So Full of S..t

     According to our President, Mexico is the most dangerous country in the world.  This is not my opinion. 

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump

"We need the Wall for the safety and security of our country. We need the Wall to help stop the massive inflow of drugs from Mexico, now rated the number one most dangerous country in the world. If there is no Wall, there is no Deal!"

I was stunned to read this today. How could I have missed this change of status? I was considering getting some dental work done in Mexico, since I can't afford to have it done in the U.S. This is terrible, what am I going to do? Where can I go, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria? Surely there is something I can do.

Wait, there is something. Pause, B R E A T H E. Could I be misunderstanding anything in his missive regarding the danger of a trek to Mexico? Ok, first things first, trust but verify. My buddy Google is always willing to share her knowledge. It seemed that "most dangerous countries in the world" would be a reasonable search. I didn't find anything addressing the threats of which I must apparently be aware in the The World Factbook, a publication of the CIA. Let us peruse some non-government sources. Oh, The Global Peace Index would probably have some information I could use. Let's see, Syria, Afghanistan, South Sudan...wait, where's Mexico? Hmmm, there it is, number 25. Maybe this list is not current. I'll try another. Maybe Travel and Leisure, they're very consumer oriented. Ok, here we go, Pakistan, Sudan, Georgia, the list is only 15 countries long. Mexico failed to make the cut. Not a problem, let's see, ahh, Atlas and Boots, what do they have? Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, South Sudan, Yemen, damnit, oh, there it is, Mexico #22.

Let me reconsider my data sources. If I were the President of the United States would I have to resort to a Google search. No, I'd definitely use a .gov. I've already checked with the CIA so on to the State Department. The travel advisories would probably be a good place to start. In case you are not familiar with the new travel advisory rating system, here's an outline. The current system was activated January 10, 2018. The system rates advisories on a scale from 1-4, with 1 being Exercise Normal Precautions: This is the lowest advisory level for safety and security risk. There is some risk in any international travel.  Conditions in other countries may differ from those in the United States and may change at any time.   4 is Do Not Travel: This is the highest advisory level due to greater likelihood of life-threatening risks. During an emergency, the U.S. government may have very limited ability to provide assistance.  The Department of State advises that U.S. citizens not travel to the country or leave as soon as it is safe to do so.  The Department of State provides additional advice for travelers in these areas in the Travel Advisory. Conditions in any country may change at any time.

     Now we're getting somewhere.  Obviously, Mexico, the most dangerous country in the world, would be a 4.  Ah, not so fast young grasshoppa.  According to travel.state.gov Mexico is a 2.  A level 2 advisory is Exercise Increased Caution: Be aware of heightened risks to safety and security. The Department of State provides additional advice for travelers in these areas in the Travel Advisory.  Conditions in any country may change at any time. 

     How can this be?  State must not rate anyone a 3 or 4.  We'll take a look anyway, just for grins.  Ok, level 4, Afghanistan, Syria, South Sudan, Yemen, hmm, this looks familiar.  There are 11 countries currently subject to a level 4 travel advisory and Mexico is not one of them.  There are 19 level 3 travel advisories and Mexico is not one of those either.  A level 3 advisory is Reconsider Travel: Avoid travel due to serious risks to safety and security. The Department of State provides additional advice for travelers in these areas in the Travel Advisory.  Conditions in any country may change at any time.   Apparently, the U.S. State Department does not feel you should even reconsider your travel to the most dangerous country in the world.  

     Let us review.  There is no reputable list which shows Mexico as the most dangerous country in the world.  Mexico is not even in the top 10.  What these list do share is Afghanistan, South Sudan and Yemen, etc., as among the most dangerous countries in the world.

     Government sources do not declare Mexico to be among the most dangerous countries in the world.  

     I'm kinda feeling I can still go to Mexico.  That's a relief.

Whaduyathink?

The Wild Colossus

Just like the brazen giant of Greek fame

With conquering limbs astride from sea to sea;

Here at our fear-washed , padlocked gates shall stand

A berserker with a torch, whose flame

Is a firebolt of intolerance, and her name

Forsaker of exiles.  From her beacon hand

Glows world-wide rejection, her wild eyes command

The bridge spanned harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she

With silent lips.  "We reject your tired, disdain your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. 

Hinder these, the homeless, tempest-host, forbid them from me,

I douse my lamp beside the impermeable door!"

I Shit You Not

 “Why are we having all these people from s---hole countries come here?” This is a quote of our esteemed, honorable President, Donald J. Trump.  This is another sterling example of the statesmanship and leadership in which he engages.  The president was referring to people from Haiti, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras and African countries in the temporary protected status program.  The following are the countries included in the program:  El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Nepal, Nicaragua, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Syria & Yemen.  So that you may place these comments into a context I will share what the Temporary Protected Status Program (TPS) is and its aims.      

     The Secretary of Homeland Security may designate a foreign country for TPS due to conditions in the country that temporarily prevent the country's nationals from returning safely, or in certain circumstances, where the country is unable to handle the return of its nationals adequately.   The Secretary may designate a country for TPS due to the following temporary conditions in the country:Ongoing armed conflict (such as civil war), An environmental disaster (such as earthquake or hurricane), or an epidemic, Other extraordinary and temporary conditions.     The purpose of the TPS is to provide humanitarian relief.  It does not exist to provide a right to citizenship.  It does allow one to work and pay taxes.  In 2016 there were approximately 153,000 benefactors of this program.  

     He followed this with suggesting that instead, the U.S. should allow more entrants from countries like Norway.  This may be hard to fathom, but Norway does not have any citizens who need to immigrate based on a need for humanitarian relief.  In fact, in 2016 there were only 362 U.S. immigrants with Norwegian citizenship.

     Immigrants from developed countries with industrial capabilities and fully functioning governments are not going to be using TPS.  What they will use is the EB-1/-2/-3/-4/-5 workers visa program.  If one believes immigrants are taking away jobs from Americans, this is the program you should be worried about.  TPS beneficiaries may gain employment.  EB visa holders are brought into the country exclusively to work.  There are approximately 140,000 EB visas issued annually.  There are EB visas issued to citizens of the listed shithole countries.  Is it possible for there to be shithole country citizens who are welcome in the U.S.?

     “Certain Washington politicians choose to fight for foreign countries, but President Trump will always fight for the American people,” said Raj Shah, the principal deputy White House press secretary.      Nobody is fighting FOR any countries.  Some are actually attempting to provide humanitarian aid to those who are hungry, suffering, oppressed, and war weary.  Not every difference in opinion has to be framed as a fight or "war on" or "epidemic", although such rhetoric is prevalent whenever a party desires to make another feel threatened and enlist the other in their cause as if they have a shared enemy.  This strategy has been employed through the centuries and across all borders.  It has been employed as a propaganda tool by democracies, monarchies, and tyrants.

     Also, can a country be a shithole without being a part of the TPS program, or is that the sole qualification?  Furthermore, is this really the type of speech in which you wish to engage in order to facilitate the conduct of foreign affairs?  The countries you refer to as shitholes today are the recipients of aid from and allies to your actual global enemies and competition tomorrow.

     If you are actually curious as to why some of the countries on the TPS are in the state they are you may want to refer 20th century history, especially with reference to U.S. military interventions and U.S. imposed market and economic policies.  

     Whaduyathink?

     

     
     

Massive Voter Fraud!!! Wait..what? Oh, maybe not.

     Apparently, voter fraud is rampant, at least in the United States.  This must be the case because candidate and President Donald Trump has made this claim repeatedly.  The context has been varied.      Allow me to share a few with you.
     January 5, 2016:   "This voting system is out of control. You have people, in my opinion, that are voting many, many times. They don't want security, they don't want cards."
     August 2, 2016:  "We may have people vote 10 times. "  "I’m just saying that I wouldn’t be surprised if the election . . . there’s a lot of dirty pool played at the election, meaning the election is rigged. I would not be surprised."

RUCKER: Do you think someone can vote multiple times?  TRUMP: Multiple times. How about like 10 times.

    October 17, 2016:  "Of course, there is large scale voter fraud happening on and before election day."

     November 27, 2016:  "In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally."  "Serious voter fraud in Virginia, New Hampshire and California - so why isn't the media reporting on this? Serious bias - big problem!"

     January 25, 2017:  "I will be asking for a major investigation into VOTER FRAUD, including those registered to vote in two states, those who are illegal and even, those registered to vote who are dead (and many for a long time). Depending on results, we will strengthen up voting procedures!"     

     There is no credible evidence to support these assertions. Furthermore, there is no credible evidence of large-scale voter fraud occurring in the United States, nor any credible evidence of any large-scale voter fraud having occurred in the 2016 election. Most claims to the contrary have originated on right-wing websites and those claims have not stood up to scrutiny, like an article on conspiracy theorist Alex Jones’s InfoWars website, which falsely claimed that 3 million undocumented immigrants voted illegally this year.

     May 11, 2017:  Presidential Executive Order on the Establishment of Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity.  

     Read it, you'll see how POTUS 45 uses the power of his office to attempt to validate his own desires.  Do not be distracted by the prose in which it is couched.  I would also strongly recommend you peruse the meeting minutes this commission has issued.  

     There are many more assertions of this type that have been made since the establishment of the Advisory Commission.  That's a hell of a lot of smoke, there must be a fire.  Evidently not, 

     January 3, 2018:  Executive Order on the Termination of Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity.  What the hell?  Oh, wait, there must be some definitive findings regarding the massive voter fraud taking place in U.S. elections.  Tell us, is it the undocumented immigrants (illegal aliens, for my Republican readers)?  Maybe it is all the dead people.  Could it be the folks who are registered in multiple states and driving amongst those on election day?  No?  Then why are you disbanding?  

     Maybe some realized the only fraud being perpetrated here is the existence of this commission.  Nope, not that either.  “Despite substantial evidence of voter fraud, many states have refused to provide the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity with basic information relevant to its inquiry. Rather than engage in endless legal battles at taxpayer expense, today I signed an executive order to dissolve the commission, and have asked the Department of Homeland Security to review these issues and determine next courses of action.” Donald J Trump.

     So, your position is still that voter fraud exists and there is substantial evidence of such.  However, because it is difficult and costly to prove this, you will, metaphorically, take your ball and go home.  Apparently the sanctity of the polling booth is not as firmly held a belief as you have led us to accept it to be.

     The only fraud here is you.  Oh, and your little hands, those are fraudulent appendages.

     Whaduyathink?

     

     

Words that shall not be Spoken

                                        

     The forbidden words are "vulnerable," "entitlement," "diversity," "transgender," "fetus," "evidence-based" and "science-based."  These are the 7 words the Trump administration has advised the CDC (Center for Disease Control) shall not be used in any official documents being prepared for next year's budget.

 

     There have been other lists of forbidden words.  If you are of a certain age you will recall the seven dirty words”.  These are the seven English-language words that American comedian George Carlin first listed in 1972 in his monologue "Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television".^[1] The words are: shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits.

     According to a former U.S. Secretary of State, “Censorship gives power to dictators and tyrants; it allows them to mask the truth, to propagate false narratives that play to their self-serving interests.”

     In the 18^th century, an author known as Voltaire offered the following exposition to those who would practice censorship.  “As you have it in your power, sir, to do some service to letters, I implore you not to clip the wings of our writers so closely, nor to turn into barn-door fowls those who, allowed a start, might become eagles; reasonable liberty permits the mind to soar — slavery makes it creep.

     Had there been a literary censorship in Rome, we should have had to-day neither Horace, Juvenal, nor the philosophical works of Cicero. If Milton, Dryden, Pope, and Locke had not been free, England would have had neither poets nor philosophers; there is something positively Turkish in proscribing printing; and hampering it is proscription. Be content with severely repressing defamatory libels, for they are crimes: but so long as those infamous calottes are boldly published, and so many other unworthy and despicable productions, at least allow Bayle to circulate in France, and do not put him, who has been so great an honour to his country, among its contraband.

     You say that the magistrates who regulate the literary custom-house complain that there are too many books. That is just the same thing as if the provost of merchants complained there were too many provisions in Paris. People buy what they choose. A great library is like the City of Paris, in which there are about eight hundred thousand persons: you do not live with the whole crowd: you choose a certain society, and change it. So with books: you choose a few friends out of the many. There will be seven or eight thousand controversial books, and fifteen or sixteen thousand novels, which you will not read: a heap of pamphlets, which you will throw into the fire after you have read them. The man of taste will read only what is good; but the statesman will permit both bad and good.”

      Napoleon claimed that the censorship was based on stopping, “the manifestation of ideas which trouble the peace of the state, its interests and good order.”  Is Trump and/or his administration troubled by the words he has banned from use by the CDC?

     I hear you, let’s just pull back on the reins for a moment.  I’m only talking about words banned from use by 1 agency.  Surely this is not a particularly urgent moment in history.

     Were this the only case of censorship or attempt to intimidate and control functions of the government and public it certainly would not be noteworthy.  However, and unfortunately, that is not the case.

     He (POTUS45) has made extensive use of his bully pulpit to do just that, bully.  He wants to control the narrative in such a manner that he can control all action and reaction.  He has proclaimed the media to be the “enemy of the American people”.  Any reporting which does not reflect favorably upon POTUS and his administration favorably is proclaimed to be “fake news”.  This proclamation has nothing to do with truth or falsehood, but is strictly about image.  If your inauguration crowd is not as impressive as you desire just present “alternative facts”.  “This was the largest audience ever to witness an inauguration, period, both in person and around the globe,” according to Sean Spicer back in January of this year.  Now, once committed to the lie, he attacked the contrary reports.  Sean accused the press of “deliberately false reporting.”   Staff at the U.S. Department of Agriculture were instructed to censor the terms "climate change," "reduce greenhouse gasses," "sequester carbon," and "climate change adaptation" in their work.  In March, the Department of Energy's international climate office had instructed staff not to use "climate change," "emissions reduction," or "Paris Agreement" in "memos, briefings, or other written communication."  Because, if you don't say the words, the problem doesn't exist.

     If Trump is sincerely concerned about his image and legacy, I would recommend he consider banning the following; tyrant, demagogue, narcissist, defaulter, sexual predator, and adulterer.  This list is not to be considered comprehensive but merely to provide a guide. 

     When George Carlin engaged in adolescent humor by uttering “dirty” words in a public forum, that can be considered either humorous or in poor taste.  When the President of the United States engages in censorship of government offices and attacks upon a free and unfettered press, that is of much more serious consequence.

     Whaduyathink?