MAKING AMERICA HATE AGAIN

To get “Making America Hate Again” by Elliot Cohen click the “Buy on Amazon” box below.

It is said that those who won’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it. This is the book on the 2015 campaign that put Trump in office. Despite the overwhelming opinion of pundits to the contrary this book predicted Trump would win.

The 2020 election looms large not only because Nancy Pelosi opposes efforts to impeach Trump, but because even if the Democrats were to impeach Trump, the Senate with it’s Republican majority are is unlikely to act on impeachment by removing Trump from office.  It is essential to understand how Trump came to power in 2015 as we head towards the 2020 election…

Some seventy years after the defeat of fascism in Europe, the United States elected Donald Trump. As president Trump has ordered the deportation of millions of immigrants, placing immigrant children in brutal deportation camps where some have died, attacked freedom of the press, paraphrasing Adolph Hitler’ by labeling journalist enemies of the people, and stated that those who marched along side a Neo-nazi that murdered a young anti-fascist women at a  white supremacist rally were “fine young men”.

How is it possible that the nation that responded to fascism in World War Two by proclaiming “we have nothing to fear, but fear itself” could give rise to this?

This well documented text examines historic similarities between Trump and the campaigns that brought fascist to power in Europe, explores why so much of the electorate voted for Trump despite his hateful rhetoric, and is essential reading to those who would understand how to fight back.

I invite you leave a comment or question relevant to a discussion of the book below:

DEMOCRATS WON’T AGREE TO SPEED CHILD DEPORTATIONS

With just days to go before the August recess Republican House members still haven’t come to an agreement on a bill to address the crisis created by the surge of Central American immigrant children entering the country. House Republicans remain divided on what to do, with conservatives opposing any bill that would send Obama money for immigration purposes other the deportation, while other House Republicans recommended amending the 2008 human trafficking law to speed up deportations of Central American immigrant children as part of a $1.5 billion spending package. House Republicans are scheduled to hold a meeting Friday morning to discuss how to proceed.

Because Conservative House members may oppose any bill that gives Obama funding for anything other than deportations House Speaker Boehner will need the support of House Democrats to pass a measure. But regardless of what House Republicans decide it appears House Democrats may not provide the votes needed to speed deportations, despite the fact quicker deportation is something that both Republicans and President Obama agree on.

According to a report in The Hill, a newspaper that covers congress, Democrats are largely in agreement with the due process protections in the 2008 human trafficking law that both Republicans and Obama would like to change.

According to Luis Gutierrez (D. Ill.) “Almost every Democrat I talk to says we should hold the line on laws passed to protect children from sex-trafficking and smugglers.”

According to The Hill, Gutierrez said President Obama was wrong to seek changes in the law. “I understand that people here are used to saying, ‘Oh, but you’re a Democrat, aren’t you going to follow the president? No, if the president’s wrong , the president’s wrong. I don’t think we should change the law.” Gutierrez concluded.

Republicans denounce Palin as irrelevant following anti-immigration rant

On ABC’s “This Week” several Republicans commented on Palins’ statement that the unsecured border crisis was  the last straw, and that it’s now time for impeachment.

But the Republicans interviewed all seemed dismissive of Palin and seemed determined disassociate the GOP from their former Vice Presidential candidate.

Ana Navarro, a GOP strategist pointed out that the Central American children were not sneaking across the border as Palin implied, but were instead seeking out border patrol agents and turning themselves in. A statement that exposed Palin’s claim that an “unsecured border” as the source of the current crisis was false with regard to most of the Central American children arriving in the U.S.

Navarros’ comment followed a segment on the same program by House Judiciary Chairman Robert Goodlatte (R. Virginia). Goodlatte, a conservative Republican, ridiculed Palin’s call for impeachment saying impeachment was not being considered because Obama had committed no criminal act that could justify impeachment.

Even Bill Kristol, whose conservative publication “The Weekly Standard,” had once run a glowing profile of Palin to bolster her reputation as a Vice Presidential candidate during the 2008 election campaign, stated that “no responsible Republican official has called for impeachment,” agreeing, in essence, that the Democrats would welcome an effort to impeach because it would be likely to enhance prospects for Democratic candidates in the 2014 congressional races.

Republican strategist Ana Navarro best summed up the mood of Republicans toward Palin saying “Nobody of responsibility, nobody in leadership, nobody of relevance has
talked about impeachment.”

With Palin now declared irrelevant by members of her own party the only question that remains is whether or not tea party types still have enough clout to force GOP to impeach. My guess is they do not.

BITTER TEA: Thank You Tea Party, for Helping Re-elect President Obama

This was a pivotal election that may determine national policy for the next 50 years. It was an uphill fight. Obama could easily have lost. Indeed, no president since FDR had ever been re-elected with this high a jobless rate. And so it is time thank the Tea Party. They deserve the credit. Sure, there were plenty of factors: Romney was an inauthentic candidate; Obama had a better get out the vote effort, but in a very close election, where every vote mattered, the Tea Party pushed a lot of votes toward Obama.

Since the election I’ve been reading Tea Party sites to understand their thinking. Clearly, the tea they drink alters reality more powerfully than the marijuana brownies Colorado and Washington voted to legalize. Let’s examine four major reasons Obama won, and compare them with what  Tea Party Republicans say.

The four voter groups most responsible for re-electing Obama were women, Hispanics, blue collar white voters in states like Ohio, and independent/late deciding voters. I’m not saying other issues/voters did not matter, just that these voters tipped the balance in favor of Obama.

The Republican “war on women” cost Romney big time. Eliminating Planned Parenthood frightens many women, including those who oppose abortion, but rely on Planned Parenthood for pre-natal care, cancer screenings, and birth control.

RedState, a Tea Party site, admits Republicans have a problem, but opposes softening their positions, suggesting Republicans instead improve on the 7% edge Romney had with married women to offset what they call the “free contraception vote.” (RedState, 11/11/12, 21 Thoughts and Observations on the Election, point 9).

Nor was Romney helped by Republican candidates saying things like pregnancy from rape is the will of god, pregnancy of rape victims means the rape was not legitimate.

“Legitimate rape?” “pregnancy by gods will?” “free contraception vote”? What exactly is in that tea they drink?

Romney lost with Hispanic voters because Republicans supported discrimination. The Arizona law targeting Hispanics for harassment was widely embraced by Republicans. That drove Hispanics to the polls delivering to Obama the 49 electoral votes of Colorado, Florida, Nevada and New Mexico. Historically, Florida Cubans vote overwhelmingly Republican, in this election Romney received less than 50% of Floridas’ Cuban vote!

According to RedState, Hispanics voted Obama not over discrimination, immigration or citizenship, but because “…most minorities will succumb to the class warfare and insidious identity politics employed by Democrats…” (RedState, 11/11/12 “21 Thoughts and Observations on the Election” point number 6).

Tea Party Republicans say immigrants are free loaders. One Tea Party blogger wrote: “It is not immigration policy that creates the strong bond between Hispanics and the Democratic Party, but the core democratic principles of a more generous safety net, strong government intervention in the economy, and progressive taxation. (Hot Air “Quotes of the Day” 11/9/12). In other words Hispanics were among the 47% Romney can’t worry about.

The reality is that non-citizen Hispanic voters have friends and family members that vote. Romney basically told these voters their friends and family members should leave the country. Is it any surprise they voted Obama? Some Republicans, even House Speaker Boehner and Sean Hannity of Fox news, recognize this reality, but the Tea Party wants none of it.

I say “go Tea Party” make your point loud and often, immigration reform will happen, and many voters will remember your bigotry, and deliver anti-Republican votes, for years, if not generations.

Now let’s talk about two demographics that Romney won: late deciding independents, and white, blue collar male voters in states like Ohio.  Romney could have prevailed in Ohio, most agreed, if he had received more votes from white, male, blue collar voters. Why didn’t more of them vote for Romney? Simple, they realized they had jobs because of Obamas decision to save the auto industry.

RedState published two articles cataloging over 50 reasons for the loss (11/7/12, “50 Reasons Republicans Lost the Election” and 11/11/12 “21 Thoughts and Observations on the Election”). Did these articles discuss support for the auto industry as an issue in losing Ohio? No. Instead RedState blamed black voters! (point 5, 21 Thoughts and Observations on the Election). True, increased black voter turn out – responding to voter suppression efforts such as voter ID requirements and reduced opportunities for early voting – did increase the black vote, but had more white, blue collar men voted Romney, Obama would not have won Ohio.

Finally, RedState writers found it “stupefying” that Obama won 55-44% among voters who said unemployment was the most important issue. It’s very simple: These voters saw an economy in trouble, a president who saved the auto industry. They remember Obama asking congress for a jobs bill, Republican leaders obstructing that effort, saying their number one priority was make Obama a one term president. This convinced enough late deciding/independent voters Obama had a plan to fix the economy that Republicans torpedoed for purely political reasons.

Romney on the other hand said it is not his job to worry about 47% of the country. Extremist Tea Party rhetoric convinced a lot of  voters re-electing President Obama was the best option. Now let’s see what happens…

BLOOD LIBEL OR NOT, SARAH PALIN IS AN ACCESSORY TO MURDER

Sarah Palins whining that she is being libeled because some are taking her to task for creating the type of political environment that encouraged the attempted assassination of Representative Giffords is nonsense.

When Republican senate candidate Sharron Angle called for using “Second Amendment remedies” to remove liberals from congress Palin did not condemn those comments, instead she decided to endorse Angle.

When people criticized the violent gun-laced shooting metaphors and warned it could lead to the very type of violence that Jared Lougghner engaged in Palin responded “Don’t retreat, instead reload.”

It is moral cowardice for Sarah Palin to now play the victim and deny all responsibility for creating this atmosphere after some wacko took her advice seriously.

Palin is clearly responsible for her deliberate decision to use gun laced metaphors in calling for political action. Plain is responsible for continuing to use such rhetoric even after many people, including Giffords herself, warned Palin of the danger, and Palins’ language, magnified by the national megaphone of FOX TV, certainly engendered an atmosphere of political hatred.

Palins decision to play the victim card is both bizarre and narcissistic when one considers that 9 year old Christina Green and 3 other people are dead,and 16 other people in Tucson were shot.

Under such circumstances Palins’ decision to complain she is being subject to “blood-libel” or any other kind of libel, is especially perverse.

A mentally unstable person acted on the vicious snake oil that Sarah Palin, FOX news, and their supporters deliberately choose to pedal, and while Palin may not be responsible for the shooting itself it is cowardly for her to deny any responsibility for the atmosphere she helped to create.

Much of the defense of Sarah Palin is built around claims that she can not be held responsible for the actions of a killer who is mentally deranged, and that much may be true, but to the extent that Loughner claims he heard voices telling him to kill, those voices were not hallucinations, they were the very words Palin and her supporters routinely filled the air waves of over the past two years…