Trump: should our behavior only be as good as the worst around us?

The story about the exchange between Michelle Fields (a former Breitbart News reporter) and Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski has finally reached the mainstream media. This has been a pretty crazy story, and I think the real story is about how Breitbart News handled the situation (firing Fields, seemingly to maintain their blatantly supportive stance toward Trump), which may or may not become a bigger part of the coverage. Either way, I’m happy that this is all getting some attention, and something this morning on the Today Show was enough to get me to dust off my keyboard and post something here for the first time in more than two weeks.

Continue reading “Trump: should our behavior only be as good as the worst around us?”

What separates parts of the GOP from democrats?

I don’t like Laura Ingraham very much, but she wrote a piece recently about the GOP and Trump that has some real insight, and perhaps even some common ground.
“I do not see how you can ask the working-class people of this country to support a collection of policies that have failed them over and over and over.”
I completely agree. I do wonder what policies she would support to help the working-class. Give more support to unions who fight for better working environments and better pay for the working class? Give more support to regulations that make the workplace safer for workers, at the expense of the company? Support increases in minimum wage laws so the working poor can rely on their salaries instead of shifting the burden to food stamps? I somehow don’t think Ingraham and I would agree on how to fix these problems, but I’m still happy to hear that she thinks it’s a problem. Like my earlier post about responding to government failure and the logic in the response to it, I’m left wondering exactly how she wants to solve this problem, and why she doesn’t support the same things somebody like me does.

Continue reading “What separates parts of the GOP from democrats?”

We didn’t start the fire…or did we?

Jeb Bush has dropped out of the GOP primary, leaving behind Ohio Governor John Kasich as the last of the more “establishment” choices in the GOP primary. Some might say that Rubio is “establishment,” but he’s not your typical GOP presidential candidate — maybe more like the typical candidate than Trump or Cruz is, but a young Senator like Rubio doesn’t fit the stereotypical image of the GOP standard bearer like Bush, Dole, McCain, or Romney. It’s a different year indeed. George Will wrote a piece not too long ago accusing Trump of damaging the GOP. I can see Will’s point, and I sympathize with him, but I don’t think that Trump’s message would resonate if the support for it didn’t already exist. I think Trump is revealing something that already exists in the party, but I don’t think he deserves credit for actually causing the damage. I think that rests on the heads of the party itself, particularly in the way they’ve acted over the past seven years. Let’s go deeper.

Continue reading “We didn’t start the fire…or did we?”

This is a good one

It’s probably pretty obvious that I’m not a republican, and it’s probably equally obvious that I don’t like Ted Cruz. Actually, of all the candidates on the GOP side this election cycle, Cruz is probably the one I can tolerate the least. It’s also important to say, up front, that I really like and respect Hillary Clinton. I was a bit undecided between Sanders and Clinton (and was very sad that O’Malley didn’t do better), but I’ve been leaning pretty strongly toward Hillary for the past few weeks. My mind is rarely made up, I’m always open to new information, and legit evidence of criminal behavior (which, contrary to FoxNews world, doesn’t exist) could certainly change my view. With all that out there: my dislike of Cruz and my support for Clinton, I have to say that the new ad from Cruz is really fun.

Continue reading “This is a good one”

On the failure of government…

Our government has failed us numerous times, and it’s safe to bet that it will fail us again. What happened with the poisoned water in Flint Michigan is a recent example, and a horrible one, but it is just one example. The Brookings Institution created the dismal graphic above, showing government failures and plotting the size/impact/type of the failures [edit, 10.6.16: the link to the image died, but the interactive is here]. There is no question that our government is imperfect, and that there is reason to be disappointed. The way each of us thinks we should respond to that disappointment is what seems to divide us, and I just don’t understand the logic behind some that fall on the other side of this.

Continue reading “On the failure of government…”

Another FaceBook Post

I still haven’t figured out exactly what I want from this blog, so for now it’s just a repository of my thoughts. A place to think things through. Sometimes I do this first on FaceBook. Sometimes I do this only on FaceBook. Sometimes I do it here first, and sometimes it’s only here. This morning I posted the following on FaceBook, and like my earlier post, I wanted to have it here too….in my pseudo-diary.

What we (all) need to realize is that very few people think they’re bigots and very few people are OK with being called bigots. The mental acrobatics needed to evade that label, when calling for an entire religious group to be barred from the country or selectively targeted is pretty impressive, but probably very normal. Being called a bigot will only make people retreat, and stop listening, but I don’t know what else to do, because the bigotry is intolerable.

My earlier post, shared from a friend, makes the point that the things people are saying about Muslims today would sound very much like Nazi propaganda if the word “Muslims” was replaced with “Jews.” But those saying these things, or supporting those who are saying these things, will argue that it’s not the same. It’s not the same because Jews aren’t trying to hurt the United States, and Muslims are. Remember that the Nazi rhetoric convinced a large proportion of Germany that Jews were trying to hurt Germany. Jews were likened to rats that carry disease to the country. The propaganda told people that Jews were shaving their beards to look like other eastern Europeans so they could infiltrate the country, waiting to strike. Jews were trying to spark war.

Trump was on Morning Joe this morning and was asked to respond to the charge that his tone, his proposals, are frightening people. His response was that we should be much more afraid of Muslims than we should be of him. This is the same tactic that was used in the 1930s. Hitler made it clear that if the Jews weren’t stopped, the Aryan peoples will be exterminated.

In a now famous speech, Hitler said (in German, not English), “We see clearly that this war could only end with the extermination of the Germanic peoples, or that Jewry must disappear from Europe. I already said it on September 1, 1939 in the German Reichstag, that this war will not end the way the Jews have foreseen it, namely that the European Aryan peoples will be exterminated; rather the result of this war will be the annihilation of Jewry. For once all the others will not bleed to death alone; for once the ancient Jewish law will come into play: an eye for an eye; a tooth for a tooth.”

The message: Jews wand to destroy their way of life. Jews want to annihilate white Europeans. The only answer is to destroy Jews.

This tactic was evil then, and the tactic is evil now. My plea to those I love who may succumb to this rhetoric, who may find ways to justify it: Don’t be on the side of evil. Don’t say, “yeah but…” Don’t say that Muslims ARE trying to hurt America, because when you do that, you’re condemning an entire group of 1.6 billion people for the acts of far less than 1% of them. You’re defining a group by the worst 1% (probably even much less). People say that a few bad apples spoil the bunch, but I’ve eaten lots of apples and I don’t think that’s true at all. You can easily pick out the good apples and enjoy them with honey like it’s Rosh Hashanah. And the bad apples probably aren’t all bad either. Cut off the bruise and the rest could be just fine. Be on the side of good, even if you’re afraid. Please.

A rose by any other name might actually not smell as sweet

There are groups of people in the world who are using terrorist tactics to fight a war against the United States and other Western countries. There is no disputing this fact. We went from being afraid of (and fighting) al-Qaeda to being afraid of and fighting ISIL/ISIS/Daesh — there is considerable debate about what to call this group (for example, see here). I’m going to call them ISIS, for no better reason than it’s probably the most recognized version and doesn’t make anybody reading this wonder what the heck Daesh is, and if Daesh is really something I should try for dessert. Either way, this group is our new big foe. They’re the ones behind the Paris attacks, and they’re the ones who apparently inspired or were somehow otherwise involved in the attacks in San Bernardino more recently. Regardless of the group of the year, President Obama (and other democrats) are being criticized for refusing use the word “Muslim” or “Islamic” in their descriptors of these groups. Rush Limbaugh and others say this is because of political correctness. For example, on December 4th, while talking about the discovery that there was a connection between the San Bernardino shooters and ISIS, he said:

And in fact, folks, to just give you a little hint, linking it to ISIS actually helps the government not call it terrorism because ISIS is not Islam.  No, I’m not saying that.  The government says that.  The left, the media says it.  ISIS is not Islam.  You’ve heard Obama say that.  ISIS is making a mockery of Islam.  In fact, what you really need to understand about the way our government looks at Islam, they look at Islam as anti-terror as well.  Islam is anti-terrorism.  Therefore, no terrorism can actually be Islamic.  Islam is the religion of peace.  We say that jokingly.  That’s actually the position of the US government.  It’s rooted in political correctness and fear and a number of other convoluted things.

Rooted in political correctness? Really? I’m not buying it.

Continue reading “A rose by any other name might actually not smell as sweet”

Alternate “news” sources give us alternate realities

The sustained popularity of Donald Trump has been making me very sad lately. His twitter feed is just one horrible statement after another. He’s said that he would consider shutting down mosques, that he wants surveillance of mosques, and, perhaps the worst of it all, he has walked the line of advocating for, or at least not refuting the idea that we have an identification system for Muslims. That last one is a bit complicated, and there might be room to give Trump the benefit of the doubt, but that’s a bit of a tangent for this post. What this post is about is how different views of the world can be, depending on where we get our “news,” and how that difference can actually make me feel much better about my fellow Americans.

Continue reading “Alternate “news” sources give us alternate realities”

Government as a business?

I saw the image above posted on Facebook the other day. The idea that government should be run like a business seems to get a lot of support from voters. Candidates often tout their private sector experience and how well they ran their businesses, and others (e.g., Carly Fiorina) are criticized for poor performance. Yes, I know that there are multiple ways to evaluate Fiorina’s time at HP, but putting that debate aside, the importance of business experience clearly resonates for many, especially GOP voters. This seems so wrong to me.

Continue reading “Government as a business?”