· Trump’s Executive Order banning immigrants/refugees from entry into the U.S. is certainly one of the most high profile topics over the past few weeks. This is the case for a variety of reasons. First, while it purports to protect America by trying to keep out those who might wish to do us harm, the logic seems to be specious at best. While referencing 9/11, the ban doesn’t include Saudi Arabia, the country that produced the majority of the terrorists who participated in the 9/11 attacks. Even far more curious, Saudi Arabia is a country where Trump’s company has significant business interests. Can anyone say conflict of interest? The decision to not include Egypt falls under the same logic apparently.
· Refugees are some of the most highly scrutinized and vetted individuals who ever gain admission to the U.S. If a terrorist wanted to enter the U.S. to carry out an attack, doing so through the refugee program is about the last approach they’d take. Past precedent indicates they are more likely to enter via a student visa or other visa and then overstay their welcome.
· In attempting to justify the ban, Trump and his talking heads (Sean Spicer and Kellyanne Conway) have – when not making up attacks that never happened, like the Bowling Green Massacre – referenced Boston, Orlando and San Bernardino. There are some issues with those references, however. The two Boston Marathon bombers were from the Soviet Union/Kyrgyztan (not included in the ban) and one of them had been in the U.S. since he was 8 and was a U.S. citizen. The Orlando nightclub attack was carried out by Omar Mateen, who was born in New York and raised in Florida. One of the attackers in San Bernardino was born in Chicago and grew up in California; the other was from Pakistan, another country not included in the ban. None of the attackers were recent refugees or recent immigrant entries into the United States. This “ban” would not have prevented any of these attacks. Looking back even further, the largest domestic terror attack prior to 9/11 was the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, which was carried out by Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, two white nutjobs who grew up in the U.S. Even the Olympic bombing and other attacks in Atlanta (which have been referenced by Spicer) were carried out by a white, crazy, right wing wacko from Florida.
· While I certainly want our country to be safe, a selectively applied blanket decision banning entry to some immigrants is not the right way to go about it. We need to consider the root of why some of these people hate us so much, something that I’ll have to get to in a future blog post.
· Aside from signing executive orders about as often as some people use the bathroom, Trump has also seen all manner of chaos in the Cabinet and close advisors he has selected. His nominee for Secretary of Education was a rich lady with no apparent relevant qualifications beyond the fact that she donated a lot of money to Trump’s campaign. She will head up the department in charge of our nation’s public schools while having never attended a public school, sent her children to a public school or ever worked in a public school. Now we can certainly argue whether or not the Department of Education should even exist (it didn’t before 1979 and it’s hard to argue that our nation’s schools are better off now than they were 40 years ago), but as long as you’re going to have that Cabinet department, shouldn’t the person in charge of it have some relevant experience? The same goes for Ben Carson, who is the nominee for the HUD secretary. Huh? I could totally understand making him the Surgeon General or nominating him for the Secretary of Health and Human Services, given his background as a physician and surgeon. But HUD? That’s another one that seems to make no sense. And then there’s his original Secretary of Labor nominee, another rich guy who apparently employed an undocumented immigrant as his housekeeper and didn’t pay taxes on her services. It appears that the only qualification for any of these roles is that you are either obscenely wealthy or you have donated money or done favors for Trump in the past. Whether you have any related experience in the area you will be in charge of matters little.
· On the campaign trail, Trump constantly attacked Hillary Clinton as being “crooked” and pointing out conflicts of interest between The Clinton Foundation and some of the political things they did. However, as we’ve already discussed, you can make the argument that Trump is allowing his business ties to dictate policy matters, in terms of his executive orders. In addition, his nominee for National Security Advisor had to withdraw his nomination after he was found to but in cahoots with the Russians and then lied about it to the Vice President. Pot, this is kettle. You’re black.
· Thank God for the separation of powers and checks and balances in our government. The President may not like it – or even understand it – but I have a feeling those checks and balances are going to come in handy over the next several months.
· I think it is ridiculous that companies like Nordstrom’s are dropping Ivanka Trump’s clothing lines. What does her clothing line have to do with the fact that he father may be a little cuckoo? How many people in this world would be screwed if they were punished for the missteps of their parents or other relatives? At the same time, I think it’s ridiculous for the President to rant and rave about boycotting those companies because of what they’ve done. The companies are wrong but the President using his position as a bully pulpit to try to bash private companies is wrong, too.
· On a more local level, Missouri recently became the 28th “right-to-work” state, accomplishing a long time goal of Missouri Republicans who had to wait until they won the governor’s office before they could get it enacted. Intelligent people can honestly disagree as to the importance and effectiveness of unions and whether or not people should be forced to join one. I’m in the middle and can see the points from both sides. I’m not going to argue for either side right now, because that could go on forever. However, I’m still a little puzzled as to why that was one of the Missouri GOP’s top priorities. They claim that it will make Missouri for attractive to employers because they won’t have to fear dealing with unions. They claim it will lead to job creation. However, if you look at the top 10 states in terms of job growth (according to Kiplinger and the Christian Science Monitor), 4 of the top 10 states are NOT right-to-work states (Oregon, Washington, Colorado and California) while 6 are (Idaho, Arizona, Utah, Florida, Georgia and Tennessee). So, is right-to-work really a factor? Or does it have more to do with the fact that all 10 of those states have either beaches or mountains or a warm climate? The right-to-work proponents point to states like the aforementioned six while conveniently ignoring that all of the poorest and worst states for job growth are also right-to-work states (Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, etc.).
· Meanwhile, the General Assembly is cutting funding to schools and universities. I’m all for being fiscally prudent, but there are some things where we simply cannot afford to skimp and education is #1, followed closely by the state’s infrastructure (roads, bridges, etc.).
· From where I sit, employers probably care less about whether or not there are unions and more about how educated the workforce is and how strong the state’s infrastructure is. Who cares about the union status if all of the citizens of the state are uneducated morons and the roads and bridges are falling apart? For my money, the General Assembly’s focus should be on investing in education and infrastructure rather than trying to bleed unions dry. Besides, the infrastructure piece creates….wait for it…GOOD PAYING JOBS! If we have awesome schools and good infrastructure – that is what is going to make Missouri attractive to businesses. Unfortunately, Missouri is on its way to becoming Mississippi and that’s NOT a good thing.
· Has there ever been a bigger cluster than NFL relocation? A year ago, they had three teams (Rams, Chargers and Raiders) who were all vying to relocate to Los Angeles. Only one of those teams’ cities (St. Louis) had put forth a viable stadium plan, while the other two had nothing despite trying for years. So what do the NFL owners do? They allow the former team – the only team in a city who was actually trying to keep their team – to move! Then, they give permission for the Chargers to move to LA a year later if they still don’t have a stadium deal in San Diego. Fast forward a year, the Rams continue to stink while playing in front of a half-empty stadium (that honeymoon didn’t last long) while NFL owners are mad at the Chargers for moving to LA even though they gave them permission to do so a year ago! The Chargers will play in a 30,000 soccer stadium at which they will gouge fans for tickets, which will likely be purchased by visiting fans since everyone in San Diego now hates the owner. Meanwhile, the Raiders had a deal to relocate to Las Vegas, only to see it fall apart when their financial partners got cold feet. So now, the league has pissed off three fan bases while having three teams either in limbo or playing in temporary stadiums. I used to think that NHL commissioner was the biggest buffoon among the 4 major sports commissioners, but he has clearly handed that title over to Roger Goodell.
· On a lighter note, we have recently signed my son up for high school classes and my daughter turns 10 next week! Where does the time go and when did I become an old fart? Time needs to slow down…..except during the week at work. Those days can fly by. J
Thanks for reading!
No comments:
Post a Comment