New York Times has failed as a newspaper this election season. The big scoops about Trump are coming from Washington Post and Newsweek, while the hometown newspaper is asleep at the switch. Even today, NYT is on the both-sides-do-it wagon soft pedaling of Trump’s hate and bigotry. It happened after the immigration speech and it happened again this morning. Their headline this morning reads:
Bitter, Personal Tone Marks 2nd Trump Clinton Debate
Sounds like a bickering match of he said, she said with both parties equally to blame doesn’t it? That’s not what I saw, this is what I saw when I made myself watch yesterday’s debate.
* Trump stalked Hillary Clinton throughout the debate
* Said bragging about sexual assault is OK because ISIS
* He had no clue about what he was talking about be it Syria or healthcare or Russia.
* He admitted as much in so many words about Russia
* He wants give Putin a complete free rein in Syria and elsewhere
* He promised to jail Hillary Clinton like his idol Putin does to his political opponents
* Tried to relitigate Bill Clinton’s infidelities as a negative against Hillary
*Repeated what do black people have to lose by voting for him, line
*Demonized ordinary Muslim citizens and Syrian refugees fleeing war
*Called Hillary Clinton, the devil
*Did not answer a single question, just repeated his fact-free bilious stump speech replete with conspiracy theories
Compared to the toddler tantrum that Trump threw on the debate stage for an hour and half, Hillary Clinton was a model of restraint and civility. She has nerves of steel, I was sputtering with rage at Trump’s indecent and ignorant behavior in my living room. No matter how low Trump goes, New York Times normalizes his behavior and enables him. Paper of record, indeed.
* Thanks to chech 1965 for letting me use his lol.
Congratulations GOP, you have just installed Putin’s puppet as your nominee. Isn’t it curious how Trump’s foreign policy objectives align so completely with what Putin wants. The mainstream media has just woken up to Trump’s soft corner for Russia. While they were obsessing about Hillary Clinton’s email servers, Adam Silverman over at Balloon Juice was on to it even during the primaries.
In the Republican nominee’s New York Times interview he is signaling the end of NATO and that the United States will renege on its treaty obligations. He is willing to throw everything successive administrations since WW II have built,down the toilet, just so that he appears tough.
Mr. Trump wants the United States to run NATO like an extortion racket. His proposals resemble dinner rants of your drunk uncle who everyone in the family goes out of their way to avoid. He wants to destroy the post war world order. He seems to be unaware of his own ignorance and is proud of it. He is evil and stupid, a dangerous combination. The Republican party has placed him on the path to power, to destroy the world as we know it. Hillary Clinton is all that stands between us and Trump induced mayhem.
Yesterday, Hillary Clinton, became the first woman to clinch the nomination of a major party for the President of the United States. I was an Obot in 2008 and was not completely taken in by Hillary Clinton when the primary season started even this time around. I was hoping that some one else would emerge on the scene like Barack Obama had 8 years earlier. However, as the primary season went on I slowly drifted into Hillary’s corner, mainly because her competition was pathetic. Maryland governor O’Malley looked good on paper but failed to make any impression, Jim Webb seemed like he had wandered into the wrong primary contest, I just could not see the appeal of his Scots-Irish shtick to the Democratic electorate. I was always skeptical of Bernie Sanders because his record in office did not match his soaring rhetoric. When it came to issues like immigration and gun control Bernie Sanders positions as a Congressman and then a Senator had not been particularly progressive.
As the contest went on it became increasingly obvious that Sanders policy expertise was tissue thin and besides rhetoric he had little to offer. At this stage of the campaign he has proved himself no better than a toddler throwing a tantrum because he did not get his way.
Hillary Clinton is a survivor and a champion fighter. She has had more brickbats than bouquets thrown at her and she still soldiers on. I salute her resilience and spirit. I envy the energy she brings to the fight day in and day out, no matter what.
So to celebrate her historic win after a hard fought and a long battle I offer you, We are the Champions, by Queen for the Queen. The lyrics could have been written by Hillary herself!
I’ve paid my dues
Time after time
I’ve done my sentence
But committed no crime
And bad mistakes
I’ve made a few
I’ve had my share of sand
Kicked in my face
But I’ve come through
I never thought I would type these words but Trump, the insult comic with a distinctive hairstyle, is the Republican nominee after his win in yesterday’s Indiana primary. We all knew this moment was coming but were hoping against hope that sanity would prevail among the insane. No such luck for us. We are stuck with the bastard child of the GOP and the so-called liberal media, at least until November. I believe congratulations are in order to the proud parents.
First of all congratulations to the Republican party. Your party’s descent into hell is now complete. You are now the party of Trump. No longer can you hide behind the fig leaf of plausible deniability. Your eight years of relentless Obama hate has reached its logical conclusion. You built it and now there is no running away from it. He embodies your demonization of the Obama coalition in flesh. Good job!
Also congratulations are in order to the brave defenders of truth in the press, especially the both-sides-do-it Pundit class. After grading Bush II on a curve and giving him a pass on all his fuck-ups till a major American city drowned on his watch, you descended like a pack of hyenas on President Obama, 5 minutes after he was sworn in. You gave Trump a platform for his noxious birther nonsense against the President. You aired his every noxious combustible utterance. You must be as proud as Prof. Frankenstein of your creation, now that he has gone on to win the nomination of the Republican party.
Party of Lincoln now the Party of Trump
In the Republican fight for the Presidential nomination, its all immigrant bashing all the time. Demonizing immigrants from Mexico is what has propelled Donald Trump to the front of the pack. So after anchor babies, building a wall on the Canadian border and tracking all visitors to the United States like FedEx packages, what’s next on the menu of the immigrant hate fest?
According to many conservative intellectuals and I am using this term loosely, the real problem with immigration is the legal variety. Number of legal permanent residents admitted every year is too damn high, for the likes of Mark Krikorian, the National Review contributor and a frequent guest expert on immigration for the PBS News Hour. This is what he has to say about legal immigration,
Downsizing the federal immigration program would give us a breather, improving the job prospects and reducing welfare dependency, not only of the native-born but also the immigrants already here. Republican efforts at recruiting in immigrant communities might have a chance of catching up to the rapid growth that will take place even without immigration. Note that better control over illegal immigration — walls, mass deportations, whatever — isn’t going to fix this. Most immigration is legal immigration, and that’s where change is most needed.
The current numbers for legal immigration are about 1 million per year. A quick look at the data shows, that about half of the green cards granted from years 2011-2013 went to direct relatives of United States citizens. These relatives include spouses, parents and children. The number of green cards that went to employment related categories was less than 15% from 2012-2013 and 16% in 2011. So even if all the employment based legal immigration was slowed down to a trickle, it wouldn’t make a dent in the overall numbers, for that you would have to get rid of family sponsored green cards or greatly reduce their numbers. In 2013, 68% of the family sponsored green cards went to the immediate relatives of US citizens of which 39% went to spouses.
So I am wondering, which of the presidential candidates of the party of limited government will first present a plan to deal with this scourge, by decreeing who you can get married to? This is not as far fetched as its sounds. The idea of ending birthright citizenship had been doing rounds in conservative circles before it ended up in the Trump plan and the national conversation. Here, is an article in Slate advocating the same, written by Reihan Salam.
What is ironic is that Krikorian and Salam who have somewhat recent immigrant roots (namely being a grandchild and a child of immigrants) want to pull up the draw bridge now that they are in and let the riff raff drown in the moat. They may try to dress their objections in more intellectual clothing but their ideology smacks of double standards and the philosophy of FYGM. According to Krikorian and Salam, the current crop of immigrants are a net drain. If they don’t work (because they are either children or the elderly) they are a burden to the society, if they work they are stealing jobs from hard working Americans. The only good immigrants, according to these two are the ones who came in generations past, like their parents or grandparents.
According to the Republican frontrunner Donald Trump and the rest of the spineless Republicans running for the nomination who cannot or will not challenge Trump, non-citizens have children to secure a foot hold in the United States. The party of family values thinks that people who are not them have children for diabolical reasons.
Having children to get a leg up in the immigration process makes zero sense, since the said child cannot sponsor his or her parents for permanent residency until they are at least 21 years old and can show that they can support their parents financially. Since that’s not something most 21 year olds are capable of, presumably the wait will be longer for most parents than the 21 years, to successfully use their child as a pawn in their own immigration process. The so called anchor baby is not particularly useful means for parents to attain the permanent resident status.
Having citizen children is no guarantee against deportation either. In 2013, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement deported more than 72000 individuals who said that they had one or more citizen children. Washington Post’s Janell Ross has more on this issue, if you are interested.