The California senator fighting for the strictest vaccination laws in the US
There are no federal or state laws mandating vaccination, but certain vaccinations are required for children entering public schools.
Depending on the state, parents can bypass these vaccination requirements for their children by getting an exemption, whether for medical reasons or for personal beliefs.
Thursday, August 29, 2019
"Don't worry. I'll pardon you."
Our emotionally fragile president will need a lot of scapegoats if he loses in 2020
Steve M quotes the Post.
President Trump is so eager to complete hundreds of miles of border fence ahead of the 2020 presidential election that he has directed aides to fast-track billions of dollars’ worth of construction contracts, aggressively seize private land and disregard environmental rules, according to current and former officials involved with the project.
He also has told worried subordinates that he will pardon them of any potential wrongdoing should they have to break laws to get the barriers built quickly, those officials said.
. . . .
When aides have suggested that some orders are illegal or unworkable, Trump has suggested he would pardon the officials if they would just go ahead, aides said.
He has waved off worries about contracting procedures and the use of eminent domain, saying “take the land,” according to officials who attended the meetings.
“Don’t worry, I’ll pardon you,” he has told officials in meetings about the wall....
Steve M quotes the Post.
President Trump is so eager to complete hundreds of miles of border fence ahead of the 2020 presidential election that he has directed aides to fast-track billions of dollars’ worth of construction contracts, aggressively seize private land and disregard environmental rules, according to current and former officials involved with the project.
He also has told worried subordinates that he will pardon them of any potential wrongdoing should they have to break laws to get the barriers built quickly, those officials said.
. . . .
When aides have suggested that some orders are illegal or unworkable, Trump has suggested he would pardon the officials if they would just go ahead, aides said.
He has waved off worries about contracting procedures and the use of eminent domain, saying “take the land,” according to officials who attended the meetings.
“Don’t worry, I’ll pardon you,” he has told officials in meetings about the wall....
I love it when lying pundits solemnly declare that, in America, no one is above the law, not even the president.
Do you think the stooges on the Supremes will let anyone nullify his eventual pardons of his cronies, his minions, his family, and even himself?
And he gets to sit undisturbed in the White House, waiting out his term, solely because the spineless Justice Department has invented for itself the flunky doctrine that a sitting president cannot be indicted - nor even accused, to hear Muller tell it.
Tuesday, August 27, 2019
Um, from whom was the press supposed to be free, again?
And it was not the people who own the presses.
Bernie Sanders Unveils Plan To Defend The News Media, Says Democracy Requires It
But, yes, BS has a plan by which the government will save the news media from those who own them.
That is exactly his plan.
Sounds like his plan is a dagger aimed at the heart of the Murdoch empire and others of that political ilk.
Bernie Sanders Unveils Plan To Defend The News Media, Says Democracy Requires It
But, yes, BS has a plan by which the government will save the news media from those who own them.
That is exactly his plan.
Sounds like his plan is a dagger aimed at the heart of the Murdoch empire and others of that political ilk.
Monday, August 26, 2019
The best so far
The best sci-fi confrontation with the challenge posed by AI and robots that I know of.
"Anything you can do I can do better; I can do anything better than you."
And cheaper.
And that's the problem.
Better than Us
The story is driven by the existence of a bot who is not programmed with Asimov's three laws, and who can and does kill humans.
"The world's only killer bot," she is called in one episode.
But the social import of the rise of the robots lies in this, that there is a plot afoot to use robots as a significantly cheaper alternative to human workers, but not only as menial laborers: doctors, also, for example.
No limit, in principle.
Humans are to be phased out through a program of very cushy early retirement, easily financed by the savings obtained by using robots in their stead.
And future humans?
Not a word about that, yet.
Haven't finished the series.
Only 3 episodes in and there are 16.
BTW, it stars Estonian Kirill Kyaro (or Kirill Käro), previously known for "The Sniffer", also available on Netflix.
"Anything you can do I can do better; I can do anything better than you."
And cheaper.
And that's the problem.
Better than Us
The story is driven by the existence of a bot who is not programmed with Asimov's three laws, and who can and does kill humans.
"The world's only killer bot," she is called in one episode.
But the social import of the rise of the robots lies in this, that there is a plot afoot to use robots as a significantly cheaper alternative to human workers, but not only as menial laborers: doctors, also, for example.
No limit, in principle.
Humans are to be phased out through a program of very cushy early retirement, easily financed by the savings obtained by using robots in their stead.
And future humans?
Not a word about that, yet.
Haven't finished the series.
Only 3 episodes in and there are 16.
BTW, it stars Estonian Kirill Kyaro (or Kirill Käro), previously known for "The Sniffer", also available on Netflix.
Get your propaganda out early
Mitch McConnell: The Filibuster Plays a Crucial Role in Our Constitutional Order
Start with this: it is not part of the constitutional order.
It is, broadly speaking just any device used to delay or prevent an anticipated decision in a legislature.
In the US senate, it is entirely an artifact of senate rules, and on the whole an inadvertent one.
And over its history it has mostly been used to defend "states rights" and associated causes.
I have argued it is in fact unconstitutional, and still think so and think we would be better off without it.
Individual politicians, parties, and voters will just need to take more responsibility for what they say and what they choose.
This is McConnell preparing for losing the senate to the Dems in 2020 and facing the very real possibility - not nearly real enough, in my view - that the Dems will junk the filibuster and steamroll the Republican minority who have so often in recent years flouted established and more amicable Washington ways in order to screw over Democrats.
Start with this: it is not part of the constitutional order.
It is, broadly speaking just any device used to delay or prevent an anticipated decision in a legislature.
In the US senate, it is entirely an artifact of senate rules, and on the whole an inadvertent one.
And over its history it has mostly been used to defend "states rights" and associated causes.
I have argued it is in fact unconstitutional, and still think so and think we would be better off without it.
Individual politicians, parties, and voters will just need to take more responsibility for what they say and what they choose.
This is McConnell preparing for losing the senate to the Dems in 2020 and facing the very real possibility - not nearly real enough, in my view - that the Dems will junk the filibuster and steamroll the Republican minority who have so often in recent years flouted established and more amicable Washington ways in order to screw over Democrats.
No. Apparently, it wasn't just nuts.
We Should Buy Greenland
Tom Cotton reviews relevant history and makes a good case.
The 56,000 Greenlanders are costing the six million Danes a lot of money.
And the Chinese are trying to establish a foothold.
Tom Cotton reviews relevant history and makes a good case.
The 56,000 Greenlanders are costing the six million Danes a lot of money.
And the Chinese are trying to establish a foothold.
So his brain is actually ten years old?
Soooo good to have a stable genius in the White House.
National Security Advisers Explain To Trump: You Can't Nuke Hurricanes
"Welcome back to Morning Joe. Hurricane season is here, and President Trump reportedly has an idea to keep the storms from causing damage to the United States. Nuclear bombs," Mika Brzezinski said.
"Nuclear bombs against hurricanes. According to Axios, Trump has suggested multiple times to Homeland Security and national security officials that they explore using nuclear bombs to stop hurricanes from hitting the U.S."
National Security Advisers Explain To Trump: You Can't Nuke Hurricanes
"Welcome back to Morning Joe. Hurricane season is here, and President Trump reportedly has an idea to keep the storms from causing damage to the United States. Nuclear bombs," Mika Brzezinski said.
"Nuclear bombs against hurricanes. According to Axios, Trump has suggested multiple times to Homeland Security and national security officials that they explore using nuclear bombs to stop hurricanes from hitting the U.S."
How exactly are they supposed to do that?
Because if it's just more yelling at white people Bannon is right and it helps the GOP.
Identity politics for Democrats can't mean they play straight into the hands of the Duce and the Klan by embracing not diversity but exclusion, validating or appearing to validate the Republicans' key racial claim that the Democrats are not the party for everybody but the party for everybody else, everybody who isn't white.
Or anyway everybody who is against whites or wants to sell them out.
Hillary did that, embracing diversity without for a moment seeming to embrace exclusion - except perhaps of white men, but that's a whole different matter.
And O did it even better.
The president has made identity politics part of his vision – progressives must fight back on those same terms
Identity politics for Democrats can't mean they play straight into the hands of the Duce and the Klan by embracing not diversity but exclusion, validating or appearing to validate the Republicans' key racial claim that the Democrats are not the party for everybody but the party for everybody else, everybody who isn't white.
Or anyway everybody who is against whites or wants to sell them out.
Hillary did that, embracing diversity without for a moment seeming to embrace exclusion - except perhaps of white men, but that's a whole different matter.
And O did it even better.
The president has made identity politics part of his vision – progressives must fight back on those same terms
The word "pogrom" would be wholly out of place, however.
The extent of the violence in Elaine is greatly exaggerated by The Guardian, apparently to enhance weaponization of this history.
Wikipedia and USA Today give national totals for the Red Summer far lower than the total given by The Guardian for just this one small southern town.
The Guardian wants you to think of it as an episode of genocide, or at least of ethnic cleansing.
But in Ukraine alone and over 40 years, actual pogroms killed tens or hundreds of thousands and left millions homeless.
For comparison, Wikipedia: According to the Tuskegee Institute, 4,743 people were lynched between 1882 and 1968 [more than 80 years - PV] in the United States, including 3,446 African Americans and 1,297 whites.
More than 73 percent of lynchings in the post-Civil War period occurred in the Southern states.
According to the Equal Justice Initiative, 4,084 African-Americans were lynched between 1877 and 1950 in the South.
That is not nothing, but it is by orders of magnitude a lesser atrocity.
Arkansas: tree honoring 1919 Elaine Massacre victims cut down
Officials are investigating after someone cut down a willow tree that was planted earlier this year to honor the victims of the 1919 Elaine Massacre in eastern Arkansas.
The willow was planted in April in rememabrance of the victims of the massacre, one of the largest racial mass killings in US history.
It occurred during the summer of 1919, when hundreds of African Americans died across the country, at the hands of white mob violence during what came to be known as the “Red Summer”.
Estimates of how many African Americans were killed in Elaine range from the low hundreds to more than 800, which would make it the deadliest such massacre in US history.
Mass graves are thought to be situated around the town.
Wikipedia and USA Today give national totals for the Red Summer far lower than the total given by The Guardian for just this one small southern town.
The Guardian wants you to think of it as an episode of genocide, or at least of ethnic cleansing.
But in Ukraine alone and over 40 years, actual pogroms killed tens or hundreds of thousands and left millions homeless.
For comparison, Wikipedia: According to the Tuskegee Institute, 4,743 people were lynched between 1882 and 1968 [more than 80 years - PV] in the United States, including 3,446 African Americans and 1,297 whites.
More than 73 percent of lynchings in the post-Civil War period occurred in the Southern states.
According to the Equal Justice Initiative, 4,084 African-Americans were lynched between 1877 and 1950 in the South.
That is not nothing, but it is by orders of magnitude a lesser atrocity.
Arkansas: tree honoring 1919 Elaine Massacre victims cut down
Officials are investigating after someone cut down a willow tree that was planted earlier this year to honor the victims of the 1919 Elaine Massacre in eastern Arkansas.
The willow was planted in April in rememabrance of the victims of the massacre, one of the largest racial mass killings in US history.
It occurred during the summer of 1919, when hundreds of African Americans died across the country, at the hands of white mob violence during what came to be known as the “Red Summer”.
Estimates of how many African Americans were killed in Elaine range from the low hundreds to more than 800, which would make it the deadliest such massacre in US history.
Mass graves are thought to be situated around the town.
Saturday, August 24, 2019
So many surprises
That For Greater Glory is on Netflix, about this.
And that Peter O'Toole is in it, even in a absurd role.
Playing a martyred priest!
Liberals used to be for freedom of religion, and not only for freedom from it.
But not for many years, now.
Of course, it is not a surprise that so many critics panned it.
Remember The Passion, which was a really brilliant and moving film, and the reception it received from our contemporary liberal and Jewish critics?
In Mexico and elsewhere the cultural revolution against Christendom was quite forthright, violent, and frank, back in the day.
Coexistence, in that time, did not seem a viable option to enough of the population and the classe politique.
And the question is forced upon us.
How can we compare a society ruled by the traditional Christian sexual morality and one ruled instead by the post-Christian, liberal and libertarian alternative?
The latter, other things equal, would be much better for adults.
The former would be better for children, both born and unborn.
For openers.
And that Peter O'Toole is in it, even in a absurd role.
Playing a martyred priest!
Liberals used to be for freedom of religion, and not only for freedom from it.
But not for many years, now.
Of course, it is not a surprise that so many critics panned it.
Remember The Passion, which was a really brilliant and moving film, and the reception it received from our contemporary liberal and Jewish critics?
In Mexico and elsewhere the cultural revolution against Christendom was quite forthright, violent, and frank, back in the day.
Coexistence, in that time, did not seem a viable option to enough of the population and the classe politique.
And the question is forced upon us.
How can we compare a society ruled by the traditional Christian sexual morality and one ruled instead by the post-Christian, liberal and libertarian alternative?
The latter, other things equal, would be much better for adults.
The former would be better for children, both born and unborn.
For openers.
Night Soldiers
Alan Furst's novel first reveals the tyranny of Soviet Russia by displaying Stalin's tyrannical behavior regarding members of the leadership of the Communist Party and the NKVD.
And as to that, the official orders to officers serving abroad to return to the Soviet Union, known to all to be orders to return for execution that, in general, no one dared disobey, are a nice parallel to the way things went in the empire of the Turks, its tyranny most neatly depicted in the mind of one of Furst's heroes, early in the book, in the practice of sending an official a garotte, indicating he should kill himself.
Which, generally, he did.
But the difficulty with this view of the situation is that, much like Khrushchev's secret speech to the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union on February 25, 1956, it hides the inherent tyranny of Soviet Communism behind the tyranny of Stalin, personally, while it hides his tyrannical rule of the entire country behind his tyrannical treatment of party members and officials.
On the other hand, Furst's treatment in the same novel of the Spanish Civil War is almost entirely satisfactory.
And as to that, the official orders to officers serving abroad to return to the Soviet Union, known to all to be orders to return for execution that, in general, no one dared disobey, are a nice parallel to the way things went in the empire of the Turks, its tyranny most neatly depicted in the mind of one of Furst's heroes, early in the book, in the practice of sending an official a garotte, indicating he should kill himself.
Which, generally, he did.
But the difficulty with this view of the situation is that, much like Khrushchev's secret speech to the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union on February 25, 1956, it hides the inherent tyranny of Soviet Communism behind the tyranny of Stalin, personally, while it hides his tyrannical rule of the entire country behind his tyrannical treatment of party members and officials.
On the other hand, Furst's treatment in the same novel of the Spanish Civil War is almost entirely satisfactory.
OK, that won't do
What with my wife's health problems and the busyness due to her being incapacitated for the last 10 1/2 months, I have lost my grip and gained 10 pounds, outright.
This is not acceptable.
This is the road to obesity.
This is not acceptable.
This is the road to obesity.
Reading Oliver Twist
I think I have read this before, but it was a long time ago and I really don't remember any of it as I now read along.
I am a couple of dozen pages in and I must say that from his birth onward, whenever Oliver has been onstage (so to speak) so far, he has always bawled his eyes out.
The lad cannot get a moment's peace.
I am a couple of dozen pages in and I must say that from his birth onward, whenever Oliver has been onstage (so to speak) so far, he has always bawled his eyes out.
The lad cannot get a moment's peace.
Tuesday, August 20, 2019
George McGovern. Jesse Jackson.
The Democratic left loves a loser.
Always has.
Still does.
Sometimes, some of them know their preferred candidate can't win, but they don't care.
Not if it helps permanently move the party toward the left.
And that is their perverse thinking: nothing will persuade the Democrats to permanently shift left like nominating a leftish sort of guy and watching him and the party's down-ticket candidates, too, get crushed in a devastating Republican landslide, as happened in 1972 when Nixon buried McGovern more deeply than anyone ever before in American political history.
Right now, the Democratic left pretty much prefers any loser on their love list to the one Democrat most likely to deny Bozo a second term.
Who said the Republicans are the stupid party?
Jill Biden: "You may like another candidate better, but you have to look at who is going to win"
Jill Biden laid out the political calculus of her husband’s presidential campaign in extraordinarily blunt terms on Monday, directly acknowledging that some voters may prefer other candidates but urging them to support Joseph R. Biden Jr. anyway, in an effort to defeat President Trump.
As Mr. Biden, the early poll leader, works — and sometimes struggles — to excite a Democratic base that has moved left since he last ran for office, Dr. Biden, campaigning in New Hampshire, called on Democrats to prioritize perceived electability over enthusiasm for individual contenders or their policies.
“You may like another candidate better, but you have to look at who is going to win,” she said, addressing a gathering of educators.
Always has.
Still does.
Sometimes, some of them know their preferred candidate can't win, but they don't care.
Not if it helps permanently move the party toward the left.
And that is their perverse thinking: nothing will persuade the Democrats to permanently shift left like nominating a leftish sort of guy and watching him and the party's down-ticket candidates, too, get crushed in a devastating Republican landslide, as happened in 1972 when Nixon buried McGovern more deeply than anyone ever before in American political history.
Right now, the Democratic left pretty much prefers any loser on their love list to the one Democrat most likely to deny Bozo a second term.
Who said the Republicans are the stupid party?
Jill Biden: "You may like another candidate better, but you have to look at who is going to win"
Jill Biden laid out the political calculus of her husband’s presidential campaign in extraordinarily blunt terms on Monday, directly acknowledging that some voters may prefer other candidates but urging them to support Joseph R. Biden Jr. anyway, in an effort to defeat President Trump.
As Mr. Biden, the early poll leader, works — and sometimes struggles — to excite a Democratic base that has moved left since he last ran for office, Dr. Biden, campaigning in New Hampshire, called on Democrats to prioritize perceived electability over enthusiasm for individual contenders or their policies.
“You may like another candidate better, but you have to look at who is going to win,” she said, addressing a gathering of educators.
Not how things should be
For years, my leftier friends told me only foolish people bought bottled water as city water, all over America, was much safer.
Nobody says that, anymore.
Not after Flint.
And now this about Newark.
Lead in the Water and a City in Crisis
Nobody says that, anymore.
Not after Flint.
And now this about Newark.
Lead in the Water and a City in Crisis
Sunday, August 18, 2019
Thursday, August 15, 2019
They are shocked, shocked!
Five senate Democrats are shocked and appalled that Republicans' readings of the constitution reflect their politics and sometimes favor the interests of Republican constituencies or donors.
And they warn darkly that, if the Supremes don't rule as they desire on a Second Amendment case now before them, the already wavering trust of the American people in the judicial integrity of the court will be further compromised and the public may demand it be restructured to reduce the influence of politics.
They threaten court-packing, in other words.
The opening salvo, the first of many to come, in a barrage of propaganda aiming to soften up public opinion and prepare it for just such a move, that many Democrats, including me, think the Dems ought to do if they can, as soon as they can?
Maybe.
And I suppose it was inevitable that such Dem propaganda would have to pretend, as Republican propaganda about interpretation of the constitution always does, that there is a single reading, or a narrow range of readings, of the constitution that any honest and objective student of the thing would arrive at, sufficient to decide all or damned near all cases or controversies, and especially cases in which the political, social, cultural, legal, or economic stakes are greatest.
But that is a fantasy suitable for children, like Santa Claus and the Elf on the Shelf.
The truth, entirely contrary to that notion, is that the constitution is so riddled with obscurity, generality, and imprecision of language and so undermined by glaring lacunae that nothing at all can get to readings sufficiently lucid and apposite to decide controversies but the political, moral, religious, or other personal and somehow relevant beliefs, commitments, or even interests of the reader.
Even the question whether and how far judges must feel themselves bound by what they admit to be, as there will be in many but by no means all cases, the evident meaning of some key passage of the thing, can be decided on no other basis than these.
And it is also a fantasy that people do not understand all that very well, and that just that is why the parties' choices of not only judicial philosophies or constitutional interpretations but of judges are entirely and necessarily a function of the political, moral, religious, or other somehow relevant beliefs, commitments, or interests of their members, constituencies, or donors.
But the broad masses include the massively stupid and naive.
And so the multiple and manifold lines of propaganda brought forth for this fight must include threads variously addressed to diverse elements of the constituencies involved.
To Save a Bad Gun Law, Democratic Senators Threaten the Supreme Court
It is a bad gun law, by the way.
Update 081819.
It's also possible this will, and may have been intended to, warn off the Supremes from overturning Roe or anything significantly related to it.
And they warn darkly that, if the Supremes don't rule as they desire on a Second Amendment case now before them, the already wavering trust of the American people in the judicial integrity of the court will be further compromised and the public may demand it be restructured to reduce the influence of politics.
They threaten court-packing, in other words.
The opening salvo, the first of many to come, in a barrage of propaganda aiming to soften up public opinion and prepare it for just such a move, that many Democrats, including me, think the Dems ought to do if they can, as soon as they can?
Maybe.
And I suppose it was inevitable that such Dem propaganda would have to pretend, as Republican propaganda about interpretation of the constitution always does, that there is a single reading, or a narrow range of readings, of the constitution that any honest and objective student of the thing would arrive at, sufficient to decide all or damned near all cases or controversies, and especially cases in which the political, social, cultural, legal, or economic stakes are greatest.
But that is a fantasy suitable for children, like Santa Claus and the Elf on the Shelf.
The truth, entirely contrary to that notion, is that the constitution is so riddled with obscurity, generality, and imprecision of language and so undermined by glaring lacunae that nothing at all can get to readings sufficiently lucid and apposite to decide controversies but the political, moral, religious, or other personal and somehow relevant beliefs, commitments, or even interests of the reader.
Even the question whether and how far judges must feel themselves bound by what they admit to be, as there will be in many but by no means all cases, the evident meaning of some key passage of the thing, can be decided on no other basis than these.
And it is also a fantasy that people do not understand all that very well, and that just that is why the parties' choices of not only judicial philosophies or constitutional interpretations but of judges are entirely and necessarily a function of the political, moral, religious, or other somehow relevant beliefs, commitments, or interests of their members, constituencies, or donors.
But the broad masses include the massively stupid and naive.
And so the multiple and manifold lines of propaganda brought forth for this fight must include threads variously addressed to diverse elements of the constituencies involved.
To Save a Bad Gun Law, Democratic Senators Threaten the Supreme Court
It is a bad gun law, by the way.
Update 081819.
It's also possible this will, and may have been intended to, warn off the Supremes from overturning Roe or anything significantly related to it.
So The Times is too conservative?
People say that a lot at Dem sites where both "socialism" and socialism are popular, and capitalism is not.
In recent weeks, The Times' front page has been relentlessly hammering Trump, the GOP, the USA, white men, and white people in general for racism, sexism, homophobia, and other sins too numerous and too diverse for me to recall them all right now, featuring multiple attacks above the fold (online edition, of course) every single day.
At least half the links and stories above the fold, and often more than that, are such attacks, nearly all of which at least include if they are not limited to the charge of racism.
But the ever more conspicuous Zinnite influence on The Times, actually more strident some days than The Guardian, shows increasingly in anti-capitalism, too.
As in this story, in which hammering the US for racism and slavery (ended by white people at the cost of some 700,000 dead, 154 years ago) provides a natural segue into hammering the US for capitalism.
In order to understand the brutality of American capitalism, you have to start on the plantation.
And yet, in this editorial - from the board, the publisher, and the editor, however, and in no way representing the newsroom or op-ed section - we see a defense of the Hong Kong rebels and a clear loathing of the red dictatorship of Beijing.
Hong Kong’s Challenge to Xi Jinping’s Iron Rule
All the same, most of the news stories concerning the situation have been sympathetic to the protesters and their aims.
In recent weeks, The Times' front page has been relentlessly hammering Trump, the GOP, the USA, white men, and white people in general for racism, sexism, homophobia, and other sins too numerous and too diverse for me to recall them all right now, featuring multiple attacks above the fold (online edition, of course) every single day.
At least half the links and stories above the fold, and often more than that, are such attacks, nearly all of which at least include if they are not limited to the charge of racism.
But the ever more conspicuous Zinnite influence on The Times, actually more strident some days than The Guardian, shows increasingly in anti-capitalism, too.
As in this story, in which hammering the US for racism and slavery (ended by white people at the cost of some 700,000 dead, 154 years ago) provides a natural segue into hammering the US for capitalism.
In order to understand the brutality of American capitalism, you have to start on the plantation.
And yet, in this editorial - from the board, the publisher, and the editor, however, and in no way representing the newsroom or op-ed section - we see a defense of the Hong Kong rebels and a clear loathing of the red dictatorship of Beijing.
Hong Kong’s Challenge to Xi Jinping’s Iron Rule
All the same, most of the news stories concerning the situation have been sympathetic to the protesters and their aims.
Wednesday, August 14, 2019
Both parties, but not the president, to China: Stay out of Hong Kong.
Pelosi: Trump's comments on Hong Kong 'invite miscalculation' by Beijing
“We urge President Trump to walk away from his recent statements, which invite miscalculation, and to work to advance peace, justice and democracy in Hong Kong,” she said.
She is among several congressional leaders who’ve unequivocally sided with the protesters who’ve clashed with police in a simmering fight to preserve their quasi-autonomy mainland China.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said a crackdown on protesters would be “completely unacceptable,” while Sen. Tom Cotton, Arkansas Republican, warned any suression would be a “grave mistake” on part with the Tiananmen Square massacre.
The leaders of the House Foreign Affairs Committee are warning China against military action amid ongoing massive pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong, and denied Beijing’s charges that the U.S. was fueling the protests.
. . . .
The strong Hill reaction left Mr. Trump as a cautious outlier on U.S. policy toward the crisis.
“I hope it works out for everybody, including China,” he said Tuesday, as protesters clashed with police at the Hong Kong airport. “I hope it works out peacefully. I hope nobody gets hurts. I hope nobody gets killed.”
He later warned, via Twitter, that Chinese soldiers were amassing near the Hong Kong border. He urged everyone to be calm and safe, though didn’t cast blame.
The president is not entirely alone in his apparent hands-off approach.
Commerce secretary says Hong Kong protests are an 'internal matter'
Appearing on CNBC, Ross was pressed on whether the US had relinquished its role as a supporter of democracies around the world.
“What would we do, invade Hong Kong?” Ross asked with a laugh.
“The president has made it clear that he is watching very carefully what’s happening,” Ross added.
Trump said yesterday that the protests were a “very tough situation” but refrained from criticizing China over the demonstration.
“I’m sure it’ll work out,” Trump said. “I hope it works out for everybody, including China.”
Ross went on to tell CNBC, “He talked about the possibility of troop build-up and it’s not that we are not watching it, it’s a question of what role is there for the US in that matter. This is an internal matter.”
“We urge President Trump to walk away from his recent statements, which invite miscalculation, and to work to advance peace, justice and democracy in Hong Kong,” she said.
She is among several congressional leaders who’ve unequivocally sided with the protesters who’ve clashed with police in a simmering fight to preserve their quasi-autonomy mainland China.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said a crackdown on protesters would be “completely unacceptable,” while Sen. Tom Cotton, Arkansas Republican, warned any suression would be a “grave mistake” on part with the Tiananmen Square massacre.
The leaders of the House Foreign Affairs Committee are warning China against military action amid ongoing massive pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong, and denied Beijing’s charges that the U.S. was fueling the protests.
. . . .
The strong Hill reaction left Mr. Trump as a cautious outlier on U.S. policy toward the crisis.
“I hope it works out for everybody, including China,” he said Tuesday, as protesters clashed with police at the Hong Kong airport. “I hope it works out peacefully. I hope nobody gets hurts. I hope nobody gets killed.”
He later warned, via Twitter, that Chinese soldiers were amassing near the Hong Kong border. He urged everyone to be calm and safe, though didn’t cast blame.
The president is not entirely alone in his apparent hands-off approach.
Commerce secretary says Hong Kong protests are an 'internal matter'
Appearing on CNBC, Ross was pressed on whether the US had relinquished its role as a supporter of democracies around the world.
“What would we do, invade Hong Kong?” Ross asked with a laugh.
“The president has made it clear that he is watching very carefully what’s happening,” Ross added.
Trump said yesterday that the protests were a “very tough situation” but refrained from criticizing China over the demonstration.
“I’m sure it’ll work out,” Trump said. “I hope it works out for everybody, including China.”
Ross went on to tell CNBC, “He talked about the possibility of troop build-up and it’s not that we are not watching it, it’s a question of what role is there for the US in that matter. This is an internal matter.”
Is it OK for the black majority to make laws governing the choices of the white minority in South Africa?
I ask because of this guilt-tripper doing her level best to stoke outrage that white people will make abortion laws impacting the choices of nonwhites.
Oh, dear me.
White conservative women have played key role in abortion policy changes this year
The main storyline on reproductive rights for months now has been this: Men, many of them conservative, have moved to curtail access to legal abortion and even ban it, imposing their will upon women.
That would be the main guilt-tripping misandrist propaganda line that we are so disgusted by and so used to.
The truth, however, is more complicated.
White women have joined men, mostly but not exclusively in the Deep South, in using their conservative majorities in multiple state legislatures to make sweeping changes to abortion policies this year.
Those laws that survive legal challenges will most deeply affect women too poor to travel or move to a state with better access to abortion services.
That’s a group that is disproportionately black and Latino — and, in the case of black women, a group that tends to support access to legal abortion.
This gap between those making the decisions and those affected by them, experts say, is a dynamic with deep roots in American history.
And it happens the other way 'round in every American city or county where a black and overwhelmingly Democratic majority makes the rules for whites, often much more Republican, and other minorities.
Oh how awful!
Wait, is it racist to deplore black majority rule over a white minority? White nationalist? White supremacist, even?
Oh, golly.
The role of white women — long key players in dictating and constraining the reproductive choices of others — is too often discounted and overlooked, experts say.
In 2019, new abortion restrictions were passed in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana after white women co-sponsored them, many voted for them and in one state, signed the changes into law.
(In those four state legislatures, 48 women — almost all of them white — voted for the restrictions.)
When Democrats get like this they just make me want to puke all over them.
And regret that the Republicans want to kill me, so I can never vote for them, no matter how revolting the Democrats get.
Oh, dear me.
White conservative women have played key role in abortion policy changes this year
The main storyline on reproductive rights for months now has been this: Men, many of them conservative, have moved to curtail access to legal abortion and even ban it, imposing their will upon women.
That would be the main guilt-tripping misandrist propaganda line that we are so disgusted by and so used to.
The truth, however, is more complicated.
White women have joined men, mostly but not exclusively in the Deep South, in using their conservative majorities in multiple state legislatures to make sweeping changes to abortion policies this year.
Those laws that survive legal challenges will most deeply affect women too poor to travel or move to a state with better access to abortion services.
That’s a group that is disproportionately black and Latino — and, in the case of black women, a group that tends to support access to legal abortion.
This gap between those making the decisions and those affected by them, experts say, is a dynamic with deep roots in American history.
And it happens the other way 'round in every American city or county where a black and overwhelmingly Democratic majority makes the rules for whites, often much more Republican, and other minorities.
Oh how awful!
Wait, is it racist to deplore black majority rule over a white minority? White nationalist? White supremacist, even?
Oh, golly.
The role of white women — long key players in dictating and constraining the reproductive choices of others — is too often discounted and overlooked, experts say.
In 2019, new abortion restrictions were passed in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana after white women co-sponsored them, many voted for them and in one state, signed the changes into law.
(In those four state legislatures, 48 women — almost all of them white — voted for the restrictions.)
When Democrats get like this they just make me want to puke all over them.
And regret that the Republicans want to kill me, so I can never vote for them, no matter how revolting the Democrats get.
The poem presupposed racism, when written, says Cuccinelli
Probably true.
And now he's being fried for it as the Dems seeking nomination and desperate to win the hearts and minds of the party's primary voters and the entire left wing noise machine all blast him, Trump, the GOP, and the new policy for racism, racism, racism.
He also pointed out the poem was written one year after the first public charge rule was imposed.
Not going to matter.
Cuccinelli: Statue of Liberty poem was about 'people coming from Europe
I guess 2020 will tell us who was right about who wins when the Dems turn up the volume, yelling about racism.
They think it turns out their anti-racist voters and helps them win.
Steve Bannon thinks it fires up the GOP base in just the right swing states to give Trump another Electoral College victory.
And now he's being fried for it as the Dems seeking nomination and desperate to win the hearts and minds of the party's primary voters and the entire left wing noise machine all blast him, Trump, the GOP, and the new policy for racism, racism, racism.
He also pointed out the poem was written one year after the first public charge rule was imposed.
Not going to matter.
Cuccinelli: Statue of Liberty poem was about 'people coming from Europe
I guess 2020 will tell us who was right about who wins when the Dems turn up the volume, yelling about racism.
They think it turns out their anti-racist voters and helps them win.
Steve Bannon thinks it fires up the GOP base in just the right swing states to give Trump another Electoral College victory.
Tuesday, August 13, 2019
Oh, no. You are so wrong.
Jill Muller's 2003 introduction to the Barnes and Noble Oliver Twist.
The myth of "gentility" as an inborn trait may have helped the author to come to terms with the social humiliations of his youth, but it severely undermines the effectiveness of Oliver Twist as social criticism.
If Oliver is to arouse readers' indignation at the plight of children in workhouses, it is essential that they view him not as a specimen of unique virtue and sensitivity, but as a typical case.
Pshaw.
Her introduction is intelligent and helpful but marred, here and there, with twaddle.
On the right side, sure, but . . . .
Cotton: ‘It Would Be a Grave Mistake of Historic Proportions’
Tuesday during an appearance on the Hugh Hewitt’s nationally syndicated radio show, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) warned China against acting on protesters in Hong Kong with a show of force, especially with armed police and the People’s Liberation Army.
The Arkansas Republican said any action could further damage China’s relationship with the United States.
“Let me reiterate my message from your show last week,” Cotton said.
“It would be a grave mistake of historic proportions if Beijing were to flood into Hong Kong with the people’s armed police and the People’s Liberation Army to crack down on Hong Kongers.
"If Beijing cracked down on Hong Kong, it would require a fundamental reassessment of our relation with their country, the kind that should have happened after Tiananmen Square.”
But apparently not war, anyway.
Tuesday during an appearance on the Hugh Hewitt’s nationally syndicated radio show, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) warned China against acting on protesters in Hong Kong with a show of force, especially with armed police and the People’s Liberation Army.
The Arkansas Republican said any action could further damage China’s relationship with the United States.
“Let me reiterate my message from your show last week,” Cotton said.
“It would be a grave mistake of historic proportions if Beijing were to flood into Hong Kong with the people’s armed police and the People’s Liberation Army to crack down on Hong Kongers.
"If Beijing cracked down on Hong Kong, it would require a fundamental reassessment of our relation with their country, the kind that should have happened after Tiananmen Square.”
But apparently not war, anyway.
Well, do you want that wretched refuse, or not?
How badly?
Should we not only open the door but by the tickets?
Cuccinelli torches famous Statue of Liberty immigrant quote
It's about revisions to the public charge rule.
In an effort to defend a new Trump administration rule aimed at making it harder for poorer legal immigrants to stay in the U.S., acting Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Ken Cuccinelli offered a new take Tuesday on the poem attached to the Statue of Liberty.
"Give me your tired and your poor who can stand on their own two feet and who will not become a public charge," Cuccinelli said during in an interview with NPR's "Morning Edition."
The poem, titled "The New Colossus" and written by Emma Lazarus in 1883, reads: "Give me your tired, your poor, / Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, / The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. / Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, / I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Any number of Trump's critics seem to think that poem has and must have the last word on US immigration policy.
Should we not only open the door but by the tickets?
Cuccinelli torches famous Statue of Liberty immigrant quote
It's about revisions to the public charge rule.
In an effort to defend a new Trump administration rule aimed at making it harder for poorer legal immigrants to stay in the U.S., acting Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Ken Cuccinelli offered a new take Tuesday on the poem attached to the Statue of Liberty.
"Give me your tired and your poor who can stand on their own two feet and who will not become a public charge," Cuccinelli said during in an interview with NPR's "Morning Edition."
The poem, titled "The New Colossus" and written by Emma Lazarus in 1883, reads: "Give me your tired, your poor, / Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, / The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. / Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, / I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Any number of Trump's critics seem to think that poem has and must have the last word on US immigration policy.
Does the EU have teeth?
The US constitution provides a federal guarantee to the states of a republican form of government.
The idea is that the general government could enforce that requirement, and that idea was involved during and after the Civil War to justify Union actions against the states of the Confederacy.
The EU provides an analogous guarantee to its member states, but the measures available to fulfill that guarantee are rather less potent. Or drastic.
Hungary’s far-right government vilifies Finland over rule of law inquiry.
Finland has pledged to pursue a hearing into alleged breaches of the rule of law by Hungary’s far-right government after a campaign of vilification led by the prime minister, Viktor Orbán.
Orbán and his spokesman, Zoltán Kovács, have launched a series of attacks in recent weeks ranging from criticism of the level of domestic violence in Finland to the purchase of strategically important Finnish islands by Russian oligarchs.
As the member state holding the EU’s rolling presidency until the new year, the Finnish government is responsible for chairing meetings of the member states and pushing forward the bloc’s agenda.
The European parliament took the unprecedented step last September of asking member states to determine whether Hungary had breached the bloc’s founding values in its overhaul of the country’s judiciary and alleged failure to respect freedom of expression, religion and equal treatment under the law.
. . . .
When its government assumed the presidency on 1 July it said it would respect the parliament’s vote in favour of pursuing the so-called article 7 process, under which Hungary could theoretically face the “nuclear” sanction of having its voting rights in EU institutions suspended.
. . . .
A spokesman for the Finnish government said the latest developments would not prevent it from “taking forward the ongoing procedures concerning the rule of law as appropriate”.
The spokesman said: “The article 7 procedure has been triggered, in the case of Hungary, by the European parliament. The treaty indicates that the next step will be a hearing in the council of the country concerned.
“The Finnish presidency believes Hungary has the right to be heard and that it is also in its best interest.”
The spokesman said the parliament had voted “nearly a year ago, so we think it is high time to move to the hearings. For some time already, a large number of member states have been demanding that hearings should begin.
“The article 7 procedure should not be seen as a process directed against a particular member state. The rule of law is part of our shared value basis and something that unites us all. We believe we must cherish it. The Finnish presidency intends to promote rule of law issues through a positive and constructive approach.”
Fabian Zuleeg, from the European Policy Centre, a Brussels thinktank said the stakes for Orbán over the rule of law would be greater if France successfully argued that EU funding should be linked to respect for the bloc’s treaties.
“A greater focus on rule of law was always going to produce a counter reaction by Hungary, which under Orbán has always argued that its democracy is as good as anywhere else in Europe, and that any comments or actions reflect different political ideologies,” he said.
“But the real political fight is still to come when the EU gets into the final phase of agreeing the next multi-annual financial framework. Here, a lot is at stake for Orbán if funding is made conditional on rule of law, which a number of western countries want to push for.”
Europe must stop this disgrace: Viktor Orbán is dismantling democracy
What, then, should the EU do?
Immediately, Weber should not be made commission president – mainly because he does not have the top-level governmental experience, but also because he has legitimated Orbán’s dismantling of Hungarian democracy by keeping Fidesz in the EPP.
The EPP itself, following a report by its three “wise men” (who will be three blind mice if they don’t see in Hungary what I have briefly summarised here), should finally boot out Fidesz.
This action has much wider importance, since a moral and political imperative of our time is for civilised centre-right parties to draw a clear line between them and xenophobic, populist extremists.
Then the EU must stop this tragic farce of its own funds being used to undermine European values.
It should appoint as European public prosecutor the Romanian Laura Codruţa Kövesi, who knows exactly what post-communist, east European corruption looks like, and make signing up to scrutiny by that European public prosecutor a condition for receipt of those funds.
It should also move to distribute more EU funding directly to local government and civil society, rather than letting it be used as a huge, centralised slush fund by a corrupt party-state.
Not least, all European institutions and heads of government must keep the spotlight on this tragedy in the heart of Europe.
Orbán himself is never constrained by excessive politeness; nor should they be. What the EU does about Hungary matters not just for Hungarians but for Europe as a whole.
The continent of Europe may have many different kinds of regime, but the European Union must be a community of democracies.
The idea is that the general government could enforce that requirement, and that idea was involved during and after the Civil War to justify Union actions against the states of the Confederacy.
The EU provides an analogous guarantee to its member states, but the measures available to fulfill that guarantee are rather less potent. Or drastic.
Hungary’s far-right government vilifies Finland over rule of law inquiry.
Finland has pledged to pursue a hearing into alleged breaches of the rule of law by Hungary’s far-right government after a campaign of vilification led by the prime minister, Viktor Orbán.
Orbán and his spokesman, Zoltán Kovács, have launched a series of attacks in recent weeks ranging from criticism of the level of domestic violence in Finland to the purchase of strategically important Finnish islands by Russian oligarchs.
As the member state holding the EU’s rolling presidency until the new year, the Finnish government is responsible for chairing meetings of the member states and pushing forward the bloc’s agenda.
The European parliament took the unprecedented step last September of asking member states to determine whether Hungary had breached the bloc’s founding values in its overhaul of the country’s judiciary and alleged failure to respect freedom of expression, religion and equal treatment under the law.
. . . .
When its government assumed the presidency on 1 July it said it would respect the parliament’s vote in favour of pursuing the so-called article 7 process, under which Hungary could theoretically face the “nuclear” sanction of having its voting rights in EU institutions suspended.
. . . .
A spokesman for the Finnish government said the latest developments would not prevent it from “taking forward the ongoing procedures concerning the rule of law as appropriate”.
The spokesman said: “The article 7 procedure has been triggered, in the case of Hungary, by the European parliament. The treaty indicates that the next step will be a hearing in the council of the country concerned.
“The Finnish presidency believes Hungary has the right to be heard and that it is also in its best interest.”
The spokesman said the parliament had voted “nearly a year ago, so we think it is high time to move to the hearings. For some time already, a large number of member states have been demanding that hearings should begin.
“The article 7 procedure should not be seen as a process directed against a particular member state. The rule of law is part of our shared value basis and something that unites us all. We believe we must cherish it. The Finnish presidency intends to promote rule of law issues through a positive and constructive approach.”
Fabian Zuleeg, from the European Policy Centre, a Brussels thinktank said the stakes for Orbán over the rule of law would be greater if France successfully argued that EU funding should be linked to respect for the bloc’s treaties.
“A greater focus on rule of law was always going to produce a counter reaction by Hungary, which under Orbán has always argued that its democracy is as good as anywhere else in Europe, and that any comments or actions reflect different political ideologies,” he said.
“But the real political fight is still to come when the EU gets into the final phase of agreeing the next multi-annual financial framework. Here, a lot is at stake for Orbán if funding is made conditional on rule of law, which a number of western countries want to push for.”
Europe must stop this disgrace: Viktor Orbán is dismantling democracy
What, then, should the EU do?
Immediately, Weber should not be made commission president – mainly because he does not have the top-level governmental experience, but also because he has legitimated Orbán’s dismantling of Hungarian democracy by keeping Fidesz in the EPP.
The EPP itself, following a report by its three “wise men” (who will be three blind mice if they don’t see in Hungary what I have briefly summarised here), should finally boot out Fidesz.
This action has much wider importance, since a moral and political imperative of our time is for civilised centre-right parties to draw a clear line between them and xenophobic, populist extremists.
Then the EU must stop this tragic farce of its own funds being used to undermine European values.
It should appoint as European public prosecutor the Romanian Laura Codruţa Kövesi, who knows exactly what post-communist, east European corruption looks like, and make signing up to scrutiny by that European public prosecutor a condition for receipt of those funds.
It should also move to distribute more EU funding directly to local government and civil society, rather than letting it be used as a huge, centralised slush fund by a corrupt party-state.
Not least, all European institutions and heads of government must keep the spotlight on this tragedy in the heart of Europe.
Orbán himself is never constrained by excessive politeness; nor should they be. What the EU does about Hungary matters not just for Hungarians but for Europe as a whole.
The continent of Europe may have many different kinds of regime, but the European Union must be a community of democracies.
Another nuclear accident in the land of Chernobyl
[T]he Russian military base near Nenoska, Russia, where a small nuclear reactor exploded last week.
In online posts and calls to local officials, Russians on Monday expressed anger that the explosion of a small nuclear reactor at a military test site last week has gone unacknowledged for days by their government.
“Even if it is not as dangerous as it seems, we deserve to know,” said Danil Kotsyubinsky, a resident of St. Petersburg who has been pressing local officials for information.
The accident, which has been cloaked in secrecy, took place on Thursday at the Nenoska naval weapons range on the coast of the White Sea in northern Russia, and it apparently involved a test of a new type of cruise missile propelled by nuclear power, American analysts say.
The explosion killed at least seven people, released radiation that briefly elevated readings in a city 25 miles away and set off a scramble by Western experts to ascertain what happened.
They're testing development of a nuclear engine for cruise missiles.
To whom would that seem like a good idea?
Or, "what could go wrong?"
"Think of it like a mini Chernobyl on a missile," MIT's Narang said.
In online posts and calls to local officials, Russians on Monday expressed anger that the explosion of a small nuclear reactor at a military test site last week has gone unacknowledged for days by their government.
“Even if it is not as dangerous as it seems, we deserve to know,” said Danil Kotsyubinsky, a resident of St. Petersburg who has been pressing local officials for information.
The accident, which has been cloaked in secrecy, took place on Thursday at the Nenoska naval weapons range on the coast of the White Sea in northern Russia, and it apparently involved a test of a new type of cruise missile propelled by nuclear power, American analysts say.
The explosion killed at least seven people, released radiation that briefly elevated readings in a city 25 miles away and set off a scramble by Western experts to ascertain what happened.
They're testing development of a nuclear engine for cruise missiles.
To whom would that seem like a good idea?
Or, "what could go wrong?"
"Think of it like a mini Chernobyl on a missile," MIT's Narang said.
"It's an air-breathing cruise missile and they put an unshielded mini nuclear reactor on it. Obviously, that's pretty bats--- insane.
"We tried this in the 1960s and gave up for a reason, and this is why. It's very risky."
Thursday's accident is the latest sign that Russia's attempts to succeed where the U.S. failed are not going to plan.
Thursday's accident is the latest sign that Russia's attempts to succeed where the U.S. failed are not going to plan.
This is the latest of several failed tests since they started in 2017.
Cheryl Rofer, a retired chemist at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the birthplace of the atomic bomb in New Mexico, believes Putin will never succeed.
"There are basic and fundamental engineering considerations that suggest that a nuclear-powered cruise missile with a very small power source will be very difficult or impossible to build," she wrote on the Nuclear Diner website Sunday.
That's because of how difficult it is to make this type of missile light enough but with enough power to fly.
Cheryl Rofer, a retired chemist at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the birthplace of the atomic bomb in New Mexico, believes Putin will never succeed.
"There are basic and fundamental engineering considerations that suggest that a nuclear-powered cruise missile with a very small power source will be very difficult or impossible to build," she wrote on the Nuclear Diner website Sunday.
That's because of how difficult it is to make this type of missile light enough but with enough power to fly.
But the main reason it was abandoned in the past is the design has the potential to spread radioactive particles over the ground as it flies.
In the 1960s, the U.S. did not want to test its rocket in Nevada or over the Pacific because of the risk it could veer off course and cause an environmental catastrophe.
"Is it dangerous? Yes!" Lewis said.
"Is it dangerous? Yes!" Lewis said.
"I think the phrase 'flying nuclear reactor' tells you all you need to know.
"You've got air blowing through an open nuclear reactor and spewing out the back."
Putin is worried US anti-missile technology, reputedly now practically useless, will improve sufficiently to provide the US with what American policy leaders - though perhaps only the loonier - might think of as a first strike capability.
An unlimited range cruise missile looks like an answer, and a nuclear engine looks like the way to power it.
Putin is worried US anti-missile technology, reputedly now practically useless, will improve sufficiently to provide the US with what American policy leaders - though perhaps only the loonier - might think of as a first strike capability.
An unlimited range cruise missile looks like an answer, and a nuclear engine looks like the way to power it.
The bourgeois revolution in China.
China Is Waging a Disinformation War Against Hong Kong Protesters
Right now, that makes it a kind of latter day Cold War between the dictatorship of the Communist Party on the one side and the protesters on the other.
With the local government of Hong Kong a weak player in the middle
What do they want, these protesters?
What did the protesters of Tiananmen want?
The Revolution of 1848 in China.
The French Revolution - or any one of several - in China.
Think of that, but scaled back to cover only Hong Kong.
For now.
It is a direct challenge to the party's exclusive hold on power.
What a provocation it must be to Chicom nationalist eyes to see in the Times a photo of a gray-haired protester in the street waving the Union Jack, the banner of the former Western, white, racist, European colonial power, or demonstrators rushing around the Hong Kong airport, a youth among them waving the Stars and Stripes, as viewers of CNN saw this morning.
The talking heads of mainstream American cable news, all in varying degrees conscious or unconscious Children of Zinn, are accustomed to demonstrators burning the US flag and interviewees and guests who revile it as a symbol of slavery, genocide, misogyny, homophobia, Christianism - or indeed, simply Christianity - and racism.
They hear and repeat, day after day, that it is the banner of an evil regime of white males that is only a recent outpost of a larger evil white thing of millenia, Western Civilization.
They must have to try hard not to gag, reporting on a courageous democracy movement of nonwhites for whom the Stars and Stripes - and the colonialist Union Jack! Colonialism! What, better a Brit colony than one of the last Red Empire in Beijing? - are symbols of exactly the free society and government they want.
Meanwhile, the Beijing tyrants, relying on the Great Firewall of China to make easier their task, are incensing nationalist sentiment against the demonstrators with dangerous success, portraying them as criminals and terrorists manipulated and funded by foreigners and particularly the CIA.
The clashes have been off and on, and more on than off, since early this year.
The government clearly is in no hurry to send in the tanks and would prefer to wait it out.
And that could work, given enough patience.
Chaos Grips Hong Kong’s Airport as Police Clash with Protesters
And this inane remark by the moron in the White House is both hilarious and disgraceful, exactly as you would expect.
We are so going to get another four years of this orange jackass.
Trump on Hong Kong protests: 'It's a tough situation … but I'm sure it'll work out'
“We’ll what see what happens,” Trump said before boarding Air Force One for an event in Pennsylvania.
“But I’m sure it’ll work out. I hope it works out for everybody, including China, by the way.”
UK should give British nationality to Hong Kong citizens, Tugendhat says
What, does he think they want to be airlifted to East Anglia?
Trump isn't the only moron.
Right now, that makes it a kind of latter day Cold War between the dictatorship of the Communist Party on the one side and the protesters on the other.
With the local government of Hong Kong a weak player in the middle
What do they want, these protesters?
What did the protesters of Tiananmen want?
The Revolution of 1848 in China.
The French Revolution - or any one of several - in China.
Think of that, but scaled back to cover only Hong Kong.
For now.
It is a direct challenge to the party's exclusive hold on power.
What a provocation it must be to Chicom nationalist eyes to see in the Times a photo of a gray-haired protester in the street waving the Union Jack, the banner of the former Western, white, racist, European colonial power, or demonstrators rushing around the Hong Kong airport, a youth among them waving the Stars and Stripes, as viewers of CNN saw this morning.
The talking heads of mainstream American cable news, all in varying degrees conscious or unconscious Children of Zinn, are accustomed to demonstrators burning the US flag and interviewees and guests who revile it as a symbol of slavery, genocide, misogyny, homophobia, Christianism - or indeed, simply Christianity - and racism.
They hear and repeat, day after day, that it is the banner of an evil regime of white males that is only a recent outpost of a larger evil white thing of millenia, Western Civilization.
They must have to try hard not to gag, reporting on a courageous democracy movement of nonwhites for whom the Stars and Stripes - and the colonialist Union Jack! Colonialism! What, better a Brit colony than one of the last Red Empire in Beijing? - are symbols of exactly the free society and government they want.
Meanwhile, the Beijing tyrants, relying on the Great Firewall of China to make easier their task, are incensing nationalist sentiment against the demonstrators with dangerous success, portraying them as criminals and terrorists manipulated and funded by foreigners and particularly the CIA.
The clashes have been off and on, and more on than off, since early this year.
The government clearly is in no hurry to send in the tanks and would prefer to wait it out.
And that could work, given enough patience.
Chaos Grips Hong Kong’s Airport as Police Clash with Protesters
And this inane remark by the moron in the White House is both hilarious and disgraceful, exactly as you would expect.
We are so going to get another four years of this orange jackass.
Trump on Hong Kong protests: 'It's a tough situation … but I'm sure it'll work out'
“We’ll what see what happens,” Trump said before boarding Air Force One for an event in Pennsylvania.
“But I’m sure it’ll work out. I hope it works out for everybody, including China, by the way.”
UK should give British nationality to Hong Kong citizens, Tugendhat says
What, does he think they want to be airlifted to East Anglia?
Trump isn't the only moron.
Sunday, August 11, 2019
Why would anyone make this movie?
Sounds pretty much like a right wing attack on liberals and their attitudes, though for days the rwnm has been spinning it as a product of liberal hatred of right wingers, defaming the latter.
But I guess Trump didn't see it that way.
Perhaps he would have preferred a film in which the roles of predator and prey were reversed.
The Hunt: Universal Pictures cancels film release
The Hunt, a satirical film in which liberals hunt Trump supporters and kill them for sport, was due to be released on 27 September.
Marketing of the film had already been put on hold following the El Paso and Dayton shootings.
Universal said the decision was made after "thoughtful consideration."
The Hunt's storyline is intended to reflect the divided nature of US politics.
One trailer for the film was pulled by ESPN.
It was said to open with the sound resembling an emergency broadcast signal.
According to the Hollywood Reporter, the liberal characters refer to their prey as "deplorables", a term used by Hillary Clinton to describe some of Mr Trump's fans in the run up too the 2016 elections.
Without naming the film, Mr Trump tweeted about an upcoming Hollywood release.
He said: "The movie coming out is made in order to inflame and cause chaos. They create their own violence and then try to blame others. They are the true racists and are very bad for our country!"
But I guess Trump didn't see it that way.
Perhaps he would have preferred a film in which the roles of predator and prey were reversed.
The Hunt: Universal Pictures cancels film release
The Hunt, a satirical film in which liberals hunt Trump supporters and kill them for sport, was due to be released on 27 September.
Marketing of the film had already been put on hold following the El Paso and Dayton shootings.
Universal said the decision was made after "thoughtful consideration."
The Hunt's storyline is intended to reflect the divided nature of US politics.
One trailer for the film was pulled by ESPN.
It was said to open with the sound resembling an emergency broadcast signal.
According to the Hollywood Reporter, the liberal characters refer to their prey as "deplorables", a term used by Hillary Clinton to describe some of Mr Trump's fans in the run up too the 2016 elections.
Without naming the film, Mr Trump tweeted about an upcoming Hollywood release.
He said: "The movie coming out is made in order to inflame and cause chaos. They create their own violence and then try to blame others. They are the true racists and are very bad for our country!"
Saturday, August 10, 2019
Sociobiology me this
A man would sacrifice the child to save the mother. You can always get another child.
But the woman would sacrifice the father to save the child. You can always get another man, eh?
At the start, anyway, a man just doesn't have as much skin in the game.
But the woman would sacrifice the father to save the child. You can always get another man, eh?
At the start, anyway, a man just doesn't have as much skin in the game.
Thursday, August 8, 2019
It's true. The slightly further and even further left are making the argument.
The Case for Opening Our Borders
Google "open borders" and you'll get hits at leftier sites like this one and even The Nation, just for starters.
So far as I know, the Democrats have not adopted this even as a long-term aspiration, though they are flirting with moves in that direction with their talk of decriminalization of illegal immigration.
CATO and other libertarians support this position, too.
Forget the wall already, it's time for the U.S. to have open borders
The left regards any consequent decline in the standard of living of American workers or Americans relying on Social Security, etc., as a price those Americans are morally obliged to pay in order to be fair, equitable, just, etc. to the people seeking entry.
The argument that American policy ought to serve the interests of Americans strikes cosmopolitan policy wonks whose own positions are not at risk as ignominiously selfish and deeply immoral.
The standard issue right regards all that as a feature, anyway, and not a bug.
Both sides try to downplay those risks, but neither bunch of partisans can be trusted.
Just another case in which powerful forces on both ends of the spectrum are prepared to undermine the position of the American working class in order to better serve the interests of others.
The cosmopolitan left and the Wall Street right agree: American workers are way overpaid and have it way too good.
Including working class retirees.
Google "open borders" and you'll get hits at leftier sites like this one and even The Nation, just for starters.
So far as I know, the Democrats have not adopted this even as a long-term aspiration, though they are flirting with moves in that direction with their talk of decriminalization of illegal immigration.
CATO and other libertarians support this position, too.
Forget the wall already, it's time for the U.S. to have open borders
The left regards any consequent decline in the standard of living of American workers or Americans relying on Social Security, etc., as a price those Americans are morally obliged to pay in order to be fair, equitable, just, etc. to the people seeking entry.
The argument that American policy ought to serve the interests of Americans strikes cosmopolitan policy wonks whose own positions are not at risk as ignominiously selfish and deeply immoral.
The standard issue right regards all that as a feature, anyway, and not a bug.
Both sides try to downplay those risks, but neither bunch of partisans can be trusted.
Just another case in which powerful forces on both ends of the spectrum are prepared to undermine the position of the American working class in order to better serve the interests of others.
The cosmopolitan left and the Wall Street right agree: American workers are way overpaid and have it way too good.
Including working class retirees.
Just doing their job
What kind of person volunteers for this job?
What kind of person rejoices in this news?
Mississippi Immigration Raids Lead To Arrests Of Hundreds Of Workers
Federal immigration officials raided several food-processing plants in Mississippi on Wednesday and arrested approximately 680 people believed to be working in the U.S. without authorization.
The coordinated raids were conducted by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Homeland Security Investigations "at seven agricultural processing plants across Mississippi," according to an ICE statement.
In addition to the arrests, agents seized company business records.
More than 600 ICE agents were involved in the raids, surrounding the perimeters of the targeted plants to prevent workers, mainly Latino immigrants, from escaping.
The actions were centered on plants near Jackson owned by five companies, according to The Associated Press.
TV news is saying many of those taken for deportation were parents whose kids, at school, were left behind.
Giving OITNB further relevance.
Is it worth the trouble mentioning that nothing Trump or the Republicans are doing will prevent or even delay the impending sorpasso, the demographic shift in which non-Hispanic whites stop being a majority of the US population.
[Yes, I am repurposing a word that had a very different meaning during the later days of the Cold War.]
Not that it's exactly imminent.
Guesses vary, but the earliest as to when this will happen is sometime after 2040.
And, anyway, when Hispanic whites are counted in (and why on earth not?), whites right now make up just under 80% of the US population, while when those folks are ignored whites comprise only just above 60% of the US population.
So when will whites, all whites, cease to be a majority in the US?
The Census Bureau says whites will still be 70% of the total US population in 2060, so not soon, and maybe not this century, if at all.
What kind of person rejoices in this news?
Mississippi Immigration Raids Lead To Arrests Of Hundreds Of Workers
Federal immigration officials raided several food-processing plants in Mississippi on Wednesday and arrested approximately 680 people believed to be working in the U.S. without authorization.
The coordinated raids were conducted by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Homeland Security Investigations "at seven agricultural processing plants across Mississippi," according to an ICE statement.
In addition to the arrests, agents seized company business records.
More than 600 ICE agents were involved in the raids, surrounding the perimeters of the targeted plants to prevent workers, mainly Latino immigrants, from escaping.
The actions were centered on plants near Jackson owned by five companies, according to The Associated Press.
TV news is saying many of those taken for deportation were parents whose kids, at school, were left behind.
Giving OITNB further relevance.
Is it worth the trouble mentioning that nothing Trump or the Republicans are doing will prevent or even delay the impending sorpasso, the demographic shift in which non-Hispanic whites stop being a majority of the US population.
[Yes, I am repurposing a word that had a very different meaning during the later days of the Cold War.]
Not that it's exactly imminent.
Guesses vary, but the earliest as to when this will happen is sometime after 2040.
And, anyway, when Hispanic whites are counted in (and why on earth not?), whites right now make up just under 80% of the US population, while when those folks are ignored whites comprise only just above 60% of the US population.
So when will whites, all whites, cease to be a majority in the US?
The Census Bureau says whites will still be 70% of the total US population in 2060, so not soon, and maybe not this century, if at all.
Lying is his job. He works at Fox, you know.
Tucker Carlson Falsely Calls White Supremacy a ‘Hoax’
Numerous critics and media outlets rebuked the conservative Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson Wednesday after he said white supremacy in America was “not a real problem” on his talk show the night before.
His remarks on “Tucker Carlson Tonight” came days after a mass shooting at an El Paso Walmart left 22 people dead and dozens injured.
Investigators said the shooter was motivated by a hatred of Hispanics and pointed to a white supremacist manifesto worrying about “a Hispanic invasion.”
Mr. Carlson also likened white supremacy to “the Russia hoax,” calling it a “conspiracy theory” used by Democrats to divide the country.
Numerous critics and media outlets rebuked the conservative Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson Wednesday after he said white supremacy in America was “not a real problem” on his talk show the night before.
His remarks on “Tucker Carlson Tonight” came days after a mass shooting at an El Paso Walmart left 22 people dead and dozens injured.
Investigators said the shooter was motivated by a hatred of Hispanics and pointed to a white supremacist manifesto worrying about “a Hispanic invasion.”
Mr. Carlson also likened white supremacy to “the Russia hoax,” calling it a “conspiracy theory” used by Democrats to divide the country.
Revolutionary what?
Capitalists and their allies support coups or revolutions against regimes of representative government only if they fear someone else will do it first and use power against them.
Anti-capitalists do it because they cannot prevail, ever, without fanatical totalitarian dictatorship.
And anarchists? Well . . . .
Chile alone could be offered as a counter-example.
A highly questionable one.
But, anyway, one could ask whether it always works out for the best for the generality of people.
Because of the Nazis, mostly.
But not only.
Still, looking at Russia, China, Cambodia, and the rest, the horrible regimes the capitalists have accepted seem much less bad.
Nazis, maybe, excepted.
Wednesday, August 7, 2019
"Other kinds of supremacy"? What?
Trump Echoes Infamous ‘Both Sides’ Quote By Comparing White Supremacy To Antifa
Despite the huge body count in the name of white supremacy, the president suggested “other kinds of supremacy” are an equal threat.
Despite the huge body count in the name of white supremacy, the president suggested “other kinds of supremacy” are an equal threat.
President Donald Trump on Wednesday deflected a question about the rise of white supremacist violence in the U.S., suggesting without prompt that “antifa” and “other kinds of supremacy” are hate groups worthy of equal concern.
Trump, speaking to reporters on the south lawn of the White House, was asked what he was going to do about America’s ongoing white supremacy crisis.
He replied that he was against “any group of hate,” under which label he included both white supremacists and anti-fascists.
Antifa are people who, at worst, use bad means to oppose bad people.
"White supremacists" - by which label people refer to dangerous white racists in general - are bad people who use bad means to achieve bad ends.
Not really the same, is it?
And the latter far outnumber the former.
Gun deaths are not all alike
An old woman with a gun shoots and kills two home invaders who have been on a spree and themselves killed several people, raping and beating and robbing many more.
Do those gun deaths count against civilian gun ownership or for it?
The NRA publishes stories like this all the time.
However many or few they are, they show a valid point.
Not all gun deaths are arguments against civilian ownership of guns.
Some gun deaths count in favor of it.
For some people to be shot to death is every bit as much a public benefit whether they are shot by civilians or police in some daring rescue.
Far from being losses, their deaths are public benefactions and result in worthwhile savings of the costs of prosecution and imprisonment.
So, "gun deaths" is not really the statistic we want to minimize or, if we do, then not all of them in the same way.
Sure, we want to cut down on home invaders killing grannies.
But not necessarily gun deaths the other way 'round.
Do those gun deaths count against civilian gun ownership or for it?
The NRA publishes stories like this all the time.
However many or few they are, they show a valid point.
Not all gun deaths are arguments against civilian ownership of guns.
Some gun deaths count in favor of it.
For some people to be shot to death is every bit as much a public benefit whether they are shot by civilians or police in some daring rescue.
Far from being losses, their deaths are public benefactions and result in worthwhile savings of the costs of prosecution and imprisonment.
So, "gun deaths" is not really the statistic we want to minimize or, if we do, then not all of them in the same way.
Sure, we want to cut down on home invaders killing grannies.
But not necessarily gun deaths the other way 'round.
Whoa. The Dude abides.
Men Who Stare at Goats
Like police hiring psychics to find missing children.
Or there's The Men Who Stare at Goats
Even less funny.
Like police hiring psychics to find missing children.
Or there's The Men Who Stare at Goats
Even less funny.
Surely that can't be right. Or maybe it is.
Tucker Carlson Calls White Supremacy a 'Hoax'
OK, let's play along and allow that "white supremacist" means "dangerous white racist".
TC is using the expression pretty much that way, pretty much the way everybody seems to be using it.
So what the heck.
TC, himself infamous for broadcasting the white nationalist "invasion", "replacement", "white genocide" propaganda, says this.
The combined membership of every white supremacist organization in this country would be able to fit inside a college football stadium.”
That might be right.
But that's actually quite a lot of dangerous white racists.
We're talking tens of thousands, right?
Of the sort of folks who could be expected not only to rejoice in but also even to personally participate in violent racist attacks.
He added, “I mean, seriously, this is a country where the average person is getting poorer, where the suicide rate is spiking—‘white supremacy, that’s the problem’—this is a hoax.
"Just like the Russia hoax, it’s a conspiracy theory used to divide the country and keep a hold on power. That’s exactly what’s going on.”
"The Russia hoax"?
On Fox, Carlson continued: “White supremacy—you know, I’ve lived here 50 years, I’ve never met anybody—not one person—who ascribes to white supremacy. I don’t know a single person who thinks that’s a good idea.
So he doesn't know what "ascribe" means and confuses it with "subscribe", in one of its meanings.
Just another C student with a big mouth.
"I don’t—I mean, they are making this up, and it’s a talking point which they are using to help them in this election cycle, obviously, because Russia died.”
Even supposing he's here dropped into using "white supremacy" to mean, uh, white supremacy and not just "dangerous white racism", did he not at the time offer comment on the infamous Charlottesville demonstrations?
Has he somehow remained all this time completely and totally ignorant of who those people were and what they were on about?
A whole panoply of dangerous white racists representing dangerous white racist organizations and urging dangerous white racist agendas, at least some of whom - think of the Klansmen among them, for example - actually do espouse, advocate, and seek to implement white supremacist policies, laws, and so on, in this country.
Think Jim Crow.
Think enslavement of blacks in the US.
Some of those folks at Charlottesville would have told you straight out those were good things.
Did he truly and honestly miss all that?
No, he's just lying.
Does anybody believe him?
Are even his regular viewers too stupid to see it?
Or do they just like it when he lies like this?
OK, let's play along and allow that "white supremacist" means "dangerous white racist".
TC is using the expression pretty much that way, pretty much the way everybody seems to be using it.
So what the heck.
TC, himself infamous for broadcasting the white nationalist "invasion", "replacement", "white genocide" propaganda, says this.
The combined membership of every white supremacist organization in this country would be able to fit inside a college football stadium.”
That might be right.
But that's actually quite a lot of dangerous white racists.
We're talking tens of thousands, right?
Of the sort of folks who could be expected not only to rejoice in but also even to personally participate in violent racist attacks.
He added, “I mean, seriously, this is a country where the average person is getting poorer, where the suicide rate is spiking—‘white supremacy, that’s the problem’—this is a hoax.
"Just like the Russia hoax, it’s a conspiracy theory used to divide the country and keep a hold on power. That’s exactly what’s going on.”
"The Russia hoax"?
On Fox, Carlson continued: “White supremacy—you know, I’ve lived here 50 years, I’ve never met anybody—not one person—who ascribes to white supremacy. I don’t know a single person who thinks that’s a good idea.
So he doesn't know what "ascribe" means and confuses it with "subscribe", in one of its meanings.
Just another C student with a big mouth.
"I don’t—I mean, they are making this up, and it’s a talking point which they are using to help them in this election cycle, obviously, because Russia died.”
Even supposing he's here dropped into using "white supremacy" to mean, uh, white supremacy and not just "dangerous white racism", did he not at the time offer comment on the infamous Charlottesville demonstrations?
Has he somehow remained all this time completely and totally ignorant of who those people were and what they were on about?
A whole panoply of dangerous white racists representing dangerous white racist organizations and urging dangerous white racist agendas, at least some of whom - think of the Klansmen among them, for example - actually do espouse, advocate, and seek to implement white supremacist policies, laws, and so on, in this country.
Think Jim Crow.
Think enslavement of blacks in the US.
Some of those folks at Charlottesville would have told you straight out those were good things.
Did he truly and honestly miss all that?
No, he's just lying.
Does anybody believe him?
Are even his regular viewers too stupid to see it?
Or do they just like it when he lies like this?
A piece by somebody who likes Joe B
Trump Shows His Terror After Joe Biden Calls Out His Racism
Trump isn’t worried about Warren, Sanders, and Harris because they fit into the campaign that he wants to run.
Biden is custom made to cut into Trump’s margin with white voters, men, moderate suburban Democrats, the Rust Belt, and the Midwest.
Donald Trump is scared of running against Joe Biden because he can’t use any of his favorite isms against Biden.
Trump won’t be able to use sexism as he could with Warren and Harris.
He can’t use racism, as he could with Harris, and he can’t use socialism that he could with Warren and Sanders.
Trump is scared.
Trump isn’t worried about Warren, Sanders, and Harris because they fit into the campaign that he wants to run.
Biden is custom made to cut into Trump’s margin with white voters, men, moderate suburban Democrats, the Rust Belt, and the Midwest.
Donald Trump is scared of running against Joe Biden because he can’t use any of his favorite isms against Biden.
Trump won’t be able to use sexism as he could with Warren and Harris.
He can’t use racism, as he could with Harris, and he can’t use socialism that he could with Warren and Sanders.
Trump is scared.
Tuesday, August 6, 2019
Eliot and her politics
Silas Marner, by George Eliot.
It is seldom that the miserable can help regarding their misery as a wrong inflicted by those who are less miserable.
Doesn't sound like a leftist, does she?
Have you heard of How Europe Underdeveloped Africa?
Her utter lack of sympathy with Molly, Godfrey's abandoned wife, speaks volumes.
Chapter 12, for example.
And why is Silas a miser, come to that?
For saving his money or for his anguish at its theft?
It is all he has to keep him from death from exposure or starvation.
But Eliot cannot see that, she cannot paint it into his character.
She sees him full of concern for his gold, but she, and so he, sees nothing of what it is for.
Or she sees it but gives it no weight, at all.
Or she sees it but gives it no weight, at all.
The Youth of Hong Kong want a Bourgeois Revolution
While in America the ignorant young boobs, the kind who used to (still?) wear Che tee shirts, say they want socialism.
"Democratic socialism" is an oxymoron and the only really existing socialism that ever happened in the modern world was the ghastly horror of Communism.
But anyway.
In Hong Kong, It’s Now a Revolution
Hong Kong separatism apart, it's a rerun of the revolt in Tiananmen Square, decades ago.
No doubt it will share the fate of that revolt, too.
Hong Kong : Pékin lance une mise en garde sans précédent aux manifestants
“Nous devons mettre en garde avec fermeté les groupes violents et ceux qui les manipulent : à trop jouer avec le feu, vous finirez par en payer le prix.
"Tous les participants auront à répondre de leurs actes en justice.
"Ce message s’adresse à tous les fauteurs de troubles : ne prenez pas notre modération pour du laxisme, ne sous-estimez pas la détermination du gouvernement central à maintenir la stabilité [de Hong Kong].”
C’est par ce message sans ambiguïté que Yang Guang, du Bureau des affaires de Macao et de Hong Kong, a mis en garde, ce mardi 6 août, les manifestants hongkongais, rapporte le South China Morning Post.
Pékin peut-il s’engager à ne pas recourir à l’armée pour trouver une issue à la crise actuelle à Hong Kong ?
À la question, le porte-parole s’est contenté d’une réponse sibylline :
“Mes réponses ont été préparées, mais je tiens à souligner une fois encore que le gouvernement central est attaché à la prospérité et à la stabilité de Hong Kong.
"Nous ne laisserons impuni aucun acte qui s’en prendrait au principe ‘Un pays, deux systèmes’.”
"Democratic socialism" is an oxymoron and the only really existing socialism that ever happened in the modern world was the ghastly horror of Communism.
But anyway.
In Hong Kong, It’s Now a Revolution
Hong Kong separatism apart, it's a rerun of the revolt in Tiananmen Square, decades ago.
No doubt it will share the fate of that revolt, too.
Hong Kong : Pékin lance une mise en garde sans précédent aux manifestants
“Nous devons mettre en garde avec fermeté les groupes violents et ceux qui les manipulent : à trop jouer avec le feu, vous finirez par en payer le prix.
"Tous les participants auront à répondre de leurs actes en justice.
"Ce message s’adresse à tous les fauteurs de troubles : ne prenez pas notre modération pour du laxisme, ne sous-estimez pas la détermination du gouvernement central à maintenir la stabilité [de Hong Kong].”
C’est par ce message sans ambiguïté que Yang Guang, du Bureau des affaires de Macao et de Hong Kong, a mis en garde, ce mardi 6 août, les manifestants hongkongais, rapporte le South China Morning Post.
Pékin peut-il s’engager à ne pas recourir à l’armée pour trouver une issue à la crise actuelle à Hong Kong ?
À la question, le porte-parole s’est contenté d’une réponse sibylline :
“Mes réponses ont été préparées, mais je tiens à souligner une fois encore que le gouvernement central est attaché à la prospérité et à la stabilité de Hong Kong.
"Nous ne laisserons impuni aucun acte qui s’en prendrait au principe ‘Un pays, deux systèmes’.”
Over the top?
Brzezinski: Trump ‘Seems to Want’ White Nationalist Terror Attacks to Happen
Hmm.
Maybe they're just "an acceptable price to pay".
Hmm.
Maybe they're just "an acceptable price to pay".
Krugman: "The Republican Party decided that a few massacres were an acceptable price to pay in return for tax cuts."
Why has the Republican Party become a systematic enabler of terrorism?
[T]he party remains in lock step behind a man who has arguably done more to promote racial violence than any American since Nathan Bedford Forrest, who helped found the Ku Klux Klan, a terrorist organization if there ever was one — and who was recently honored by the Republican governor of Tennessee.
Anyway, the party’s complicity started long before Trump came on the scene.
More than a decade ago, the Department of Homeland Security issued a report warning about a surge of right-wing extremism.
The report was prescient, to say the least.
But when congressional Republicans learned about it, they went on a rampage, demanding the resignation of Janet Napolitano, who headed the agency, and insisted that even using the term “right-wing extremism” was unacceptable.
This backlash was effective: Homeland Security drastically scaled back its efforts to monitor and head off what was already becoming a major threat.
In effect, Republicans bullied law enforcement into creating a safe space for potential terrorists, as long as their violent impulses were motivated by the right kind of hatred.
. . . .
No doubt some members of Congress, and a significant number of Trump administration officials, very much including the tweeter in chief, really are white supremacists.
[T]he party remains in lock step behind a man who has arguably done more to promote racial violence than any American since Nathan Bedford Forrest, who helped found the Ku Klux Klan, a terrorist organization if there ever was one — and who was recently honored by the Republican governor of Tennessee.
Anyway, the party’s complicity started long before Trump came on the scene.
More than a decade ago, the Department of Homeland Security issued a report warning about a surge of right-wing extremism.
The report was prescient, to say the least.
But when congressional Republicans learned about it, they went on a rampage, demanding the resignation of Janet Napolitano, who headed the agency, and insisted that even using the term “right-wing extremism” was unacceptable.
This backlash was effective: Homeland Security drastically scaled back its efforts to monitor and head off what was already becoming a major threat.
In effect, Republicans bullied law enforcement into creating a safe space for potential terrorists, as long as their violent impulses were motivated by the right kind of hatred.
. . . .
No doubt some members of Congress, and a significant number of Trump administration officials, very much including the tweeter in chief, really are white supremacists.
And a much larger fraction — almost surely bigger than anyone wants to admit — are racists.
(Recently released tapes of conversations between Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon reveal that the modern G.O.P.’s patron saint was, in fact, a crude racist who called Africans “monkeys.”)
But racism isn’t what drives the Republican establishment . . . .
But racism isn’t what drives the Republican establishment . . . .
The central story of U.S. politics since the 1970s is the takeover of the Republican Party by economic radicals, determined to slash taxes for the wealthy while undermining the social safety net.
With the arguable exception of George H.W. Bush, every Republican president since 1980 has pushed through tax cuts that disproportionately benefited the 1 percent while trying to defund and/or privatize key social programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act.
This agenda is, however, unpopular. Most voters believe that the rich should pay more, not less, in taxes, and want spending on social programs to rise, not fall.
So how do Republicans win elections? By appealing to racial animus.
This is such an obvious fact of American political life that you have to be willfully blind not to see it.
. . . .
[T]here are more and more angry white people out there willing to commit mayhem — and able to do so because those same Republicans have blocked any effective control over sales of assault weapons.
A different, better G.O.P. might have been willing to acknowledge the growing threat and supported a crackdown on violent right-wing extremism, comparable to the F.B.I.’s successful campaign against the modern K.K.K. in the 1960s.
A lot of innocent victims would be alive today if Republicans had done so.
But they didn’t, because admitting that right-wing extremism was a threat, or even a phrase law enforcement should be allowed to use, might have threatened the party’s exploitation of racial hostility to achieve its economic goals.
In effect, then, the Republican Party decided that a few massacres were an acceptable price to pay in return for tax cuts.
And yet he's wrong.
They don't sell tax cuts with racism, alone.
There is Christianism, homophobia, Islamophobia, abortion, and a lot more, really.
Everything we identify with Republicanism that isn't racism.
And yet he's wrong.
They don't sell tax cuts with racism, alone.
There is Christianism, homophobia, Islamophobia, abortion, and a lot more, really.
Everything we identify with Republicanism that isn't racism.
A reminder why we miss him
He may easily have been the most decent human being to occupy the White House during my entire lifetime.
Truman was president when I was born.
Barack Obama's twitter statement about the El Paso and Dayton shootings
As for that use of "white supremacy" I deplore it, but never mind.
The statement reminds us why so many of us felt proud to be able to vote for him, send him to the White House, and keep him there as long as constitutionally possible.
While he did not mention the Duce by name it's pretty clear he had him in mind.
Anyway, Brian Kilmeade thought so, and so Bozo thought so.
And he couldn't resist a public reply that basically just cribbed Kilmeade's reply.
Trump responds to Obama over statement on mass shootings
Hm.
Why might Bozo deserve blame that O did not and does not?
What a puzzle, eh?
Could it be . . . . ?
While Bozo has so far resisted gun control measures to help stem the tide, O supported such efforts.
While Bozo and his campaign have furiously demonized immigrants from our south and actually adopted as their own the replacement/invasion propaganda of white nationalist terrorists, O and his side refused inflammatory rhetoric about anyone, and were actually blamed and regularly denounced by T and by Republicans for refusing such rhetoric, particularly about Jihaders.
Could that be . . . . ?
Update.
Is the Duce the most indecent person to sit in the White House in my lifetime?
I think so.
And remember that period includes Nixon.
Truman was president when I was born.
Barack Obama's twitter statement about the El Paso and Dayton shootings
As for that use of "white supremacy" I deplore it, but never mind.
The statement reminds us why so many of us felt proud to be able to vote for him, send him to the White House, and keep him there as long as constitutionally possible.
While he did not mention the Duce by name it's pretty clear he had him in mind.
Anyway, Brian Kilmeade thought so, and so Bozo thought so.
And he couldn't resist a public reply that basically just cribbed Kilmeade's reply.
Trump responds to Obama over statement on mass shootings
Hm.
Why might Bozo deserve blame that O did not and does not?
What a puzzle, eh?
Could it be . . . . ?
While Bozo has so far resisted gun control measures to help stem the tide, O supported such efforts.
While Bozo and his campaign have furiously demonized immigrants from our south and actually adopted as their own the replacement/invasion propaganda of white nationalist terrorists, O and his side refused inflammatory rhetoric about anyone, and were actually blamed and regularly denounced by T and by Republicans for refusing such rhetoric, particularly about Jihaders.
Could that be . . . . ?
Update.
Is the Duce the most indecent person to sit in the White House in my lifetime?
I think so.
And remember that period includes Nixon.
Two dots that don't seem to connect
The Dayton shooter was a bit of a psycho with a psycho interest in violence per se.
And the Dayton Shooter was apparently politically in sympathy with antifa and the further left, and not at all with the relatively center left stand of Biden and his ilk.
And still, so far anyway, those dots don't connect in the Dayton shootings.
Dayton shooter appeared to tweet extreme left views and had an abiding interest in violence
Those two things are true, but not so far related.
Despite the headline suggesting they somehow are.
And the Dayton Shooter was apparently politically in sympathy with antifa and the further left, and not at all with the relatively center left stand of Biden and his ilk.
And still, so far anyway, those dots don't connect in the Dayton shootings.
Dayton shooter appeared to tweet extreme left views and had an abiding interest in violence
Those two things are true, but not so far related.
Despite the headline suggesting they somehow are.
Monday, August 5, 2019
A good editorial in the NYT
We Have a White Nationalist Terrorist Problem
If any white person in any degree concerned by the sorpasso is a white nationalist then there are a lot more white nationalists than realize it, and by far not every white nationalist is a terrorist or criminal of any sort, no more than every pro-lifer is a terrorist.
Come to that, there are a whole lot of white nationalists, in that case, who don't have and wouldn't support a white nationalist agenda of any kind.
And nobody has any business suppressing free speech.
Once and for all (I hope, but know better. So, no, I guess I despair), white supremacy is political rule of nonwhites by whites involving special and repressive measures such as exclusion from office, exclusion from the franchise, or other such measures.
The cultural or political predominance associated with being a demographic majority is not "supremacy", even if the majority is white, though some people seem to use the expression as though it covered that case - obviously a tendentious usage.
[Update. O and others persist in using "white supremacy" as a labor for the mere fact that whites are a demographic majority in the US, and he writes of the concern of white nationalists at losing this status as a fear of loss of white supremacy.
But if majority status is "white supremacy" in the US - and Canada, and many states in Latin America, and all states in Europe - then majority status in every state in sub-Saharan Africa is black supremacy, and majority status in China is Han supremacy, and elsewhere we have Korean supremacy, Japanese supremacy, and so on.
White supremacy bad, other supremacy good?
Tendentious usage is such a bore.]
White supremacy, as a fact or a goal, may, but need not, be associated with or motivated by ideas of racial superiority or other manifestations or varieties of racism.
On the other hand, if we learned that an organization of ethnic Estonians sought to keep ethnic Estonians a demographic majority in Estonia we would have no qualms about calling it a nationalist group or about calling their goal a nationalist one.
So we should have no hesitation applying the label "white nationalist" to any group or person seeking to preserve the majority status of American whites, or to delay its loss, on account of that goal.
Update, 1221 EDT 08062019.
Fears or concerns associated with the sorpasso, by the way, ought not to drive policy or in any way determine an agenda.
Not in the least.
In my opinion, anyway.
So if merely being concerned makes you a white nationalist, your white nationalism ought to be politically irrelevant and empty.
And perhaps it is worth pointing out that though whites are going to cease to be America's majority that does not mean any other race or ethnic group is going to become America's majority.
The nonwhites of America who are going to be the majority are not one race or ethnic group but many, quite distinct from one another.
And American whites will continue to be the largest single racial or ethnic group in America for a long time to come.
The situation of whites in America is not going to parallel the situation of whites in South Africa, or of Chinese in Malaysia, the Ainu or Koreans of Japan, or the Uyghur in China.
In a very real and important sense, white Americans are not going to be suddenly living in a country where somebody else is in the majority.
If any white person in any degree concerned by the sorpasso is a white nationalist then there are a lot more white nationalists than realize it, and by far not every white nationalist is a terrorist or criminal of any sort, no more than every pro-lifer is a terrorist.
Come to that, there are a whole lot of white nationalists, in that case, who don't have and wouldn't support a white nationalist agenda of any kind.
And nobody has any business suppressing free speech.
Once and for all (I hope, but know better. So, no, I guess I despair), white supremacy is political rule of nonwhites by whites involving special and repressive measures such as exclusion from office, exclusion from the franchise, or other such measures.
The cultural or political predominance associated with being a demographic majority is not "supremacy", even if the majority is white, though some people seem to use the expression as though it covered that case - obviously a tendentious usage.
[Update. O and others persist in using "white supremacy" as a labor for the mere fact that whites are a demographic majority in the US, and he writes of the concern of white nationalists at losing this status as a fear of loss of white supremacy.
But if majority status is "white supremacy" in the US - and Canada, and many states in Latin America, and all states in Europe - then majority status in every state in sub-Saharan Africa is black supremacy, and majority status in China is Han supremacy, and elsewhere we have Korean supremacy, Japanese supremacy, and so on.
White supremacy bad, other supremacy good?
Tendentious usage is such a bore.]
White supremacy, as a fact or a goal, may, but need not, be associated with or motivated by ideas of racial superiority or other manifestations or varieties of racism.
On the other hand, if we learned that an organization of ethnic Estonians sought to keep ethnic Estonians a demographic majority in Estonia we would have no qualms about calling it a nationalist group or about calling their goal a nationalist one.
So we should have no hesitation applying the label "white nationalist" to any group or person seeking to preserve the majority status of American whites, or to delay its loss, on account of that goal.
Update, 1221 EDT 08062019.
Fears or concerns associated with the sorpasso, by the way, ought not to drive policy or in any way determine an agenda.
Not in the least.
In my opinion, anyway.
So if merely being concerned makes you a white nationalist, your white nationalism ought to be politically irrelevant and empty.
And perhaps it is worth pointing out that though whites are going to cease to be America's majority that does not mean any other race or ethnic group is going to become America's majority.
The nonwhites of America who are going to be the majority are not one race or ethnic group but many, quite distinct from one another.
And American whites will continue to be the largest single racial or ethnic group in America for a long time to come.
The situation of whites in America is not going to parallel the situation of whites in South Africa, or of Chinese in Malaysia, the Ainu or Koreans of Japan, or the Uyghur in China.
In a very real and important sense, white Americans are not going to be suddenly living in a country where somebody else is in the majority.
I had the Dayton shooter completely wrong
Not a right wing politically motivated killer at all.
A Democrat, and the killings don't appear to have had any political motivation.
Sunday, August 4, 2019
What's in a name?
Why are people referring to these white Nativist killers generically, or individually, as white supremacists?
What's the foundation for that?
What we know is that they resent, fear, and want to stop nonwhite immigration in order to at least delay the approaching demographic sorpasso that will happen when the nonwhites of America outnumber the whites.
That makes them white Nativists.
That does not make them white supremacists.
But maybe there is material in those manifestoes that shows they are that, too.
What, I wonder.
Sen. Brian Schatz: "We have a white supremacist problem"
Santorum: "The person in El Paso is a white supremacist."
Everybody seems to be calling these guys that, today.
Maybe this absurdly broad usage at the ADL helps explain it.
White supremacy is a term used to characterize various belief systems central to which are one or more of the following key tenets: 1) whites should have dominance over people of other backgrounds, especially where they may co- exist; 2) whites should live by themselves in a whites-only society; 3) white people have their own "culture" that is superior to other cultures; 4) white people are genetically superior to other people.
In truth I would have thought belief in point 1 is, all by itself, the sum and substance of white supremacism, taking "other backgrounds" to (somehow) mean "other races".
And is that actually what these guys think or want?
Wanting white Americans to be spared slipping into minority status in the US is not and does not entail that, nor any others of the 4 points the ADL identified (though I suppose it's a safe bet these guys accept 3 and 4 in that ADL list, and maybe even 2 as some sort of ideal case).
And it's certainly not what the exterminationist fans of The Turner Diaries want.
They don't want to rule people of other races. They want to kill all of them.
Anyway, the ADL takes a considerably broader view than seems to be common in online dictionaries.
Here's one that's typical.
Definition of white supremacist : a person who believes that the white race is inherently superior to other races and that white people should have control over people of other races.
But that's to my mind too restrictive, since anyone who believed the second but not the first would not count as a white supremacist, on this definition; that seems wrong to me.
Update.
It seems right to call them white nationalists, too.
We would not hesitate, I think, to call a group of ethnic Estonians out to ensure ethnic Estonians remain a majority in Estonia rather than being eclipsed by Russian immigrants a group of Estonian nationalists.
The analogy is close enough.
What's the foundation for that?
What we know is that they resent, fear, and want to stop nonwhite immigration in order to at least delay the approaching demographic sorpasso that will happen when the nonwhites of America outnumber the whites.
That makes them white Nativists.
That does not make them white supremacists.
But maybe there is material in those manifestoes that shows they are that, too.
What, I wonder.
Sen. Brian Schatz: "We have a white supremacist problem"
Santorum: "The person in El Paso is a white supremacist."
Everybody seems to be calling these guys that, today.
Maybe this absurdly broad usage at the ADL helps explain it.
White supremacy is a term used to characterize various belief systems central to which are one or more of the following key tenets: 1) whites should have dominance over people of other backgrounds, especially where they may co- exist; 2) whites should live by themselves in a whites-only society; 3) white people have their own "culture" that is superior to other cultures; 4) white people are genetically superior to other people.
In truth I would have thought belief in point 1 is, all by itself, the sum and substance of white supremacism, taking "other backgrounds" to (somehow) mean "other races".
And is that actually what these guys think or want?
Wanting white Americans to be spared slipping into minority status in the US is not and does not entail that, nor any others of the 4 points the ADL identified (though I suppose it's a safe bet these guys accept 3 and 4 in that ADL list, and maybe even 2 as some sort of ideal case).
And it's certainly not what the exterminationist fans of The Turner Diaries want.
They don't want to rule people of other races. They want to kill all of them.
Anyway, the ADL takes a considerably broader view than seems to be common in online dictionaries.
Here's one that's typical.
Definition of white supremacist : a person who believes that the white race is inherently superior to other races and that white people should have control over people of other races.
But that's to my mind too restrictive, since anyone who believed the second but not the first would not count as a white supremacist, on this definition; that seems wrong to me.
Update.
It seems right to call them white nationalists, too.
We would not hesitate, I think, to call a group of ethnic Estonians out to ensure ethnic Estonians remain a majority in Estonia rather than being eclipsed by Russian immigrants a group of Estonian nationalists.
The analogy is close enough.
Not the only string to his bow, actually
Donald Trump's 'go back' comments were 'genius', says Nigel Farage
Johnson was actually right.
Not every horrific, offensive, disgusting, or unforgiveable remark made by a racist is a racist remark.
Not even those clearly intended to pander to the racism of others.
Johnson was actually right.
Not every horrific, offensive, disgusting, or unforgiveable remark made by a racist is a racist remark.
Not even those clearly intended to pander to the racism of others.
When did he avow it?
Beto O’Rourke on Trump and El Paso: 'He is an open, avowed racist'
Beto O’Rourke, the Democratic presidential candidate and former Texas representative in the US Houses, was asked by the CNN host Jake Tapper on Sunday about Donald Trump:
“Do you think President Trump is a white nationalist?”
“The things that he has said, both as a candidate and then as president of the United States, this cannot be open for debate.
"You, as well as I, have a responsibility call that out, to make sure that the American people understand what is being done in their name by the person who holds the highest position of public trust in this land.
“He does not even pretend to respect our differences or to understand that we are all created equal.
“He is saying that some people are inherently defective or dangerous – reminiscent of something you might hear in the Third Reich, not something that you expect in the United States of America – based on their religion, based on their sexual orientation, based on their immigration status, based on the countries that they come from.
"Calling those in Africa shithole nations and saying that he’d like to have more immigration from Nordic countries, the whitest place on planet Earth today. Again, let’s be very clear about what is causing this and who the president is.
“He is an open, avowed racist and is encouraging more racism in this country.”
That he is a racist is not much open to doubt, just as Beto claims.
But most of what Beto alleges here is very much open to doubt, and it only begins with the question when did Trump openly avow his racism.
I have never seen or heard that, but I have seen and heard Bozo volubly deny he is a racist and insist he is, for example, the black American's best friend and political ally and benefactor.
That's all lies, of course, but it's what he has actually said, not what is true, that's in question.
The article quotes more of Beto, and I agree with what it there quotes him as saying.
Beto O’Rourke, the Democratic presidential candidate and former Texas representative in the US Houses, was asked by the CNN host Jake Tapper on Sunday about Donald Trump:
“Do you think President Trump is a white nationalist?”
“The things that he has said, both as a candidate and then as president of the United States, this cannot be open for debate.
"You, as well as I, have a responsibility call that out, to make sure that the American people understand what is being done in their name by the person who holds the highest position of public trust in this land.
“He does not even pretend to respect our differences or to understand that we are all created equal.
“He is saying that some people are inherently defective or dangerous – reminiscent of something you might hear in the Third Reich, not something that you expect in the United States of America – based on their religion, based on their sexual orientation, based on their immigration status, based on the countries that they come from.
"Calling those in Africa shithole nations and saying that he’d like to have more immigration from Nordic countries, the whitest place on planet Earth today. Again, let’s be very clear about what is causing this and who the president is.
“He is an open, avowed racist and is encouraging more racism in this country.”
That he is a racist is not much open to doubt, just as Beto claims.
But most of what Beto alleges here is very much open to doubt, and it only begins with the question when did Trump openly avow his racism.
I have never seen or heard that, but I have seen and heard Bozo volubly deny he is a racist and insist he is, for example, the black American's best friend and political ally and benefactor.
That's all lies, of course, but it's what he has actually said, not what is true, that's in question.
The article quotes more of Beto, and I agree with what it there quotes him as saying.
More white racist, white nationalist, white Nativist violence in two cities in 24 hours
El Paso Shooting: Massacre at a Crowded Walmart in Texas Leaves 20 Dead
A 21-year-old gunman armed with a powerful rifle turned a crowded Walmart store in this majority-Hispanic border city into a scene of chaos and bloodshed on Saturday, stalking shoppers in the aisles in an attack that left at least 20 people dead and 26 others wounded, the authorities said.
. . . .
The authorities identified the gunman as Patrick Crusius, from a Dallas suburb.
He was taken into custody after he surrendered to the police outside the Walmart.
The authorities said they were investigating a manifesto Mr. Crusius, who is white, may have posted before the shooting, which described an attack in response to “the Hispanic invasion of Texas.”
Shooting in Dayton, Ohio, Kills at Least 9
MSNBC says 9 dead and 26 wounded.
Seems everyone else is saying 16 wounded.
At least nine people were killed and 16 were wounded in a shooting early Sunday in Dayton, Ohio, the second American mass shooting in less than 24 hours and the third in a week.
The shooting began at 1 a.m. on East Fifth Street in the city’s Oregon entertainment district, the Dayton Police Department said.
It said on Twitter that officers were “in the immediate vicinity when this shooting began and were able to respond and put an end to it quickly.”
Officers shot and killed the gunman, who was using a long gun, the police said.
The mayor of Dayton was on saying police were there in less than a minute from when the shooting began, and still the shooter was able to kill 9 and wound 26.
He did that in less than a minute.
Police have not yet identified the killer or his motive.
My guess is he's another white racist.
To be clear, so far, most if not all of the killers motivated by race politics this year have been whites consumed with hatred of others.
Only a fool could deny that Trump's endless bellowing about an invasion of undesirables and criminals and druggies and terrorists from the shithole countries to our south has created the atmosphere of heightened racial hostility that has resulted in numerous such incidents since the advent of the Duce.
Of course, it might be said he is merely echoing now and then what Fox and Breitbart scream 24/7, so maybe most of the fault is actually theirs.
And that would rightly be said.
El Paso: Beto O'Rourke blames 'racist' Trump for inflaming hatred
Pete Buttigieg: America ‘Under Attack From Homegrown White Nationalist Terrorists’
The El Paso killer is said by one network to face hate crime charges, and by another to face charges of terrorism.
If that manifesto records a purpose of the killings was to discourage immigration from the south, that would do it.
Violence to incite terror to achieve a political goal by modifying behavior is pretty much the definition of terrorism.
And wouldn't that be a first?
Charging a white racist mass murderer with terrorism, I mean?
A 21-year-old gunman armed with a powerful rifle turned a crowded Walmart store in this majority-Hispanic border city into a scene of chaos and bloodshed on Saturday, stalking shoppers in the aisles in an attack that left at least 20 people dead and 26 others wounded, the authorities said.
. . . .
The authorities identified the gunman as Patrick Crusius, from a Dallas suburb.
He was taken into custody after he surrendered to the police outside the Walmart.
The authorities said they were investigating a manifesto Mr. Crusius, who is white, may have posted before the shooting, which described an attack in response to “the Hispanic invasion of Texas.”
Shooting in Dayton, Ohio, Kills at Least 9
MSNBC says 9 dead and 26 wounded.
Seems everyone else is saying 16 wounded.
At least nine people were killed and 16 were wounded in a shooting early Sunday in Dayton, Ohio, the second American mass shooting in less than 24 hours and the third in a week.
The shooting began at 1 a.m. on East Fifth Street in the city’s Oregon entertainment district, the Dayton Police Department said.
It said on Twitter that officers were “in the immediate vicinity when this shooting began and were able to respond and put an end to it quickly.”
Officers shot and killed the gunman, who was using a long gun, the police said.
The mayor of Dayton was on saying police were there in less than a minute from when the shooting began, and still the shooter was able to kill 9 and wound 26.
He did that in less than a minute.
Police have not yet identified the killer or his motive.
My guess is he's another white racist.
To be clear, so far, most if not all of the killers motivated by race politics this year have been whites consumed with hatred of others.
Only a fool could deny that Trump's endless bellowing about an invasion of undesirables and criminals and druggies and terrorists from the shithole countries to our south has created the atmosphere of heightened racial hostility that has resulted in numerous such incidents since the advent of the Duce.
Of course, it might be said he is merely echoing now and then what Fox and Breitbart scream 24/7, so maybe most of the fault is actually theirs.
And that would rightly be said.
El Paso: Beto O'Rourke blames 'racist' Trump for inflaming hatred
Pete Buttigieg: America ‘Under Attack From Homegrown White Nationalist Terrorists’
The El Paso killer is said by one network to face hate crime charges, and by another to face charges of terrorism.
If that manifesto records a purpose of the killings was to discourage immigration from the south, that would do it.
Violence to incite terror to achieve a political goal by modifying behavior is pretty much the definition of terrorism.
And wouldn't that be a first?
Charging a white racist mass murderer with terrorism, I mean?
Saturday, August 3, 2019
About OITNB
My wife tells me this is the last season of Orange is the New Black.
As it has been in the past, this is truly an excellent show full of wonderful acting opportunities for people who might not otherwise see a lot of work, or such fine work, in a major and popular program.
And as I have been in the past, I am during almost every episode deeply offended by the constant undercurrent of white bashing.
I mean, shouldn't my living room, or any room where I watch TV, feel to me like a safe place?
Why, I feel like such a snowflake.
All the same, the show this season is highlighting the cruelty of Bozo's policy on the southern border, and there I cannot help but sympathize.
Family separation, child imprisonment, deportation of people who've been here since childhood - the horrors just go on and on.
As it has been in the past, this is truly an excellent show full of wonderful acting opportunities for people who might not otherwise see a lot of work, or such fine work, in a major and popular program.
And as I have been in the past, I am during almost every episode deeply offended by the constant undercurrent of white bashing.
I mean, shouldn't my living room, or any room where I watch TV, feel to me like a safe place?
Why, I feel like such a snowflake.
All the same, the show this season is highlighting the cruelty of Bozo's policy on the southern border, and there I cannot help but sympathize.
Family separation, child imprisonment, deportation of people who've been here since childhood - the horrors just go on and on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)