😱 Words Hurt, and Words Destroy

round challah userpicSince the first Trump administration, I’ve listened to what people say closely, watching for those tell-tale signs that they are MAGA supporters. The reason why was simple: The die-hard MAGA supporters, and much of the MAGA leadership, held values and positions that were diametrically opposed to my beliefs. When they used the signaling words that said, “I’m MAGA”, it took it to mean that they aligned themselves with those beliefs (and particularly, the specific hatreds). I became fearful around them. I became disappointed that people I thought were good and decent could align themselves with people that were anti-science, that were anti-minority, that were racists and even worse. I was disappointed because they aligned themselves with people that on the surface claimed to be supportive of Jews, but who underneath spread antisemetic canards such as the fear of “Globalism” and similar world control garbage. This was came from the words they used, and what those words signaled to me.

I was happy that I didn’t hear such words from the progressive side of the spectrum.

But in the last few months, and especially since the win of Mandami, the growth of the DSA faction within the Democratic party, and the Ed Sheeran debacle, I’m hearing troublesome words more and more. Just this morning, I received a marketing email from Penzey’s, whom I considered trustworthy, using the word “Genocide”. I’ve written and shared a number of posts on Facebook attempting to explain why as this has crystallized in my head, and I felt it was time for a more permanent blog post. In particular, I’d like to talk about two of the more prominent whistles I’m hearing on the progressive side that have me fearful.

The first is “genocide”. I’ll start by saying that the actions of the Israeli (Netanyahu) government towards the innocent citizens of Gaza are wrong. However, I do not believe that the Israeli government was specifically targeting those innocents. The Israeli government was targeting Hamas, which has the specific policy of hiding in civilian areas, and launching attacks from civilian areas. They do this because they know how the Israeli government will respond, and that the response will injure Gaza citizens which has PR value to Hamas. Hamas doesn’t care about Gazans. They divert aid to their own pockets. They don’t establish governmental support to help the people of Gaza. You don’t even see other Arab nations coming to the support of the Gazans.

Genocide is an international crime defined as specific acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. Israel’s intent is not to destroy the Palestinian people. It is not to destroy all Arabs. You don’t see Israel going after Palestinians living legally in Israel. Israel’s actions, while horrific and wrong, don’t rise to the level of genocide. The key factor is intent. Did the IDF bomb hospitals and kill civilians? Yes. Did they specifically target the hospitals to kill those civilians? No. They targeted the building because they had reports that Hamas was using the building. So is this genocide? Genocide requires intent to target a national or ethnic group, and that intent was lacking. Was it horrific and wrong? Yes, and the specific actions should be condemned. But it wasn’t specifically genocide.

The problem is that the word “genocide” is bandied around (with nary a mention of the role of Hamas, or blame for Hamas). This is actually the result of a PR effort from Hamas, because they understand the power of the word, and the connection of the word with the Holocaust, where actual genocide was committed. The two are not equivalent.

When I was in college, I took a course on antisemitism. That course explored the power of words. This was shortly after the Vietnam War ended. They looked at the term used for guerilla fighters in the jungle. “Guerilla fighters” was a neutral term: it implied they were non-governmental, fighting for a particular cause they believed in. But when they were called “terrorist fighters”, it put them in a different light. When they were called “freedom fighters”, that light drastically changed. The terms chosen and used had a specific public relations intent and colored our reaction to what happened. Hamas, and the Hamas supporters, have specifically spread the word “genocide” to describe the horrific actions and collateral damage from Israel’s war on Hamas, because of the specific emotional baggage it brings. Words hurt.

Now, let’s get to the term “Free Palestine”, which we’ve also been hearing this week. I wrote the following on FB, which I think captures my concern well:

I’m reading all the posts about Ed Sheeran, and wondering if all the folks shouting “Free Palestine” and cheering what happened to his tour truly believe and support a State of Israel, with a functioning democracy, living in peace with Palestinian neighbors in Gaza and the West Bank, who are also free from Hamas rule.

That I would support.

But what I fear is that’s not what a lot of people yelling “Free Palestine” and “Genocide” support. And that’s what has me fearful.

And what I fear is that the other nations in the Middle East would not support that. And that’s also what has me fearful.

And what I fear is that the hatred being expressed towards Israel will spill over into hatred of Jews elsewhere. And that’s also what has me fearful.

And I don’t think I’m alone in my fear.

Again, we have a situation where we have a slogan that Hamas has promoted bandied around without specifics. Hamas wants to free Gaza and the West Bank from what they call “the Israeli Occupation” (and “Occupation” is yet another PR loaded word that has an emotional hit). But Hamas never seems to want to free Gaza from the Hamas (or P.A.) occupation; that’s never a stated goal. Hamas wants to be able to remain in Gaza and attack Israel from there, because one of Hamas’ stated goals IS the destruction of Israel as a nation. That’s a stated goal of many in the region.

But those who shout “Free Palestine” never seem recognize that. They blame Israel. They blame Israelis. They attack Israeli citizens, even when those Israeli citizens are equally critical of the Netanyahu government. Their actions are equivalent to attacking all Americans for the behavior of Donald Trump.

Words hurt. I never know the specifics of what those shouting “Free Palestine” mean, so I assume the worst.

And here, my friends, is why these words matter. It was best captured in another post I shared:

Because something very ugly is happening with antisemitism, and I don’t think those of us who call ourselves liberals or civil-rights advocates get to pretend it isn’t happening simply because some of it is coming from our own side.

I expect antisemitism from Nazis, white supremacists and people carrying tiki torches.

What has been much harder for me to process is watching people who would NEVER hold a Muslim American responsible for the actions of Iran, or an Asian American responsible for the Chinese government, suddenly treat a Jewish person in Florida, New York, London or Paris as personally answerable for the Israeli government.

That makes no sense.

A Jewish American is not Benjamin Netanyahu.

A synagogue is not the Israeli embassy.

A Jewish college student is not the IDF.

And criticizing the Israeli government is not inherently antisemitic. Of course it isn’t. Israelis themselves fiercely criticize their government. Palestinians are entitled to human rights, dignity and safety. Palestinian children are not responsible for Hamas, any more than Jewish children are responsible for decisions made by the Israeli government.

We should be capable of holding all of those thoughts in our heads at the same time.

But context matters.

“Free Palestine” said as an expression of concern for innocent Palestinians is one thing.

“FREE PALESTINE!” screamed in the face of a Jewish person simply because they are Jewish is something else entirely.

And I think people need to understand why those words can land differently on Jewish ears today.

They have been shouted during attacks on Jews. They have accompanied threats and violence against Jewish people thousands of miles from Gaza. Jews have been confronted at synagogues, on campuses and on city streets over the actions of a government they may not support, in a country where they may not even live.

So when a Jewish person tells me that those words frighten them in a particular context, my response isn’t going to be, “Well, that’s not what I mean, so you shouldn’t feel that way.”

I’m going to listen.

Here’s the full post:

 

 

Essentially, people are taking their anger over the actions of the Israeli government, which has been fed by the PR machine of Hamas, into anger against people who broadly support the right of the nation of Israel to exist, just like any other nation in the world. As those folks are Jewish, they are then extending that anger into antisemitism, under the mistaken belief that American Jews — that is, individual American Jews — influence the behavior of and support the Israeli government. They take that anger and write antisemitic words on synagogues, and attack people’s homes, and attack people.

Words hurt. Words incite actions.

There is a Jewish story, which you can fully read on the Chabad website. It tells the story of a man who wanted to apologize for the damage done by the rumors he told, and the words he used.

The rabbi looked at him. “Do you have any feather pillows in your house?” “Rabbi, I am not poor; I have a whole bunch of them. But what do you want me to do, sell them?”

“No, just bring me one.”

The man was mystified, but he returned a bit later to the rabbi’s study with a nice fluffy pillow under his arm. The rabbi opened the window and handed him a knife. “Cut it open!”

“But Rabbi, here in your study? It will make a mess!”

“Do as I say!”

And the man cut the pillow. A cloud of feathers came out. They landed on the chairs and on the bookcase, on the clock, on the cat which jumped after them. They floated over the table and into the teacups, on the rabbi and on the man with the knife, and a lot of them flew out of the window in a big swirling, whirling trail.

The rabbi waited ten minutes. Then he ordered the man: “Now bring me back all the feathers, and stuff them back in your pillow. All of them, mind you. Not one may be missing!”

The man stared at the rabbi in disbelief. “That is impossible, Rabbi. The ones here is the room I might get, most of them, but the ones that flew out of the window are gone. Rabbi, I can’t do that, you know it!”

“Yes,” said the rabbi and nodded gravely, “that is how it is: once a rumor, a gossipy story, a ‘secret,’ leaves your mouth, you do not know where it ends up. It flies on the wings of the wind, and you can never get it back!”

When people use the PR-intentional words “genocide” and “Free Palestine”, they are spreading a submessage of hate and creating fear. That is not likely their intent, but it is the message they convey. Just think about the message that is conveyed when people you know are good wear MAGA hats.

Why am I posting this message today? Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement, starts Sunday evening. In the days leading up to Yom Kippur, we apologize for any unintentional wrongs we may have done. I always strive to be careful in my words, to not spread hateful speech, to not use my words to hurt. If I have done so, I sincerely apologize — that was not my intent.

I hope that those reading this — and especially those who are now using the terms “Genocide” and “Free Palestine” — are aware of what those words are conveying to Jews around the world, and the fear those words are raising. I hope that those who support a better life for those innocent civilians in Gaza and the West Bank, as I do, will choose better words.

I leave you with this: Consider the difference between the phrases “Free Palestine” and “Let Gazans Govern Gaza”.

 

Share

📰 Saying the Unspeakable

Recently, I’ve been reading the news and having a bunch of unspeakable (or unpostable) thoughts. Perhaps I should explain. These are thoughts that might be unpopular with the folks that just superficially read the news, who don’t bother to think deeply about the news and consequences, or don’t understand that many issues have deeper complexities than might just be on the surface. Trying to describe these in the short-form post that is FB or other social media doesn’t work well, so I’m turning to my blog. Here are some of these potentially unpopular thoughts:

  • Not Everyone Named in the Epstein Files is a Pedophile. What prompted this thought was Lauren Gunderson. Gunderson is playwright and author; she is actually the most produced playwright of the last 3 years, with many feminist and scientific plays out there. Recently, a theatre company in Rhode Island cancelled a production of Gunderson’s play the Revolutionists (see my review of another production) because Gunderson’s name surfaced in the latest batch of publicly released Jeffrey Epstein-related files. Now, Gunderson has never met Epstein and has never had anything to do with him (as she notes in her response). However, her ex-husband knows him well; one reason (I presume) he is an “ex”. I’ve also seen memes going around saying that anyone mentioned in the Epstein files should be prosecuted and treated as guilty even without a trial.Hopefully, we all agree that pedophilia is bad. But simply being named in the files doesn’t make one guilty of that crime. I write loads of posts and emails that mention Trump; that doesn’t mean I’m guilty of the same crimes. A fundamental notion in the USA is that folks are innocent until proven guilty. The Epstein files should be analyzed, in their unredacted form, to determine those who are likely to have committed crimes. Those crimes should be then investigated to find corroborating evidence, which can then be used by the legal system to bring people to justice. But a simple mention in the files should not be viewed as proof of guilt of the same crimes as Epstein.
    .
    [ETA: There appears to be something similar happening with the boycott against Lifetouch School Photography. Snopes has a nice piece on this, noting that the connection is tenuous. They note: “These claims began because Lifetouch’s parent company is owned by private equity firm Apollo Global Management, whose ex-CEO, Leon Black, has come under scrutiny for his close financial and personal relationship to Epstein. Multiple women have accused Black of sexual assault. Although prosecutors have looked into some of these allegations, Black has never been charged with a related crime. Apollo acquired Lifetouch’s parent company, Shutterfly, when Black ran the private equity firm. Lifetouch’s president at the time, Greg Hintz, was not in the available Epstein files. Further, there’s no evidence that Lifetouch, as a company, conspired with or even corresponded with Epstein. Lifetouch’s current CEO, Ken Murphy, is not in the public Epstein files. Yet because of the actions of a FORMER co-CEO of a twice removed private equity owner (Apollo owned Shutterfly, which owned Lifetouch), schools are cancelling school photo days. This is over-zealousness reminiscent of the McCarthy Red Investigations.]
    .
    And, yes, this means that some guilty men may have finessed the system to suppress sufficient evidence to convince a jury. That’s where the civil courts come in: there’s a lower standard to sue for monetary damages. Remember that OJ was not convicted criminally for the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman; he was convicted in civil court. Further, the low moral standards that come from deep involvement with Epstein likely mean there are often other crimes for which there may be more evidence (and prison is still prison). But we must remember that our society presumes innocence, and the mere mention in the Epstein files or a passing association  therein doesn’t mean the individual is guilty of Epstein’s crimes. There needs to be more than a mere mention.
  • Our Current Election System is Suitably Strong to Prevent Non-Citizens From Voting. Recently, the SAVE Act has been in the news. On the surface, this seems like a good thing: We don’t want non-citizens voting in local, state, and Federal elections. Who could be against that? Well, I’m against this act, because it is a backdoor way of limiting the citizens that can vote, serving to disenfranchise the poor, minorities, the disabled, and women. This article explains things well. The SAVE Act requires proof of citizenship, IN PERSON, at the time one registers. The “in person” is a problem for many, especially the disabled and those who cannot travel or take time away from work. It is a problem for the military. The only acceptable proofs of citizenship are birth certificates and passports, and they must match the name on your ID. The requirement for a passport is a problem: A large percentage of Americans don’t have passports because they don’t travel internationally, or cannot afford the cost of the passport (plus the cost of the pictures and other documents). Birth certificates are also a problem, as some folks simply don’t have them due to home births, or can not obtain or afford them. Plus, if people have changed their names, they then need the extra costs of obtaining the paper trail of the name changes, which might not be acceptable (and remember, each government document will have processing costs). Lastly, all of these takes time.
    .
    More importantly, it isn’t needed. We already have laws that prevent non-citizens from voting, and states already require proof when folks register, and match up information in state databases (for example, they should be able to match up information with the Real ID information which also notes citizenship). Further, despite all the claims by the Trump administration, non-citizen voting is not a problem. Recent research has shown that noncitizen voting occasionally happens but in minuscule numbers, and not in any coordinated way. “Noncitizens are not a large threat to our election system currently,” said David Becker, the executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research (CEIR), which conducted the research. “Even states that are looking everywhere to try to amplify the numbers of noncitizens … when they actually look, they find a surprisingly, shockingly small number.” The fact that there is a “shockingly small number” means that it isn’t sufficient to impact an election — certainly not at the national level, which is what the SAVE Act is worried about.
    .
    In reality, the SAVE Act is just an attempt to make it harder for segments of the population that are likely to vote Democratic to be able to register. It is just a poll tax in disguise. But to speak out against requiring an ID to vote sounds like you are saying just anyone can vote, which is something very different.
  • Denying Passports Based on Non-Payment of Child Support Is Bad. Another item in the news relates to the State Department denying passports to those who don’t pay child support. On the surface, this seems like a reasonable idea. After all, non-payment of child support is a bad bad thing. But think about this in terms of the requirements of the SAVE Act, and suddenly this seems like a bad idea. After all, the goals of this idea can be met in many other ways: most notably, by simply putting the names on the TSA “no fly” list and watch lists at ground borders.
    .
    [ETA: It was pointed out to me in a FB comment that the No Fly list wouldn’t work: That limits ALL travel; passports only limit international travel. Limiting all travel could impact the ability to earn funds to pay child support through jobs across the US.]
    .
    Here’s why doing this by denying passports is bad: Given the SAVE Act, it can also serve to disenfranchise. Now, we do disenfranchise at the state level for some crimes, notably convicted felons. States could certainly choose to do this for child-support scofflaws. But it should be at the state level. If the Feds could do this by State Department fiat, think of what else they could do. Deny passports to naturalized citizens. Deny passports to people whose parents are citizens. It is just the crack in the door to more voter suppression. This proposal has its heart in the right place, but the implementation is flawed.

So, I’ve said it: Three things that on the surface sound like I’m taking the wrong position. But, when you think about them, you come to realize that the opinions of the “court of public opinion” are often not well thought out.

 

Share

A Note to the 45/47 Supporters

userpic=trumpFIrst and foremost, we disagree on political positions. That’s true for every administration. You disagree with the positions and policies when Democrats are in charge, and I disagree with the positions and policies when Republicans are in charge. The party out of power has disagreed with the party in power going back to before this nation was a nation. So let’s set that disagreement aside, for now.

I do hope we can agree with one thing: The Constitution should be the supreme law of the land. We got rid of kings and monarchs when we established this nation, and no matter how much we love a particular politician, we don’t want that politician to be an all powerful king (or dictator). We want the Constitution to be supreme, and we agree that we must follow that Constitution, messy as it is. That also means we have to deal with things we don’t like. You may not like freedom of speech or religion, and I may not like the right to own guns, but they are in the Constitution, so we somehow make it work.

Thus, with respect to an administration implementing their policies — whether or not we agree with those policies — that implementation must be constitutional. It must be in accordance with the words of the Constitution. It must follow the laws established by Congress, for the Executive Branch does not create laws — it ensures that congressionally-created laws are faithfully executed. If it doesn’t like a law, it works with Congress to change the law. Oh, and regulations? Those need to be the executive branch filling in the details regarding a law that Congress has passed. They should not be, essentially, new law.

We have three parts of government to explicitly prevent Kings. Congress makes the laws. The Executive ensures those laws are executed (and takes care of foreign policy, subject to congressional approval). The Judiciary determines whether actions taken by Congress or the Executive are Constitutional and in accordance with the laws passed by Congress (if those were Constitutional).

Alas, this is where we are running into a problem with the 45/47 administration. They are ignoring the constitution, which requires due process for anyone in the country (not just citizens). They are trying to suppress freedom of speech, and trying to impose particular religious views on everyone. They are thumbing their nose at judicial decisions. They are trying to govern by Executive Order. Out of a hatred for particular groups, they are declaring things as foreign invasions that are not invasions; and they are using the media they control to create a false narrative of fear. These are problems.

There is no problem with removing undocumented immigrants. HOWEVER, they must be accorded due process. They must be given the chance to show they are truly undocumented, for America is a nation of its word: If we have given legal permission for someone to be here, we should honor that. Right now, the administration’s ICE enforcement is deporting people without due process, and in doing so, they are expatriating US citizens and legal residents — hard-working Americans, not criminals — with the undocumented. They are not giving them the right to challenge their deportation, or to challenge their imprisonment. That, my friends, is unconstitutional.

The administration is also, intentionally, treating these people with hate and violence. They are grabbed, with no time to inform their family, no way to communicate. Small children are taken to holding prisons, and not given any support or help to navigate the system. Treating people with respect has been a hallmark of America. Are we abandoning those ideals to behave like a tin-pot dictatorship?

The administration is violating law by sending the military to our cities, creating violence where there was only peaceful protest. They aren’t asking the state governments. They are just ordering troops. This, also, is unconstitutional. States control their national guard unless there is a demonstrable invasion.

They are also creating a culture of fear, and disrespecting Congress. They are handcuffing and throwing to the ground members of the US Senate, simply for asking questions (which is their congressional duty). They are disregarding elected leaders of the community, with members of the Executive Branch saying “We are staying here to liberate the city from the socialist and the burdensome leadership that this governor and that this mayor placed on this country and what they have tried to insert into this city.”. No, folks, it was the people that elected this leadership, and government MUST be responsive to the people. This is not a dictatorship; it is a representative democracy whose authority is the Constitution.

So, to the 45/47 supporters out there: While I strongly disagree with your leadership’s policies, as the elected leaders, they do have the authority to work to implement them (just as the other side should have the ability to peacefully protest them). HOWEVER, that implementation MUST be Constitutional. It must come from Congress, and it must accord due process, follow the laws and funding enacted by Congress, and must be humane. It must respect leaders elected by the people.

Here’s a simple test: If the party you don’t like was behaving like this — that is, governing by Executive Order, disrespecting Congress, ignoring the courts, disappearing people without due process, cutting programs and agencies that they didn’t like without congressional approval, assaulting congressional leaders, putting the military in cities without the governors approval to enforce their power — would you find it acceptable? If the answer is no, then that answer applies whomever is doing it. If you find it acceptable, I submit you would be more comfortable in a dictatorship, not a constitutional republic.

The mention of funding was there for a reason. Constitutionally, it is the Congress that has the power of the purse. They are the ones that allocate funds, and the Executive Branch is charged with executing the funding priorities established by Congress. This administration is ignoring that. They are ignoring congressional mandates on how funds are to be spent. In doing so, they are destroying American’s leadership position in science, health, and research. Administrations can change directions — that’s their prerogative. However, they must do it in accordance with the Constitution: They must convince Congress to rescind funding and change the laws regarding how those funds are spent. The Executive Branch cannot govern by fiat and executive order, acting as if it was led by a King or Dictator.

America is a constitutional republic with three EQUAL branches. We’ve been lazy, and have allowed the executive branch to grab too much power. That’s bad when the party you don’t like is in power, and, truthfully, it is bad when the party you like is in power. We’ve also allowed the two-party system to usurp the voice of the people: Our leaders in Congress should be more responsive to what their constituents are saying than what party leadership is saying. Party leadership’s goal is to stay in power, not to do what is right for the nation.

We need Congress to represent the people, and to work together for what their constituents want. Right now, we have members of Congress that are scared to listen to their constituents. They pledge allegiance to what the President says and what the Party says, for that’s what keeps them in power. They don’t listen or care about the impact of those positions on the people they represent. That’s wrong — whichever party is doing it.

In summary, I hope we can all agree that recent administrations have drifted away from Constitutional norms. Congress must listen to and represent the people, and work in their interest (and not be rubber-stamps for a political party or specific leader). The Executive Branch must not make laws by fiat, but must faithfully execute the laws Congress establishes, within the Constitutional boundaries. The Judiciary must be respected and non-partisan, interpreting the law and ensuring it is followed.

Share

Revenge Is A Dish Served … Orange

userpic=trumpRecently, there’s been a meme going around that states that Trump is going after Harvard because they rejected Barron, but accepted the Obamas. Now, that meme is pure supposition; Snopes rates it as unverified. To me, the reason that meme is going around is not its accuracy; it is because to the liberal community, it is plausible. That’s the real problem: We’ve come to believe that the President using the power of his office to take personal revenge on those who he believes has harmed him in any way is normal.

It is not.

The job of the President is to ensure that laws passed by Congress are enforced. He doesn’t get to create new laws; he doesn’t get to selectively enforce laws on those he doesn’t like. The President doesn’t get to take punitive action because someone told him “no”. The President doesn’t get to withhold legally authorized funding because a private organization exercised the right of free speech (or allowed a private individual, attending that private organization, to exercise the right of free speech).

It is clear that the President is selectively targeting Harvard. He doesn’t seem to be going after any other university with equal vengeance, so the impression being given is that this is some form of revenge. We don’t know the specifics, but revenge does seem the most logical explanation. After all, his excuse of antisemitism isn’t strongly borne out, nor would it engender this specific response (it hasn’t for other universities where similar speech has occurred). His excuse of wanting immigration records is also not borne out; HHS and ICE should already know the students on Student Visas that are attending Harvard. No, this is clearly punitive. This is a personal grudge.

We elect the President to work in the best interest of the nation, not himself or his family. We’ve already seen numerous examples of where this President is working to benefit his family or pocketbook.  We also expect the President to have a sufficiently thick skin that he can set aside the personal grudges while in office. After all, we didn’t elect a King (or Queen) that can yell “Off with their head” at the slightest provocation.

Harvard has done nothing to justify the response it is getting from this administration. We need to somehow get our congresscritters and the courts to stop this policies of revenge. I may not agree with what the Harvard students have said to provoke the President, but they do have the right to say it.

ETA: It appears that the attack on Harvard may be motivated not be revenge, but the Heritage Foundation’s Project Esther. The NY Times has a longer exploration of the project. However, it is important to remember that disagreeing with the Israeli government on the handling of Gaza DOES NOT imply agreement with the goals of Gaza leadership. In particular, support for a two-state solution, where it is recognized that both Israeli and a Palestinian nation have a right to exist in peace and with secure borders, is not antisemitism.

Share

I’m Fed Up With These Cuts to Things That Do Good — A Rant

This is something I’ve been thinking about writing for days, even weeks. Bottom Line Up Front: I WANT MY TAX DOLLARS TO GO TO WHAT TR*MP IS CUTTING, NOT ELON MUSK’S MINIONS.

The Tr*mp administration is gutting funding to things like scientific research, the arts, humanities, weather forecasting and research, public broadcasting, health initiatives, education initiatives, and such. Well excuse me, but that’s where I want my tax dollars to go. Why is the government cutting these things? Ostensibly, because they are DEI or “Woke”, but really because Tr*mp’s minions think this is the way to “own the libs”, forgetting that Congress authorized this spending, and Congress has the power of the purse. But then again, Tr*mp doesn’t seem to believe he needs to follow the Constitution, and he has no idea what the Declarations of Independence is about.

So with these cuts, will I at least see my taxes drop significantly, so I can donate the funds to these organizations? Nope. Federal spending is UP under Tr*mp: more spending for his golf trips, paying for DOGE and its staffers, and fighting all the lawsuits his actions start? I don’t want my tax funds paying for his golf or DOGE.

Am I at least seeing prices drop from all of this? Nope. With tariffs, prices are going up up up. Food prices. Commodity prices. Paper product prices. Tr*mp is doing this for a political purpose, and has already indicated he doesn’t care if people get hurt, or what people has to pay. In fact, he’s so disconnected he doesn’t even know what people are really paying.

Perhaps it is helping his investment buddies? Again, not really. He’s created such volatility in the market that those depending on the market for income or retirements have seen TRILLIONS in value wiped away. He single-handedly tanked one of the best economies and brought us to the brink of recession. He says his moves are good for business, but business says they are not. Business needs a reliable way to plan, and his volatility has made planning impossible. So they stop spending, especially with the impacts of tariffs — which business can’t afford to absorb (and he threats to take action against anyone who passes them on).

It is clear that this administration’s policy is not the betterment of the nation, or the following of the Constitution. It is operating from two policies, and two policies alone: (1) “Own the libs” — do anything that is perceived to upset liberals, not caring the impacts of those actions; (2) “revenge for political or personal enemies” — use the power of the Federal government to settle personal grudges.

Well, I don’t want to pay for those policies. I want my tax dollars to fund scientific research, the arts, humanities, weather forecasting and research, public broadcasting, health initiatives, education initiatives, and such. Withholding tax dollars won’t fix it (they are taken from my paychek anyway, at least until I retire). Protests in the street, while putting out a good image, will only lead this administration to more forcible suppression. We must push Congress to “grow a set” and do their job: Remind the administration that it is Congress’ job to increase or decrease spending, and that these small agencies are not where the waste is. These cuts impact people, and more than just “the libs”. Most voters in this country support pennies from their taxes dollars going to these efforts.

Congress: Do your job. This cutting and hurting people must stop.

This is the article that prompted this screed: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2025-05-05/national-endowment-for-the-humanities-california-indigenous-history-missions

Share

Tea Leaves and America

userpic=trumpThe age of American Exceptionalism is over. Tr*mp, and his administration, killed it.

Over the weekend, I’ve been reading the tea leaves, so to speak, and thinking about America’s future and the impact of Tr*mp, 45/47. My conclusion is that Tr*mp is serving as the catalyst that moves American from the “Shining Beacon on the Hill” to a sovereign nation, like any other. Let me explain.

For much of its history, America was just like any other sovereign nation. But during the 20th Century, thanks to WWI and WWII and what came right afterwards, America assumed a leading position among other countries. Thanks to the work of folks like Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson, America began a leader. We resolved worldwide conflicts. We were the leader in science, in medicine, in industry. Our statecraft resolved conflicts; our humanitarianism saved lives. We were the refuge for those persecuted. We were a beacon of justice, a nation where liberty and justice was truly FOR ALL.

Donald Tr*mp, and his minions, have killed that in a few short months. It is unclear if we will ever climb back up that mountain; indeed, to listen to a large portion of the country, they don’t want us to climb back. They think “America First”, but by that they mean “America isolated and self-sufficient”. In that isolation, they don’t realize what they have lost. Here are some examples.

  • Europe. Tr*mp’s horrendous treatment of Ukraine and Zelinsky, who has been a long term ally and who had agreed to give up their nuclear weapons in exchange for promises of American protection, has stunned Europe. More importantly, it has spurred Europe into action. The nations of Europe, working together, are developing a peace plan for the region and will present it to the US and Russia. Europe is also planning to spend more for its own defense (defence), realizing it can no longer depend on America. Is that good or bad? Hard to say, but it does mean that America is no longer the leader in that region that it once was. It is also bad for American defense companies, who were making a lot of money selling arms and munitions to Europe. If America is untrustworthy and imposing tariffs, they may also decide that locally-made is better.
  • Middle East. Tr*mp’s notion of buying Gaza and turning it into a resort has pushed the Arab nations into action, and they are meeting to devise their own plan for the rebuilding of Gaza. This would push out Hamas, and install a new Palestinian Authority 2.0 to govern the region. This could ultimately be a good thing and might bring stability to the region, although the longer term impact on Israel is harder to say. But, I think, if Gaza and the West Bank are governed by a group with no Hamas ties, backed by all the other Arab nations (including those Israel has peaceful relations with), there might be a solution. But the key thing is: America will be on the sidelines of that solution.
  • North America. Tr*mp’s treatment of Canada and Mexico may very well draw these two countries into a tighter alliance, if only for protection. This alliance could spread to the other democratic nations of Central and South America. None of these countries trust Tr*mp.
  • Medicine. RFK Jr. has shut down medical science at NIH, and slowed work on new vaccines. But the health issues will not go away, and others will pick up the slack. I expect to see European consortiums and private industry establishing standards. I see the UN taking a role in selecting the flu vaccine for each year. I see other nations picking up the skills to investigate pandemics and develop solutions. In short, the Tr*mp administration’s abandoning of health science will remove America from the leadership position and make it a follower, just like most nations. America will become, at best, a middle-tier nation instead of the leader in technology and research.
  • Science. Tr*mp’s shutdown of research at NSF and similar agencies will have significant impact on America’s standing in the research community. We will lose funding for students in the industries to attend conferences and learn from others. We will see less research funded. The net impact of this is that other countries will pick up the slack and the leadership. We’re already seeing this with research from China and South Korea, and we will likely see similar growth from India. This adds to the already strong work coming out of Europe and the FSB countries. Remember that this research has been the source of American innovation — not just NSF research, but research done through groups like DARPA and for DOD projects — and this American innovation is what created things like the Internet. No more. The next big innovations will likely come from somewhere else. America as the innovation leader will be no more.
  • Weather. Tr*mp may gut NOAA and the NWS because he is afraid of climate change research, but weather and climate isn’t going away. Other nations will pick up the slack and the science, and will become the leaders in the field. This is an area I can see Canada picking up the mantle, especially for North America, because accurate weather is required for commerce. In the short term, there will be big impacts in lack of preparation for incoming storms, and people will be killed.  This will also impact the American aviation industry; pilots and air traffic controllers depend on accurate weather information to establish flight plans.  Shipping depends on ocean weather. Our commerce will suffer.
  • Humanitarian Aid. People have, and will, die in response to Tr*mp’s abandonment of USAID and similar support. This creates a void that other countries will step in to fill — most notably, China. This is what is referred to as Soft Power, and China excels at this. It will move more countries into alliance with countries like China, India, and Brazil, and reduce America’s influence. NGOs will also pick up the slack, as will faith-based initiatives.

In the longer term, Tr*mp’s initiatives may well do some of what he wants: Isolate America, make America focused on itself. It may reduce some spending, but nothing all that significant. It will certainly increase the grift and fraud from the American oligarchs, but that’s the subject of a future blog post. It will increase the power of Russia, especially as the US reduces the efforts it was taking to stop the interference of Russia in US affairs, where Russia has long wanted to interfere in our elections and control our computer systems.

Will it make America Great Again? No. It will make America less significant globally. We’ll be just another nation, not the leader of the free world. Tr*mp will have abandoned that mantle, and he will have abandoned it in such a way that we never might get it back completely.

Share

Erasers and Names

This morning, while in the shower, I was musing about a post I had read on FB about 15 minutes earlier. Of course, I can’t find it again, but the post was about DOD schools in Europe removing posters and textbooks about the accomplishments of blacks, women, and minorities (Update: I found the article). This was being done in response to the DEI Executive Order. We’ve seen similar things happening over the last two weeks. Posters of women cryptographers being covered at the National Cryptological Museum. Pages on the Tuskegee Airman being removed from DOD site. Numerous examples of the accomplishments of minorities being scrubbed from the collective consciousness.

So my mind went to the question of  why this is being done. And the answer that I came up with is the erasure of history: the eventual end goal is to celebrate only the accomplishments of European White Men, probably Christian. This allows the narrative to be promoted that minorities have not contributed anything, and are therefore worthless. We all know what we can do with worthless things. Yup, they are planning to go there.

The train of thought then went to a different station. It was then thinking about all the names we have out there celebrating these folks. Names on buildings. Names on highways. Names on streets. There was a brief muse on how Trump and the new DOD Secretary want to return Confederate names to DOD bases. Why? Do you have to ask at this point?

But it then returned to all these minority names on schools and buildings. These are much harder to remove, and each name will prompt some to ask the question: “Who was ______?”. The answer to that, my friends, is good danger and good trouble, for we can show the value of minorities.

So we must now intensify our naming efforts. Name those schools. Name those highways. Get the names carved in stone. Make them hard to erase. Work your hardest to prevent the erasure of history.

Oh, and why *this* userpic. If you know TGOV, if it about two women cross-dressing to get around society’s conventional restriction on men.

Share

Wither The Rule of Law?

userpic=divided-nationThere are so many articles I want to discuss, and I don’t want to inundate FB with multiple posts, and BSky has a character limit, so a blog post it is:

I don’t know how, but Trmp and Musk, and their cohorts, need to be reigned in. They must learn that Congress controls the purse and how is it spent. They must learn that the President is NOT a king, and his princes are not all powerful. They need to be reminded that the Constitution is above all, and that oaths are to the Constitution and the laws therein, and not a specific individual.

Share