On the fly and always sly:
+ The impeachment process has began. At least, the beginning of the beginning. Or maybe, imagine the impeachment process as baseball season, and what commenced on March 4th was Spring Training. Say what you will about Michael Cohen's disingenousness and the weight of his testimony last week, it was enough to get the ball rolling.
+ The Democratic Party has never had a concensus on Israel. All this posturing about pledging support to Israel is an absolutely shortsighted way to resolve a thoroughly complicated topic.
+ I grew up watching "Jeopardy," so hearing about Alex Trebek's cancer diagnosis was disheartening. On a personal level, I know pancreatic cancer is pretty much a death sentence. Here's wishing Alex the best.
+ I'm on my way to Austin (again)! More details soon.
(617)
Showing posts with label anti-Semitism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anti-Semitism. Show all posts
Monday, March 11, 2019
Monday, November 7, 2016
Some Final Thoughts on the 2016 Presidential Election
This year, I saw America. This wasn't a specific goal, but the circumstance and result of doing some long-awaited traveling. I spent quality time in seven different states, including a part of my home state of Illinois that I hadn't visited in some time. I nonchalantly interacted with locals, tried things I had never previously experienced, met the spouses and family of good friends, and generally tried to appreciate the atmosphere of an unfamiliar terrain. I connected with some wonderful people and created memories that I'll always treasure, in an attempt to temporarily bridge a gap between age, religion, and culture.
I mention age, religion, and culture because I spent of this time in what would be considered "red state" territory. The atmosphere was humble and relatively speaking, socially conservative. I largely avoided talking politics, even though this brutal election was on nearly everyone's minds. I came to realize that Donald Trump, the multimillionaire who finagled his way to the Republican presidential nomination, represented none of these people.
In the early days of the 2016 presidential campaign, I was baffled by how Trump and his incendiary, nationalist rhetoric was polling ahead of the perceived GOP front-runner, Gov. Jeb Bush. As it turned out his anti-Mexican, anti-Muslim, and mostly meninist platform catered to an ignored demographic, a new silent majority of sorts: social conservatives that didn't identify as Republicans. They were on the fringes of society and politics itself: bigots, rubes, conspiracy theorists. The type of people that make the most appalling hashtags trend on Twitter, who only listen to conservative news-talk pundits like Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh, and Alex Jones and perceive them as beacons and not bilious entertainers. In other words, people who think mainstream conservatism is too out of touch with their toxic beliefs.
Indeed, Trump took advantage of this silent majority, and made Twitter his playground. If the election was limited to one social media outlet, then the New York real estate mogul would be winning decisively. He ran laps around Sec. Clinton, demonstrating a lack of filter and tact not previously seen by a presidential candidate. The woman who would become the Democratic candidate did her best to take the high road until she finally told Trump off. She tweeted "Delete your account," a succinct but oddly flaccid retort. Where Clinton emphasized her many qualifications (and Trump's lack thereof), Trump just kept attacking anything and everything without remorse. The pandering and flame-throwing was incessant, and his status as the fringe right's patron saint was solidified. Clinton knew better than to add gasoline to a flame war, and stayed on the high road instead.
I grew up around mostly Republicans in a shallow-red Chicago suburb. I was raised to not judge a person by their gender or race or faith or creed, even though my hometown circa 1991 was overwhelmingly white and Catholic. That wasn't something to came to me innately; I remember my first grade teacher, a woman of Greek descent, struggling to explain why Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks were so important to American history to a classroom that was over 90% white. I had two minority classmates, a third-generation Mexican-American and a girl who was half-Haitian, half-African American. The Latinx classmate was extroverted and well-liked, but the other girl was awkward, timid, and a bully target. My teacher failed to make her (and our class in general) understand what King and Parks sacrificed to give her the right to be as equal as everyone else. It was until she moved away, about a year later, that my classmates and I realized how awful we were.
When I see the childish antics of Trump's most ardent supporters, I think back to that first grade classroom. They all had something in common: they were rural or suburban and overwhelmingly white, but also left behind in the new economy, expect easy answers to hard questions, and worst of all reluctant to accept that America is more multicultural and diverse than its ever been. They see Muslims, blacks, and the LGBTQ community as threats, but their real-life interaction with them is minimal and they base their fear out of stereotype. As a result white supremacy, anti-Semitism and sexism have shifted from the fringes to the middle of the discussion. Moderate conservatives, or at least Republicans that supported minimally more palatable candidates like Ted Cruz and Dr. Ben Carson, begrudgingly joined the frenetic Trump bandwagon because, well, who else was going to beat Hillary?
Even though the Democrats have labeled itself as the "party for women," there was a time in the early-to-mid 1980s when the GOP headquarters staffed more women than men. Where Democrats have more or less embraced feminism (with some qualms), Republicans have largely been either ambivalent or oblivious. Where the women of the GOP mostly stayed in low-level administrative roles, women in the opposing party ran for office and inspired the next generation to follow their footsteps. The backward legacy of Phyllis Schlafly, the face of anti-feminism, lingers in the GOP months after his death and will likely do so for years to come. If the 2012 election was a deliberation on women's health rights, then 2016 is about what it means to be an American woman, period.
This is the sixth election, presidential or midterm, that I've covered in this blog. I usually end each pre-election missive with a nonpartisan plea to vote, to demonstrate the most basic tenet of democracy. This year, I can't bring myself to play my intercession down the middle. Where Hillary Clinton has many flaws, Donald Trump has proven repeatedly that he is vile and shortsighted beyond redemption. He is shameless opportunist that will break every campaign promise the moment he enters the White House, then blame his failures on everyone except himself. Trump was overexposed as a reality star 10-plus years ago and exhaustively omnipresent now. Say all you want about decades of unproven rumors and right-wing vilification, Hillary Clinton is the only logical choice to be our next president. Someone will bring up Benghazi and the private emails, but someone else will retort with at least 20 things that Trump did. This election is about a leader against a demagogue. Beyond the former first lady, there is no other viable option.
(533)
I mention age, religion, and culture because I spent of this time in what would be considered "red state" territory. The atmosphere was humble and relatively speaking, socially conservative. I largely avoided talking politics, even though this brutal election was on nearly everyone's minds. I came to realize that Donald Trump, the multimillionaire who finagled his way to the Republican presidential nomination, represented none of these people.
In the early days of the 2016 presidential campaign, I was baffled by how Trump and his incendiary, nationalist rhetoric was polling ahead of the perceived GOP front-runner, Gov. Jeb Bush. As it turned out his anti-Mexican, anti-Muslim, and mostly meninist platform catered to an ignored demographic, a new silent majority of sorts: social conservatives that didn't identify as Republicans. They were on the fringes of society and politics itself: bigots, rubes, conspiracy theorists. The type of people that make the most appalling hashtags trend on Twitter, who only listen to conservative news-talk pundits like Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh, and Alex Jones and perceive them as beacons and not bilious entertainers. In other words, people who think mainstream conservatism is too out of touch with their toxic beliefs.
Indeed, Trump took advantage of this silent majority, and made Twitter his playground. If the election was limited to one social media outlet, then the New York real estate mogul would be winning decisively. He ran laps around Sec. Clinton, demonstrating a lack of filter and tact not previously seen by a presidential candidate. The woman who would become the Democratic candidate did her best to take the high road until she finally told Trump off. She tweeted "Delete your account," a succinct but oddly flaccid retort. Where Clinton emphasized her many qualifications (and Trump's lack thereof), Trump just kept attacking anything and everything without remorse. The pandering and flame-throwing was incessant, and his status as the fringe right's patron saint was solidified. Clinton knew better than to add gasoline to a flame war, and stayed on the high road instead.
I grew up around mostly Republicans in a shallow-red Chicago suburb. I was raised to not judge a person by their gender or race or faith or creed, even though my hometown circa 1991 was overwhelmingly white and Catholic. That wasn't something to came to me innately; I remember my first grade teacher, a woman of Greek descent, struggling to explain why Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks were so important to American history to a classroom that was over 90% white. I had two minority classmates, a third-generation Mexican-American and a girl who was half-Haitian, half-African American. The Latinx classmate was extroverted and well-liked, but the other girl was awkward, timid, and a bully target. My teacher failed to make her (and our class in general) understand what King and Parks sacrificed to give her the right to be as equal as everyone else. It was until she moved away, about a year later, that my classmates and I realized how awful we were.
When I see the childish antics of Trump's most ardent supporters, I think back to that first grade classroom. They all had something in common: they were rural or suburban and overwhelmingly white, but also left behind in the new economy, expect easy answers to hard questions, and worst of all reluctant to accept that America is more multicultural and diverse than its ever been. They see Muslims, blacks, and the LGBTQ community as threats, but their real-life interaction with them is minimal and they base their fear out of stereotype. As a result white supremacy, anti-Semitism and sexism have shifted from the fringes to the middle of the discussion. Moderate conservatives, or at least Republicans that supported minimally more palatable candidates like Ted Cruz and Dr. Ben Carson, begrudgingly joined the frenetic Trump bandwagon because, well, who else was going to beat Hillary?
Even though the Democrats have labeled itself as the "party for women," there was a time in the early-to-mid 1980s when the GOP headquarters staffed more women than men. Where Democrats have more or less embraced feminism (with some qualms), Republicans have largely been either ambivalent or oblivious. Where the women of the GOP mostly stayed in low-level administrative roles, women in the opposing party ran for office and inspired the next generation to follow their footsteps. The backward legacy of Phyllis Schlafly, the face of anti-feminism, lingers in the GOP months after his death and will likely do so for years to come. If the 2012 election was a deliberation on women's health rights, then 2016 is about what it means to be an American woman, period.
This is the sixth election, presidential or midterm, that I've covered in this blog. I usually end each pre-election missive with a nonpartisan plea to vote, to demonstrate the most basic tenet of democracy. This year, I can't bring myself to play my intercession down the middle. Where Hillary Clinton has many flaws, Donald Trump has proven repeatedly that he is vile and shortsighted beyond redemption. He is shameless opportunist that will break every campaign promise the moment he enters the White House, then blame his failures on everyone except himself. Trump was overexposed as a reality star 10-plus years ago and exhaustively omnipresent now. Say all you want about decades of unproven rumors and right-wing vilification, Hillary Clinton is the only logical choice to be our next president. Someone will bring up Benghazi and the private emails, but someone else will retort with at least 20 things that Trump did. This election is about a leader against a demagogue. Beyond the former first lady, there is no other viable option.
(533)
Monday, August 4, 2014
My Inevitable Gaza Blog Entry
A few days ago, a tiny independent film called "Guardians in the Galaxy" was released in theaters. Toward the end of the film, a CGI-animated talking raccoon voiced by Bradley Cooper says something incredibly sage and insightful: "Everyone has dead people. That doesn't mean everyone else in the galaxy needs to die because of it."
In spite of its source, this quote applies quite well to major international story of the past few weeks, the umpteenth skirmish between Israeli and Palestinian forces in the Gaza Strip. It's the same childlike "he hit me first," avenging-my-ancestors mentality that has dogged the region since the late 1940s. Unlike past conflicts in the Holy Land, this latest round of attacks and never-ending crusades for revenge has spilled out to social media, where everyone and their mother has been posting and tweeting their opinions for nearly a month now. I've been largely a spectator, but the near-constant arguing has left me exhausted. A fair number of friends and acquaintances are either pretending to be experts or sharing links to op-eds that support their opinions.
I am fully aware that this conflict is complex and convoluted, a fight along religious lines that spans centuries, if not millennia. What I don't think people realize is that if any side in this fight was unilaterally right or wrong, the "war" would have ended decades ago. I suppose the reason why I haven't said anything consequential about this controversy until now is because I'm somewhere between apathetic and burned out. Lately, the mere thought makes me feel lethargic. For that alone, I don't plan on commenting until it all dies down... or whenever Israel and Palestine inevitably start throwing rocks at each other again, I don't know.
NOTE: Thanks to Matthew Kovich for inspiring this post.
(451)
In spite of its source, this quote applies quite well to major international story of the past few weeks, the umpteenth skirmish between Israeli and Palestinian forces in the Gaza Strip. It's the same childlike "he hit me first," avenging-my-ancestors mentality that has dogged the region since the late 1940s. Unlike past conflicts in the Holy Land, this latest round of attacks and never-ending crusades for revenge has spilled out to social media, where everyone and their mother has been posting and tweeting their opinions for nearly a month now. I've been largely a spectator, but the near-constant arguing has left me exhausted. A fair number of friends and acquaintances are either pretending to be experts or sharing links to op-eds that support their opinions.
I am fully aware that this conflict is complex and convoluted, a fight along religious lines that spans centuries, if not millennia. What I don't think people realize is that if any side in this fight was unilaterally right or wrong, the "war" would have ended decades ago. I suppose the reason why I haven't said anything consequential about this controversy until now is because I'm somewhere between apathetic and burned out. Lately, the mere thought makes me feel lethargic. For that alone, I don't plan on commenting until it all dies down... or whenever Israel and Palestine inevitably start throwing rocks at each other again, I don't know.
NOTE: Thanks to Matthew Kovich for inspiring this post.
(451)
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
A Left Hook, Than a Right Upper Cut
If there's a news story that I've been keeping an eye on recently, it would probably be last week's shootings at the National Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC. Strangely, the media coverage of the event has eclipsed the consequences of this hate-fueled murder. The supposedly left-leaning mainstream media has painted shooter James von Brunn as a white supremacist, an anti-Semite, and a right-wing extremist, though only the first two labels are accurate. In response, conservative news groups such as the non-profit organization American Values has pointed out that "Nazi" is an abbreviation for "National Socialist" and that the shootings are a harbinger for more "Islamofascism" to come.In a way, both sides are wrong; hate doesn't have a political affiliation. Comparing the party of Hitler to 21st century socialism is like saying hippies are "hip," isn't it? This bigoted old coot acted on his own terms, with no agenda beyond his prejudiced and distorted view of the world. Yes, I am aware that his "manifesto" was vehemently anti-Obama, and he was convinced that the president was not born in the US and should be removed from office immediately, but his remarks were almost purely racially motivated. James von Brunn is an ignorant, deluded, anti-government, anti-American shell of a human being, and no matter where you stand on the political spectrum I hope you agree that his punishment will be swift and justified. Even a real conservative should know that their political opponents are just as above racism and anti-Semitism as they are.
Speaking of the conservative media, while I'm not condoning per se the various jokes that David Letterman made in regards to Sarah Palin and her daughter, I think the Alaskan governor did overreact in her response. When you're suddenly thrust in the media like Palin was last year, you have to realize that when it comes to satire and mockery, you're fair game. When President Bush's twin daughters were busted for underage drinking 8 1/2 years ago, the president-elect made a quick retort at the pundits and the story was forgotten about soon after. Letterman's jokes did not condone rape, nor was he saying anything new about the way Governor Palin presents herself; the two most-quoted jokes were aimed toward Alex Rodriguez and Eliot Spitzer, and I think Jay Leno first compared Palin to Tawny Kitaen almost a year ago. (Letterman apologized for real last night, admitting the joke just wasn't that funny.) If former President Bush can live with being the butt of jokes, why not the Governor of Alaska?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
