Humane Conditions for Human Beings!

Almost everyone will agree on the beauty of a flower.  There is a natural appeal to the eye that generally comes across as both pleasant and even calming.  This may be true for other things in daily life, from cute animals to artwork or a beautiful table setting.

Oddly enough, this universal appeal doesn't apply to our own species.  In particular, I point to the current issues related to immigration to the United States, particularly along the southern border with Mexico.  

The Evil of the Demonization of Immigrants

Before his election, Donald Trump was characterizing those crossing the border as generally criminals: "They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”  (Presidential announcement speech, June 16, 2015).  Trump and many of his supporters have been demonizing these human beings.  Trump has a continuous pattern of demonizing or down-playing those from poor countries, or who are people of color, or just not from northern Europe.  This plays to hatred of immigrants and people of color, hatred that can be found in some of Trump's followers but more especially in the fringe extreme right and hate groups.

This demonization of peoples if evil!  This is not the American way.  This does not support the works of our Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  In this matter of demonizing human beings, Trump is un-American!

The Evil of Inhumane Treatment of Detainees

Migrant camp at the border by Tijuana. 
Nov. 2018 photo by AP.

Current reports indicate that the number of peoples crossing the southern border and detained by the United States is overwhelming facilities resulting in overcrowding and unsanitary conditions, including for children.   This poor treatment of human beings in not the American way.  

More funding is needed immediately to improve conditions so that they are humane and sanitary.  If there are more people than can be held in safe and humane conditions, then people need to be released on one side of the border or the other.

The persistence of inhumane and unsanitary conditions in another sign of the un-American actions of the Trump Administration!

_________________________________________________________________________________

Contact your elected representatives in Congress and demand immediate action to ensure humane and sanitary conditions for detainees!! 

You Reap What You Sow

Yesterday, a rally for Presidential candidate Donald Trump was cancelled for safety concerns after waves of demonstrators descended upon the venue.  Demonstrators were protesting various statements Trump had made regarding Mexicans, Muslims, and Black Lives Matters supporters.

Trump has been blaming the demonstrators for inciting emotions and denying him of his 1st Amendment right to speak.

However, from a Libertarian standpoint, Trump is wrong on both counts.  

On the 2nd point, everyone has a 1st Amendment right to speak.  Trump does.  The protesters do.  

Trump also has to get used to the fact that as a public figure, he will get protesters and a press that doesn't always swoon at every word that comes out of his mouth.

On the 1st point, it is Trump who has incited emotions:

• "The Mexican Government is forcing their most unwanted people into the United States. They are, in many cases, criminals, drug dealers, rapists, etc.” (interview on Fox News’ “Media Buzz,” July 5, 2015, quoted in the Washington Post, July 8, 2015)
• "Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on."  (Trump campaign press release, quoted by CNN, December 8, 2015)
• "'I'd like to punch him in the face,' Trump said, remarking that a man disrupting his rally was escorted out with a smile on his face."  (reported by CNN February 23, 2016)
• "Knock the crap out of him, would you?" (Trump at a rally, reported by US News & World Report, March 11, 2016)

In recent rallies, a photographer was pushed to the ground when walking from the press area, various protesters were pushed and roughed up by security while being taunted while being removed from the venue, and "a reporter for the conservative website Breitbart, was grabbed by the arm and almost forced to the ground, apparently in an effort to prevent her from asking a question of the candidate." (quoted from a report by US News & World Report, March 11, 2016).

Clearly, these statements and actions foster suspicion and even hatred of protesters, as well as those groups he spoke against (Mexicans, Muslims, blacks).  And Trump cannot claim it's the protesters' fault when it is Trump who has said "I'd like to punch him in the face," and "Knock the crap out of him, would you?"

You reap what you sow!

The President Shall Nominate a Replacement for Justice Scalia

No sooner had Antonin Scalia, Associate Justice  of the Supreme Court un-expectedly died, when the controversy over his replacement started.

The President wants to nominate a replacement.  A number of Republican senators and Presidential candidates say we should wait until the public votes for a new president.

Who is correct?  

Let's start with a quote from the Constitution of the United States, Article II, Section 2.  Referring to the President of the United States, the second sentence of the second paragraph states "...and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint ... Justices of the supreme Court..."

At times like these, we should follow the Constitution.  The Constitution is clear, using the auxiliary verb "shall" to indicate an obligation.  Not just a nice idea, not just a suggestion, not just maybe he should, but "shall" means it's a true obligation.

Most importantly, there's nothing in the Constitution saying that if the President only has 1 year left in his term, he should wait for the next President.  It's just not there.

So the President is obligated to submit a nominee to the Senate.  Once nominated, the Senate has its role of providing Advice and Consent.  In that role, the Senate can advise the President that he shouldn't have nominated anyone.  But, giving the obligatory nature of the auxiliary verb "shall," that would be unconstitutional advice.  Sorry, Senators!

The Senate also must provide its Consent to any nominee.  If the Senate does consent to the nominee of the President, they can vote accordingly.  And the President can try again.  And the Senate might not vote to approve the nominee.  This back and forth until the next President is sworn in.  That would at least be constitutional.

But, to follow the Constitution, the President shall nominate a replacement for Justice Scolia.  Not to do so would be unconstitutional.

Immigration and Terrorism

Syrian Refugee camp
Photo source:  Center for Immigration Studies

Paris, Nov. 14, 2015:  coordinated terrorists at-tacks result in 129 dead. The western world is now focused on these attacks, ISIS, and Syrian refugees.  It strikes fear in many.

And, not far behind, are the fear-mongers, scapegoating immigrants and Muslims.  The forces against freedom are ramping up.  Republican Senator Lindsay Graham summed it up as ISIS is Going to Kill Us All!  Not to be outdone, former Gov. Sarah Palin says ISIS will plant the flag of Allah atop the White House.  (Side note:  Isn't Allah the same as Christian's God the Father?  If the religious right says we are a Christian nation, why don't they embrace the idea of planting the flag of God the Father atop the White House?)

Yes, this is a serious threat and ISIS is certainly bent on a path of repression and gruesome murder of those who disagree with their distorted vision of Islam.  But, how do we respond to the threat?  They want their enemies to fear them and hate them.

I think that we in free democracies need to propose a two-pronged response.  First is that our governments need to strike back and remain vigilant on the intelligence front.  Second, and equally important, is we cannot surrender our freedoms in the face of murderous terror.

No to Fear!

We cannot cower in the fear of the possibility of a random act of terrorist violence.  On the rational side, we are more likely to be killed in an automobile accident than be killed by ISIS.  We are more likely to be killed by a crazed gunman, and event that happens all too often in our nation.  (Unlike Europe, we are pretty well armed nation, and many gun owners would relish the opportunity to take out a few terrorists.)

We should pray for the victims, morn the victims.  But we need to carry on and live in freedom.

No to the Merchants of Fear!

The politicians are having a hayday with fear.  Particularly, conservative politicians seem to thrive when we have enemies to fear.  Fear is a strong emotion, and it gets out the vote!

But fear is crippling.   It clouds our judgment.  It leads to hatred and repression.   We must say no to the Merchants of Fear and their distorted vision.

No to Repression of Muslims and Immigrants!

The Merchants of Fear are calling for more repression of Muslims and immigrants.  

• We hear Donald Trump, taking an idea right out of the Nazi playbook, calling for Muslims to be tagged in a data base, not unlike sex offenders.  Is the next proposal forcing them to wear a crescent and star of Islam?

• We hear politicians like Jebb Bush calling for a religious test for refugees:  Christian is good, Muslim is no good.  (But this is from the party that keeps saying the US is a Christian nation and interpreting Freedom of Religion as only the freedom to choose which brand of Christianity you wish to follow.)
• We also hear politicians saying no to Syrian refugees.  Among the thousands of refugees, there is a chance there may be one or more agents of ISES.  Is this a reason to say no to all refugees?  Or maybe just tighter screening?

The Merchants of Fear know that fear leads to hate and hate leads to popular support for repression.  

What is most dangerous of repressive policies is that they often focus the fear and hate on the wrong population.  While conservatives supported the fear of Iraq, we were attacked by radical Saudis on 9/11.  While the attacks in Paris are being blamed on Syrian refugees, it appears they were planned by a Belgium national.  While we are lead to fear foreigners, most mass killings in the US are committed by US citizens.  

Fear distorts our view of where the real risk is.

We must be prudent.  Our government must fight back against ISES.  Our government must keep vigilant for intelligence about the plans of terrorists.

But having done what is prudent, we must carry on and not be be crippled or blinded by fear and hatred.  We must live and relish the freedom we have!

Welcome to v2.0 of the Post 9/11 World

The current popular uprisings in the Middle East are proving the arch rivals of 9/11 wrong.

The neoconservatives of President George W. Bush's administration said democracy must come to the Middle East, but tried to install it by force, such as the invasion of Iraq. They were wrong. Democracy is coming from popular uprising, not unlike the way it emerged in the United Stated or in India.

Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida sought to overthrow the oppressive oligarchies through violent means. Today, bin Laden is far from center stage, as the oppressive oligarchies through nonviolent means.

Any day that both misguided neoconservatives in the US and misguided violent religious terrorists worldwide are proven wrong is a great day for the freedom of all people!

Is Democracy Breaking Out in Egypt? (But No One Is Noticing It!)

The world news is saturated with reports of the uprisings in the streets of Egypt. The clear and constant demand is for the departure of President Hosni Mubarak. But what is behind it? Is it the Muslim Brotherhood, as some are claiming? Will it lead to a more conservative regime? A regime based on Sharia Law?

Or are we possibly seeing the birth of democracy in Egypt? (Many demonstrators interviewed say they want democracy and free and fair elections.) And will it spread to the rest of the Middle East?

Things are different now in 2011. Authoritarian regimes can't keep their tight grip on a population linked by the internet. Information flows more freely. Regimes can't keep people in the dark or uninformed.

And secrets are a thing of the past, as we witness with WikiLeaks. In fact, information from WikiLeaks may have in part sparked demonstrations in Tunisia which may have in part sparked demonstrations in Egypt. And next Jordan. And maybe also Yemen, and Syria, and the Palestinian State.

They say the truth will set you free. So, are we witnessing a milestone event, where the free flow of the information on the internet may lead to an outbreak of freedom and democracy? Will this be the first revolution that started on Facebook?

Unfortunately, the western nations are too fixated on a "controlled transfer of power" as to miss what could be Egypt's version of the American Revolution leading to free and fair elections and real democracy. Yes, Mubarak will step down, but not until September, in part at the advice of an American diplomat. But this will not satisfy the people of Egypt.

The world is changing. And the democracies of the world cannot afford to sit idly by and not support the expansion of freedom.

(Note this post is in part inspired by my friend Kelvene Requiroso who posted: "I smell people's victory over there in Egypt! Democracies of the world, let us UNITE!")