The Lesser of Four Evils

I had to write the word "explosion" about twenty times for work today, and every single time my fingers inexplicably typed "explosure" and that's actually a pretty accurate term for what happens in my head when I think about the fact that Donald J. Trump may actually become the President of the United States.

I understand I'm just preaching to the choir at this point, and that's fine. I just hope I can impress upon the choir that this is not a drill. The latest Washington Post-ABC poll has Trump at 46%, Clinton at 45%. This causes me physical pain and acute nausea. The KKK, neo-nazis and other white supremacist groups are plotting a show of force at urban polling places on election day in hopes of suppressing black votes. Complacency has no place in the last best shit show of 2016. Get. Out. There. And. Vote.

I don't know how to "fix" America, but I do know Donald Trump is not the answer. He is the worst thing to happen to this country in a long time. He's a hate-peddling swill-merchant. And the saddest thing is, people are buying what he's selling.

Here's a little story. I was in San Francisco this weekend and ended up in the middle of a budding bar fight. Well, really it was just an unprovoked attack on some unsuspecting bystander and I decided to play knightress in shining Northface fleece. I was sitting at a table minding my own business, having a cocktail and chatting with my brother and a friend when I couldn't help but notice a drunk blonde leaning over me to yell at the woman behind me.

Woman 1 (Drunk Blonde): "ARE YOU EVEN AMERICAN?!"

Woman 2: Yes I am.

Woman 1: WELL YOU DON'T SOUND AMERICAN!

Woman 2: I don't know what to tell you. My family has lived in San Francisco for three generations. How long have you lived in San Francisco? [Her ancestors hailed from Japan, I later learned.]

Woman 1: WELL YOU DON'T LOOK AMERICAN! DO YOU EVEN KNOW ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION? DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY REPRESENTATIVES WE HAVE? YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW! SEE?! YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW! YOU'RE NOT EVEN AN AMERICAN!

I stood up at this point because, No, bitch. Nobody invokes the Constitution of the United States to support their harebrained, bigoted blonde ass on my watch.

Me: Do you know how many representatives we have?

Woman 1: I asked her!

Me: I'm asking you. Do you even know?

[I shit you not, this clown did. not. even. know. I cannot think of a more telling display of self-righteous dys-trumpian ignorance.]

Woman 1: SHE'S UNAMERICAN!

Me: 53. 53 representatives. Do you know who our senators are? Do you know your representative? Do you know your state representatives? Do you know when the Constitution was adopted? How many amendments are there? Which ones are in the bill of rights?

I basically gave this real life troll an American citizenship quiz. And she failed. Bigly. (She was then escorted from the bar by an acquaintance who assured me "She's really pretty nice when she's sober." Riiiight.)

This reminded me of the time someone called my little brother a fag in the Castro. Like, bruh, two groups you should probably not insult in San Francisco: The Asians and The Gays.

My husband thinks things have always been this bad - or worse - and the unholy trifecta of the internet, Donald Trump and the GOP have merely converged to reveal America's vast, flabby underbelly. Personally, I think I preferred when they stayed in their mama's basements. But if we're gonna smoke 'em out and smarten 'em up, there has got to be a better way.

Listen. If you truly think Donald Trump or Gary Johnson or Jill Stein are, in any universe, on any scale, by any measurement - more prepared, educated, capable, or qualified to serve as Commander in Chief - well then I personally think you need to get your news somewhere other than Facebook. Gary Johnson is dangerously uninformed. Jill Stein is a tin-hat conspiracy theorist who also has no idea what she's talking about - and, ps, has ties to Wall Street, Big Pharma & Big Oil - the same industries she so sanctimoniously decries!!! As I've said before, if you choose one of these yahoos over Hillary Clinton - flawed? yes, uninspired? maybe, a politician? most definitely, but one who's eminently qualified and has served thirty years as a public servant, then I think your "principled stand" against the "Lesser of Two Evils" is a bunch of baloney. But if, after doing your due diligence and educating yourself, that is what you truly and honestly believe, then I am not here to persuade you otherwise.

Likewise, if you truly and honestly believe that Hillary Clinton is an evil warlord intent on fomenting WWIII for her own personal and political motives, then, you know what? This post is not for you.

If you're still here - a recap of my feeling on third party candidates in general. I completely understand your beef with the two party system - now more than ever. And most years I would absolutely encourage you to do you. That is your right and your prerogative as an American citizen. But this is not most years! I am legitimately terrified that Johnson/Stein will pull a Ralph Nader and land that Squirrel Nut Zipper in the white house. People keep saying "If not now, when?" My answer to that is, ANY YEAR A BIGOTED, MISOGYNIST, ORANGE DEMAGOGUE ISN'T ONE OF THE TWO MAJOR PARTIES RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT. But hey, I guess it's better to "throw away your vote" than cast your lot with the likes of Donald Trump. At least then you can sleep at night. (Unless the third party votes result in a Trump presidency. Then that nightmare's on you.)

I have suffered from repeated brain explosures these past days as I read about the latest Hillary Clinton email "drama" that is, from what I can tell, more of a last-ditch political stunt than an actual story, but hey, 'Merrica. Obviously I'm looking at this through my own lens, but, this is how all this crap reads to me:

Trump says Mexican immigrants are criminals and racists.
Clinton used a private server for her emails.
Trump says John McCain isn't a war hero because he got caught, insults a decorated general, and lest we forget the Khan family.
Clinton used a private server for her emails.
Trump mocks a disabled reporter.
Clinton used a private server for her emails.
Trump says we should bar all Muslim immigrants, subject the Muslims that are here to an "ideological test," and while we're at it, screw those Syrian refugees.
Clinton used a private server for her emails.
Trump threatens to unwind the First Amendment.
Clinton used a private server for her emails.
Trump tried to play judge, jury, and executioner when he said the Central Park Five, who were cleared of any crime by DNA evidence, were "still guilty."
Clinton used a private server for her emails.
Trump vows to single-handedly overturn Roe v. Wade, says women who have abortions should be "punished," (and clearly lacks basic understanding of the workings and responsibilities of the three branches of government).
Clinton used a private server for her emails.
Trump says a federal judge ruled against him because the judge was Mexican. (He was born in Indiana.)
Trump refuses to disavow white supremacists.
Clinton used a private server for her emails.
Trump has said countless terrible things about women, but I think this is everyone's personal favorite: "Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything."
Clinton used a private server for her emails.

Of course, I'm hardly unbiased here. And I do understand why people have concerns about her. She's hawkish, she's too cozy with Wall Street, etc. Fine. Again, if you truly and honestly believe that her shortcomings outweigh those of your third party candidate of choice, then great, democracy, yay. But just FYI, the whole "Crooked Hillary/Killary" thing is such a fallacy. Hillary is not a "criminal." If you had gone to law school (ps - I did) you would know that one essential element of a crime is criminal intent. Such intent was deemed lacking in each and every Republican-led witch hunt investigation against her. Another "minor" prerequisite to being a criminal is breaking the law. She hasn't done that either. On claims that she (personally?) "sold weapons to Saudi Arabia" or "created ISIS" - News flash - America has been bargaining with bad guys (the lesser of two evils, so to speak), propping up authoritarian regimes, and engaging in shady back-channel arms deals with countries lacking democratic pedigrees since the Cold War, so you're not pinning that shit on my gal Hillz. On the claims of her being a "murderer" - Unless you are ALSO going to call every sitting president, vice president, secretary of state, director of the CIA, and so on and so forth an "evil-murdering-murderer-head" then you do not have a leg to stand on.

Do I agree with these policies, from my comfortable position as a civilian armchair quarterback? Absolutely not. Do I think this is the way it should be? Hell no. The thing is, I have never been president or secretary of state, so I cannot presume to know what kind of difficult choices they are forced to make on a daily or hourly basis, but I don't think any of these people (save Donald Trump) goes to work every morning deviously rubbing their (tiny) hands together planning how many innocent lives they're going to destroy. These people receive stacks of surely terrifying intelligence data. They make hard decisions. They try to protect our country - its people, and yes, our economic and political interests. This is the real world. It's messy and scary and there are grey areas and terrible things happen and the United States, in building itself up as a global superpower, has made some pretty shitty sacrifices along the way.

Should we as a country work together to change the United States' role in this global game? Well sure, if everyone really feels so strongly about it, then yes, we certainly should. But you know what is 100% NOT the answer? Handing over the nuclear codes to an insecure, power-hungry little man who can't resist pushing shiny red buttons.

You know something else we have to do if we really want change? We have to care about this shit more than once every four years, and we have to do something other than bitch about it on the internet. The only thing politicians care about more than money is votes. If we - their constituents - show them that we really and truly care about these issues, all the time, not just as a platform and imaginary agenda. If you really care about things like oil dependence, unnecessary foreign intervention, drone strikes, civilian casualties of war, war period, police brutality, inhumane treatment of immigrants, for-profit prisons, the school-to-prison pipeline, equal pay, public education, to name a few - then we have to get involved, find your local representative (mine's Daryl Issa, so I'm fucked), get organized, get vocal, BE THE CHANGE. This means still caring, still bitching, and most importantly, STILL DOING on November 9th, December 9th, next year, and beyond.

PS - In case you're wondering, I personally, do not at all feel as though I'm voting for the "lesser of two evils." I think Hillary, though as flawed as anyone who has spent her entire adult life in the public eye would be, has a solid track record as a "liberal with a centrist tinge." I don't even see it as a choice. It's like asking if I want a vodka-with-flat-tonic, or a glass of drano.

PPS - Anyone who thinks Bernie Sanders or the like could have stepped in January 20th and immediately sever all foreign ties and turn the United States into a great pacifist nation and change our national anthem to Kumbayah has been smoking too much of Gary Johnson's wacky tabacky.

PPPS - This is (probably) my last political post for the year, I'm sure you'll be happy to hear. This time next week, I'll write about something much less controversial, like vaginas. Unless Trump wins. Then I'll be writing about my little "vacation" to the insane asylum.

For some reason this reminds me of Donald Trump. Except without the leash. 

Read:

I Didn't Unfriend You Over 'Politics' "I am so tired of people feigning shock and outrage over others not wanting to remain friends with those who are directly or indirectly fueling discrimination."

The Atlantic: From Whitewater to Benghazi - A Clinton Scandal Primer

Newsweek: Donald Trump's Companies Destroyed Emails in Defiance of Court Orders.

Newsweek: The George W. Bush White House 'Lost' 22 Million Emails

Oh, hello Pot. Meet Kettle.

Salon: Is Hillary Clinton an emailing criminal? A nonpartisan guide to national security and foreign policy issues in the presidential election

Media Matters: A Comprehensive Guide to Myths and Facts about Hillary Clinton, Benghazi, and Those Emails

Admit It. The Clinton Email Controversy Bothers You, Yet You Don't Actually Know What the Clinton Email Controversy Is

Fact Check: Hillary Clinton 'Corruption' Claim

Also, if you're going to get your news from Facebook, follow Dan Rather. He's awesome.

Watch:

Ignorance Is Not Bliss

I've got a bone to pick. I keep seeing the same handful of "arguments" (which falsely implies some sort of logic) being hurled about the Interwebs lately (at me privately, on my blog, and repeatedly assaulting my eyeballs on my news feed). And I think they're a bunch of baloney.

First things first.

Credit: Notions Capital (Flickr Creative Commons)

1. Donald Trump and his latest blatantly racist douchebaggery chicanery.

Just no.

Remember how in my last post I was like, hey, let's practice tolerance, if you actually sit down and share a cocktail or a quesadilla with someone you'll find out they're human, just like you. Well. Let me tell you. I am having a REAL hard time practicing tolerance and understanding with this piece of ... work. And hey, if he was just some lone (crazy ass) ranger who was totally off the reservation, that would be one thing. But this PSYCHOTIC YAHOO is the front running republican candidate?!? I'm sorry but what in the fucking fuck, people?! I AM SO CONFUSED. Confused, and also, filled with an overwhelming urge to scream, cry, or bury my head in the sand. If I sat down across the table from Donald Trump I would have to try very, very hard not to throw my conciliatory community-building beer in his face. At first it was kind of amusing, like a sociological experiment. Then it became unbelievable. Then it became disturbing. Now? Now I am absolutely terrified. Please PLEASE tell me this is all just a terrible joke???

THIS GUY JUST HELD UP JAPANESE INTERNMENT CAMPS AS A POSITIVE EXEMPLAR FROM AMERICAN HISTORY. AND HE IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. The land of the free. A country of diversity and acceptance. A nation that was founded by immigrants. (Okay, well, more like stolen from its original, rightful owners by immigrants but you get my point). He thinks Islam has no place in America? No place in the 21st century? HE has no place in America in the 21st century. He is a fear-mongering bigot whose beliefs go against everything that American stands for.

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breath free,*
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.**
Send these, the homeless, the tempest-tost to me,***
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

* Except Muslims.

** But actually, really really ridiculously rich Muslims are cool.

*** Excludes Syrians and other people who are browner than me, but ORANGE PEOPLE ARE WELCOME! Send me your overworked Oompa Loompas, I've got just the factory for them!

PS, If Dick Cheney's like, "Bruh, you went too far," you done CROSSED THE LINE.

2. The meaning of "well-regulated" in the Second Amendment (from my recent FB post):

An anonymous reader commented on my post about guns. I still can't get over the fact I have anonymous readers. DM doesn't really believe it, he thinks my post hits are all Ukrainian hacker bots. Anyway. S/he wrote this:

"Nice piece, but you might want to look up what "well regulated" means in the vernacular of the late 18th century, when the second amendment was written. It means "well equipped". :)"

This was my response:

"Thanks. Actually, according to the Supreme Court in DC v Heller (whose holding I vehemently disagree with but it is the supreme law of the land, after all ;)), per the vernacular, "well-regulated" means "the imposition of proper discipline and training," which sounds to me like a great place to start!

In any event, even without the qualifying clause, no individual rights granted by the Constitution (Bill of Rights) are without limitation. They are subject to a balancing act of the rights of the individual vs. legitimate government interest, e.g., the general welfare of its citizens."

In fact, the Court in Heller said that "the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited," and pointed out that "the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose."

Like I said, I'll talk about this stuff until my face turns blue!

3. "In 1789, Thomas Jefferson said 'Cross my heart, hope to die, the Federal Government will never steal your guns, pinkie swear, no take-backs.'"

You know what else our "Founding Fathers" said? That white people could OWN black people. That blacks had 3/5 the human worth of whites. That black people could not vote. They were not allowed in white schools, restaurants or places of business. Women could not vote and were considered chattel. Native Americans were systemically displaced and slaughtered. So, forgive me if I don't find this to be an ironclad argument. The Constitution is an amazing document and the backbone of American democracy, but it was written over 200 years ago and has to adapt as we learn and grow as a nation.

"Do the best you can until you know better. Then when you know better, do better." - Maya Angelou

PS, You're not the only one who can quote the Founding Fathers in support of your argument. They also said that gun owners should be subject to discipline and training, as noted above.

PPS, See also, section 2.b re: no individual rights being absolute, including but not limited to, the right to keep and bear arms.

PPPS, How do you know the framers weren't talking about THIS?

4. This meme has come across my news feed no less than five times in the past week. There's so much wrong with this analogy, I don't even know where to start. 

I guess my main issue is this: No one is saying "make guns illegal," are they? I know I'm not. I mean, we can't even vote to keep guns out of the hands of suspected terrorists, so I don't think rounding up all the guns in the country and throwing them in the ocean is on the agenda. All people are saying is "make guns harder for baddies to get," and also maybe "you don't need a grenade launcher and a high powered assault rifle for 'self defense?'" If I were in charge I would also say we must take further steps to ensure that all the "good guys with guns" know how to safely maintain, store, and operate them. Is this really so unreasonable?

In any event, as I said in my last post on the subject, laws against drunk driving and prescription drug abuse don't completely eradicate those behaviors, either, but its a place to start. (And hey if you're arguing for a cease-fire in The War on Drugs, I'm all about that conversation.)

5. "Thank God I don't live in crazy Commie California!" Amen to that.

6. "I still don't believe Muslims are generally good people."

I'll ask you again: Do you actually know any Muslims? That's what I thought. Go befriend an actual, real-life Muslim, then get back to me.

If you still feel that way after you actually know a person from the faith about which you so freely cast aspersions, watch this:



Here are the Clif Notes: Yes, some countries that are predominantly Muslim (e.g. Saudia Arabia) have some messed up laws. Some countries that are predominantly Christian (e.g. Ethiopia) have some messed up laws. Balancing human rights and multiculturalism is a messy thing and (much) more work needs to be done. And yes some terrorist organizations have bastardized the religion for their terrorist purposes which I've already said is not a trait unique to Islam. But that is on the country and the organization and the individuals who carry out these acts, not on the religion itself.

"Islam doesn't promote violence or peace. Islam is just a religion, and like every religion in the world, it depends on what you bring to it. If you're a violent person, your Islam, your Judaism, your Christianity, your Hinduism is going to be violent. There are marauding Buddhist monks in Myanmar slaughtering women and children. Does Buddhism promote violence? Of course not. People are violent or peaceful. And that depends on their politics, their social world, the way they see their communities, the way they see themselves." - Reza Aslan

6. "No Christians have done anything bad in the name of Christianity since the Crusades." Wrong again.

The KKK.

Neo Nazis, skinheads and other non-Muslim extremists.

FLDS (Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints).

Now, I assume members of mainstream Christianity would decry, "But those aren't Christians!"

And now you know how Muslims feel.

That is all. I swear I have some non-political posts for you. I just need to get to a place where my fingertips aren't autonomously driven by a blind and fiery rage.

Unless I get picked up by the US Government for my search history: guns, terrorist, Muslim, Christian, KKK, neo-Nazi, skinhead, child marriage. Don't worry though, I'll still be able to get a gun!

Until then:

On the subject of religious bias, watch this video, I implore you.

The Paradox of Tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. 

- Karl Popper, Open Society and its Enemies, Vol. 1

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out -
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out -
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out -
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak for me.

- Martin Niemöller

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

- Edmund Burke