A Chris Cillizza post that simply cries out for Godwin violations:
Think what you will, but one thing is clear: The political upside for Republican politicians pushing an immigration ban on Syrians and/or Muslims as a broader response to the threat posed by the Islamic State sure looks like a political winner.
Best line:
"And I would add, these are the same folks who suggested they're so tough that just 'talk to Putin' or staring down Isil [will work] ... but they are scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America as part of our tradition of compassion. At first they were too scared of the press being too tough on them in the debates. Now they are scared of three-year-old orphans. That doesn't seem so tough to me."
Smack.
Now they are scared of three-year-old orphans. That doesn't seem so tough to me
"They were all around him, half a dozen of them, white faced children with dark eyes, boys and girls together.
And in their hands, the daggers."
No one who uses the word "savvy" is entitled to a hearing.
Cf. "funky," "sassy," "rollicking good time," "badass," "pimpmobile," "thought leader."
I grant the general premise of the post (on probably too many things and probably far too often), but is there any reason to think he'll be able to actually bring more Syrian refugees to the U.S. before he leaves office?
Drum is doubling down, but he cites Obama in this video has how to do it without being "guilty of mockery." Which is pure question-begging IMO. If you think that that statement, from a President speaking overseas, isn't mockery, then you're purely reacting to... tone, I guess? Like, literal tone of voice? Because the bit quoted in 3 is every bit as mocking as the stuff in my FB feed. I mean, he freaking smirked while saying it.
Drum acknowledges "a couple sentences of ridicule", but again, I think he's essentially saying, "liberals are stupid to mock frightened conservatives, except for mockery that I approve of, which is obviously fine and effective."
OK, Old Man OC.
6: Given the 18-24 month approval period, obviously not. In terms of the pipeline, I have no idea what his executive powers are. Could he designate every Syrian national a legitimate asylum seeker*? Would that change anything? What's the bottleneck?
*I'm assuming this would get around A. Congressionally-mandated immigration limits, and B. the part of the process where you have to jump through hoops just to prove you face prosecution back home
I still maintain that I'm a moderate in a political spectrum that's just distorted right now. You liberals seem to have lots of problems.
OK, Old Man OC.
Least scary Spiderman villain ever.
"pushing an immigration ban on Syrians and/or Muslims as a broader response to the threat posed by the Islamic State"
this is the "lucky charms are part of a nutritious breakfast" of political arguements
There's a fair bit of mockery in that clip, and those are pretty great lines too - he's been hitting them pretty hard on the being-tough-on-whatever narrative every time they start complaining about moderators or whatever. But unlike some of the other times he seemed really mad to me in that clip - there were a couple places where it looked like he was working really hard not to just start swearing.
The other thing that Drum seems to be missing is that the mockery is tied to a lot of righteous anger. Mocking Palin or Carson can be ineffective because it can come off as smug/condescending/all those liberal things. But mocking a tough guy because he's afraid of an orphan while pointing out that such cowards were also a part of the Holocaust, and also acting directly anti-Christian (and, indeed, refugee aid groups run by evangelical Christians are horrified by the rhetoric on the right) gets across a really clear moral message.
Haidt and people are always trying to claim that liberal moral values are somehow defective. Well, we're on the side of the angels here, and I'll be damned if I let the other party claim any righteousness.
This thread reminded me that there was a story in My Life about Clinton as governor of Arkansas being asked to accept Cuban refugees. It looks like somebody at the Washington Post recalls the same story (and adds a bunch of detail -- however it all seems to support the Clinton perspective in a way which feels a bit overdetermined).
"When the White House dismissed my suggestion out of hand," Clinton wrote, "I should have known we were in for a long, rough ride."
That ride commenced almost immediately. There were 20,000 Cubans at Fort Chaffee by May 20. Locals' reactions to their uninvited guests recalls some of the angry rhetoric about Syrian refugees put forth since the Paris attacks.
"To say that they [local residents] are scared is an understatement," Clinton remembered one sheriff said. "They are arming themselves to the teeth, and that only makes the situation more volatile."
On May 26, "a couple hundred" refugees escaped the fort, running out through an unguarded gate. Clinton demanded the National Guard act, but was faced with a bit of a Catch-22: The Cubans weren't illegal aliens, so they couldn't be detained against their will -- even though they weren't citizens, and were now walking free among Arkansans, many of whom were hostile.
Clinton called Carter and "demanded that someone be given authority to keep the Cubans on the base," he wrote. "I was afraid people in the area were going to start shooting them. There had been a run on handguns and rifles in every gun store within fifty miles of Chaffee."
I can't recall an issue that has made me feel as passionately enraged about the rank hypocrisy, moral cowardice and chickenshit tough talk that defines mainstream America. Lots of things bother me, but this is just deeply infuriating. I am honestly worried about making it through the inevitable bloviating among my extended (conservative) family this Thanksgiving without breaking a plate over someone's head.
In terms of the pipeline, I have no idea what his executive powers are. Could he designate every Syrian national a legitimate asylum seeker*? Would that change anything? What's the bottleneck?
Yeah, that's just the kind of thing I was wondering about.
When my fuckfaced governor said he was scared of refugees, I was wishing there were some sort of program where you could volunteer to sponsor a family of Syrians. Run them through a standard passport/whatever screening and they can come stay at my house while they get on their feet.
Obvs, "on their feet" in this context means "finding jobs somewhere other than Texas."
6: is there any reason to think he'll be able to actually bring more Syrian refugees to the U.S. before he leaves office?
8: What's the bottleneck?
I'm not sure the 18-24 month pipeline is the problem: there are people already in the pipeline, from what I understand, already on the verge of being cleared. The problem is that individual governors can block the use of any federal funding provided for support of refugee settlers in their states; and of course the congressional asshats who are either proposing legislation to bar Syrian immigrants altogether, or suggesting that such a bar be added to the omnibus spending bill due to be approved in December.
chickenshit tough talk that defines mainstream America.
I'm sure he'll follow this up by insulting Obama's mom.
That last is probably the biggest barrier. Obama would have to toy with the idea of vetoing any budget bill with that rider attached. Infuriatingly, then, quite a bit rests with the new Speaker of the House. Maybe Mitch McConnell can grapple with Paul Ryan over it all, I dunno.
At a guess, the administration will just say: fine, you states declining to take in refugees can just not have them. In exchange for that concession, ditch the fricking budget amendment.
I was wishing there were some sort of program where you could volunteer to sponsor a family of Syrians. Run them through a standard passport/whatever screening and they can come stay at my house while they get on their feet.
Yeah, we looked into this, but it doesn't work that way. But go here and see who is doing what in your state, and you can probably find a way to help.
16, 22: Yeah, AB asked about that this morning.
My pipeline question was about the 15k refugees that are coming. Like, what's stopping that number from being bigger? It's nothing to do with governors, and I assume it's tied to immigration limits, but asylum seekers aren't supposed to count against those limits so...?
19: I'm 100% positive I couldn't make it through Thanksgiving dinner with Ted Cruz without breaking a plate over his head.
23: Oh, I'd misunderstood the bottleneck question -- and suspected I had, actually.
My sense was just that Obama et al. somewhat arbitrarily decided on 10k Syrian refugees. I don't know if they've put forward any rationale. Hillary Clinton has, I believe, called for 65k, the UN recommendation.
It looks like it's still a matter of congressional funding:
The U.S. spent more than $1 billion to settle 70,000 refugees to the country during the 2014-2015 fiscal year. To add another 15,000 would likely cost the government at least another $200 million. The White House does not need congressional approval to expand the refugee quota, but it will depend on Congress for the funding necessary to accommodate those who seek asylum in the United States.
Now I can't stop fantasizing about breaking a Thanksgiving dinner plate over Ted Cruz's head.
Urple, geez, we all fantasize about breaking something in Ted Cruz's face. I'd go for his nose, myself.
15: You should do it. Total confrontation.
Right. Like he's going to care about his dinner plate.
I just checked, and while there are lots of Donald Trump pinatas available for purchase online (a worthy choice, to be sure), I couldn't find a Ted Cruz pinata. If someone can find one, let me know, I might buy a few as gifts.
Ok I think this right here is a genuine accomplishment when it comes to assholery about Syrian refugees. And from a Democrat no less! He's only a mayor and not a governor though so at least there's that.
I hadn't realized it, but there's a hole in my life that can only be filled by urple liveblogging Thanksgiving.
33: Wow. The best part is where he invokes the Japanese internment as a model to be imitated.
Yeah, that truly is next-level. I'd like to believe it's fake.
Drum triples down.
His argument is that the only thing anyone will ever hear from this Obama speech is the mockery, which is why you should never use it (this is why Republicans have lost every election since they started mocking liberals and Democrats).
But the thing is, there's only one important fact to counter the fear: we have a process, and it takes 18-24 months. If anyone can hear that and still think refugees are a problem, then they're assholes, not good faith undecideds. And that 18-24 month fact is just as much in my FB feed as mockery. I'd be surprised if there are any media outlets other than Fox that will quote only Obama's mockery; they may focus on it, but even the likes of CNN will include more than a single snippet.
So what Drum seems to be arguing is that, in the face of comically, world-historically pathetic bedwetting, the winning move is to... dryly state some facts and not point out that the opposition is A. pathetic, and B. evil.
Why doesn't anyone hire this guy as a campaign advisor? If only he'd been around to tell Biden to take Paul Ryan more seriously, we wouldn't have had President Romney all these years. For that matter, imagine if Gore had just turned down his mockery a bit, and instead focused on dry recitation of facts that supported his positions! What bliss Democrats would be in!
I disagree with Drum about this, too, but given that he's felt like a steadfast companion online for the last dozen years, and he also told us today that his days are likely numbered, I'm not feeling much anger.
Ideally one should use mockery to separate politicians from their supporters. Biden did that well. Targeting emotions, even cowardly ones, deeply felt by those supporters doesn't.
he also told us today that his days are likely numbered, I'm not feeling much anger.
Are you being facetious, or was he being super-blase about a serious development? I read that post as modestly bad news.
OK, on reread, I see
Unfortunately, it's unlikely that I can try a higher dose of my current chemo med with my immune system already so compromised.which is, indeed, alarming. Like, two factors, neither terrible on their own, but squeezing from both sides. Ugh.
41 is a fair point, except I still feel like this case is an exception. I mean, I'm sorry, but Godwin be damned, these are the people who turned away the Saint Louis, and I'll be damned if I cater to their fine feelings. If they want to say that their feelings of unease are more important than the lives of people facing slaughter (and a quarter million people dead as of last year is getting into relevant territory), then they have to own it, not whine, "You're being uncivil."
Furthermore, IMO there is daylight between the pusillanimity of the pols (again, see that Roanoke d-bag) and the unease of the people. Maybe mockery is too blunt a device to prise the two apart, but I also think that, if we validate the fear, then they don't give a shit about anything else. I mean, if you say, "Sure, ISIS agents are probably trying to sneak through with the refugees, but..." you've already lost the battle. What frightened whitey would give up 0.0001% of their comfort for the salvation of some lousy Muslims unless they're forced to face the fact that failing to do so goes against A. everything America is supposed to stand for, B. everything Jesus and Jehovah stood (stand?) for, and C. anything somebody with guts would do?
One other thing: Part of the problem in the whole social media outrage machine is that the grooves are so well-worn. But here we have a situation where the righteous include conservative white Christians and godless urban liberals, while the cowering include Republicans and (some) Democrats alike. Calling out Schumer alongside Toomey arguably does as much good in the eyes of the uncertain as any amount of tobesure-ism.
41 - Why would that be? The advantages seem obvious: you can easily provoke a defensive, and hence weak looking response; you can make them look foolish before their supporters; you can make their supporters feel uncomfortable whenever the issue comes up and want to avoid it, which undercuts its force; and you make them look silly to anyone undecided/low information/etc.. People can often find some line or whatever appealing right up until it's mocked and then they'll back off it really quickly and soon enough they'll deny ever having said/thought it. Calling out tough-guy posturing with mockery is like the absolute most effective way of dealing with it, and not just in politics either.
Unless the idea is that Obama would successfully gain support from Trump's serious xenophobic followers if only he wasn't so mean to them and was willing to tell them their pants wetting was courageous manliness motivated by something other than hatred it's hard to see what the down side is here.
America's long history of shunning refugees. Not just the 30's!
Urple, geez, we all fantasize about breaking something in Ted Cruz's face.
Wind, for example.
Just catching up on this beautiful front page from Scotland on Monday.
I get that many conservatives don't know anything about anything. But will you find many saying interning Americans of Japanese descent was a great idea, Joe McCarthy was a hero, we should have been on Germany's side in WW II, and so on?
48. It is great. But the picture makes me think of French men at ATMs mocking English knights.
Wtf dictionary? ATMs should be arms.
The great inclusivity visible in today's Scottish nationalism is both surprising and admirable.
Refugee resettlement agency in Indiana decides to re-route Syrian family to protect them. Connecticut governor personally welcomes them.
Link fail. Connecticut governor personally welcomes them.
49- Yes to the first two- wasn't that Michelle Malkin's book? Less often the third because everything is Munich 1938.
But remember, per 2 it's political "winner" for the Repuns.
||
Has anyone ever produced a video of an unarmed, black, male suspect actually reaching for a police officer's gun? For what percentage of shootings of black men shot by cops, who are alleged to have "reached for the officer's weapon," is there no other evidence than the testimony of the cops?
||>
Has anyone ever produced a video of an unarmed, black, male suspect actually reaching for a police officer's gun?
Only when necessary for the development of the plot.
Viewing this sort of thing in terms of political expediency - in terms of what people find persuasive as opposed to what is true - is unhelpful, and I'm always surprised when people do that.
The relevant question is: Is Obama correct in his framing? Is it, in fact, ridiculous and cowardly to reject Syrian refugees, or is he mocking people unfairly?
I propose that his framing is fair and correct, and provides a helpful way of thinking about the situation. Charlie Pierce seems to disagree. Even ogged may be having second thoughts about whether Obama chose to ignore some relevant context.
Okay.
But criticizing the politics of it? Wondering whether this is the way to persuade people? The first question is: who the hell really knows how things are going to play? If he'd called the chicken-shit rightwing nutcases "chicken-shit rightwing nutcases," then yeah, sure, that probably doesn't go over well politically. This seems a lot more ambiguous.
The second question is the same as the first: Who the hell knows how this is going to play? I'll tell you who knows: Barack Obama does. Absent some pretty strong evidence to the contrary, I'm inclined to trust his judgment on political expediency. This is a guy who, again and again, comes up with the right answer to the question: What works politically?
There's a horrible thing on my facebook comparing Syrian refugees to M&Ms, some of which have been poisoned.
49: The asshatosphere has attempted to rehabilitate Joe McCarthy's legacy, sure. Here's an example using bigger words and nominally more serious than e.g. Ann Coulter's work.
60: Do you ever find yourself having to restrain yourself from explaining the analogy ban off-site? Happens to me all the time.
In this case, I had to explain that at least I wasn't planning on licking the Syrians.
Has anyone ever produced a video of an unarmed, black, male suspect actually reaching for a police officer's gun?
There are a fair number of examples of an unarmed male suspect (of various colours) reaching for a police officer's gun, obtaining it, and using it to kill the police officer. Would those count, or are you actually after video?
60: It has been grapes and jellybeans in mine. In related news, I sure did go to high school with a bunch of ignorant assholes.
Mine is coming from the teacher. The teacher who used to go off onto tangents (he taught science) about how wrong the U.S. was in Vietnam.
That they are comparing the refugees to tasty appealing snacks, proves that it's not racism.
I don't do the Facebook as a general rule and not planning to start for this, but my wife was bemused at how this particular issue much more than any other (including elections) has led her to learn the politics of almost everyone she had avoided knowing that for. It seems to have struck some particularly resonant chord of "I need to share my views on this!"
Cheers for Scotland and Connecticut. This morning, NPR interviewed some Spanish lifeguards who are in Greece as volunteers to rescue refugees coming in from Turkey.
is there no other evidence than the testimony of the cops
I don't know percentages, but in Ferguson the suspect left pieces of himself on the gun.
Are you talking about the Jamar Clark shooting? Congrats on one upping Ferguson. All they had was a robbery suspect with no history. You guys managed to latch on to a guy who beat his girlfriend and then returned to the scene to try and keep the medics from putting her in an ambulance. And what do you think the odds are that this isn't his first arrest for some kind of crime of violence? Some other town is going to have to protest the shooting of a kiddie rapist or some shit to top this one.