Opuscula Racist ! Xenophobe ! Ignoramuses

THE MEDIA AND DEMOCRATS in Congress are proving they missed out on Vocabulary 101 in elementary (a/k/a primary) school.

For example: Anyone who says anything about a “person of color” is a racist.

I was mugged.

The police ask me to describe the attacker.

I cannot.

If I report that I was attacked by a man, that is sexist, so I cannot use that descriptive.

If I report that I was attacked by a “person of color” (e.g., anyone other than a Caucasian) that’s racist. (Could I tell the Oriental cop that a “person of color” came to my aid? Or is that, too, racist?)

Define “racist.”

 


Above image from Merriam-Webster ¹

 

THERE IS NO question that the president is “thin skinned” and that his tweets are, more often than not, a knee-jerk reaction to taunts from Democrats still smarting from Hillary’s defeat.

But “racist”?

True he suggested that at least four of his tormentors should go “back where they came from.” One of his loudest detractors was rescued by America from civil strife in Somalia; the remaining three members of “The Squad” are U.S. citizens by birth, but they should be removed from the House and sent back to their congressional districts as simple citizens.

These women, calling them “ladies” is more than I can manage, have abused the office in most unladylike terms — at least in language that this geezer find inappropriate. So much for the “gentler sex.”

Or is that sexist?

The president might be labeled “xenophobic,” but given how he treats legally admitted foreigners and people from different cultures — he manages to deal with North Korea’s dictator — and finally strangers. According to the Dictionary.com² as shown in the following image.

 



 

The president seems to do well with leaders from many countries. So far I have not heard of him inviting someone to a state dinner and then not showing (a la Obama and Netanyahu).

If I am not mistaken, the current Mrs. Trump is a naturalized American.

With the exception of the negative Washington Post that headlined What Trump has not done for African-Americans and Hispanics, most web sites credit the president for doing a good job for blacks — hardly the mark of a racist.

I was unable to read the WashPost article so my assumption is based on the headline. Sites that acknowledge Trump’s efforts include
Voters Say Trump Better for Blacks Than Obama, But More Is Needed³
Alveda King: Trump has done more for African Americans than Biden⁴
Trump's real record on race may surprise you⁵

There is no argument that the president has tried, and been repeatedly thwarted by Democrats in the House, to reduce the influx of illegal immigrants entering the U.S. from Mexico (and points south).

It is worth noting that Trump’s predecessor gave Mexico US$75 million to help it control illegal immigration from countries to Mexico’s south. No complaints from the media or Congress for that use of taxpayer dollars.⁶

It is my opinion that in conjunction with that the Feds ought to crack down on the people hiring the illegals at sub-standard wages. Make hiring an illegal alien an offense with real teeth — $10,000 fines per illegal AND no less than 90 days at the country farm (jail where inmates are expected to work). Failure to provide an I-9 form for each employee already is a Federal crime with stiff penalties.⁷

Between what Trump has done for blacks and the reason behind the clamp down on illegal aliens, it is hard to charge the president with either racism or xenophobia.

Anti-Muslim?

That also “doesn’t wash.”

He DID try to restrict unlimited access of all citizens from seven predominately Muslim countries. He did try to insist on strict vetting of these citizens. (His predecessor had put similar vetting requirements in place, but no one complained.)

There are 50 Muslim dominated countries around the globe.⁸ Trump was concerned with only seven.

Unlike Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Trump has NOT refused sanctuary to any Muslims who might be headed to a death camp⁹

While Trump HAS put illegals in camps, FDR put American citizens into concentration camps. Who ordered the current separation of families is open to debate; it should not have happened, but when children are sent into a country illegally or abandoned by their parents, what are the options?

 

Trump’s biggest problem is finding someone to rein in his tweeting. His reaction to the Democrats’ constant baiting only encourages additional attacks.

Restraint on the president’s part will gain respect both for the man and the office while showing the ignorance of his attackers.

 


Cartoon by Bruce Plante in the Tulsa (OK) World July 6, 2017

 

---

Sources

1. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism

2. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/xenophobe

3. Rasmussen Reports, http://tinyurl.com/y5lqfwgm

4. Des Moines Register, http://tinyurl.com/y2h6ct5z

5. Chicago Tribune, http://tinyurl.com/y3rbcaus

6. Mexican wall, http://tinyurl.com/yb9d3uej

7. U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement, http://tinyurl.com/y2x7c57o

8. Muslim countries, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country

9. FDR & death camps, http://tinyurl.com/ycm2yztn

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.

Comments on Trump’s “Racism”

Opuscula Apartheid, Arab style

APARTHEID, according to the dictionary¹ is defined as:

: racial segregation specifically: a former policy of segregation and political and economic discrimination against non-European groups in the Republic of South Africa


2 : separation, segregation cultural apartheid gender apartheid

Given that there is no government sponsored, or even encouraged, racial or religious segregation in Israel, apartheid cannot be applied to Israel.

ON THE OTHER HAND, apartheid CAN be applied to the PLO-controlled areas and to Jordan where Jews (of any hue) cannot reside.

It also can be applied to several cities in Saudi Arabia were only Muslims are allowed to enter.

Alan Dershowitz, with whom I do not always agree, wrote a book, The Case for Israel^{2, 3}. It has been sitting on the shelf for some time, unopened.

Saturday, looking for something to read I pulled it down and commenced reading.

To his credit, Dershowitz cites his sources. I am “very big” about citing sources.

On Page 37 of the book, in Chapter 4, Was the Balfour Declaration Binding on Internationals Law? Dershowitz writes:

The first state established in (English-ruled) Palestine was thus an emirate with a large Palestinian majority. Abdullah, the brother of neighboring Iraq’s new ruler, would rule it. Many of the Jews who lived in what became Transjordan (now Jordan) — some of whom had lived there for generations — had been forced because of episodic outbreaks of violence and, by law, the few remaining Jews were forbidden from living in Transjordan. (Emphasis mine.)

Dershowitz’ source: Jordanian nationality law, Article 3(3) of Law No. 6 and Official Gazette No. 1171, Feb. 6, 1954.

THAT is apartheid.

While an Arab — Muslim, Christian, Druze, etc. — may buy land in “apartheid “ Israel, according to Wikipedia.org⁴,

Palestinian land laws refer to ownership of land under the Palestinian Authority (PA). These laws prohibit Palestinians from selling Palestinian-owned lands to "any man or judicial body corporation of Israeli citizenship, living in Israel or acting on its behalf." These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian rule of the West Bank (1948–1967). Land sales to Israelis are considered treason by the Palestinians because they threaten the founding of a future state and to "halt the spread of moral, political and security corruption". Palestinians who sell land to Israelis can be sentenced to death, although death penalties are seldom carried out; a death sentence has to be approved by the Palestinian Authority President.

THAT is apartheid.

The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement IS apartheid within the dictionary definition (ibid.) as it forces Jewish-owned companies away from Palestinian (PLO)-controlled areas.

SodaStream is a prime example.

SodaStream employed both Israeli Jews and Arabs from PLO-controlled areas until BDS forced SodaStream to relocate. It relocated to southern Israel where it employs Jews and Bedouins.

Equal pay for equal work.

SodaStream was busing in workers from the PLO-controlled areas at its expense and paying them higher salaries than they could receive at home.

Bottom line: BDS hurts the PLO more than Israel, but the BDSers apparently don’t care.

A major — and growing — supermarket chain, Rami Levy, employs both Israelis (Arabs, Christians, and Jews) and some Arabs from the PLO-controlled areas at equal pay in its stores.

Hundreds of Arabs from the PLO-area enter Israel on a daily basis and work for salaries above anything they could earn at home.

Caveat: I hold dual citizenship, Israel and U.S. I lived in Israel and visit often. I see first hand Arabs at work in Israel.

There ARE places in Israel where Arabs — even Israeli Arabs — are less than welcome. These areas usually are populated by refugees or descendants of refugees from Muslim countries.

There also are Arab communities in Israel that discourage Israeli Jews from being part of the community. Affinity communities are common worldwide.

BOTTOM LINE

To claim that Israel is an apartheid state is a sign of ignorance. Most of the people making this blatantly untrue claim never have been to Israel (or the PLO-controlled areas) or, for that matter, any apartheid country (e.g., Jordan, Saudi Arabia).

Apartheid in the PLO-controlled areas is a fact. Apartheid hurts the Arabs living under PLO domination — or Hamas domination in Gaza — more than it hurts the people it seems to segregate, people — Israeli Arabs, Christians, and Jews who could provide jobs, health care, and education (sans the politics of hate taught in United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) schools) if the Arabs of Gaza and the PLO-controlled areas would abandon THEIR apartheid practices.

A quick comment on peace

Most “official” Israelis have been willing to have a “two-state” solution since 1947.

(Actually, there already IS a “two-state” solution; the other state is Jordan.)

Can there be peace with a “Palestinian” state controlled by the PLO and by Hamas?

Not until the PLO and Hamas give up their pledges to drive the Jews to the sea.

On the other hand, Israel HAS long-lasting treaties with Egypt and with Jordan. All parties benefit from these agreements.

Today, Arab physicians come from PLO-controlled areas to study and work in Israeli hospitals. Arabs from the PLO areas are treated at Israeli hospitals with the same level of care as Israeli patients.

There are extra-governmental groups of Israelis and PLO-area Arabs working to train those under PLO control to work in a high tech industry that, unfortunately, is not available in the PLO-controlled areas.

If the PLO and Hamas want peace, Israel is prepared to work toward that end.

Final question

If the PLO and Hamas are really peaceful pseudo-governments, why don’t Egypt and Jordan want to accept these peoples into their countries?

Jordan doesn’t want them because they will try, once again, to over-throw the crown. Egypt doesn’t want them because Hamas is a terror organization that works against Egypt as much as Israel. (Begin tried to give Sadat Gaza; Sadat was a better negotiator and refused Begin’s offer.)

---

Sources

1. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apartheid

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_for_Israel

3. https://electronicintifada.net/content/case-israel-critical-review/5629

4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_land_laws

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.

Comments on Apartheid, Arab style

Opuscula Trump tweets: Stupid — Yes Racist — No

FOUR “WOMEN OF COLOR” and their friends are claiming that President Trump’s stupid “go back where you came from” tweet is racist.

The tweet is stupid because of the four, only one is a naturalized American; the others were born in the U.S.

But racist? Only in the minds of the women and their friends.

 

Cartoon by Bruce Plante in the Tulsa (OK) World July 6, 2017

 

DONALD TRUMP is many things. Some good. Some appallingly stupid.

Many — perhaps most — of his “social media” comments are stupid.

They are knee jerk — the emphasis is on “jerk” — reactions.

The Democrats and a few Republicans have baited him from Hillary’s non-conciliation speech after she lost the election until today.

Trump is not one of the “Old Boy” politicians and the professional politicians may feel endangered. He shoots from the lip, as the expression goes.

Editorial cartoonists have a field day with Trump Tweets.

Justifiably.

Before he took office there was, at least by this scrivener, hope that someone, anyone would rein in his instant, ignorant responses to his attackers.

That hope was dashed and continues to be trampled upon each time Trump tweets.

As president, Trump HAS (tried) to honor his pledge to the average American.

He promised to build a wall on the Mexico-U. S. border — then stupidly insisted against all evidence that Mexico would pay for the wall.

Never mind that Trump’s predecessor in the White House gave Mexico funds to help it build a wall on Mexico’s southern border. Funny how no one in Congress or the media complained about that.

He promised to bring back jobs to the U.S.; he did that.

He is trying to deal with China and other countries that have taken advantage of this country’s stupidity in foreign trade, a situation he inherited from previous administrations, both Republican and Democrat. He seems to think that if Country A levies a 60% tariff on Made in America products, the U.S. should levy an equal tariff on Country A’s products.

Plus, it encourages manufacturers to move at least some production to the U.S.

Assembled in America It seems to work. No thanks to Trump, but a number of Japanese auto makers have set up production lines in the U.S. The auto makers would have pulled out if the arrangement was not profitable for them. Ford brought back F-150 pickup assembly it moved to Mexico from Virginia where Ford put many Americans out of work.

In my 75-plus years I never have seen attacks on a president as vicious and continuous at the Democrats' attacks on Trump.

The Republicans behaved, for the most part, civilly to Trump’s predecessor despite his attempt to ruin the nation in eight years.

I do not hold with polls. I don’ trust them.

I have created polls that, with a select group of responders, can give me the results I want.

The only “poll” in which I have any confidence is the one answered in the privacy of the voting booth, and at times even that is suspect.

Don’t suggest that outsiders, e.g., Russians, tried to influence the elections. U.S. politicians, including Trump’s predecessor in the White House, have mucked about in other nations’ elections, at times using force to remove an elected official with whom Washington was unhappy.

Trump won that poll, at least that is what the electoral college determined. Personal opinion: there is no reason for the college to exist in this age of instant communication and accurate vote counts.

Trump does himself — and the country — no favors with his knee jerk, off-the-cuff remarks, all too often based on ignorance. Trump needs someone to fact check his comments before going public.

It is one thing not to be “politically correct,” but it is another to be stupidly incorrect.

America needs a strong president, and it has that in Trump.

American does NOT need a buffoon as its face to the world.

At the same time, the leftists in both parties need to tone down their oft-unjustified attacks on the president; they are only setting themselves up for similar abuse from conservatives when they eventually regain control of the White House.

What America needs is not a “good 5¢ cigar”¹ but a good dose of civility.

When I was a young airman I was told that no matter how much I disliked the colonel (and I did dislike the colonel), I was saluting the rank, not the man.

The same should apply to the presidency; the leftists may — and by their actions obviously do — hate the man, but they should show respect for the office.

Mocking a politician is a great American sport, but the constant, unrelenting attacks on Trump go far beyond mere mocking.

If the leftists would back off, even a little, perhaps we would have fewer stupid tweets from the Oval Office.

We are showing the world politics at its worst. We should be ashamed.

---

Sources

1. http://tinyurl.com/y2nozerd

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.

Comments on Trump tweets

2020 Census question What am I Missing here?

I DON’T UNDERSTAND THE flap over asking “The Citizenship Question” on the census.

The question was on previous census forms.

The census forms are anonymous.

I’M A CITIZEN. Actually, I am a dual-national. I was, as the song goes, “Born in the U.S.A.” to U.S. citizens and can go back several generations in America.

My wife is a naturalized American citizen.

We both will answer the citizenship question if it is on the form.

I know some people who are not U.S. citizens.

They are here on work visas, Green Cards, student visas, and so on.

Bottom line: They are here. Legally.

Those that work (legally) pay taxes and Social Security and Medicare, benefits those here for a relatively short period will not enjoy.

On the other hand, they DO benefit from the country in many ways.

It is a two-way street.

So why are the leftists screaming about a simple census question: Are you a citizen of the U.S.A.?

Perhaps the leftists feel that illegals will be identified for what they are if they respond to the census.

But illegals WON’T respond to the census. They will be “away from home” or have some other excuse if a live person tries to interview them (vs. the more typical questionnaire in the mail).

It is against the law for any Census Bureau employee to disclose or publish any census or survey information that identifies an individual or business. This is true even for inter-agency communication: the FBI and other government entities do not have the legal right to access this information. In fact, when these protections have been challenged, Title 13's confidentiality guarantee has been upheld. (Emphasis mine.)¹

There can be a penalty for failing to respond to the census; however, no penalties have been levied since at least the 1970 census.

The Census Bureau likes to stress the positive benefits of participation in the survey, but the proverbial stick does exist. Under Title 13 of the U.S. Code, you can be fined up to $100 for refusing to complete a census form and $500 for answering questions falsely. However, the Website for the U.S. Census Bureau points out that the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 effectively increased these minimum fines to $5,000. Noncompliance used to bring the possibility of a 60-day prison sentence and a one-year prison term for false answers, but Congress struck those provisions in 1976.²

Granted, the census can be used to “guesstimate” the number of illegals in the country by comparing municipal head counts and welfare demand to the number of people — citizens or not — answering the census. Cities claiming to be “sanctuary” cities undoubtedly will fall into this category. That’s OK since the municipality’s tax payers are paying for the privilege of hosting illegals.

Interestingly, the leftists seem focused on Latino illegals, ignoring all others.

There are illegals from many countries in the U.S. Many simply overstayed their visa Some not only managed to work but to build a business that employed others, citizens and fellow illegals.

The leftists’ interest in the Latino illegals might be because so many leftists employ Latino illegals.

If no one employed illegals — from ANY country — the number of illegals could be, would be, drastically reduced. That seems to have escaped the leftists’ mentality.

There ARE people who come to the U.S. because their lives are in danger in their home countries. The U.S. has a long history of welcoming such people; recent examples are Cubans and Vietnamese. (A notable exception were Jews trying to flee from the nazis; Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his State Department made certain the Jews went to their deaths in Europe rather than offer them sanctuary in America.³)

This scrivener is suggesting that the leftists are objecting to the citizenship question because they want to keep their under-paid serfs — Latinos — in semi-bondage. They know the illegals cannot seek employment elsewhere sans either proof of citizenship or permission to work in the U.S.

U.S. citizens must prove their right to work in the U.S. when they complete a Form I-9 for employers. Employers failing to have a Form I-9 for each employee can be fined. As of August of 2016, fines for all Form I-9 compliance violations had doubled from their previous levels. Those fines now range from $110 to $1,100 per violation up to a range of $216 to $2,156—not per individual form, but per error or omission on that form. ⁴

Bottom line: I fail to understand why asking if I am a U.S. citizen is so unconscionable; what has got the leftists so upset? Because President Trump wants the question included does that mean that the leftists automatically, in knee jerk reaction, oppose the questions.

Or does it just seem that way?

---

Sources

1. http://tinyurl.com/yy8ebjy3

2. http://tinyurl.com/y54mkz3h

3. http://tinyurl.com/y35dutpg

4. http://tinyurl.com/yxf99v5k

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.

Comments on Citizenship Question