Tag Archives: History

The NFL takes a knee against our white-supremacist-in-chief Donald Trump

No individual has disgraced and diminished the office of the presidency with his puerile conduct more than Donald Trump. Vladimir Putin could not be more pleased with his handiwork and  the damage that Trump is inflicting on the status and moral  leadership of the presidency. Trump is systematically attempting to dismantle the foundational principles, values and mores of American democracy.

Putin pal Donald Trump is no position to question the patriotism of any American.

Over the weekend, Donald Trump turned his plan to divide Americans  on America’s professional sports teams and athletes — in particular, African-American athletes who protest police violence against minorities — something Donald Trump has encouraged, Trump’s speech encouraging police to be ‘rough’, and more recently, to protest Trump’s failure to adequately condemn white supremacist hate speech after Charlottesville.

In this regard, the U.S. Congress unanimously agrees that Trump has failed to adequately condemn white supremacist hate speech. Congress takes Trump to task over his Charlottesville comments.

President Trump is trying to silence athletes who protest police violence in his “law and order,”  i.e. , institutional racism world, and more directly, silence critics of his white supremacy by attempting to reframe their protests as unpatriotic and disrespect for the flag. “Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel” – Samuel Johnson, 1775.

We have seen this right-wing play before when the Bush-Cheney regime tried to silence the Dixie Chicks for their public criticism of their unnecessary and illegal war in Iraq.  Like the Dixie Chicks, NFL players, coaches and owners were Not Ready to Make Nice on Sunday.

Continue reading

Trump’s phantom ‘armada’ leads to mockery and distrust in South Korea

The Trump White House and the Pentagon were either deliberately deceiving the American people last week, or they were so incompetent that they just didn’t know what they were doing. It’s likely a combination of both. Amy Davidson of the New Yorker reports, Donald Trump, North Korea, and the case of the phantom armada:

Some degree of delusion always has to be factored in with Donald Trump: when he referred to “the aircraft carriers” and, in another interview, with Fox Business, said that “we are sending an armada, very powerful,” he was widely understood to be referring to a single aircraft carrier, the U.S.S. Carl Vinson, and its support ships. In fairness, the Vinson would have been powerful and provocative enough—if it had, in fact, been speeding toward the Korean Peninsula, or the Sea of Japan, or even just the Pacific Ocean, which it was not. It was in the Indian Ocean, headed in the opposite direction, for exercises with what might be described as the Australian Armada. Just when you think you see the contours of Trump’s phantom menace, he comes up with a Phantom Fleet.

[T]he movements of a carrier group can’t be so hard to conceal, except, perhaps, from the people in charge of America’s foreign policy. Trump wasn’t alone on this one; it’s not a case of him just causing trouble with his phone and Twitter account, rambling about bad hombres. As the timeline makes clear, it’s even worse. (The Wall Street Journal and the Times have good versions.) On April 9th, three days before Trump’s Wall Street Journal interview, the Navy had said that it had ordered the Vinson “to sail north”; H. R. McMaster, the national-security adviser, reiterated that news on the same day, framing it as a response to North Korea’s own provocative moves. Secretary of Defense James Mattis followed that up on April 11th by saying that the Indian Ocean exercises were off, and said that the Vinson was “just on her way up there.” That was false. The next day, the Navy said again that the Vinson had been “ordered north”; it added that the effects of that deployment on “other previously scheduled activities are still being assessed during the transit.” The Pentagon is now trying to sell that last bit as a quiet correction of Mattis, which the press mysteriously missed—but that is, simply put, ridiculous. For one thing, there’s the phrase “during the transit,” which assumes that transit had begun. Or is the idea that the Vinson was on its way to the Sea of Japan, in the sense that we are all on our way from cradle to grave, or that Trump is in transit from the Oval Office to choosing items for the gift shop in his Presidential library? A lot can happen in between.

Continue reading

Someone really needs to explain Godwin’s Law to Sean Spicer

If today is a Jewish holiday, it must be time for “Baghdad Sean” Spicer to stick his foot in his mouth again. Someone really needs to explain Godwin’s Law to this  guy. SNL needs to call Melissa McCarthy for this Saturday.

Passover is this week, so naturally Sean Spicer Flubbed the Holocaust on Passover:

There’s no good time to make a Hitler comparison, but deploying one in the midst of Passover to justify voluntary airstrikes is an especially unwise choice, as White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer realized, to his chagrin, Tuesday afternoon.

Spicer was fielding questions about the Trump administration’s confusing and diffuse strategy toward Syria when he was asked why the White House believed that Russian President Vladimir Putin would break with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad at this moment.

“You look, we didn’t use chemical weapons in World War II. You had someone as despicable as Hitler who didn’t even sink to using chemical weapons,” Spicer said.

As puzzled reporters and other observers immediately noted, Spicer’s statement was deeply confusing, even if one could make a case it was accurate in very narrow terms. the Nazi government did not release chemical weapons on the battlefield during World War II. This may be the point Spicer was trying to make, as Defense Secretary James Mattis used a similar line later Tuesday afternoon.

Continue reading

Centennial Commemoration of U.S. entry into World War I

This week marks the centennial anniversary of the United States entry into World War I, the “Great War” and the “war to end all wars.” Lest we forget, World War I and its consequences shaped the events to follow in the 20th Century.

Surprisingly, this centennial anniversary has received little to no attention in the American media.

Yesterday, April 2, was the anniversary of President Woodrow Wilson asking Congress for a declaration of war against Germany. It went without notice in the American media. Wilson asks for declaration of war:

On April 2, 1917, President Woodrow Wilson asked Congress to send U.S. troops into battle against Germany in World War I. In his address to Congress that day, Wilson lamented it is a fearful thing to lead this great peaceful people into war. Four days later, on April 6, Congress obliged and declared war on Germany.

In February and March 1917, Germany, embroiled in war with Britain, France and Russia, increased its attacks on neutral shipping in the Atlantic and offered, in the form of the so-called Zimmermann Telegram, to help Mexico regain Texas, New Mexico and Arizona if it would join Germany in a war against the United States. The public outcry against Germany buoyed President Wilson in asking Congress to abandon America’s neutrality to make the world safe for democracy.

Wilson went on to lead what was at the time the largest war-mobilization effort in the country’s history. At first, Wilson asked only for volunteer soldiers, but soon realized voluntary enlistment would not raise a sufficient number of troops and signed the Selective Service Act in May 1917. The Selective Service Act required men between 21 and 35 years of age to register for the draft, increasing the size of the army from 200,000 troops to 4 million by the end of the war.

More than four million American families sent their sons and daughters to serve in uniform during the Great War. 116,516 U.S. soldiers gave their lives in combat. Another 200,000 were wounded (a casualty rate far greater than in World War II).

Continue reading

Trump Inaugural Address: American Carnage, America First

Donald J. Trump used his inaugural address to do what no other American president has ever done before: he described America as a dystopian post-apocalyptic hellscape right out of Escape from New York.

Trump takes office, vows an end to ‘American carnage’:

Trump delivered a dark inaugural address in which he pledged fealty to all Americans. But he made little overt attempt to soothe a nation still wounded from arguably the ­ugliest election season of modern times and signaled that he intends to govern as if waging a permanent political campaign.

Trump reprised the central ­arguments of his candidacy and harshly condemned the condition of the country he now commands. He said communities had fallen into disrepair with rampant crime, chronic poverty, broken schools, stolen wealth and “rusted-out factories scattered like tombstones.”

“This American carnage stops right here and stops right now,” Trump declared in his 16-minute address.

Trump has spent his entire life living in the toney gated communities of wealth and privilege only made possible by his living in America, where this grifter and con artist can take advantage of the vulnerable and the gullible.

The “American carnage” he describes exists only in the fetid imagination of Donald J. Trump (and the fever swamps of the conservative media entertainment complex from which he emerged). Fact-checking President Trump’s inaugural address. As the New York Times editorializes, America was already pretty great, despite its flaws, before Trump took office on Friday. What President Trump Doesn’t Get About America.

Continue reading

Donald Trump revives Richard Nixon’s 1968 playbook

I am seeing far too many pundits and reporters, some of whom are too young to have been around in the 1960’s, try to make the false analogy that the violence in America today is reminiscent of the tumultuous 1960’s. These are people I like to call “idiots.” Today is nothing at all like the 1960s. I know, I lived it.

We do not have cities burning from race riots and the national guard patrolling the streets of major cities to put down violence, and to protect police and firemen. We do not have anti-war protesters on college campuses and in Washington, D.C. being confronted by “hard hat” supporters of the war in Vietnam, the police, and the national guard. And we have not suffered a decade of assassinations of political and civil rights leaders.

There has never been an election year as violent and tumultuous as 1968, and God willing, there will never be another year like it again.

SilentMajorityBut apparently some geniuses (sic) advising Donald Trump have convinced him that running Richard Nixon’s 1968 p;aybook, complete with the Southern strategy of dividing America by appealing to racial animosity, imposing “law and order” against minorities and anti-war protesters, and appealing to a “silent majority” of Americans who support the war and getting tough on minorities and protesters, but who do not publicly speak out, is once again the path to victory in 2016.

Paul Waldman of the Washington Post writes, Trump is trying to re-run Nixon’s 1968 campaign. Here’s why it won’t work.

Judging by what he’s done over the last couple of days, Donald Trump seems to have decided that the way to win in November is to re-run Richard Nixon’s 1968 campaign. For those of you who weren’t around then, Nixon argued that the country had turned into a nightmare of chaos and violence, and only a strong leader like him could bring order and safety.

Continue reading