Welcome to DCW
Upcoming Events9/26/16 - Debate #1
10/4/16 - VP Debate
10/9/16 - Debate #2
10/19/16 - Debate #3
11/8/16 - Election Day
Tag Cloud2008 Democratic National Convention 2012 Democratic National Convention 2012 Republican National Convention 2016 Democratic National Convention 2016 Election 2016 Republican National Convention Abortion Affirmative Action Affordable Care Act Antonin Scalia Ben Carson Bernie Sanders Bob McDonnell Canada Chris Christie civil rights Delegates Delegate Selection Donald Trump First Amendment Hillary Clinton Immigration Iowa Iowa Caucuses Iran Jeb Bush John Kasich John McCain Marco Rubio Martin O'Malley Missouri Nevada New Hampshire Paul Ryan Pennsylvania Philadelphia polling Puerto Rico redistricting same-sex marriage Supreme Court Ted Cruz Title IX United Kingdom Voting Rights
DCW in the News
Clinton Sanders 2842 1865 56 not voting/abstained Trump Cruz 1537 569 1237 to win
Category Archives: The Politics of Hate
We knew the policy was coming. We should have guessed that Trump would botch it — both in terms of the actual policy and in terms of how it was implemented. Now, we have a fustercluck of a “temporary” Arab ban policy. There are potential legal issues involved which I will discuss below. As a major cautionary note, I don’t do immigration law. Despite what the U.S. Supreme Court may think, those of us who deal in ordinary criminal law don’t really get the nuances of immigration law nor all of the technical terms involved.
Before turning to the potential legal challenges, what has happened over the past five days is exactly why there are usual procedures for issuing executive orders. While Trump would probably have still tended toward the outrageous in this policy, some of the problems might have been avoided if things had been handled better. Instead, we have a policy statement masquerading as a policy.
This morning on the radio, they were asking for people to tweet whether the problem related to Orlando was whether there were too many guns, or not enough oversight on the mentally ill. How very, VERY, wrong a question.
The tragedy at Pulse has so many root causes, and so much blame to go around. I am struck by all the lives affected: the dead, the injured, their families, friends and co-workers, plus everyone who is LGBTQI. And I have questions. Many questions.
First, I have LGBTQI friends. I don’t think of them as L or G or B or T or Q or I — they are my friends. The people I share a meal with, dance with, go shopping with….just plain friends. I used to have a lot more gay male friends, sadly lost to what was then called GRID, before it was AIDS. I’ve watched the struggles over the years: the hiding before Stonewall, the discrimination, the beatings for having been born. The evangelicals say that we are all created in G-d’s image: how do they integrate their supposed love of G-d with their obvious hatred of those created in her image? Rumor has it that the shooter was “incensed” by seeing two men kissing. I don’t get it.
This post is about The Donald, but first, an anecdote to frame the discussion. My dad is a movie buff. He took me to my first film, the story goes, when I was 6 weeks old, all in bunting because “if there are going to be two women in my life, one of them will love musicals”. To this day, my mom, not so big on musicals. My dad took me to revival films, to remakes, to new movies all my life. When he took me to see the remake of The Invasion of the Body Snatchers, in the first scene, when Donald Sutherland is driving in San Francisco’s Chinatown, a man runs into the street, yelling “It’s happening again, I’ve seen it all before.” He is struck and killed by a car. My dad said “That’s Kevin McCarthy, he had the Donald Sutherland role in the original. He has seen it all before.”
I know about Germany in the 1930’s from people who saw it all. From my grandparents, to my childhood chiropractor and dentist who both had numbers on their arms, to the older people who used to explain what they meant by “Never Again.”
I live in suburban Philadelphia in 2016, not Berlin in 1933, and I am terrified.
Last Friday in Chicago was the last straw for me. Back in the summer, when the MSM was making fun of Donald Trump, I assumed what every political junkie thought: Bush v Clinton. And then I saw a Trump rally. I understood immediately the type of people to whom he would appeal, and how broad and deep the appeal could go. Donald Trump, as many have said before me, is the embodiment of where the GOP has been going for years, but with a few twists. That fascism twist. That isolationist twist. That ability to blame innocents and spare the real source of problems twist.
Regular readers of this blog know that a recurring topic of discussion has been how long the Republican Party can stay intact as it now is. For forty years, the Republican Party has been a combination of nativist Dixiecrats, Christian Fundamentalists, economic libertarians, neo-conservatives, and the traditional moderate business establishment. For most of the forty years, this coalition has been a con job with candidates using enough coded phrases and wedge issues on the campaign trail to keep the nativists and the fundamentalists happy at election time, but focusing primarily on keeping the neo-conservatives happy on foreign policy and the establishment happy on economic issues once in office.
For the first twenty years to thirty years this strategy worked well in most places. The gradual increase of Hispanic citizens, however, is altering the demographics (at least in Presidential election years), making it difficult to keep the nativists happy and still have a chance at winning the presidential election. (For Congress and state legislatures, the geographic dispersion of seats plus a little bit of gerrymandering will help the Republicans keep their heads above water for a little bit more). At the same time, the grassroots are beginning to catch on to the con, and they are becoming restless.
Wanting to give a chance for the heat of the moment to pass, I did not post on this topic last week. However, our wonderful politicians to paraphrase another statement, never miss an opportunity to make things worse by over-reacting to the crisis du jour. While it is unclear that the current proposed legislation on refugees actually changes the screening process, the timing of this legislation and the specific requirement that the Administration give periodic reports to Congress is another blunder on the PR side of the war on terror — sending a clear message to the Muslim world that the U.S. sees Muslims as our enemy, even though that is not the case. Several points need to be made (and hopefully will be made by those who want to be President and our other national leaders, but I am not optimistic).
First, and foremost, fundamentalism — whether Islamic or Christian or Jewish or Hindi or Buddhist — is an idea. An idea can’t be defeated by military force. In today’s world, all it takes is a computer (or smart phone) to communicate messages — both to recruit new participants and to coordinate plans — and to transfer the funds needed for operations. While controlling a piece of territory (especially one rich in natural resources) can allow a training program and help with raising funds, it is not absolutely necessary. Thus, if our only strategy is a military one, we face the modern day equivalent of a mythical Hydra — lop off one head (Al-Qaeda) and a new head (ISIS) emerges to take its place within a year or two.
Second, all religions have the potential for a fundamentalist streak, and most religions have some text that can be interpreted to support holy war (call it a jihad, a crusade, or whatever) against non-believers. Most also have texts that can be read to support tolerance and non-violent attempts to convert by persuasion and demonstrating the goodness and truth of the religion. Christians attempting to convince others that Islam is different should first closely examine their own history — even at this late time, we are only a couple of decades removed from the troubles in Northern Ireland and the war in Bosnia, much less the continued mistreatment of gays and lesbians on religious grounds by Christian leaders in Africa. We also need to recognize that all religions have different sub-denominations. If a Muslim tried to lump in Episcopalians with Southern Baptists, both groups would quickly respond about how different Episcopalian beliefs are from Southern Baptist beliefs — although both qualify as Christian and protestant. Yet, in the U.S., we quickly gloss over the differences between Sunni and Shia and all of the divergent schools of belief that fit within each of those two broad categories.
Yesterday, the House passed HR 4038, a bill that expands background checks on certain refugees who wish asylum in the United States. It passed with bipartisan support 289-137. (Full list of who voted how is here.)
If you think this is okay, you could not be more wrong. The whole issue of refugees is bringing out the worst in far too many politicians and candidates, as well as “regular” Americans. And if you think it will stop with Syrians and Iraqis, you have no understanding of history. This is a blight on our collective soul as a country.
Reasons and rationale after the jump.