El Diablo is a Nevertrumper

El Diablo Nevertrump1

I can’t believe it took me two and a half years to think of this!  But seriously, when MSNBC, and CNN, and other corporate media outlets bring on war criminals from the Bush era to lament the rise of Trump, this is what they look like!

I’m thinking of doing a short fictional work on here – El Diablo 2020!  We’ll see if I find the time, but essentially, the plot is that nevertrumper El Diablo runs as a Democrat to be the first Otherkin President, and to defeat Trump, which of course is the most important thing of all.  #anybodybuttrump  He’s Satan trapped in a man’s body, and thinks of himself as LGBTQ+ because of the whole “Otherkin” thing.

Advertisements

Political Correctness of the Right

IlhanOmarAtCair

Over the last half decade, I’ve found myself sympathizing more with the right.*  One of the main reasons for this is that many of my classically liberal principles (freedom of speech, religion, thought, expression, etc.) have been championed by the political right, while the left has become increasingly hostile to these core liberal principles.  However, while the right seems to be a better guardian of these principles, I’ve always know that there is one big fat asterisk next to those principles in their ideological platform.  Next to that asterisk, you’ll find “except for Muslims!”  This is also coupled with a double-standard when it comes to political opponents.

Since Trump’s rise, this hypocrisy hasn’t been more evident than with the recent vitriol directed at Rep. Ilhan Omar.

Except for Muslims

I saw this ugly side of the right plenty of times during the Obama era, but with the rise of Trumpian populism, being moderate on LGBT issues, pro-working class, pro-free speech, protective of religious freedom (asterisk!); I figured right-winged political correctness was on the back burner.  It has been.  But now they’re pulling that pot back to the front burner.

Omar gave a speech to CAIR in late March, stating that following the 9/11 attacks, all of Islam has been held accountable by society, and it has become socially acceptable to strip Muslims of basic civil liberties.  Her exact words that have earned her so much hatred were “some people did something…”** by which she explains that it was some Muslims, and consequently, all Muslims are being held accountable.  But that “something” was not the best choice of words, admittedly.  But that has been taken out of context to slander Omar and claim that she is trivializing the tragedy of the 9/11 attacks.  Memes are circulating showing Omar with her hijab smiling, and people fleeing for their lives from the falling towers in the background.  This is absolutely despicable!

You Reap What You Sow

Trump supporters don’t like it when they’re treated this way, and neither do I.  Trump’s words have often been taken out of context and twisted around.  Trump supporters have also been targeted by politically correct SJW’s who want to ruin peoples’ lives over poorly chosen words taken out of context.  Roseanne lost her show because she issued one bad tweet with reference to “Planet of the Apes” about a multi-racial woman who worked for Obama, who is partly African American.  At first glance, most people probably wouldn’t know that she is partly African American.  But the twitter mobs relentlessly pursued her, and ABC, like the cowards they are, cancelled her highly rated, pro-LGBT, pro-racial equality, sitcom.

A few months ago, the Catholic Covington high school boys were targeted by the SJW twitter mobs.  Some of them we wearing MAGA hats, and they had a difficult confrontation with a group of native Americans.  At first, they were accused of bullying these native Americans.  People were demanding they be expelled from school; they were being compared to 1950s segregationists; memes were circulating with one of the boys’ face calling it “punchable”; and then the truth came out.  The boys had actually been harassed for hours by a small group calling themselves the “Hebrew Israelites”, and they were subjected to racial and homophobic slurs.  The native Americans came along late in that confrontation to diffuse the situation by playing their drums and chanting.  It was an awkward situation for these teens, and some of their behavior deserves a reprimand.  But they did nothing to deserve the backlash they got.

Trump supporters hate it when this happens to them, and I’ll continue to defend the right of my dear deplorables to express their grievances in this free country, in the face of Antifa savagery, twitter mobs, doxing, deplatforming, etc.  Free speech is not “white privilege”; it is an American right!

Ilhan Omar’s Rights as an American Citizen

I know there are some who simply don’t see Muslims as Americans.  I hear comments like, “I don’t wish them any harm; I just want them to go back from where they came.”  However, many are natural born American citizens.  Others, like Omar, are naturalized American citizens.

Twice now Ilhan Omar’s words have been twisted around and taken out of context by Trump supporters who are rightly angry when this was done to Roseanne, to those Covington High School teens, and to Trump himself.  First, Ilhan Omar dared to question the influence that AIPAC has on American foreign policy.  Questioning AIPAC has been equated with “anti-Semitism”, because they represent the state of Israel, and if you question a lobbying group that represents the views of about half of Israel’s population, that apparently makes you an anti-Semite.  Omar’s hijab likely only adds to the stigma.  However, as old time conservative Pat Buchanan rightly stated in Omar’s defense, Omar’s questions of dual loyalty are very consistent with American tradition and past leaders.  Questioning the influence of AIPAC does not equate to hating Jewish people any more than would questioning the influence of CAIR equate to Islamophobia.

And now, Omar again is having her words twisted around to suggest that she doesn’t think the 9/11 attacks were a big deal.

As an American citizen, Omar has every right to expect religious freedom, and every right to peacefully voice her grievances.  She has every right to question American foreign policy, as well as the influence of any foreign nation on that policy, including but certainly not limited to the state of Israel.

I hope nothing happens to Omar

Omar reports having received death threats as a consequence of this.    As a public official, her words and actions are subject to scrutiny, but this should remain peaceful.  She has done nothing to deserve death threats, or worse!

Aside from that, there’s a second reason I hope nothing bad happens to her.  I can already see how the PC left will use any harm against her for their own agenda.  They will hold it up as further evidence that “hate speech” is not free speech, and claim that a peaceful society has an obligation to suppress such speech.  They’ll repeat their circular arguments that tolerance doesn’t mean tolerating “hate” because “hate” is intolerance, and you can’t tolerate intolerance.  The rights the PC left rightly demand for Omar, they will deny to my dear deplorables.

I hope that those on the #trumptrain will heed Mr. Buchanan’s wisdom, and defend Omar’s basic rights as an American.  Continue to criticize her policies as you see fit, but please stop standing by while her words are twisted around and she is treated the same way that so many of us have been treated.  Let’s be better than that!

Note(s):

*I’m still an old school progressive, fellow traveler on the #trumptrain unless and until the Dems start representing working people again

**You’ll find the remark in question about 15 minutes into this video

Does Jesus Love The Pharisee?

Pharisees

Why was Jesus fully human?*  Jesus was tempted by the Devil.  Jesus knew hunger, pain, frustration, anger, compassion, betrayal, and death.  Before betrayal and death, Jesus turned our understanding of righteousness on its head.  He would, to the dismay of the Pharisees, go among the sinners, the tax collectors, the prostitutes.  Why would he even touch her?  The Pharisees would ask in disgust!

Jesus taught us to love even our enemies.  It’s easy to love those who love you.

Jesus sure loved to preach, didn’t He?

In some of my debates with my brothers on the Christian left, I’ve found myself in the role of the Pharisees’ defendant.  They chastise the religious right for being much like the Pharisees.  They are judgemental, they love to point to this part of the Bible, and that part of the Bible, but they miss the big picture.  As Saint Paul taught us, the law condemns, but Christ has fulfilled the law.

But Jesus, can you practice what you preach?

Jesus loved to call the Pharisees hypocrites, and lecture us on loving even our enemies.  He loved to bring tax collectors and prostitutes into the light, partly out of compassion, but partly to show the failures of the Pharisees as spiritual guardians of the Jewish people.  But is Jesus any better than the Pharisee if he does not love the Pharisee?  Are my brothers and sisters on the Christian left any better if they love the world – the prostitutes, the tax collectors, the secularists, the globalists, the hedonists – and do not love the Pharisees of our time?

Jesus loved the Pharisees

St Paul the persecutor was a cruel and sinful man; Jesus hit him with a blinding light and then his life began – Rolling Stones (Saint of Me)

Hypocrisy?  Not Jesus!  Perhaps the greatest temptation was the temptation to hate the Pharisee, or to stand smugly over them when they come to the father.  But yet on the cross, Jesus even prayed for His crucifiers**.  “Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do!”

Jesus loved not only the poor, the oppressed, the prostitutes, the tax collectors; Jesus loved the centurian who took part in His crucifixion.

Jesus’s love for the Pharisees didn’t end there.  Saul was one of the worst of those stuffed robbed Pharisees, not merely upholding the parts of the law that they were hung up on, but going to great lengths to persecute early Christians.  I wonder how many Christians, being fully human, but not fully divine, cursed Saul’s name.  But even after the crucifixion, even after the beard was ripped from His face, the crown of thorns placed upon His head, and the nails driven into his wrists; Jesus loves the Pharisees.

Instead of leaving Saul to pile sin upon sin, thinking he did so in the name of God, Jesus came to him.  Why do you persecute me?

On the cross, when Jesus prayed for His crucifiers, He overcame a temptation that is hard to imagine any human, not divine, overcoming.***  After His resurrection, He continued, and loved Saul, who became Paul.

Even Paul was still, in some ways, a Pharisee.  My Christian left brothers have their reservations about Paul, for as we know, the only mentions of homosexuality in the New Testament come from Paul.  Jesus never touched that issue, nor did His apostles.  As many on the Christian right focus on this issue, therefore, I’d remind my friends on the Christian left the great lengths that Jesus went to, to bring that lost sheep back to the flock.

I’ve been there too

If I sound preachy, rest assured, I’ve been there too.  I grew up on the edge of the Bible belt, in Jacksonville, Florida.  I’ve been preached at by my share of fundies too.  I’ve been ridiculed by a Baptist preacher for my Megadeth tee-shirt, and silenced in my effort to explain that the leader, Dave Mustaine, actually converted to Christianity.  Jesus dwells with the heavy metal bands, just as He dwells with the tax collectors.  I was only a teenager then.  This isn’t the only run-in I’ve had with Bible Belt Pharisees, but it’s the one I remember most vividly.

I admit, being fully human and not divine, I might not be able to do as Jesus.  If I met that Baptist preacher**** today, I’d have to pray for the strength to not just tell his self-righteous arse to get his robe stuffed!  But even Peter lacked the courage to go to the cross with Christ.  Jesus loves Peter, too.

We pray for forgiveness of our sins, known and unknown.  If we wish Christ to forgive us, we must strive to show the same forgiveness to the Pharisees.  We must love the Pharisee, as Jesus loves us.

 

I also recommend “Go Love a Pharisee” by Insanitybytes22.  This article focuses more on the hypocrisy of the Pharisee, but as you can tell by the title, draws the same conclusion.

Note(s):

*Jesus was fully human and fully divine.  I’m merely examining the human qualities of Jesus in this article.

** To my Jewish friends, some may take these references so many of us Christians make to the Pharisees the wrong way.  I know there’s a long history of self identified Christians taking the story of the crucifixion to blame the Jewish people and justify atrocities against the Jewish people.  But this is not the purpose of this story in the Gospels.  Our faith teaches that we ALL have crucified Him.  We say this on Palm Sunday.  Any who would use the story of the crucifixion to justify anti-semitism have corrupted our teachings.

*** Before find his way back, Dave Mustaine found it hard to believe that Jesus could truly be that forgiving, and in one of his first songs with Megadeth, “Looking Down The Cross”, Mustaine speculated that Jesus was internally condemning His crucifiers.  FYI, Mustaine later found his way, for Jesus loves the Heavy Metal singers too.

**** No offense to my Baptist brothers and sisters.  He was just one Baptist preacher of a rather small, but very loyal congregation.  But I do not see him as a reflection of Baptists in general.  In fact, my practice of referring to “brothers” and “sisters” I picked up from another Baptist I greatly admire, Dr. Cornell West.

Dismissing Security Experts, Trump Invites Putin To Pentagon

TrumpWithPutin

 

Emboldened by the Mueller report’s lack of finding evidence of collusion, Trump is suddenly becoming very chummy with Putin.  Against the strong advice and dire warnings from security experts, the intelligence community, and Sec. of State Mike Pompeo; President Trump will be dining at the Pentagon with Putin.  The menu will include several Russian classics, including caviar, Pelmeni (a Russian meat pie), Borscht.  The White House chef expressed concerns due to his lack of expertise in such unusual cuisine.  But Trump replied, “You better get used to it.”

In a display of diplomacy and trust, President Trump will then lead Pres. Putin through some of the most high security areas of the Pentagon, and discuss mutual cooperation to defeat any last remnants of ISIS.  A Russian Orthodox shrine will also be erected in Putin’s honor.

GNN’s Tim Acoster was able to catch Trump on his way to greet Putin’s arrival and asked, “Mr. President, why are you ignoring your security experts and even the Sec. of State?”  To which Trump replied, “I don’t need to follow their advice.  I’m a pretty smart guy.”

 

Why Political Correctness Sucks!

TuckerCarlsonNYMagCover

When I read a recent hit piece against Tucker Carlson, calling him “racist”, “misogynist”, etc. I found myself asking a very odd question – What would Louis Farrakhan say?

WHAT?!  Louis Farrakhan?!!!  The “Nation of Islam” guy?

Yes, Louis Farrakhan.  Keep that in the back of your mind as I continue.

So this ridiculous hit piece in the New York Magazine  dug up some comments from at least 10 years ago where Carlson called in to the Bubba the Love Sponge radio show – a shock jock semi-political talk radio show from a bygone era of free speech and offensive free-for-alls.  If you ever listened to Bubba the Love Sponge back in the day, you’d know the nature of this show.  He had guests of every race, creed, and color.  He endorsed Obama for President in 2008.  He endorsed Alex Sink (Dem.) for Governor of Florida in 2010.  Sponge, in the 1990s, was known to make many homophobic comments, but by 2010 (if not sooner) was a full supporter of marriage equality.  But Sponge didn’t apologize.  That’s not his style.  Sponge speaks off the cuff, calls himself a “fat ass” and “stupid ass”, and speaks the same way to many of his friends.  That’s how he rolls.  Anyone with any sense, and a skin thicker than cling wrap, knows not to take anything said on that show too seriously.  I think he was inspired by Howard Stern also (need I say more?)

So onto Tucker Carlson’s comments, I’m not going to trust NYMag’s claim that he called women “extremely primitive”, since they only quoted those two words not the complete sentence.  I will say this.  Some people are extremely primitive.  I think it’s more shocking when it’s women, because the stereotype is that men are boorish, and women are supposed to “civilize” us.  It’s likely that a younger Tucker Carlson was experiencing the inevitable shock that comes from women falling off the pedestal that we men tend to place them on.

Probably the worst of Tucker Carlson’s comments were the claim that white people or Europeans* were responsible for “creating civilization”, which they called “white nationalist rhetoric”.  And there was also the stereotypes about Iraqis being “semi-literate primitive monkeys.”  I won’t defend these comments, but I will say how they should be addressed momentarily.

This brings me to Louis Farrakhan.  As a white person, shouldn’t I be deeply offended that the Nation of Islam regards white people as a “devil race”?  It does offend me, yet I listen to Farrakhan.  Unlike the SJWs who want to PC Tucker Carlson off the air, I can imagine how Farrakhan would respond to Tucker Carlson – with education.  One of the things I’ve learned from listening to Farrakhan is that some of the oldest civilizations are black.  I’d also heard it from old Malcolm X speeches, I’ve seen bits from an interesting black conservative I like to follow on twitter, Chidike Okeem,** about ancient pyramids in the Sudan.  That got me studying the ancient Kingdom of Kush.  But before I get on a tangent about Kush, let me bring this back to Tucker Carlson’s comments.

Educate, Rather than throwing a PC tantrum

While the author of this NYMag article did not throw a tantrum, we all know the intent of this.  It’s to cause a hyperbolic reaction from SJWs and try to get Carlson fired.  Here’s a much better solution.

First, remember that Carlson said these things 10 years ago (which is not an excuse), and he might have learned a lot more since then.  But even if he hasn’t, it would be far more productive to engage him, rather than trying to ruin him.

I’m sure if anti-PC Tucker Carlson were in a room with anti-PC Louis Farrakhan, that Farrakhan would bare him no ill will, nor try to ruin his life.  He’s very in-your-face, so he might call Carlson “ignorant”, and his comments were, indeed, ignorant.

Learning from Farrakhan, and many others, I’d recommend that Carlson have a dialogue on his show.  Actually talk about the history of civilization.

Carlson’s ignorant statements from 10 years ago are easy to refute, and it would do a far greater service to humanity to educate Carlson rather than PC him off the airwaves (though I don’t think they could get FOX to fire him anyway.)

What Carlson Needs to Learn About Civilization

First, the Iraqis that he ridicules, actually sit on top of the first human civilization ever – Mesopotamia.  The ancient Mesopotamians were clearly not “white”.  They were likely brown, like their Arabic descendants.  Their Arabic descendants invented the numerals that we rely on now for basic math.  So much for “semi-literate Monkeys”.

Second, many of the earliest civilizations were black, some were Asian, and eventually olive-skinned Euro-Mediterranean; but none of them were white.  Before the invasions began, Ancient Egypt was an African civilization and likely black.  Kush was certainly a black civilization, related to Egypt.  These two kingdoms built the wonder that is the pyramids!  The Chinese, far away from all of this, also had a remarkable ancient civilization that invented the compass, type printing, paper making, just to name a few.

Third, all of this happened while white people were still either the Viking ancestors wearing furs and surviving the frozen wilderness, or Celts with their faces painted blue.  I don’t say these things to knock our ancient ancestors.  They bared the cold of northern Europe and later made great developments in human civilization.  But in the scope of human civilization, we were late comers.

Lastly, we didn’t build modern civilization on our own.  It is fair to say that white people led the creation of modern civilization.  From the printing press, parliamentary government, to the industrial revolution and modern science; whites have led the modernization of human civilization.  However, we stood on the progress of previous civilizations of many colors, and lest we forget, much of the hard labor was done by black slaves.  Even if modern civilization was the only civilization in human history, haven’t blacks made more than their fair of contributions, all things considered?

PC History, White-Washed History, and Real History

As whites took the lead in civilization, our ancestors developed a strong sense of superiority.  Over the centuries, they effectively erased, or minimized the civilizational contributions of other races and created a narrative that puts whites, or at least our olive-skinned Roman cousins, as the Alpha and Omega of civilization.  This kind of cherry-picked, and often false history should be rebuked.  But recognizing that it was the mainstream narrative for centuries, we shouldn’t assume the worst when someone erroneously perpetuates that narrative.  While white nationalists have the worst of intentions, when a free thinker like Tucker Carlson echos something similar, it’s likely the result of ignorance.  The antidote to ignorance is knowledge.

To counter this narrative, we’ve also been exposed to a deeply faulty PC history.  This version of history often exaggerates the contributions of marginalized groups, while largely ignoring the positive contributions of European civilization.  Whites are cast as the “oppressor class”, and everyone else is the “oppressed”.  This even includes LGBT persons, which is a completely different issue from race, yet PC history often digs up bits of LGBT history that have been buried, and blames “white supremacy” for their suppression, as though every other race on the face of the earth were some kind of LGBT rainbow paradise, until those darned white people came along!

When researching, and telling history, we need to all agree on one primary principle – the accuracy and completeness of telling history is more important than anything else.  It’s more important than putting your own people in a positive light.  It’s more important than lifting up “marginalized groups”.  And it’s certainly more important than peoples’ feelings and what they find offensive.  We shouldn’t assume that any source is entirely objective, nor should we silence any source.

The Tucker Carlson who called in to the Bubba the Love Sponge show ten years ago has a lot to learn.  But he won’t learn anything by being politically correct.

“Don’t be in a hurry to condemn because he doesn’t do what you do or think as you think or as fast. There was a time when you didn’t know what you know today.”
— Malcolm X

 

Note(s):

*Again, NYMag took two words and possibly butchered the context

**For the record, I don’t discuss Okeem and Farrakhan in the same paragraph to suggest that they are similar.  They don’t have very much in common, other than a desire to inform modern western civilization about the ancient history of black civilization.

***I’ve referred to some rather disparate sources to make my point.  We learn a lot more with a market-place of ideas than we do by worrying about feelings, and trying not to be offensive.

Criminal Justice Reform is happening! Thanks Trump!

Trump is doing so much good lately I just can’t write the blog posts fast enough!  So I’m making this more of a shout out.  President Trump just signed into law the First Step Act, which aims to reform our overcrowded prison system by addressing recidivism, releasing many non-violent offenders into parole, and focusing more on education and rehabilitation.  It’s about redemption, rather than just punishment.

I wrote on this subject more extensively in 2016 during the campaign.  “Can We Finally Get Criminal Justice Reform In 2017?

(Update!  I made a crucial mistake in the next paragraph regarding the Congressional Black Caucus.  As it is my practice to correct my mistakes, rather than cover them up, I’ll leave my original words, but rectify my error in the notes at the end with the corresponding asterisk)

The “Congressional Black Caucus” initially opposed it in its early stages.  They insisted that the bill do something substantial.  Thanks, in part to this, the final version of the First Step Act takes significant steps to reduce recidivism and release non-violent offenders.

The NAACP has expressed their support for this final version, while also expressing some reservations.  Now I will agree that it doesn’t go far enough.  We need to address mandatory minimums and harsh sentencing also.  But as George Orwell would say, a half a loaf is better than no loaf.

I’ll also point out that the First Step Act being less than perfect did not stop the principled Van Jones from supporting it.  Van Jones has little nice to say about President Trump, and has called him racist and worst.  But Van Jones knows that a good idea is a good idea, regardless if it comes from the left wing, the right wing, or a chicken wing on a string at burger king.  That’s why I’ve always respected him.

So, in conclusion, this is a victory for criminal justice reform, but not THE victory.  Let’s keep the momentum!  This is great, but we need more.

But for now, thank you Mr. President for doing more to combat institutional racism than any president since LBJ.

Note(s):

*I previously made a terrible mistake when I quickly wrote this shout out.  I was misled into believe that the CBC did not support this, which I blamed on blind partisanship.  However, the CBC only opposed the early House version, which was a much weaker bill than the final version.  Kushner, Van Jones, and many in Congress carefully considered the CBC’s requests for improvements and implemented many of them, winning the CBC’s support.  This is their statement on the final version.   https://cbc.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=970

Trump is making peace, and “liberals” hate him for it!

TrumpQuote1

These are crazy times!

In 1972, Democrat George McGovern ran against then President Nixon on a peace platform.  McGovern (D) was the hippies’ candidate.  McGovern’s supporters were often chastised as “communists” and told to “go to Russia!”

In 2004, Kerry ran against Bush criticizing him for Iraq.  Around that same time, Betty Castor (D) ran against Mel Martinez (R) in Florida for a US Senate seat.  Martinez ridiculed her for calling the US the “global bully”.  Republicans loved putting their Bush/Cheney bumper stickers on their pickup trucks, right next to the “How do you like US now!” with images of bombs falling on the middle east.  Can anyone have imagined then a Republican President leading the charge towards peace, while Democrats chastised him and claimed he was doing it to help Russia?!

Yet here we are!  A few months ago, Trump made an important first step towards peace with N. Korea, and Rachel Maddow chastised him for it and claimed he was doing it to help Russia.  Now, Trump has announced that we will be withdrawing from Syria, as ISIS has been defeated, and surely enough, the “liberals” are chastising Trump for “helping Russia”?

How did we get here?

I have two theories.  1.  “Liberals” hate Trump so much, they will simply oppose anything and everything he is for.  2.  “Liberals” were never really advocates of peace, but of globalism.  It’s unilateral warmongering that they oppose, not warmongering in and of itself.

So, either the “liberals” are blinded by their hatred of Trump, or they are prepared to inflict mass suffering and death on people in the Middle East who did NOTHING to us, just to test out their far-fetched theories of globalism and “nation-building”.  I’m leaning toward #1, the hate theory.  The reason being that Trump is also trying to pass a rather substantial prison reform bill right now (The First Step Act).  Despite the fact that African Americans have for decades lamented racial injustice in the criminal justice system; the entire Congressional Black Caucus (all Democrats) opposes this bill that Trump supports.*

Just in case you think the entire American Left has gone insane, let me reassure you.  There’s a few principled ones left on the left.  Jimmy Dore never fails, and he has said that Trump’s recent announcement is good news, and has called out so-called “liberals” for their hypocrisy.  “Trump has so completely ruined Liberals brains that they now publicly cheer on war and military confrontations with Nuclear powers”

And no, Dore is not shilling for Trump.  He also criticized Trump for not also cutting military spending and re-investing it in America.  You see, Dore has these things called principles.  It’s something I vaguely remember liberals having many years ago, like, early Obama era (pre-Libya).

Another principled lefty, Cornel West, warned us about this two years ago.  He warned us of the Democrats’ hypocrisy.  “…when you actually look at the reinforcement of the new Jim Crow…that occurred under Democrats; it would persist under Hillary Clinton.”  Given that Clinton’s very loyal Congressional Black Caucas is unanimously opposing Trump’s efforts to roll back the new Jim Crow, it seems West was right.  On this matter of peace abroad:

“Can you imagine Russian troops in Mexico and Canada?  What would US response be?  Well that’s very much what NATO troops are vis a vis Russia…but that kind of provocation for Russia that has nuclear arms is the kind of thing that Hillary Clinton supported, and her connections to the Robert Kagans and Henry Kissingers are just frightening!”

I haven’t been able to find Cornel West’s take on Trump’s recent announcement, but I’d be eager to hear it.  West has described the Trump administration as “neo-fascist” on multiple occasions, but he is not afflicted with blind partisan hatred.

Despite a handful of principle, it looks like most of the American “left” would rather hate Trump than give peace a chance.

**TrumpObamaHaveInCommon

 

Note(s):

*Since posting this, the CBC supported the final version of the First Step Act, and I and so many others are grateful for their insistence on a truly substantial bill before passing, rather than just a symbolic gesture.

**I’m not sure where Mr. Chase’s politics are, so I’m not putting him in with West and Dore.  I just shared his post because it’s clever and adds some perspective to this lunacy.