"Something," Ilhan Omar, and Islamophobia

Why is the GOP hating women of color today?

Well, here it is.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/04/11/pure-racist-act-ny-post-slammed-using-attack-rep-omar-over-speech-islamophobia/

 So several things here. People are mad because she didn't call 9/11 murder, she called it "something." And why she might have done that - the answer to this is absolutely illustrated in the Post's reaction and in people's reaction below. See the quote a few paragraphs down.

She may have said that because she was talking in that moment that was picked out and over-analyzed about the resulting Islamophobia and the blanket assumption after 9/11 that all Muslims and more widely all brown people are terrorists and dealt (and it remains) with everything from death threats and discrimination to actual physical harm.

So proving her point, the NY Post puts the signature picture of the burning towers and responds to the Congresswoman's words with all the power of its shoddy journalism on the front page with a giant headline, guaranteed to whip up the uninformed hatemongers into a frenzy. Aaand this happens...

Quote:

"Hundreds of people protested Omar outside the banquet, with chants that included “Burn the Koran,” “Ilhan Omar go to hell,” and “Shame on you terrorists.”

She used her speech to talk about Islamophobia, and she did not mince words about President Trump, saying she believed that he played a role in fueling “hate against Muslims.” "

So you see the Islamophobia she was referring to is alive and well.

When someone says 9/11 is murder, it puts the attention on the perpetrators, which was done after the tragedy to generate hate widely for brown people and Muslims and flag waving vengeance and a desire to kill in another ill-conceived invasion in Afghanistan and Iraq, the latter having nothing to do with it. Do we call those murders?? There were far more victims of 9/11 than those who died in the towers and she was differentiating between them.

Note that these people aren't criticizing her words, they are saying that she is a terrorist which was the very point she was making about the atmosphere after 9/11 where government policy and GOP/Bush fearmongering had dangerous effects then and continues to now through GOP/Trump.

You can question her phrasing, her tone, or her clothes - women deal with this EVERY SINGLE DAY with sexism and women of color more so than me through racism - but she is making a valid point that we need to pay attention to.

This is the NY Post's front page news:

And here you have another example of the NY Post's opportunistic bottom feeding exploitation of fear, racism, and stereotypes. Sub par journalism would be one thing. Inciting hatred is far worse.

Trump press conference as president elect, he used to do them every day, but. . . .

Funny, but factual run down of the press conference:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2017/01/11/what-the-bleep-happened-at-the-trump-news-conference/?utm_term=.9297fc16dc7c

Fact check anyone??

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/jan/11/live-coverage-donald-trumps-first-press-conference/


What follows are some of my Facebook microblogging posts on this disaster.

***********

So the press conference, the first in 167 days, starts with Mr. Pence of Periods for Pence fame:

"Nineteen of the 21 cabinet officials have been announced, nine committee hearings already scheduled, seven more soon to go on the books in the next several days and it is a — it is a compilation of men and women with an unprecedented caliber of leadership and background to help this administration move our nation forward. Perhaps that’s why there’s been such a concerted effort by some in the mainstream media to de-legitimize this election and to demean our incoming administration."

Oh, honey, noooo. Sweetie, look- your running mate demeaned and de-legitimized the election* and, baby, HE chose incompetent cabinet picks that oppose the very mission of the department they were nominated to head. Don't blame the media, honey, bad form. Bad form indeed. But you're correct about unprecedented! ! Good try sweetie pie, check your facts first though. You'll do better next time.

*remember when he said the election was rigged-if he lost, lost the popular vote, colluded with Russia, made fun of a disabled reporter, raped women, demeaned a Muslim veteran- you know the list, no one can demean like Trump, he wins at demeaning, he's really the best, believe me, he loves you! !

*** *** ***

"So, I just want to compliment many of the people in the room. I have great respect for the news and great respect for freedom of the press and all of that. But I will tell you, there were some news organizations with all that was just said that were so professional — so incredibly professional, that I’ve just gone up a notch as to what I think of you. OK?"

I want to listen to the whole thing (and comment), i do, but this and that stunningly empty intro about not being a stranger to news conferences and winning because of news conferences, maybe i can't. Barf.

Up a notch! Oh there was much celebration and relief in the world of the hated mainstream media. Pence, the bad cop, only minutes before, chastised them for demeaning the election and the new president, for shame, for shame. But whew, up a few notches! The Donald is happy! For now. Good job press, that's the goal of journalism, right! ?

But what about Trump and Putin anyway?

Then

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dn1ZK2kcfQ8

Now

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-putin-presidential-debate-ive-never-met-him-fact-check-a7371061.html

*** *** ***

"We’ve got to get our drug industry back. Our drug industry has been disastrous. They’re leaving left and right. They supply our drugs, but they don’t make them here, to a large extent. And the other thing we have to do is create new bidding procedures for the drug industry because they’re getting away with murder.

Pharma, pharma has a lot of lobbies and a lot of lobbyists and a lot of power and there’s very little bidding on drugs. We’re the largest buyer of drugs in the world and yet we don’t bid properly and we’re going to start bidding and we’re going to save billions of dollars over a period of time."

Also in his press conference, he said drugs. A lot. But what does it mean? ?? Is he going to SELL drugs? Legalize pot? Find some missing drugs? I do declare, I do love a mystery! !

And pharmaaahkh. I'm pretty sure he has no earthly idea what that is. Much like cyber. 

Which is hilarious. 

And terrifying.

*** *** ***

"...I want to thank a lot of the news organizations here today because they looked at that nonsense that was released by maybe the intelligence agencies? Who knows, but maybe the intelligence agencies which would be a tremendous blot on their record if they in fact did that. A tremendous blot, because a thing like that should have never been written, it should never have been had and it should certainly never been released."

Why, dear SmallHands McCheeto, why should it never be written or released? Maybe he's referring to his goons who possibly tried to silence the news? Who knows? He sounds very sure. . . He has the freedom to lead chants of 'lock her up' based on NOTHING, encourage his people to beat up protesters, not distance himself from the KKK and their supporters but news outfits should do the opposite of their obligation and not to try and sort out his potential to be blackmailed, ties to foreign powers and investigate the character of a public figure who means to attempt to lead us??? What a nutjob. How did this happen? He DID say it was rigged. But he's a liar. You could make a logic puzzle put of this. . . To simulate reality, it should be impossible to solve, though.

*** *** ***

"And I will say, if the election didn’t turn out the way it turned out, they would not be here. They would not be in my office. They would not be in anybody else’s office. They’d be building and doing things in other countries. So, there’s a great spirit going on right now. A spirit that many people have told me they’ve never seen before, ever."

The economy would have come to a screeching HALT if he hadn't been elected. Makes sense. (Nope.) Or those people wouldn't be in his office making him feel super important. Also makes sense. 

Obama's gift to Trump, the economy :)
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/30/obamas-biggest-parting-gift-to-trump-may-be-the-economy.html

A little fact checking on the jobs claims
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-sprint-jobs-previously-announced

http://www.salon.com/2016/12/29/donald-trump-is-once-again-taking-credit-for-jobs-he-had-no-part-in-creating/

*** *** ***

"So, we’ve been very, very much involved, and other things. We had Jack Ma, we had so many incredible people coming here. There are no — they’re going to do tremendous things — tremendous things in this country. And they’re very excited."

I just love how he can drop a name and if you weren't up on actual news, you'd be none the wiser listening to the baffoon elect. In his surrounding sentences, he elucidates exactly NOTHING. His speeches are not designed to give information, but to dump adjectives into the air, words very like tremendous, and taking credit for things that happen independently of him* (while blaming the media for his blunders and lack of character).

on Jack Ma:  http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/10/jack-ma-trump-pledge-is-fantasy.html

*this was a fun memory from the debate akin to his usual- I raise my hand at sun rise, therefore I make the sun rise!! Thank me! I'm great! Believe me!

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/sep/27/donald-trump/donald-trump-wrong-again-about-nato-increasing-ter/

*** *** ***

"We’re going to create jobs. I said that I will be the greatest jobs producer that God ever created. And I mean that, I really — I’m going to work very hard on that. We need certain amounts of other things, including a little bit of luck, but I think we’re going to do a real job. And I’m very proud of what we’ve done."

Oh the Cheeto's reign will be unprecedented, i can promise you! He'll be in every English lesson on how NOT to write /speak! So many words, so little said. 

We need certain amounts of other things? ?? What???

And that second line is nauseating because it calls to mind his opinion on women- that he's God's gift to them. He just changed up the words. That he even mentioned God should be offensive to Christians, but that's another story.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-trumps-carrier-deal-isnt-the-way-to-save-u-s-jobs/

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2016/12/04/trumps-carrier-deal-means-nothing-for-future-jobs/&refURL=https://www.google.com/&referrer=https://www.google.com/

*** *** ***

"And we haven’t even gotten there yet. I look very much forward to the inauguration. It’s going to be a beautiful event. We have great talent, tremendous talent. And we have the — all of the bands — or most of the bands are from the different — from the different segments of the military. And I’ve heard some of these bands over the years, they’re incredible.
We’re going to have a very, very elegant day. The 20th is going to be something that will be very, very special; very beautiful. And I think we’re going to have massive crowds because we have a movement."

Beautiful and tremendous bands, all from the military, because EVERYONE ELSE REFUSED. Elegant, special and beautiful. And movement. His movement. Republicans welcome, all else be damned. He says nothing about the peaceful transfer of power and democracy, just an elegant day about HIM. There is nothing in his speech to suggest he intends to unite the country after a divisive campaign he participated in and incited violence in and in which he threatened legal action on his opponent, only language suggesting rewards for only the people who voted for him like this is just some massive business deal and to the victor go the spoils.

Big crowds. Hm. Looks like many will be attending other events though. . .

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/200-buses-have-applied-for-inauguration-parking-1200-for-the-womens-march_us_5878e7dfe4b09281d0ea697f

And THIS speech is telling and courageous, describing why some lawmakers won't attend the inauguration and be part of the "massive crowds":

https://www.democracynow.org/2017/1/11/rep_luis_gutierrez_on_why_he

https://gutierrez.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/why-i-will-not-be-inauguration-and-will-be-marching-women

*** *** ***

"It’s a movement like the world has never seen before. It’s a movement that a lot of people didn’t expect. And even the polls — although some of them did get it right, but many of them didn’t. And that was a beautiful scene on November 8th as those states started to pour in.
And we focused very hard in those states and they really reciprocated. And those states are gonna have a lot of jobs and they’re gonna have a lot of security. They’re going to have a lot of good news for their veterans."

He talks about news conferences at his news conference, the elegant day that will be his inauguration, November 8, like he can't get enough and that it's some kind of culmination and victory worthy of our respect and adulation, rather than the broad, all-encompassing themes and things that could unify like democracy and working together, peace and being a force for good in the world.

All he wants to talk about are those who were FOR him and how THEY will be rewarded, HIS precious movement, division,the opposite of unity.


Sooo, he's going to be president of the swing states only? ?


Those that voted for him get good things, no one else. This is a democracy, not a business. And just how will he enact that? Or did he misspeak? AGAIN?

*** *** ***
He was very close to saying actual things with naming an appointee, though still claims he's going to solve all the veterans' problems, fix the VA, "straighten out the whole situation" (of which he knows nothing) without saying anything about how he plans on doing this when no one else has been able to, though they've had fantastic beautiful terrific people working on it also.

". . . we’re gonna straighten out the whole situation for our veterans."

As for cancer progressing while waiting on treatment, he says: "Not gonna happen, it’s not gonna happen."


How will he fix it? "And we’re gonna set up a — a group."


Oh! Brilliant! A group! That explains everything then!

"And we’re gonna straighten out the V.A. for our veterans. I’ve been promising that for a long time and it’s something I feel very, very strongly."

You said that already, just as nonspecifically.

"So, you’ll get the information on David. And I think you’ll be very impressed with the job he does. We looked long and hard. We interviewed at least 100 people, some good, some not so good. But we had a lot of talent. And we think this election will be something that will, with time — with time, straighten it out and straighten it out for good ‘cause our veterans have been treated very unfairly."

The bit about interviewing 100 people, some good, some not so good- soooo, did you HIRE the not so good ones too?? Very unclear.

And the bit about veterans being treated unfairly is interesting- he used 'unfair' about Hillary (and the media for reporting facts) frequently and the way the Obama admin did things he didn't like, so it seems that might be a dig at the "other " side he seems intent on dividing from. Unfair assigns blame, in this case to democrats maybe? He could just be saying it's unfair in general terms, to which we can all agree and relate on both sides of the aisle, healthcare in the US, the way it's dispensed is pretty bad, which is why Obama tried to fix it and we ended up with the sub-optimal Obamacare after Republicans were done with it.

*** *** ***

When I hear about fantastic admirals doing big things with beautiful competition, I know he must have the biggest, most beautiful information about the military, more than any general, that he can guarantee you!

*** *** ***
He has inspired belated New Year's Resolutions!

1. Use Twitter more

2. When you have no idea what you're talking about use MORE adjectives proportionally

3. When you receive criticism, especially when it is valid, attack the messenger, accuse them of lying and being uninformed and demeaning motherhood, your profession. 

*** *** ***

And next post will be the questions at the press conference. . . where THIS happened. . .

https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000004865825/trump-calls-cnn-fake-news.html

*** *** ***




Periods for Pence: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/meet-the-woman-who-calls-mike-pence-every-day-to-talk-about-her-period_us_581ce1e5e4b0aac624845535

Obama's farewell address

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/10/us/politics/obama-farewell-address-speech.html?_r=0


Hard not to quote the whole thing but here are some favorite parts---

This is where I learned that change only happens when ordinary people get involved, get engaged, and come together to demand it....It's the insistence that these rights, while self-evident, have never been self-executing; that We, the People, through the instrument of our democracy, can form a more perfect union.

On inequality

After all, if every economic issue is framed as a struggle between a hardworking white middle class and undeserving minorities, then workers of all shades will be left fighting for scraps while the wealthy withdraw further into their private enclaves.

He had good advice for many groups in the context, but this hit home because I've heard people I know say these things in the course of my life and I know they are untrue and unjust and those things make me angry. Injustice makes me angry like few things do.

For white Americans, it means acknowledging that the effects of slavery and Jim Crow didn't suddenly vanish in the '60s; that when minority groups voice discontent, they're not just engaging in reverse racism or practicing political correctness; that when they wage peaceful protest, they're not demanding special treatment, but the equal treatment our Founders promised.

The key. And here he begins talking to everyone as in both parties, saying hard things, but necessary, where before he was talking everyone as in the nation.

So regardless of the station we occupy; we have to try harder; to start with the premise that each of our fellow citizens loves this country just as much as we do; that they value hard work and family like we do; that their children are just as curious and hopeful and worthy of love as our own.

Hitting the nail on the head

This trend represents a third threat to our democracy. Politics is a battle of ideas; in the course of a healthy debate, we'll prioritize different goals, and the different means of reaching them. But without some common baseline of facts; without a willingness to admit new information, and concede that your opponent is making a fair point, and that science and reason matter, we'll keep talking past each other, making common ground and compromise impossible.

So many good points, stressing participation, we need that right now.

And all of this depends on our participation; on each of us accepting the responsibility of citizenship, regardless of which way the pendulum of power swings.

Our Constitution is a remarkable, beautiful gift. But it's really just a piece of parchment. It has no power on its own. We, the people, give it power - with our participation, and the choices we make. Whether or not we stand up for our freedoms. Whether or not we respect and enforce the rule of law. America is no fragile thing. But the gains of our long journey to freedom are not assured.

Compare with Trump's press conference that happened a day after where he talks incessantly about how he won, how it felt to win, what he did to win, rather than his plans to unite the country, release tax return, right wrongs in a divisive campaign, accept reality, plans for his term in office. . . 

(Writing this post on Obama's address and the next on Trump's press conference on the same day, several days late, apologies!)

Bottom line on Iran

Iranian Protest Parallels With 1979
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/8109101.stm

There are a lot of folks comparing recent events in Iran with 1979 and many Americans are Tweeting and Facebooking their support for demonstrators and declared the election rigged as soon as Ahmadinejad's victory was announced. We may never know for sure if the election was indeed rigged, but there were a lot of suspicious events surrounding it. Too many for a coincidence.

I think we need to be careful who we throw our support behind, especially with us Westerners not being all that familiar with Middle Eastern history. With all the American support and media coverage for demonstrators and the reform candidate, before I did some homework I thought this guy must be a drastic change from the current leader. Maybe he is going to start a new revolution away from an Islamic Republic and toward a Western democracy. Wonderful.

Except that's not exactly the case. All candidates are vetted by the Ayotolla, so really, how revolutionary can these folks be anyway? They are people very much tied to this current government: a PM that led during the Iran-Iraq war, a revolutionary guard commander against Iraq, a speaker of Parliament.

A guest on The Diane Rehm Show summed it up quite well. The fight is not between the government and exiled or illegal opposition, it is a fight within the government. Even if Mousavi were to prevail in a recount or truly free and monitored election, Iran would not morph into a Western liberal democracy (complete with the AIPAC branch?), it would just be a slightly more moderate version of the current government. Our troubles and issues with Iran wouldn't disappear and Israel certainly wouldn't be anymore satisfied or less demanding (of it's demands on us to demand more of Iran), regardless of who wins, unless it changes to a Zionist Western democracy, of course.

I'm all for free and fair elections and I think rigging elections is frustrating and insulting (and shooting peaceful protesters is outrageous), but I also think perhaps the media has made so much of the demonstrations that people mistakenly think that Iran is on the verge of creating a liberal democracy (that will have zero nuclear ambition if the US wants it to).

Further, I am a little worried that all this worldwide attention on Iranian protests is maybe leading to a list of grievances for which a group of nations will want to confront Iran and give it an ultimatum that will result in another war (needlessly). Hopefully, Obama will be more cautious than Bush & Co, but it is unsettling. We in the West are all too eager to jump into war when it's not on our soil, regardless of whether or not we have all the facts. I mean, let's say we jump in and "liberate" Iran and install who we think should have won- Mousavi (or someone else who is actually pro-West and will implement liberal democratic changes). Will we make sure the election was rigged before bombing them to the stone age? The bigger question is- are we sure Mousavi would be that much better than Ahmadinejad and would it justify another war, massive casualties, and all the horrors that go with it??

Maybe I'm jumping the gun, but the media coverage and tone worries me a bit.