You’re fired

Oh Donald Trump, you’re such an idiot:

“Wouldn’t you love to see one of these NFL owners,” wondered the president, “when somebody disrespects our flag, to say, ‘Get that son of a bitch off the field right now, out. He’s fired. He’s fired!’ ” The hypothetical was met with cheers from the assembled crowd.

Trump also said such an owner would “be the most popular person in this country. Because that’s a total disrespect of our heritage. That’s a total disrespect for everything we stand for.” He added that if fans were to “leave the stadium” in response to a protest, “I guarantee things will stop.”

First, if an owner fired their best player because they kneeled, my guess is they wouldn’t be too popular that team’s fans.

Second, “That’s a total disrespect for everything we stand for”? I thought the country stood for free speech? I guess that’s not as important as blind loyalty for the Donald.

Lastly, if we’re going to fire someone who disrespects our country, can we fire Trump? Please, he’s an embarrassment to everything the country stands for.

The Trump administration loves political correctness

The Trump administration wants to reduce the number of refugees coming in to the US, but a report they had asked for didn’t have quite the conclusion they wanted:

Trump administration officials, under pressure from the White House to provide a rationale for reducing the number of refugees allowed into the United States next year, rejected a study by the Department of Health and Human Services that found that refugees brought in $63 billion more in government revenues over the past decade than they cost.

The internal study, which was completed in late July but never publicly released, found that refugees “contributed an estimated $269.1 billion in revenues to all levels of government” between 2005 and 2014 through the payment of federal, state and local taxes. “Overall, this report estimated that the net fiscal impact of refugees was positive over the 10-year period, at $63 billion.”

What could they do? Why ignore the part they don’t like:

“In an average year over the 10-year period, per-capita refugee costs for major H.H.S. programs totaled $3,300,” it says. “Per-person costs for the U.S. population were lower, at $2,500, reflecting a greater participation of refugees in H.H.S. programs, especially during their first four years” in the United States.

The budget Mr. Trump released in May argued that refugees and other immigrants were a fiscal drain. “Under the refugee program, the federal government brings tens of thousands of entrants into the United States, on top of existing legal immigration flows, who are instantly eligible for time-limited cash benefits and numerous noncash federal benefits, including food assistance through SNAP, medical care and education, as well as a host of state and local benefits,” the document said.

President Trump loves to rail against political correctness, but here his administration is engaging in the real thing. They have a set conclusion and ignore any information that contradicts it. That’s political correctness, only information that is ‘correct’ matters.

How discrimination disadvantaged blacks

Via here, here’s an explainer of how segregation worked and how it has lead to racial inequality:

The term “redlining” … comes from the development by the New Deal, by the federal government of maps of every metropolitan area in the country. And those maps were color-coded by first the Home Owners Loan Corp. and then the Federal Housing Administration and then adopted by the Veterans Administration, and these color codes were designed to indicate where it was safe to insure mortgages. And anywhere where African-Americans lived, anywhere where African-Americans lived nearby were colored red to indicate to appraisers that these neighborhoods were too risky to insure mortgages.

In one development … in Detroit … the FHA would not go ahead, during World War II, with this development unless the developer built a 6-foot-high wall, cement wall, separating his development from a nearby African-American neighborhood to make sure that no African-Americans could even walk into that neighborhood.

The Underwriting Manual of the Federal Housing Administration recommended that highways be a good way to separate African-American from white neighborhoods. So this was not a matter of law, it was a matter of government regulation, but it also wasn’t hidden, so it can’t be claimed that this was some kind of “de facto” situation. Regulations that are written in law and published … in the Underwriting Manual are as much a de jure unconstitutional expression of government policy as something written in law.

African-American families that were prohibited from buying homes in the suburbs in the 1940s and ’50s and even into the ’60s, by the Federal Housing Administration, gained none of the equity appreciation that whites gained. So … the Daly City development south of San Francisco or Levittown or any of the others in between across the country, those homes in the late 1940s and 1950s sold for about twice national median income. They were affordable to working-class families with an FHA or VA mortgage. African-Americans were equally able to afford those homes as whites but were prohibited from buying them. Today those homes sell for $300,000 [or] $400,000 at the minimum, six, eight times national median income. …

So in 1968 we passed the Fair Housing Act that said, in effect, “OK, African-Americans, you’re now free to buy homes in Daly City or Levittown” … but it’s an empty promise because those homes are no longer affordable to the families that could’ve afforded them when whites were buying into those suburbs and gaining the equity and the wealth that followed from that.

The white families sent their children to college with their home equities; they were able to take care of their parents in old age and not depend on their children. They’re able to bequeath wealth to their children. None of those advantages accrued to African-Americans, who for the most part were prohibited from buying homes in those suburbs.

The vacancies in the white projects were created primarily by the Federal Housing Administration program to suburbanize America, and the Federal Housing Administration subsidized mass production builders to create subdivisions that were “white-only” and they subsidized the families who were living in the white housing projects as well as whites who were living elsewhere in the central city to move out of the central cities and into these white-only suburbs.

So the government instituted policies that made it much harder for African-Americans to buy houses which made it so their children were less likely to be able to afford to go to college (even ignoring the discrimination at colleges of the time) and less likely to have an inheritance that they could use to build wealth or help their children. That’s why we have this thing called Affirmative Action. Official government policy kept African-Americans out of better schools and colleges, and made it very difficult to buy homes in most better neighborhoods well into the 1960s; this directly meant that they would have less wealth that they could use for their children which meant the children were disadvantaged by government action. If a government action hurts a group, a government action should try to fix it.

Trump supports the troops some more

This is Trump supporting the troops:

President Trump is preparing to give the Defense Department authority to expel transgender people from the military in an upcoming order, barring the Pentagon from recruiting transgender troops, and cutting off payment for sexual reassignment surgery and other medical treatments for those already serving.

A White House memo that is expected to be sent to the Pentagon in the coming days gives Jim Mattis, the secretary of defense, six months to enforce the transgender ban that Trump announced abruptly last month in a series of tweets. The directive was confirmed Wednesday by a person familiar with its contents but who was not authorized to discuss its details and spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The authority has not been finalized. Once it is approved, it would allow Mattis to force out transgender service members by setting a legal standard of whether they would be able to deploy to war zones or for other lengthy military missions.

So when he tweets something like this:

 GREAT HONOR to spend time with our BRAVE HEROES at the Air Station Yuma. THANK YOU for your service to the United States of America!

remember that he doesn’t include everyone in the military, only the ones that appeal to him. Don’t be surprised if the list of people in the military he supports decreases as time goes along. More here.

Yay Boston

Boston dealt with right-wing speech the right way:

“I think it’s clear today that Boston stood for peace and love, not bigotry and hate,” Mayor Martin J. Walsh said at a late afternoon news conference.

Walsh also thanked the Boston Police Department and other law enforcement agencies, including the MBTA Transit Police and the State Police.

“They carried themselves with dignity, and I’m proud of that work, and I’m proud of the fact that here in Boston we were able to have a very successful day,” the mayor said.

Police Commissioner William B. Evans said at the news conference, “We probably had 40,000 people out here standing tall against hatred and bigotry in our city and that’s a good feeling.”

Nearly all the demonstrators “were here for the right reason,” Evans said, though “we did have people who came here to cause problems.”

By early evening Saturday, police had made 33 arrests on disorderly conduct and other charges.

Violence is part of the whole Nazi existence. They thrive on victimhood and need an enemy to fight.  If you ridicule and whenever they rally, hold one that is much, much bigger–in Boston there were an estimated 40,000 counter-protestors to the, at most, a couple hundred ‘free speechers’. Mission accomplished.

Are they racists or trolls?

It seems there will be a Boston ‘Free Speech’ rally assuming they can get anyone to speak:

Organizers of the Boston Free Speech Coalition, which also identifies as the New Free Speech Movement, garnered attention for the rally by inviting speakers with known ties to white nationalism, white supremacists, and racist views.

Medlar said his group supports free speech for everyone, including those who are the most vile. He said his group denounces violence.

Here is part of their statement on their Facebook page:

While we maintain that every individual is entitled to their freedom of speech and defend that basic human right, we will not be offering our platform to racism or bigotry. We denounce the politics of supremacy and violence. We denounce the actions, activities, and tactics of the so-called Antifa movement. We denounce the normalization of political violence.

We are a coalition of libertarians, progressives, conservatives, and independents and we welcome all individuals and organizations from any political affiliations that are willing to peaceably engage in open dialogue about the threats to, and importance of, free speech and civil liberties. Join us at the Parkman Bandstand where we will be holding our event. We look forward to this tide-changing peaceful event that has the potential to be a shining example of how we, in the city of Boston, can come together for the common goal of preserving freedom of speech for all and respectfully discussing our differences of opinion without engaging in violence.

It’s just a complete coincidence that all of their originally planned speakers (Gavin McInnes, Kyle Chapman, Augustus Invictus, Joe Biggs, and Brandon Navom) are conservative and, at least partially, part of the alt-right. So, please don’t claim that they’re ok with racism even though some of their original speakers are outright racists.

Here’s the thing, there are only two reasons that you invite these type of abhorrent people to speak at your rally (notice it’s very different to support a person’s right to speak and giving them a forum to speak at; the first is something all free speech advocates should do, the second is not). First, because you have similar views. Second, you’re a troll just trying to stir up trouble for fun or profit. I’m not sure which fits the organizers of this event, but both reasons mark them as pretty bad people.

Donald Trump and Nazis

It seems that President Trump can be convinced to say Nazis are bad, of course he also did this:

“I am seriously considering a pardon for Sheriff Arpaio,” the president said in the interview Sunday, speaking from his golf club in Bedminster. “He has done a lot in the fight against illegal immigration. He’s a great American patriot, and I hate to see what has happened to him.”

It’s pretty obvious that Kevin Drum is right:

Trump refused to explicitly condemn neo-Nazis and white nationalists for two days, and there’s no question that his fans got the message: “He didn’t attack us. He just said the nation should come together,” wrote the Daily Stormer’s Andrew Anglin. “No condemnation at all. When asked to condemn, he just walked out of the room. Really, really good. God bless him.”

Today Trump grimly recited a prepared text from a teleprompter, but did so under such obvious pressure that his white nationalist fans understand he’s just playing a role. This is exactly the way he handled the David Duke controversy last year: weasel words for a couple of days, followed by an obviously insincere condemnation under heavy pressure.

And here comes Dinesh D’Souza:

Author Dinesh D’Souza explained why white nationalists actually belong in the Democratic party, which promotes ethnic nationalism, just days after violence displays by white supremacists left the nation grieving.

It’s always been ahistorical crap that Nazis were on the left, but when actual Nazis and white supremacists explicitly say they like Trump and  say ‘God bless him’, you might want to lay low for a bit.

Oh and here’s more:

Former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke said on Saturday that the white supremacist demonstration in Charlottesville ― called “Unite the Right” ― was in line with “promises” made by Trump.

We are determined to take our country back. We are going to fulfill the promises of Donald Trump,” said Duke, speaking at the rally. “That’s what we believed in, that’s why we voted for Donald Trump. Because he said he’s going to take our country back. That’s what we gotta do.” 

And I don’t know if D’Souza noticed but they call themselves the Alt-Right, a term declared by white supremacist Richard Spencer.

Previous Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: