft’s ties to 
the coal industry, it is concerning 
that she will be in this position. 
Despite these issues, Craft was 
confirmed as U.N. ambassador 
by the Senate with almost no 
Democratic support. 
We have seen similar stories 
of inexperienced officials being 
awarded 
important 
roles 
in 
government, 
including 
Rex 
Tillerson — former Exxon Mobil 
CEO — who served as Trump’s 
first Secretary of State, despite 
having no formal diplomatic 
experience 
or 
background. 
Trump has shown a propensity 
for 
nominating 
donors 
to 
ambassadorships, 
despite 
their inherent lack of relevant 
experience for the role. Such was 
the case with the Ambassador to 
the United Arab Emirates, where 
Trump broke the longstanding 
precedent 
of 
appointing 
a 
career diplomat to the role and 
instead chose John Rakolta Jr., a 
businessman with no diplomatic 
background.
One may argue Trump is 
simply following a precedent 
set by past U.S. presidents on 
both sides of the aisle, who 
also 
awarded 
donors 
with 
ambassadorships. 
However, 
an 
analysis 
of 
Trump’s 
picks has shown that he has 

nominated 
underqualified 
donors to ambassadorships at 
a higher rate than any of his 
predecessors. In an equally 
dangerous 
fashion, 
many 
important 
positions 
related 
to international relations or 
national security remain vacant. 
There are hundreds of open 
positions in the administration, 
with at least 88 of them in 
the Department of Defense. 
Important 
roles 
such 
as 
Secretary of the Navy, Director 
of National Intelligence and 
Secretary of Homeland Security 
are all vacant or are filled by 
acting personnel who have 
not had to face questioning or 
a Senate confirmation vote. 
This is extremely concerning 
because, without the proper 
staffing, 
these 
departments 
and agencies may be stretched 
too thin or may be unable 
to meet the needs of our 
rapidly changing geopolitical 
situation. Given our current 
international uncertainty, it is 
more important than ever that 
these critical positions are filled 
by competent and experienced 
officials. 
As we have seen with the 
recent 
situation 
with 
Iran, 
students 
are 
taking 
notice 
of the volatile state of our 
international 
affairs. 
From 
protests to memes, University 
of 
Michigan 
students 
have 
expressed concern over the 
condition of our world and our 
relationship with other nations. 
If we want to maintain a safe 
and secure world, we need to 
be aware of the incompetent but 
powerful figures guiding our 
foreign policy and use our voices 
to advocate for stronger and 
more capable leaders to resolve 
the issues facing our nation and 
our world in the future.

Isabelle Schindler can be reached 

at ischind@umich.edu.

ANNA GETZINGER | CONTACT CARTOONIST AT GETZINGA@UMICH.EDU

The need for qualified voices in government

ANIK JOSHI | COLUMN

Why does CNN keep putting these people on TV?

Anik Joshi can be reached at 

anikj@umich.edu.

Was the entire 
hiring department 
recently hit over 
the head with a 
two-by-four?

The hubs uphold an 
all-encompassing 
approach to 
solving community 
problems.

