They Are Gazans. Gazans. And Did I Mention "Gazans"?

During much of the years 2009-2016 (or 2015), I never missed an opportunity to criticize President Obama- for roughly the same reason Matt Stoller does here. However, in this tweet he chooses the wrong incident to slam the ex-President because the latter said nothing wrong.

Ultimately Obama never stood for anything except his own celebrity. He built the deeply loathed Democratic party that exists today. https://t.co/mUTs3Tomll

— Matt Stoller (@matthewstoller) April 30, 2026

The website Middle East Eye, widely believed to be funded by Qatar, reported last October

Social media users have accused former US President Barack Obama of dehumanising [sic] Palestinians and "bothsides-ing" genocide for a social media post about the announcement of a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas.

"After two years of unimaginable loss and suffering for Israeli families and the people of Gaza, we should all be encouraged and relieved that an end to the conflict is within sight; that those hostages still being held will be reunited with their families; and that vital aid can start reaching those inside Gaza whose lives have been shattered," Obama posted on X on Thursday.

He continued: "It now falls on Israelis and Palestinians, with the support of the US and the entire world community, to begin the hard task of rebuilding Gaza – and to commit to a process that, by recognizing the common humanity and basic rights of both peoples, can achieve a lasting peace."

Many users criticised the choice to reference "Israeli families" while referring to Palestinians as "the people of Gaza".

The ‘people’ of Gaza are Palestinians. They have survived a genocide and an ongoing attempt to eliminate them for over a century,” Palestinian-American human rights attorney Noura Erakat added.

The people of Saudi Arabia are Saudi Arabians. The people of Nigeria are Nigerians. The people of Ukraine are Ukrainians. And the people of Gaza are Gazans. This should not be so hard. Yet 

Several argued that the distinction was not merely stylistic, but part of a long-standing rhetorical pattern in western political language.

Sana Saeed, a media critic, wrote: “this wasn’t a deliberate demarcation of humanity; it’s reflex. A masterclass in seven words on how Palestinians are rendered faceless and nameless when slaughtered, while Israelis are granted empathy - especially when they are the butchers.”

Obama observed "an end to the conflict is within sight;" that hostages "will be reunited with their families." He suggested also that"vital aid can start reaching those inside Gaza," that "the hard task of rebuilding Gaza" and of achieving "a lasting peace" can begin.

It's unsurprising that eventual peace with Israel and the release of live hostages would be distasteful to Islamists. It's a little more surprising that someone envisioning lasting peace and the rebuilding of Gaza would be scolded (though not much more).

The article continued

"For Obama, Israel has families, but Gaza just has people. Israelis are hostages being held but Gazans are merely 'those' who need aid," posted one user.

“When they deign to mention Palestinians at all, they must always throat-clear by mentioning Israelis first. Thems the rules," said journalist Barry Malone.

If it is unacceptable to address the matter of Israelis while addressing the plight of Palestinians, there is an alternative. "The Palestinians in Gaza are led by a ruthless, evil entity named Hamas which should be wiped off the face of the earth."  O.K., then: Palestinians are mentioned with no mention of Israelis.

Moreover

Several social media users highlighted Obama’s use of the word “conflict” to describe Israel’s assault on Gaza, which the UN, genocide and legal experts, and international rights organisations have concluded constitutes a genocide.

"'Conflict' connotes that this was a war with two equal sides and not a genocide/wiping out of an entire region and its infrastructure," responded one user.

"It’s a GENOCIDE," responded historian Assal Rad. "There is no accountability without acknowledging it, and there is no justice without accountability."

Several users said the framing constituted a “bothsides-ing” of a situation defined by Israeli occupation and siege.

The word "conflict" was used because it was a conflict (unfortunately, still is). Obama was not trying to score points or to litigate the issue of genocide; he was applauding an apparent ceasefire.  

And- for the 173rd time or so I've had to mention: this was, or is, not genocide. Killing lots and lots of people, even unnecessarily, is not genocide. If it were, Russia currently would be accused of genocide against Ukrainians and the USA would be accused of genocide against Iranians (or Persians). Nonetheless, neither major power- and Israel has proven it, too, is a major power- is attempting to wipe out an entire people.

Russia, a nuclear power, could wipe out Ukrainians; it is not. The USA, a nuclear power, could wipe out Irainians; it is not. Israel, generally believed to be a nuclear power, could wipe out Iranians; it is not. The Russian assault against Ukraine is not referred to as war crimes committed against Slavs, but rather against Ukrainians. However, it has become acceptable for Islamists and their allies to define the ongoing Middle East dispute in racial terms. 

This is reprehensible. 

The Israelis are not trying to exterminate a people. If it were trying to eliminate Palestinians, Jordan- at least 50% Palestinian- now would be under brutal asault.  (And it probably would become a wasteland.)

The Islamists who actually were offended by the remarks of ex-President Obama would argue that what Israel has done to Gaza would constitute genocide. However, with the ever-increasing number of people outside of Gaaza who would identify as "Palestinian,"it is odd that "Palestinian" would be considered synonymous with residents of Gaza. I suppose that referring to inhabitants of a strip of land constituting a political entity would fit "the longstanding rhetorical pattern in western political language," as Middle East Eye put it.  Que c'est horrible!

The term "genocide" is one of the best examples of definition creep.  "Genocide" never meant unnecessary killing or even slaughter but something far worse. However, those who wish to accuse Israel of the worst behavior imaginable have employed "genocide" as a weapon against a nation with the gall (chutzpah?) to believe that it has a right to exist.  The expression joins "traitor" and "racist" as among the most commonly abused words whose definition is stretched well beyond its original, justified, meaning.

These were comments posted on social media and everyone has a right to express his or her opinion. However, individuals who find these viewpoints distasteful and- more importantly- absurd should not ignore them.  And it shouldn't be left to the far right, which often attacks such remarks, to expose them as nonsense.

Share |

Striking Timing

In his monologue on Thursday night, ABC's Jimmy Kimmel

speaking during a mock version of the annual dinner two nights before the official event, delivered a series of jokes aimed at the president and his family. Typically, a comedian headlines the dinner, and Kimmel’s skit involved him delivering remarks as though he were the comedian selected to roast the attendees.

“Our first lady is here. Mrs. Trump … you have a glow like an expectant widow,” Kimmel said.

“By the way, in the unfortunate event that our president has a medical emergency tonight, do we have a doctor in the house — oh, I’m sorry. I mean, do we have a Jesus in the house? I always confuse them, too,” he added, referring to a meme President Trump had previously posted and then deleted on Truth Social that appeared to depict him as Jesus.

In January, Dr. Vin Gupta, medical analyst for NBC News, maintained that Trump, whose father was diagnosed with Alzheimer's Disease in his '80s,  was displaying "word finding difficulties" and "inattentention, he loses his train of thought."  He was exhibiting "clear inability to epress his own thoughts, difficulty completing a sentence, tangential speech. Of course, memory issues. He doesn't know what he's talking about. Greenland fro even the course of a sentnece and confuses it with Iceland."

Dr. Jonathan Reiner, the cardiologist who served as Vice President Dick Cheney's physician, pointed out that Trump was taking 325 mg of aspirin daily, typically prescribed only after a stroke or heart attack. Noting significant bruising that the President had been suffering, Reiner asked "Why would you continue to take a higher dose of aspirin than your doctor recommends if you're bruising excessively? Makes no sense."

In the words of John Oliver, now this:

Fresh concerns over US President Donald Trump’s health have surfaced after recent visuals and reports suggested possible issues with his mobility.

Speculation grew after observers claimed Trump may be using a hidden leg brace, with some pointing to his movements and posture in public appearances. Social media users also questioned his coordination, with videos showing him appearing cautious while walking.

The Administration's response to the accumulated evidence of ill health of the President has been either to withhold medical information from the public or to deny, deny, deny

Kimmel contends that his words reflected the significant age difference between the middle-aged First Lady and the elderly President. Nontheless, the President is not a well man and, taken as a whole, evidence indicates that he may be dying. If Kimmel's critics had condemned the comedian for making light of the President's physical condition while evidence mounts that his health is critical, it would have been bad enough. Facts can be disregarded.  But it's worse than that. 

Kimmel made his weak joke in the evening of April 23. Yet, it wasn't until Monday, April 27 that Melania Trump- who once lived with husband Donald- complained "his monologue about my family isn't comedy- his words are corrosive and deepens the political sickness within America."  As deeply offended by "cancellation culture" as the rest of the Republican Party, Melania argued "People like Kimmel shouldn't have the opportunity to enter our homes each evening to spread hate." 

She continued "A coward, Kimmel hides behnd ABC because he knows the network willl keep running cover to protect him."  "Enough is enough," whined the woman who hasn't had an original thought since she definitely was not a call girl nor passed among Jeffrey Epstein, Donald Trump, and other men. The ex-"model" added "It is time for ABC tot ake a stand. How many times will ABC's leadership enable Kimmel's atrocious behavior at the expense of our community."

A joke is not "behavior;" it is speech. The wife of the President, who did live with her husband at least a few years since she definitely was no longer a call girl, should know that.

A few hours later, the President himself, never missing a chance for demagoguery, described the comedian's joke as "shocking' and 'something far beyond the pale.'" Also a staunch oppponent of cancellation culture, Donald added "Jimmy Kimmel should be immediately fired by Disney and ABC."

Yet, the remarks of the  presidential press secretary which were most significant.  Lyin' Leavitt charged "Who in their right minds [sic]says a wife would be glowing over the potential murder of her beloved husband And having experienced what I did with the First Lady on Saturday night, I can tell you that she was anything but that."

In adding "this kind of rhetoric about the President, the First Lady, and his supporters is completely deranged," Karoline conflated Kimmel's comment with all other comments, inaccurately implying that they are polific. Referring to Donald as Melania's "beloved husband" is just short of bizarre when the First Lady evidently "hates his f---ing guts."

But the most telling phrase of Karoline's comment was "potential murder." This was not a reference to Ryan Routh, who poked a rifle through a chain-link fence while candidate Trump was golfing at Trump International Golf Club in Fort Pierce, Florida. Nor was it a reference to Thomas Crooks, who was shot dead after he fired at President Trump at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. 

Leavitt was linking Kimmel's joke to the effort of Cole Thomas Allen to storm into the ballroom where President Trump, Vice President Vance, and other members of the Administration had joined a vast numer of journalists and other invited guests for the White House Correspondents' Association dinner. Of course, the apparent assassination attempt had occurred after (by two days) Jimmy Kimmel's monologue.

The press secretary suggested that Kimmel's remark was in particularly bad taste given "what I did with the First Lady on Saturday night."  She- and the President and his "wife"- could have expressed their alleged outrage on Friday or on Saturday morning or afternoon. Donald even could have posted something on Untruth Social overnight on Thursday. He often posts things overnight because he is awake when he is absolutely, positively not using drugs.

However, it was more advantageous to do so on Monday, following the incident at the Washington Hilton. It was an effort to anger those people who would know about the event, hear the condemnation on Monday or Tuesday, and assume that Kimmel made some wful remark after the President ws almost, almost shot and killed. Hypocritical? Cowardly? A little of both? You make the call.

A little thought and individuals would have realized the comment came before Saturday night but thinking these things through asks a lot of people busy with their personal lives.  That applies especially to those "poorly educated" Trump claims to love.

A master propagandist, the presidential press secretary has learned much from the master propagandist, her own master. Others in the regime also have done so, which is reason not to understimate the Administration, even as the President suffers through a period of extraordinary unpopularity.

 

Share |

They Melt So Easily

If it didn't come from "RNC Research," you'd have to think Republicans have a sense of humor.

ELISSA SLOTKIN: President Trump is an “existential threat to democracy.”

Your vile rhetoric is inciting violence against President Trump and Republicans. pic.twitter.com/80HyshfdXM https://t.co/gP7gM30iCz

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 26, 2026

There was the time in the week preceeding the last presidential election when Donald Trump said to Tucker Carlson of Liz Cheney "She's a radical war hawk. Let's put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, OK? Let's see how she feels about it, you know, when the guns are trained on her face."  No inciting violence against his enemies on that one.

In March, 2024 Donald posted a video on Untruth Social of Trump-themed vehicles. One of the pikcup trucks included a bound and gagged Joe Biden in the back of a pickup truck. No inciting violence, there, either.

 

When several Democratic members of Congress posted a video recommending members of the military refuse illegal orders, President Trump responded with his own tweet "This is really bad, and Dangerous to our Country. Their words cannot be allowed to stand SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR FROM TRAITORS111 LOCK THEM UP??? " After reflecting upon this he later added "SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!""

Then following the murder of actor and producer Rob Reiner and his wife last December, Donald posted on Untruth Social

A very sad thing happened last night in Hollywood. Rob Reiner, a tortured and struggling, but once very talented movie director and comedy star, has passed away, together with his wife, Michele, reportedly due to the anger he caused others through his massive, unyielding, and incurable affliction with a mind crippling disease known as TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME, sometimes referred to as TDS. He was known to have driven people CRAZY by his raging obsession of President Donald J. Trump, with his obvious paranoia reaching new heights as the Trump Administration surpassed all goals and expectations of greatness, and with the Golden Age of America upon us, perhaps like never before. May Rob and Michele rest in peace!

Threatening to shut down political opponents any way he can is not an anomaly for Donald Trump. It is his brand, and if it can be accomplished violently, he's all the happier. Yet, the right-wing whines that Senator Elissa Slotkin is inciting violence against Republicans because she states the obvious, that "Donald Trump is an existential threat to democracy."  Snowflakes, we have learaned, cry easily.

 

Share |

Ever the Enemy of Our Western Allies

Unfortunately, President Trump wants it this way.

“America is no longer an ally."

Trump’s actions prove he’s no longer a Nato ally and the rest of Europe needs to “double down” on defence spending to replace America’s “firepower” says Nato’s Former Deputy Supreme Allied Commander, General Sir Richard Shirreff. pic.twitter.com/Uo558SgLms

— Times Radio (@TimesRadio) April 24, 2026

A year before Donald Trump previously left the presidency, we learned that he had

told the president of the European Commission in 2020 that the US would “never come help” if Europe was attacked and also said “Nato is dead”, a senior European commissioner said.

Multiple news outlets said the exchange between Trump and Ursula von der Leyen at the World Economic Forum in Davos in 2020 was described in Brussels on Tuesday by Thierry Breton, a French European commissioner responsible for the internal market, with responsibilities including defence.

“You need to understand that if Europe is under attack we will never come to help you and to support you,” Trump said, according to Breton, who was speaking at the European parliament.

According to Breton, Trump also said: “By the way, Nato is dead, and we will leave, we will quit Nato.”

According to the Jerusalem Post, Trump added: “And by the way, you owe me $400bn, because you didn’t pay, you Germans, what you had to pay for defence.”

Just this week, The Independent reported

The Trump administration has reportedly drawn up a “naught or nice”-style list of NATO allies, separating them into different categories based on how the U.S. grades their contribution to the alliance.

The reported effort comes as President Donald Trump has furiously denounced the transatlantic alliance for not doing more to support the U.S. war against Iran.

A European diplomat told Politico the reported list appears to be an extension of an idea Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth floated in December, when he told a defense forum that “model allies” will receive the “special favor” of the U.S. and nations “that still fail to do their part for collective defense will face consequences.”

“The White House has a naughty and nice paper so I guess the thinking is similar,” the diplomat said.

Hegseth has used the “model ally” language in meetings with NATO members, another diplomat told the outlet. The list was reportedly prepared in advance of NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte’s visit to Washington earlier this month.

The Independent has contacted the White House, the Pentagon, and NATO for comment.

The reported list could prompt the U.S. to take adverse actions against alliance members, which could range from moving U.S. troops to blocking sales of American defense tech to allied nations, though observers told Politico these moves might end up harming the U.S. more than the countries it is allegedly seeking to punish.

And in related news, does anyone remember Greenland?

An internal Pentagon email outlines options for the United States to punish NATO allies it believes failed to ​support U.S. operations in the war with Iran, including suspending Spain from the alliance and reviewing the U.S. position on Britain's claim to the Falkland Islands, a U.S. official told Reuters.

The policy options are detailed in ‌a note prepared by Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon's top policy adviser, who expressed frustration at some allies' perceived reluctance or refusal to grant the United States access, basing and overflight rights - known as ABO - for the Iran war, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe the email.

Colby wrote that ABO is "just the absolute baseline for NATO," according to the official, who added that the options were circulating at high levels in the Pentagon.

One option in the email envisions suspending "difficult" countries from important or prestigious positions at NATO, the official said.

President Donald Trump has harshly criticized NATO allies ​for not sending their navies to help open the Strait of Hormuz, which was closed to global shipping following the start of the air war on February 28.

He has also declared he is considering withdrawing from the alliance.

Indications are, though, that President Trump does not views the Falkland Islands, which justifably belong to Great Britain, as similar to Greenland, Venezuela, or Cuba. Rather, it appears that he mostly wants to turn the territory over to Argentina and its Trump-loving "anarcho capitalist", Javier "The Rug" Milei, who is anxious to gain control over the Falklands.

It's difficult to nail down definitively Donald Trump's longstanding desire to emasculate and eventually wipe out NATO. It could be his allegiance to Vladimir Putin or a fear that a powerful, united Europe would interfere with his unilateralist foreign policy. Or it could be simply that, as an apostle of the zero-sum game, Donald believes that anything which hurts Europe helps him. Whatever it is, President Trump realizes he won't be President or alive forever.. And as he leaves, he would have the satisfaction of knowing that he has destroyed so much in his wake. 

Share |

Choices

In one way, Scott Jennings is correct.

How many lives would ultimately be saved if we actually kept violent criminals in prison instead of releasing them onto the streets to terrorize America?

We don't have to live this way. pic.twitter.com/iVyZ119QQP

— Scott Jennings (@ScottJenningsKY) April 20, 2026

In a discussion on CNN last August when President Donald Trump ordered the takeover of Washington, D.C. by federal forces, host Abby

Phillip said it is “interesting” and “probably it’s a good thing” that Republicans are now talking about illegal guns on the streets, as for years they rejected calls for stricter gun regulation and insisted the number of firearms on the streets was not the issue in the country’s gun violence.

Phillip also noted the GOP have long hit out at D.C’s stricter gun laws making it harder to legally own a firearm, which Jennings now seems to be supporting.

“Republicans aren’t for illegal guns. Republicans are for responsible gun ownership,” Jennings said.

Frost then asked Jennings if that was the case, why had Trump stripped funding for the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which included grants earmarked for local gun-violence prevention. Reuters reported last month that the Trump administration had terminated around $158 million in gun violence prevention grants in Democratic-led cities such as D.C., New York, and Los Angeles.

“Republicans are for legal gun ownership,” Jennings reiterated. “The laws of D.C. have obviously not been enforced to the point where the citizens believe they’re safe.”

Phillip then asked Jennings that if Republicans want fewer gun laws, how can he advocate for legal gun ownership while opposing as much regulation on guns.

“A gun becomes illegal when a violent person uses it on another person,” Jennings said.

Making a gun illegal only as it's used on another person is a little late for the children of Shamar Elkins of Shreveport, Louisiana, a National Guard veteran who early on April 19

went to two houses within a short walk of each other, killing eight children – seven of his own – and gravely wounding two women, including the mother of his children. The victims who were fatally shot ranged in age from three to 11, authorities said...

After the shootings, the gunman, identified as 31-year-old Shamar Elkins, stole a car at gunpoint and fled onto a nearby interstate, officials said. Police pursued him into Bossier City, where they exchanged gunfire. Elkins was pronounced dead at the scene, but it remains unclear whether he was shot by police or died by suicide.

The incident is being investigated by ATF and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of Louisiana and

On April 26, 2026, federal prosecutors charged Charles Ford, 56, with being a felon in possession of a firearm and making a false statement to federal agents, with the firearm and false statement charges relating to the firearm used by Elkins....

Whne law enforcement interviewed the original purchaser, that person identified Ford as the person to whom she'd given it. Ford, a convicted felon not permitted to possess firearms, initially lied to ATF agents about possessing the firearm, claiming he never did. Ford later admitted that he did possess the firearm, claiming that he kept the firearm under his seat. Ford further admitted to believieng that Elkins tookd possession of the firearm.

In the video above, Jennings notes that Elkins had been charged in Louisian in 2019 for illegal use of weapons and carrying a firearm on school property. He pled guilty to (only) the illegal weapons charge while the other charge was dismissed and was placed on probation for 18 months. Jennings remarks

It makes you wonder what if he had gotten a lengthy prison sentence back then instead of leniency from progressive prosecutors. Well, we probably wouldn't be talking about eight dead children today if something different had happened back then.  Another example of a criminal justice system that seems to be tilted in favor of the violent instead of the innocent. Living this way is a choice, folks, and we can stop making it any time we want.

"We" can make that decision, though probably neither Jennings nor I knows whether the fault in this case lies with the prosecutor's office of the judge hearing the case in this very conservative, solidly Republican state. (More details would be helpful.) But if we can (re-) create a criminal justice system more concerned with the needs of the innocent rather than of violent offenders, we can also decide to do something with guns.

We can renew an assault weapons ban, which was in place from 1994 to 2014. It was highly effective, perhaps 

because assault weapons are semiautomatic firearms designed for rapid fire and combat use, and large-capacity magazines increase the number of rounds that can be fired without reloading. While the gun lobby prevented the ban from being as effective as it could have been and saddled the law with a 10-year sunset provision, the ban did impede the easy access to the type of lethal weaponry that those intent on mass killing have readily available in most of the country today. (Assault weapons are legal in 43 states; large-capacity magazines, commonly understood as ammunition-feeding devices holding more than 10 rounds, are legal in 41.)

Louisiana has no assault weapon restrictions and its gun laws are among the most lenient in the nation. It also has the second highest rate of gun violence in the nation, which is very likely not coincidental. Firearm violence is a problem, of course, not only for Louisiana but for every state, especially those which tolerate it due to worship of guns and a convenient misreading of the Second Amendment. Punishment of the offender is important but so is prevention of firearm violence and that, too, is a choice we can make. 

Share |

Warped

Elise Stefanik, for whom "whole civilization" means "regime":

Heated clash erupts on CNN as Jake Tapper presses Rep. Elise Stefanik over President Trump’s rhetoric toward Iran

Tapper pushes: “A president threatening to wipe out an entire civilization… you’re applying two different standards”

Stefanik fires back: “He is targeting the… pic.twitter.com/4wzoYHun83

— Derrick Evans (@DerrickEvans4WV) April 19, 2026

What part of "a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again" does former Representative Elise Stefanik not understand? Donald posted on Untruth Social on April 5

A whole cvilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don't want that to happen, but it probably will. However, now that we have Complete and Total Regime Change, where different, smarter, and less radicalized minds prevail, maybe something revolutionarily wonderful can happen, WHO KNOWS?  We will find out tonight, one of the most important moments in the long and complex history of the World. 47 years of extortion, corruption, and death, will finally end. God Bless the Great People of Iran!

What we found out was, praise be to God, that TACO. Trump backed down, and so Iran- and thereafter, possibly the entire Middle East- was not wiped out

During the interview CNN's Tapper had with Stefanik on CNN's State of the Union on April 19, the latter claimed that President Trump

is targeting the Iranian terrorist regime. Everyone seems to understand that Jake, except for CNN.

And what did it do? It brought the Iranians to the table, delivering a cease-fire, and, frankly, bringing this terrorist regime to its knees. It has been very important for us to address, frankly, this conflict that has been going on for decades, the terrorist regime that has not only hijacked the Strait of Hormuz, but has been the number one state sponsor of terror.

After Trump's threat, Iran agreed to a two-week ceasefire, which temporarily relieved the nation of bombardment. On April 10, Vice President Vance negotiated with the Iranians for one day, which came to no avail.  In light of the ceasefire, Tehran was to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, but then reneged when it contended that the continuation of Israeli military operations in Lebanon violated terms of the agreement. 

Responding to the breakdown of talks, the US military began a blockade of Iran's ports on April 13, prompting Tehran to threaten to retaliate against the ports of its Gulf neighbors. Israel and Lebanon then agreed to a ceasefire and Iran backed down. But on April 20, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf of Iran "issued a sharp rebutall to US President Donald Trump, laying out a multi-point counter that challenges"  several claims made by the American President. And Ghalibaf announced that the Strait wouldn't remain open and "Iranian authorization" would be required to sail through it.

Stefanik made her "brought the Iranians to the table" boast one day prior to that. However, negotiations currently are suspended, the Iranians aren't at "the table," and the notion that "this terrorist regime (has been brought) to its knees" is delusional, or would be if she believed it. That is, unless "brought to its knees" means "radicalized and emboldened."

But that is nothing compared to Stefanik's obscene perspective on genocide.  Jake Tapper asked the ex-congresswoman repeatedly about the President's threat to wipe out Iranian civilization. And, with slight wording change, each time her response was the same:

- He was focusing on the Iranian regime.

- And it's very important to note that the- I'm talking he was focused on the Iranian terrorist regime.

-But that's- Jake, you can ask this question but the reality is it was targeted toward the Iranian terrorist regime.

-President Trump was not calling for genocide. Shame on CNN for saying that.

Stefanik argued "if you want to compare the President of the United States to the university presidents who failed to call for the condemnation of calling for the genocide of Jews, that's on you, Jake."  This was worse than classic bothsiderism or moral equivalence. She strongly implied that statements from the "from the river to the sea" students and college presidents who did not squelch their anti-semitic speech were worse, and more significant, than President Trump's threat against the Iranian people.

Those words included "a whole civilization will die tonight." Then as if to make sure that everyone understood, Donald added "never to be brought back," making crystal-clear his wet dream of destroying an entire people. The civilization would be unrecognizable and irretrievable, victim of unparalleled death, destruction, and horror. The USA instantly would have become an international pariah and a society which would forever be placed alongside Nazi Germany in the history books.  A good thing, according to Elise Stefanik.

 

 Share |

Messiah, He Said

Joy Behar was almost almost right. Sort of.

Joy Behar: “Jesus himself did not run around saying, ‘I’m the Messiah, I’m the Messiah.’”

Alyssa Farah Griffin: “Ehhhhh.”

Sara Haines: “That’s exactly what Jesus said, ‘I am the Messiah!’”

Joy Behar: “No, he did not! Jesus was more modest than that. Listen I knew Jesus,… pic.twitter.com/FNTIiczhRC

— RedWave Press (@RedWavePress) April 14, 2026

Texas senator Ted Cruz responded to Joy Behar's remarks with "Jesus answered, 'I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

Entirely correct; also, off-point.  Behar argued "Jesus himself did not run around saying 'I'm the Messiah, I'm the Messiah.'"

That's accurate. Jesus did not run or run around; he walked. He did claim to be the Messiah, though less often his than equality with God. In John, chapter 4 while on his way from Judea to Galilee, Jesus stopped at a pool in Samaria and struck up a conversation with a woman who came by for water. When he mentioned that she had had five "husbands," the woman identified him as a prophet and Jew and (as recounted in verses 21-26).

“Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”

The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.”

Then Jesus declared, “I, the one speaking to you—I am he.”

 In Mark 14: 61b-62a, Jesus was asked "Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One" and responded "I am..."

By comparison, Jesus claimed divinity on several occasions Perhaps most famously was the reference Senator Cruz made, from John 14:6. Also

Mark 14:62: after claiming to be the Messiah, Jesus stated "And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."

John 5:22: "Moreover, the Father judges no one but has entrusted all judgment to the Son."

John 11:25- 26: "I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he dies, yet shall he live and whomever lives by believing in me will never die. Do you believe this?"

Mark 2:28: "So the Son of Man is lord even of the Sabbath."

And simultaneously asserting divinity and pre-existence, the latter a triumph of eloquence and decisiveness over proper grammar:

John 17:5: "And now, Father glorify me in your ownpresence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed."

John 8:58: "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM."

There also were instances in which other individual(s) contended, or that Jesus implied, that Christ was divine. Those contrasted, at least in degree, with those occasions in which he himself was definitive.

Behar can't believe that Jesus called himself the Messiah because he "was more modest than that." Well, for the rest of us, even Donald Trump, it would be extraordinarily immodest and boastful. Of course, the rest of us are only mortal, did not exist at the creation, do not miraculously heal the sick, and will not be executed and raised from the dead.

Pretty impressive resume. Or as Walt Whitman is thought to have said, "if you done it, it ain't bragging."

Share |

Trump's Singular Hatred for His Country

The ultra-opportunistic, once Biden-Harris enthusiast Lindy Li, aggressively pro-Trump, has something to say that's absurd even by the standards she has set:

 

The United States of America has NOTHING to apologize for

I hated Barack Obama’s worldwide apology tour and fake red lines

I cringed at Biden’s indecisiveness and weakness on the global stage

We are the greatest nation in human history. Americans should be PROUD, never sorry pic.twitter.com/RkuqT6exR2

— Lindy Li (@lindyli) April 14, 2026

This is an ironic defense of a man who hates his own country. 

At a Turning Point conference in July, 2023, presidential candidate Donald J. Trump bleated that the USA was a "dead" country during the presidency of the incumbent, Joseph R. Biden. He added 

Millions of illegl aliens have stormed across our borders, it is an invasion, like a military invasion. Our rights and liberties are being torn to shreds. Your country is being turned into a third-world hellhole, run by censors, perverts, criminals, and thugs.  We're going to hell.

Censors, perverts, criminals, and thugs?  But enough about you, Donald. It's your desscription of our country as "a third-world hellhole" which should have been a major blow to his campaign, but of course wasn't.

Also during that campaign, Trump appeard on "Eric Bolling The Balance" on Newmax and asserted "our elections are third-world. Our airports are third-wrld. Everything we have now is third-world."

More famously, Donald took to Untruth Social last May during the runup to the Supreme Court's consideration of birthright citizenship and declared "We are, for the sake of being politically correct, a STUPID Country but, in actuality, this is the exact opposite of being politically correct, and it is yet another point that leads to the dysfunction of America."  He had Truth Socialed roughly the same thing on April Fools' Day.

"Stupid" was capitalized to ensure that people understood that he believes that his own, and their, country is stupid. It didn't work, though, and evidently never will. On Untruth Social on 10/30/22, Trump called the USA "rigged, crooked, and evil," and hardly anyone noticed. During his Cabinet meeting of February 26, 2025, he described the American people as "bloaated, fat, and disgusting" and hardly anyone noticed.

Perhaps it's Donald Trump's secret sauce, constantly making outrageous, ugly, and dishonest statements that little attention is paid to any one such remark. Or  perhaps our self-image has been so degraded by Donald that most Amricans believe their own country is stupid and evil, dominated by perverts and criminals ruling disgustingly obese people.

Last August (a few months after his meeting at the White House with the President), Bill Maher commented

Steve Bannon famously said that the way you win is to flood the zone with s—. You want to help him with that? Great you do you, but I’m not chasing every brain fart down the rabbit hole. So therefore, here is my 1/8 of the term scorecard for what actually matters: Turning the Environmental Protection Agency into the pollution Protection Agency. Yes, that’s going to matter. All the people who will lose health care and all the debt that will be run up from the big, beautiful bill. Yes, that matters.

That's a legitimate point. However, if we don't take notice of what Trump says (which Maher, as a comedian, regularly does), we may get suckered into giving him the benefit of the doubt about an action, which Maher did when initially supporting the recent attack upon Iran. It's easy to forget how truly an evil individual the President is and that he virtually always has a malevolent motive.

And so we have an online political creator who simultaneously believes the USA has much to be proud of and that, of our last three presidents, it is Donald J. Trump who is the one who stands for that. Therefore, it is never a waste of our time or energy to point out that our current President really does dislike our country and its people.

Share |

Iran: a Threat?

In a previous post, I favorably quoted international relations scholar John Mearsheimer.  A longtime critic of Israel, Mearsheimer justifiably is opposed to President Trump's attack on Iran. However, it appears his opposition may be rooted in hostility to the one democracy or republic in the Middle East.

Piers Morgan: "Iran is no threat to the United States?"

John Mearsheimer: "No, it's not."

Piers Morgan: "They fund terrorist organizations dedicated to the obliteration of Israel."

John Mearsheimer: "You're making the argument that because we're joined at the hip with Israel,… pic.twitter.com/LlpYaxmZ0g

— Red Pill Dispenser (@redpilldispensr) April 14, 2026

The assertion that "Iran is no threat to the United States" is hogwash, obviously flapdoodle (vying to be the one American to invoke "flapdoodle" anytime this calendar year). In early March, CBS News reported

Iran has been designated by the U.S. as a state sponsor of terrorism since 1984. It has launched more than 1,600 drone attacks on U.S. allies in the Middle East since the war began last week, according to the Institute for National Security Studies in Israel.

On "CBS Mornings," two former counterterrorism officials and CBS News national security contributors, Sam Vinograd and Joe Zacks, discussed the potential threats to the U.S. and what Americans should know to help protect themselves.

Vinograd said Iran represents a "multi-dimensional threat to the homeland."

"They seek to inflict damage in our physical spaces, in cyberspace and in terms of the actual information that we're ingesting and digesting and circulating right now," said Vinograd, a  former DHS assistant secretary for counterterrorism and threat protection.

She said Iran has a "deep bench of players they tap into to inflict damage," including proxies — regional, like-minded terrorist organizations — along with state agents.

Iran has also developed what she calls "surrogate networks here in the United States — regular criminals that they actually hire and pay money to do things like murders and assassinations."

Then there was a report issued on March 20, in which

the FBI and other federal intelligence agencies cautioned that Iranian government "poses a persistent threat" to U.S. military and government personnel and buildings, Jewish and Israeli institutions, and Iranian dissidents in the U.S. Despite those warnings, the FBI and National Counterterrorism Center had not identified broad threats to the American public, the report said….

The March 20 report - titled "Public Safety Awareness Report" - was issued weeks after Reuters and other news outlets reported that the White House blocked the release of a similarly described intelligence product. At the time, the White House said it was ensuring any information was properly vetted before release.

Iran does pose a threat to the USA. It posed significantly less of a threat to the USA before the Trump Administration launched its attack on Iran on March 1, 2026. And it posed even less of a threat to the USA before the Administration last autumn reassigned individuals from cybersecurity to deportation of immigrants. 

John Mearsheimer believes we're "joined at the hip with Israel." Corrction, sir: the Trump Administration is joined at the hip with Benjamin Netanyahu, a small but critical distinction. Iran is a threat to the USA, even though he prefers to believe that any enemy of Israel is no enemy of ours.

Share |

Not Best Friends

We knew Pope Leo XIV was in trouble with President Trump when in the first week of January when Robert Francis Prevost remarked

The good of the beloved Venezuelan people must prevail over every other consideration This must lead to the overcoming of violence, and to the pursuit of paths of justice and peace, guaranteeing the sovereignty of the country, ensuring the rule of law enshrined in its constitution, respecting the human and civil rights of each and every person, and working together to build a peaceful future of cooperation, stability and harmony, with special attention to the poorest who are suffering because of the difficult economic situation.

Justice and peace? National sovereignty? Rule of law? Human and civil rights? Cooperation, stability and harmony?  In an earlier time, a priest might as well have preached celibacy to (the late) Wilt Chamberlain. These are not things Trump believes in.

And now the Pope has gone and done it again. In March, he said "I am praying for peace. I hope that [a] ceasefire would be the most effective way to work together to find peace for all parties, to respect all parties and to come to a solution."  Earlier this month, he seemed to take a swipe at Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, remarking that Jesus Christ "does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war."

So on the Lord's Day, Trump tweets

Pope Leo is WEAK on Crime, and terrible for Foreign Policy. He talks about “fear” of the Trump Administration, but doesn’t mention the FEAR that the Catholic Church, and all other Christian Organizations, had during COVID when they were arresting priests, ministers, and everybody else, for holding Church Services, even when going outside, and being ten and even twenty feet apart. I like his brother Louis much better than I like him, because Louis is all MAGA. He gets it, and Leo doesn’t! I don’t want a Pope who thinks it’s OK for Iran to have a Nuclear Weapon. I don’t want a Pope who thinks it’s terrible that America attacked Venezuela, a Country that was sending massive amounts of Drugs into the United States and, even worse, emptying their prisons, including murderers, drug dealers, and killers, into our Country. And I don’t want a Pope who criticizes the President of the United States because I’m doing exactly what I was elected, IN A LANDSLIDE, to do, setting Record Low Numbers in Crime, and creating the Greatest Stock Market in History. Leo should be thankful because, as everyone knows, he was a shocking surprise. He wasn’t on any list to be Pope, and was only put there by the Church because he was an American, and they thought that would be the best way to deal with President Donald J. Trump. If I wasn’t in the White House, Leo wouldn’t be in the Vatican. Unfortunately, Leo’s Weak on Crime, Weak on Nuclear Weapons, does not sit well with me, nor does the fact that he meets with Obama Sympathizers like David Axelrod, a LOSER from the Left, who is one of those who wanted churchgoers and clerics to be arrested. Leo should get his act together as Pope, use Common Sense, stop catering to the Radical Left, and focus on being a Great Pope, not a Politician. It’s hurting him very badly and, more importantly, it’s hurting the Catholic Church! President DONALD J  TRUMP            

     

Pope Leo must be so weak on crime that he was criticized by the president who pardoned

1,583 people arrested in connection with the Capitol attack. It covered not only the misdemeanor trespassers who wandered through the building taking selfies, but also those convicted of assaulting police officers with bear spray and flagpoles, members of militia groups found guilty of conspiracy to overthrow the government, and individuals who had pleaded guilty to some of the most serious charges the Justice Department had brought in its history.

A report publicshed in December identified

at least 33 insurrectionists who have been rearrested, charged or sentenced for other crimes since January 6, 2021. The charges range from possession of child pornography to sexual assault, child molestation and aggravated kidnapping. Many incidents occurred before the pardons; only four insurrectionists allegedly reoffended since receiving their pardons.

 “I found it really disturbing that the pardons put people on the street again who had been held to account,” Honl-Stuenkel said. “All that was swept away with the stroke of a pen. And that has consequences mostly for the women and children in the orbit of these insurrectionists.”

At least six of the pardoned insurrectionists are charged with committing child sex crimes; five were charged with illegal possession of weapons, including two who had previous domestic violence convictions; and two were charged with rape.

So Donald Trump accusing someone of being soft on crime is akin to, oh, Wilt Chamberlain criticizing someone for being promiscuous. Trump's "landslide" included winning a minority, 49.97%, of the popular vote.  In Venezuela, "the state-embedded drug trafficking structure is also largely intact." If Trump ordered the kidnapping of  President Nicolas Maduro to end the drug traffic into the USA, he failed miserably. And Pope Leo is no advocate for proliferation of nuclear weapons.

No doubt His Holiness is sincere, even more so since Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby threatened war against the Vatican in a private meeting with Pope Leo's then-ambassador to the USA at the Pentagon in January. "America haas the military power to do whatever it wants in the world. The Catholic Hurch had better take its side" will tend to focus the mind.

It was Trump being Trump in his Easter Sunday message to the leader of the Roman Catholic Church and spiritual leader of over 50 million Americans and hundreds of millions abroad. He has ratcheted up the division, disunity, and hatred in the USA.

Donald could have said something simple, such as "I admire Pope Leo as a religious figure but He doesn't have the intelligence available to us and is misugided." Trump still would have been wrong about the war but he wold have goten his point across. He would have been wrong but he wouldn't have been cruel and hateful. And how better for President Trump to prove he's a honest-to-God believing Christian? Oh, yea- there is one way:

Share |

Cesspool of Bigotry

I don’t give a RIP about being politically correct. Here’s the truth: America was founded on CHRISTIAN values.

If you refuse to assimilate and follow our laws, love our country, and be a proud AMERICAN… then LEAVE.

We don’t want you here.https://t.co/dETXKcNAmw

— Coach Tommy Tuberville (@SenTuberville) April 9, 2026

If Senator Tuberville really wants to evict residents of our nation who don't love our country, he should have urged the deportation of the guy who on January 20, 2917 referred to "American carnage" and who on october 30, 2022 described the USA as "rigged, crooked, and evil."  But no big mouths on the right said anything either time, and that fellow is President for a second time.

Here is where a liberal or progressive is to say "but immigrants love this country even more than do native-born Americans." But that's not the point. If there were such a thing as an effective loyalty test, Donald Trump would have been banished to the golf courses of Scotland long ago.  

So Tuberman is a bigoted extremist, longing to deport persons practicing an unacceptable religion. He hates Muslims because they're Muslims. However, there are Muslims who hate people because they're not Muslim.  Note the

September 23, 2025 meeting of Dearborn’s City Council, where first-term Mayor Abdullah Hammoud refused to apologize for trying to bully Christian evangelist Ted Barham into leaving the city at the previous city council meeting on September 9, 2025. Barham attracted the mayor’s ire at that meeting by complaining about the naming of a busy intersection after a Hammoud supporter who, in addition to praising former Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, once joked about sending Israeli Prime Minister the Benjamin Netanyahu “back to Poland.”

Not only did Hammoud, the mayor of a city with more than 100,000 residents—55 percent of whom are Muslim—fail to apologize for bullying Barham in a vain effort to get him to leave the city, not one council member offered a word of criticism of Hamas and Hezbollah after they were challenged to do so by one of the more than 100 audience members who showed up to attend the September 23 city council meeting.

“Do you definitively, unequivocally—by name—denounce Hamas and Hezbollah, or do you support them?” Dearborn resident Anthony Deegan asked the council members on September 23. They said nothing in response.

It doesn't seem as if asking for criticism of Hamas and Hezbollah is asking a great deal. Council members would not have to betray their principles. Or perhaps they would have because

With its silence, the council lent credence to Barham’s concerns about the naming of the intersection of Warren Avenue and Chase Road after Osama Siblani, the founding publisher of Arab American News. According to the ADL, Siblani told the Chicago Tribune in 2006 that, “If the FBI wants to come after those who support the resistance done by Hezbollah, then they better bring a fleet of buses. I for one would be willing to go to jail.”

Siblani’s gibe about needing a fleet of buses to arrest Hezbollah supporters in the region is no joke. In 2024, Dearborn hosted an Al Quds Day celebration during which protesters called for America and Israel’s destruction. Siblani has condemned chants calling for America’s destruction, but according to the Middle East Media Research Institute, he has legitimized an anti-American narrative to audiences in the Middle East. In 2024, he described U.S. efforts to drive Iran out of Syria as an attempt to steal the country’s oil. “America wants two things: To partition Syria and to keep the oil and gas resources,” he said.

Siblani, who now has a street named after him in a substantial American city, appears to be quite a character inasmuch as

In 1993, Siblani, a newspaper publisher, abandoned the principle of free speech during an appearance on Larry King’s show on CNN on which he condemned U.S. President Bill Clinton for meeting with Salman Rushdie for an hour. Rushdie was forced to live in hiding as the result of a fatwa calling for his murder issued by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1989. Khomeini issued the fatwa in response to the publication of Rushdie’s book, Satanic Verses. “When [Clinton] met with Salman Rushdie in the White House for one hour,” Siblani said, “it’s sending a message—The President’s thereby sending a message to the Islamic world that he condoned the insult of Islam, and that is something that should not have been done.”

By way of comparison, Siblani came to the defense of Al Manar, described by National Review (NR) in 2006 as “a satellite television channel operated, owned, and controlled by the Iranian-funded Hezbollah terrorist network [that] was designated as a global terrorist entity.” NR reports that Siblani “was quoted in the Washington Post as saying, ‘I disagree with the State Department that it [Al-Manar] incites violence. … By that standard, they should shut Fox News for inciting against Muslims.’”

After Barham strongly criticized naming a street after a supporter of Hezbollah, city councillor 

interrupted Barham to declare, “I’m going to stop you because he’s not a violent person. You can interpret his words any way you want, but I will guarantee you he is not intending to incite violence anywhere in the world. … [W]e’re not going to allow personal attacks in our community.”

Well, of course he is, because the Mayor dwells in the sewer of deeply personal attacks. After Barham responded to the councillor

Eventually, Dearborn Mayor Abdullah Hammoud, a Shia Muslim whose family hails from Lebanon, weighed in, calling Barham, “a bigot,” “a racist,” and “an Islamophobe.” He didn’t stop there.

“I want you to know as mayor, you are not welcome here,” the mayor told Barham. “And the day you move out of the city will be the day that I launch a parade celebrating the fact that you moved out of the city because you are not somebody who believes in coexistence.” It was an astounding display of contempt from an elected official who had sworn to uphold the United States constitution when he was sworn in as mayor in 2022. Hammoud’s verbal attack was an attempt to use the language of coexistence and a narrative of Muslim victimhood to put an uppity non-Muslim in his place.

 

When a Christian resident of Dearborn, Michigan, spoke out against naming a street after well-known Hezbollah supporter Osama Siblani,

Mayor Abdullah Hammoud got very angry: “You do not belong in this city, Islamophobe! Get out, you are not welcome here!” pic.twitter.com/za0KVi5LBI

— Dr. Maalouf ‏ (@realMaalouf) April 10, 2026

Well, of course he is, because the Mayor dwells in the sewer of deeply personal attacks. After Barham responded to the councillor

Eventually, Dearborn Mayor Abdullah Hammoud, a Shia Muslim whose family hails from Lebanon, weighed in, calling Barham, “a bigot,” “a racist,” and “an Islamophobe.” He didn’t stop there.

“I want you to know as mayor, you are not welcome here,” the mayor told Barham. “And the day you move out of the city will be the day that I launch a parade celebrating the fact that you moved out of the city because you are not somebody who believes in coexistence.” It was an astounding display of contempt from an elected official who had sworn to uphold the United States constitution when he was sworn in as mayor in 2022. Hammoud’s verbal attack was an attempt to use the language of coexistence and a narrative of Muslim victimhood to put an uppity non-Muslim in his place.

That expression of tolerance and support of free speech came from the mayor of a major municipality outside of the city of Detroit.

So we have two individuals, Alabama senator Tommy Tuberville and Mayor Abdullah Hammoud, one of whom believes No Muslim Need Apply and the other who believes No Non-Muslim Need Apply.

Dogmatism or narrow-mindedness is often derided as characterizing the extremism of the far right and of the far left. However, in this case, that would be a serious misreading of the situation.

If Senator Tuberville's bias or parochialism is a product of right-wing radicalism, Hammond's prejudice is something a little different. Consider infamous Twitcher streamer Hasan Piker, who once stated "America deserved 9/11" and, as NBC's Kristen Welker noted, has "referred to ultra-Orthodox Jews as inbred, employed anti-Semitic dog whistles (blood-thirsty, violent pig dog) against an anti-Hamas viewer of his stream, compared liberal Zionists to liberal Nazis and said Hamas is 1,000 times better than the Israeli state." And, of course, the old "if you don't like it here, why don't you go back to where you came from," when he attacked a pro-Trump Vietnamese-American woman with

F--- you, dude," Piker said. "I mean, seriously. F--- you old lady. Shut the f--- up you stupid f------ idiotic old lady with your stupid f------ gamer headset. Who has f---ed you harder, America or f------ Ho Chi Minh? Suck my d--- old lady. Goddamn dude. F--- this refugee. F--- this South Vietnamese motherf------, whatever, like Christian supremacist psychotic f------ refugee living in America now and able to talk that s---. Why don't you go back and live in f------ South Vietnam in the same conditions if that's your perspective?

Seems nice.

The Council on American-Islamid Relations (CAIR) has vigorously defended Piker (of course), who has been campaigning with Abdul el-Sayed, who is running for the Democratic nomination to replace retiring senator Gary Peters of Michigan. Recently asked about Piker, Michigan senator Elissa Slotkin acknowledged that from what she was aware of, his language "sounds deeply antisemitic, consistently, and therefore not someone that should be helping anybody out in the Michigan political environment." 

After Slotkin on April 3 appeared on "Real Time with Bill Maher," CAIR and CAIR-Michigan issued a statement denouncing Bill Maher's "long history of anti-Muslim bigotry and anti-Arab racism." It claimed "it was deeply hypocritical for Senator slotkin to embrace Bill Maher just days after she denounced a Muslim politician for associating with a podcaster accused of bigotry."

CAIR is wrong to attribute to Maher the "anti-Muslim bigotry and anti-Arab racism" he is frequently accused of on social media with no explanation. But that's not the point. 

The organization alleges there are "double standards that American Muslims face." One is tempted to disagree with this statement, absurd on its face.

Yet, there is a double standard. If any political figure- or perhrps any public figure at all- were to have made about Muslims the remarks made by Hasan Piker about Jews, Asian-Americans, or the elderly, progressives, liberals, centrists/moderates and even a few Republicans would be apoplectic- as would be warranted.  Piker not only would be roundly condemned as a bigot, racist, fascist, and worse.

Yet, here we are, with candidate el-Sayed and congresswomen Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Ro Khanna up his rear end and Representative Ro Khanna and Senator Bernie Sanders getting close. It's not ultra-conservatives and ultra-libberals; it's Repulbican ultra-consrvatives and Democrats who are Islamism (not Muslim or Islamic)- friendly. Both are illiberal attitudes, in the best meaning of liberal.

It's not only that Piker is the left's answer to white supremacist Nick Fuentes. It's that some (still a minority, thankfully) Democrats are openly accepting of a prominent bigot and Republicans such as Senator Tommy Tuberville, Steve Miller, and others being Fuentes-adjacent.   This toxicity will continue as long  as Donald J. Trump is with us.

 

Share |