Sunday, October 28, 2018

Emperor Trump

"How well Your Majesty's new clothes look. Aren't they becoming!" He heard on all sides, "That pattern, so perfect! Those colors, so suitable! It is a magnificent outfit." -- Hans Christian Andersen, The Emperor's New Clothes


Like most of us who walk the earth, I gravitate toward those who are like me. Our tastes, education level, culture, language, socio-economic status, and our politics help us choose our friends. At the same time, Facebook and other social media brings together strange bedfellows as we "friend" people that we know or knew but not like us and who we would not necessarily hang out with.

I have a few Facebook friends who are decidedly not aligned with my political beliefs. Most of these people I respect as people. If you know me in person, you know I am a kind, compassionate, and respectful person, and I think I'm pretty much the same behind a computer screen. It is difficult at times to gently confront, challenge, and question on Facebook when insults, abuse, and ad-hominem attacks are often the response. 

I wish I had kept screen shots of my various interactions, but here is one example of an interaction that I was able to find. 

My friend PS posted an article about arming school teachers. It was a public post, but I'm going to remove the names and use initials. The author of each quote has initials in bold. (All quotes are copy-and-paste)

One of her friends commented (in response to another poster, not me):
MM No need to be sorry for your opinion. We have tried gun bans in major cities, gun free zones, improved background checks, more gun laws. IT DOES NOT WORK. It's not the gun, knife, sword, or inanimate object, group, organization, or political party. It is the crazy person determined to do damage. EVERY federal building has limited, controlled access, metal detectors, armed security, open coat, brief case and backpack searches. Their has never been a federal building massacre. The government has decided that self serving politicians, activist judges, and slimy lawyers are more valuable then our children. Israel solved the problem 40 years ago. We've know how to solve it since 9/11. Politicians do not have the will, desire, or pressure to solve it. It's not about money, they "need" the grand standing, media "face time", and re-election talking points. Anything less then comprehensive risk assessment and complete access control is pointless and doomed to fail.
(I know; he was completely wrong to say "there has never been a federal building massacre" We all remember Oklahoma City.)

My reply to the gun issue in general, and partially in response to the above, was:
LSR It's such a faulty argument that regulating "inanimate objects" is worthless and not done. We have tons of inanimate objects that have tegulations that save lives. Elevators, ovens, (and your favorite silly comparison) AUTOMOBILES, paint, anything with an electrical plug, heaters, building codes, on and on. Regulations will not strip weapons from your hands. They will make easy access more difficult. This is the start we need. We shouldn't need to put the burden on our teachers to be soldiers and not teachers.

PS pointed out that no one had mentioned "no regulations." She wrote: "ok, so in MM's quote he is saying that the gun is not at fault, he is not saying there should not be regulations. And I agree with you that inanimate objects have, do, and should have regulations. But banning guns, magazine sizes, etc. is not effective. Taking away lawful citizens rights is not acceptable, and would make the problem worse. Closing loopholes in the system would help."

Fair enough. She pointed out that his comment was railing about "banning guns" (which most of us Libtard Leftist Snowflakes don't want to do, and which has never been done, but that's a whole 'nother topic). My friend was measured in her response. Her friend, however.....!!

This was his response to me:
MM Little Sister Resister, Are you illiterate or can you not comprehend English? I see it over and over from the anti-gun crowd. Add words, paraphrase, change meanings, or flat out lie about what was said. I NEVER said inanimate objects should not be regulated. That is a asinine statement and a bald face lie. I said they are not to blame, they are inanimate (look up the definition). You purposely change the conversation and add "ideas" that are not there. If you cannot be honest, and stay on subject, go the hell back to your "safe space". I have no tolerance for "creative" liars.

Do they not understand that this type of inflammatory, bullying, ad-hominum attacks does nothing to further constructive dialogue? Or want people to continue to try to understand their viewpoints? It really opened my eyes. Many on the right indeed act like bullying, inflammatory jerks! This behavior undermines, not promotes, their viewpoints. Their Supreme Leader enables them to act this way. This type of response does give me another little insight into the mind of the Right, though.

So, my friend PS, who posted the article about arming teachers, I know as an acquaintance, really, from many years ago. We grew up in the same town at the same time. She was kind to me in high school and we did socialize some. My mom worked with her dad. Now, she is a Trumpeter. And I know her to be intelligent and kind. She is a world-traveler, educated, and professional. Though we grew up in the same wonderful (and nearly-homogenous) town, there's no real reason why we should be similar politically. 

Interacting about political issues on Facebook makes me anxious -- probably because I cringe at the prospect of having insults slung at me like Thanksgiving Day mashed potatoes.

Anyway, the inspiration for this post. (Finally Little Sister Resister gets to the point!) This week my friend posted publicly with a link to this Wall Street Journal Op/Ed by David Gelernter. A civil discussion took place on her thread. When it's civil, it is easier to see the reasoning underneath, and I start to understand a bit more. 

Even with the civility, I still got anxious. And anxiety fuels my need to write. This blog is a way to deal with the overwhelming anxiety that the 2016 election caused. And PS's post was part of what left me anxious for a couple of days. My response to the op/ed, and to the many comments on her Facebook thread, was too much for a couple Facebook comments, I frankly didn't want to be subjected to insults, and my questions weren't being answered, so I used it as an inspiration for this post and took to my trusty computer. 

I have two goals in this post. One, to describe the reasons why this Leftist hates Trump. (By the way, we need to embrace that word, leftist. It used to bristle me, but hey! the Lefter the Better, is my 2018 thinking!) And two, to give a glimpse into an individual on the Right's head. 

Mr. Gelernter in his WSJ op/ed, proclaimed to everyone that the real reason Leftists hate Trump -- and therefore America -- is because: 

Not that every leftist hates America. But the leftists I know do hate Mr. Trump’s vulgarity, his unwillingness to walk away from a fight, his bluntness, his certainty that America is exceptional, his mistrust of intellectuals, his love of simple ideas that work, and his refusal to believe that men and women are interchangeable. Worst of all, he has no ideology except getting the job done. His goals are to do the task before him, not be pushed around, and otherwise to enjoy life. In short, he is a typical American—except exaggerated, because he has no constraints to cramp his style except the ones he himself invents.
and

The difference between citizens who hate Mr. Trump and those who can live with him—whether they love or merely tolerate him—comes down to their views of the typical American: the farmer, factory hand, auto mechanic, machinist, teamster, shop owner, clerk, software engineer, infantryman, truck driver, housewife. The leftist intellectuals I know say they dislike such people insofar as they tend to be conservative Republicans.

and
True, Mr. Trump is the unconstrained average citizen. Obviously you can hate some of his major characteristics—the infantile lack of self-control in his Twitter babble, his hitting back like a spiteful child bully—without hating the average American, who has no such tendencies. (Mr. Trump is improving in these two categories.) You might dislike the whole package. I wouldn’t choose him as a friend, nor would he choose me. But what I see on the left is often plain, unconditional hatred of which the hater—God forgive him—is proud. It’s discouraging, even disgusting. And it does mean, I believe, that the Trump-hater truly does hate the average American—male or female, black or white. Often he hates America, too. 

Wow. 

It's hard to know exactly where to begin. I have to say that all of this is rubbish. Absolutely rubbish, and for the Right to be telling the "average American" that Trump is just like them and that all on the Left hates him or them for it, that's crazy. It's so crazy that it is not really worth refuting. We on the Left ARE "the farmer, factory hand, auto mechanic, machinist, teamster, shop owner, clerk, software engineer, infantryman, truck driver, housewife." We Libtards, by definition, want to support all those people! And we, too, have certainty that America is exceptional. It's been a wonderful experiment in government, and our ideals are worth striving for. We are exceptional, but we still have a lot of work to do toward realizing those ideals.

Does Gelernter really think that the majority of Americans (remember, a majority of registered voters are registered Dems, and a majority of voters voted against Trump) are the evil ivory tower intellectuals that Mr. Gelernter fears so much? (The War on Intellectuals is a topic that I've had on the back burner for a long time, BTW, and I hope to complete someday, if Trumpster Fires ever start to wane). 

But my goal here was not to refute bit by bit the ridiculous claims that Mr. Gelernter made. My goal was to explain the real reasons the Left (at least this Leftie) hates 45. As one commenter on the original Facebook thread said, "This is an opinion piece by a Trump supporter proposing to explain the Left. It's completely wrong and seems to me to be an attempt to help the Right dismiss the real reasons that those on the Left dislike trump. Perhaps someone who actually dislikes Trump would be a better person to write this opinion." 

Challenge accepted!

Oh so many reasons! PS suggested that we Leftists don't or can't argue about policy. She seemed to understand Mr. Gelernter when he equated complaining about Trump's policies with being against America. To be fair, her complete comment was:

PS So the article charges the left don't like America.. That is an unfair charged statement. I guess I ignore obvious generalities like that. I can see their point, if you like Trumps policy and think it's what is best for America, being against it makes you sort of against America. But it's not accurate none the less. As you said our difference stem from disagreements on what is best for the country. But instead of hearing the left argue about policy, I see a lot of people scream about how he lies, cheats, is racist etc. It's all directed at HIM not his policy.

OK, so let's start there! Let's talk about policy! Shall I re-post my entire 22 months' worth of blog posts? Hahaha

Here are just a few policies which I detest, and a very few links to illustrate his policies. If anyone wants more links, let me know and I'll point you to some least-biased sources. I really wanted to add links, but it became overwhelming.

Trump's dangerous policies:

* Hobbling science and science research

* Gutting the Department of Education

* Appointing cabinet members who disdain the very departments they lead

* Separating moms from their babies and jailing children

* Hostility to immigrants and refugees; ending DACA

* Climbing into bed with the NRA

* Having had advisors and cabinet members who are in jail

* The gawd-damn wall

* Demonizing LGBTQ people, including wanting to banning them from the military and attempting to make them invisible

* Policies that piss off our allies

* Hostility toward Muslims and the Muslim ban (and the hypocritical policy of protecting rich business partners in Saudi Arabia)

* Policies that harm women, including defunding Planned Parenthood, nominating Supreme Court justices that will overturn Roe v Wade, and policies from A to Z that hurt women and children

* Policies that take away healthcare coverage, especially for our most vulnerable (those who use Medicaid), striving to dismantle the Affordable Care Act.

* Trade policy: tariffs, that are overwhelming opposed, even by his supporters.

* Policies that give tax breaks to the wealthiest of the wealthy.

* Policies that gut our National Parks

* Policies that harm businesses and drive them overseas.

* Policies that deny climate change

* Policies that give favor to Russia

....and there are more but my fingers are tired.


One commenter stated, "Although there are times I cringe at his rhetoric and feel that he is his own worst enemy, he has made my life better and he does not allow my country to be bullied on the world stage. So he makes gaffes, so what?"

So what?? So he is President. of. the. United. States. Gaffes matter. Words matter. Rhetoric matters.

And it's not better to be the bully vs. the victim of bullying. (Giving the benefit of the doubt again. I've never had the sense that the U.S. has been bullied in all the many years I've been on Earth).

To be fair, my life is also better, in one way only. My brokerage account is singing. Yes, the upper-middle-class lives are better, because one thing that is improving in the U.S. is the stock market. Not necessarily the whole economy, because housing is struggling and wages have stalled, but the stock market is going up. As it has for 100 years. And as it will long after Trump is gone.





Am I happy my stock holdings are going up? Yes, of course. To be clear, I was also happy about that in just about every single year since I started investing in 1986, through 15 years of Republican Presidents and 18 years of Democrat. Yes, the stock market is going up. Let's go ahead and give that to Trump. Economists know that stock market changes are not really influenced by any President or his policies, but let's put that aside for now. Yes, the stock market is booming. But that one measure does not make everyone in the country in a better place. It makes us white rich people richer. Happier? Maybe. But I am not happy that my less-fortunate brethren do not have better lives and live in fear of the future. I am not happy that the environment puts all of our happiness at risk. I am not happy for... (scroll up for list!)


And onward about policy:

Not official party-line policies, but these personal habits, which one might call personal policies (He rarely deviates from these):

* His policy about making journalists "enemies of the state"

* His policy of degrading women

* His policy to bully and name-call his critics

* The policy of believing and falling in love with a brutal dictators, including one especially brutal dictator with nukes

* His hate-mongering

* His fear-mongering

* His dangerous rhetoric

* His policy of defending Nazis and White Nationalists and their sympathizers, going so far to call himself a "Nationalist."

* His policy to incite violence against his detractors

* His policies to act like a fascist dictator

* His hiding his tax status and his tax evasion over decades in cahoots with his father

* His policy to lie about everything in order to keep his base intentionally misinformed.


Which brings me to:

Trump's lies and the circular arguments

My friend, in the same thread, when I pointed to this list of all of the falsehoods surrounding Trump, responded:
Well Little Sister Resister, I am not a politifact fan, they are another source that has pledged committed to an agenda. And secondly even in this article they did not say he lied, they say this is a listing of false statement... two totally different things.
(False Statements per wikipedia - "A false statement need not be a lie. A lie is a statement that is known to be untrue and is used to mislead. A false statement is a statement that is untrue but not necessarily told to mislead, as a statement given by someone who does not know it is untrue.")
I know you may think this is a fine point and who cares, but it is a convenient fact that can support you either way you lean, if you don't like him, you see them as lies, if you like him... as i have commented before, that I find him careless with his language. He generalizes and exaggerates. I do not believe he lies. He boasts. Of course i wish he was more careful, but his intentions remain consistent. He's a definite optimist and sees things more positive than they really are, and blames the people that are not optimists (regardless of political affiliation) for the negativity in the world.

Let's take her second bit of thought first.

It's really unfathomable how anyone in this country can use this sort of argument to defend the most lying individual in government in America's history. Even if she distrusts the fact-checkers around the world, people close to the President and his own media mouthpiece agree, he lies, and he lies often.

But let's just give the benefit of the doubt, that he "just boasts." Boasting is harmful too. One can lose credibility quite quickly if one is prone to boasting. And when Trump "makes false statements," this is also un-Presidential. By the very definition that she cited, "A false statement is a statement that is untrue but not necessarily told to mislead, as a statement given by someone who does not know it is untrue." I submit that if any one person should strive to know the truth of the statements that he is about to make, then it is the President of the United States of America. And further, if he is informed that a statement he made was unfortunately -- and unknowingly -- false, then it is his DUTY to correct it!!

I challenge anyone to show my ONE example, just one, where he has backed out of a "false statement" and corrected himself.

Also, she calls Trump an "optimist" which is absolutely mind-boggling. He is one of the most fatalistic public personalities I can think of! Just look at this from the Washington Post: 'It doesn't matter.' 'We'll see.' The Trump Doctrine is sounding more fatalistic every day.

She apologizes for him also by saying he is "careless with his language." This, too, is an unacceptable trait in a President. Just plain unacceptable. I can't think of another President who was described as such. So even if we give him the benefit of the doubt that he "boasts" and is "careless with his language," or "tells falsehoods rather than lies," well, none of that is OK. A President is held to a higher standard. Our country is better than that.

Even if his buffoonery and "gaffes" were not all so full of lies and hate, he would still resemble reasonably presidential President like George W Bush (who we did not feel the need to protest in the streets about). But Trump is full of lies and hate. And I'm not giving him the benefit of the doubt. He lies. Pure and simple. Pathological. And this is one big, BIG reason to hate him.

Let's look at his lies.

How about this doozy, from just yesterday? From Fortune magazine:  'The Greatest Idea I Think I’ve Ever Had.' Trump Repeatedly Boasts About a Vets Healthcare Law at Rallies. Obama Passed It in 2014

Here is a list of his false and misleading claims.

And here is another one.

And here is another one.

And even FAUX News has called him out on his lies.




But my friend and her friends are still act as apologists. And they don't seem to be interested in getting through the lies/false statements/boasts and finding the truth.


Steve Sack 


When she stated that the fact-checker Politifact is "has pledged committed to an agenda" I asked her what her sources for information are, how she strives to find the truth, and how she finds least-biased sources. She said she consumes "anything and everything." I pressed her to name some specific sources, and her response was:
PS Facebook, YouTube, Fox News, CNN, Airline magazine, Conversations with friends... And as I said above, when called to defend some of these ideas I searched the internet for the un-edited versions of the incidents mentioned.

This is interesting to me. And filled my understanding a bit more. Facebook and YouTube are not primary sources. In fact, they are some of the sources of some of the most false "information" available. Airline Magazine? I looked that up, and I could not find a news source called Airline Magazine. There are magazines available on airplanes. I think that may be what she means? Not exactly hard-hitting journalism there. And we know that FAUX News is an entertainment site, an unapologetic mouthpiece for the Right, and not at all a legitimate source. CNN is closer to being a good source. It's more factual, but biased to the left, and it's inflammatory and often speculative, especially in their 24-hour TV cycle with developing stories and talking head opinion pieces. "Conversations with friends," well, I'll let that sit. That's not a news source. There was crickets about my question about how she checks her sources. I asked her what she meant by "unedited versions." Did she mean going to original sources, less-biased sources? There was no answer.

I am beginning to understand that this lack of a desire to find the truth is a large part of the problem with the Right's apologist tendencies.

Another of her friends chimed in on this issue:
NSC We don't use fact checking sites that are basically left-leaning propaganda. That is why you like them....but that does not make them "the truth", any more or less than the sources we rely on are "the truth". The truth is hard to determine, don't be so arrogant that you believe you have the truth and we don't. All media is biased. Until you realize that, you will remain unaware of legitimate ideas and idealogies of the right. Many, if not all liberals I talk with have NO IDEA what we believe or why. They don't listen to what we say, just put up smoke screens and phony "fact check" excuses to make our points "illegitamate". I predict that this election AGAIN will baffle the left as the right wins on Nov 6.


I have no argument that every source is biased to some degree. Each writer is human, after all. But there is a difference between biased and factual. And indeed, there are sources that are least biased and most factual. I wanted to delve further into this and talk about bias, factual reporting, and fact-checking, but it got to be too much to do in this post. So, I will save this interesting topic and all my research for another post.


Thank you for sticking with me and reading all of this. It was cathartic for me to write. It was gratifying that my search for understanding has uncovered a few more stones. It has distracted me from the horrors and violence that befell our nation this week.

Thanks for reading, thanks for resisting. Now, let's get our go-to-votin' duds on and get to the polls!

RESIST! VOTE!


P.S. I've done something in this post that I've never done before in this blog in the last two years. The first one who can tell me what it is will get a coffee gift card from me!



Tuesday, October 23, 2018

Not voting is disrespecting the best of what this nation stands for.

"Not voting is disrespecting the best of what this nation stands for." - - Thomas Hauser


Why should you vote and why you should not not vote? Because voting is a magnificent right, privilege, and responsibility of each U.S. citizen over the age of 18.


Credit: Variety


Voting is a right, and one that was hard-fought for some of us. The U.S. Constitution did not originally have language about who was eligible to vote. States were left to determine voting rights. And it was generally white male property owners who had the right to vote with a few exceptions (female property owners were able to vote in NJ until 1807; a few states allowed freed slaves to vote; some jurisdictions allowed non-white voters provided they were property owners). By 1856, white men who didn't own property were able to vote.

It wasn't until 1870 -- nearly 100 years after the birth of our country -- that non-whites were allowed to vote, when the 15th Amendment was passed. The 15th Amendment reads, "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." Of course, this wasn't functional by any means, as black people were disenfranchised using many methods (poll taxes, literacy tests, intimidation, etc). It wasn't until much later, when the Civil Rights movement rose up and the Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965, that black people were more able to vote. Many people were harmed during the fight that gave rise to the Voting Rights Act. It was hard fought.

Women achieved the right to vote when the Suffragettes fought for passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920, 46 days after the birth of my mother, and 144 years, one month, and 14 days after the birth of our nation.

Thank you, Suffragettes!
Cartoon by Tim Eagan


Eighteen-year-olds didn't win the right to vote until 1971, when the 26th Amendment was passed. Citizens were going to war in Vietnam at age 18, yet they weren't allowed to vote. The 26th Amendment changed that.

Do not let our forebearers' struggles be in vain! Respect their struggle and VOTE!


Voting is a privilege. Though the American system is extremely powerful, disenfranchisement tactics and voter suppression are happening right now. The power to vote was hard-fought, but for many, the fight continues. Not one of us should take that privilege for granted!

Even today, 241 years after this brilliant experiment in a new kind of government began, there is still a struggle for the rights of the people to vote! Many people will have a lot of trouble making their voices heard on November 6, 2018. And that's just not right.

There are reports of Voter Registration purges in multiple jurisdictions, most notably in Georgia and in Ohio. Voter intimidation, especially toward the black community, continues to be a problem, for example in Georgia and in North Carolina. There are voter identification requirements keeping the poor and disadvantaged away from the polls. And we should all be concerned and outraged that the Native Americans in North Dakota, who live on reservations and don't have street addresses, have suddenly been told they can't vote unless they have a street address. That is not right. Period. If here is just one vote suppressed, we have a problem.


Voting is a responsibility. It's one of the biggest responsibilities we have as citizens. We the People are handed the power to choose the people who serve us in our government. It's a huge responsibility to assess and choose the citizens who will do our bidding and do the Right Thing. And to do the Right Thing for the oppressed, for the still-disenfranchised, and for the next generation. We have a responsibility to them to make the world a better place for them.

Voting is Power. Do you want to give your power away??

President Obama filmed this charming video disarming many excuses about not voting.





And why should you not not vote? Well, would you have someone else choose your menu for you every day for the next two years? You craving a steak? Nope, it's gluten-free, vegan broccoli buns for you! Wanting a nice slice of watermelon on Independence Day? Nope. That day is Thirsty Thursday! Only beer, all day. (Ok, maybe that wouldn't be so bad!)  Don't give your power away. Just don't. Don't not vote!!

But the one overwhelming reason you should vote in these midterms is because we have an illegitimately chosen, lying, bullying, misogynistic, xenophobic, Fascist "President" in cahoots with a hostile foreign power and who has pissed off our allies, who is actively working to oppress and and harm every group of Americans other than the richest of the rich, and whose party, in majority power, doesn't call him on his shit. Our wise Founding Fathers, in order to create a more perfect union, created a brilliant system of checks and balances that is wayyyyy off the rails. We must flip at least one body of Congress so that a modicum of checks and balances can be restored before more damage is done.


As a side note, I never bought into the argument, "If you don't vote, you don't have the right to complain." Yes, you do. Whether you vote or not, you have Rights of Free Speech and Freedom of Assembly to complain as much as you want about your government. And that is powerful. But it's more powerful to take the reins, exercise your right to vote, and have a DIRECT impact on the course of our nation. How great is that? It's government of the people, for the people, by the people. But only if the people get involved. 


Need another reason to get involved? I'll let comedian Nato Green outline it for you:





"Nobody will ever deprive the American people of the right to vote except the American people themselves and the only way they could do this is by not voting." -- Franklin Delano Roosevelt

Please, please, take your right, your privilege, and your responsibility to the polls! There's only two weeks left before Election Day! Some of you can go now! Or mail your ballot in today! Me, I love the trip to the polling place on Election Day, with my loved ones, taking the pen in hand and marking that lovely, powerful ballot. To me, it's like Christmas. And I get a sticker!

Spread the word that Uber is providing free rides to the polls, and Lyft is offering reduced fares. Offer a ride to a neighbor. Talk about the issues and the candidates; get people excited!

This group of Massachusetts thinkers brainstormed ways to increase voter participation. It was sobering that more people skipped voting than the number who voted for the winner of the 2016 Presidential election! I love their idea of making Election Day a holiday and really making it special!

And don't stop at casting your vote. After Election Day, I implore you: Stay involved! Pay attention! Read (more than just the headline!). Keep in contact with the Members of Congress who are working for YOU and make sure they work in YOUR best interest. I point you to a previous post, in which I give resources for finding and communicating with your Members of Congress. Make them do your bidding! 



Sunday, October 21, 2018

What do our neighbors think?

"Don't throw stones at your neighbors if your own windows are glass." -- Benjamin Franklin


A Canadian friend (thanks, ROb!) pointed me to an article about what Canadians think of our situation, and this inspired me to look a little bit about our friends and neighbors around the world.


Ed Wexler


Former Canada Prime Minister Jean Chrétien  in his new book, "My Stories, My Times," considers the rise of TЯUMP to be the "end of the American Empire." He cites the protectionist policies are undoing the international prosperity that was fostered by the United States since WWII.

Here is Mr. Chrétien in his own voice. He says they laugh at us.

(apologies; I tried to embed a video of  Chrétien, but it didn't display correctly. See the video here)


But we knew that alaready.



In the wake of the tariffs, the travel ban, the wall, the rejection (really reorganization) of NAFTA, the abolishment of the Iran nuclear deal, the pull-out from the Paris Agreement, the deep concerns about 45's relationship with Russia, and many other foreign policy issues, the United States' reputation is suffering around the world.

This report from the Pew Research Center just came out a few days ago. Here are nine charts about how the world sees the U.S. and its President*.

The short answer is: across the world, people still have favorable views of the U.S., and prefer the U.S. to be the leading power, but they have low confidence that TЯUMP will do the right thing.

This image is striking:

Pew Research

The Pew analysis seems to suggest that China is growing as an international power, but the U.S. is still favored, though there is low confidence that it can maintain the leader role.

Western Europeans particularly have a dim view of the United States' protections of personal freedoms.


Pew Research



Looking at a few countries individually, here is a nice chartt by MSNBC. Pretty sobering.



Here's a nice summary article by Pew saying that the United States' image has been tarnished since the 2016 election. Internationally, there is pessimism about the U.S, though our friends prefer the U.S. to be the leading power.

Several months ago, about a year after the new administration took control, Gallup also conducted a poll about the world approval. Across the world, approval about the U.S. leadership hit record lows. The overall approval rating was at 30%, lower than the previous low record under Bush II, which was 34%. People in the Americas were least approving, at 24% approval rating.

And speaking of the Americas....

It was obvious early on that Mexico hated Señor Xenophobe when former Mexico President Vicente Fox published a series of YouTube videos calling him out. These were so scathing, at first I thought they were fake, but indeed, it's really Mr. Fox and it's really how he feels. They are funny, and they're brutal. Here is one. I'll let you look up the others.






And in Europe. Not such favorable opinions, either. This photo from the G7 summit, originally posted on Angela Merkel's Instagram, speaks for itself.

Angela Merkel's Instagram


Prior to the Summit, British Prime Minister Theresa May said she "trusts" him. She may be the only one in the world! See her comments below.




But the citizens of Great Britain? They protested loudly when 45 made a visit across the pond over the summer. This balloon was launched. Angry Baby! Read more about it here.

Newsday.com

And an artist created a crop circle on a farm in the English countryside to greet the visiting President*:

From The Bucks Herald. In Russian, it reads, "F*ck Trump"


This recent article suggests that the once-chummy relationship between France's Emmanuel Macron and SCROTUS may be chilling. They had a meeting recently, and the one positive Macron was able to point to: "no new conflicts emerged."

I still love this episode of Handshake Wars with Emmanuel Macron:





And back to the Americas and our friends in Canada: the current Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has never had a good relationship with our Supreme Leader.

From Mr. Trudeau's own battle in Handshake Wars...




...To Trump's blasting Trudeau with a tweet after the G7:



...Canadians are not fond of TЯUMP.


Most countries' leaders have more tact and finesse than ours, so their words about him are subtle. The BBC put together a nice collection of quotes from various world leaders.

Here are a few:

Argentina, President Mauricio Macri
On his former business partner, during the election:
Trump is a "totally crackpot presidential candidate," Mr Macri said (in Spanish). "Facilitate the election of Hilary [Clinton]

EU, Donald Tusk
In an open letter to EU leaders, criticising Mr Trump:
"Particularly the change in Washington puts the European Union in a difficult situation; with the new administration seeming to put into question the last 70 years of American foreign policy."

Indonesia, President Joko Widodo, known as Jokowi
On trade negotiations: 
Jokowi is a fan of "mutually beneficial cooperation" with the United States, and wants Mr Trump "to continue to work together to build peace and create prosperity for the world."

Japan, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe
At the White house, ahead of a round of golf:
Mr Trump is an "excellent businessman", adding "my golf is not as good as Donald's, but my policy is: never give in.
"Never resort to the short cuts... I hope to discuss with Donald the future of the world." 
Along with another awkward handshake.

Now, to be fair, there are some world leaders that love him. One, of course, is his bestie Putie. I've written about their love affair in an earlier post, To Russia with Love. And SCROTUS himself admitted that he and Kim Jong-Un are in love!  ❤️❤️


In general, there is great concern around the world, as a CNN international diplomacy writer outlined earlier this year. This should concern each of us! The US is looked at like the grumpy old man across the street. Wouldn't we rather be the host of the block party rather than the ones who have flaming dog-doo left on the front stoop?

Luckily, we can reverse this world opinion. We can show the world that the citizens of the United States are also concerned, and we are going to change things. And the way we will show them is by flipping Congress in just over two weeks and by getting a Progressive back in the White House in 2020. Let's get this block party started!!

Resist! ðŸ‡ºðŸ‡¸ VOTE🇺🇸





Sunday, October 14, 2018

A feminist is anyone who recognizes the equality and full humanity of women and men.

“A feminist is anyone who recognizes the equality and full humanity of women and men.” - Gloria Steinem


Calling all feminists! 


So the #MeToo movement rose up and women found their voices, voices that had been muffled for a long time, individually and collectively.

And Christine Blasey Ford found her voice, and though it terrified her, she contacted her Member of Congress when Brett Kavenaugh was on the short list of possible Supreme Court nominees, bringing the assault he committed against her to the light.

And as a defense, it was supposed that though the poor dear was assaulted, it was not our wonderful, privileged, brilliant, white, Yale grad Brett who did the assaulting. He was falsely accused!

And oh my gosh! We've got to fear for our sons and our grandsons! They may be falsely accused someday!


Drew Sheneman


Let's get one thing straight. Brett was not falsely accused. He assaulted her on that summer night in 1982. He may not be lying when he said he didn't do it. He most likely does not remember doing it. He admittedly was a heavy drinker in high school and beyond to college, and probably beyond that. I don't have to remind my readers that heavy drinkers often do not remember things that happened while they were drunk. He doesn't remember assaulting her. It doesn't mean he didn't do it. She remembers it. He did it.

Republicans politicized the issue of false accusations. Suddenly they found a bit of what passes for "compassion for others" somewhere, maybe from their second toenail on their left foot, and they became very very worried about their husbands, fathers, sons, and grandsons.

People like Donny Jr, who is more worried more for his sons than his daughters.

People like my friend, who posted about this story and added the comment,"As the grandmother of 5 boys, stories like these scare the crap out of me."

People like 45, who said it is a "very scary time" for young men.

False accusations are not acceptable! But the statistics are clear. Only 2-10% of sexual assault accusations are false. Of the 90-98% that are true, only 1.9% of the perpetrators get jail time. So, even if the false reports go further than the report, the repercussions are still very very small that there will be any consequences. Those false reports also have little chance of being believed. That being said, it's never ever right to make a false report, of rape, of assault, or of ANYTHING. False reports cause harm.

So, are the people who are worried about their sons being falsely accused of sexual assault also worried about them being falsely accused of hit-and-run? How about non-sexual assault? Of theft? Of murder? If not, why not?

Are the people who are worried about their sons being falsely accused of sexual assault working to end false accusations by law enforcement? Or those falsely convicted? The Innocence Project estimates that between 2.3% and 5% of prisoners in the US are innocent. Are they outraged about those people sitting in jail?

Are the people who are worried about their sons being falsely accused of sexual assault working to end racial profiling and false accusations against Black people? For eons, Black people have had the police stop them or the police called to investigate them for nothing more than being Black.

Here are just a few cases in the national media lately. This is a fraction of the everyday profiling (aka falsely accusing) that Black people in America endure.

The Starbucks case: Black men arrested for literally doing nothing.

Barbecuing while Black: call the police.

The Harvard scholar arrested in his own home.

The Black man shot in his own apartment by a white police officer.

The Black man stopped by police just this week for babysitting while Black.

It goes on and on and on. Every day. In every community across the United States.

Are the people who are worried about their sons being falsely accused of sexual assault also worried about these men?

No. Of course not. Because falsely accusing people of color is part of the fabric of our nation. Punishing people for being brown is normal. It doesn't threaten the white person's safety/freedom/wealth/well-being. In fact, these kind of false accusations help to keep white people advantaged.

I'm angry about this. Not only for the fact that this hand-wringing by Republicans, politicizing this minor men's issue, risks keeping women MORE muffled, but it spits in the face of the REAL falsely accused, people perfectly innocent of ANYTHING other than being brown.

So be quiet. And put your money where your mouth is. Donate to the Innocence Project, the ACLU, the Southern Poverty Law Center, or another organization that works to fight against injustice. Teach your sons to be respectful of women and to surround themselves with good people, and they won't have to worry about being falsely accused of sexual assault.

***DEEP BREATH***  whew ....anger dissipating....

Now. Let's face it: there are false accusations of sexual assault. It happens and it's a bad thing. How big a concern is it really? Is this really the biggest issue that our brothers, fathers, uncles, sons, and grandsons face? When the President* puts this on the national stage, does it really do men justice? Really and truly? (Ok, so my anger may not be dissipating)

How can we support the men in our lives?

Firstly we can acknowledge that men face unique issues that are worthy of being addressed. One of them is false accusations of sexual assault, but it's one issue of many. False accusations are not the biggest issue that men face. Let's support men by acknowledging their difficult issues.

What about their own sexual abuse? Men are also unlikely to report sexual assault, for the very same reasons --maybe even to the nth degree--that women are. And this analysis shows that men are more likely to be raped than to be falsely accused of committing rape.

Men have great deal of pressure to live up to the masculinity that society expects of them, and this pressure can lead to anxiety, depression, and violence.

Men are falling behind in education. More women than men are enrolling in and graduating from college.

Men have a lower life expectancy than women.

Fathers tend to have a role as second-fiddle in parenting, facing workplace inequalities in parental leave and facing custody battles.

Men often face mental health issues with regard to sexual orientation and gender identity.

Men are more likely to have violence in their lives, from getting in fights, to joining gangs, to going go war, to committing and being victimized by violent crime.

and many other issues.

If we want to support the men in our lives, and bring men's issues to the forefront of the National Conversation, false accusation of rape is really pretty far down the list.


The #MeToo movement is not a War on Men. Men aren't the enemy. Within the parameters of the #MeToo movement, they are not victims, unless they too were sexually assaulted. And then we shall listen to them when they also say, "Me too."

What Republicans are really afraid of is not being falsely accused, but of being held accountable for their actions and for having women and minorities gain power.




Human rights conversations should include men's issues. We need to support and lift up all of our fellow Earth Travelers. We all need to have compassion for each one of us. One of the biggest ways to support the equality and full humanity of women and men? Vote the party of Compassion. Vote Blue. Vote Democrat.

Resist. Gain power. Vote on November 6.




Sunday, October 7, 2018

Sooner or later everyone sits down to a banquet of consequences.

"Sooner or later everyone sits down to a banquet of consequences." - Robert Louis Stevenson



Bruce MacKinnon

We've had one more stumble into the yawning rabbit hole of our Nation's demise.

It's really hard to write this. History was made yesterday, when the 115th Senate voted to confirm Judge Brett Kavenaugh as a Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States.

And to every decision, there are consequences. One hundred people, elected to represent our interests, sat and made a decision. And that decision has consequences. Some are big, some are small, but the repercussions of that decision will be lasting.

I have been filled with anxiety and dread for several weeks, and now the reality is that this man is on the highest court. I look at my one-year-old granddaughter, and I fear the consequences that she will face because of it  -- through her whole life. That's a sobering thought.

So what do we take away from the last couple weeks?  (Caution: Debbie Downer stands up below, but keep reading; Hopeful Little Sister Resister comes back!)


Consequences to every last one of us:

1. Our Democracy has taken a astronomical hit. "Due Process" is a concept that is dead. Doing the Right Thing = dead. Compassion = dead. The nation is not only deeply divided, which in itself is not a bad thing, but the very fabric of our Nation is tearing. The principles which have guided us for 241 years are crumpled.

Here is an excellent essay in the Washington Post that lays it out better than I ever could.

2. We've reached a new low in our discourse. A new level of incivility is upon the land. "Incivility" is an understatement. It was sickening to witness what we've witnessed in the last week or so. I could not believe a grown man acting so childish and entitled, challenging and mocking Senators of the United States.

We have come to expect this sickening behavior from SCROTUS. His comments at a rally in Mississippi, mocking Dr. Ford and her testimony, was a new low, even for him. But it's not unexpected. And that fact in itself is incredibly sad.

We have come to expect it from the entitled, elite white old men who lord over the land. It was shocking, but not surprising, when Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), made Brett the victim, and made a spectacle of himself calling the process "Hell."

But the person who wants to be placed to the highest court? Speaking to Senators of the United States of America? Sitting before them to ask them to bestow upon him the honor of sitting on the highest bench? Asking their favor to judge his fitness?

Brett sneered to Sen. Kolbucher (D-MN), "Have you ever blacked out?"  Not once but TWICE.  And to Sen. Whitehouse (D-RI), “Do you like beer, senator? What do you like to drink?”  His graceless questions may have been awkward attempts at filibustering each Senator's five minutes, but it showed his true colors as a boorish, contemptible man-child. Not fit for the highest court in the land. Not fit even to have dinner in my home.

His defense of this angry, sniveling, undisciplined, undignified testimony?  "Look at what you made me do." Another gas-lighting, abusive man in power. Great.

3.  Another branch of our Tri-Corner Government has been dirtied. The one that seemed to be standing firm with nearly unblemished reputation. The Supreme Court, once the hallowed ground for the most elevated, thoughtful, even-tempered, and fair-minded individuals in whose trust we place to hand down far-reaching decisions and to be an integral part of our Nation's checks and balances:  Sullied. Credibility vanished.

Many in the Judge Business advised the Senate not to confirm. The American Bar Association warned not to confirm in a letter sent to the Senate Judicial Committee.

Quite alarmingly, judges on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, D.C, Circuit, where Justice (I shudder to use that word) Kavenaugh sat for 12 years, sent more than a dozen letters to Chief Justice Roberts, complaining of judicial misconduct on the part of Brett Kavenaugh. Justice Roberts did not act on the complaints, and now they are forever buried.

And perhaps most dismaying, Justice Kagan has grave concerns about this appointment and what in means for our Nation.  She laments, "It's an incredibly important thing for the court to guard is this reputation of being impartial, being neutral and not being simply extension of a terribly polarizing process." She fears that the Court will lose legitimacy. I've wondered over the last week what the other Justices think of him and the trajectory of the Court. Perhaps someday we'll hear from more of them.

Never in our history has there been so many misgivings about a Supreme Court nominee, from top to bottom, in this country. The Supreme Court is deeply wounded.

4...
5...
6....
repercussions to the country. You can fill in with more (or comment below).

Bill Day 


Consequences to our children:

Girls' and women's beliefs that they don't count, that they won't be believed, that there are no consequences to their attackers, are being cemented.

Boys' and men's beliefs that women don't count, that no one will believe them, that they have no consequences to their actions, are being cemented.


Consequences to the Midterms and Beyond:

Here's where we have some positives.

Many pundits have speculated that this issue has motivated the Republican base as it has the Democrat base. I doubt it. And if it has, it has only fired up the basest of the base (and I do mean that in the Shakespearian meaning of base (base (adjective): not showing any honour and having no morals)). I want to believe that most Republican citizens, in their hearts, believe Christine Blasey Ford and do not approve of this man's behavior at his Senate hearing. That's what is in my heart.

And for the rest, they may cheer their Misogynistic Cheeto, but I really don't think they are as fired up and mobilized as those on the Center on over to the Left.

So, the consequences for the Republicans: they are going to get demolished at the polls in a few weeks, and for years to come. And specifically, consequences for Susan Collins. Shortly after Kavenaugh was nominated, there came a kickstarter-type campaign to raise money for Collins's eventual opponent, to be collected from donors only if she chose to vote to confirm him. She voted yes, so her as-yet-unnamed 2020 opponent has a chest of over 3 million dollars already! (Susan Rice yesterday gave an indication that she may jump in the race.)

This article is great. It outlines that Republicans may have won the battle, but Democrats will definitely win the war.

The numbers fluctuate, but in general, there are more Democrats than Republicans, and Gallup reports that as of October, 2107, at least, more of those who identify as independent lean left than lean right. From Wikipedia:
As of October 2017, Gallup polling found that 31% of Americans identified as Democrat, 24% identified as Republican, and 42% as Independent. Additionally, polling showed that 46% are either "Democrats or Democratic leaners" and 39% are either "Republicans or Republican leaners" when Independents are asked "do you lean more to the Democratic Party or the Republican Party?"
And nearly every single one of them is fired up.

Change happens when people get angry. People in the streets ended Vietnam. People in the streets furthered Civil Rights. People in the streets WILL stand up and right our course. I'm sure of it. It'll take time to undo the damages, but it will happen. We need to work together. Next stop: November 6.

And when they are in power again, David Atkins of the Washington Monthly advises that they channel their inner Mitch McConnell and push their agendas hard. Change will happen. Change must happen.


Consequences to our knowledge base: 

Ok, I'm stretching it but I need to find more positives. People are learning. Knowledge is good. We're learning more about sexual assault and its effects. We're learning about the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" (Hint: it's a legal premise protecting the accused in a criminal court. It does not apply to job applicants). We're learning about brain science and the way memories are laid down in our brain. Dr. Ford herself explained a little about the neurology of trauma memories being stored in the hippocampus. (Which by the way, if any one of those Senators can remember what they were doing at 8:46am EDT on September 11, 2001, but not recall what they had for breakfast that morning, they are living proof of the kind of episodic traumatic memory that Dr. Ford described).


Consequences to our Nations Laws:

There are real fears that Kavenaugh's inclusion on the Court will usher in overturning many of our treasured laws. The biggest fear is that Roe v Wade will be overturned and individual States will once again decide if abortion is to remain legal or not. There is also fear that Kavenaugh will be the deciding factor in overturning the Affordable Care Act, affirmative action, and even curtailing the Mueller investigation and giving life to the notion to the President is above the law. Reeeealllly scary shit.

For more reading on the consequences of Kavenaugh on the Supreme Court, read FiveThirtyEight or CNN.


FiveThirtyEight

Though the Court is now more conservative than ever, we have to remember that Kavenaugh is but one voice among nine. He will not be single-handedly changing laws. My heart wants to believe that the process will still work. (please please please let the process work)  And we still have the Notorious RBG!  Please stay alive, Ruth!


Let us consider this other quote about consequences. We who have studied psychology know this to be true.

"The consequences of an act affect the probability of its occurring again." - B. F. Skinner

 Now, it's our job. Each and every one of us must be active citizens of this great country and mete out consequences. Let's get to the polls on November 6. Motivate those around you. Keep the conversation going. Let's get that Moral Compass repaired STAT!  WE CAN DO IT!


RESIST! VOTE!


Tuesday, October 2, 2018

REVOLUTION!

Jim Morin - thanks, Big Sister Resister!


“In the adjustment of the new order of things, we women demand an equal voice; we shall accept nothing less.” - Carrie Chapman Catt

The old white men running Congress have been quaking, and they've been assailing Liberals for assailing old white men. For example, a tweet by the icky ultra-right-wing-nazi-retweeter Rep. Steve King (R-IA):


Here's the thing.

It's not old. It's not white. It's not men. And it's not all old white men. It's the institutionalized version of old white men who have been in power for too, too long in our Country.

It's not necessarily a vote *against* old white men, it's a vote *for* inclusion of many other groups. Heck, if an old white man has a good head on his shoulders and will govern for the "many" and not for the "money," and is not institutionalized in the old white man ways, then heck yeah I'll vote for him! I considered voting for John McCain for example. And I voted for verrrry old, verrrry white Ross Perot! There are plenty of good old white men! But I admit – all things being equal, if there are two well-qualified candidates, I will go for the person who is not an old white man. We need change! And we need diversity!

Simply put, old white men don't represent all of us. They don't understand all of us. We need, among others, old white women, young Latina women, young white men, young Black men, old Black women, AND old white men in government.  We need more immigrant, LGBTQ, low-income, and middle-class Americans in Government.  We need the melting pot in United States Government!

Including the Supreme Court! As Ruth Bader Ginsburg famously answered in 2015 to the question of when will there be enough women the Supreme Court? "When there are nine."


The old white men should be scared. Their house of cards is about to topple. Women are strong, we have numbers, and we are motivated! Indeed, a revolution is coming. We are poised to drain the swamp. The right way. And if this movement "scares" men into behaving better, then we're on the way to better days!

How will the revolution happen? Not only are more women running, as I outlined in my last post, but women are more active in organizing, campaigning, donating, and VOTING. And women are leaning hard left. Since the GOP is the party of old white men, Republicans have every reason to be afraid.



Here is an excellent analysis of woman voting trends by NPR's Danielle Kurtzleben. Read it and check out the graphs she included, some of which I include here.

Historically, women have outnumbered men at the polls, both for midterm elections and for Presidential elections. As you can see in the chart below, according to the Center for American Woman and Politics at Rutgers University, the average turnout is about 42% overall at the midterms and 61% overall for President. Women outnumber men by about 3 points across the board. I'm interested to see what the numbers will be in this election. In past "normal" years, when we were able relax about our government chugging along, many folks let midterms float by without a thought. The 2018 midterms, just five short weeks away, are the most highly anticipated in my memory. I am interested to see what the polling numbers will be.


And women are leaning left. This chart shows the differences in how men tend to vote Republican and women tend to vote Democrat, this year is projected to be a hard left turn for women.



So, yeah. A revolution is underway. With the momentum of the #MeToo movement and the contemptible behavior of so many old white men poised to confirm a despicable man to the Supreme Court, the urgency is real. According to a new poll by Quinnipiac University, women overwhelmingly believe Dr. Ford over Brett Kavenaugh, and are opposed to his confirmation. More than ever, women are ready to revolt.


Make your voice heard. Loudly. Vote in the Revolution on November 6!