The Real Meaning of “America First” and Why It Matters

Posted by historymaniacmegan on January 27, 2017

For the love of God, please don’t use “America First” as a catchphrase. Seriously, that phrase doesn’t remotely mean what Trump, Republicans, and over 60 million voters think it means. Because it’s a saying with historical roots that evokes one of the ugliest chapters in American history.

Like most of the humanities, history is often an underrated subject that doesn’t get the attention it deserves. Sure it may not lead to a lucrative career, but that doesn’t mean it’s not useful or necessary. But historical knowledge is often essential when it comes to understanding our world and even ourselves, especially in the realm of politics and government. Though many people might think history class is a waste of time, they are sorely mistaken. To know history is an essential part of being a good citizen in any democratic society because whatever happens in the past doesn’t really go away. What happens in the past affects us in the present as well as becomes part of our heritage. By showing us how we came to be, history also tells us who we are and what we could be. Past events can give us answers on why things happened the way they did. And they can sometimes help us find solutions, especially on what not to do. Yet, though great moments in our history are worth remembering, there are also moments of great sin and shame we shouldn’t forget, especially if their impact persists to this day. Because it’s often said that those who don’t know history are bound to repeat it. Or at least make terrible decisions that might lead to history repeating itself. Those who don’t care to know about history and see no value in it are prone to disrespect the greater humanity. And if a historically illiterate person has political power, then they pose a serious danger to us all.

Even before Donald Trump became president, it’s very clear he doesn’t know much about American history nor does he see the value in knowing it. Sure his campaign slogan was “Make America Great Again” but the kind of past he’s referring to is one of nostalgia for a time in which the United States really wasn’t that great. Nor was it a time that most of us would want to live. At the same time, Trump embodies the absolute worst in our country’s past with his rhetoric of fear and division, his message of racism and xenophobia, his decades long history of corrupt business practices, his disregard for decency, his consummate lying, and his petty vindictiveness. His presidential victory was made possible by the fact Americans are embarrassingly ignorant in civics and history, as statistics widely support this claim. History will not look kindly on the Trump supporters who elected one of the most deplorable individuals of our time to the White House and will in time be deemed morally reprehensible and ultimately forced to explain themselves to their grandchildren. I know these words seem harsh and hard to swallow for many. But as a history major, I know far too well of what happens whenever people support leaders on the wrong side of history. It’s no question that Trump certainly is and that his presidency will be an absolute disaster. And there is no way I can sugar coat it.

Nevertheless, Donald Trump’s historical illiteracy and apathy can be better demonstrated than in his use of the phrase of “America First” that he used as a centerpiece in his campaign. At first, this saying may seem innocent on the surface. But what does “America First” mean exactly? According to Trump, “America First” is just a catchphrase for prioritizing American interests as in, “My foreign policy will always put the interests of the American people, and American security, above all else. That will be the foundation of every decision that I will make. America First will be the major and overriding theme of my administration.” He likens it to an original slogan, telling David Sanger, “To me, America First is a brand-new modern term. I never related it to the past.” In many ways he wants to make it seem like it’s a patriotic affirmation like putting the US first above all else which certainly resonate to the over 60 million Americans who elected him president.

Contrary to what Trump may say, the phrase “America First” has a long history. But it’s most identified with the America First Committee, a group that opposed US entry into World War II. Though it only lasted for about a year and a half, it was one of the biggest anti-war organizations in US history with members hailing from all walks of life. However, its failure to disown its ugliest supporters would forever poison its reputation.

However, contrary to what Trump may say, the phrase “America First” is actually not a brand-new modern term but one that dates all the way to the early 20th century. The phrase was originally a political slogan for Woodrow Wilson’s reelection campaign in 1915 to echo the isolationist policies he’d later abandon for good reason and is also the name of a credit union based in Utah.And William Randolph Hearst often used the phrase in the 1930s as a nationalistic enthusiasm for crushing the left by hyperbole in his anti-FDR crusade. But the term would become best associated with the America First Committee, an organization whose legacy remarks upon one of the ugliest chapters in modern American history. Originally established by a group of Yale Law students including Quaker Oats heir R. Douglas Stuart Jr., future president Gerald Ford, future Peace Corps director Sargent Shriver, and future US Supreme Court justice Potter Stuart, the America First Committee was the foremost non-interventionist pressure group against the American entry into World War II. At its peak, it boasted over 800,000 paid members in 450 chapters and was one of the largest anti-war organizations in American history. It also claimed a lot of prominent members from all across the political spectrum and all walks of life. Some were millionaire financial backers like Henry Ford, General Robert E. Wood of Sears-Roebuck, meatpacker Jay Hormel, banker William J. Grace, Sterling Morton of Morton Salt, textile manufacturer William Regnery, publisher Joseph M. Patterson of the New York Daily News, and publishers Robert R. McCormick of the Chicago Tribune. Political supporters of the AFC included US Senate Democrats Burton K. Wheeler of Montana and David I. Walsh of Massachusetts, North Dakota Republican Senator Gerald P. Nye, and Socialist leader Norman Thomas. Another was Washington socialite Alice Roosevelt Longworth who was also a former president’s daughter, the then-current First Lady’s cousin, the then-president’s distant cousin, widow to a Speaker of the House, a former mistress and baby mama to a US Senator, and sister to a future Medal of Honor recipient. Oh, and her baby daddy Republican Senator William A. Borah of Idaho supported the AFC, too. The American First Committee even had celebrity allies such as novelist Sinclair Lewis, poet E. E. Cummings, Walt Disney, silent-screen icon and actress Lillian Gish, architect Frank Lloyd Wright, WWI flying ace Eddie Rickenbacker, novelist Kathleen Norris, and most importantly famed aviator Charles Lindbergh. Future president John F. Kennedy and author Gore Vidal were also AFC members.

Though hard to believe today, the reasons why many Americans didn’t want to fight Nazi Germany in 1940 are somewhat understandable. After all, many saw World War I as a meaningless bloodbath between imperialistic European powers that the US had no business in. And many thought the war in Europe at the time would be the same way.

Of course, you should know that Adolf Hitler had already invaded Poland by this point and posed a significant threat to European nations who stood in his way as Great Britain was experiencing its shittiest year of the war while France and Belgium fell to the Nazis. Oh, and a militarist Japan was causing all kinds of hell for Asian countries and/or European colonial possessions in the Pacific but their front won’t be the main focus for awhile. The standard rationale for the American First Committee was that the United States was protected by 2 oceans and its vast land mass, and that intervention in Europe would turn out no better than it had in WWI. While most Americans rooted for the Allies in 1940 (85% according to a Fortune poll), they didn’t want to do anything that would help them win either. After all, the US already did that in 1917 during World War I which strongly divided the American public and didn’t seem like a conflict the country should’ve gotten involved in. Yet, after the British found Germany trying to provoke a Mexican reconquista on the American southwest, maintaining neutrality was impossible. Then there’s the fact the US was home to so many European immigrants who didn’t want to support a country they didn’t like or be thoroughly demonized as the enemy. Not to mention, the US lost about 110,000 troops during this time, including 43,000 to the influenza pandemic and they were only in the war for a little more than a year while isolationism was such a powerful influence that the US Senate refused US entry into the League of Nations despite it being among Wilson’s Fourteen Points or at least on his terms. Though Gary Gerstle would prefer the term unilateralism in which the US should be free act in the world to preserve its own interests like it had in Latin America and the Pacific. And since WWI seems like a meaningless bloodbath provoked by an archduke assassination, well, you can see why Americans wouldn’t want to be entangled in another European conflict. Then there’s the fact Britain and France participated in imperialism with colonies in Africa, Asia, and the Pacific which comes with the usual human rights violations.

The America First Committee was often highly critical of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt as well as opposed his Lend-Lease policy. On one hand, he did promise to uphold neutrality while attempting to maximize Allied support. But on the other hand, even when neutrality was popular most Americans wanted the Allies to win. FDR understood that the US would have to get involved in the war sooner or later.

Even before World War II kicked off with Hitler’s Polish invasion, most Americans demanded US neutrality on Europe that Congress passed a series of neutrality acts to keep the government from supporting either side. Though in practice, it was to keep FDR from corresponding with Winston Churchill and sending support to Britain. Because the Axis powers were widely disliked in the country, anyway. Yet, though FDR promised to keep the US out of the war, he attempted to maximize support for the Allies on the side while skirting if not actually violating the principle of neutrality. The America First Committee profoundly distrusted him for this and harshly accused FDR of lying to the American people. Sure FDR probably acted dishonestly but to be fair, he understood that many of these Allied European nations were fighting for their lives. And he realized if Americans wanted the Allies to win, then the US government would have to help them. But the AFC criticized and opposed him at every step, especially when he decided to seek a third term and proposed Lend-Lease in early 1941 both of which most Americans supported anyway. Besides, though most Americans might not be happy with intervention, they’d be willing to so if US involvement was necessary to defeat fascism which only became increasingly apparent as 1941 went on particularly when Hitler stabbed Stalin in the back by invading Russia.

Though America First often tried to brand itself as a mainstream anti-war organization, it included members whose views had more to do with their anti-Semitism, pro-fascism, xenophobia, and Nazi sympathies. Unfortunately, America First refused to disown these ugly elements and would later be defined by them as you see in this Dr. Seuss cartoon.

So where does the historical baggage come in? Because all you say about the American First Committee was that it was a bipartisan anti-war group opposing US entry into WWII for pretty justifiable reasons. However, not everyone in the America First Committee opposed US intervention over the catastrophes of World War I or in the name of general pacifism. Nor was it just a group for FDR haters either. Though the AFC was harshly critical toward him and many of his opponents joined up as a way of primarily attacking the guy for his New Deal. The AFC also included more than its fair share of people whose views had more to do with their anti-Semitism, pro-fascism, and xenophobia. Some members were even said to be Nazi sympathizers. Such facts weren’t helped from the fact that the AFC so staunchly wanted to preserve American neutrality even if it meant urging the government to be nice to Hitler. Nor that it counted prominent anti-Semites of the day among its ranks. Or that several prominent AFC members believed that old-fashioned democracy was in decline and that a modern, energetic fascism represented a The Wave of the Future as Anne Morrow Lindbergh titled her 1940 booklet. She even took her pro-fascist position one step further in her book by calling US sign a pact with Germany similar to Hitler’s Non-Aggression Treaty with Josef Stalin. Naturally, the Roosevelt administration attacked the book as “the bible of every American Nazi, Fascist, Bundist and Appeaser” and it was among the most despised books of the period. She also called Hitler “a very great man, like an inspired religious leader—and as such rather fanatical—but not scheming, not selfish, not greedy for power” in a letter. As America First tried to brand itself as a mainstream organization, the anti-Semitic attitudes and Nazi sympathies of some of its leaders and many of its members began to emerge. And their refusal to disown their ugliest supporters would be its fatal flaw. According to historian Susan Dunn in a CNN article from last April, “It had to remove from its executive committee not only the notoriously anti-Semitic Henry Ford but also Avery Brundage, the former chairman of the U.S. Olympic Committee who had prevented two Jewish runners from the American track team in Berlin in 1936 from running in the finals of the 4×100 relay.” And America First’s anti-Semitic problems only became worse when Charles Lindbergh was recruited as their spokesman.

The most famous face of America First was none other than famed aviator Charles Lindbergh, best known for his nonstop solo flight from New York to Paris in 1927. In 1940, he was a lauded as a national hero in the US. But in 1941, that was soon to change.

Now Charles Lindbergh was a natural choice to represent the America First Committee. For one, he was a major celebrity who was universally loved for his nonstop solo flight across the Atlantic. He was also relatively handsome and had a lovely family that would eventually include 5-6 children. Of course, his oldest child had already been kidnapped and murdered which was reported so exhaustively and sensationally by the press that it became known as “The Crime of the Century.” Second, he had no interest in exploiting his celebrity and was a very private man for very good reasons. Nor did he have higher ambitions of any kind, political or otherwise. Third, he came from the Midwest, which was home to the bulk of the AFC’s registered members and he was certainly one of the most famous celebrities from that area at the time. Fourth, he was no fan of FDR and had feuded with him for years which satisfied some of the haters. Fifth, he was a charismatic man whose words can sound just as good on paper as they would coming from his mouth. And finally, compared to a lot of celebrities at the time, he had a rather wholesome reputation. It’s no surprise that the famed aviator from Minnesota would become the AFC’s highest profile spokesman whose speeches were heard by hundreds of thousands within the movement and millions outside.

Hermann Göring with Charles Lindbergh. Library of Congress photo

During the mid to late 1930s, Charles Lindbergh visited Nazi Germany several times where he toured the Luftwaffe as well as hobnobbed with a bunch of high Nazi officials like Hermann Goering. Unfortunately, the place impressed him a little too much that despite condemning Krsitallanacht and seeing Hitler as a fanatic, he kind of came off as a Nazi sympathizer.

Yet, behind that boyish face, was a man with very whacked out political views though they were not unusual or socially unacceptable for the time among the American people. Lindbergh believed in eugenics as he expressed his ideal woman as having a keen intellect, good health and strong genes because “experience in breeding animals on our farm had taught me the importance of good heredity.” To be fair, he was raised at a time when eugenics was espoused across the political spectrum even though it led to some of the worst known human rights abuses known to man and was based on junk science. In the mid to late 1930s, Lindbergh made several trips to Nazi Germany to tour the Luftwaffe which made a great impression on him that he became convinced that no power in Europe or the US could defeat it. He believed that a war between Germany and the US would be bad and it would be especially for the “white race.” So much so that Lindbergh stated that he believed the survival of the white race was more important than the survival of European democracy. “We can have peace and security only so long as we band together to preserve that most priceless possession, our inheritance of European blood, only so long as we guard ourselves against attack by foreign armies and dilution by foreign races,” he wrote in his infamous 1939 article for Reader’s Digest. It didn’t help that he publicly and privately spoke of Hitler in admiring terms as having “far more character and vision than I thought existed in the German leader who has been painted in so many different ways by the accounts in America and England. He is undoubtedly a great man.” As an ardent anticommunist, Lindbergh considered Russia a “semi-Asiatic” country and saw Communism as an ideology that would destroy the West’s “racial strength” and replace everyone of European descent with “a pressing sea of Yellow, Black, and Brown.” And if Lindbergh had to choose, he’d rather see the US allied with Nazi Germany than Soviet Russia. Oh, and he was an anti-Semite who subscribed to conspiracy theories. In his reaction to anti-Jewish pogrom Kristallnacht (which consisted of the Nazis destroying over 100 synagogues along with thousands of Jewish businesses while imprisoning thousands of Jews), Lindbergh wrote, “I do not understand these riots on the part of the Germans. It seems so contrary to their sense of order and intelligence. They have undoubtedly had a difficult ‘Jewish problem’, but why is it necessary to handle it so unreasonably?” Because Hitler wanted to do terrible stuff to the Jews, asshole. And it didn’t help that he received the Commander Cross of the Order of the German Eagle from Hermann Goering on Hitler’s behalf a few weeks before which caused controversy, which he refused to return. “It seems to me that the returning of decorations, which were given in times of peace and as a gesture of friendship, can have no constructive effect,” Lindbergh wrote making excuses for Nazi Germany. “If I were to return the German medal, it seems to me that it would be an unnecessary insult. Even if war develops between us, I can see no gain in indulging in a spitting contest before that war begins.” Yes, but it would’ve at least absolved him from suspicion. Because in 1941, Lindbergh resigned his Air Force commission as colonel at FDR’s demand after proposing that the US negotiate a neutrality pact with Germany during his testimony opposing the Lend-Lease bill before House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

On September 11, 1941, Charles Lindbergh would give a speech at an America First rally in Des Moines, Iowa. In it, he blamed the British, the Roosevelt administration, and American Jews for pushing the US into war with Europe. Guess which group he put on notice for pushing for war through their control of the media.

Charles Lindbergh’s political ideas on race, the Jewish people, and foreign policy might seem morally reprehensible and extreme today, but they were hardly fringe in the early 1940s and he had voiced them without serious public outcry at this point. If anything, resigning his Air Force commission may have worked in his favor as far as some non-interventionists were concerned. However, he would play a critical role in why “America First” has become the noxious slogan that continues to echo isolationist, defeatist, fascist, and anti-Semitic sentiments to this day. On September 11, 1941, Lindbergh would deliver a speech to a huge crowd during an America First rally in Des Moines, Iowa. In it, he identified forces pulling the US into the war as the British, the Roosevelt administration, and American Jews. And it’s what he said about the third group where he made his true thoughts known. At first, he expressed sympathy for the persecution the Jews in Germany suffered and remarked on how he understood why any American Jew would want to see the Nazi regime pay. But then he went on putting American Jews on notice, saying that America’s “tolerance” for them rested upon a fragile foundation but most somehow most still don’t seem to understand that and want the US to intervene in a war that would endanger everybody but especially them. Then Lindbergh let the Jews know what he really thought about them, “Their greatest danger to this country lies in their large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio, and our government.” In other words, Lindbergh saw American Jews constituting of a wealthy, influential, and conspiratorial foreign, “race” that controls “our” media and has infiltrated “our” political institutions. And that they were an internal alien out-group, hostile to “us.” In short, he blames the Jews for pushing the US into war and manipulating the narrative through the media. Such sentiment reeks classic anti-Semitism which had no basis in fact. Though Lindbergh claimed he wasn’t “attacking either the Jewish or the British people,” he went on saying, “that the leaders of both the British and the Jewish races, for reasons which are as understandable from their viewpoint as they are inadvisable from ours, for reasons which are not American, wish to involve us in the war. We cannot blame them for looking out for what they believe to be their own interests, but we also must look out for ours. We cannot allow the natural passions and prejudices of other peoples to lead our country to destruction.” So fighting an enemy that’s either bombing the shit out of you on a regular basis or persecuting (if not exterminating) people from your ethnoreligious group and possibly your loved ones from the old country aren’t American reasons? Also, their interests weren’t exactly based on “natural passions and prejudices of other peoples” either. Though Lindbergh uses such words to make British and Jewish seem like they want to drag the US into a needless war that could lead to its destruction.

Charles Lindbergh’s Des Moines speech was met with public outrage from all over the country over his anti-Semitic and divisive remarks that he’d suffer a massive fall from grace. So much so that his hometown even took his name off their water tower. His now tarnished reputation would never fully recover.

Somewhere in his speech Lindbergh crossed a line because public reception was not kind to him or the American First Committee from this point on. Lindbergh was strongly and swiftly condemned for his anti-Semitic and divisive words. Reporting from Europe, New York Herald Tribune columnist Dorothy Thompson wrote, “I am absolutely certain that Lindbergh is pro-Nazi. I am absolutely certain that Lindbergh foresees a new party along Nazi lines.” The San Francisco Chronicle wrote, “The voice is the voice of Lindbergh, but the words are the words of Hitler.” And those sentiments of outrage echoed widely among newspapers, columnists, politicians, and religious leaders. Interventionists opposed to America First created pamphlets indicating how Nazi Germany praised his efforts and included quotations like “Racial strength is vital; politics, a luxury.” The pamphlets also included pictures of Lindbergh and other American Firsters using the stiff-armed Bellamy Salute (a hand gesture described by Francis Bellamy to accompany his Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag that fell out of favor during the 1920s and 1930s because totalitarian regimes adopted salutes of similar form). Though the photos were taken at an angle not showing the flag, observers still found such gestures indistinguishable from the better known Heil Hitler. But Lindbergh’s detractors weren’t the only ones bashing him for his Des Moines speech. His fans who lionized him also had harsh words to say. The Des Moines Register called his speech, “so intemperate, so unfair, so dangerous in its implications that it cannot but turn many spadefuls in the digging of the grave of his influence in this country.” The anti-Roosevelt and non-interventionist loving Hearst papers condemned Lindbergh as “un-American.” His mother-in-law and sister-in-law publicly opposed his views while civic and corporate organizations cut all ties with him. Hell, his hometown of Little Falls, Minnesota took his name off their water tower. And I’m sure millions of kids probably took down their pictures of him that they put in the trash like he was a disgraced sports hero. In the public’s view, the once beloved aviator was now disgraced and his tarnished reputation would never fully recover.

From that point on, the America First Committee would be associated with Nazi sympathies and anti-Semitism ever since. Soon even the more moderate isolationist cut ties with the organization before it disbanded after Pearl Harbor. Since then, almost no politician who’s wanted to draw close to America First as it remains a shameful stain on our history.

In turn the America First Committee was as TIME put it on a cover story, “touched the pitch of anti-Semitism, and its fingers were tarred.” Despite its protestations that it wasn’t an anti-Semitic group and that it was looking out for American Jewish interests, America First would become associated with such anti-Semitic rhetoric Lindbergh had voiced in that infamous speech in Des Moines. So much so that more moderate isolationists started dropping out and it acquired its very bad name and pernicious reputation. And after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor that December, the America First Committee disbanded since there was no possibility of isolation by that point. But echoes of “America First” have persisted in the years and decades since. Before Trump decided to make it a campaign slogan, Pat Buchanan used it for his presidential campaign to run in 2000 on the Reform ticket. Of course, Buchanan believes that World War II as an “unnecessary war.” In his book A Republic, Not an Empire: Reclaiming America’s Destiny, he’s depicted Lindbergh and other pre-war isolationists as American patriots smeared by interventionists during the months leading up to Pearl Harbor. And Buchanan suggests such backlash of Lindbergh highlights “the explosiveness of mixing ethnic politics with foreign policy.” He also campaigned against free trade. Ironically, it was Trump who seeking the Reform Party nomination at the time, called Buchanan “a Hitler lover.” So it’s possible he might know something about where “America First” came from even if he doesn’t care about the implications from employing it. Because Buchanan certainly does. But as far as political figures go, Buchanan is an exception since his views on history are outside mainstream conservatism. Since the 1940s, there has almost been no politician who’s wanted to draw close to America First.

Then despite the highly negative historical connotations, why the hell does Trump keep using “America First” as a catchphrase? He’s said he likes the expression. But I think he likes how his supporters positively react to it as an innocent patriotic affirmation. Mostly because a lot of his supporters have absolutely no idea where “America First” came from or what it really means.

But why would Trump employ such a phrase like “America First” in his rhetoric despite that those words echoing such an ugly chapter in America’s recent past? Sure he may like the expression, but he may even enjoy more the kind of applause and provocation he gets from uttering those words by the very supporters who have absolutely no clue where that awful phrase came from nor care to find out. And he probably doesn’t care that such catchphrase makes some people hear disturbing echoes that the Anti-Defamation League has asked him to stop using “America First” and redirected fifty-six thousand dollars in donations from the Trump family to anti-bullying and anti-bias causes. But Trump won’t stop saying that phrase anytime soon. Because to him, it’s a tremendously popular slogan that resonates with his economic nationalism. And he’s denied the phrase’s existence as a historical term whenever reporters have pointed it out for him. For instance, when asked whether he meant isolationism last April, Trump replied, “Not isolationist, I’m not isolationist, but I am ‘America First.’ So I like the expression. I’m ‘America First. We have been disrespected, mocked and ripped off for many, many years by people that were smarter, shrewder, tougher.” In some ways, it’s possible Trump wants “America First” to mean “we will not be ripped off anymore.” And since American historical consciousness doesn’t run deep, it’s possible that Trump supporters see “America First” as an innocent affirmation of patriotism that it’s not.

It’s possible that Trump may believe his adoption of the phrase “America First” could supersede its past. However, I don’t think it’s possible not because of Trump. But mostly because such symbols and phrases with noxious connotations don’t usually change their meanings over time. And it’s a lesson I’ve surely learned when I argued for the Confederate Flag’s removal during the summer of 2015.

As NPR’s Ron Elving put it, “assuming he is aware of at least some of that history, Trump is demonstrating his confidence that his adoption of a phrase can supersede its past.” But is it even possible for him to shake off that phrase’s toxic past? The Atlantic states such endeavor could prove difficult especially since Trump’s inauguration speech offered little to no outreach to the millions of Americans who fear what his presidency may bring. However, I think this assumption is a bit too optimistic. I say this because many of those Trump supporters who see “America First” as an innocent patriotic affirmation also see the Confederate flag as a sacred emblem of their Southern heritage. In the summer of 2015, I wrote a post arguing why the flag should be removed due to being a symbol of white supremacy that’s been used to justify decades of subjugating, discrimination, and violence against black people, which apparently angered a lot of people who tried to tell me otherwise. The Confederate flag is often associated with very ugly chapter in American history in which a bunch of powerful white guys started a war after splitting off from the US in order to form a country where they can subjugate black people to a lifetime of involuntary servitude. It is very clear that many Southern whites still haven’t gotten over that the North won that war which outlawed slavery that they went to great lengths to make sure black people could never gain any social, economic, or political power. And despite the Civil Rights Movement and the election of Barack Obama, these people show no sign of stopping any time soon.

In 2015, a group in Detroit, Michigan erected a billboard like this that was condemned by the Anti-Defamation League on grounds of anti-Semitism. As Heidi Budaj said, This particular sign goes a step further and raises an old anti-Semitic canard of dual loyalty, implying that Jews are not loyal to the country in which they live. Make no mistake that while many of the Jewish people in the United States support the state of Israel as a Jewish state, we are loyal Americans.” Of course, the use of “America First” is much more closer to its historical anti-Semitic roots. However, I’m not really sure if the group who put up this billboard knows what “America First” really means or even intends to incite anti-Semitism.

That being said, I think “American First” will continue to emanate how opposition to American entanglement in the world became polluted by anti-Semitism regardless of what Trump, his supporters, or Republicans may think. They may claim they don’t hate Jewish people nor embrace a 1940s isolationism. They may not be Nazi sympathizers or be soft on Hitler the way Charles Lindbergh was or how the America First Committee might’ve been. But however they use “America First” regardless of what meaning attached to it, none of their personal biases change that phrase’s toxic isolationist, defeatist, nationalistic, fascist, and anti-Semitic evocations. And just because such people don’t believe such stuff anymore doesn’t mean such interpretations go away. I also don’t think Trump helps his case by having a noted anti-Semite and white nationalist to write his speeches on his White House along with plenty of anti-Semitic supporters (i.e. white supremacists). As Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt said, “For many Americans, the term ‘America First’ will always be associated with and tainted by this history.” Conservative editor of The Weekly Standard Bill Kristol would say the same adding on Twitter, “I’ll be unembarrassedly old-fashioned here: It is profoundly depressing and vulgar to hear an American president proclaim ‘America First.’” Greenblatt and Kristol may not always agree with everything, but when it comes to “America First,” both these men see such phrase evokes a shameful chapter in our history. And one Jewish woman wrote on Facebook, “That America First part brought me to tears and anyone who doesn’t understand why can unfriend me right now.” Despite what anyone would say, such connotations pertaining to “America First” still persist in the historical contexts, especially among American Jews. And that’s not likely to change anytime soon. So if you’re a proud patriot who wants to make America great, you should stop saying “America First” and not support politicians who use that as a catchphrase, especially if they have no idea to what it really means.

The historical contexts of “America First” still exist in the minds of many Americans whether Jewish or Gentile this day and that’s unlikely to change. So if you want to show love to America, don’t use “America First” as your patriotic affirmation nor support politicians who use the term as a campaign slogan. Because it’s very likely they have no idea of its historical roots as to what it really means.

An Open Inaugural Letter to Donald Trump

Posted by historymaniacmegan on January 20, 2017

Mr. Trump, when in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for some lowly blogger like me to pinch my two cents in with this whole fiasco. During the 2016 election, I worked tirelessly to ensure that you’ll never become President of the United States once you became the GOP nominee. I wrote 3 blog posts citing how you’re such a despicable human being who screwed workers, investors, contractors, banks, and pretty much anyone who’d dared to challenge you or your precious brand. Of course, my efforts failed since you wouldn’t be president if they succeeded.

However, if you think I’m writing to you to offer an olive branch and let bygones be bygones, you are sorely mistaken. You may have won over the support of the Republican Party establishment, enough votes to ensure a victory in the Electoral College as well as people in my neighborhood, family, community, and state, etc. You may have the constitutional legitimacy to be President of the United States. You may have a business empire worth millions of dollars and a name known the world over. But none of that guarantees that I’ll ever kowtow and respect you or see you as my president. Because you don’t win my respect by simply being very rich or famous or being President of the United States. No, respect has to be earned. You lost that chance forever long before you ever ran for president, especially after you started promoting birther conspiracy theories. Though I thought you were nothing more than a joke just using birtherism to garner publicity. Yet, your shock jock mentality stopped being funny the moment you referred to Mexicans as criminals, rapists, and drug mules while your popularity increased. Now that I know of all your dirty dealings and many grievous sins, you absolutely disgust me. And the fact so many people voted for you despite your critical moral failings and lack of qualifications incenses me to no end as well as makes me feel ashamed of my country. And the fact you’re President of the United States doesn’t change the fact you’ve flunked basic tests of decency as the unrespectable man you are.

To see you as president makes me feel that Americans don’t seem to have any moral standards whatsoever in the candidates they elect. Now I don’t expect for my political candidates to be saints by any stretch of the imagination. But I do wish they abide by certain standards of human decency such as having some semblance of a conscience which you completely lack. From what I’ve read or seen of you, I know of no moment when you’ve never been unconditionally nice to anyone. Nor do I know any time when you’ve taken any responsibility for your actions, ever said you’re sorry, or even admitted you’re wrong without someone pitting you in a corner. Nor could I ever tell whenever you’re telling the truth or making a promise you intend to keep. But I do know of countless times when you stiffed employees and contractors out of their hard earned wages as well as cheated investors and left them holding the bag whenever your business ventures failed. I know of instances of you using litigation as an intimidation tactic or lashing out on Twitter whenever someone dared to mock, challenge, or speak out against you. I do know of times when you’ve praised brutal dictators as well as done business with them. And I know of times when you’ve done business with known criminals. I also remember times when you’ve clearly lied, made promises you never intended to keep, as well as went to great lengths to avoid taking any responsibility for the widespread harm you’ve caused so many people. I’m not just talking about all the terrible things you said you’d do to minorities during your presidential campaign or your tirades against critics wanting to hold you accountable. But also the people who’ve put all their time, effort, and sometimes even resources into your ventures so they’d succeed only to have you swindle them out of what they’re rightfully owed. Yet, you feel absolutely no remorse and don’t give a damn about the consequences if they don’t affect you. If they do, you just deny, sue, intimidate, or blame someone else for them. Because you think your wealth and status guarantee you special privileges that exempt you from following codes of conduct you don’t think should apply to you. And I know that every time you were in a position of power or trust, you’d usually abuse it to enrich yourself with no second thought. You’re such a thoroughly despicable human being with delusions of grandeur who’d rather not let his dirty laundry see the light of day. I have no capacity to respect you and no amount of money and power could ever change that.

You may have won over a large swath of white voters with your virulent screeds of racist and xenophobic dog whistles, appeals to a whitewashed nostalgia, flag-waving patriotic grandstanding, and countless promises of making America great again. However, I know all too well that you really don’t give a rat’s ass about your supporters who think the world of you unless they have a generous bank account or their name in lights. And I know as president, you will certainly betray the white working class voters who elected you if you haven’t already done so whether it be for yourself, the GOP establishment, the corporate elites of the 1%, or your cabinet of swamp cronies. I may not know the full extent of your politics but I know you aren’t a man of the people and don’t give a shit about the working man you’d only cater to with empty promises if he can give you what you want. Even if it means voting for a candidate who goes against the kind of sacred American values they hold dear and who brings out the worst of this country. But that doesn’t mean you’ll deliver since I’m fully aware that your white working class supporters have been conned by an elite con artist of the 1%. But you don’t fool me because I know exactly the kind of piece of shit you are. The media may call you a populist but your populism is nothing but a charade while your presidential campaign was all smoke and mirrors but no substantive policies. Contrary to what your supporters think of you, you’re not successful, strong, or fearless leader who deserves respect but a weak, cowardly fraud who wouldn’t have his wealth or the presidency if he wasn’t born into the 1% and had his daddy’s money bailing him out of trouble. And I wasn’t surprised when you broke your promise to drain the swamp because your extensive history shows that corruption runs to the very core to your identity. I know you will use the presidency screw the American people your own self-enrichment with little regard to laws, rules, or others. I know you will honor no loyalties and commitments and betray the office and government you’re sworn to uphold. Because I know you have no respect for America, its values, its constitution, or its people. And I know you have no respect for democracy or believe a government conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all are created equal. If anything, you certainly won’t fix what’s wrong with this country but make it worse for you’re part of the problem. Even if you are now the president, I see absolutely no reason why I should have any respect for you.

You may be the President of the United States as we speak. You may have the support of my relatives, friends, neighbors, community and fellow Pennsylvanians. But you can forget me addressing you as “Mr. President” and giving you a chance to lead or treating you with any kind of respect the office entails for the next 4-8 years even for the sake of unity or the country. Your supporters, the GOP, the media, and at least 60 million Americans may continually excuse and enable your appalling and despicable behavior no matter what you do. But I will not because not only do you go against everything I and America stand for, but you also constantly violate norms of ethical behavior which I still deem as unacceptable in a president. To unite behind you for the sake of the country will only give validation of racist, xenophobic, and misogynist and sexual predatory behavior as well as legitimized greed and authoritarianism as acceptable. To call you my president would be to send a message it’s okay to bully, intimidate, incite violence, and lie to people in order to get what you want and not take responsibility for all the hurt you’ve caused. To recognize you as my country’s leader means being fine with a president who’s eagerly willing to violate my constitutional rights. To be willing to work with you shows I’m willing to live in your world of vanity, hate, recklessness, untruth, vindictiveness, and your disdain for democratic norms that will lead to national decline and suffering. And deferring any respect to you for the sake of the presidential office or national unity will only give legitimacy to everything about America I despise. As president, you don’t deserve being recognized as worthy of the respect the office entails because you’re still an unrespectable man who’s nothing but a disgrace to the nation whose principles he doesn’t represent. Having you as president doesn’t make America great again and never will since you’re nothing but a repulsive sociopathic demagogue who puts the dignity of the presidential office in jeopardy. Your election shatters my faith in the American people beyond recognition as well as the people I know and love. To accept you as my president is to give my stamp of approval of your character and behavior which I won’t tolerate as well as abandon the kind of moral values I won’t desert.

Now I may still respect my country, pay taxes, and observe its laws just like any citizen. But I will not do so out of respect for you or the policies which I so vehemently oppose. Though I will exercise civil disobedience if any of your policies infringe on my civil rights or liberties or those of my fellow Americans. I will fight for the welfare of all Americans including those who elected you since I care about and respect them much more than you ever will. And I vow to resist you in order to keep you from destroying this great nation any further even if it means calling for your impeachment and removal from office. For I think those calling for your assassination are way too kind and out of their minds. As long as you’re in office, I refuse to recognize you as an authority figure. I refuse to give you any benefit of legitimacy that you don’t deserve. I refuse to normalize, excuse, or defend whatever you say and do because I see your presidency as a disaster of American democracy and think you set a terrible example to children. You may be president, but you are not my leader and you don’t represent me or my values because you aren’t worthy of my respect let alone admiration. And as long as you’re president, I will not cooperate with you, I will not bow down to you, and I will not obey you. You may complain if you wish but you can go fuck yourself by the pussy and go straight to hell for all I care. While only God knows what’s redeemable in one’s heart and soul, I deny you the right to take away my rights or those of others, especially if they can’t defend themselves. Because I still believe in basic human decency as well as the notions of liberty, equality, and the common good that have made this country great. I will not submit to a presidential authority who rejects the Constitution as well as its underlying principles of democratic self-government and individual rights. I will not comply with a president who uses the mass media to lie, insult, to strip individuals of their dignity, to commit the grossest falsehoods against religious and national groups, as well as encourage persecution, torture, and violence. I will not get behind a leader who actively campaigns against any notion of sexual, religious, or racial equality, embraces a form of self-serving capitalism with no conscience, and threatens those opposing him with the unchecked power of the state. Because even as president, you have absolutely no right to strip minorities of equal status and protections or throw away a democratic future of posterity. And God be damned if I let it happen in my lifetime. I know what may be in other people’s hearts or minds today, but as for me, you will never be my president and I hope your term of office goes down in flames.

So instead of wishing you well and congratulations on your presidency, all I have to say to you is go to hell and fuck you. Because if you can’t respect democracy and American values or exercise any form of decency, then I see no reason to treat you with the utmost disrespect and contempt befitting of a public figure so worthy of being so strongly despised by the American public. You’re a piece of pussy grabbing human garbage who represents everything about America I hate. To see you as president gives me nothing but shame. So even if over 60 million Americans consented to you screwing them, doesn’t mean you have a right to fuck with me. Because you absolutely don’t, not now, not ever. And if you do in any way, which I’m sure you will, I will not let you get away with it and make sure your life becomes a living hell. And if you shall come to my area for any reason, fuck off. So goddamn you and everything you stand for since you’re nothing but garbage to me. Your con man’s words have no value to me since you’re a pathological liar who only tells your supporters what they want to hear while shamelessly robbing them blind with no second thought. To me, you’ll always be an outright fraud who belongs in jail instead of the White House. If reading this post inflames you to the point you’re tweeting nasty shit about me because I don’t give you the kind of respect you feel entitled to, remember that I owe you nothing. And if you’re not happy with me attacking your brand or so-called good name, then perhaps you can shove it up your ass you seem to talk out of. You can do whatever you want with me but all I have to say is screw you for I don’t care what you think of me. So you might as well go fuck yourself as your presidency fucks up the country.

Why We Need to Defend Network Neutrality

Posted by historymaniacmegan on November 19, 2016

net-neutrality-op

Since the 1990s, the internet has become so much a part of our lives that it’s easy to imagine that it will always remain the free and open medium it is now. We’d like to believe it will remain a place where you can always access any lawful content you want and where those delivering that content can’t play favorites because they disagree with the message being delivered or want to charge more money for faster delivery. However, despite that we have rules in place protecting network neutrality thanks to the Federal Communications Commission, there may be no such guarantees after January 20, 2017. Why? Because not only did 60 million voters elect an unrespectable man like our soon-to-be groper-in-chief, Republicans have control of both houses in Congress and will more than likely retain power on the Supreme Court. Furthermore, there Senate hasn’t reconfirmed a Democratic FCC commissioner to another 5-year-term. Not only that, but the man President-Elect Evil Cheeto Head wants to chair the FCC is a longtime opponent of net neutrality and telecom lobbyist. If Donald Trump and his swamp cronies have their way within the next 4-8 years, this open internet and the network neutrality principles that sustain it, could be a thing of the past. Profits and corporate disfavor of controversial viewpoints or competing services can change both of what you see online and your connection quality. And the need to monitor what you do online in order to play favorites means even more consumer privacy invasions piled up on top of the NSA’s prying eyes. A lot of Americans don’t know about net neutrality because it doesn’t get a lot of coverage on the news media than it should. As for me, I first heard about this from my parents while I was in high school after they watched something from Bill Moyers about it. Those who do overwhelmingly support it across the political spectrum. And many Americans take the notion of a free and open internet for granted which they will sure to miss. But unfortunately, its share of detractors are in high positions of power as well as contribute generously to Republican politicians. Here I list a rough FAQ on net neutrality basics because if there’s a time we need to know and preserve net neutrality to protect the internet, it is now.

Network neutrality is the principle that requires all legal content to be treated equally by internet service providers. This allows consumers to pay a monthly fee to the ISPs in order to access any website and service they want. Net neutrality is essential for a free and open internet in a digital economy as well as in a 21st century democracy.

What Is Network Neutrality?

Network neutrality is the guiding principle that internet service providers and government regulators should allow access to all applications and content regardless of source and without favoring or blocking particular products or websites. In other words, while ISPs provide you access to the internet, they should treat all services and websites the equally, which lets you use it as much as you want for anything you want at the cost of a monthly fee. Network neutrality preserves a free and open internet while preventing companies from discriminating against different kinds of websites and services.

What’s the Difference Between ISPs and Content Providers?

An ISP is a company that provides you access to the Internet like AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, Cox, Charter, and Time Warner Cable. Most people get their high-speed internet access from only these few telecommunication giants. The very few smaller carriers usually rely on the big guys to serve their customers. Content providers are companies that create and/or distribute videos and programs like Netflix and Amazon. Sometimes ISPs can also be content providers as well since Comcast owns NBC Universal as well as delivers TV shows and movies through its Xfinity internet service.

net-neutrality-what-you-need-know-now-infographic

We should care about network neutrality because it encourages innovation, promotes free speech, and prevents abuse by ISP gatekeepers. Without it, ISPs would demand a cut from every website in order to funnel that content to customers and possibly slow down or block content they don’t like. What the ISPs want the internet to be like should be unacceptable to all Americans.

Why Should We Care About Network Neutrality?

Network neutrality is essential because a free and open internet is the single greatest technology of our times that stimulates ISP competition, helps prevent unfair pricing practices, promotes innovation, promotes the spread of ideas, drives entrepreneurship, and protects freedom of speech. Overall, network neutrality keeps the internet a cornerstone of freedom and opportunity. When we receive or send data over the internet, we expect our ISPs to transfer it from one end of the network to the other. We don’t expect them to analyze or manipulate it. Without net neutrality, telecommunications companies can carve the internet into fast and slow lanes. An ISP can slow down its competitors’ content or block political opinions it disagreed with. ISPs can also charge extra fees to the few content companies that could afford to pay for preferential treatment while relegating everyone else to a slower rate of service. Such actions could destroy an open internet. So this is a very important issue.

Telecom companies want to interfere with their customers’ internet mainly for profit and corporate interests. They want to block speech that would make them look bad, slow down or block applications that aren’t their own, and increase profits by making developers pay more to avoid having their data blocked or slowed down.

Why Would the Telecoms Want to Interfere with Internet Data?

Well, the answer boils down to simple profit and corporate interests. Companies might want to interfere with speech that makes them look bad, block applications that compete with their own, or increase their profit by forcing developers to pay more to avoid having their data blocked or slowed down.

Those who believe that competition will ensure a free and open internet are sorely mistaken since building broadband is expensive that most ISPs are telecom companies since they already have the communication infrastructure already in place. And as far as internet provider consumer choice is concerned, most Americans are usually limited to 3 or fewer.

Won’t Competition Prevent Them from Doing Any of This?

Sorry, free-market believers, but your faith in the divine forces of capitalism will not save you. Normally competition should and would prevent telecoms from interfering with internet data. But it won’t. For one, data manipulation isn’t always easily detectable. Content can be delayed or distorted in a number of subtle ways. Secondly, building a high-speed broadband service is very expensive so there aren’t many of them. So it’s no surprise that they tend to be big phone and cable companies because they already have the data “pipes” in place. Most Americans don’t have more than a handful for legitimate high-speed broadband options at home (the vast majority have 3 or fewer). What this means is that customers can’t switch if big broadband providers start messing around with their service. Additionally, big content providers like Netflix have to send their data through these “last mile” gatekeepers. So, all you free-market absolutist libertarians, the current market competition just isn’t enough to stop them from blocking services or charging more for a fast lane.

If telecom companies had their way which might happen under a Trump administration, you can expect a the future of the internet to look like a pay to play service like this. Doesn’t seem like one you’d want, does it?

Have There Been Any Actual Instances of Service Providers Interfering with the Internet or Is This All Theoretical?

Real abuses have happened consistently over the past decade. New technologies now allow telecom companies to scrutinize over every piece of information we send or receive online like websites, email, videos, Internet phone calls, or data generated by games or social networks. They could also program the computers that route that information to interfere with the data flow by slowing down or blocking traffic and communicators that they don’t like while speeding up traffic they do or that pays them extra for the privilege. To put it this way, imagine if your phone company could mess with your calls every time you tried to order a pizza from Domino’s because Pizza Hut is paying them to route their calls first. Though opponents claim the threat is only “theoretical” or that applying common carrier principles to the internet is a “solution in search of a problem,” there have been numerous incidents of abuse. There’s AT&T censoring words from Pearl Jam’s Eddie Vedder when he sang, “George Bush, leave this world alone” and “George Bush find yourself another home.” The company complained the words were censored to prevent youth visiting the website from being exposed to “excessive profanity.” Though the song contained none. They later blamed it on an external website contractor hired to screen the performance. There’s Comcast discriminating against an entire class of online activities by using deep packet inspection to block file transfers from customers using popular peer-to-peer networks like BitTorrent, eDonkey, and Gnutella. In national tests conducted by the Associated Press, their actions were confirmed to be unrelated to network congestion since blocking took place at times when it wasn’t congested. And while Comcast blocked applications often used in trade videos like pirated content, much of what was blocked was legitimate. Then we have Verizon cutting off text-messaging program by the pro-choice group NARAL that it used to send messages to its supporters. The company stated that it wouldn’t service programs from any group “that seeks to promote an agenda or distribute content that, in its discretion, may be seen as controversial or unsavory to any of our users.” And that was just 2007. These are just incidents but this kind of behavior hasn’t become broadly accepted to the internet structure. But without enforceable net neutrality rules in place (which can happen under a Trump administration), that could quickly happen. The consistency of these abuses tells us all we need to know about what will happen if companies are permitted to exploit their power over our Internet connections.

Net neutrality is great for business since it puts small businesses, startups, and entrepreneurs on an fair and playing field. They rely on net neutrality to launch their business, create a market, advertise their products and services, and distribute their goods to customers. This helps create jobs, competition, and innovation. Without it, ISPs would seize every possible opportunity to profit which would squeeze its competitors out.

Why Is Network Neutrality Important for Business?

Net neutrality is crucial for small business owners, startups, and entrepreneurs, because they rely on an open internet to launch their business, create a market, advertise their products and services, and distribute their goods to customers. They need an open internet to foster job growth, competition, and innovation in the 21^st century and beyond. Net neutrality lowers the barriers for them by ensuring the web is a fair and level playing field. And it’s because of net neutrality that businesses and entrepreneurs are able to thrive online. They use the internet to reach new customers as well as showcase their goods, applications and services. Since ISPs are by definition the gatekeepers to the internet, they would seize every possible opportunity to profit from that gatekeeper control if net neutrality wasn’t in place while the next Google wouldn’t get off the ground. So no company should be able to interfere with this open marketplace.

Net neutrality is essential for a free democracy in the 21st century because it protects freedom of speech. Not only that, but net neutrality allows the internet to be a platform for voices to be heard who wouldn’t be represented otherwise in our media landscape.

Why Is Network Neutrality Important for Communities of Color?

The open internet allows communities of color to tell their own stories as well as organize for racial and social justice. The mainstream media has failed to allow people of color speak for themselves. And due to economic inequality and runaway media consolidation, they own only a handful of broadcast stations. This lack of divers ownership is a primary reason why the media has gotten away with portraying minority communities stereotypically. The open internet gives marginalized voices opportunities to be heard which they wouldn’t previously have access to. Without net neutrality, ISPs could block unpopular speech and prevent dissident voices from speaking freely online. This would lead people of color to lose a vital platform. Not to mention, millions of minority owned small businesses wouldn’t be able to compete with large corporations online, which would further deepen economic inequality in our nation’s most vulnerable communities. This isn’t just limited to communities of color either. For instance, the Internet is a great place to find out about environmental disasters in rural areas that tend to slip under the radar, which I’ve put to very good use. Not to mention, since runaway media consolidation and decline in newspapers has led to less local voices being heard from within their communities and less local content being produced, having a free and open internet more than makes up for it.

President-Elect Cheeto Creepazoid is a known opponent of net neutrality and has a known telecom lobbyist he wants to tap to head the FCC. It’s also clear that he doesn’t understand net neutrality either. Since he’s an extremely greedy and vindictive bastard who’s no friend to free speech, expect to take his views on this subject very seriously. Because starting January 20, 2017, net neutrality’s days may be numbered.

Why Do We Need to Defend Network Neutrality?

In February 2015, the Federal Communications Commission enacted Title II reclassification of internet access service to a telecommunications service which allows the agency to create strong network neutrality rules allowing customers to have reasonable, reliable, and nondiscriminatory services. What the FCC did was designate ISPs as “common carriers” or private companies that sell their services to consumers without discrimination. This is similar to how consumers received landline telephone service. A federal court decision has also upheld the ruling. However, even good ideas have their detractors and net neutrality is no different. Since the 2015 FCC Title II classification, opponents have worked everywhere from Congress to the courts in order to dismantle or undermine it. While foes have filed 10 lawsuits over it, Republican lawmakers have put forth more than a dozen bills or amendments to weaken or kill the FCC’s new regulations. None succeeded. However, Donald Trump’s election to the presidency as well as guaranteed Republican control of Congress and possibly the Supreme Court is very likely to mean that net neutrality’s days may be numbered. Trump will appoint 2 new commissioners in 2017 (while a Democratic member hasn’t been reconfirmed for another term) and has 2 people on his transition team with strong ties to the telecom industry. Trump’s man to run the FCC is Jeffrey Eisenach who’s a known anti-regulatory zealot criticized for his anti-neutrality stance as a think tank scholar while receiving funds from Verizon to underwrite his work. As Center for Digital Democracy executive director Jeffrey Chester states, “What Trump appears to be doing on internet and privacy policy is basically allowing the swamp to decide our digital future, allowing crocodiles to eat up our rights. What the big cable and phone companies want Trump to do is to turn the internet over to them to run as a private fiefdom.” Since Trump is known to be very pro-business and a greedy sociopath as well as no friend to the First Amendment and constitutional rights, his opposition to net neutrality is almost certainly sincere. So as soon as Trump is sworn in, expect net neutrality to be a threat.

Here is a small snapshot of net neutrality camps. Most Americans aware of net neutrality usually favor it along with the following mentioned. Those opposed are usually telecom companies as well as free-market conservatives and libertarians.

Who Supports Network Neutrality?

The good news is that network neutrality enjoys huge bipartisan support among consumers since more than 4 million Americans have filed public comments with the FCC about it, which is more than any other issue it’s handled. Chances are if Americans have heard of net neutrality, they most likely support it regardless of race, age, creed, political stance, or income level. The fact so many organizations support it like Greenpeace, Gun Owners of America, the Christian Coalition, the Electronic Frontiers Foundation, AARP, American Library Association, Consumer Federation of America, and the Media Access Project illustrates how popular net neutrality is across the political spectrum. You can include unions and religious institutions as well. It also enjoys strong support from small businesses and large companies like Apple, Netflix, Tumblr, Kickstarter, Wikia, Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, Google, Amazon, eBay, Yahoo!, Etsy, and others. President Barack Obama is one of the most prominent supporters of net neutrality whose expressed commitment to the cause helped lead to the landmark 2015 FCC ruling that designated the internet as a utility to preserve it and so are most Democratic Party politicians.

This is Pennsylvania US Representative Tim Murphy (R). He represents my congressional district. Unlike the most of his possible constituents Murphy publicly opposes network neutrality which is against the interests of every internet user, mostly due to big telecom companies giving him big wads of cash. That and how nobody seems to successfully run against him. If you live in my congressional district and think you can beat him, give me a call. Please, I don’t want him representing me any more. And I don’t care if people in my district approve of him.

Who Opposes Network Neutrality?

The bad news is that despite being a highly good and popular idea, net neutrality has a lot of very powerful enemies such as telecommunications industries, some network engineers, conservative to libertarian scholars, and many Republican politicians. Major ISPs and telecommunication companies like Comcast, Verizon, Cox, AT&T, and Time Warner mainly oppose net neutrality because they want to manage internet access like blocking charging users different rates to access different services or simply blocking certain services altogether. The 2015 FCC Title II ruling was not great to their bottom line that they’ve vowed to fight these regulations all the way to the Supreme Court. And in fact, the last time the FCC tried to instill net neutrality protections, Verizon sued and the rules were overturned by a federal court in 2014. These companies have lobbied against net neutrality 3 times as hard as its biggest proponents as well as outspent them 5 to 1. They also heavily contribute to Republican political campaigns which explains why so many GOP politicians oppose net neutrality while their constituents overwhelmingly don’t. Many of these politicians call it, “Obamacare for the Internet.” Organizations against net neutrality are usually free-market advocacy groups like FreedomWorks, Americans for Prosperity, the American Enterprise Institute, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, Citizens Against Government Waste, and the Progress and Freedom Foundation. Tech companies like IBM, Intel, Cisco, Qualcomm, and Juniper also oppose net neutrality measures as well.

The main reason why many Americans don’t know much about net neutrality is due to runaway media consolidation. As of 2016, 90% of the media is controlled by 6 corporation. Two of these corporations are telecom giants like Comcast and Time Warner who oppose net neutrality.

Why Don’t We Hear About Network Neutrality?

Mostly because the mainstream media rarely talks about it if ever. Yes, there may have been an episode of John Oliver about it as well as some discussion on PBS but that’s about it. A big reason for this is media consolidation. As of now, only 6 corporations control 90% of media in the United States, including Comcast and Time Warner who are known to oppose net neutrality. And it doesn’t help that Comcast owns MSNBC while Time Warner owns CNN. Then there’s Fox News which is a conservative news outlet owned by Rupert Murdoch. Not to mention, a lot of telecoms sponsor a lot of news programming which can influence their content. The fact so many Americans have never heard about net neutrality leads them to take the notion of a free internet for granted. And if Trump’s administration gets rid of it, most Americans will miss it.

Protecting Network Neutrality is important for all Americans and we need to make sure it survives the Trump administration. 21st America depends on a free and open internet which is essential for our society. This is a list of what you can do.

What Can We Do to Protect Network Neutrality?

Well, you can do a lot of things to protect network neutrality. You can e-mail the Federal Communications Commission. You can contact your state representatives (though make sure they’re not against net neutrality before you do so because a lot of them receive campaign contributions from giant telecom companies. So if you live in Pennsylvania and your representative is Tim Murphy or Joseph Pitts, contact Senator Bob Casey instead. Because Senator Pat Toomey is against net neutrality, too, along with these big telecom industry stooges). You can donate to civil liberties and consumer groups like Public Knowledge, Electronic Frontiers Foundation, Free Press, Consumers Union, and the American Civil Liberties Union. You can stay informed and tell your friends. At any rate, remember that network neutrality isn’t a partisan issue so don’t let Trump’s swamp cronies let telecom companies slow down or block sites users love. And let the FCC use its Title II powers to stop them.

Remember Trump and his swamp cronies are enemies of the free and open internet we know and love. Don’t let them kill network neutrality or this will happen. Please, my fellow Americans, I know most of you support this. Please don’t fail me like you did in the 2016 Election. America can’t afford this.

Don’t Ask Me to Give a Chance on an Unrespectable Man

Posted by historymaniacmegan on November 12, 2016

To the Trump supporters and voters out there, I know the election’s over and that your guy has been elected president fair and square through the Electoral College process thanks to your votes. It may not seem fair to me since my candidate Hillary Clinton won the popular vote (even by a narrow margin), but that’s how the system works. Yes, I am heartbroken that my candidate didn’t win through this bitter election and I didn’t get much sleep that night. But now that Donald Trump is president-elect, you tell me it’s time to come together, have an open mind, and to give him a chance to lead that he deserves. After all, you tell me that this is a time of civility, unity, and reconciliation. Besides, you insist that he may not be as bad as I think and my refusal to do so just makes me a whiny sore loser. You want me to treat this moment as a normal election which I should get over with and move on with my life as if everything in this country within the next 4 years will be fine.

However, asking me to accept a Trump presidency is something I cannot do. Not now, not ever. You may call me a whiny liberal with a sense of entitlement who can’t get over her candidate losing. You may call me a spoiled crybaby who can’t accept not getting what she wanted. You may call me unpatriotic for refusing to get behind the future president you voted for. You call me out of touch and immature for saying that Trump is not my president. You may say by not accepting Trump I have no respect for the presidency, the will of my fellow Americans, or democracy.

But in truth, my rejection of Trump has nothing to do with my politics or being unable to accept reality. I accept that Trump won the presidency and will be come January. I know there’s nothing I can do about it. Besides, I’ve experienced political setbacks before which I can deal with. Had the Republicans won this election with a viable presidential candidate, I would more likely put aside political differences and accept that person as my president with little complaint. Sure I’d be sad that my candidate lost, but I’d get over it. But this is not one of those times. Because with your votes, you elected an unrespectable man as president of the United States. No unrespectable man deserves a chance to lead even if he did win the White House.

When you’re asking to give Donald Trump a chance to lead, you’re asking me to accept what I already deem as fundamentally unacceptable in everything that a US president should be as well as represents America at its worst. President or not, Trump is a man I have absolutely no respect for in any capacity and that will never change. Now that he’s set to become the next president, I have never felt so ashamed of my country in my life. I am deeply horrified that so many of you could vote for such a thoroughly despicable human being with no redeeming qualities whatsoever. I am appalled that so many of you were willing to excuse this man’s gross violations of basic human decency that you wouldn’t tolerate in anyone else. I am absolutely disgusted that so many of you can be fine with electing a con artist who’s cheated his customers, investors, contractors, bankers, and employees. And I can guarantee that he will cheat you. I am upset that you could choose a man to lead our nation whose campaign was built on unfiltered disdain toward racial and religious minorities as well as endorsed by white supremacist terrorists. I am outraged that so many of you could be okay with a president who’s a sexual predator with a long history of objectifying and denigrating women. I am deeply distressed that you would vote for a man who is an entitled elitist who is corrupt to the core and doesn’t think the laws apply to him, an unrepentant and vindictive bully who uses litigation as an MO to anyone who’s challenged and criticized him, a pathological liar who’s constantly made promises he never intends to fulfill, and a irrepressibly greedy sociopath who’s tried to enrich himself by abusing trust others have placed in him whenever he’s in a position of authority. I am greatly troubled that you could ever support a man who has little respect for norms of ethical and acceptable behavior. I am angered that you voted for a man who never takes responsibility for his action, never says he’s sorry, and never admits he’s wrong. I am deeply incensed that you’re willing to choose a man to lead our country who’s had a history of unethical business practices that’s hurt thousands, who’s unwilling to release his tax returns and medical records, who’s surrounded himself with sycophants and outright criminals, who’s praised and done business with notorious dictators, whose flag waving patriotism is a sham, and who’s willing to use people as pawns in order to get what he wants and doesn’t care who gets hurt. Finally, I am extremely distraught that you elected a man who clearly has no respect for American values, American institutions, the rule of law, or constitutional rights that have made this nation great. And the fact I know very well that most of you aren’t bigoted monsters only makes it worse.

I know you will tell me that you voted for Trump because you hated or distrusted Hillary Clinton, your stance on the issues, his campaign promises, or what not. But whatever it is, I absolutely don’t give a damn. If you don’t like Trump for any reason, you should’ve tried to stop him regardless of what you believed even if it meant supporting a party that doesn’t share your beliefs and electing a candidate you despise. Hell, you shouldn’t have voted for him during the primaries in the first place and not let him take over the GOP. You could’ve easily stopped him then but you didn’t. But plenty tried, even within the Republican Party. And to be honest, I actually agreed more with Bernie Sanders than Hillary. But I voted for Hillary in the primary anyway because I knew people outside the Democratic Party wouldn’t get behind a candidate like Bernie Sanders even if they were white working class. And as much as I wanted change and see Bernie’s policy ideas a reality, I really didn’t want Trump in the White House and he was already the presumptive GOP nominee by then. I knew he was an unrespectable man even then, just not to the degree I know now. Yet, I also knew that unrespectable men must be stopped. Hillary Clinton seemed to be the only reasonable choice available to me. But unlike you, at least I made the right one I would never regret. I can’t say the same for you even if you don’t now.

Whatever your reasons may be for supporting him, they don’t excuse the fact you have given validation that racist, xenophobic, and misogynist and sexual predatory behavior as well as legitimized greed and authoritarianism as acceptable. It also doesn’t excuse the fact your vote for Trump sends a message that it’s okay to bully, intimidate, incite violence, and lie to people in order to get what you want and not take responsibility for all the hurt you’ve caused as well as being fine with a leader who’s eagerly willing to violate your constitutional rights. I know you don’t intend to say these things when you voted for him. But that doesn’t matter since your vote shows you’ve decided to live in Trump’s world of vanity, hate, recklessness, untruth, vindictiveness, and his disdain for democratic norms that will lead to national decline and suffering. Yet, what’s worse is that you didn’t care. You may not really like him. You may not really believe what he stands for. But casting your vote for him doesn’t make you any less guilty of giving legitimacy to this revulsive message of this unrespectable man.

I thought you were better than to vote for a candidate like Donald Trump who goes against everything this nation stands for. I thought regardless you perceived about Hillary Clinton, you’d do the right thing by electing a leader who’d make people feel proud to live in this great country. Even if you think Hillary is a criminal who belongs in jail. But you voted your self-interests to “take my country back” and elect that despicable demagogue who promised to “make America great again.” Sorry, but voting a man like Trump for president doesn’t make America great again and never will. Nor does it take your country back either but allowing it squandered by a sociopathic demagogue who’s only playing you for a pawn as well as put the dignity of the presidential office in jeopardy. It’s not a matter whether he’ll betray your interests but when. And when that time comes, you will come to despise him as much as those who’ve opposed him. In fact, your election of Trump makes the rest of us lose our faith in the America we’ve known and grown up with and the promise that it brought us that all are created equal and endowed with the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It especially shatters my faith in the American people beyond recognition as well as in the people I know and love. And for millions of my fellow citizens, the inevitability of a Trump presidency makes them live in fear, many for their lives and families being torn apart. Their fears are entirely rational since Trump fueled his campaign on bigotry as well as promised to do terrible things to them. But what message Trump’s election sends to the American people bears no resemblance to the values I was taught to exercise, admire, respect, or value in anybody, let alone in a president-elect. And I’ve learned many of these values from you, which makes me see your vote for Trump as a betrayal of those American ideals you taught me. Now I’m not sure if I know who you are anymore. To accept Trump as my president would be to normalize him as just a regular politician he’s not, which I won’t do. To accept Trump as my president is to give my stamp of approval of his character and behavior which I will not tolerate. Winning the electoral college doesn’t absolve Trump from fueling his campaign with bigotry and hate or the grave sins he’s committed against millions of Americans. And it’s because of that I’ll never stand united behind a president who’s an unrespectable man.

Don’t tell me that it was economic anxiety that led you to vote for Trump. Because most voters earning less than $50,000 a year voted for Hillary even among whites with the most economic grievances. Besides, while many white working class voters may be struggling but they make more money than their poor neighbors and are very much the middle class of their rural communities. Not to mention, white people across the board voted heavily for Trump. Sure non-college educated whites came out by force but nearly half of white college graduates voted for him, too. I’m sure everyone in the Rust Belt states know those good factory jobs left due to policies that were at least 30 years old and knows they’re never coming back ever. You know that any promise to bring back those jobs is just a mere pipe dream that will never materialize. Also, if Trump’s election was really about economic anguish then I’m not sure why you’d go for a so-called multi-billionaire from Manhattan. Don’t tell me you voted for Trump because he’s an “anti-establishment outsider” because I know though Trump may not have any political or military experience, he’s very much part of the establishment. For God’s sake, he’s been a member of the 1% his entire life and he’s more likely to support his rich buddies than your concerns if you’re white working class. Not only that, but I’ve grown up around people like you and I know very well how you complain about your taxes going to social programs like Obamacare or welfare as a thinly veiled way to poor shame as well as denigrate minorities and immigrants. I’m also aware of how you put rich people on a pedestal as if they’re successful entrepreneurs to be revered regardless of how they earned their money or how much their greed destroys. Now I’m sure that some of you may have legitimate economic concerns, but it’s very clear to me that you couldn’t care less about economic woes unless they pertain to your struggles or your tax dollars going to programs you don’t like or to beneficiaries feel are beneath you. Sure some of you may not like the elites but many of you make wealthy corporations and businessmen sacred cows who can do no wrong. But most of you like to scapegoat minorities and poor people for taking white people’s jobs, mooching from your hard earned tax dollars, and are protected, coddled, or exploited by the white affluent liberals you revile. But those liberals at least care much more about you than the big piggy billionaires, corporations, big banks and Wall Street people you constantly excuse. Besides, out of all the candidates in the 2016 Election, the one really cared the most about you white working class folks was Bernie Sanders. But I know you wouldn’t vote for him because of how much you don’t want to unite with your brown and black brothers and sisters in solidarity since they have more in common with you anyway and how America would be much better off if you did. You shirk at the notion of him calling himself a Democratic Socialist, which you view with suspicion. And I know you don’t like paying taxes either which I know you already view as big government even if it’s for your own benefit.

The exit poll data makes it perfectly clear that most of you who voted for Trump are way more white than working class. But that doesn’t stop the mainstream media from blaming the white working class for resentment of people of color and immigrants. But I know full well that white people at all income levels deride immigrants and minorities as well but they try to conceal it through their fiscal conservative rhetoric thinking liberals like me won’t even notice. If not, then you talk about it through the lens of securing our borders or fighting terrorism. Though the latter is quite ironic to me since you don’t seem to mind voting for a candidate who was endorsed by white supremacists. Or how you talk about how deindustrialization left the poor white working class without good jobs while Democratic party abandoned them for minorities, immigrants, LGBT people, women, and the environment. Sure I may empathize with the white working class on some level and why they’d be discontent with the establishment as well feel that they’re disrespected or left behind. But I find it very hard to believe that the Democrats really don’t care about the struggles in their communities. After all, weren’t the Democrats the ones to talk about paid family and sick leave, improving Obamacare and making healthcare more accessible, environmental protection, network neutrality, making college more affordable, and a higher minimum wage? Meanwhile, Republicans want to curb collective bargaining and union power through right to work laws. To say that the Democrats left behind or disrespected the white working class makes absolutely no sense to me. Or how you talk about it through rampant voter fraud that doesn’t exist. But you don’t fool me. It’s now perfectly clear to me that you still benefit from institutional racism and want it to stay that way whether you admit it or not. I mean the fact that many of you believed Barack Obama wasn’t born in the US or was a secret Muslim illustrates my point. Besides, many of you said that Barack Obama was “not your president” when he was elected in 2008. And I know it wasn’t because Obama wasn’t an unrespectable man since he was a man of great dignity who earned that chance to lead. Trump isn’t. You voted for Trump to preserve your white privilege which you thought was under threat by the nation’s increasing diversifying cultural landscape. Even if it means voting for a man who’ll only drag you through the mud along with your fellow citizens you deem as undeserving. There is no way around it. But while I don’t write off every one of you racist, sexist, or xenophobic maniac, I have to acknowledge that each of you decided that maniacal racism, sexism, and xenophobia wasn’t disqualifying for the President of the United States. Or that your selfish reasons for voting Trump matter more to you than protecting the rights of your fellow countrymen. I’m sorry, but I’m not letting you direct blame to the white working class who you scapegoat in order to avoid responsibility for the man you voted for. It’s another way of saying, “Don’t blame us, it’s the ignorant rednecks’ fault since they’re racists facing economic peril.” You knew liberals would blame them if Trump won as well as feel guilty that they’ve been out of touch with these people. For a while, I almost believed you. Yet, later it became apparent that these white working class voters only consisted of a part of Trump’s support. And those whites who were working class weren’t living on the edges of the economy either. But even if you fancy yourselves as non-racist or non-sexist virtuous people, you deserve all the shame you can get, possibly more than the proclaimed racists. Because you knew by voting for him you willingly handed the reins to a selfish, racist snake (sorry snakes). This makes you complicit in stating that millions of your fellow Americans don’t matter no matter how much you try to rationalize it. And I will not stand for it because it’s not okay.

Look, I know I probably have racist views that I may not be conscious of. Yet, as someone who’s studied history and researched political issues, I’m much more aware than most of my fellow whites. Though that hasn’t always been the case. I know I benefit from inequality and often fail to call it where I see it. But this election wasn’t one of those times since you failed to stop someone whose explicit aim was to scapegoat and pursue discrimination into law as well as in new and dangerous ways. You can’t be blameless for this no matter how strong your love for this nation’s ideals are which I now currently question. And in many ways, I feel like I didn’t do enough to call you out on your bigotry earlier when I should’ve since I knew it was always there. Even then, I underestimated how deep your disdain for the Other until today. And now I’m absolutely disgusted with you like I don’t know who you are anymore. What I find hard to accept is that many of ordinary Americans like you would vote for such an unrespectable man to lead your country. Look, I understand if you’re frustrated by the government dysfunction in Washington and that you may want change. But that doesn’t mean you should latch yourselves onto a wolf in sheep’s clothing who goes against your national ideals. And I know full well this wolf is the man you voted for. So if you berate me for rejecting Trump, don’t call me unpatriotic or a sore loser who won’t accept the election results. Because I do accept the results. But I also accept what Trump’s election means for this country and what it says about the American people. And to call him “not my president” means that I oppose his version of America and everything he stands for. Trump doesn’t represent me or the majority of Americans who voted against him no matter how small the difference. And I will fight him and his government tooth and nail to protect the American values I hold dear which I didn’t abandon on Election Day. I can’t say the same about you. So don’t tell me to embrace or support Trump because we’re one country united. Don’t lecture me about patriotism or values. And don’t ask me to give a chance on an unrespectable man.

An Electoral Catastrophe

Posted by historymaniacmegan on November 9, 2016

I cannot express the fear, anger, and disdain I feel when I heard that our next President of the United States will be a man whom I can never respect in any capacity. Our country doesn’t deserve a man like Donald Trump as its leader. I find it especially shameful that many of my friends, neighbors, relatives, and even my home state went to this most wretched man. I know this man won’t keep his promises because he makes them with no intention to fulfill them. This man doesn’t give a damn about anything or anyone but himself and his own gain. This man has never made sacrifices, never accepts responsibility, never did any good for goodness sake, and never felt any remorse. He’s a man with no interest in anything but his own money, power, and fame. He doesn’t seem to value education, possess any intellectual curiosity, appreciate culture, or hold the truth in high regard. He’s a man of no ideas, political experience, and no understanding of the world he wants to lead. I know this man cares nothing about our country, our history, our values, our institutions, our rule of law, our democracy, or our people. This man won the presidency by stoking many of the worst sentiments of human nature as well as saying that our country is a wretched human wasteland. His victory is a disaster for democracy at its worst and sets a horrific example for the world as well as our children. His campaign represents a rejection of our democratic norms and put fascism on the ballot while white, working class rural voters responded to his vile, bigotry, and false promises in droves to vote “Yes.” I absolutely loathe Trump so much I’m not sure if I can respect the presidential office during his term because he absolutely doesn’t have the character of someone whom I could be truly proud to say he’s the leader of my country. And at no time in my life have I felt such shame for my country, my extended family, many of my friends from both high school and college, my community, my state, and even my neighborhood who elected this black hole of humanity on anti-minority statements or outright hate that even white supremacist terrorists happily joined in. Except me and my parents who only had the only Hillary Clinton sign in the whole neighborhood and were possibly the only people who voted for her. For that I feel such a sense of shame for the hatred so many people in my life believe about people who are different than themselves. So for anyone who voted for the repulsive unapologetic racist, then may I be the first to say shame on you because it’s your racism that’s wrong with this nation.

Electing Trump as president doesn’t “make America great again” and never will. It does just the opposite by giving acceptable license to such a despicable man’s behavior and rhetoric that can harm millions of Americans. And it doesn’t help that most of Trump’s supporters voted for him because of his racist comments that they were willing to overlook his other unsavory qualities. Perhaps I could be among the few white women in America who’ve not only supported and voted for Hillary Clinton, but also actively wrote about racism throughout my blogging career. Despite overcoming my own prejudices with a great degree of success while writing these and reading a few books by minority authors, I am not proud of it. In fact, I’m absolutely horrified that so many white people in this country don’t actively share my disdain for racism that they’d at least not let the racist candidate win. This especially goes for my fellow white college graduates. It’s no wonder that minorities are scared to death since Trump’s election sends a resounding message that an overwhelming number of white people doesn’t want minorities here which I feel is utterly unconscionable. I’m even more upset that these racists who don’t want minorities here are people I know and people I grew up with. I am deeply disgusted by that fact because I’m well aware that it does not make things okay for many of my fellow Americans who’ll be subject to the Trump administration’s worst abuses. Trump’s presence will embolden white supremacists who supported him to be more audacious as well as push further and more extreme actions. Mosques will be vandalized and perhaps temples, synagogues, along with black and Hispanic churches. Mexican and Latino Americans could be targeted to a degree not seen in decades while Trump’s plan to deport undocumented immigrants will divide thousands of families which to me is beyond the pale. Police departments could be filled with black suspects that are stopped and frisked with no good attorney general willing to stop them. You can also take into account that lax gun laws will allow white supremacists and other right-wing terrorists access to firearms as well as more mass shootings and law enforcement deaths. So I’m not too off about how electing Trump lets the terrorists win. I can’t accept a man as my president whose message that racial discrimination is good and prudent to the entire citizenry because I know such attitudes don’t keep Americans safe from the threat of right-wing domestic terrorism which will undoubtedly rise but will probably be unsurprisingly ignored.

Trump’s presidency will solve none of our problems in this country that desperately needed fixed. As president, Trump intends to repeal Obamacare and has the majority to make it happen, which will result in at least 22 million Americans losing their health insurance, which I won’t stand for because I don’t want our healthcare system go back to the Bush years. Denying healthcare to anyone in need is unconscionably cruel to me because I believe medical care is a basic human right. Besides, despite Obamacare’s faults, the law is a huge success that has lowered the uninsured rate by half and if we didn’t have it, things would be worse. I know that Republicans have pledged to do this since its passage for 6 years saying it’s made things worse. But in reality, they were opposed to it from the very beginning due their party’s free market ideology and contributions from health insurance companies. As for the environment, Trump is sure to reverse Obama’s efforts to curb climate change like the Clean Power Plan, emissions standards, signed on to the Paris Climate Deal, and renewable energy funding. Trump not only wants to reverse all this, he also wants to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency altogether (which was established in the 1970s). The effect on emissions could be enormous which can reverberate for thousands of years and affect hundreds of millions of people. Without drastic emission reductions, global temperatures will continue to rise. Meanwhile the ice caps keep melting, the seas will rise, Florida will go underwater, and mega droughts could affect the Southwest for generations and generations. Not to mention, Trump’s presidency will give a free ride to Paul Ryan’s fiscal plans with 60% benefitting the richest Americans, make devastating cuts in social programs, and tax cuts for the rich with Food Stamps and Medicaid ending as we know it. Not to mention Medicare could be voucherized while Social Security could be privatized. Such a plan will not only keep the rich from paying their fair share, raise taxes on poorer and middle-class Americans, but also tear into the social safety net on the nation’s poorest Americans as well as put millions of children in extreme poverty. In short it will be a disaster because government should play a key role in reducing inequality like granting paid leave, equal pay for women, affordable childcare, and tax increases for the rich. But that’s not going to happen. And I know far too well that the next 4 years will have a presidency that believes in a self-serving capitalism with no conscience that Donald Trump personifies to a tee. Rejecting such legitimized greed in my country is critical part of my progressive Catholic identity. I cannot accept this from a government to undo so much progress this country has made under Obama and I will not bow down to Trump for it.

Trump’s presidency will also tarnish America’s reputation as a respected world power and beacon of the free world. It’s bad enough that Vladmir Putin and WikiLeaks were able to help Trump with the election by hacking into Hillary’s e-mails. But Trump is sure to be Putin’s puppet since his commitment to the Trans-Atlantic Treaty is shaky, doesn’t believe in NATO, and is extremely sympathetic in Russia’s dominance of neighboring countries. He also thinks Putin and Syrian dictator Bashir al-Assad are bombing ISIS when in reality, they’re focusing their assaults on non-Syrian rebels. Yet, Trump’s win should also encourage Assad and don’t expect him to lift a finger on behalf of his victims. It doesn’t help that Putin is greatly feared in Russia who’s left a trail of dead journalists. There are also possibilities of a trade war with China that could cost millions of American jobs, dismantling the Iran deal, the possibility of Trump turning Eastern Europe over to Putin, and his stupid wall he thinks Mexico should pay for. Then there’s the fact Trump supports torture which is a human rights violation in my book along threatening to alter American foreign policy in dangerous ways. I have no confidence that Trump could ever honor diplomatic ties or treaties and thus, I could never call him my president.

Though I might’ve known there may have been a chance that Trump would win the presidency, I always had faith that the American people will wise up and vote for Hillary Clinton despite all her baggage and beliefs. I thought despite whatever issues she represented or personal feelings toward her, Americans would choose a candidate who’d make people feel proud to live in such a great country like the United States. I thought my fellow Americans would put their country over their self-interests when they came to the voting booth this Election Day. And no matter how bad the race got, I somehow had faith that this day would pass and our national nightmare would be over. I thought Americans were better than to elect a sociopath for president like Donald Trump, a man who’d nobody would want to associate with in their every day life nor would want as a role model for their children. I was wrong for Trump’s victory and upcoming presidency thus marks the winter of our discontent. Today my faith in the American people is now shattered beyond recognition.

I know Trump supporters aren’t bad people. I know they work hard and take pride in supporting themselves. I know that many are angry. But what they did to “make America great again” was selfish, shameful, and disgraceful. And I will make sure they regret it for the rest of their lives. I know such a phrase will evoke nostalgia but it’s of an earlier time that only exists in a dream. I don’t want to go back to a time when they thought things were better when they were actually worse. I know these people want respect. I know these people want change. Hell, I even want change and so does everyone. But they should understand that they don’t get that by entrusting their vote to a wolf in sheep’s clothing who’ll fleece them and turn this great country into his little fiefdom. They say he’s an outsider and doesn’t represent the elite. In reality, he’s an elitist to the core whose interests always go against the common working man he sees an unsuspecting pawn and nothing more. They should also know that blaming vulnerable minorities for their troubles and lack of control doesn’t give them what they want either. What they got was an outright fraud who’s never had any respect for them, their values, their institutions, their freedoms, their country, or their rule of law. In effect, what they thought was a protest against one set of elites was really submitting to another elite as a license to screw them. They didn’t take their country back. They had their country squandered by voting a sociopathic demagogue who appealed to their baser natures. Because I’ve seen people take these deals before and I know the little guy gets swindled every time. Trump won’t fix it and he won’t make their lives better. He has already lied to them like he does all the time. He’s already given them false hopes and promises he never intends to follow through. He will rob them. He will cheat them. He will hurt them. He will let them down. But many seem taken with conservative media like Fox News or so set in their pessimistic reactionary worldview that they may not even realize this. But what’s more disturbing about them is how much they’re willing to overlook Trump’s inexcusable sins like they just don’t care that he was unqualified, temperamentally unfit, dangerous, and represents a major threat to American democracy. It’s as if they have no moral standards of behavior in a presidential candidate whatsoever. Or how their political choices may inspire their children to bully minority kids in their neighborhood or school. In the end, all I know is their support for Trump will give them nothing they want and may be even worse off than they were. And they’re doing with their votes is just bringing the rest of us down with them and dragging us through the mud. I guarantee he will wreck this nation and make the rest of us live with the consequences for the rest of our lives as well as those for generations to come. If they’re wise, these Trump supporters will regret voting for him. Maybe not today or tomorrow. But someday and for the rest of their lives. How do I know this? Because he’s screwed people who’ve trusted him left and right. And Trump supporters will be no exception.

Yet, though these Trump supporters try make themselves seem like they’re rugged individualists, the reality is that many of them aren’t. They’re actually kind of pathetic like many of the rest of us. Sure they may be religious, but they lack real Christian courage and they tend to choose their Un-Christian politics over Christian virtues. They think they’re tough with guns which they think will protect them. Yet, in reality, cling to their guns because they believe the world is a dangerous place and that the police can’t be trusted. Some may believe that government spending is out of control despite that they’re on welfare and food stamps because their job pays a shitty wage and doesn’t offer benefits. And they’re so afraid of being fired they’re so unwilling to stick up for themselves to their employer who’s exploiting or possibly robbing them. Many of them feel their lives seem hopeless no matter how hard they work they tend to scapegoat minorities and others poorer than themselves for being lazy or getting special treatment. Many also believe that if their candidate doesn’t win, then the election must be rigged by rampant minority voter fraud. They also have a tendency to fall prey to people who’d promise them a better life but actually using them for their own ends. But they always seem to cling onto a right-wing ideology that’s failing them and makes them think the world is a far worse place than it actually is. I have very little confidence these people could ever support a man like Bernie Sanders because these people are so adverse to liberal ideas that may sound even a teensy bit Socialist to them even if he best represents their interests, let alone a politician who calls himself a Socialist. I know all too well that these Trump supporters would’ve never accepted him. Many may be distrustful of government feel that it doesn’t support their interests even when their assistance helps them or is necessary that they feel they’re disregarded, disrespected or left behind. And they live in the same old patterns because they’ve been told not to stand up for themselves, revere the rich as successful people who they say earn their money, are so stuck in their ways, or accept everything as God’s plan. I’ve grown up around these people all my life and while I don’t dislike them, I tend to see many as misinformed, ignorant, self-serving, cowardly, hypocritical, and pathetic. Not to mention, I’ve heard their subtle racist comments all the time which are nevertheless damaging. But now I’m absolutely sick of their latent bigotry and won’t tolerate it any longer. Not even on special occasions when I’m supposed to be polite and keep my mouth shut on political matters. Even worse, many of them don’t seem to consider how this election will have on their children. I mean Trump allegedly sexually assaulted several women and teenage girls he called liars and threatened to sue as a form of intimidation. While he owned the Miss Universe pageant, he used to go into the dressing rooms when the contestants were partially clothed or naked, even during the teen competitions. It doesn’t help that his 3^rd and current wife is a college dropout who modeled in porn and he objectifies women on a regular basis. He even suggested that he’d date his daughter Ivanka if he could. It doesn’t help these girls’ mothers sold out their political views to this orange piece of human garbage. The fact that Trump’s election may normalize, excuse, or even encourage everything he’s said is particularly troubling. I don’t know if I can call a man like Trump, “Mr. President,” because I don’t want to normalize sexism. Or how Hillary’s defeat could prevent women from entering politics for fear of such a vicious backlash that won’t guarantee them victory (though Hillary did win the popular vote and thank God). Yet, the fact so many parents are willing to overlook Trump’s sexual predatory behavior and misogyny in this election somehow implicitly validates that these actions are acceptable. I am ashamed that American parents everywhere would even do such a thing since it sets an exceptionally horrible example to kids. And I refuse to tolerate it.

However, most importantly, I can’t accept Donald Trump as my president and because I don’t believe he respects the US Constitution as well as Americans made in order to form a more perfect union where all are created equal. He is more of a figure from authoritarian politics, not the American tradition and a democratic constitution that empowers such a leader has misfired badly. It’s very clear the Supreme Court gutting the Voting Rights Act as well as legalized voter suppression and intimidation played a huge role in his victory. In this election, Trump ran on a platform rejecting the Constitution as well as its underlying principles of democratic self-government and individual rights. Other than the 3^rd Amendment, there’s hardly a provision in the Bill of Rights or later amendments he didn’t explicitly promise to override. For instance, declaring open season on journalists is a huge violation of freedom of the press as would banning Muslims and shutting down mosques be with freedom of religion. Others include freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures like stop and frisk, the right to counsel along with the Fourteenth Amendment right to birthright citizenship and equal protection to Fifteenth Amendment voting rights. It’s like he offered Americans a bag of magic beans in an exchange for their rights and their form of government with nearly 60 million complying (which didn’t include me since I voted for Hillary who won the popular vote). I deny their right to give Trump my rights or those of others who can’t defend themselves. No result is legitimate threatening the constitutional promise “secure the blessings of liberty.” No amount of angry and frightened voters has a right to strip minorities of equal status and protections or throw away a democratic future of posterity. American national leaders gain their legitimacy by competing in compliance with not just outward forms but the clear values of our Constitution such as equal dignity, religious freedom and tolerance, open deliberation, and rule of law. These sacred constitutional principles don’t bind Donald Trump. In fact, norms of decency don’t apply to him as he shrugs off the very burden of the fact itself. Like Old World dictators, he uses the mass media to lie, insult, to strip individuals of their dignity, to commit the grossest falsehoods against religious and national groups, as well as encourage persecution, torture, and violence. He actively campaigns against any notion of sexual, religious, or racial equality. He threatens those opposing him with the unchecked power of the state. Sure there was a decay in American democratic norms before Trump who took advantage of a political system hardened in hatred that it’s caused constant gridlock as well as the growth of mass surveillance and toxic government secrecy. Though Trump was elected president on November 8, he’s not my president nor ever will be.

Why You Should Never Ever Vote for Donald Trump

Posted by historymaniacmegan on November 6, 2016

donald-trump-psychopath

With the election a few days away, most Americans have already decided to vote either for Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump as their new president. Of course, while I think every American has a right to vote their own conscience if they want to, I think the choice for the highest elected office in the land is obvious. And yes, I strongly urge my readers, my friends, and my family to vote to exercise their civic responsibility and for the love of God, cast a vote for Hillary Clinton. Sure she may be a liberal who goes against everything you stand for. Sure she may have a ton of baggage like her e-mails, her marriage to Bill, and what not. Sure she may be pro-choice and think what a woman does with her body is her business. But for God’s sake, she’s running against a fucking sociopath with no political experience who undermines our American ideals, people! Seriously, I don’t care where you stand on the issues or what your beliefs are. I don’t care what you think about Hillary either or whether you can trust her. This election isn’t about the issues but whether we’ll elect the first woman president or a fucking embarrassment who may put this country on the road to ruin as we know it. Say what you want about her, but at least Hillary is a normal politician who will lead this nation within the framework of the constitutional laws. At least Hillary is qualified for president as well as shown herself to be a serious candidate for the job. At least Hillary is an acceptable role model for your children to aspire to. And if Hillary is elected president, at least I’ll be assured the American experiment set by our Founding Fathers will still exist within the next four to eight years. The same can’t be said about her opponent. Trump, on the other hand, should’ve been shut down in the Republican primaries months ago. If you think Trump is more trustworthy than Hillary, then you must be an idiot. If you think Trump can change, you must be a fool. If you think Trump could “make America great again,” like you hope he would, you must be insane. Trump is a volatile con artist who’s abused his power whenever he’s been in a position of leadership. Look, I may be a practicing social justice Catholic who believes in advancing the common good in all else which is why I’m a strong progressive Democrat. But in this election, I’m not saying that Donald Trump shouldn’t be president not because I disagree with my politics which is true. I’m saying that Trump shouldn’t be president because he’s a man not to be trusted with power or leadership of any kind. Because all he cares about is himself. Seriously, there’s never been a candidate so evil in this country as Donald Trump. And here I list 50 reasons why you shouldn’t vote for him.

Even Trump supporters don’t think Donald Trump is qualified. That should send a red flag. Seriously, why wasn’t he defeated in the primaries already? Why the hell did he have to be the Republican nominee?

He’s Not Qualified or Fit for the Presidency– While Hillary Clinton was a lawyer and advocate by trade as well as First Lady of both US and Arkansas, US Senator from New York, and Secretary of State, Trump has held no political office or has held any government job whatsoever. Yes, we’ve had presidents who never held elected office. Yet, many have had some public service for the US Government. For instance, Ulysses S. Grant, Zachary Taylor, and Dwight D. Eisenhower were generals. Herbert Hoover was a Secretary of Commerce as well as head of the FDA during WWI and organizer for humanitarian relief efforts in Belgium and the Soviet Union. William Howard Taft served as a governor of the Philippines at one point in his life and in Theodore Roosevelt’s cabinet. He doesn’t even have that kind of political experience either. Besides, running a business is very different than running a country as Hoover learned the hard way. There’s also no evidence suggesting that he knows anything about foreign policy, balancing government budgets, education, diplomacy, or the Supreme Court. But more importantly, Trump has the temperament mentality of a spoiled, impulsive, and ill-behaved brat who’d probably not make it out alive in Willy Wonka’s candy factory of horrors. He’s made a lot of terrible decisions over his life that make me seriously question his judgement as well as said things that might not indicate he’s all there or even has interest in what the presidency entails. He also has serious moral character flaws that just can’t be ignored.

As they often say, the trouble with jokes is that so many get elected. Well, at least nominated as in Donald Trump’s case. However, once he started winning GOP primaries he stopped being funny. Now he’s downright scary.

2. He’s Not a Serious Political Figure Who Commands Respect– When Donald Trump first ran for president in 2015, I wasn’t nearly as upset as I should’ve been since for a long time Trump was basically seen as a joke. And a bad one at that. You know an extremely egocentric rich guy with a hideous haircut who hosted a reality show, built crappy hotels and ugly golf courses, as well as did very ridiculous things for the sake of publicity. Before his run for president, Trump’s been an international punchline as well as the honorary punching bag at a celebrity roast. To be honest, I thought Trump wouldn’t last long in the primaries since I didn’t think people would take him seriously enough to vote for him. Yet, the joke quickly stopped being funny for me when people started attending his rallies in droves and Republicans eventually voted him as their nominee. Now less than a week before the election and what I once perceived as a joke is now downright scary that I was extremely tempted to vandalize Trump signs from my neighbors’ properties. Electing Trump as president makes America look like a joke to the world, which should scare the living shit out of you.

Donald Trump is a perfect definition of a sociopath as you see in this picture. Trump only does what he can to get what he wants and doesn’t care who gets hurt. He uses people to his own ends and screws them over with no second thought. He never takes responsibility and never feels truly sorry for his actions. And he has very thin skin.

3. He Has No Conscience or Moral Values– Now when it comes to politician’s moral character, I mostly don’t care about what they do in their private lives since I know people are flawed creatures. However, we all know that Trump was never a nice guy to begin with and was never ashamed about being a shameless absolute jerk. But the more you know about Trump as a human being, the more you realize that he’s way more despicable than you could ever imagine. After considerable research into his scandals, even I can’t think of a single instance Trump has ever done anything unconditionally nice, shown any compassion or concern for other people, tried to hold himself accountable. And there are thousands of times from the last several decades when he has done the exact opposite. Trump is willing risk ruining people’s lives to get what he wants with no second thought. He just doesn’t seem to care about anything but himself. His sins aren’t just shocking but also appalling. He’s a narcissist at best and a sociopath at worst. Hell, even his The Art of the Deal co-author Tony Schwartz said if he was writing the book today, he would’ve made it a very different book with a very different title: The Sociopath. He’d later write, “I put lipstick on a pig. I feel a deep sense of remorse that I contributed to presenting Trump in a way that brought him wider attention and made him more appealing than he is. I genuinely believe that if Trump wins and gets the nuclear codes there is an excellent possibility it will lead to the end of civilization.” Schwartz found Trump to be such a horrible person that he continues to feel a sense of shame for his time as The Art of the Deal ghostwriter. Glenn Beck has also called him a sociopath asking Charlie Rose, “Have you seen him during the last year and a half truly feel for someone that couldn’t help him? Truly connect on a human level?” He went on saying how alarming and frightening how little empathy Trump shows adding, “A sociopath is somebody who doesn’t really see the human experience in somebody else, and I haven’t seen that in him. I haven’t seen him deeply affected by the human condition in an individual.” Let’s just say while Glenn Beck may have outlandish theories, his idea of Trump being a sociopath is very believable and can be thoroughly supported by biographers, people who knew him, and reporters.

Donald Trump Promotes 'Trump University'

Those who think Hillary Clinton isn’t trustworthy may have a probable cause. However, those who think Donald Trump is more trustworthy than Hillary are nothing but morons. Seriously, Trump has made a career of swindling people of their money that Wall Street no longer wants to do business with him. Also, his Trump University was a major scam and he’s due to go on trial for fraud later this month.

4. He’s Not Trustworthy– Say what you want on Hillary Clinton’s e-mails and her other activities, but if you’re voting for Trump because you can’t trust her, I strongly think you should reconsider. Yes, I know that so many people are willing to trust him over Hillary with running the country, but that rationale is absolutely insane. Trump’s long record of corruption since the 1970s is well documented as well as been recorded in legal proceedings and court cases. His flamboyant corruption runs to the very core of his identity. Trump has been a defendant in literally thousands of lawsuits brought by service providers and vendors whom he failed/refused to pay for services rendered to him and his business organizations. It’s abundantly clear that wage theft is part of Trump’s business model. Even Trump’s lawyers allege he didn’t pay their legal fees. What kind of businessman would do this? He’s also failed to pay his debts on his failing casinos that he later had less control of them with each bankruptcy. Not to mention, several major financial institutions like JP Morgan Chase and Goldman Sachs have flatly refused to do business with him for these and other reasons. In fact, Trump’s reputation in business is as a scam artist or as Mitt Romney put it a “con man” and “snake oil salesman.” You can also look into the allegations involved in the Trump University scandals to support Romney’s conclusions and why he won’t support him. Sure Wall Street may not be the most trustworthy when it comes with handling other people’s money. And yes, I know these banksters have campaigned against political candidates like Elizabeth Warren because of policy disagreements. But what Wall Street bankers and Warren can agree on is Trump. What Wall Street has against Trump is that they know he’s a swindler and a cheat who will take their hard earned money they’ll never see again. In fact, many there probably have done business with Trump themselves or know someone who has. So much so that they now deem Trump a high financial risk potential investors should avoid at all times. If Wall Street bankers can’t trust a Republican presidential candidate, especially one who claims to be a successful businessman, you can’t trust him with running the country.

Hillary Clinton may lie. But whenever Trump opens his mouth, it’s easier to know whether he’s lying than whether he’s telling the truth. That’s why Politifact named him 2015 Liar of the Year. The competition wasn’t even close.

5. He’s a Pathological Liar– Trump’s dishonesty is so well known that Politifact named him the winner of its annual “Lie of the Year” Award in 2015, a competition which the fact-checker said “was not even close” unquestionably in reference to the fact that it rated 72% of Trump’s public remarks on factual circumstances as false. Politico states he lies every 5 minutes. There’s even a website called Trumplies which is a vast compendium of misstatements, inaccuracies and outright falsehoods. Greatest hits include his RNC acceptance speech, defamation of Ted Cruz’s father in his first post-convention news conference, and his recent statement to the New York Times about NATO which was reported the next day and which he categorically denied. Seriously, the guy blatantly lies in public like there’s no tomorrow. As a businessman, he’s constantly lied to people in order to give him what he wants then making excuses why he didn’t fulfill his promises. Now cheating rich investors may be understandable to some extent since many forgave him for not paying him back. Yet, the fact he promised to pay his workers before refusing to pay them later is just beyond the pale. He’s also constantly lied to cover his own ass. You can re-watch any of the debates to prove my point. Seriously, whenever I see him on TV, I usually assume he’s lying because he’s lied so much. He even doubles down on his lies. Sorry, but Trump never tells it like it is. In fact, he tells what his supporters want to hear which isn’t.

2016-06-09t22-37-12-433z-1280x720-nbcnews-ux-1080-600

Donald Trump has a habit of not paying his bills on time, in full, or ever. He says he pays his workers based on whether they do a good job or not. Though it’s abundantly clear that he’s been subject to hundreds of wage theft allegations by people who worked for him he stiffed. Yeah, you’re better off not working for his projects.

6. He’s a Boss from Hell and No Friend to Working People– Trump may boast that he creates thousands of jobs over his business career. However, he has proven to be a man you don’t want to work for at all. For one, Trump has long been subject to hundreds of wage theft allegations over the past few decades from workers ranging from contractors, casino employees, and even his lawyers. Small businesses worked for him have either failed or struggled to continue because Trump didn’t pay their bills. One Republican consultant even tweeted how Trump stiffed his own dad in the 1980s. Trump has used various excuses like shoddy workmanship. Secondly, Trump also has a history of hiring undocumented workers many of whom worked under terrible conditions. During the demolition of the Bonwit Teller Building in order to make room for Trump Tower, Trump’s companies hired over 200 undocumented Polish workers who did backbreaking work for $5 an hour without hard hats and often slept on site. Also, workers complaining about back pay were threatened with deportation. He’s also been subject to allegations from former models at Trump Model Management who lived in squalid conditions while earning almost nothing and not having proper work permits. Not to mention, he’s hired foreign guest workers at his resorts even when Americans applied for the same positions. Third, he’s been sued by unions as well as tried to prevent workers from unionizing at his Las Vegas hotels. Fourth, he forced production employees from The Apprentice to work for him after Hurricane Sandy despite New York City being in a state of emergency and effectively shut down. Many of these employees endured dangerous conditions during commutes to Trump Tower. Fifth, his companies have been subject to complaints for disrespecting women and discriminating against minorities. Sixth, former employees have testified that Trump was prone to micromanagement as well as takes little interest in the diversity of his executives or the welfare of lower-level staff. Many said that Trump lacks the temperament deal with setbacks and becomes instantly impatient with those who don’t support or agree with him while remaining resolutely loyal to those who do. Others said he was a workaholic with very few true friends who felt sometimes awkward with company outside the workplace. Some said he doesn’t get the best people around and hates when someone else gets credit. Not to mention, he’s made many of his employees sign non-disclosure agreements. All these incidents and more should tell you that Trump is a horrible boss and is no friend to working Americans.

Sure Trump may be subject to a Celebrity Roast on Comedy Central, host SNL, and appear on late night TV from time to time. But a lot of comedians don’t like working with him because he’s very particular on how they make fun of him. This is a huge problem because a president is joked about 24/7 and doesn’t have control which jokes get aired. This is why Trump bombed on SNL. If Trump can’t take a joke, he can’t be president.

7. He’s Dangerously Petty and Vindictive– There’s overwhelming evidence that Trump can’t take any form of criticism no matter how slight and that he’s vindictive to the extreme. Dare to challenge, mock, criticize him, or stand in his way, and he’ll either take to Twitter or threaten to file a lawsuit against you (which might be substantiated). You might remember his confrontations with reporters and news organizations during the primaries, his weeks long attack on Megyn Kelly, as well as his shameful and despicable attacks on Khizr Khan and his wife. Yet, you can even look at his record before that. Trump sued a New York Times reporter for libel over saying he was worth less than a $1 billion as well as threatened to sue a MSNBC newscaster for saying the same thing. He’s sued Bill Maher for making fun of his involvement in the Birther movement. He lashed out at Jon Stewart on Twitter for calling him “Fuckface von Clownstick.” He’s threatened to sue a rapper for writing a song about him. He’s threatened to sue an activist who campaigned to get Macy’s to dump him as the store’s spokesman and remove his branded products from their stores. He’s sued a New York attorney general for bringing suit against Trump University and the Trump Institute or as I call it, “doing his job.” He’s smeared Alicia Muchado whenever Hillary Clinton talked about him fat shaming her. He’s even bashed SNL for Alec Baldwin’s impression of him. We should all know that Trump turns to Twitter and lawsuits to intimidate and suppress. Yet, there are time in which led to victims suffering real life consequences. In 1990, he threatened to sue Janney Montgomery Scott unless they fired gaming securities analyst Mark Roffman who correctly issued a negative forecast for Trump Taj Mahal. The firm caved and Roffman lost his job as well as spent the next few years in a living hell. The next year, Trump would successfully suppress an 80 minute documentary called Trump: What’s the Deal? by threatening litigation to broadcasters and distributors. Why? Because the documentary powerfully and disturbingly portrayed Trump as fraud which is very well supported. There’s even a persistent rumor that Trump is running for president just to get revenge for his treatment at the White House Correspondents Dinner, which has substantial merit. Say what you want about Hillary Clinton, but this woman has endured vicious and false attacks by her enemies for decades, some in powerful positions. But has Hillary ever resorted to Twitter wars and threatening litigation against people who’ve criticized her, challenged her, mocked her, or stand in her way? No. Because whenever someone goes after Hillary, she does what she has to do and moves on. Sure she might get occasionally angry, but she gets over it. She doesn’t take political attacks and jokes personally because that’s what she has to deal with as a politician running for president. She can take even the most damaging accusations that’s thrown at her. Whereas Trump retaliates viciously over mere jokes about him which makes him very dangerous if he’s ever elected president. This is especially when you consider that the offices would allow him to have access to the nuclear codes. Doesn’t help that he’s threatened to drop nukes. If Trump can’t take Alec Baldwin impersonating him on SNL, then he poses a serious national security risk in the White House.

Out of all the things he’s said, the one thing I can count on Donald Trump being honest about is his greed. Sure he’s been greedy and grabbed all the money he could however way he can. But it came at a very terrible cost to people who’ve invested their dough and never got it back as well as people who worked for him and never received the money. And he’s not a good businessman either.

8. His Candidacy Normalizes Greed and Exploitation– We all know that Trump is greedy and that he’s not at all ashamed of it. Since he began his presidential campaign, he’s encouraged voters in his Nevada primary victory speech, “to get greedy for the United States … to grab and grab and grab … to bring in so much money and so much everything.” Sure people might take it as: I’m rich and successful. Vote for me and you’ll be rich and successful, too. Come with me and grab as much as you can to make America great again. While Trump may not be wholly responsible for normalized greed in this country since it’s been prevalent for the last several decades as part of the conservative and libertarian gospel. Yet, normalized greed often leads to so many social and economic problems in our nation throughout its history like labor exploitation, income inequality, for-profit health insurance, environmental devastation, subprime loans, lack of Wall Street accountability, cuts to social programs, climate change denial, privatization, large-scale wage theft, union busting, poor shaming, Citizens United, policing for profit, and more. Not to mention, normalized greed has proven very destructive Americans’ souls so much that social justice issues are now seen as liberal talking points. I staunchly want to put an end to this normalized greed not only as a liberal Democrat but also as a practicing Catholic who deeply believes in fulfilling the common good. Donald Trump not only is a staunch adherent to normalized greed, but he even resorts to measures that will even make Wall Street bankers blush such as refusing to pay his workers, not making good on his investors, using his foundation as an all-purpose slush fund, running his Trump University scam, using intimidation tactics to shoo out tenants, and more. But no matter how you look at it, Trump has lived his whole life enriching himself at the expense of others and unashamedly so, which we should never accept in a presidential candidate.

20150902-uv-trump-share-v2-caucus-update-3

Here are some things that Donald Trump says about women. Of course, these poster came out before the “grab ’em by the pussy” audio bit came out. And these quotes are rather tame compared to his other sexist comments.

9. His Candidacy Normalizes Sexism and Sexual Abuse– It’s well known that Trump is notoriously sexist and has objectified women all his life. And yes, he’s a walking and talking example of toxic masculinity in our culture as well as a great contributor to misogyny and rape culture. He’s also rated women by their looks from a scale of 1 to 10 as well as criticized them for being fat and ugly. His sexist comments on women are utterly repulsive and his history of sexually humiliating beauty queens who won’t tow the line is well known. He’s even used Bill Clinton’s infidelity to attack Hilary on the campaign trail. Oh, and he’s even talked about banging his own daughter. So it should surprise no one that women have come out alleging Trump of sexual assault once his “grab ‘em by the pussy” rhetoric leaked. Not to mention, the former beauty pageant contestants who stated that Trump went into their dressing rooms while they were changing. Yet, even before that, he’s been accused of sexual misconduct by his ex-wife for rape, makeup artist Jill Harth for sexual assault, and an anonymous woman for child rape in the 1990s. Trump has denied many of these allegations and has threatened to sue them as always. Yet, the fact people still support Trump despite these allegations against him is very disturbing. Meanwhile, so many women have gotten sexually assaulted and raped that many don’t report their abusers out fear they won’t be believed for what happened to them. Some don’t even receive the support they need. And some victims have seen their rapists receive an all too generous sentence. Now none of us is perfect when it comes to addressing sexual assault. But when you support a candidate like Trump whose sexism is unparalleled in our times, you’re basically making a statement by saying that this sort of behavior is okay which shouldn’t be acceptable.

screen-shot-2016-04-07-at-7-19-47-am-1280x960

During the 2016 campaign, Donald Trump has shown a shocking ignorance of how the federal government works. Just look at Stephen Colbert’s face in this bit.

10. He’s Ignorant About Government– Now I have to admit, Trump isn’t too ignorant about how government works. Or at least when it comes to political contributions to candidates. Or hiring the most savvy lawyers and accountants. But as far as I know, that’s just as far as it goes. Trump has been constantly criticized for his lack of knowledge about the US political system. Of course, you can’t expect him to know more about government than his more politically experienced opponents. We do however, expect a presidential candidate to know at least about as much about government as anyone who’s taken a high school or college civics course. Surely that’s not too much to ask a presidential candidate to know about American federalism, the basic function of federal courts, as well as the grants of and limits of federal power. We’re not sure if Trump even knows even that much. During the primaries, Trump said he’d pick Supreme Court Justices who’d “look very seriously” at Hillary Clinton’s e-mails. It’s like he doesn’t know what the Supreme Court does even in the most elementary sense. No, SCOTUS doesn’t initiate criminal prosecutions, doesn’t investigate crimes, doesn’t try criminal cases, and doesn’t serve as a fact-finder in criminal prosecutions. The Supreme Court only reviews cases on appeal whether they’re criminal or not. And they’re usually concerned whether laws pertaining to the case were constitutional. Yet, from what Trump says, he seems as if he’s suggesting that Supreme Court Justices could prevent Hillary from “getting away with it,” such as investigating her or demanding that she be tried and convicted of a crime. In a primary debate in Houston, Trump referred to federal judges as “signing bills.” Even an eighth grade civics course can tell you that federal judges don’t sign bills. That’s what the president does in the federal system. Sure many Americans don’t understand how the Supreme Court and federal judiciary system works. But if you’re a major party nominee for president and there’s an open seat on the Supreme Court, you absolutely must have some basic understanding that Trump clearly doesn’t. Yet, the fact his supporters don’t seem to mind really sends a red flag. Having a major party presidential candidate with such astounding ignorance about how the political system work may seem like he doesn’t care about the government its supporters want him to lead.

11. He’s Extremely Inconsistent– Now I know that many political candidates are guilty of flip-flopping to some extent in order to pander to their base and make themselves look electable. But it’s well-known that Donald Trump has changed his positions on issues as often as he changed his socks even during this campaign season. Trump changes his mind so frequently and so dramatically that a compilation of his current policies wouldn’t tell the whole story nor would be up to date for very long. I mean this is a guy who once offered up 3 different views on abortion within an 8 hour timespan. So if you’re only voting for Trump for his pro-life position, you might want to seriously reconsider as well as rethink what actually constitutes a “pro-life” candidacy in this election. He also tends to mix facts with exaggerations and outright falsehoods while simultaneously refusing to offer any specifics. He even insists that unpredictability is an advantage he’ll use to cut better deals. Now Trump and the Republican Party are now putting forward the most elusive platform in modern history. So much so that NBC News has compiled a list featuring no less than 138 distinct shifts on 23 major issues. And that’s just his stated views since he announced his candidacy in June of 2015. But if Trump becomes president, his views are going to matter. And the fact he lacks core ideological convictions on many of these issues is huge a problem as well as posts another reason why people shouldn’t trust him. I mean if you don’t stand for nothing, what do you fall for?

31b59189474f8f8088eae84b0ebbfccf13edeed5810bbf12bb77ed8b152ee50b_1

This quote sums up on how much of an egomaniac is Donald Trump. Sure he thinks he’s a smart guy who went to one of the best schools in the country. Mostly because his daddy could send him there as a legacy.

12. He’s a Dangerous Self-Delusional Egomaniac Who Doesn’t Listen to Anyone Else– We all know that Trump is a raging narcissist with a very high sense of self that he can’t tolerate any ill word against him. We know this from his own interviews, interviews with people who’ve known him, employees, and you name it. Yet, he has such an inflated sense of self that he’s very hostile to people who call him out on his mistakes, disagree with him, make him look bad, challenge him, or what have you. Because according to him, Donald Trump’s the most wonderful, terrific, and brilliant person on the planet who’s a rich and successful businessman able to solve any problem as well as can do no wrong. And if anything bad happens to him isn’t his fault. A guy with an “I alone can fix it” mentality is a man not to be trusted because he’s not going to listen to anyone else. Trump’s career as a businessman shows this repeatedly over the years with his gigantic ego leading to many of his business failures. For instance, Trump would’ve had more success with Trump Airlines if he just merely kept it the no frills Eastern Air Shuttle he bought exactly how it was and focused on the customers’ real needs. But no, he wanted to revamp it into Trump Airlines to suit his own image of gaudy luxury that the company ended up accumulating a lot of debt it couldn’t pay. Another instance pertained to Rank Group offering to invest in Trump’s Castle with a deal that would’ve helped reversed declining fortunes for Trump Hotels and Casinos. All Trump had to do was let Rank rebrand Trump’s Castle as Hard Rock. But Trump backed out at the last minute because he wanted his name to stay on the property. A savvier person in his place would’ve taken the deal because rebranding is a small price to pay. Then there’s the time when he threatened to sue a brokerage firm unless they fired a guy for accurately predicting that Trump Taj Mahal was going to fail. And the time when he tried to evict tenants from a building he owned in order to build a luxury condo complex, which would’ve failed if the residents didn’t successfully sue to keep their homes. Now what makes one a good businessperson may not make one a good president. However, if someone is lousy in business due to their humongous ego, then they’ll certainly be a terrible president, if not then dangerous. This is certainly the case with Trump.

trump-hotels-and-casino-resorts-filed-for-bankruptcy-in-2004-donald-trump-as-chairman-25-gif

Here’s a stock slip from Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts Inc. from the 1990s. Of course, this company would end up bankrupt in 2004 and 2009. Sure Trump may say he’s a good businessman, but his record of failures that include 4 bankruptcies related to his casinos shows that he’s not. Besides, Wall Street bankers no longer want to lend him money anymore.

13. He’s a Horrible Businessman– Trump likes to sell himself on the idea that he’s a rich and successful businessman whose wealth and business acumen as evidence he’ll make a great president. The reality has shown that he’s nothing of the sort. For one, he was born to wealth and privilege thanks to his dad’s success as a real estate developer during the Great Depression. If it weren’t for his daddy’s wealth or close ties to politicians, then Trump would’ve most likely became nothing more than a sleazy used car salesman at best. I apologize to the sleazy used car salesmen. Has he had success? Of course, he has such as the renovating the Commodore into the Grand Hyatt Hotel and his dad chipped in on that one. But most of his ventures have been disasters. Some have been outright scams that defrauded hundreds of people like Trump University. In fact, it’s been said that if Trump didn’t have his dad to repeatedly bail him out, he would’ve declared personal bankruptcy before he was 35. Because his tax returns during the late 1970s and early 1980s shows that his personal finances were a disaster. By the time Trump came up with his Atlantic City casino scheme, his finances were falling apart. A lot of times, it’s been his own fault like using junk bonds to finance Trump Taj Mahal that it was already losing in its first year and would eventually go bankrupt. His inability to manage his debts at his Atlantic City casinos would later lead to 3 more bankruptcies as well as reduced control each time. According to Kurt Eichenwald of Newsweek, “Lost contracts, bankruptcies, defaults, deceptions and indifference to investors—Trump’s business career is a long, long list of such troubles, according to regulatory, corporate and court records, as well as sworn testimony and government investigative reports. Call it the art of the bad deal, one created by the arrogance and recklessness of a businessman whose main talent is self-promotion.” Trump’s net worth is almost unknowable given the loose standards and numerous outright misrepresentations he’s made over the years that many don’t even think he’s a billionaire. He also tends to claim success even when it’s not there which in the business world is called lying. Not only that, but he’s gained a reputation as a scam artist on Wall Street that major banks now refuse to do business with him. Let’s just say, you don’t want to do business with this guy, let alone allow him to run the country.

While Donald Trump may call Hillary crooked, he’s way more corrupt than her. The amount of corruption cases is mindboggling. This chart shows what he did with some of his campaign cash for personal use.

14. He’s Corrupt as Hell– As I said before, Trump has a long and documented history of corruption since the 1970s which run to the very core of his identity. Many of his scandals have been recorded in court cases and legal proceedings. He’s so corrupt that I’ve had to continuously update my list of his corruption scandals on a regular basis and the sheer amount is mind-boggling, thanks to reporters unearthing many of these alarming stories. These range from unfair business practices, connections with mafia figures and known criminals, his ties to dictators, scams that defrauded hundreds of people of their hard-earned money, bankruptcies that left investors holding the bag while he made off with their cash, refusing to pay workers, history of being charged with housing discrimination, funneling money through a charity for his personal use, his history of exploiting undocumented immigrants, anti-trust violations, campaign financial abuse, and so much more. Whenever Trump has been in positions of power and authority, he’s demonstrated a pattern of trying to enrich himself while abusing the trust they placed in him whether it’s creditors, contractors, charitable givers, Trump University students, regulators, or campaign donors. Sometimes his abuses of trust are within legal bounds or entail breaking the law. Yet, the common thread shows that Trump screws people over to benefit himself. And despite the plethora of excellent reporting, too many voters either are unware of his troubling history and may view him as a successful businessman who says offensive things or don’t care. The fact so many voters think Trump is more honest and straightforward than Hillary is very troubling. Trump’s record makes it crystal clear that he’s more interested in rapaciously extracting what money he can and doing what he wants with little regard to laws, rules, or other people. Not to mention, he’s repeatedly proven willing to violate norms about what sort of behavior is acceptable and ethical. If you look what he’s done with power in the past, his corruption becomes the most troubling of his many unsavory qualities. There are many, many reasons to be concerned about a Trump administration’s ethics and potential to abuse power.

15. He’s a Perpetual Backstabber with No Respect for Loyalty– When it comes to relationships, Trump is as likely to build them, exploit them, and toss them for his own ends. Never mind if they were long time business partners who stuck by him through failure and success. Never mind if it’s the wives #1 or #2 who get tossed aside by a hotter and younger successor. Never mind if it’s the investors who gave money to him whose debts went repaid. Never mind if it’s the workers who poured their heart into his buildings for a set pay that they’d never receive. Whenever he’s in power he’s abused people’s trust. If he is ever elected president, he will certainly abuse the trust of the American people, honor no loyalties and commitments, and betray the office and government he’s sworn to uphold. Put your trust in Donald Trump and you’ll live to regret it. Because he will let you down and let you down hard.

Here’s Donald Trump tweeting about a woman being murdered in Chicago. First one just has condolences. The second one has him trying to make it all about him. Yes, it’s insensitive.

16. He’s Exploited Tragedies and Disasters– Whenever something bad happens in this country, Trump gleefully steps into the national spotlight and tries to benefit from it whether it pertains to money or stumping some speech. He has done this on several occasions throughout his life and in the worst way possible. In 1989, he faked a near death experience to get front page headlines when 3 of his company executives were killed in a helicopter crash, claiming he was supposed to be there but changed his mind at the last minute. In the 2000s, he took $150,000 from the Empire State Development Corporation which was designed to help small businesses after 9/11 when many of them were destroyed or went under that led furious local politicians issuing an open letter that Trump return the money. In 2005, he received $17 million in insurance for hurricane damage at his Mar-a-Lago club while repairs were only totaled at $3,000. During his campaign, Trump has claimed that the mass shootings at the Orlando night club and San Bernardino as well as terrorist attacks in France vindicated his claims on Islamic terrorism in America. Now that has to be very insensitive. When it comes to national tragedy and there have been many, a president must be able to give a condolence speech in remembrance to the victims. Not try to capitalize on it as Trump does, which is just so insensitive and so unbecoming.

Donald Trump racism isn’t just limited to his presidential campaign since he’s been sued for discrimination before. Yet, his ad calling for the deaths of the Central Park Five is perhaps one of his worst moments. I mean these were teenage boys for God sake! Never mind that they were railroaded by the system until the authorities caught the real rapist with DNA evidence. Yet, Trump still thinks these guys are guilty to this day.

17. His Candidacy Normalizes Racism, Discrimination, and Xenophobia– Contrary to what some experts might say, what made him so popular that people voted for him was his offensive remarks that reeks cultural hatred, which is scary enough. Yet, Trump has a long and documented history of racism. Back in the 1970s the Department of Justice sued him and his father for violating the Fair Housing Act by refusing to rent to black tenants and lying about whether apartments were available. Trump claimed that the federal government was trying to get him to rent to welfare recipients. The case dragged for two years where he signed an agreement in 1975 agreeing not to discriminate to renters of color without admitting to discriminating before. He’d later break that promise by the way. There have been reports of black employees being discriminated against at his casinos over the decades. In 2000, Trump secretly ran a series of ads in opposition to a casino proposed by the St. Regis Mohawk, which he saw as a financial threat to his casinos. In them, he suggested the tribe had, “record of criminal activity [that] is well documented.” In 2010, he opposed the construction of a proposed Muslim community center in lower Manhattan two miles from Ground Zero which he called “insensitive” and offered to buy out one of the investors in the project. On Letterman, Trump argued referring Muslims, “Well, somebody’s blowing us up. Somebody’s blowing up buildings, and somebody’s doing lots of bad stuff.” The next year, he played a big role in pushing rumors that Obama wasn’t born in the US and urged the president to release his birth certificate which he did. But Trump still didn’t believe him. He also argued that Obama wasn’t a good enough student to get into Columbia and Harvard Law and demanded he release his University transcripts. However, one of his most infamous racist tirades was when he ran an ad in the local papers in the wake of the Central Park Five where 5 black and Latino teenagers were accused of attacking and raping a jogger near Central Park. In these ads Trump demanded, “BRING BACK THE DEATH PENALTY. BRING BACK OUR POLICE!” Below that, he wrote: “I want to hate these muggers and murderers. They should be forced to suffer and, when they kill, they should be executed for their crimes. They must serve as examples so that others will think long and hard before committing a crime or an act of violence.” The teens’ convictions were later vacated after spending 13 years in prison in a great miscarriage of justice and the city paid a $41 million settlement. Trump still believes they’re guilty to this day despite that the real culprit turned himself in and DNA evidence to the contrary. During his campaign, Trump called Mexicans rapists who were bringing crime and drugs, called for a ban on Muslims, argued that a judge should recuse himself from the Trump University case over his Mexican heritage, tweeted an image of Hillary in front of a pile of money and a Star of David, attacked a Muslim Gold Star family, and made a pitch to black voters saying, “You’re living in poverty, your schools are no good, you have no jobs, 58 percent of your youth is unemployed. What the hell do you have to lose?” Furthermore, he’s been endorsed by white supremacist groups like the KKK and the American Nazi Party whom he has yet to denounce. Trump’s blatant racism on the campaign trail is a serious problem since it gives even the most ardent white supremacists some level of legitimacy as well as put racial minorities in danger. And like I said, supporting a racist like Trump for president basically gives license that whatever he say is acceptable no matter how much it has threatened people’s lives.

Donald Trump often talks about how he’ll fight the terrorists. Yet, he’s never denounced the terrorists who endorsed him like the Klu Klux Klan and other white supremacist groups. Let’s just say if Hillary loses these terrorists win.

18. He’s Endorsed by Extremists and Terrorists– And if his candidacy legitimizing racism isn’t the worst thing about Trump’s campaign, well, it gets worse. Trump’s virulently racist rhetoric has attracted a lot of enthusiastic endorsements by white supremacists and anti-government extremists who think he’s the candidate they’ve been looking for. These people are domestic terrorists and who’ve posed a growing threat to our nation’s security in recent years. While lack of media attention on radical right wing terrorist attacks emboldens these people to attack minorities and other potential victims in their neighborhood, Trump’s failure to denounce their ringing endorsements of him encourage them even more. This further compromises public safety for vulnerable populations such as minorities particularly blacks, Latinos, and Muslims. There have been reports of these Trump supporters resorted to acts of violence and not just at rallies. These include a Moroccan taxi driver shot in Pennsylvania, a black church vandalized and burned in Mississippi, a black family being assaulted by a hospital volunteer in North Carolina, a Muslim woman being thrown an “unknown liquid” in her face in Virginia, a Hispanic couple’s truck being vandalized in California, and the list goes on. Trump’s campaign also has connections to the Alt-Right which is a set of far-right ideologies, groups, or individuals whose core belief is that “white identity” is under attack by multicultural forces using “political correctness” and “social justice” to undermine white people and their civilization. They’re usually characterized by their heavy use of social media and online memes, eschewing “establishment” conservatism, skew young, and embrace white-ethno nationalism as a fundamental value. Trump is a hero to these people while one of his campaign managers works for Breitbart magazine, an alt-right publication. These are the real deplorables among Trump supporters and if Trump can’t denounce these dangerous people, then he doesn’t deserve your vote.

Donald Trump hasn’t just praised dictators on the campaign trail, he’s done business with some of them. While on a visit to the UN in 2009, Trump rented Libyan dictator Moammar Qaddafi his house in Winchester, New York. Qaddafi would set up his tent on Trump’s estate but he never slept there. Mainly because the locals voted to kick him out their town. Of course, who could blame them because Qaddafi sponsored terrorism that killed many Americans. At least Hillary and Obama got rid of the bastard.

19. He’s Linked to US Enemies and Dictators- It’s well known that Trump has openly praised Russia’s dictator Vladimir Putin, calling him, “a man so highly respected within his own country and beyond.” In reality, Putin is far from respected. In fact, he’s highly feared having left a trail of dead journalists and invaded countries like Ukraine. Trump has numerous ties to Russia since he’s financed projects from its banks and it’s well known that the Russian government is behind hacks at Wikileaks and the DNC. His campaign manager Paul Manafort has offered his services to pro-Russian Ukranian President Viktor Yanukovych that paid him $12.7 million in undisclosed cash payments. Manafort has also worked for Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos, the Saudi royal family, a Bahamian president accused of drug trafficking, and a former Angolan leader accused of torture. Before his campaign, Trump went into business with an Azerbaijani billionaire playboy with familial connections to its kleptocratic and dictatorial government, did business with the Cuban government during the Embargo in the 1990s, rented New York office space to a state-owned Iranian bank that’s been linked to the country’s nuclear program and terror groups, and tried to rent his opulent Winchester estate to none other than Moammar el-Qaddafi. Yes, that Qaddafi who’s notorious sponsorship of terror that’s killed scores of Americans. During his campaign, Trump has praised Kim Jong Un saying, “How many young guys — he was, like, 26 or 25 when his father died — take over these tough generals, and all of a sudden … he goes in, he takes over, and he’s the boss. It’s incredible. He wiped out the uncle, he wiped out this one, that one. I mean, this guy doesn’t play games. And we can’t play games with him.” No, it’s not. That’s scary since North Korea is an autocratic dictatorship that’s a US enemy and tests nuclear weapons. He’s lauded Syria’s Bashir al-Assad and told ABC that the US shouldn’t trust some of the groups rebelling against the repressive regime. “Assad’s a bad guy, but they’re all bad guys. We’re supporting rebels. You know they talk about the Syria Free Rebels. We’re supporting rebels. We don’t even know who they are,” he said. And during a North Carolina rally, he said, “We shouldn’t have been there. We shouldn’t have destabilized Saddam Hussein, right. He was a bad guy, really bad guy. But you know what he did well? He killed terrorists. He did that so good. They didn’t read them the rights. They didn’t talk. They were terrorists. Over. Today, Iraq is Harvard for terrorism. You want to be a terrorist, you go to Iraq. It’s like Harvard, OK? So sad, so sad.” Saddam Hussein’s best known for committing genocide against the Iraqi Kurds with chemical weapons. Trump’s history and praise for dictators from US enemy nations should really scare the shit out of you. This is not what I’d want in a president.

Here’s Donald Trump tweeting on how Scotland took its country back by voting for Brexit. However, Scotland voted IN. Yeah, not very informed in international affairs.

20. He Alienates Our International Allies– As I said before, Trump doesn’t value loyalty and commitments to his business allies, employees, investors, and even wives, Trump is likely not to value the support of our allies either. He’s also has had precarious relationships with world leaders, many of whom express fear in a Trump presidency. Some US allies have used words like “stupid” to describe his ideas. And the fact Trump has business dealings with reviled tyrants known to commit human rights abuses as well as praised known US enemies only makes it worse. Please, for the sake of our world, don’t vote for Donald Trump.

21. He Has No Broader Interest in the World– It’s well known that Trump has some interest in the world, when it pertains to his business interests. But when it comes to making the world a better place, then he just doesn’t give a damn. Even in America, his whole life revolves around making the world his personal playground he could build stuff on and profit from. He has no interest in making the world a better place or sacrificing for the greater good. He never has. He doesn’t care who gets hurt or screwed. He doesn’t care if his business deals put entire countries and people in danger. Nor does he take any interest in other cultures or honoring national commitments to other nations which should be essential for a president. For instance, Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, her Clinton Foundation, and time as First Lady show that she really has an interest in global affairs, which will help our image abroad. During his presidency Barack Obama often played tourist while in a foreign country which improves our diplomatic relationships. Foreign countries like it when our leaders show an interest in them. I don’t see Trump doing this. A world of ruthless competitors guided by nothing but blind ambition and profit is hardly a pleasant place, especially with someone like Trump in political office.

Even Trump supporters know that Trump sets a a very bad example for children. Yet, Trump supporting parents are really not helping their case when they endorse a candidate they don’t want their kids to emulate. Hillary has taken advantage of this.

22. He Sets a Terrible Example for Children– What sickens me more about Trump’s supporters the most is that many of them have children who attend school or younger. When a parent supports a political candidate, they’re implicitly telling their children that whatever this candidate does is acceptable behavior. If not, then it’s giving one’s children license to look upon that candidate as a respectable role model to emulate and admire. It doesn’t take much to see that Trump is a terrible role model for children and even parents who support him don’t want their kids to act like him. After all, he spews profanity, insults women, mocked a disabled reporter, demeaned a prisoner of war, made racist comments, incited violence at his rallies, is on his third wife, threatens to sue people on a regular basis, and calls anyone disagreeing with him a “loser.” I mean the guy is a total bully with no consideration for other people. You may say he’s a role model for children of what not to be when they grow up. Sure Trump’s own grown children may have turned out all right. But we have to concede that he was barely involved in their childhoods unlike their mothers, nannies, and even their grandparents. So they’re not really a reflection on him per se. Still, teachers have become increasingly worried about Trump’s candidacy leading to a rise in school bullying. This is especially the case when it’s white children harassing minority students. And it doesn’t help that some minority kids might be among the few nonwhite children in their schools. Now there are kids who fully understand that Trump is a bully and a terrible role model. But there are kids who may not see Trump that way and take his offensive words to heart and think that being a bully is a winning strategy. How parents feel about politics is one thing but what we teach our children is another. I know that all parents want to teach their children the right things. But for parents who support Trump need to understand that they may unintentionally be teaching their children the wrong lessons. I know most wouldn’t actually teach that Trump’s behavior is okay. But that may not be what their kids would take from it. At least I can respect Glenn Beck opposing Trump on this since he said, “I don’t want my children to look at that man and say, ‘Yeah, he’s my President.’ I won’t have that. I will not endorse it, I will not tolerate it.”

Donald Trump has often claimed that not being sorry for anything is a sign of strength. However, he’s too dumb to realize that not taking responsibility for his actions and never apologizing for anything just makes one an asshole.

23. He Never Takes Responsibility and Never Apologizes– While we all make mistakes once in a while, we’re taught to take responsibility for our actions as well as apologize. Holding oneself accountable for one’s sins isn’t easy but it’s an act of true moral courage and strength. This is especially true when it pertains to a public figure running for the highest elected office in the land. It’s well known that Trump has refused to take ownership for the outrageous things he’s said and done not just during his campaign but also over the course of his life. He never apologizes for any missteps or intemperate attacks. He’s demonstrated a remarkable lack of empathy for people whom he’s attacked, injured, or harmed. When Trump is caught he usually does one or more of the following: deny involvement, deny it ever happened, blame someone else for it, say they deserved it, spin it into something positive or trivial, threaten litigation, or resort to legal action. But he will never see it his fault and never see himself wrong. He will avoid apologizing as well as taking responsibility unless he’s pressured to do so. DOJ suing him and his dad housing discrimination in the 1970s? Say the federal government was forcing him to rent to welfare recipients. Refusing to pay hundreds of contractors? Tie them up in court and other negotiations to financially overpower and outlast them in order to drain their resources. Also, claim that their work was shoddy. Caught cheating on Ivana with Marla? Blame Ivana for losing her attractiveness after having kids and wanting to do more with the business. Gaming securities analyst forecasts trouble at Trump Taj Mahal? Threaten to sue his employer to get him fired. Call for the deaths 5 minority teenagers who were later found innocent? Assert they’re guilty as sin to this day. Caught taking advantage of a federal loophole to avoid taxes? Say that makes him smart. Caught declaring bankruptcy to avoid taxes? Claim he takes advantage of the laws when running a company. Humiliate a beauty queen for her weight gain? Say she wasn’t honoring her contract and that she starred in a porn. Cheer for the housing crisis? Say it’s called business. Trump University consumers suing for fraud? Blame them for being suckers. Call the state attorney general investigating a liberal stooge for Obama or Hillary. Use family charity as personal piggy bank? Call the state attorney general investigating a liberal stooge for Obama or Hillary. Publicly advocate birtherism even after Obama shows his Hawaiian birth certificate? Claim Hillary started the controversy in 2008. Claim opponent’s dad conspired to kill Kennedy? Deny it. Claim global warming is a hoax by the Chinese? Deny it. Caught saying, “grab the pussy” on tape? Say it’s locker room talk. Multiple women come forward with sexual assault allegations? Deny it, claim some of them ugly, and threaten to sue. No matter how you look at it, Trump always tries to cover his own ass and take considerable action not to be held accountable. And whenever he does say he’s sorry, the apologies are nothing but hollow. This is not what you want in a leader or anybody.

This is Donald Trump’s tweet after the Pulse Nightclub shooting where he just had to pat himself on the back for being right on Islamic terrorism. For God’s sake, nobody should be tweeting this shit.

24. He’s a Selfish, Shameless, and Sleazy Opportunist– Whenever Trump is in a position of power, he uses it to empower and enrich himself by abusing those who placed their trust in him. If he wins, expect the presidency to be no different. Many Trump supporters would claim that they like him because he’s not afraid to “tell it like it is”, “be politically incorrect,” and intends to “make America great again.” Some say he’s an “outsider” who “can’t be bought.” But even before he ran for president, I knew Trump was a sleazy opportunist and self-promoting con man willing to do anything to get what he wants and doesn’t care who gets hurt. I saw him do it before whenever he promoted his projects and latched on to political causes for the sake of wealth, power, and fame. While many supporters swear he, “tells it like it is,” he’s actually lying on multiple levels. He’s conning people into voting for him by telling them what they want to hear and what would entertain them. He’s playing for an audience by appealing to voters’ frustrations, insensitivities, and unsavory emotions. His candidacy is nothing but a reality show satiating a bloodlust and structured insanity. And while supporters may swear that Trump will make America great again by moving our system through sheer force of un-bought will, it’s really just part of his Big Lie. He’s telling folks never mind the policy details, never mind the separation of powers, and never mind profound partisan disagreement. Everything will be easy and terrific. But in the end, we should all understand that all who Donald Trump cares about is Donald Trump. Win or lose, he will let his supporters down and they will regret it. Like he has let down so many other people throughout the years. He’s let down Wall Street investors by breaking his promises to pay them back as well as making off with their money when things go south. He’s let down his employees by refusing to pay for their work despite promising otherwise. He’s let down his customers with his scams. He’s let down veterans after promising to donate millions to a charity for them when he didn’t. And what’s worse is that Trump doesn’t care who suffers.

Donald Trump’s campaign is one of the biggest train wrecks we’ve seen since June if 2015. Here we have Trump with a notorious anti-Hillary ad with a Star of David. It was changed into a circle to tone down the anti-Semitic imagery.

25. He Can’t Run a Decent Presidential Campaign– Since he announced his candidacy in June 2015, Trump’s presidential campaign is just a horrific train wreck that really should’ve gone away during the Republican primary season. The only reason why Trump managed to outlast his primary opponents was the fact his celebrity and penchant for controversy gave him free campaign publicity. But even then, you could sense critical flaws. For one, Trump’s candidacy was all spectacle but no substance as well as relied on his offensive statements and antics in order to hog the camera. There were no detailed policies but campaign promises consisting of simplistic bullishit by a guy who seems completely unconcerned about the implications in order to accomplish them. I mean Trump promised to build a wall between the US and Mexican border as well as promised that Mexico will pay for it. How do you expect to accomplish that? Second, Republicans working to elect Trump described his campaign debilitated by infighting, a lack of staff to carry out basic functions, minimal coordination with allies, and a message that’s prisoner to their guy’s momentary wins. According to NBC News, veteran operatives were shocked by the Trump campaign’s failure to fill key roles. In June, there was no communication team to deal with hundreds of media outlets covering the race, no response director to quickly rebut attacks and launch new ones, and a limited cast of surrogates lacking a cohesive message. It’s also said that staff appeared unprepared to address scandals and controversies like Trump University or whatever comes out of Trump’s mouth. Third, the Trump campaign was far from clean and has been prone to scandals ranging from shady campaign managers, allegations of malpractice, and the list goes on. Fourth, Trump has repeatedly violated political norms of acceptable behavior in this election. Let’s just say if one can’t run a decent campaign, they can’t run the country.

Melania Trump has promised to fight cyberbullying as First Lady if her husband is elected president (and God, please don’t let this happen). However, it’s ironic that she’s married to one and could do her part by taking away his phone.

26. He’s an Unrepentant Bully– It’s not hard to see that Trump is a bully whenever you turn on the news as he always has been all his life. But I’m not saying this because he insults whole demographics and people he doesn’t like or thinks treated him unfairly. Yet, while Trump may seem to have all the characteristics you might associate with a narcissistic school yard bully, he’s much worse. Sure he may attack immediately when someone criticizes them even for the slightest insults. You may notice that Trump frequently talks about “winners” and “losers.” Of course, “losers” to him include opponents or anyone who disagrees with him. To him, “losers” are people who “deserve to lose” which clearly reveals his indifference to, and rationalization for, injuring or humiliating others. Yet, he also does far more damaging things than that like flaunting a rival’s dirty laundry, spreading unsubstantiated claims to the masses, throwing temper tantrums, and taking an active efforts at character assassination. And if things go wrong for him, then he’ll say that the whole system is rigged against him. It’s very clear that Trump uses intimidation tactics not only to defeat, but also to demean and destroy his rivals. And that’s just on the campaign trail. Trump has also threatened and filed lawsuits against those who merely said negative things about him or joked about him. He’s threatened and took litigation against anyone daring to hold him accountable for his actions or challenging his perceived image as a skilled businessman. He’s humiliated people for not wanting to do things his way and even afterwards like with Chris Christie and Ted Cruz. Let’s just say that Trump intimidates not just to win and get his way, but also to escape the consequences of his actions. And he does it in an attempt to destroy people with no second thought. Nobody should find this acceptable behavior in a president.

27. He Associates with Horrible People– While Trump always claims that he associates and hires the best people throughout his life, this is far from the reality. You may know he has shady ties to dictators like Putin, Qaddafi, and the Castro brothers. Yet, he’s been linked to the mafia many times for many years over varying degrees of closeness. Of course, it wasn’t unusual for construction magnates like him to have mob connections during the 1970s and 1980s. Trump often portrayed himself as an unwilling participant but that’s probably bullshit. Trump’s reputed to have a close relationship with Gotti associate Robert LiButti whom he worked very hard to keep happy like not letting black and women card dealers at his table whenever he gambled at his Atlantic City Casinos, gifting 9 luxury cars in exchange for $1.65 million in cash, inviting him on his yacht and helicopters, and other instances. In the 1970s, he and his father were represented by a lawyer named Roy Cohn while sued for housing discrimination under the DOJ. Cohn also represented Genovese crime family boss Tony Salerno and worked for disgraced US Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s. Cohn would later get disbarred for fraud and other wrongdoing. But Trump didn’t just limit doing business with mobsters and despots. In 1992, Trump Taj Mahal foreign marketing vice president Danny Leung and 3 other Trump casino employees were named an associates of the Hong Kong-based organized crime group 14K Triad. Additionally, Leung was said to give complimentary tickets for hotel rooms and Asian shows to numerous Asian organized crime associates and members. And according to the New York Times, Leung, “flew in 16 Italian crime figures from Canada who stole more than $1 million from the casino in a credit scam. The incident was never reported because Trump never filed charges.” His casino and junket licenses were later removed. Another criminal Trump was associated with is Felix Sater in a questionable condo hotel scheme who had a 1998 racketeering conviction for a $40 million Mafia-linked stock fraud scheme and who had then become an informant against the mafia. Another associate in that scheme was Bayrock Group’s Tevfik Arif who was detained in Turkey for running a high priced prostitution ring consisting of him setting up trysts between wealthy businessmen and Eastern European models, some underage aboard a $60 million yacht once used by the nation’s founder Ataturk. Then we have a couple of con artists named Mike and Irene Milin who ran Trump Institute in the mid-2000s and were known were known serial operators of get-rich-quick schemes. And let’s not forget his campaign mangers Corey Lewandowski who arrested for battery of a Breitbart reporter, Paul Manafort who lobbied for despots along with campaign adviser Roger Ailes best known for sexually harassing women as CEO of Fox News and surrogate New Jersey Governor Chris Christie who’s under investigation for causing a traffic jam in political revenge against a mayor. You don’t want to see a guy with these connections in the White House. Then you have Ivanka’s husband Jared Kushner whose dad spent 2 years in prison on campaign finance charges as well as used his New York Observer to punish real estate Mogul Richard Mack for refusing a write-down on a loan. Let’s just say Trump does not have nice friends.

Here is Donald Trump tweeting about New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman whom he thinks is going after his Trump University because he’s a liberal stooge for the Obama administration. My theory: I think Schneiderman is after Trump for the Trump University scam because he’s doing his fucking job!

28. He Promotes Conspiracy Theories– One of my criticism in my Fox News article was how the network had a tendency to promote unsubstantiated conspiracy theories. Even before his campaign, Trump has spent years pushing conspiracy theories to his supporters’ delight and his enemies’ disdain. And he pushes these theories mostly to make his foes look bad. I’m not sure if he really believes them or not. His advocacy of birtherism is utterly shameful as well as his inflammatory claims about Obama. So was his claim that Ted Cruz’s father was involved in the Kennedy assassination or his and Rubio’s questionable eligibility for the presidency (Cruz was born to an American mother in Canada while Rubio was born in Miami). Or anything about Muslims like 9/11 hijackers having girlfriends who fled to Saudi Arabia, Muslim Americans celebrating in New Jersey on 9/11, mosques preaching hate, or Syrian refugees billing ISIS for their phones. He’s even pushed theories like fake racist crime statistics, immigrants mostly being rapists and criminals, Mexico deliberately sending criminals to the US, people coming into the country with Ebola, vaccines causing autism, global warming being a hoax by the Chinese, and rampant voter fraud. As for the Clintons, well, Trump is eager to get those out like alleging their involvement in Vince Foster’s murder (which was actually a suicide), Hillary wanting to take guns, Hillary lying about Benghazi, the Clintons’ involvement in Whitewater, and more. By the way, he kept talking about Hillary’s involvement in Benghazi even after the late Chris Stevens’ mother told him to shut up about it. Recently 370 economists signed a letter to the Wall Street Journal as citing Trump’s promoting of conspiracy theories that mislead the public saying: “He misinforms the electorate, degrades trust in public institutions with conspiracy theories, and promotes willful delusion over engagement with reality. If elected, he poses a unique danger to the functioning of democratic and economic institutions, and to the prosperity of the country.”

When Donald Trump tried to make a deal of how he made so many sacrifice after attacking a Gold Star family, there was a Twitter campaign called #TrumpSacrifices. Many of these were parodies of how little Trump sacrificed in his life.

29. He’s Made No Sacrifices for Anybody or Anything– One of the most powerful speakers at the DNC in July was when Khizr Khan addressed Trump to, “Go look at the graves of brave patriots who died defending the United States of America. You will see all faiths, genders and ethnicities. You have sacrificed nothing and no one.” This comes from a Muslim Gold Star father of a decorated war hero calling Trump out on his bigotry and selfishness. Trump cruelly and viciously attack Khan and his wife in true Islamophobic fashion. But when asked by George Stephanopoulos whether he made any sacrifices to his country, Trump replied, “I think I’ve made a lot of sacrifices. I work very, very hard. I’ve created thousands and thousands of jobs, tens of thousands of jobs, built great structures. I’ve had tremendous success. I think I’ve done a lot.” Really? Well, from what I’ve heard, Trump skipped out of Vietnam while 58,000 men in his generation died there, bragged about cheating on his wives, neglecting his children, refusing to pay workers, failing to pay back investors, deliberately avoided paying taxes while taking government money, constantly breaking promises, uses his charity as a personal piggy bank, as well as conning customers in his scams. Not to mention, suing people in order to avoid the consequences of his actions. Let’s just say when it comes to sacrifices, it’s the party Trump deals with who ends up making them. Apparently, Trump’s idea of sacrifice is all about making wealth or you know greed which is the exact opposite. So much so that there’s a Twitter hashtag called #TrumpSacrifices as a joke. Seriously, this is a guy who’s never made any sacrifices whether it be for his country, in his relationships, or for anything else. If he becomes president, he will throw the American people under the bus.

trump-is-not-the-crazy-stupid-conservative-you-think-he-is

Despite that Donald Trump having a penchant for patriotic displays during his presidential campaign, his record shows that his patriotism is a sham. I mean the guy used government money for his projects and doesn’t pay taxes. Also, skipped out on Vietnam.

30. He Has No Respect for America, Its Values, or Its People– I’m very aware that Trump always likes to show himself as a flag-waving American patriot who loves his country. In truth, he’s more likely to say he loves his country in order to exploit it for his own gain while he couldn’t care less about our nation. He’s used his wealth and privilege to get out of Vietnam, avoid taxes, use taxpayer funds for his little projects, and filing lawsuits against people who’ve criticized him or want to hold him accountable. Hell, he even brags about paying as little as possible in taxes as he can get away with. Not to mention, he won’t release his tax returns. What about creating American jobs? Well, Trump has but a lot them came with imaginary paychecks that never materialized as well as jobs that pay below minimum wage. Some of them are even done by undocumented immigrants who could be easily told to shut up with deportation threats. Oh, and a lot of his goods were made in foreign countries like China, Mexico, Turkey, Slovenia, or anywhere in Southeast Asia. What about praising repressive dictatorships who hate America and have a rap sheet of human rights violations? I mean he did business with Cuba during the Embargo, rented out his Winchester house to Qaddafi, rented out New York office space to state-owned Iranian bank, is chummy with Russia’s Vladimir Putin whose country is hacking Democrats’ e-mails on his behalf, and praised despots on the campaign trail. What about spreading damaging but unsubstantiated claims about the President? What about calling a Vietnam War POW a loser for getting captured? What about renigging his promise to donate money to veterans? What about advocating torture? What about hostility to minorities and immigrants? What about his RNC speech about America being a pitch black country soaked in blood a la Hunger Games dystopia? A presidential candidate who has done these things deserves to have his patriotism questioned. Sorry, but I think Trump seems to salute himself and not any flag. And certainly not the American flag. To Trump, patriotism is just a convenient cloak to play to the masses.

If Donald Trump had any respect for democratic values, then tell me why he feels the need to issue legal threats and file lawsuits to anyone who’s challenged or criticized him. Of course, the New York Times knew how to respond to this threat.

31. He Has No Respect for Democracy– Now the United States was built on the idea of democracy which Americans cherish as a government that’s conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all are created equal. Now let’s see how Trump does with democratic values. American melting pot of cultures? Build a wall to keep Mexicans out and ban Muslims. Free speech? Sues people who challenge or criticize him. Also, hates when people joke about him. Freedom of the Press? Bashed the media for liberal bias despite airing almost every word he’s said and sued a reporter for challenging his billionaire status. Freedom of Religion? Ban Muslims and attack the Pope. Freedom of assembly? Stop a bunch of workers from unionizing at his Las Vegas hotel. Right to petition? Threaten to sue a guy who wants you dropped from Macy’s. What about election results? If he loses, then it must be rigged by minorities committing voter fraud. Equal rights? Believes that women should be fired for being pregnant, ugly, or fat. Also, blacks need to be stopped and frisked, Muslims banned, and Mexicans deported. That and along with a disturbing affinity for tyrannical dictators, Trump doesn’t have much respect for democracy.

On the campaign trail, Donald Trump has often said he’ll bring back American jobs and how he’s created so many jobs fore this country. Excuse me, but can you tell me where this was made?

32. He’s a Notorious Hypocrite– While Trump likes to relish in dishing out Hillary Clinton’s baggage such as calling her a liar and a crook who’s put our country in danger. However, records show that Trump is a much bigger liar and crook who praises and does business with dictators. He’s savaged people for not paying taxes as well as companies for moving overseas for tax and business advantages. Meanwhile, Trump hasn’t paid federal income taxes in over 20 years and has no problem using the American tax code to suit himself. Besides, many products with his name on them aren’t American made. Trump has attacked Bill Clinton for his affairs while he tried to get his wife to pose for Playboy, bragged about his affairs, and has been married 3 times. He’s blasted Hillary’s use of foreign donors for the Clinton Foundation pay for play scheme. At the same time, he’s been using his charity as a personal piggy bank with other people’s money for over two decades. He complains about undocumented immigrants being criminals while exploiting them as cheap labor he could threaten to deport. While he constantly slams Hillary for her e-mails on private server during her time as Secretary of State, court records show that his company has yearly erased e-mails since at least the late 1990s.

33. He’s a Trigger Happy Coward– We all know that Trump tends to be quite aggressive in his rhetoric. And he’s been seen by many as crazy and unstable. Doesn’t help he lacks total self-control on a podium. He has to attack everyone who opposes him even after he’s defeated them. He has to be hostile on Twitter as well as threaten or file lawsuits at anyone who’s challenged him or wants to hold him accountable. Even when it’s a Muslim Gold Star family stating how he has never made any sacrifices. His menacing, angry convention speech can only be seen as delusional and demented as if it’s spoken by a raving lunatic. He’s promised to bomb the shit out of ISIS and lock Hillary up in prison. Sure he may talk tough to trigger happy proportions. Yet as David Atkins states in Washington Monthly states, “Ultimately, however, Donald Trump is a coward. Not just for serving himself at the expense of others even as millions of Americans devoted their lives to causes greater than themselves on the battlefield, in the classroom, at the laboratory table and in the civic engagement hall. He is a coward because he cannot face the reality of what he has done with his life before an audience not prepared to idolize him.” And in many ways, he usually takes a coward’s way out in order to cover his own ass whether it be denial, blame, lawsuits, threats, or what have you. Because if Trump was truly brave, he’d take responsibility for his actions and apologize. Democrats have a word for crazy men like him known as “chickenhawk.”

Though Donald Trump brags about being a successful businessman, the truth is that he inherited his money from his father Fred. Fred also bailed him out a number of times until his death in 1999.

34. He Constantly Appeals to His Privilege– Note I’m not talking about white or male privilege here. But privilege Trump enjoys as a lifetime member of the 1% which allows him to be the entitled rich man he’s always been. All his life, Trump has constantly appealed to his status of as being born a white man of wealth and privilege to do whatever he wants and get away with it. His inherited status has allowed him to get out of serving Vietnam when thousands of other drafted young men were killed. When his personal finances were a disaster, his dad bailed him out. He’s used his status to get government funding for his projects, avoid paying taxes, and avoid responsibility for his actions while leaving his workers, investors, customers, and others screwed. And it’s his affluence and privilege as being part of the 1% that Trump can rise to positions of power and get away with breaking laws. Any normal person who’s committed a fraction of his crimes would’ve been stopped years ago. In fact, it’s because he’s so rich and powerful that he’s able to use lawsuits as a technique for retaliation, intimidation, and damage control. And he’s not shy about it at all. Yet, it’s because of his privilege as the rich white man Trump is that he’s been able to sell his image as the successful businessman for years despite it only being a façade as slews of renowned reporters have pointed out.

35. He Constantly Appeals to Secrecy– Trump has often harangued Hillary for being secretive as each batch of her e-mails is being discovered by the FBI and the Russians as well as made public by WikiLeaks. However, Hillary has released both her medical records and tax returns while Trump hasn’t. In fact, Trump is far more secretive than Hillary. Transparency is just simply not his style. His platform doesn’t have clear cut policies and no clear details on how to accomplish them. And even before his presidential campaign, Trump has a penchant of secrecy such as having employees sign non-disclosure agreements, erasing e-mails from company computers each year, destroying and withholding testimony and evidence, not disclosing charity records, and more. We don’t know how much Trump actually earns since he won’t release his tax returns. Neither does Wall Street know what Trump did to the money he stole from them. The fact Trump has resorted to secrecy so much over the years matters, especially when he’s a candidate of a major party for president. If he wins, his administration will be one of secrecy which won’t be good for the country.

While politicians are used to mudslinging each other during campaigns, Donald Trump attacks his opponents unusually viciously. Here he is saying how Ted Cruz’s wife is ugly.

36. His Campaign Strategy Mainly Revolves Around Bringing Down His Foes– Trump’s campaign is particularly noteworthy since it’s more or less on appealing to people’s prejudices and anxieties while viciously attacking his opponents in any way he could in order to get media attention. He won the Republican primary this way as he attacked and defeated his toughest opponents one by one. And it’s clear that Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush got the worst of it. Whether its calling Hillary a criminal who should be in jail or promoting conspiracy theories, Trump’s campaign has set a very hostile precedent for this election. In fact, if you watch his debates, Trump devotes more time to attacking Hillary than discussing actual policy. Even during the town hall which Trump devoted to interrupting her and talking about Bill Clinton’s sex scandals and even spent some time following her on the stage. And if he thinks he’s losing, he claims that the whole thing is rigged by voter fraud and that people need to be vigilant poll watchers in order to intimidate minorities at polling places. In years of ugly elections, Trump’s persistent bullying on the campaign trail makes it so apparent that he should be the candidate to lose.

367d8c4900000578-0-image-a-28_1469196210581

Here’s Donald Trump giving his daughter Ivanka a friendly hug during the RNC. Yes, I know there’s a real Manchurian candidate vibe here. It’s disturbing. Yeah, that’s just creepy.

37. He’s Terrible to His Family– Yes, I know that Trump’s family is extremely loyal to him despite that he’s completely despicable. Of course, his father was the same way which is why the two got along so well. But this didn’t help his brother Freddy whose fatal flaw was being a normal guy born to an affluent family of sociopaths. He also liked to fly planes which his father and brother Donald constantly thought was at the same level of a bus driver. Freddy died an unhappy alcoholic at 43 in 1981. Yet, it was reported that Trump helped draft his father’s last will that cut Freddy’s kids out of their grandfather’s inheritance when the old man died in 1999. According to the New York Times, “Freddy’s children sued, claiming that an earlier version of the will had entitled them to their father’s share of the estate, but that Donald and his siblings had used ‘undue influence’ over their grandfather, who had dementia, to cut them out.” It gets worse as the Times adds, “A week later, Mr. Trump retaliated by withdrawing the medical benefits critical to his nephew’s infant child.” We should take note that his nephew’s son had cerebral palsy. And you thought his mocking a disabled reporter was bad. He’s also very shitty husband who bragged about cheating on them as well as groped other women. His marriage with first wife Ivana ended after Trump’s affair with Marla Maples went public and their nasty divorce with Ivana claiming Trump raped her. His second marriage with Maples also ended in a nasty divorce with her taking their daughter Tiffany to California. As with third wife Melania, well, there’s rumors that she may not have been legal when she came to this country. But you probably know what she has to deal with. Then we have his children for whom he wasn’t really around much when they were growing up. But how he treats his daughters is pretty telling. I mean Trump once told reporters that he’d date Ivanka she wasn’t his daughter. And then he touched her ass at the RNC. Yeah, that totally seems too much like Mrs. Iselin and Raymond Shaw in reverse. Let’s just say if Jared Kushner’s New York Observer isn’t endorsing Trump right now, this is probably the reason. As for Tiffany Trump, well, he doesn’t really take much notice of her as her RNC speech makes her seem like she’s begging for his attention. And he didn’t even watch her. Yet, when she was born Trump already seemed to reduce her to body parts saying that she had her mom Marla’s legs but wasn’t sure whether she’ll have her breasts yet. Oh, and there’s a chance he may not have wanted her in the first place. His sons Donald Jr. and Eric have turned out to be pricks who hunt endangered animals on African safari. And according to one of Donald Jr.’s classmates, Trump once slapped him across the face in college and that Jr. despised his father, was habitually drunk, and hated the attention his last name afforded him. Yet, he and Eric also inherited their dad’s racism and sexism, too. Yeah, Trump isn’t really very nice to his family is he?

38. His Campaign Is Tampering with the Political Process– The reason why Trump managed to get this far in the 2016 election is that his train wreck go so much press attention during the Republican primary that the news networks basically gave him free publicity that basically put his competition out of commission. And he did the same thing during the general election with constant allusions to the Clintons’ scandals as well as Hillary’s e-mails. It doesn’t help that he’s had help by Putin’s Russian government and WikiLeaks who both have beefs with Hillary and the Obama Administration. We know the DNC hacks were by the Russians. Not to mention, Trump has called for his supporters to poll watch for in person voter fraud at the polling places particularly where minorities vote. There are even allegations of voter suppression in states like North Carolina, Indiana, Florida, and Pennsylvania. And we know who’s targeted in these states. You know minority voters who support Hillary. That doesn’t get me started by how Republican dominated states have resorted to gerrymandering. Let’s just say if Trump is losing, it’s not because the election’s rigged against him as he believes. Quite the contrary.

Donald Trump rallies have been known for their moments of violence. And Trump is said to encourage the spectacle. Here is a fight in Tucson, Arizona.

39. His Campaign Rhetoric Is Inflammatory and Incites Violence– All through the campaign season, Trump’s rhetoric is very inflammatory with racist and sexist comments that have caused supporters glee and opponents cringing in fear. And some of them have a good reason to be concerned, especially if they’re minorities since Trump’s endorsed by white supremacists. Yet, Trump also has a history of calling for violent acts against those who protest at his events that goes back until at least August of last year. He’s encouraged supporters to beat up protesters at his rallies, particularly if they’re people of color. He’s even suggested violence against Hillary alleging she’d get rid of the Second Amendment. Yet, what’s even more disturbing is how he talks about it so casually. But violent rhetoric can get too out of hand, particularly since some of his supporters are known terrorists.

trumps-weapons-grade-stupidity-when-donald-trump-was-asked-w-politics-1459555941

Here’s what Donald Trump said about appointing Supreme Court Justices. What he says indicates he doesn’t know what the Supreme Court does at all. This is a problem.

40. His Campaign Has No Substantive Policies– While Trump’s campaign contains enough spectacle to take over the airwaves, but there’s no substance to it unlike those of his opponents. He’s never been transparent on anything especially when it comes to his medical records and tax returns. We don’t know how he’ll build his wall on the US-Mexican border or how he’ll force Mexico to pay for it. He doesn’t have details on his healthcare plan he intends to replace Obamacare with (and probably has none). Most of his campaign promises tend to have vague assertions and broad rhetoric. There’s little on what Trump plans to spend, how he plans to pay for it, and what he thinks his programs will look like. In his rhetoric, Trump doesn’t seem to have much knowledge on public policy details even stumbling on basic American governance and frequently demonstrating his ignorance of key challenges and issues in policymaking. For instance, Trump accused President Obama for keeping interest rates low which is the Federal Reserve’s job. If he’s elected president, we won’t know what he’s going to do which is very troubling.

Protestors hold up a sign towards the crowd at a rally for U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump at Oral Roberts University in Tulsa, Oklahoma

While the media has tried to make Trump support about economics, support is mostly based on racism, xenophobia, and authoritarianism. This banner makes it clear.

41. His Political Appeal Is Based on Cultural Hatred and Authoritarianism– I know many Trump supporters probably don’t have much faith in government and are going through tough economic times. I know many Trump supporters are working class whites with no college degrees. Yet, according to Nate Silver, Trump supporters are on average wealthier and more educated than their peers. So the white working class isn’t a monolithic group. For instance, there were a lot of white working class voters who supported Bernie Sanders during the Democratic primary. Besides, a lot of these white working class voters tend to be very suspicious of government as well as continually complain about paying taxes for welfare recipients. So it’s more likely that Trump support has more to do with race and xenophobia since it’s Trump’s spewing of cultural hatred that has made him so popular like building a wall, stop and frisk, and banning Muslims. The fact he’s been endorsed by white supremacists and terrorists that he hasn’t denounced shows this. Besides, if you’ve heard “Make America Great Again,” it evokes some kind of warped nostalgia as if he sets to make it the way it was. Even though that imagined past didn’t really exist or wasn’t anything like that they thought it was. We should also take into account how white society in the South has long been structured to view whiteness as a mark of higher status whether during slavery or segregation. Not only that we should also account how Southern whites learn their history within the nostalgically racist “Lost Cause” mythology when it pertains to the American Civil War. And how Barack Obama’s presidency challenged that and many didn’t like it. Let’s just say, the cultural hatred angle for Trump support makes a lot more sense for me.

This list shows who’s been suing Donald Trump for stealing their money over the decades. What he’s done by cheating these people really shows how Trump doesn’t have much respect for the law. Not to mention, he uses the court and his money to get away with

42. He Has No Respect for the Rule of Law– If reading Trump’s history tells me anything about him, it’s that he often believes that the rules don’t apply to him. Or at least when the penalty doesn’t consist of jail time. But whatever the case, he tends to treat rules and laws as inconveniences as well as exploits legal loopholes. He ignores conflicts of interest as well as takes what he wants regardless who gets hurt. He’s been repeatedly caught for discriminating against blacks whether in housing or in the casino business. For years, he’s been repeatedly fined for breaking rules relating to operating his casinos including an incident in 1990 when his father Fred bought 700 chips at Trump Taj Mahal for $3.5 million. He’s also went to great lengths to avoid being accountable for paying back investors along with wage theft. Yet, what shows Trump’s disrespect for the law the most is his Trump Foundation charity in which he used other people’s money for his own purposes. With his Trump Foundation, Trump has used the money to pay for lawsuits, bribe public officials, buy stuff like portraits of himself and a helmet signed by Tim Tebow, and funneling money in them that would’ve been counted as taxable income otherwise. He’s even said to use Trump Foundation money to fund his campaign. All these are known as self-dealing which is illegal for a charity to do under the IRS. But Trump gets away with this. Even more telling is how many times Trump has used lawsuits to avoid taking responsibility for his actions. Furthermore, Trump’s campaign has been plagued with money shenanigans. Another can be him expressing no regret calling for the Central Park Five to be executed despite the fact they were exonerated due to DNA evidence. But Trump still believes they’re guilty to this day. Even legal experts across the political spectrum are scared of a Trump presidency since he doesn’t seem to have respect for the rule of law in this country nor has any respect for American constitutional traditions. As Adam Gopnik wrote for the New Yorker, “The American Republic stands threatened by the first overtly anti-democratic leader of a large party in its modern history—an authoritarian with no grasp of history, no impulse control, and no apparent barriers on his will to power. The right thing to do, for everyone who believes in liberal democracy, is to gather around and work to defeat him on Election Day.” He later goes on to say, “If Trump came to power, there is a decent chance that the American experiment would be over. This is not a hyperbolic prediction; it is not a hysterical prediction; it is simply a candid reading of what history tells us happens in countries with leaders like Trump. Countries don’t really recover from being taken over by unstable authoritarian nationalists of any political bent, left or right—not by Peróns or Castros or Putins or Francos or Lenins or fill in the blanks. The nation may survive, but the wound to hope and order will never fully heal. Ask Argentinians or Chileans or Venezuelans or Russians or Italians—or Germans. The national psyche never gets over learning that its institutions are that fragile and their ability to resist a dictator that weak. If he can rout the Republican Party in a week by having effectively secured the nomination, ask yourself what Trump could do with the American government if he had a mandate.” In the US, it’s well established that nobody, not even the President is above the law. Unfortunately Trump always thought he’s above the law because he’s rich. And there’s a strong chance he won’t uphold the constitution if he ever becomes president.

Here’s Donald Trump Mar-a-Lago portrait that the Trump Foundation paid for at $20,000. It’s at his Florida Resort. Of course, how Trump got it is an act of self-dealing which is illegal under the IRS.

43. He Constantly Breaks His Promises– All his life Trump has made promises to people in order to give him what he wants. Yet, once he has it, he often doesn’t fulfil his word and always making excuses why. A June article from the USA Today alleges that Trump has refused to pay workers for decades when he said he would. As of 2016, Trump has at least 60 lawsuits involving employees and contractors alleging he didn’t pay them. He’s settled with 48 servers at his Miami golf resort in a lawsuit about failing to pay overtime for a special event. There were at least 253 subcontractors who weren’t paid in full and/or on time for work on Trump Taj Mahal Casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey. It’s very clear that Trump promised to pay these people or they wouldn’t have agreed to work for him. And yet, he refused to pay them in the end. He’s also failed to pay back investors who’ve lent money to him and now Wall Street no longer trusts him. Not only that, but Trump has promised to donate money to charity over the years and never makes good on them. Well, unless he’s called out on it. It’s not that Trump constantly breaks his promises. It’s just that Trump constantly makes promises that he has no intention to fulfill. It’s part of how he works. You can’t have a president like that.

44. Even Republicans Hate Him– We should understand that Trump was never the favorite to win the Republican primary in the 2016 election. The Republican establishment wasn’t happy when he was ahead in the polls or when he won primary after primary. And when the many of these Republicans finally caved to Trump in the general election, it was mostly because they feared for their jobs and possibly the good of the party. Yet, many Republicans still won’t support Trump such as Mitt Romney, the Bushes, Colin Powell, Condolezza Rice, Glenn Beck, Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Tom Ridge, Former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Reagan Education Secretary Bill Bennett, the National Review, Wall Street bankers, the Weekly Standard, and many conservative newspapers. George Will even left the Republican Party for his opposition to Trump. Nebraska Senator Bob Sasse wrote a long Facebook post explaining why he won’t vote for Trump. Right wing radio host, Eric Erickson explained his reason because he’d, “put my country before my party and decline to help the voters in this country commit national suicide.” At the RNC, it’s very apparent that the Republicans weren’t warmly behind their candidate. In fact, many prominent Republicans like John McCain refused to attend. Those who did, didn’t give an enthusiastic endorsement and don’t seem to like him much. For instance, I know that Paul Ryan doesn’t like Trump and has even called him out on it. Yet, he ended up endorsing the guy anyway, because he’s Speaker of the House and was in a tough primary fight with a Trump supporting opponent. And even in his convention speech, he barely mentioned the guy. Then there’s Texas Senator Ted Cruz who declined to endorse Trump at the RNC in his speech after the latter viciously attacked him at the primary for calling his wife ugly and insulting his father. Yet, Cruz would eventually cave to endorse Trump anyway when he discovered he was up for reelection in two years. You also have Chris Christie who’s only been supporting Trump to get on a ticket or at least a cabinet position, whom Stephen Colbert likened to “a best man at a wedding he doesn’t believe in.” Any way you look at it, the Republican establishment more or less supports him as if they feel that they have to since he’s their party’s nominee.

38f5bb4d00000578-3815803-image-a-3_1475245819740

Donald Trump has received very few major newspaper endorsements during this election than most candidates. Perhaps it’s because Trump is no fan of freedom of the press. And that he’s a morally bankrupt individual to begin with.

45. Newspapers and Experts Have Warned People Not to Vote for Him– While experts and newspapers usually have their own political biases, what’s unusual about this election is how many have refused to endorse the Republican nominee. In fact, there are many who are coming out to encourage Americans not to vote for Trump. For one, Hillary has received way more newspaper endorsements than what’s usual for any presidential party nominee. Even more telling is that many of these publications usually endorse Republican candidates with some not endorsing a Democratic presidential nominee in decades. Major publications that didn’t endorse Hillary usually went with no endorsement, Gary Johnson, or not Donald Trump. Nevertheless, Hillary’s high newspaper endorsement count doesn’t indicate an acceptance of her politics that many of these papers disagree with. In fact, it’s indicative that the newspaper industry doesn’t want Trump to be president for good reason. After all, Trump is no fan of First Amendment rights since he sued a reporter for challenging his billionaire status. Experts who oppose Trump include 370 economists, 50 GOP national security officials, legal experts across the political spectrum, and more. Even 600 historians have spoken against Trump. David McCullough said the prospect of a Trump presidency distressed him that he felt he could no longer remain publicly attached saying, “When you think of how far we have come, and at what cost, and with what faith, to just turn it all over to this monstrous clown with a monstrous ego, with no experience, never served his country in any way — it’s just crazy. We can’t stand by and let it happen. The Republican Party shouldn’t stand by and let it happen.” Filmmaker Ken Burns voiced opposition against Trump in his commencement address at Stanford University, where he said that despite 40 years of avoiding advocacy in his work, he no longer had, “the luxury of neutrality or ‘balance’ or even of bemused disdain.” It should be a red flag that a Trump presidency poses nothing but trouble.

46. He Brings Out the Worst of America– Watching the Republican primaries take its course this election was especially distressing for me. Whenever Trump would do something outrageous that would get normal presidential candidates out of the race, he didn’t suffer any fall in his popularity. It’s like his supporters kept excusing his behavior on the stage even when he was encouraging them to beat up protestors at his rallies. There are even people comparing Trump rallies to 1930s Germany which led to the rise of Adolf Hitler. And we know what happened there. Yet, such comparisons do have merit since Trump’s campaign revolves around a cult of personality like he would make everything okay. And these supporters think he would because look how successful Trump is. Look how strong and fearless he is. And to prove how much America needs him, Trump reminds voters that America is in deep, deep trouble. Yet at same time, Trump’s campaign has no substantive policies on how he’ll get things done. Nevertheless, a candidate who says he’ll fix it but doesn’t offer any plans spells trouble. But it seems that his supporters don’t seem to care what he does and seem to take him at every word. This is bad.

Donald Trump likes to use “America First” in his presidential proposals, particularly when it comes to foreign policy. This term was used by Charles Lindbergh’s anti-war group called the America First Committee known for its isolationism as well as virulent Anti-Semitism. Lindbergh’s “America First” speech was filled with Anti-Semitic language and cost him his reputation.

47. He Has Little Knowledge of History or the Lessons Learned from It– Trump has never cared about the consequences of his actions and his candidacy certainly shows this. It’s very clear the Trump isn’t just ignorant on matters of basic civics, he has no sense of the American past and doesn’t understand the achievements in this country. Sure he’d want to “make America great again,” but he doesn’t understand what already makes America great in the first place. According to the New Republic, he’s never read a presidential biography and that his knowledge of presidential history is almost entirely self-serving. It doesn’t help that people in the media have compared aspects of Trump’s campaign to parts of America’s past and none of them are good. One example would be Trump’s foreign policy outline which he refers to as “Restore Fortress America” or “America First” which to him means disconnecting from other countries, more barriers to trade, tougher negotiations with long standing NATO allies, and a more restrictive immigration policy with a wall and Muslim ban. It also shares similarities to the America First Committee before US entry into WWII while Nazi Germany was taking power across Europe. Now the American First Committee was an isolationist group who opposed US involvement in the war, which originated with college students. Yet, it soon became a group that included conservatives who wanted to stick it to a liberal president as well as virulent Anti-Semites and Nazi sympathizers. Things got worse when famed aviator Charles Lindbergh became their public spokesman and gave a highly Anti-Semitic speech in 1941 that was universally condemned, which combined with being too nice to Nazi Germany led him to suffer an epic fall from grace. The phrase “America First” has become taboo ever since as well as an Anti-Semitic byword. But when Trump was asked about this group in July, he claimed that “America First” was a brand-new modern term and that he never related it to the past and not what Lindbergh had in mind. It’s very clear that Trump doesn’t know about the shameful American First Committee nor does he even care. Nor does he care about the parallels that suggest how the old isolationist movement is relevant to his campaign. Because he kept using “America First” as a slogan not just to his foreign policies but his other ones, too. It’s like he’s using this phrase because he thinks it sounds good for his campaign. Another term is the “silent majority” which seem eerily reminiscent of the radical right John Birch Society of the 1960s, which played an active role in the Red Scare. It was also used in the Nixon campaign of 1968. Yet, what Trump doesn’t know is that the past doesn’t always stay in the past and those who don’t know much about history are doomed to repeat it.

48. He Gives Little to No Thought to His Responses to Questions or Challenges– Trump’s campaign has been characterized as all spectacle without any substance. Trump doesn’t seem to think that policy matters much, details don’t matter at all, and that positions are negotiable. All that matters for Trump is running on attitude and charisma, strength and success, that goo-goo elites make America a loser, and that he’s the superhero who can make it win again. However, this campaign style is extremely done. Presidential elections aren’t about mere policy face offs, they’re also about competence, leadership, values, vision, records, and which face voters want to see their TV the next 4 years. Sure like Trump, Obama ran as a political outsider which worked out well for him. However, Obama had a detailed policy agenda and much of it has become the law in the land. We’re not sure what would become law under Trump or how he’d face challenges. Even worse, Trump has given little or no thought in his responses to questions or challenges as we’ve seen from his debate performances. But when we’re choosing a president, then we need to know what they’re going to do if elected. And if Trump can’t give a good response to a policy question, then he shouldn’t be elected.

While Donald Trump’s campaign has many veteran supporters, this doesn’t mean he’s nice to them. In fact, quite the opposite. Here is his fake veterans hotline voicemail.

49. He’s Shown Disrespect to People Who’ve Supported Him– Trump has been unusually vicious to people who opposed him and not just on his campaign either. Yet, he could also be quite awful when it comes to people who support him. First, Trump has had a long record of bashing veterans including times when he’s had disabled vet vendors chased off Trump Tower, calling a decorated war hero and POW a loser for getting captured, organizing fake veterans fundraisers, accepting a Purple Heart from a supporter and saying how he always wanted one, ignoring a mother’s demands not to politicize her son’s death in Benghazi, setting up a fake veterans hotline, calling his sexual escapades during the 1970s his “Vietnam,” attacking a dead soldier’s parents, claiming to know more about ISIS than the generals, and more. Let’s just say Trump really has no respect for those who served our country in uniform and kept our country safe in a time of war. Yet, veterans rank among some of his most loyal supporters despite all that. Second, while Trump claims he’s pro-life and has considerable support in the pro-life crowd, his record isn’t, even on the campaign trail. He’s taken 5 different positions on abortion in 3 days, called pregnancy an “inconvenience” for a business” (before he denied it), had a woman fired for getting pregnant, tried to replace a pregnant employee who refused to sleep with him, may not provide maternity leave to his employees, mocked a disabled reporter, rejected his first wife after she popped out 3 kids for him, bragged about sexual assault, rates women based on their bodies, cut medical benefits to his nephew’s son with cerebral palsy, praised his future current wife for taking birth control every day on the radio, may have paid and urged mistresses to have abortions (since he answered, “such an interesting question” when asked this), and once told future second wife “Uh, excuse me? What are we going to do about this?” after finding out about an accidental pregnancy (despite that Marla Maples had already made up her mind to go through with it). Sorry, pro-lifers, but Trump is not your man. I mean calling pregnancy an “inconvenience for a business” is even less pro-life than calling abortion “a women’s right to choose” especially since the former statement has killed far more innocent unborn children than the latter. And I think Trump’s belief in pregnancy as an inconvenience for business basically sums up his stance on reproductive rights. In other words, he believes a business’s needs are more important than an unborn child’s or even the mother’s. Besides, whenever he speaks on the matter, he seems like he has to go the extra mile to prove he’s pro-life. Yet, while the pro-life movement backs Trump in droves, it’s very apparent that these people are being played for major fools. Third, are women, LGBTQ+ people, immigrants, and minorities who are supporting him but that goes without saying. Fourth, this can go on.

sorry-parents-never-support-someone-like-trump-funny-ecard-0b9

Of course, this is very true when it comes to Trump supporters. It seems that these people treat Donald Trump like he’s a bad boyfriend thinking he’ll change. But let’s just say his employees, investors, and ex-wives thought the same thing. Seriously, if you support Trump, I guarantee he’ll let you down. So I hope Trump let’s you down by losing the race. Because if he wins, we could be in trouble.

50. He Brings Out the Worst in His Supporters– I know that a lot of Trump supporters aren’t bad people. I know that a lot of Trump supporters are well-educated and not stupid. Yet, whenever I see or hear people I know support Trump, I feel utterly appalled. Now Trump isn’t a guy these people would want in their neighborhood or someone they’d want their children to emulate. Of course I know many of these people support Trump because they’re racist, Islamophobic, and xenophobic even if it doesn’t define them. Some people who support Trump are violent like some of the Second Amendment fanatics who like to carry their guns in full view as well as right wing terrorists and extremists. But this is a man who’s violated the norms of ethical behavior even the most ardent Trump fans wouldn’t accept in someone in their lives, let alone in a presidential candidate. And yet, these same people continually excuse Trump and his campaign no matter what happens like they have little to no standards for what a presidential candidate should be. Look, I know many people are supporting Trump because they’re pro-life, Republican, or don’t like Hillary Clinton. But come on, to support Trump for these reasons just makes you look pathetic. Because there are plenty of people who are in all these camps but are still voting for Hillary Clinton anyway because they have standards for what to expect in a president. Hell, even some of Hillary’s enemies are supporting her like Michael Chertoff. Yet, what’s worse is that plenty of Trump supporters don’t seem to care if their man is a raging sociopath with no political experience who’s lying them into a gigantic con. They don’t seem to question his morals. They don’t seem to question his policies or lack of them. They don’t question whether he’s fit for the presidency. They don’t question whether the veracity of his statements or whether he’s lying to them. They don’t question his sordid past that debunks his claim as a successful businessman. All they care about is whatever Trump says and how he’ll make America great again. And the fact so many Americans are willing to vote for a guy like Trump, including people I know such as friends and family just scares the living shit out of me.

Yes, here we have robber baron Trump sitting in his gaudy gold oval office ushering a new autocratic gilded age for America. For the love of God, America, please don’t let this happen. Jesus, please, don’t. I don’t want to see a Trump presidency.

Why We Need to Raise the Minimum Wage

Posted by historymaniacmegan on October 27, 2016

1x-1

When the federal minimum wage law was signed by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1938, it was meant to keep America’s workers out of poverty and increase consumer spending in order to stimulate the economy. Since then the federal minimum wage has been increased 22 times with its current value at $7.25 an hour. However, it is a poverty wage which doesn’t keep people from being poor nor has it kept up with the US cost of living. In fact, it’s said a full time job on $7.25 an hour can’t even support even the basic living essentials in all 50 states. Nevertheless, campaigns to raise the minimum wage have recently been gaining momentum across the country ranging from ballot initiatives to grass organizing to major legislative efforts in states and localities. Many have achieved some degree of success. Yet, at Capitol Hill, proposals to raise the minimum wage have gone nowhere, despite widespread popular support across party lines as well as economists. As for me, I feel that not only should the federal minimum wage be increased, it should also be adjust automatically to keep pace with cost of living that doesn’t exempt tipped workers and the disabled. While I do not believe raising the minimum wage would relieve poverty even at $15 an hour, I feel that it’s good responsible policy as well as the right thing to do.

This graph from the Department of Labor illustrates how the minimum wage has fallen by a third since 1968. If it was automatically adjusted for inflation from that time on, the minimum wage today would at least be $11 an hour.

The Minimum Wage Is an Arbitrary Value-The only good explanation as to why the minimum wage is a poverty wage is mostly due to increases requiring approval by Congress and it doesn’t keep pace with inflation or rising costs of living. This is why the new minimum wage value usually falls from the moment it’s set. The federal minimum wage today is $7.25 per hour. Does it mean it’s higher than it used to be? In terms of real dollars, yes. But in terms of buying power, no. When adjusted for inflation, the current federal minimum wage would need to be more than $8 per hour to equal its buying power in the early 1980s and nearly more than $11 per hour to equal its buying power of the late 1960s. For tipped workers, it’s $2.13 an hour which has remained unchanged for over 25 years. In other words, why the current minimum wage is $7.25 per hour has nothing to do with inflation adjustments. Because despite minimum wage increases, its buying power has dropped and keeps falling. Though President Obama has argued for the minimum wage to increase automatically with inflation which can eliminate requirements for formal congressional action, reduce time between increases, and better help low-income families keep up with rising prices. There’s even a bill called The Raise the Wage Act proposed by Senator Patty Murray and Representative Bobby C. Scott proposing to do just that along with raising the wage to $12 an hour by 2020 as well as set automatic increases starting in 2021 and eliminate the unfair subminimum tipped wage of $2.13 an hour. It’s a policy that makes far better sense the current one. Some states have also enacted rules to do the same thing. So why is the federal minimum wage a paltry $7.25 per hour? Well, since increasing it requires congressional approval, I think it has more to do with politics and employer preference for cheap labor. In other words, it’s an arbitrary value.

2. Most Minimum Wage Jobs Can’t Be Outsourced – While conservatives often argue that raising the minimum wage will lead many people to lose their jobs, we need to understand that most minimum wage jobs are in the service industry. Unlike jobs in manufacturing, it’s unlikely most of them could ever be outsourced overseas with globalization. Besides, when we’re talking about minimum wage employees, their pay has nothing to do with international competition. Because they’re not engaged in the export sector. Competition in the service industry is mostly domestic and localized as well as staffed by local workers and serving a local customer base. In other words, service jobs be in a specific location. The biggest threats to pay in service sectors aren’t foreign countries known for human rights violations but large multinational corporate chains who treat their employees like shit.

Recent trends show that most job creation has taken place in low wage industries. So it’s no surprise that a higher share of millennials work in low wage industries while lower shares work in mid or higher wage industries.

3. New Job Growth Has Been Concentrated in Disproportionately Low Wage Industries– Today more families than ever rely on low wage and minimum wage jobs to make ends meet especially since job losses during the Great Recession have hit higher wage sectors like construction, manufacturing, and finance hard. And according to a 2012 report by the National Employment Law Project, 58% of all jobs created post-recession were low wage occupations. This isn’t a short term trend either since 6 of the top ten growth occupations projected by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics for the next decade are low wage jobs, such as home health aides, customer service representatives, food preparation and service workers, personal and home care aides, retail salespersons, and office clerks. Raising the minimum wage would boost pay scales in these jobs where millions of Americans spend their careers today. And for many it’s getting harder for many workers to move beyond a low wage job. Thus, raising the minimum wage right now is more important than ever.

Here’s a picture on the hazards of domestic labor. Now people in these jobs usually earn minimum wage or less. Some of them earn more. But what this chart tells you that it’s anything but easy. In fact, it’s hard and thankless work. The same can go for many low wage jobs.

4. Most Minimum Wage Jobs Aren’t Easy– Those opposed to minimum wage increases argue that anyone could do a minimum wage job which doesn’t require a lot of responsibility. But that has no bearing on reality whatsoever. Service industry workers often have stressful work days as well as unpredictable work schedules. A lot of them don’t have nice work environments either. Not to mention, a lot of these jobs lack health benefits, paid leave, opportunities for advancement, and job security. Many minimum wage employees work on weekends and holidays. A lot of them work 8-hour days while some can work even more. Some even have more than one job if they work part-time. Some may even experience workplace injury or illness. A lot require constant human interaction, time management, and multitasking. Let’s just say there’s a very good reason why a lot of minimum wage jobs have high turnover rates. These aren’t easy jobs anyone can do. They’re thankless, stressful, and grueling jobs while these workers receive little respect for all the crap they put up with on a regular basis. I spent a Christmas season working at Macy’s which paid $8 an hour. I spent hours on my feet that I had a lot of aches and pains. I also had to deal with hours of Christmas music in the background. By the end of my shift I was exhausted. I have often seen ads for many of these jobs which have a long list of duties and responsibilities as well as skills like patience, knowledge, care, and communication. There are plenty of caregiving jobs with educational requirements that pay minimum wage like home healthcare and childcare. Hell, even hairdressers and manicurists can earn low wages and they have to go through cosmetology school. Some low wage jobs can require at least an associate’s degree or even a 4-year college education. Building services may also require special skills. For instance, janitors may have a wide range of duties besides indoor cleaning like maintenance, security, and yard work. The cleaning industry is known for hiring 17-23% of undocumented immigrants as well as posts a median pay of $10.68 an hour (though many school janitors get paid more than the teachers so it’s not always a low wage job). Bank tellers, data entry keyers, cooks, pharmacy assistants, clerks, hotel receptionists, and security guards can also be paid minimum wage. In many ways, I think the terms “low-skilled” or “unskilled labor” just refers to jobs with shitty pay.

Many people argue that low wage work is such because they don’t require a lot of skills, education, and lack social value. If that were true, then explain to me why Cesar Chavez became so famous for organizing farm workers for better conditions. Yeah, that doesn’t hold up.

5. Most Minimum Wage Jobs Don’t Lack Social Value– When most people think of jobs paying minimum wage, they tend to think about people working at fast food restaurants which only consist of 5% of low wage jobs. In fact, most low income jobs pay poor may have little to do with their value in society. Or if they do, then it might be a reason they’re paid so poorly in the first place. At any rate, they’re all around us which include security guards, nurse’s aides and home healthcare aides, child-care workers, educational assistants, maids and porters, janitors, call center workers, bank tellers, data entry keyers, food preparation workers, waiters and waitresses, cooks, pharmacy assistants, hairdressers, manicurists, fish and meat processors, sewing machine operators, laundry and dry cleaning operators, ambulance drivers, parking lot attendants, and farm workers. Sure there may be people in these jobs who make good money like a janitor at a public school or hairdressers. But we’re talking about general trends. We’re not necessarily talking about people who make no contribution to society. In fact, we’re talking about people in jobs that don’t get much respect. If you don’t believe me, then think about how Caesar Chavez became so famous for organizing California farm workers in the 1960s. Or why so many workplaces and corporations in the service industry take major steps to keep their low wage workers from unionizing.

epi-minimum-wage-family-03-12-2014-01a_sml_large

This is a graph from the Economic Policy Institute illustrating how a minimum wage increase would affect American families. After all, low wage workers are usually responsible for half of their family’s earnings. Not to mention, 1 out of 5 kids has a parent who’d be helped.

6. Raising the Minimum Wage Will Benefit Workers and Their Families– Even if you work full-time at $7.25 an hour, you’re lucky to retain $225 a week or $12,000 a year after taxes and deductions. This is precisely threshold of poverty for a single person. Not enough to pay rent or take care of dependent children. In fact, it’s barely surviving. In no state can a minimum wage worker afford a 2 bedroom unit at a fair market rent, working a standard 40 hour work week. Or at least without paying more than 30% of their income. But a lot of minimum wage workers are trying to pay rent and have dependent children to support sometimes by themselves, which is why many are on welfare and food stamps. In addition to the 1.3 million people working at minimum wage, raising it to $10 per hour would help 1.7 million working below it, and 21 million working above the minimum but below that amount. So you’re talking about a third of the workforce. 17.5 million children will also benefit since at least one of their parents will get a raise. Raising the minimum wage to $12 or $15 an hour could benefit even more. Not to mention since women and minorities are disproportionately represented in low wage jobs, raising the minimum wage could help close significant gender and racial pay gaps.

Here’s a snapshot on how many hours a person would have to work a week on $7.25 an hour to afford rent in the country. As you see, all the values are above 40 hours.

7. Raising the Minimum Wage Benefits the Economy– When workers are paid more, they’re more likely to spend more, especially when it comes to their own companies or hometowns. This explains why Henry Ford decided to pay his workers high wages to make and later buy his cars. Now Ford wasn’t a nice guy. But even he knew that workers are customers and the better a worker’s ability to participate in the economy as a consumer, the better off businesses and the economy will be as a whole. Though businesses might experience a dip in their profits, they’re able to pay higher wages without reducing employment because the savings can be substantial even if greater productivity and lower turnover may not fully pay for the minimum wage increase. Workers earning low wages are less committed to their jobs and less likely to stay for long. Employee turnover forces businesses to constantly find and train new workers, costing them significant money and time. Most of the time the new recruits may not be as optimally efficient during their training period as the experienced and productive workers they replaced. This can incur indirect costs to businesses from lost sales and imperfect customer service as new workers learn on the job. Add to that the fact a lot large retail companies like QuikTrip, Mercadona, Trader Joe’s, and Costco not only invest heavily in their employees, but also have the lowest prices in their industries, solid financial performance, and better customer service than their competitors. They also have better reputations, more work satisfaction, and less employee theft. 89% of small businesses in the country also pay their employees more than the federal minimum wage. Many small business owners believe higher wages level the playing field by preventing larger and less scrupulous firms from gaining a competitive advantage through very low labor costs. A strategy adopted by large corporations such as retail giants like T.J. Maxx, Walmart, Gap, and Ikea which have enjoyed record profits for years as well as employ 2/3 of all low wage workers. It’s no surprise why most small businesses support increasing the minimum wage to at least $12 an hour, some to even $15. In many ways, this makes a lot of sense since these large retail giants see workers as expendable while small businesses need to hold onto their best employees for as long as they can. Small businesses and large companies have proven that the key to their success is a combination of investment in the workforce and operational practices benefiting employees, customers, and the company.

This map show the lot of tipped workers many of whom can earn below minimum wage at a rate as low as $2.13 an hour + tips. But the system in paying tipped workers is so complex that these workers are subject to manipulation and abuse. Many have had their tips stolen by their bosses. And many live in poverty.

8. Current Tipped Minimum Wage Laws Are Terrible– According to the National Employment Law Project, an estimated 4.3 million people work in predominantly tipped occupations in the US. Employees classified as tipped workers if they receive at least $30 per month in tips and the current federal tipped worker minimum wage is $2.13 an hour, which is less than a third of the current federal minimum wage and has remained unchanged since the 1990s. While most tipped workers are in the restaurant industry, these include car wash workers, nail salon workers, valets, and airport attendants among others. Two thirds of tipped workers are women which makes the subminimum tipped wage a form of legislated pay inequity. Many tipped workers use these tips to support their families and to pay for higher education like student loans. Labor movements have called to eliminate the tipped minimum wage. 7 states already have and their tipped workers earn full minimum wage + tips which I strongly think is how tipped workers should be paid anyway. New York’s tipped minimum wage is $7.50 which is more than 83% its full minimum wage. And in Hawaii, tipped workers only earn less than half minimum wage if they receive more than generous tips. Other states and D.C. have also increased their tipped minimum wage above $2.13 an hour. But these rates aren’t equal and aren’t always fair. And personally, I find the idea of a subminimum tipped wage as absolutely unfair and ridiculous. Add to that the fact employers are required to make up the difference if a tipped worker’s base wage and tips doesn’t add to the full minimum wage. But this is a complex system that’s both difficult to comply with and largely unenforceable for these reasons:

It requires extensive tracking and accounting tip flows which even law-abiding employers find burdensome and difficult. This also allows less ethical employers to take advantage of this notorious complex system to illegally keep a portion of tips for themselves. Thus, this results in many tipped employees failing to receive the tips which they’re entitled to as well as have their income prone to manipulation and abuse.
Employers are allowed to average tips over the course of the work week and required to “top up” only if an employee’s average hourly earnings are less than the full minimum wage. They’re also allowed to estimate their workers’ tips in order to determine how much tax to withhold. Though this estimation approach isn’t sufficient for federal minimum wage compliance, many employers use this anyway though they don’t actually verify that their workers really do receive enough tips to bring them up to the full minimum wage. One southern New Jersey waitress told NELP, “They just take our total sales for the day—say it’s [a couple] hundred dollars—and they just [estimate] 15% of that.” Under the federal minimum wage law, this is illegal as well as overstates tips since many customers tip less than 15% and “a few times a week” a customer leaves no tip at all.
Tips are allowed to be pooled among various types of restaurant employees, giving a portion of those tips a server receives to legitimately be reallocated to other workers. This is a frequent and sometimes legally dubious practice at many businesses across the country as well as creates other opportunities for unethical employers to illegally skin off a portion of these tips for themselves or use to pay other employees whether they’re tipped or not.
Tipped workers who’ve experienced tip-stealing or other forms of wage theft are often reluctant to demand what they’re owed in fear of reprisal. Many of rely on their supervisors to schedule their shifts and make more or less in tips depending on what shifts they’re given. So complaining about being ripped off might lead to being scheduled on a less profitable shift or simply fired.
Tip stealing is rampant in industries that employ tipped workers who are often victims. Tip violations can take various forms but ultimately, they all result in tipped workers losing some of their tips to improve the employer’s bottom line. Some employers simply pocket a portion for tip pools while others can be less direct such as including non-tipped workers in the tip pool so they can be paid the lower minimum wage for tipped workers. Sometimes restaurants can take advantage of communication barriers among workers. The National Employment Law Project mentioned a waitress setting aside 15% of her tips for bussers but was expected to pay upfront and didn’t know whether they got it. They also discuss how waiters and waitresses in an upstate New York town exposed that managers had simply pocketed a portion of their tips they deducted, supposedly to share with the bussers. Additionally, they also talked about a Maryland waitress who already shared her tips with a captain, bussers, and host who finally contacted a union for help when the restaurant’s managers tried to take a portion of her tips for themselves as well. Several high profile lawsuits have recently been filed in response to these practices.
According to a 2014 report by the White House Economic Council and the Department of Labor, 1 in 10 surveyed tipped workers reported hourly wages below the federal minimum wage, tips included. This compared to 4% of all workers reporting earnings below minimum wage.
Compliance and enforcement challenges aside, despite requiring employers to make up the difference between tips and statutory minimum wage, it remains the case that customers are directly responsible for paying a portion of workers’ wages under this system. Thus, instead of being a gratuity for good service, having a subminimum tipped wage renders tips a customer-funded wage replacement and lowers labor costs for employers in a few select industries.
Work for tipped employees is inherently uneven and often unpredictable with most making substantial amounts on Friday and Saturday nights and much less other days of the week. In addition, bad weather, a bad economy, seasonal change, and a host of other factors can cause sudden drops in tipped income and economic insecurity. Also, tips can fluctuate widely and are often paid in cash.
Nationwide, the median tipped wage for servers is $10.11 per hour and $9.89 for waitresses. This despite claims from the restaurant industry that servers make a median between $16 and $22 per hour. The median wage for all workers nationwide is $16.48 per hour. Median wages for tipped workers in general are nearly 40% lower than overall median hourly wages.
46% of tipped workers depend on public assistance from the federal government which is well over the rate of 35.9% for all workers. 12.8% of tipped workers in the US live in poverty, including 15% of restaurant servers. In fact, servers experience poverty at well over twice the rate of the overall US workforce. They’re also only a quarter as likely as the workforce as a whole to receive employer-provided health insurance and are twice as likely to be uninsured. In states the federal tipped minimum of $2.13 per hour is implemented, 14% of tipped workers and 18% of servers live in poverty. In states where tipped workers are paid full minimum wage + tips, the poverty rate for them is 10.8% and 10.2% for servers.

Despite fierce contention in the media and in Congress, raising minimum wage has wide support among Americans. This NELP graph illustrates this.

9. Raising the Minimum Wage Has Wide Support– Most Americans feel the minimum wage is too low and are concerned about rising inequality. A 2014 Public Policy Polling shows that 80% of respondents don’t believe they could support themselves or their families on minimum wage. Other polls show that 7 in 10 Americans believe that income inequality is getting worse and nearly as many believe the government has a role to play in reducing the gap between rich and poor. A 2013 Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 57% of Americans want lawmakers to address income inequality. The Hart Research Associates shows that 75% of Americans support raising the minimum wage to $12.50 or more by 2020, including 92% of Democrats, 53% of Republicans, 73% of Independents, 80% of women, and 72% of non-college whites. On the small business front, support for increasing the minimum wage is 61% or 3 in 5. 63% of Americans support a $15.00 minimum wage. 71% of Americans favor eliminating the subminimum tipped waged to ensure tipped employees the same minimum wage as other workers. 82% support automatic annual minimum wage increases to ensure it keeps up with the annual costs of living. There is no reason why Congress should be unable to pass The Raise the Wage law right now, even with a Republican majority. At least as far as the American people are concerned.

10. Minimum Wage Laws Unfairly Exempt Disabled People– Under the current federal law, the Secretary of Labor can issue special wage certificates to employers allowing them to pay disabled workers a subminimum wage, sometimes just a few cents per hour and in segregated work environments where they often perform mundane tasks that don’t use their existing skills, interests, and talents. Yet, this exemption is based on an antiquated notion that encourages disabled workers to rely on Social Security Income, Medicaid, food stamps, or other government programs in order to get by. There are also current training and employment strategies to assist those with even the most significant disabilities to obtain integrated and meaningful work. And when paired with the right rehabilitative tools, training, and expectations, employees with disabilities can be as productive as their nondisabled peers. It’s also discriminatory since nobody should be paid below the minimum wage, disabled or not. And I say that even if the minimum wage is too low.

c9a69d01-32cf-4310-98a5-bef313c517b6image41

During the Gilded Age, those in blue collar professions worked in terrible working conditions with long hours and shitty pay. Many of these workers were children, some of them as old as kindergartners, mostly because their parents worked in the same place and didn’t earn enough to support a family. Still, we should also acknowledge that once workplace regulations and protections were in place, these large companies still earned money and lost nothing.

11. Blue Collar Jobs Used to Have Shitty Pay– Yes, I’m well aware that a lot of jobs in the service industry pay minimum wage or even less than that. And yes, I know many argue low wages are a cost-driven necessity for these jobs. On the other hand, you have a lot of blue collar jobs in mining and manufacturing which many people see as good paying jobs that many working class people lament leaving their hometowns or being outsourced. However, we should also acknowledge that blue collar jobs were the shit jobs of 19th and early 20^th century industrialization with dangerous conditions, long hours, and very low pay. And I mean like working in the mine for 14 hour days on a wage that can’t support your family. So now your eight year old has to drop out of school and go to work with you. It wasn’t unusual for whole families to work in a factory, including the kids who could be as young as four years old. Now we’re talking about a time when there were no workplace safety protections, no minimum wage, no workers’ rights, and institutionalized child labor. So what changed? Well, these workers organized into unions and went on strike for their rights, not just risking getting fired but also getting killed. And they faced staunch opposition from their robber baron bosses. Yet, once they got what they wanted, these blue-collar jobs were no longer seen as shit jobs by later generations. In fact, they were seen as jobs that could support a family and local economies benefitted just the same. But this shows us that the existence of shit jobs has more to do with an employer’s desire for cheap and expendable labor than what the job entails. Also, keeping workers dependent on them that they’ll put up with any abuse they give them. Not to mention, it supports the argument that low wages are a choice and not a cost-driven necessity. This is why a lot of corporations don’t want to raise the minimum wage or have their workers unionize. Not only that, but also that the shit jobs of today don’t have to be the shit jobs of tomorrow if we invest more in our workers. Raising the minimum wage is a good place to start.

12. Raising the Minimum Wage Saves Taxpayer Money– With wages being what they are, many low income workers have relied on public assistance because their paycheck can’t cover basic expenses. Even if they work for companies that could certainly afford to pay them a raise and benefits. American taxpayers spend an annual $153 billion in taxpayer money helping low wage earning families get by. This includes food stamps, Medicaid, CHIP, TANF as well as childcare subsidies and reduced-free school lunch programs. These programs help Americans meet a basic standard of living despite being targets for cuts and reductions. But having workers rely on public assistance has more to do with their employers paying them nothing more than poverty wages. Therefore, the government is indirectly subsidizing these companies that refuse to pay more. In fact, some companies like McDonald’s doesn’t even hide that half their workforce is on welfare and even encourage their employees to seek public assistance. Higher wages at work save taxpayer money since they lift more people out of poverty and produce more tax revenue. Sorry, libertarians, but cheap labor doesn’t come cheap.

This is a graph from the Economic Policy Institute that shows what the average minimum wage worker. Despite the stereotype of a teenage working after school, most minimum wage earners are adults who work full time as well as earn more than half of their family’s total income.

13. Low Wages Don’t Relieve Poverty– Contrary to what conservatives said about minimum wage jobs being for teens trying to earn extra money and experience, 89% of minimum wage workers are 20 years old or over while many are women and people of color. 37% of them have at least some college education. A third of them are over 30. Not to mention, 57% of minimum wage jobs are full-time and are unlikely filled by teens anyway. Some low wage industries don’t hire teens at all. That being said, statistics show a lot of low wage workers make nearly to over half their family’s income and 28% of them are parents. Sometimes they could be the family’s chief breadwinner, especially in single parent households. In every state working the minimum wage leaves a full-time worker with two kids below the poverty line. Not to mention, low-income wage earners may work multiple jobs which gives them even less time to spend with their kids as well as take care of themselves. At worst this could lead to a case like Maria Fernandes who worked so hard to make ends meet that she died from gas fumes in her car while napping between shifts. Fernandes was said to work 4 jobs and sometimes didn’t sleep for nearly a week. There were a couple occasions when single mothers were busted for leaving their kids unsupervised due to working 3 jobs and lack of available childcare options. Many low income workers have also experienced a considerable toll on their health while their children suffer in school and in life. No one who works for a living should have to live in or near poverty, especially full-time.

14. Raising the Minimum Wage Has Expert Support– In January 2014, over 600 economists across the country sent a letter to President Obama and congressional leaders arguing for a minimum wage raise to $10.10 by 2016 and then indexed to protect it against inflation. 7 of these were Nobel Prize winners. Even the Department of Labor supports this measure and think it’s a better idea than the current minimum wage laws we have now.

Here’s a map from the Wall Street Journal showing the minimum wage increases within each state. Of course, some pay below or have no minimum wage laws at all.

15. The Minimum Wage Has Been Raised in Localities and States– As of 2016, 29 states, D. C., as well as countless localities have raised the minimum wage, many in recent years. Some have even enacted measures to increase the minimum wage automatically with inflation and the costs of living. Not only that, but despite congressional Republican opposition, raising the wage in these states, D.C., and other jurisdictions weren’t just mere liberals pushing for it. Sure Washington State, Oregon, California, New York, Illinois, and Massachusetts voted for minimum wage increases. But so have red states like West Virginia, Arkansas, South Dakota, Nebraska, Alaska, Missouri, and Montana. Swing states like Florida, Michigan, Arizona, and Ohio have also raised their minimum wage. The fact minimum wage increases have passed in states of various political leanings should emphasize its widespread support among party lines.

Despite that many opponents of minimum wage increases argue that raising it would kill jobs or raise prices, keep in mind that none of them bring up this argument when it comes to skyrocketing CEO pay while regular wages remain stagnant. Seriously if your company can afford to give a CEO a generous severance package of a few million bucks, they can raise wages on their lowest paying workers. It’s not hard to see.

16. Opposition to Minimum Wage Increases Has More to Do with Self-Interest and Ideology– I know there are people who argue that raising the minimum wage would hurt the economy as well as kill jobs and raise prices. However, we need to understand that despite bipartisan and expert support, raising the minimum wage is still seen as a mainly liberal issue in the halls of Congress. Why? Because a lot of Republican politicians are bankrolled by big corporate lobbies who would rather use cheap labor, many of whom boast record profits and very much can afford to pay their workers more. There are a lot of libertarian and conservative economists and think tanks to back them up, some of whom want to abolish minimum wage which just makes workers even more prone to further exploitation. Believers in free market and trickle down economics usually see low wage jobs as a cost-driven necessity for economic prosperity. But employers often use this argument to justify not giving their impoverished employees a raise for decades, including your Gilded Age robber barons. Besides, no Fortune 500 CEO uses this argument when it comes to their own pay, which has skyrocketed dramatically. I mean the median CEO to worker pay ratio has risen from 20-to-1 in 1965 to 204-to-1 in 2015. Some of the highest paid CEOs make 300 times more than their typical employees. There are plenty of CEOs with million dollar salaries as well as stock options/grants, bonuses, benefits, and other perks. Hell, even bad CEOs receive generous severance packages whenever they left their companies in worse shape than when they took over. Yet, no libertarian or conservative argues that raising their pay will contribute to higher prices, job loss, or worse economies. Or why people end up paying higher prices and lose their jobs while worker wages remain stagnant. Yes, I know that a CEO’s job may require more skills, education, and talent than a lot of minimum wage occupations and that we’ve been through a recession. But it doesn’t convince me why conservatives and libertarians think raising the minimum wage will lead to economic ruin while raising CEO compensation won’t. Surely a company that can generously compensate its own CEO can pay its lowest earning workers $15 an hour, which is just small potatoes. So I think it’s more of a matter of corporate greed and self-interest.

This quote by Chris Rock perfectly explains why we need the federal government should raise the minimum wage. Most companies will not give their employees a raise by themselves. They need to be mandated to do it.

17. Large Employers Are Unlikely to Increase Wages on Their Own– While many conservatives and libertarians might tell us that workers would be better paid if it weren’t for all those pesky taxes regulations, it is not the case. The robber barons during the Gilded Age didn’t pay federal income taxes until the 16^th Amendment passed in 1916 and none of their tax dollars went to benefit their impoverished, overworked, and underpaid employees. Not to mention, their workplace policies are the reason why we have so many regulations and agencies to protect workers today. Besides, there are plenty of large corporations exploit federal tax loopholes so they don’t have to pay at all. And yet, conservatives and libertarians claim that if we get rid of the tax burden with social welfare programs and regulations, the “free market” will provide and take care of workers. Uh, excuse me but during the Gilded Age, those tax supported social programs didn’t exist and I’m pretty sure the free market didn’t take care of those low wage workers. Unions and the government policies they lobbied for while facing staunch opposition from these large companies. Besides, corporations lobby at all levels of government like crazy for direct and indirect public assistance like bailouts, subsidies, special tax breaks, deductions, tax and policy loopholes specifically designed for them, so-called “right to work” laws, and more. Say what you want about welfare, but I’d rather have my tax dollars go to assisting poor people than to a $3 billion a year corporate jet subsidy, a $200 billion Wall Street bailout, special tax breaks to hedge fund managers allowing them to pay a 15% tax rate, or a $70 billion a year home mortgage deduction with 77% going to people earning over $100,000. Sure corporations may like lower taxes and less regulations but even if they get what they want from their political lackeys, they will not give workers a raise unless they’re pressured to either by unions, government policy, or both. But wait, what about companies that pay workers better wages like Costco? Yes, there are big businesses that treat their workers generously like Costco but the Costcos in this world are the exception to the rule, especially in sectors that hire low wage workers. Therefore, federal government action to raise the minimum wage is necessary.

By raising the federal minimum wage to at least $10.10 an hour, corporations will only have to spend just 1/3 cent of every dollar spent on wages, according the the Congressional Budget office. So I’m confident these large companies with minimum wage labor can totally afford it.

18. Raising the Minimum Wage Is the Right Thing to Do– Economics aside, we should consider the fact that as earnings from corporations and the top 1% increased to dramatic new high, wages have stagnated or lost value even as productivity also rose. This could never be more true for low income workers. Raising the minimum wage will protect the most powerless in our workforce. Now could anyone say whether it’s fair for businesses to boast big profits while paying their employees poverty wages? Of course not. Is it fair for someone to live in poverty despite working a full-time job? Hell no. And if raising the minimum wage hurts their profits, why should I care? I mean a big company like McDonald’s is unlikely to lose business if they pay their workers $15 an hour since they’ll usually make a big profit anyway. Besides, most small businesses pay their staff more than minimum wage anyway since they can’t afford replacing them while retaining a competitive edge against their larger counterparts. As for price increases, well, they usually rise whether wages increase or not. And studies show that the increases won’t be much. What about jobs? If raising the wage results in reduced hiring and hours and more job loss by big companies, it won’t be due to economics. It would be more or less because of greedy executives who’d use just about any excuse to cut their workforces. Small businesses, on the other hand, are more worried about poor sales than being trounced by their big business counterparts than anything. Even if raising the minimum wage does hurt the economy like its critics have predicted, what about the concept of economic justice? I think that should matter. After all, labor is critical to a business’s success and workers who dedicate their time and effort into that company should get a bigger cut in that. Look, from how I see it, there’s no good reason to not raise the minimum wage. And above all, no one working a full time job should live in poverty. Even though I know that raising the wage won’t cure poverty any time soon, at least it can show a good example by making businesses invest more in their workforce. It’s about time.

86647-quotes-franklin-roosevelt-minimum-wage

As FDR said himself, nobody should work a full time job and still live in poverty. Workers have a right for a decent living wage which has been denied to many in the name of profit. So raising the minimum wage is the right thing to do. Besides, what’s wrong with economic justice for God’s sake?

Policing for Profit: The High Price of Low Taxation

Posted by historymaniacmegan on October 6, 2016

police-profit-asset-seizure

Nobody likes taxes. In fact, that’s why politicians always campaign on lowering them to lessen burdens on families. But we have to admit, if we didn’t pay them our governments couldn’t govern and provide services we need as a society. Believe me, our Founding Fathers found this out the hard way with the Articles of Confederation. The truth is, governments to raise money somehow and taxation is a fair way to do so. And I think a progressive tax system in which the rich are taxed more than the poor is sufficient since the rich earn more money. Yet, no matter what your tax bracket is, you still benefit from government services in some way. Still, if taxes are either too low or don’t provide enough revenue, then governments could be in trouble and sometimes cutting programs and staff may could lead to catastrophic results. Some local governments may find ways to enrich their coffers during times of financial pressure when other forms of revenue decline.

Guys, if you want to know why pot isn’t legal in California. Remember that its state police have funded efforts opposing marijuana legalization. And here we have two cops gloating over their booty.

In recent years, thousands of American cities and towns have relied on judicial fines and forfeiture to fund their governments, which is unhealthy for our democracy. Serious revenue declines, anti-tax popularity, local budget pressures have led municipalities to expand their use of revenue-generating law enforcement practices such as red light and speed cameras. However, public awareness hasn’t hit the national spotlight until the Department of Justice’s 2014 investigation into Ferguson, Missouri. We all know that the DOJ was looking into Ferguson due the police shooting of Michael Brown. But the racism and injustice in Ferguson was far worse. Between 2011 and 2013, the city collected 80% more fines and forfeitures by which point it raised 20% of its budget through this. Before the killing of Michael Brown, Ferguson anticipated that they’d collect an extra million through 2014 through police activity, raising a total of 25% through fines. This despite being home to a Fortune 500 company Edison Electric, a successfully revitalized commercial district, and an office park filled with corporate tenants that Ferguson could’ve taxed for all their worth. Well, if it weren’t for an amendment from the 1980s requiring citywide referendum approval on local tax increases, licenses, or fees. Even then, it wouldn’t be difficult since I think Ferguson’s 67% black population would’ve approved since they pay most city taxes anyway while the wealthy are barely taxed at all. Seriously, Ferguson’s tax system is incredibly unfair. Cities and their police departments may see increasing their dependence on fines as a viable strategy for funding their governments but it corrupts the justice system and brings great harm to the people it serves.

So far, John Oliver has been among the only people in the mainstream media to show the problem with profit policing. This one pertains to municipal violations which can screw the poor and minorities.

Profit Policing Is Not Normal nor Financially Healthy – For economically healthy municipalities, even when the absolute dollar total of fines and forfeitures may be large, they still represent a small proportion local revenue. Places like New York City, Washington D.C. and San Francisco only raise about 1-2% of their budget through civil penalties, which is about the norm. And that’s how it should be. Because most cities run on progressive tax revenue like income and property taxes. Ferguson doesn’t. In their budget, regressive taxes like sales and utilities account for almost 60% of the city’s revenue followed by municipal fines at 20%. By contrast, progressive taxes account for just under 12%. This means that Ferguson extracted more revenue from African American renters than from those owning the homes themselves. This is not how a local government should generate revenue and it’s no wonder that Ferguson has had trouble paying its bills since it incurred a debt of $3.7 trillion. And it had its credit rating downgraded to junk status by Moody’s in 2015. Even worse towns around Ferguson relied on fines for over 30% of their revenue. 3 towns in Louisiana reported collecting more from fines than from taxes with Henderson collecting $3.73 in fines for every tax dollar. Relying on fines to keep municipalities afloat isn’t normal because relying on bad behavior to balance local budgets isn’t financially viable. Making even less sense is jailing people who owe less money than it cost to incarcerate them, leading to bigger deficits as well as a cycle of dependency. As the Brennan Center’s Justice Center put it, “Having taxpayers foot a bill of $4,000 to incarcerate a man who owes the state $745 or a woman who owes a predatory lender $425 and removing them from the job force makes sense in no reasonable world.”

When law enforcement is most concerned with creating revenue from citations, protecting and serving the community is no longer a priority. Instead, the community is exploited with very harmful results. This is why for profit policing is bad.

2. Profit Policing Undermines Justice– Fines and civil forfeitures were set as disciplinary measures, not as a municipal fundraiser. They were never meant to contribute significant revenue to local governments. But this is exactly what happened in Ferguson that the city manager and police chief discussed using tickets to meet revenue benchmarks. Not to mention, police were encouraged to issue traffic tickets who were evaluated and promoted on how much cash they could gin up. In Saint Louis County, half the judges had incentives to find people guilty and coerce payment through threat of jail. Not to mention, civil asset forfeiture becomes big which results in prosecutors and police departments to adjust budgets and tactics in order to prioritize fundraising over public safety and justice. Often this could lead to police being better trained to pursue seizures and take advantage of lax standards for the department’s benefit. It’s very clear that whenever law enforcement is a fundraising tool, the justice system is severely compromised. Because when you use law enforcement to raise funds, then it’s not about promoting safety or justice. It’s about making money through people breaking the law which can hurt the nation’s most vulnerable people.

When it comes to policing for profit, racial minorities are often the victims and are disproportionately targeted. Here is Valerie Whitner from Pagedale, Missouri who along with her husband, accumulated $2,800 in fines for issues on their modest home. These include having chipping paint on a downspout, not having a screen door on the rear entrance of their home, and having weeds growing in their vegetable garden. Sometimes they were even issued fines for not having their home “up to code” without explanation. They were even threatened with demolition and were forced to take out pay day loans to keep their head above water and make mandated repairs.

3. Profit Policing Discriminates Against Minorities– While Ferguson had a cash-starved municipal government, they were hardly a poor city. Its government could’ve easily solved their money problems by taxing local businesses, one of which is a Fortune 500 company that makes $24 billion a year. The fact Ferguson relied on cops and courts to extract fines and fees to generate revenue was the result of more than a century of public policy choices designed to protect largely white business and property owners while passing the bills along to disproportionately black renters and local residents. Given Ferguson’s extraordinary climate of police harassment, you can guess who got slapped with the fines. Despite that Ferguson is only 67% black and sees plenty of white commuters, 85% of all traffic stops involved black motorists and were twice as likely to be searched and arrested than their white counterparts. This despite when searched, whites were 2/3 more likely to be caught with some sort of contraband. Municipal violations for not mowing the lawn or putting out trash in the wrong place at the wrong time were overwhelmingly issued to blacks. 95% of citations for jaywalking and 93% if arrests were issued to blacks. We should also account that Ferguson’s mayor, city manager, and police chief were white. Minorities are more likely to live below the poverty line. And it’s not just in Ferguson, but in a lot of communities with white leaders and a large minority population. You might know the case of Philando Castile who was shot by a cop in St. Anthony, Minnesota. But you may not know was that this guy had been pulled over by police 52 times within the last 14 years of his life and accrued over $6,000 in fines. Now he must’ve been an epically bad driver or racially profiled on an average of once every 3 months. It’s very clear that St. Anthony relied on Castile’s and his black neighbors’ money to balance their budget. Brennan Center estimates that 10 million people owe more than $50 billion in debt due to their involvement in the criminal justice system. 60% of this total is owed by blacks and Latinos with average totals around $7,000. That said, when police need money, it’s usually minorities who suffer.

splc-news-items-splc-lawsuit-closes-debtors-prison-in-alaba-1280x720

This woman is Harriet Cleveland who couldn’t afford to pay her $152 fine in traffic violations that she ended up spending jail time. This despite that she tried all she can to pay for it, even going without food and utilities. Her story illustrates what happens when poor people can’t afford to pay their fines right away. It’s sad and very exploitative.

4. Profit Policing Screws the Poor– Whenever cities use municipal fines and fees to generate local revenue, the poorest residents usually suffer the most. Not only are often targeted by police like in Ferguson (since many are minorities), but they’re among the least likely to afford the fines. In 2014, 75% of all Ferguson residents had active outstanding arrest warrants. Most of these involved people who couldn’t afford to pay. According to Arch City Defenders, citizens failing to appear or pay fines that were “frequently triple their monthly income” were liable to be jailed, sometimes for as long as 3 weeks. Those with outstanding warrants were rendered ineligible for most forms of public assistance and government-provided social services. This combined with public housing exclusion, often send residents out on the streets. Municipalities can also compound financial hazards for those fined by contracting with private probation collectors who can add additional, legally enforceable fees and interest to the amount the court has required. It doesn’t help those who can’t pay fines, can lose their licenses along with their jobs.

While running into a stop sign in California results in a $35 fine, the violator could end up paying up to $238 in Riverside County. This graph breaks it down.

5. Profit Policing Results in Higher Payments– This means that municipalities relying on fines to sustain their budgets might result in violators paying more money than originally owed. Even for a seemingly minor offense. This could happen in a number of ways:

Initially starting with a reasonable fine but tacking on surcharges and fees-For instance, a $35 fine for running a California stop sign can balloon into $238.00. San Diego is notorious for this since they could tack on as many as 10 surcharges with a $35 speeding ticket like a $40 state penalty assessment, $36 court penalty assessment, a $20 court construction fee, a $8 state surcharge, a $16 DNA identification, a $35 criminal conviction fee, a $40 court operations fee, a $4 emergency medical air transportation penalty, and $1 night court fee. All adding to $235.
Charging outrageous fines from the get go– Examples include charging $255.000 for driving over less than 25 miles over the speed limit, $500 for party noise, and $1000 on parents for juvenile graffiti. Some can consist of outrageous fines like $450 for stealing $5 of food.
Payment Plans– Those who can’t afford traffic tickets the first time may take this route in some states. But they can make paying off tickets more difficult and more expensive. In Illinois, people falling behind in payments can get hit with a 30% fee. And New Orleans charges $100 to start one.
Probation Fees– 44 states charge people various fees for being on probation. Many of these are handled by companies like Judicial Correction Services which charge a $10 set up fee and $140 per month. Those who couldn’t bring the entire amount had to report to JCS offices more frequently, sometimes multiple times a week. When people fell behind, JCS continued to collect its own fees which effectively extended their probations and guarantee the company more money. When people couldn’t pay, employees threatened to revoke their probation which resulted in jail time. It’s an unconscionable practice that should be outlawed.
Private Collectors– Not only they can collect on tickets but can add additional legally-enforceable fees and surcharges. They can also threaten people who don’t pay with jail. Sure they may charge the courts nothing. But they can charge people on probation a fortune.

The town of Pagedale, Missouri is a notorious example on how profit policing can lead to ordinances allowing fines be issued for very ridiculous reasons. Its police force has aggressively targeted its citizens for harmless conditions like screen door holes, chipped paint, weeds in garden, mismatched drapes, high grass, and you name it. Let’s just say we know Pagedale issued ticketing on these ridiculous rules in order to fill its coffers. Basically its motto would be, “If you can’t ticket violations, invent them.”

6. Profit Policing Results in More Oppression and Hostility– Those who live in municipalities that depend on fines to balance budgets are more likely to be stopped by police and fined. Sometimes this could be for the usual traffic violation. But sometimes it could be for things people really shouldn’t be fined for. For instance, in Pagedale, Missouri, residents can be ticketed and fined for having mismatched curtains, walking on the left-hand side of a crosswalk, wearing pants below one’s waist, having holes in window screens, having a barbecue in front of the house, and more ridiculous ordinances that you can find in a wacky law listing. In Ferguson, 75% of its residents have outstanding arrest records. Municipalities with profit policing are more likely to have a more militarized force as well as higher police brutality against minorities.

Policing for profit often creates distrust between law enforcement and communities. Because citizens being sponged are more likely to think that the system no longer works for them. And in a way, they’re right.

7. Profit Policing Leads to More Community Distrust- While trust between law enforcement and the public may be difficult without profit-driven policing practices, using fines to fund municipal governments erodes it even further. Police are sworn to protect the public and work with local communities to solve problems pertaining to crime and disorder. It’s one thing for cops to use excessive force on unarmed black people and get away with it due to systematic racism. But it’s even more unconscionable for cops to harass residents with absurd systems of fines and penalties on mostly extremely minor offenses. Making police revenue generators for cities and towns diverts them from their traditional role of community guardians and protectors. Not to mention, people have been taught to believe that local governments and police are supposed to work for them, not the other way around. Ferguson isn’t a feudal domain where police vassals can harass the peasantry as they please. Such actions lead to a growing distrust between the police and the community, especially among poor and minority citizens. And that’s not good.

Here’s a diagram from Arch City Defenders on Ferguson’s terrible court system to its African American residents. Notice how it’s a vicious cycle and how the people in charge seem to be white. I think imprisonment for debt isn’t even legal.

8. Profit Policing May Not Be Legal– For many people below the poverty line, facing for being unable to pay a speeding ticket can be a very real possibility. Municipalities significantly funded through fines rely on judges to find people guilty and force them to pay or serve jail time. However, the federal government has already established that judges can’t send people to jail for being too poor to pay fine through a 1983 Supreme Court case. Furthermore, debtors’ prisons were outlawed nearly 200 years ago.

Civil asset forfeiture is when police take your stuff on suspicion that it was used in a crime, which they can do whatever the hell they want with it. Though seen as a crime fighting tool, there have been so many cases where innocent people have had their stuff taken away from them. And many had a hell of a time getting it back through the court system. Here’s how hard it is to fight civil forfeiture.

9. Profit Policing Leads to Civil Forfeiture Abuse– Civil forfeiture is when police take people’s money and property without making an arrest. Under this, police don’t have to formally charge owners with a crime, just suspect their assets are tied in some way to illicit activity. And forfeiture is mostly approved without definitive proof of alleged criminal ties. Such property can include cars, homes, and even businesses. Yet, once government takes control of the person’s property, it’s typically sold off sending proceeds back to police departments and legal offices working the case. It’s regularly touted as a crime fighting tool like targeting wealthy criminal finances who may not carry all their cash in the same car. But since there’s a lot of booty potential for cops through civil forfeiture seizures, there’s a strong incentive to pursue this process aggressively and abuse these laws and exploit innocent owners’ lack of safeguards. This is especially true when a police department’s aim is the bottom line. Sometimes they could use it as a slush fund. In 2014, the Departments of Justice and Treasury deposited more than $5 billion into forfeiture funds, up from less than a $1 billion within the last decade. There are countless horror stories of law-abiding citizens who’ve gotten hopelessly entangled in the process. In a couple Texas border towns, it wasn’t unusual for police to pull over minority drivers before seizing whatever money and valuables in their possession. After that, they’d coerce them to sign their possessions over under forfeiture laws by threatening jail on trumped up charges or taking their children. And many must go through a complex legal maze to get it back. But due to lack of transparency and public reporting there’s not a lot of data to tell exactly how lucrative or common civil asset forfeiture is in each state. This has to be fairly common in places like Ferguson. Guess who ends up being victimized by this. Still, civil forfeiture is basically state sponsored theft and should be banned.

Civil asset forfeiture has been frequently abused by police in recent years. The DOJ in 2014 lists money taken from civil asset forfeiture at $5 billion up from nearly $1 billion in 2004.

10. Profit Policing May Not Be Constitutional– The 8^th Amendment bans cruel and unusual punishment as well as excessive bail and fines. Since profit policing can lead to higher fines and fees that people are unable to pay, it’s most likely unconstitutional. Since profit policing happens in minority communities, you can say it violates the Equal Protection Clause that bans discriminatory punishment as well as the Due Process Clause that requires neutral administration of criminal law. Then there’s civil forfeiture which I think is also unconstitutional under the 4^th Amendment that protects citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures. So expect it in the Supreme Court.

When police departments are more directed to raising municipal revenue, law enforcement accountability goes out the window. Not only that, but leaves bad cops on the streets free to extort money from poor minority citizens as they please. Or confiscate people’s stuff if they think it’s involved in a crime. Like this guy.

11. Profit Policing Hurts Police Accountability– I am aware that police accountability hasn’t been very good lately due to how cops who use excessive force against unarmed black people get away scot free. And I know every police force has its bad apples who make the good cops look bad. However, when budgetary whims replace peacekeeping as law enforcement’s central motivation, then you can forget about police accountability altogether. Because when a police department’s main aim is profit, bad cops are more likely to get away with bad behavior. Not just “bad” as in morally corrupt and racist, but also in a job performance sense. For instance, Ferguson’s Darren Wilson who shot Michael Brown was fired from a previous job. Actually the whole police force Jennings, Missouri was disbanded for being awful. Not to mention, in Ferguson police were even encouraged to ticket and collect fines as well as were rewarded for it in career advancement. The demands were so intense that the police department had little concern with how officers did this, just that they do it a lot. Didn’t matter if their stops had little relation to public safety or questionable legal basis. Didn’t matter if the cops in question were menaces to public safety. Only cops who failed to issue an average of 28 tickets a month were disciplined. I’m sure Darren Wilson wasn’t one of them. At the same time, white police officers frequently fixed parking tickets for friends. Let’s just say it leaves so much room for corruption. After the Brown shooting, the DOJ found the Ferguson Police Department to be an abysmal failure. They reported, ““Ferguson’s law enforcement practices are shaped by the City’s focus on revenue rather than by public safety needs. This emphasis on revenue has compromised the institutional character of Ferguson’s police department, contributing to a pattern of unconstitutional policing, and has also shaped its municipal court, leading to procedures that raise due process concerns and inflict unnecessary harm on members of the Ferguson community.”

These are charts of St. Louis County municipalities with the biggest increases in non-traffic cases since 2010. Those who can’t afford to pay fines often have the system stacked against them. Meanwhile, the judges may often let their friends off easy.

12. Profit Policing Hurts Judicial Accountability– As we all know in scandals involving privatized prisons, whenever the courts’ aims is to increase revenue, the justice system is severely compromised. It is the same when it comes to municipal fines as well as “Cash for Kids.” Prior to the Michael Brown shooting, the city of Ferguson’s court system was ranged in the top 8 in Saint Louis County by generating more than $1 million in revenue during 2010. Their courts exceeded over $2 million in 2012. At the same time Ferguson Judge Ronald J. Brockmeyer owed $172,646 in back taxes and let his white friends off easy while extracting fees from Ferguson’s poor and black population. And many had the system rigged against them since they couldn’t afford a lawyer or pay a fine. Some even faced jail time. He’s had since been removed.

1200x630_289774_violence-erupts-in-ferguson-after-gran

What happened in Ferguson after Darren Wilson got off on shooting Michael Brown is a good example what could happen if a town has been under profit policing for far too long. This protest wasn’t just about police brutality they’ve put up for years but also on how often African Americans were exploited through other means. It was a disaster waiting to happen.

13. Profit Policing Hurts Public Safety– When revenue is the bottom line in profit policing, police departments focus more on issuing fines on petty offenses for municipal revenue than keeping people safe. It should surprise no one that some well-known police brutality victims were initially stopped for something preposterously minor. This illustrates how profit policing and law enforcement use of excessive force are clearly linked. North Charleston’s Walter Scott was stopped for a busted taillight before Michael Slager gunned him down. Having a busted taillight isn’t even in a crime in South Carolina. And this guy had a record for gratuitously using a taser. Sandra Bland and Samuel DuBose were stopped for minor traffic violations in Texas and Cincinnati like failing to use a turn signal or missing a front license plate. Philando Castile was also stopped for traffic violations for a whopping 53^rd time. Wilson stopped Michael Brown for shoplifting and jaywalking. The thing is, when profit policing is in place, abuse is rampant while public safety is compromised. Communities distrust the police who they don’t think work for them. Some may even show a lack of respect for the law and may refuse to cooperate with police. Bad police are allowed to patrol on the streets with guns and may even get away with police brutality. Minorities and poor people are continuously screwed and preyed upon. It is no wonder that Ferguson, Missouri was one police shooting away from civil unrest. We have to accept that public safety depends on the community’s relationship with law enforcement. Municipalities can’t protect their populace if they’re using police to fleece from them since it creates a toxic environment.

Here’s a letter from Ferguson’s mayor to one of the city’s policemen for his service. This pertains to him issuing tickets. Notice how they emphasized how he contributed to the city’s budget.

14. Profit Policing Corrupts Governments– Look, I know that many municipal governments use their police departments to enhance their coffers because they’re financially struggling and don’t want to raise taxes, especially when taxes would make more financial sense. However, when a government backs profit policing, they’re clearly not acting in the people’s best interests. This was certainly the case with Ferguson but other communities in Saint Louis County were demonstrably worse. Then there’s the fact many of these towns enacted ordinances just for the sake of generating more revenue through fines, especially if they’re unrelated to traffic and not technically illegal elsewhere. Ferguson’s were also skewed since their city manager congratulated the police chief for record citation revenue. While Ferguson’s cops held anti-black views so did their municipal employees as the DOJ found out through various e-mails mocking blacks through speech and familiar stereotypes. Most of Ferguson’s decisionmakers believed African Americans lacked personal responsibility despite that black residents made incredible efforts to pay their fines disproportionately handed out to them. White city officials meanwhile, condoned a striking lack of personal responsibility as the cause.

policing-for-profit-1

The Unforgivable Sins of Fox News

Posted by historymaniacmegan on September 27, 2016

faux

I know what I have to say is controversial but I don’t care. I’m a political liberal and I know that many people won’t agree with me on my political views (well, many people I know anyways). So it goes without saying that I don’t get my information from Fox News or rely on any source that uses it, except if it’s a fake news show on Comedy Central. I don’t hide my disgust for a so-called 24-hour “news” network which I think functions more as a right-wing propaganda machine than a proper news organization. Yet, just because I may criticize Fox News doesn’t mean that I don’t think other media outlets have problems for the state of the American media is a very sorry one indeed. It’s just that Fox News is a very special case in which the very principles of journalistic integrity like objective reporting and commentary are thrown out the window in exchange for using appeals to emotion to get their message across.

This basically sums up what I think about Fox News. “Fox News. Fair and Balanced. Unless you have read a book or anything ever.” Yeah, that’s basically it.

Is the media biased? Well, that’s without question since all news outlets are run by humans but whether many of our TV news networks are liberally biased or not is anyone’s guess but apparently Fox News believes this. Of course, while Fox News’s motto is “Fair and Balanced,” everyone should know that it’s certainly biased toward the right and bases it’s whole existence on being the Republican Party’s mouthpiece (though claiming they’re an unbiased primary source of information) when most news outlets are just out to attract viewers and sponsors as well as make a profit. Sure MSNBC may have some liberally biased programming, but Joe Scarborough has his own show there and Pat Buchanan tends to drop by sometimes. Oh, and when Fox News is owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., they’re also owned by a conglomerate called Comcast who doesn’t support net neutrality. In fact, most American media outlets are by corporate conglomerates and many have corporate sponsors who may want to use a news program to push their own agenda. And that the Republican Party has absolutely no problem attracting big corporate donors since they are the party of big business. So to be fair, while MSNBC may be a liberal version of Fox News it is only more or less left-of-center one since there is a limit to how liberal they can be yet they do have a tendency to copy some features from it. You can’t say the same with other networks who may be deemed “liberal” just because they tend to say things that Fox News disagrees with.

screen-shot-2014-03-05-at-9-38-22-am-1280x701

Fox News has often been the butt of late night comedians especially under Jon Stewart’s tenure on The Daily Show. And with Stephen Colbert, Stewart has harshly criticized the network and reduced it to the kind of destructive joke it actually is.

Another thing which irks me about Fox News is not just their politics but how they tend to politicize everything to the point of absurdity. Look, criticizing the President, politicians you don’t agree with, or social policies are one thing. Though I may not be comfortable with Fox News putting down major demographics with hateful slander but I understand they do that to pander to a certain audience since politics and prejudices tend to go hand in hand (and history has a lot of examples of this). Sometimes it’s hard to disagree with a social issue without insulting a whole demographic (with or without intention). However, sometimes they tend to politicize things that really shouldn’t be like the Muppets. Really, the Muppets? Not only that, but they address anything they disagree with in the most juvenile way possible like yelling or screaming until the other person shuts up. While I do think people have a right to disagree with each other, I don’t think adults should attack people through utter childishness as well as inciting unreasonable anger and fear, which has created a hostile political environment where the rational thinking conservative is rarely ever seen and you can’t even disagree with one who doesn’t lash out at you. For instance, I may say rich people and corporate heads need to pay more in taxes and be held more accountable, but that doesn’t mean I hate rich people for simply being rich (I don’t). But someone who may take Fox News seriously may think otherwise.

This graphic from Talking Points Memo shows a rough sketch about Fox News. Most of its viewers are over 65. Yet, strangely 25% of them think that everything they report is true. They’ve also been said to be more misinformed than from other stations.

Look, I know many people might be calling this blog post liberally biased or as inspired by the “liberal media” or my liberal views. But since the 24 hour cable news network’s advent in 1996, Fox News has been among the most popular and one of the most trusted sources among Americans, according to some studies. However, it’s well known that Fox News one of the most prolific conservative news outlets with a staunch loyal following. Yet, if anyone thinks I’m bashing Fox News because of their political slant, you’re sorely mistaken. In fact, it’s not just Fox’s status as a conservative news station that roils me. It’s much more than that. For its duration, Fox News has been harshly criticized not just by liberals and programs like the Daily Show and other late night shows, but also by highly regarded experts. As for me, I see Fox News as way less trustworthy than sites like Wikipedia. Seriously. As far as I am concerned, Fox News is not a legitimate news source as well as been a major disgrace to our country. And here I have a list explaining why.

It’s no secret that Fox News is a conservative propaganda machine. But they’ve been known to mix in their conservative editorial content in their news reporting doesn’t adhere to journalistic principles. They’ve also been openly promoting Republican candidates.

Political Ideologized News Coverage– Despite their slogan being “Fair and Balanced,” everyone knows that Fox News has a strong conservative political bias that it doesn’t even try to hide. We know its reputation as a strongly conservative news outlet is a major reason why their viewers tune in. Network employees noted how executives exert a degree of control over its daily reporting content. As former producer Charles Reina explains, “The roots of Fox News Channel’s day-to-day on-air bias are actual and direct. They come in the form of an executive memo distributed electronically each morning, addressing what stories will be covered and, often, suggesting how they should be covered. To the newsroom personnel responsible for the channel’s daytime programming, The Memo is the Bible. If, on any given day, you notice that the Fox anchors seem to be trying to drive a particular point home, you can bet The Memo is behind it.” However, it’s one thing for a news outlet to have a political ideological slant. Putting conservative editorializing within news stories neither fair and balanced nor ethically responsible journalism. Neither is having network executives coach reporters on how report the news. Look, I may not like how the mainstream media does journalism, but I think striving for objectivity and being open to all viewpoints are worthy media endeavors. Fox News doesn’t even try to hold up to journalistic principles and resorts to ideological based reporting. Otherwise known as propaganda. Even when Fox tries to make seem like it’s “fair and balanced” with having people like Alan Colmes on the network, the so-called “liberals” aren’t really that liberal. This opens the doorway for all other misuses in journalism.

Fox News has relied and popularized a lot of conspiracy theories throughout its run. Here is Glenn Beck using his blackboard conspiracy theory illustrations which depict involving ACORN, Obama, and Woodrow Wilson. Yes, it’s crazy. Also, Jon Stewart would mercilessly parody this.

2. Promoting Unsubstantiated Conspiracy Theories– As a conservative political media network, Fox News has had major role in hosting, promoting, and repeating conspiracy theories. Fox News has endorsed numerous unsubstantiated claims about democratic politicians and other people they don’t like. Featured unsubstantiated claims have revolved around Obama being a Muslim, Obama not being born in the US, Hillary’s role in Benghazi, the “liberal” mainstream media, “liberal” Hollywood, 9/11 Trutherism, Hillary’s declining health, the murder of Antonin Scalia, global warming hoax, Obamacare “death panels,” the “gay agenda,” FEMA detention camps, Spongebob’s homosexuality, anchor babies, Google censoring Clinton body counts, war on Christmas, war on Christianity, anti-capitalist Muppets, gun confiscation, moon landing hoax, Planned Parenthood abortion factories, ACORN voter fraud operations, big government and unions destroying everything, and much more. They’ve even featured a lot of conspiracy theorists like Orly Taitz, Alex Jones, and many of their news hosts like Glenn Beck. Still, trying to pass off conspiracy theories as factual information is irresponsible and not becoming of any credible news organization. Because a lot of them are based on speculation, personal bias, gossip, and urban legend. And most of them have been thoroughly debunked, sometimes through a process known as simple logic as well as research supported by facts. Yet, since Fox News cares more about their conservative agenda, it all depends on whether these theories suit them.

Fox News has reported the news by perpetuating very harmful stereotypes that pertain to race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, income, and culture. Here Obama is calling Fox News on saying how it makes an effort to suggest that poor people are sponges, leeches, and lazy. Well, turns out that Obama is right. However, their racial crime coverage is appalling, especially with how they slander Black Lives Matter.

3. Perpetuating Offensive Stereotypes– Whether it pertains to all Muslims as backward and violent religious fanatics who are all suspected terrorists by default even if they’re American, blacks as promiscuous gangbanging deadbeat dads and drug addled welfare moms, illegal border crossers having anchor babies, Hispanics as undocumented criminals, LGBT people as depraved pervs, spoiled millennial brats, poor people being unemployed moochers on welfare, and feminazis, Fox News never misses an opportunity to disparage a person they don’t like, particularly if they’re not white, rich, Christian, or male. It doesn’t help that most of their reporting staff is white. Fox’s coverage of racial crime is particularly appalling which doesn’t hesitate to include racial overtones. Not that general racial crime coverage isn’t racist because it certainly is if you watch the local news. But racial crime coverage on Fox News stands out since the racism doesn’t seem accidental or just consist of daily showings of black mugshots. In fact, Fox seems to perpetuate racial crime stereotypes with stories they choose to cover and their frequent use of racial identifiers. They even actively exploit the race angle by speculating that otherwise non-racial events are examples of racist hate crime. Case in point focuses to the network framing the murder of an Australian teen in Oklahoma as a racist hate crime by three young black men. In reality, the guy was twenty-three, the murderers were teens, one of the killers was white, and the kids admitted to killing him just for kicks. Sure it was cold-blooded murder and these kids were sick but it’s far from a racist hate crime. More like the white victim just having to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. Not to mention, the local District Attorney told Greta Van Susteren there was no evidence the crime had anything to do with race. On that same program, Fox featured the murder of a white WWII veteran by two black suspects in Spokane. Though a reporter said the murder looked more like a “random beating” or “possible robbery,” Van Susteren asked whether it was racially motivated. It wasn’t. Later, Pat Buchanan would use this story to say that “racial hate crimes [are] 40 times more prevalent in the black community than the white community, and nobody talks about it” with dubious statistics to boot. Sorry, Pat, but white racial hate crime against blacks is far more prevalent. You can find that out in your American History book. But it’s not the only case Fox has tried to question whether a crime with a black killer and white victim was racially motivated. By contrast, the network would swear that George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin in self-defense when race certainly played a role. Even worse, Sean Hannity tried to connect Martin’s killing to the New Black Panther Party while Geraldo Rivera blamed Martin for his own death because he was wearing a hoodie. Another incidence of Fox News racism revolves Peter Doocy describing Department of Justice findings of racial bias where he emphasized that then Attorney General Eric Holder “floated the possibility” of dissolving Ferguson’s police department as a result. Steve Doocy linked the DOJ’s report and Holder’s response the shooting of two Ferguson police officers and added, “a new wave of violence comes one week after Attorney General Eric Holder vowed to dismantle that city’s police department,” questioning whether it was “what he wanted.” In a way he seems to blame Holder for the police shootings even though nobody at DOJ had any plans to dissolve Ferguson’s Police Department. No wonder Jon Stewart criticized Fox News of ignoring the realities of systematic racism those in Ferguson were protesting. Though we all know that Fox News refers Black Lives Matter as a bunch of lawless and violent thugs they’re clearly not. They even go as far as saying that BLM advocates cop-killing when the group promotes nothing of the sort. They also say that the unarmed black victims were violent thugs and that the cops’ actions were justified. Doesn’t help that the network has Bill O’Reilly commenting how life under the infamous dehumanizing institution of slavery wasn’t really that bad (newsflash: it was). It’s clear Fox News thinks that racism doesn’t exist anymore when it surely does. Let’s just say if you believe that, then you’re a racist. Look, I know that Fox might be playing to an audience that’s probably full of racists to begin with. But Fox News’ propping of offensive stereotypes has misinformed countless white viewers and made race issues much more controversial.

This is James O’Keefe. He made a video depicting a sting on ACORN dressed up as a pimp for interviews. He showed a video that was deceptively edited to show the negative to show negative responses in an effort to conduct character assassination against the community organizing nonprofit. He’s been sued by one of the employees for defamation.

4. Creating Scandals Through Unethical Practices– Fox News has been particularly insidious in trying to demonize liberals and Democrats as well as other people they don’t like, especially Barack Obama and his administration. During the 2008 election as well as Obama’s presidency, the network has tried to smear the president as a scary black man out to get white people. They have done so through taking quotes and videos out of context as well as ramming so-called scandals down viewers’ throats no matter how twisted the story may be. When the NAACP charged the Tea Party of racism, Fox and their friends aired a two minute clip of Shirley Sherrod talking about an incident with a white farmer from decades ago who’d later become a close family friend. What she told was a story about overcoming prejudices and reconciliation. But Fox only aired part of the clip and branded it as racism. She was fired. Another insidious case concerns how Fox News demonized ACORN, an agency that works for poor and minority interests. This involved a young man named James O’Keefe who dressed up as a pimp and went to several ACORN offices asking for advice and recorded the visits. The videos were edited only to show negative responses and make it seem like O’Keefe was actually dressed as a pimp for the interviews. He has since been arrested and convicted of breaking into a government office on false pretenses. As of 2010, he’s also being sued by ACORN employee, Juan Carlos Vera for being falsely portrayed in a heavily edited video to be conspiring with O’Keefe to transport undocumented immigrants as prostitutes. Then there’s Fox News taking small clips of Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s sermons and twisting them into making him an anti-American, anti-white madman. In an impassioned speech, Wright referenced comments from former U.S. Ambassador Edward Peck on Fox News who referred to 9/11 as chickens coming home to roost, which Fox News used to make him look like an Al-Qaida supporter. In other sermons, Wright would criticize the US on several fronts including nuking Japan during WWII, the Vietnam War, support of apartheid, the Tuskegee experiment, Iran-Contra, the Iraq War, and AIDS. Save for Wright’s claim about the government starting AIDS, most of them are thoroughly backed up. Furthermore, unlike most Fox News pundits and GOP politicians, Wright is a former Marine who’s also served as a cardiopulmonary technician in the US Navy. In fact, he worked for the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, Maryland and was part of the medical team charged with caring for President Lyndon B. Johnson. If you need proof, there’s a photo depicting him tending to LBJ right behind an I.V. pole and standing in front of then White House Press Secretary Bill Moyers. There’s also a thank you letter. So it’s fairly pointless and shameful to attack this man’s patriotism. But you wouldn’t know that from how Fox News depicts him. What Fox News did to Sherrod, Wright, and ACORN was not journalism but deliberate attempts at character assassination through dubious means. What Fox has considerably hurt their reputations and earned them notoriety they didn’t deserve.

With his heavily right-wing militia buddies, Cliven Bundy squared off in an aggressively anti-law enforcement standoff against federal agents. This was over that the Feds were ordered to confiscate his cattle due to his refusal to pay $1 million in grazing fees and fines for public land use. Fox News championed his cause as him standing up to big government. Never mind that Bundy was staging domestic terrorism against law enforcement. Disgraceful.

5. Defending and Glorifying Terrorists and Criminals– Now it’s one thing how Fox News denigrates minorities blacks and Latinos as criminals and Muslims as terrorists. However, if there’s a story that concerns a conservative who’s in trouble with the law, well, they might cover it quite differently. When the story about Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s showdown with the Feds broke, Fox News flaunted its disdain for law enforcement in order to champion him. Never mind that the Feds were there in the first place to legally confiscate his cattle because Bundy refused to pay over $1 million federal grazing fees and fines for using public land. Nor the fact the rancher was supported by heavily armed militia men and women and the stand-off was aggressively anti-law enforcement. Nor how the Southern Poverty Law Center described it as “Militia snipers lined the hilltops and overpasses with scopes trained on federal agents.” In other words, these guys basically threatened the Feds with violence. Or how the SPLC noted that these people taunted the Feds with insults denouncing various officers as a “terrorist,” “loser,” “chickenshit,” and a “fucking pussy.” Would it be rude to call Bundy an insurrectionist? How about domestic terrorist? But there you have Fox News acting as his publicist with Bill O’Reilly, Todd Starnes, and Sean Hannity calling him a hero sticking up to government overreach. For a network to treat a criminal with no respect for authority like Bundy is beyond disgusting. Luckily, Fox News got their comeuppance for their inexcusable stance when Bundy publicly remarked how blacks were better off as slaves. Another good example would be the case with George Zimmerman who fatally shot unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin in a Florida gated community. Martin was clearly a victim of racial profiling since he was on his way to visit his father and minding his own business while Zimmerman followed him. The fact Zimmerman got away with it on Florida’s infamous “Stand Your Ground” law is an utter disgrace. However, when Sean Hannity had a panel on race that included a black minister Pastor Marcus Jarvis and lawyer Eric Guster, Hannity asserted that Zimmerman was absolutely in the right for fatally shooting the black teenager. The black men were rightly pissed off. Hannity would later interview Zimmerman who’s admitted that he doesn’t regret killing Martin and that he felt it was all God’s plan. He’d later give an account that Martin had beaten him and he shot the kid out of fear for his life. Fox had clearly framed the Trayvon Martin’s murder as an act of self-defense when the actual tapes illustrate that it was not the case. Moreover, Zimmerman has had other encounters with the law such as a 2005 arrest for shoving an undercover alcohol agent, an ex-fiancee filing a restraining order against him on domestic violence, a 911 call from his estranged wife citing that he threatened her and her dad with a gun as well as punched the latter in the face, a 2013 arrest for aggravated assault with a weapon, domestic violence, battery, and criminal mischief against his girlfriend, a 2015 arrest for aggravated assault with a weapon against his ex-girlfriend, and being punched during a Gators’ game for bragging about Trayvon Martin’s murder. The fact Fox News stood by this man is appalling.

When it comes to black activists who protest police brutality like Black Lives Matter, Fox News is always quick to portray them as violent, lawless thugs who support cop-killing. However, when it comes to right-wing and anti-government cop killers, Fox News tends to either ignore it or make them seem like isolated incidents that have nothing to do with politics. Because at Fox News, white supremacist and right-wing anti-government terrorism doesn’t exist.

6. Blatant Hypocrisy and Double Standards– Fox News has an astounding record on hypocrisy and double standards when covering the news. And the network would always take the side that best suits their conservative ideology. Over the years, the cable news channel has been quick to label protests against police brutality as lawless thugs promoting cop-killing such as the people of Black Lives Matter. Yet, when it comes to cop killings by right-wing and anti-government gunmen to deliver their warped political messages, they ignore it, say it has nothing to do with politics, or blame political and community leaders who’ve spoken out about the troubled relationship between the blacks and the police. While Fox News is quick to treat a mass shooting or bombing involving Muslims as a terrorist attack to promote radical Islam, when it comes to white supremacist and anti-government attacks, they treat them as isolated incidents having nothing to do with politics with perpetrators being portrayed as wacko lone wolves not representing any cultural or political movement. In one instance, they even treated an anti-government terrorist as a hero despite that he and his supporters staged an armed stand-off against the Feds. In reality, the rise of right-wing and anti-government domestic terrorism has become an increasing concern. And there are incidents in which such the attack had a lot to do with politics. For instance, the guy who killed worshipers at a Wisconsin Sikh Temple was a skinhead. For some reason, Fox News doesn’t believe that right-wing domestic terrorism even exists. Another example has to pertain to music and entertainment when Fox News blasted the rapper Common for setting a terrible example to young people by recording songs about killing cops (which really wasn’t the case). They also criticized Beyonce and other black recording artists for the same thing, using offensive black stereotypes no less. Meanwhile, there’s Ted Nugent who’s said very disparaging remarks about Obama and Hillary at a concert and his song “Cat Scratch Fever” contains very sexually explicit lyrics. On Fox News, he’s seen as an honored guest. Then there’s Fox News commentators criticizing on how certain women dress and liberal politicians doing morally dubious things in their personal lives. However, Fox & Friends once had Hooter Girls on their show and the network mandates their on-air talent to wear short dresses. As for conservative politicians in their private lives, well, note that they undergo damage control like labeling disgraced Republicans with a D to their names. They may even ignore the scandal entirely. Or they may even defend them. After all, you might see Newt Gingrich appear on the network from time to time. You know the former House Speaker who tried to crucify Bill Clinton over his sexual proclivities who also cheated on and later dumped two wives for getting sick. Rudy Giuliani is another familiar face. He was the former thrice-married New York City mayor who used local resources to conduct an affair with his mistress (and later Wife #3) while still married to Wife #2. Not to mention, Bill O’Reilly’s personal conduct toward women. As if these people pride themselves for not being politically correct….

Fox News has been a major contributor to the rise in climate change denial. This despite that there’s a 97% scientific consensus that human caused climate change is real and it’s a serious problem that can’t be ignored. This has very much hindered the US from passing any real climate change policy. Clearly, whenever it comes to global warming, Fox is clearly misrepresenting the facts.

7. Misrepresenting Facts– According to a 2015 report from the Independent Journalism Review, Fox News has an astonishing 61% of claims rated Mostly False or worse compared to MSNBC with 44% and CNN with 20%. Nothing illustrates Fox News so consistently misinforming the public whenever the topic is climate change where it has disproportionally represented climate contrarian views. This despite the fact that there’s a 97% expert consensus on human-based global warming. According to a 2012 report by the Union of Concerned Scientists, 93% of Fox News’ global warming coverage was misleading. Statements identified in the report included, “…dismissals of human-caused climate change, disparaging comments about individual scientists, rejections of climate science as a body of knowledge, and cherry picking of data.” Fox News’ influence in climate change denial is extensive and undeniable. And their influence has resulted in very negative consequences for the US as well as the world. It’s well established in the scientific community that climate change is real, is manmade, is happening, and is a very serious global problem. Yet, Fox News’ endorsement of climate change denial has greatly hindered efforts to prevent climate change and adapt to a warming climate as well as undermined the public’s trust in climate science and led to low levels of public concern. Furthermore, it’s also said their distortion is a big reason why Republicans continue denying climate change. Thus, climate change has become a highly partisan and controversial issue in American politics when it shouldn’t be. This is very troubling especially since the Pentagon has ruled climate change denial as a national security. Of course, climate change isn’t the only thing Fox News lies about, but their misleading climate change coverage shows how their misrepresentation of facts has drastically hurt this country. This is inexcusable.

In 2008, Fox News took revenge on two men from the New York Times for a so-called, “hit piece” on the network. Fox proceeded to alter their photos while superimposing their faces to a photo of a man with his poodle. This is just photoshop antics you’d see on the Daily Show. But on Fox News, this is just irresponsible.

8. Photo Manipulation– On July 2, 2008, Fox & Friends co-hosts Steve Doocy and Brian Killmeade aired photos of New York Times reporter Jacques Steinberg and TV editor Steven Reddiccliffe that appeared to have been crudely doctored in order to portray them unflatteringly. This during a discussion of a piece in a Times piece on June 28 that pointed out what Steinberg called “ominous trends” in Fox News ratings which Doocy called a “hit piece” Reddiccliffe ordered. On the show Steinberg was depicted with yellowed teeth, “his nose and chin widened, and his ears made to protrude further.” Reddiccliffe was portrayed with yellow teeth as well as “dark circles … under his eyes, and his hairline has been moved back.” The broadcast later showed an image of Steinberg’s face superimposed on a poodle while Reddiccliffe’s was over a man holding the poodle’s leash. Times editor Sam Sifton called the photo aired on Fox “disgusting” and the criticisms on its reporting a “specious and meritless claim.” The manipulation was probably no accident.

9. Video Manipulation– Fox News has a long record of selective editing, withholding content, and using video clips for their own deceptive purposes. On November 10, 2009, Sean Hannity misrepresented video footage purportedly showing crowds at a Rep. Michele Bachmann orchestrated protest. On the Daily Show, Jon Stewart showed inconsistencies in alternating shots according to sky color and tree leaves showing footage from Glenn Beck’s much larger 9/12 rally spliced in. Hannity estimated that 20,000 were in attendance. Luke Russert and the Washington Post guessed somewhere between 4,000-10,000. Stewart has also periodically accused Fox of playing video footage out of context. Another instances was when Sean Hannity played footage of Obama stating the DREAM ACT couldn’t be passed by executive order to make him seem like a hypocrite. Even though the full footage shows Obama going on to clarify the president can stop deportations. Of course, Fox News can make excuses such as when it was found the network used footage from a 2008 McCain/Palin rally for a Sarah Palin book signing at Grand Rapids, Michigan as Greg Jarrett told viewers that there was a massive turnout. Senior vice-president Michael Clemente issued a statement saying, “This was a production error in which the copy editor changed a script and didn’t alert the control room to update the video.” They also like to splice quotes such as when they aired a clip of Michelle Obama saying that she’s proud of her country now that her husband was running for president around the 2008 election. What she actually said that she’s very proud of her country.

Fox News has been extremely sexist both in its on-screen rhetoric which show a strong opposition to women’s rights and to its female employees. For instance, Fox’s female on-air talent have to wear short skirts and can’t wear pants. And this is Andrea Tantaros who likened Fox News’ workplace culture, “like a sex-fueled, Playboy Mansion-like cult, steeped in intimidation, indecency, and misogyny.” She was also among many women at the station harassed by then CEO Roger Ailes and claimed that former Senator Scott Brown and Bill O’Reilly harassed her as well.

10. Showing No Respect for Women– Sexist stereotyping, feminazis, and Hillary Clinton comments aside, Fox News has remained a cesspool of sexism both on and off screen. Fox News isn’t necessarily in line with notions of conservative womanhood but they’re nonetheless has a legendary disdain for women. Sure they’re antagonistic to women’s rights, bemoan the rise of female breadwinners, think female brains aren’t great for business executives, shame rape victims, and that feminism is a cause of women high school teachers sexually abusing students. Yet, when it comes to notions of female wholesomeness like modesty, you can bet Fox isn’t going for that. Mostly because it’s owned by an Australian man who’d use tits to sell a newspaper. Just look at Fox’s female on-air talent who mostly have to be highly attractive and mostly blond and white as well as comparatively young or be yanked off the moment they age. They’re also required to abide to a stringent dress code consisting of sleeveless short dresses, some with cleavage revealing peekaboo cutouts (with few exceptions) or tight cleavage revealing shirts with short skirts. These are outfits that could barely pass a high school dress code and it’s definitely not something a conservative Christian would want their daughter to wear. But it’s very much implied female broadcasters are expected to use sex to sell. Then there’s the case with former Fox & Friends co-host Gretchen Carlson who played a total ditz who gets the wrong context for terms like “ignoramus” and “czar” even when she googled both terms. This despite that she’s a high school valedictorian, a Stanford graduate with high honors, a former student abroad in Oxford, and able to play Zigeunerweisen on the violin. It’s clear she was deliberately playing dumb so her viewership could see her as more identifiable and less intimidating. She’s even had to put up with a barrage of sexist jokes from her male colleagues which culminated in a 2012 incident where she walked off the set. Her demeanor sets a very terrible example to girls and projects very sexist standards on feminine behavior that many people encourage. Off-screen, it’s just as bad as former newscaster Andrea Tantaros described the workplace culture as “like a sex-fueled, Playboy Mansion-like cult, steeped in intimidation, indecency, and misogyny.” According to Tantaros, Fox News had a yearly “trunk show” where female employees are forced to dress and undress in front of staff. Workplace sexual harassment at the network is rampant. Roger Ailes has a well-known record of sexually harassing women even before he became the network’s CEO. It’s a major reason why he wasn’t offered a job in the Nixon administration despite helping Tricky Dick win in 1968. Anyway, Carlson alleged that Ailes told her, “You and I should have had a sexual relationship a long time ago, and then you’d be good and better and I’d be good and better.” This during sexual harassment meeting! He also may have told a woman “you might have to give a blowjob every once in a while” for him to help with her career. Carlson claims her contract wasn’t renewed as direct retaliation about the pervasive harassment and sexism she faced. Megyn Kelly has said Ailes has sexually harassed her as well. So has Tantaros. Yet, a lot of women at Fox News have non-disparaging clauses in their contracts and may not be able to come forward for fear they’d lose their job. Not only that, but according to Tantaros, Fox has numerous “sock puppet” accounts on its talent which are fake identities to promote or trash someone through seemingly independent blogs or social networking sites. In other words, Fox spends a lot of time looking for dirt on talent employees which they use for leaking baseless and harmful information about them in order to discredit and cause reputational harm. Thankfully, Ailes resigned and is now working for the Trump campaign. However, this doesn’t mean that Fox News’ problems with sexual harassment have necessarily gone away. Bill O’Reilly has been subject to sexual harassment, extortion, and domestic abuse allegations. And this sexual creep still has a show on the network. Let that sink in.

The fact Fox News has a loyal following of fans yet lacks any form of class has contributed greatly to this nation’s increasingly polarized and hostile environment. Here Fox News has a headline calling Michelle Obama as Barack’s “baby mama.” Racist? Yes. Offensive? Of course. But a lot of viewers are racist and will buy it.

11. Contributing to a Hostile Political Environment– Since the advent of Fox News, the American public has become more politically polarized. Sure the rise of social media has something to do with it. But we should remember that a lot of Fox’s audience is over 65 and is less likely to have a computer or internet. Now being a conservative news station is one thing. Yet, Fox has taken it much further with supporting Republican stances and politicians without question. No matter how wrong those stances would be or how hypocritical it makes them seem. They also breaking news stories that embarrass the GOP as well as labeling prominent Republicans who’ve upset the public as Democrats. As for liberals and their causes, they’ve been unrelentingly hostile with heinous insults, slander, character smears, cheer when one of their initiatives fails, and just plain bullying. Even when it pertains to liberals standing up for basic decency and especially if they’re non-white. Case in point the Black Lives Matter movement. Since Fox has such a loyal following, these people accept their commentary as gospel. Many of them have become vociferously hostile like the Tea Party members and Trump supporters. Fox News has had a hand in perpetuating climate change denial, increasing racial tensions, increasing legislative gridlock, and others. Not to mention, recent Republican politicians have increasingly become more partisan and less willing to compromise, especially in Congress. It’s very clear that Fox News has played a role in our political dysfunction in our democratic society.

Here is Bill O’Reilly’s producer Jesse Watters ambushing Vermont US Senator Bernie Sanders. O’Reilly sends employees to do this a lot, mainly for revenge and to humiliate his targets. This is a terrible method of journalism and is clearly an intimidation tactic.

12. Using Intimidation Tactics– Now I may have discussed some intimidation tactics on how Fox News tries to silence female employees who’ve been sexually harassed by their male bosses and colleagues. However, sexual harassment situations aren’t the only times Fox has resorted to intimidation. For a time on The O’Reilly Factor, it wasn’t unusual for Bill O’Reilly to send employees to stalk, harass, and ambush people who didn’t want to appear on his show. Or people O’Reilly doesn’t like. One major case was in 2009 when O’Reilly’s producer and crew to ambush Think Progress blogger Amanda Terkel on vacation in order to asking why she was hurting rape victims and demanding that she apologize. This was in an attempt to humiliate her and depict her as fearful, agitated, and incoherent on national TV. Why did he do this? Because Terkel was one of many people who called out the hypocrisy of O’Reilly being a speaker for It Happened to Alexa Foundation, an organization dedicated to helping rape victims. And Terkel was totally justified to call him on it. Because O’Reilly is a flat out pig who once famously said, “Now Moore, Jennifer Moore, 18, on her way to college. She was 5-foot-2, 105 pounds, wearing a miniskirt and a halter top with a bare midriff. Now, again, there you go. So every predator in the world is gonna pick that up at two in the morning. She’s walking by herself on the West Side Highway, and she gets picked up by a thug. All right. Now she’s out of her mind, drunk.” Definitely not a guy you’d want to speak in front of rape survivors. Not to mention his reputation as an uniformed, creepy, loudmouth who’s been accused of sexual harassment and domestic abuse. But camera crews to follow people in order to ambush and humiliate them is just unethical and possibly illegal. Yet, somehow O’Reilly gets away with it. Another case from 2008 centers around the legendary Bill Moyers, a former press secretary and then PBS broadcaster who refused to appear on O’Reilly’s show. Moyers made him look like a fool. Vermont US Senator Bernie Sanders was another during his presidential candidacy. Sanders blew the producer off. Others include Arianna Huffington, former Bush press secretary Scott McClellan, Tim Robbins, Jane Fonda, Sean Penn, Susan Sarandon, and even Barack Obama during his Senate days (where O’Reilly did it himself). O’Reilly has had a long record of ambushing and threatening journalists, politicians, religious officials, activists, celebrities, and even judges. O’Reilly has suggested that the “ambush journalism” conducted by his producers is limited to targeting “public servants” and stated prior to these “ambush interviews” subjects would either be asked to appear on his show or explain their actions. In reality, they’re just O’Reilly’s way of getting revenge.

During his time on Fox News, Glenn Beck’s ridiculous madman rants gave the network high ratings. Unfortunately, it inspired 3 violent criminals to commit acts of domestic terrorism. One of whom, killed 3 cops in Pittsburgh with an AK-47. He was later fired from the network after 296 sponsors dropped him.

13. Encouraging Extremism and Violence– As I said Fox News has a horrible record of handling cases pertaining to right-wing terrorism and white-on-black crime. But it’s even more disturbing whenever Fox defends men like George Zimmerman and frame Cliven Bundy as a hero. Fox’s Bundy glorification is particularly disgraceful because it makes it seem like staging an armed militia stand-off against the Feds is perfectly okay because these domestic terrorists are standing up to big government. Uh, excuse me, but when is domestic terrorism ever acceptable? Apparently whenever the perp is a right-wing nutjob, according to Fox. It doesn’t help that Fox has had plenty of conspiracy theorists on their network. But they’ve also engaged in some rather violent rhetoric about people they don’t like. There’s Glen Beck’s saying, “To the day I die, I am going to be a progressive hunter.” Bill O’Reilly’s comments on the late Dr. George Tiller are especially awful: “[I]f I could get my hands on Tiller — well, you know. Can’t be vigilantes. Can’t do that. It’s just a figure of speech.” He repeatedly called him, “Tiller, the baby killer” and even said that Tiller was an evil man with blood on his hands who had to be stopped and that anyone who doesn’t stop him has blood on their hands as well. He said all of this shortly before the Kansas abortionist was murdered in his church. Still, publicly calling for someone’s death, abortionist or not, is unconscionable regardless of whether you’re pro-life, pro-choice, or pro-anything. Then there’s Ralph Peters on then Taliban-held Pfc. Bowe Bergdahl, “[W]e know this private is a liar; we’re not sure if he’s a deserter.” He later added that if he was a deserter, “the Taliban can save us a lot of legal hassles and legal bills.” An NBC correspondent later reported the Pentagon claimed Peters’ comments “could endanger” the captured soldier. To be fair, I know most Fox News viewers aren’t violent. And I know that Fox News never intends to inspire violence either. But knowing that a lot of Fox’s fanbase supports Donald Trump, such rhetoric could explain a lot since they probably hear it a lot and think it’s entertaining. However, that’s the problem for there may be extremist Fox News fans out there who might take those words out of context and might be inspired to carry out acts of violence. Like the right-wing terrorists that Fox News believes don’t exist. In 2010, Byron Williams traded gunfire with 10 California Highway Patrol Officers after they stopped him for erratic driving. After his arrest, Williams said he intended to start a revolution by traveling to San Francisco and killing important members of the Tides Foundation and the ACLU. He also claimed that he was inspired by Beck’s chalkboard conspiracy theories on liberal groups and described himself as a “progressive hunter.” Another avid Glenn Beck fanboy was Richard Poplawski who fired upon 5 Pittsburgh cops with an AK-47 and killed 3 of them. According to a friend, Poplawski loved Glenn Beck and was reportedly obsessed with Beck’s theories of an imminent food crisis, that paper money would soon be worthless, and that the government planned to intern dissidents in concentration camps. A third is Kenneth B. Kimberly who discussed bombing a bridge and made threatening statements about Obama. Little did he know, he was talking to an undercover federal agent who led investigators to seize 20,000 of ammunition rounds and several firearms from his property. He and other suspected militia members also gathered at his home to make grenades. Kimberly also claims to be a leader of the extreme right-wing militia called the Brotherhood of American Patriots whose mission is to “resist in the event the government started rounding up the patriots” and to stand up in the face of foreign invasions and societal breakdowns. Gives you an idea how Fox’s violent rhetoric could go.

Bill O’Reilly’s time at Fox News has consisted of allegations of sexual harassment, extortion, domestic abuse, calling for an abortionist’s murder, and pathological lying. On that last part, O’Reilly has lied about his past as well as written a series of books based on dubious historical research. Any other reporter with a rap sheet like that would’ve been fired. But Bill O’Reilly still has a show and the network has jumped to his defense. Shame.

14. Failing to Hold Newscasters Accountable– Yes, working at Fox News isn’t really nice since newscasters are coached on what to report and female on-air talent are subject to harassment and confined to a skimpy outfit dress code. But when it comes to some really awful stuff among its talent, Fox News doesn’t seem to do anything about it or at least until there’s a big public scandal or the newscaster has become an increased liability to the network. And a lot of Fox newscasters get away with shit that their mainstream media counterparts wouldn’t. Yes, I know the bit about Roger Ailes being booted out as Fox News CEO for sexual harassment. But if it wasn’t for Gretchen Carlson filing a high profile lawsuit, Ailes would be network head today. Besides, other Fox executives and newscasters have had sexual harassment allegations as well. One of them is Bill O’Reilly whose show is still on the air and has also been accused of extortion and domestic abuse. O’Reilly also repeatedly denounced Kansas abortionist Dr. George Tiller for 4 years before his murder and may have called for his death. But he responded to such allegations saying, “no backpedaling here … every single thing we said about Tiller was true.” Maybe, but that’s absolutely no excuse for inciting violence against him and such comments are very irresponsible, especially for a public figure. Then we have O’Reilly’s long list of lies. He’s lied about winning two Peabodys for hosting Inside Edition in the 1990s which is a tabloid show. He’s claimed to be an average guy who came from nothing when he spent his childhood growing up in an affluent New York suburb, attending private school and college, taking regular vacations in Florida, and lucking out of the draft during Vietnam. Furthermore his father was a currency accountant for an oil company and I’m sure he earned more than $35,000 a year unlike what O’Reilly claims. He’s lied about knocking at the front door at George de Mohrenschildt’s daughter’s home at the moment de Mohrenschildt committed suicide. Audio files made by Gaeton Fonzi indicate he wasn’t there. He even lied about surviving a combat situation covering the 1982 Falklands War, even though there were no American journalists in the islands during the conflict. And that O’Reilly had arrived to Buenos Aires shortly before the war ended. He later said the situation was a riot in Buenos Aires after Argentina surrendered. Former CBS colleague Eric Engberg said the riot they covered wasn’t a combat situation where he heard no shots fired and saw no ambulances or tanks on the street. Furthermore, the sound guy and cameraman with O’Reilly at the time have backed up Engberg’s claims. At any rate, archived video of the incident shows that O’Reilly might’ve been right about the Falklands War riots being combat situations. However, his other claims regarding his reporting in El Salvador and Northern Ireland were questioned. In 2013, he stated: “I’ve seen soldiers gun down unarmed civilians in Latin America, Irish terrorists kill and maim their fellow citizens in Belfast with bombs.” He’s even claimed that he saw nuns gunned down in El Salvador. Later it was clarified that O’Reilly had been shown images of murdered nuns and Irish bombings but wasn’t an eyewitness in either case. Then he’s said to lie about being attacked by protesters while reporting the LA Riots which has also been disputed by former colleagues at Inside Edition. In the mainstream network news, you have NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams who lied about witnessing a helicopter being shot down in Iraq and got canned for it. O’Reilly lied about witnessing events several times and is still working. Not to mention the Daily Dot has a list of 99 of his lies and his history books have been charred by historians for being off-based and weakly researched. His books have even been bashed by conservative news outlets. His Killing Lincoln book was banned at the Ford’s Theatre bookstore for historical inaccuracies by the National Park Service which included a claim that Lincoln’s War Secretary Edwin Stanton was involved in his assassination plot. A claim in which he and co-author Martin Dugard failed to provide evidence. They also claim that Lincoln worked in his Oval Office which was actually constructed in 1909. In fact, his office was actually what we now call the Lincoln bedroom. Meanwhile, when respected CBS News anchor and 60 Minutes correspondent Dan Rather couldn’t supply any tangible proof on George W. Bush skipping out on his military service in 2004, the network fired him. O’Reilly still has his job despite that he’s been widely seen as a pathological liar. Yet, the fact he hasn’t been fired for things most journalists got canned for is just very disturbing as far as the media landscape goes.

This is Wayne Simmons who was a Fox News resident “terror expert” claiming to be a former CIA agent. He was later sentenced to 33 months in jail for decades of fraudulent claims about being a CIA agent. He’s also had a rapsheet of swindling and firearms violations. You have to wonder what Fox News’ background check system is like.

15. Failing to Fact Check Sources and Background Check Experts– Like I said, Fox News cares more about their conservative agenda than it does about facts. And it doesn’t really care where they get their information from. So fact-checking sources isn’t really in vogue at the network. A lot of Fox’s sources usually come from the Heritage Foundation think tank but they also rely on conspiracy theorists and websites like Infowars which is owned by radio host Alex Jones who’s listed as an extremist by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Now Jones is notorious for his epic rants about “New World Order” plots for world government enforced eugenics, secret internment camps, militarized police, and behind the scenes control by a global corporate cabal. According to him, the only way to avert this dystopian future is if true patriots resist before it’s too late. His hundreds of thousands of acolytes are taking heed, building bunkers, hoarding food, and investing in precious metals. You might’ve seen Glenn Beck promoting these things whether on Fox News or on Comedy Central. In some cases like with Richard Poplawski and Jared Loughner, they’re resorting to violence like killing 3 cops with an AK-47 or killing 6 people and shooting a US Congresswoman in the head. He also believes that some of the nation’s worst mass shootings and terror attacks were government-led “false-flag” operations and even suggested that 9/11 was an inside job. Another SPLC extremist luminary Fox News has had on their network is self-proclaimed historian David Barton whose book The Jefferson Lies was recalled by the world’s largest Christian publishing company for too many serious errors. You know the kind of gross factual mistakes that would end a real historian’s career. Barton has promoted the false notion that our Founding Fathers never intended a separation between church and state but rather sought to build a Christian nation. His Wallbuilders group sells lots of books and DVDs pushing his fun-house vision of religious patriotism. However, despite being among “one of the 25 most influential Evangelicals” he’s an utter fraud whose version of American history is filled with flagrant omissions and distortions that bend reality to his own fact-free vision. Even among conservative Christian history scholars who’ve refuted his claims think he’s a crackpot. He was a regular guest on Glenn Beck’s “Founders’ Fridays.” Sometimes Fox would feature experts with sketchy credentials or sketchy ties. Many of the climate-denying “scientists” on the network don’t have a scientific background. One time, Bill O’Reilly had a “national security analyst” Ryan Mauro who claimed that Muslims were forming “no-go zones” in the US where they would train and launch domestic attacks. Not only they were never substantiated by credible sources in law enforcement, but he’s actually a national security analyst for the Clarion Project which has been classified as an anti-Muslim hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Fox News has invited him back numerous times to spread his false and inflammatory smears that give Fox News viewers the wrong impression of Islam along with an unwarranted fear of peaceful fellow citizens. There’s also Milwaukee sheriff named David Clarke who delivered a keynote address to a New York chapter Oath Keepers meeting, a right-wing militia terrorist group who believe in a wild set of conspiracy theories. These people were best known for their controversial presence during protests and unrests in Ferguson, Missouri during which members were armed with semi-automatics. The SPLC lists its founder as an extremist while the Anti-Defamation League describes them as “heavily armed extremists with a conspiratorial and anti-government mindset looking for potential showdowns with the government.” There was even a Fox News commentator Wayne Simmons who claimed to be a former CIA agent and had appeared numerous times on the network since 2002. He would later be sentenced to 33 months due to his fraudulent claims about being a CIA agent for decades and actually had neither military nor intelligence background. He also defrauded a woman out of $125,000 in a bogus real estate investment, defrauded the government several times, and illegally possessed two firearms around his arrest (due to being barred from having prior firearms violations at both the state and federal level). In other words, the man was a con artist. So I guess Fox News doesn’t do background checks on their experts either.

Here’s a picture depicting the people whom Fox News sees as the most dangerous people on earth. One is the first black president they’ve talked shit about for years. The other Pope Francis whom Fox News labeled a Marxist who just bashed their brand of journalism. Oh, wait, what Fox News does isn’t really journalism. They just try to pass it on like it is. No wonder The Daily Show and late night comedians make fun of them.

The National Security Threat of Domestic Terrorism (Depicted by the News Media)

Posted by historymaniacmegan on September 24, 2016

american-domestic-terrorism

When Americans think about terrorism, they usually imagine 9/11 and other attacks perpetuated by people who aren’t from this country and who aren’t like us. Groups like Al Qaida and ISIS usually come to mind. Yet, while foreign terrorist attacks like 9/11 are enough to make us frightened and willing to send troops to Afghanistan, there’s a national security threat more pressing that most people don’t pay much attention to. It’s called domestic terrorism which refer to terror acts carried out by US citizens or permanent residents on US soil. Domestic terrorists have committed 80% of attacks since 9/11 and killed more Americans on US soil than their foreign counterparts. Under current US law enforcement, the USA PATRIOT ACT defines acts as domestic terrorism those in which:

involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
appear to be intended –
1. to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
2. to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion;
3. to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping;
occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

Accurately referred to as “America’s Favorite Domestic Terrorist,” legendary abolitionist John Brown has become a highly controversial figure both for his anti-slavery ideology as well as his violent tactics. But he perfectly illustrates why Americans may have a hard time recognizing domestic terror even in their American history books.

But when it comes to identifying domestic terrorism in contemporary culture, a lot of Americans struggled since the perpetrators may look like them and may share ideas that they kind of agree with. A good case in point is American abolitionist John Brown who’s known for participating in Bleeding Kansas and trying to overthrow the institution of slavery through staging an unsuccessful raid on Harper’s Ferry in 1859 that killed 7 and injured 10. Brown’s raid on a government arsenal in present day West Virginia clearly fit USA PATRIOT ACT’s definition of domestic terrorism. Brown’s raid involved acts dangerous to human life that violated US and state criminal laws, were clearly intended to intimidate civilians and influence government policy, and definitely occurred on US soil. The fact he believed himself an instrument of God’s wrath in punishing men for the sin of slavery certainly proves that his extremist beliefs had a religious dimension. But since Brown’s motivation behind his attack on Harper’s Ferry was to overthrow the institution of slavery, well, he’s rarely seen as such even by modern day academics. Mostly because Americans agree that slavery was a very terrible sin and the fact it divided the country as well as took 4 year civil war to outlaw it. So in hindsight, Brown’s idea of destroying the institution of slavery through violence isn’t really that crazy (though to a point). And it’s mainly because of Brown’s abolitionist views no matter how extreme they were that he’s often seen as a heroic martyr and visionary to many people. Nevertheless, Brown’s actions prior to the American Civil War and the tactics he chose still make him a very controversial figure today. But Brown’s life and our perception of him illustrate why a lot Americans have difficulty identifying acts of terror by our fellow countrymen in the nation. This is a problem as I explain in this post in FAQ and list format.

This is a photoshopped picture that advocates gun control. However, it also illustrates the problem the media has with identifying domestic terrorist attacks.

If law enforcement has a clear definition on what domestic terrorism is, why is the term used so subjectively as a media and political term?

It’s mainly because when it comes to domestic terrorism, law enforcement and the mainstream media live in two different realities and have very different motivations for identifying what constitutes one. And the latter usually has more influence on the American people. Since American law enforcement’s main priority is ensuring public safety, their criteria for identifying terrorists acts is based on criteria defined in the USA PATRIOT ACT. So when it comes to defining domestic terrorism, all law enforcement care about is whether the act was criminal and endangered human lives, whether it was intended to promote a political agenda through coercion or intimidation, and whether it was committed by someone who lived in the US on US soil. That’s it. By contrast, the media defines domestic terrorism quite differently through the following criteria:

One of the most significant factors in how the media determines whether a violent attack is domestic terrorism is the suspect’s identity. If they’re Muslim, chances are that they’ll be labeled as a terrorist is very high.

Perpetrator’s Race and Cultural Identity – If the perpetrator is a Muslim American, their chances of being seen as a domestic terrorist are extremely high regardless of motivation. If it’s a non-Muslim white American with a conventional name, their chances of being seen as a domestic terrorist are usually dependent on other factors. As for the likelihood of non-Muslim blacks and Hispanics perpetrators, it’s very hard to say since both groups are often associated with criminal stereotypes though neither are widely perceived as terrorists.
Perpetrator’s Motivation– Any American Muslim perpetrator who commits an act of terror in the name of Islam will be automatically be labeled a terrorist in the media as well as linked to foreign Islamic terrorist groups like Al-Qaida or the Islamic State. Black and Hispanic perpetrators will only be identified as such if they’re connected to known terrorist groups or embrace an extremist ideology. But when it comes to non-Muslim white terrorists, it can vary considerably depending on their motivation. White violence against women, racial and religious groups, LGBT people, disabled people, and immigrants will usually be seen as hate crimes at best but not always and not without controversy (if the incident is covered at all). Yet, many hate crimes usually qualify under the USA PATRIOT ACT’s definition of domestic terrorism anyway. Anti-abortion and ecological extremists are less likely to be seen as domestic terrorists since a lot of people hold anti-abortion and environmentalist views. So like John Brown, labeling them as such is controversial though they’ll certainly be seen as nuts regardless political ideology. Then you have the anti-government perpetrators whose acts of terror may cause controversy if ever labeled domestic terrorism. This is especially the case when you’re talking about right-wing extremists or the open carry crowd (though open carry may be legal in some states, carrying a gun in public is an act of intimidation and coercion so it qualifies).
Nature of the Attack– In the media, the nature of the attack matters considerably such as the method and body count. Perpetrators who stage bombings that kill lots of people will most likely be seen as domestic terrorists. So would any attacks that involve hijacking, bioweapons, mass poisoning, hostage taking, chemical weapons, kidnapping, and property destruction. Shootings may depend on whether the perpetrator is either Muslim or clearly committing a hate crime. At any rate, they have to involve violence and/or fatalities. Despite causing hundreds of millions in property damage and having a sheer volume of crimes, eco-terrorists aren’t really seen as such since a lot of their crimes don’t get people killed. Same goes for left-wing Communist and anarchist terrorists. Merely using guns to intimidate people based on political ideology may not be labeled as domestic terrorism when it clearly is. Cyberterrorism may get some attention even though it’s not considered such while paper terrorism doesn’t get much attention at all.
Location– Attacks that take place in major cities are more likely to be labeled as domestic terrorism than ones in less urban areas, especially if they take place near places of great significance. In some ways, this makes sense but also ignores a lot of other terror incidents that take place around the country.

Meanwhile, if the perpetrators in question are white, right-wing, and stage a heavily armed takeover of a national wildlife refuge in Oregon, you might expect headlines like this. Since AP is held to very high journalistic standards, this headline tweet is appalling. These guys aren’t peaceful protesters. They have guns with them and they took over a national wildlife refuge in order to intimidate people and influence government conduct. It’s domestic terrorism, plain and simple.

If you watch TV news, you might get the impression the media is more likely to label a violent incident as domestic terrorism based on a biased set of criteria which gives Americans the impression that terrorists tend to be Islamic extremists. When in reality, Muslim terrorist attacks aren’t a very big threat to national security, even after 9/11. Why the media decide does this:

Contrary to what you might be accustomed to on the news, anti-government, racist, and other nonjihadist extremist killed nearly twice as many people as those by Islamic jihadist since 9/11. Many Americans don’t realize this, especially if they’re on a steady diet of Fox News. Maybe that’s because most nonjihadist terrorists are white.

Desire to Avoid Controversy– Domestic terrorism is a loaded word. And while the mainstream media likes sensational news stories, they also take great aims to avoid offending people. This is particularly true when a terror incident involves right-wing extremists since a lot of mainstream media outlets are owned by large corporate conglomerates. Some like Fox News even have a right-wing ideology. That’s not to say leftist terrorists exist since they certainly do since Occupy Wall Street might qualify since they have a long list of property crimes, rampant drug use, rape, murder, and assaults. But when Janet Napolitano brought up the threat of right-wing domestic terrorism in 2009, Republicans were furious.
Public’s Unwillingness to Identify with Terrorists– Like I said about terrorists, people are more comfortable to label a terrorist act as such if the perpetrator is different from them. And since a lot of people don’t know anyone who’s Muslim, Muslim perpetrators are more likely to be seen as terrorists than their non-Muslim counterparts. But when a terror incident involves white supremacists and other right-wing extremists, a lot of conservative politicians hesitate to declare it as such. Many of them even downplay dangers posed by right-wing extremism altogether. This is especially when Fox News glorifies a Nevada rancher who engaged in an armed standoff against the feds over grazing rights and a bunch of armed men for occupying a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon and the fact the current GOP presidential nominee has been endorsed by white supremacists. When it comes to right-wing domestic terrorism, most conservatives are like Draco Malfoy. Sure they may be totally comfortable having racist, xenophobic, homophobic, sexist, and anti-government views. And yes, they may not be happy with the political and cultural landscape these days as well as nostalgize about a past that never was. But like Draco Malfoy on Muggle-borns, most of these conservatives are neither extreme in their viewpoints nor are willing to resort to violent terrorist acts for them. On the other end, I may believe that this country should do more to protect the environment and stop climate change but that doesn’t mean I’m willing to bomb an animal testing facility because that’s crazy. But when someone commits an act of violence on behalf of their political agenda, it makes a lot of people who may share that perpetrator’s view to some extent very uncomfortable and reluctant to address it as an act of terror. So they don’t.
Sensationalism– We should understand that sensationalism sells and the media does everything it could to exploit violent terror incidents. The more violent it is and the nuttier the perpetrators seem, the more attention it will get and more ratings the media outlet will have. This is especially be the case if the perpetrator is Muslim.

According to a local law enforcement survey the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security, anti-government terrorism was seen as the top terrorist threat in their jurisdictions. And that percentage is far more than those who listed anything relating to Islamic terrorist threats. The media doesn’t really pay attention to this because most anti-government terrorists are white.

Unfortunately, the way the news covers domestic terror attacks has very negative repercussions in the country. Now it’s one thing to call a mass shooting in San Bernardino and at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando as domestic terrorism. Same goes for the Boston Marathon bombings. But it’s another when both these attacks are seen as acts of domestic terrorism while the mass shootings at Pittsburgh, Tucson, and Charleston are not. Rather as far as the media was concerned, these were attacks made by violently mentally ill white men. Sure it was an accurate assessment, but it doesn’t tell the whole story. For one, the man who fired an AK-47 at 5 cops in Pittsburgh was a white supremacist who believed Jews secretly ran everything and that Obama wanted to take away his guns. But as far as the media is concerned, he was just a crazy nutjob who killed 3 cops after his mom called police over a domestic dispute concerning a dog peeing on the carpet. Second, the Tucson shooter who tried to assassinate Congresswoman Gabby Giffords was a conspiracy theorist who believed in a New World Order to brainwash people. Third, the shooter who killed 9 people at the Emmanuel AME Church in Charleston was a white supremacist who donned a pro-apartheid jacket on his Facebook page, had a Confederate flag license plate, told racist jokes, advocated segregation, and went on a racist rant on how blacks are raping white women and taking over the world. Furthermore, he specifically chose to fire upon blacks at the church due to its long association with civil rights activism. Yet, these terror incidents were reported. Most aren’t covered by major news outlets at all. Negative repercussions of inadequate and sloppy coverage of domestic terrorism include:

The heavy attention on Islamic terrorism in the US media outlets had perpetuated rise and acceptability of Islamophobia as well as led to American Muslims being targets of everything from harassment to outright deadly violence. Featured here are American Muslims Yousef Abu-Salha, his brother-in-law Deah Barakat, and his sisters Yusor and Razan. Save for the Yousef, three people would later become victims of an anti-Muslim hate crime in a Chapel Hill condominium by one of their former white neighbors who was banned from the building. The man basically broke into Deah and Yusor’s condo and killed them and Razan in cold blood. Yousef would later say, “It’s a shame that you turn on a major news channel and you see a news story about ISIS and then they’ll cover our story and they do an okay job, but immediately after it will be another story about these radical groups. I think it sends US citizens a bad message that these Muslims are all the same.”

Legitimizes Discrimination– The media’s coverage of Islamic terrorism since 9/11 in the US and abroad has contributed so much to Islamophobia that Muslims in American pop culture have been nastily stereotyped as fanatical Islamic terrorists who hate our country and our western values. Each terror attack since then have been filtered by the media and consumed by the public as wrongdoings of Muslims around the world. Muslims have been further vilified and dehumanized in Hollywood movies like American Sniper. Because of this, American Muslims, Middle Easterners, and South Asians have become acceptable targets for profiling, oppression, and even terrorist attacks. For many Americans, just looking like a Muslim makes them an automatic terror suspect by default as well as someone to be feared. This is a major reason why welcoming Syrian refugees in the US has been so controversial even though it shouldn’t. Around the country, mosques have been fired on, defaced, or burned. Muslims have been shot and killed execution style in their living rooms, fatally stabbed on their way home as well as been beaten in their stores, schools, and on the streets. They’ve also been kicked out of planes, egged outside Walmart, scorched with hot coffee in a park, shot in cabs, and punched while pushing their children in strollers. They’ve had clothes set on fired and their children bullied in school. They’ve been threatened by neighbors who’d burn down their house if they didn’t move away as well as had their cemeteries vandalized and Quran desecrated. They’ve been fired for wearing hijabs and for praying. A Muslim congressman has received death threats. In Irving, Texas, heavily armed right-wing gunmen blocked entrance of a mosque and held banners reading, “we are the solution to Islamic terrorism.” Other armed anti-Islam demonstrations and “Muslim-free” businesses raise deep concerns. Civil and human rights advocates are challenging the use of “domestic terrorism” believing that it’s doled out in a racially-discriminatory manner that merely exacerbates hate they and law enforcement are trying to prevent. Exacerbating hate on a group of people who just happen to have the same religion as terrorists is not a solution to Islamic terrorism and just makes it worse. The fact that 55% of Americans hold an unfavorable view of Islam makes Islamophobia not just the biggest threat to American religious freedom, but also a potential threat to national security since Muslim communities play a crucial role in alerting law enforcement to terrorist threats.
Does Not Represent Reality– While the American public rightfully sees Islamic terrorists as a threat to safety, the reality of terrorism exists in all forms and that terrorists come from all racial and cultural backgrounds as well as embraced a wide range of extremist political and religious ideologies. For law enforcement officials, the biggest terrorist threats aren’t jihadists. Rather it’s far right wing extremists that have carried out well over half of the deadliest US terrorist attacks since 9/11, committing 93% of all extremist murders in the last 10 years. Most of their extremism is homegrown as well as pose a very real danger to this nation’s character such as pluralism, tolerance, and equality, which form the basis of a liberal democracy. Though jihadist terrorism is often reported on the news, the US has seen very little violent extremism by Muslims. On the other hand, white supremacists are among the most lethal since they’ve committed 83% of all right-wing extremist murders and 77% of all extremist killings in the past decade as well as were involved in 52% of shootings with police. They also regularly engage in various terrorist plots, acts, and conspiracies as well as other traditional forms of crime. Anti-government extremists, right-wing militias, and sovereign citizens are among the most common. But no matter what their ideology, right-wing extremists are also more numerous, cover a larger geographic range, and are more likely to live in your neighborhood. Not representing these groups in the media as the terrorists they are that we should condemn is very irresponsible, even if the station is Fox News.
Promotes Cultural Profiling– How the media has reported domestic terrorism can also lead to real but ineffective policies that have resulted in cultural profiling, particularly of Muslims and people suspected of being one. Those charged with plotting terrorism for the Islamic State faced more severe charges than militia members, “sovereign citizens,” and other anti-government extremist who’ve been prosecuted for similar activity (even though many more terrorist attacks in the US are carried out by non-Muslims). After 9/11, many American Muslims, South Asians, and those of Middle Eastern descent found themselves being subject to harsher security checks as well as are more likely to be on a no fly list or subject to surveillance. As a result, trust between law enforcement and Muslims has been strained. In recent years, anti-Islam bills became laws in 10 states. Florida and Tennessee passed laws revising the way they approve textbooks for classroom use as a direct result of anti-Islam campaigns. Don’t get me wrong, Islamic terrorists do exist in this country and do pose a threat to national security. But profiling Muslims as suspected terrorists by default is never excusable since the vast majority of them are regular people like us who just want to live their lives in peace and mind their own business.
Fails to Hold Public Figures Accountable for Their Rhetoric– The media is a huge influence in the American public but we should be aware what many public figures may say could be taken out of context by some nutjob who’d use it in a terror attack. It’s been widely suggested that political rhetoric may play a role in fueling hate crimes, especially since Donald Trump started running for president as well as said very hateful things about almost every demographic imaginable. But since he started running and calling on Muslim bans, anti-Muslim hate crimes dramatically increased to its highest levels since the aftermath of 9/11. It doesn’t help that Trump has been endorsed by white supremacist organizations whom he’s consistently failed to denounce. A lot of what’s said on Fox News has probably led to a lot of terror attacks and it doesn’t help that they have glorified anti-government terrorists like Cliven Bundy as heroes as well as inspired many nutcases to do horrible things that have killed people. Not to mention, a lot of conservative special interest groups have said similar things as well as many Republican politicians. I know there are liberal groups and Democrats who might inspire some degree of terror violence. But I single out conservatives since right-wing terrorism has become much more of a problem in recent years, according to terror experts and government organizations.And yes a lot of these radical right-wing extremists consume conservative media outlets like Fox News.
Ignores Very Real Threats– While Muslim terrorism in the news stirs fear and hatred for even the most ordinary Muslim Americans, the far more serious threat of the radical right has received relatively little attention. But bring that fact up in front of Republican politicians, expect outrage and even offense as an attack to demonize the right. The media seems to be just as deft to these threats, especially if it’s Fox News. Such response leads to downplay to take such threats as seriously as they should be by the public. Radical Right-Wing terrorists present a more deadly threat given their affinity for hoarding weapons and explosives. Not paying attention to these terrorists has consequences such as emboldening these people to carry out mass casualty attacks. Americans are much more likely to live near a white supremacist or anti-government sovereign citizen than a jihadist (A nearby town in my area had its own Klu Klux Klan chapter). When we’re talking about racial and religious minorities, living near a radical right-wing terrorist can put them in very real danger.
Compromises Public Safety for Vulnerable Populations– Whenever domestic terror incidents aren’t reported and treated as the heinous acts they are, people are left very vulnerable to attacks. This was very apparent in the South during segregation when countless African Americans were subject to lynchings as a way to control black communities and retain white supremacy. During the Civil Rights Movement, African Americans and other activists were frequent targets of white supremacist violence. Though white supremacy is no longer as acceptable as it was, the hateful ideology and violence hasn’t gone away. Recent incidents including a white supremacist firing on Black Lives Matter activists in Minneapolis, a NAACP building bombing in Colorado, and a black church shooting in Charleston. In every terror attack involving Muslims since 9/11, hate crimes against Muslims in America have become alarmingly high. A study from Georgetown University has reported 174 incidents of anti-Muslim violence from 2015 consisting of 12 murders, 29 physical assaults, 50 threats against people and institutions, 54 acts of vandalism, 8 arsons, and 9 shootings or bombings. Contrary to what the media might say, Muslims are far more likely to become terror victims than terror perpetrators. However, Muslims and blacks aren’t the only group in the country vulnerable to domestic terrorism in the nation even by white supremacists. White supremacist groups also target immigrants, minorities, Jews, LGBT people, and sometimes Christians. Targets for anti-government and sovereign citizens are law enforcement and other authority figures. Still, not recognizing clearly politically motivated attacks by non-Muslim perpetrators leaves many Americans especially vulnerable.

It is no secret that now GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump has been endorsed by the Klu Klux Klan over his racist remarks on Mexicans, blacks, immigrants, and Muslims. However, Trump hasn’t distanced himself from this white supremacist terrorist organization which has a long history of violence against blacks since its formation during Reconstruction. If a presidential candidate from a major party can’t denounce a terrorist endorsement, then that person isn’t fit to be president. Seriously, the KKK are beyond deplorable.

As you can see the state of how the news media depicts domestic terrorism is appalling. Excessive coverage of one group of terrorists has led to disproportionate fear, suspicion, and unjust discrimination against a religious minority and other others. But significant less attention of a far more serious homegrown terrorist threat has gone under the media radar and has neither been sufficiently challenged by our political culture nor law enforcement. Not only this disproportionate rate of media coverage lead to increased profiling and discrimination, it also makes the US less safe as a whole. Furthermore, it makes public figures less likely to take responsibility for their rhetoric that could inspire many of these nutjobs to commit heinous acts. Now while the government may be slow to act on domestic terrorism, the media doesn’t have to. In fact, if the media just got it together and report domestic terrorist attacks in a way they should, then it might actually encourage leaders to come up with policies combating it. After all, people didn’t take lynchings as serious acts of terrorism meant to intimidate black people during segregation in the South until Ida B. Wells investigated them in the 1890s and began an anti-lynching campaign to spread awareness about the atrocity. Today she is turning in her grave. If the news media should cover domestic terrorism correctly, then it must be depicted in a way that’s represents the reality. By that I mean showing that domestic terrorism can take many forms, be motivated by different ideologies, and committed by people of many different backgrounds. And that all these domestic terrorists should be treated as a national security threat to be taken seriously.

2931225700000578-3103341-image-a-64_1432954295853

Here we come to a bunch of heavily armed open-carry activists “protesting” at a mosque in Phoenix against “Islamic Radicalism.” In reality, they’re just a bunch of armed terrorists who are using their guns to intimidate the Muslims who worship there. This isn’t peaceful protesting, it’s domestic terrorism and should be treated that way. This should neither be tolerated nor encouraged by anyone. It’s utterly disgraceful anyone there with a gun wasn’t arrested. Because the country needs to know that armed protest rallies are never ever acceptable.

	John A. Fenner on Signs of a Sociopath (with Don…
	judy thompson on The Magnificent Judgment at…
	The Very Naughtiest… on NSFW Elf on the Shelf (a. k. a…
	మానిఫెస్ట్ డెస్టినీ:… on The Indigenous Peoples of Nort…
	The Wonderful World… on The Wonderful World of Flower…

The Lone Girl in a Crowd

The thoughts and perceptions of an aspiring writer on life and the world around her

Tag Archives: politics