Quantcast
Channel: Pax on both houses
Viewing all 30150 articles
Browse latest View live
↧

Playa Bolonia, Outside Tarifa, Spain, 2015

April 17, 2019, 7:28 pm
↧
Search

Trevor Noah, Lawrence O'Donnell And "The View" Probe Democratic Candidate Pete Buttigieg

April 17, 2019, 7:43 pm
↧
↧

Hour-Long Interview With Pete Buttigieg On His Book "Shortest Way Home"

April 17, 2019, 8:04 pm
↧

Native American Activists Comment On The Fire At Notre Dame

April 17, 2019, 8:14 pm
↧

The Best Song From Every Tom Petty Album

April 17, 2019, 8:46 pm
↧
↧

What Happened Before The Big Bang?

April 17, 2019, 8:57 pm
$
0
0
Related image

What Happened Before The Big Bang?

In the beginning...

The first thing to understand is what the Big Bang actually was.
"The Big Bang is a moment in time, not a point in space," said Sean Carroll, a theoretical physicist at the California Institute of Technology and author of "The Big Picture: On the Origins of Life, Meaning and the Universe Itself" (Dutton, 2016).
Related image


↧

Nicholas Kristof: “We Would Have Starved”

April 18, 2019, 5:16 am
$
0
0
Yuliana Rocha with her son, Diogel.
k.
The New York Times
The New York Times

Thursday, April 18, 2019


Yuliana Rocha with her son, Diogel. Fabiola Ferrero for The New York Times
Venezuela blocks access to many journalists and is a difficult place to cover, so I don’t think the world understands just how desperate the country’s plight is. And because Trump is hostile to the government there, some liberals are more sympathetic to it than they might otherwise be. So I give my column over today to the voices of Venezuelans I met on the Colombia/Venezuela border while I was traveling with Mercy Corps, an aid group active there. The stories are harrowing.
One striking thing about the desperate Venezuelans is that they are hungry, homeless — and pregnant, or holding new babies. That’s because contraception is virtually impossible to come by now, and what oral contraceptives are on the market are often fakes. So just when people are least able to feed babies, there’s a baby boom. Listen to their voices!
Sonia Nazario, author of “Enrique’s Journey,” represents the gold standard for writing about immigration. She wrote recently about the brutality suffered by some women in Central America that impels them to flee to America, but she also went one step further: She started this GoFundMe to raise money for some of the women leaders in Honduras who are trying to create order there. If President Trump wants to reduce immigration from Central America, I think one useful step would be to donate to this GoFundMe and reduce the push factors forcing families to flee.

↧

"The Muslim Mother Theresa," Nicholas Kristof

April 18, 2019, 5:17 am
$
0
0
<nil>
That’s me with my friend and hero, Edna Adan, who founded a maternity hospital in Somaliland and battles maternal death and FGM there; she was also a figure in our book “Half the Sky.” Edna in more recent years started a university training health workers, and as a result the maternal mortality rate is inching down, and the most grievous kind of FGM (infibulation) is declining as well. Sometimes in the operating room, the surgeon, nurse and anesthetist are now all female — an astonishing feat in a country that banned girls from school when Edna was a girl. I posted the photo on Instagram and a reader responded that after reading about Edna years ago, she had changed careers and become a nurse-midwife — and now she hopes to volunteer at Edna’s hospital. And by the way, for any of you doctors or nurses, Edna welcomes volunteers.
↧
Search

"The Mueller Report Is Just The Beginning," Newsweek

April 18, 2019, 5:21 am
$
0
0
"Donald Trump Is Not A Loyal American ... We Have A Traitor In The White House." Pulitzer Prize Winner, Law Professor, And Trump Biographer | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
"The Mueller Report Is Just The Beginning," Newsweek

David Cay Johnston: "Trump Is Not A Loyal American... There Is A Traitor In The White House"
http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2018/07/david-cay-johnston-trump-is-not-loyal.html

Op-Ed Columnist
 

Op-Ed Columnist, David Leonhardt, New York Times

If you want a good preview of the Mueller report, try Asha Rangappa, a former F.B.I. special agent writing in Politico; the law professor Richard Hasen writing in Slate; or Peter Baker, in The Times. 






↧
↧

Fox News Pastor: Christians Who Follow Trump Are Spiritually Superior To Other Believers

April 18, 2019, 5:25 am
↧

"The Coming Obselescence Of Animal Meat," The Atlantic

April 18, 2019, 5:30 am
↧

In The Last 3 Years, The # Of Americans Who Identify As Evangelicals Has Declined 5.8%

April 18, 2019, 7:11 am
↧

"If Jesus Is So Great, Why Aren't You Nicer?" MSNBC Analyst (The Daughter Of Two Christian Ministers) Slams Hypocritical Christians Targeting Mayor Pete

April 18, 2019, 7:38 am
$
0
0

Image result for kindness quote, "pax on both houses"

"If Jesus Is So Great, Why Aren't You Nicer?" MSNBC Analyst (The Daughter Of Two Christian Ministers) Slams Hypocritical Christians Targeting Mayor Pete

Hour-Long Interview With Pete Buttigieg On His Book "Shortest Way Home"

https://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2019/04/hour-long-interview-with-pete-buttigieg.html

Absolutism As A Last Ditch Defense Against The Challenge (Threat?) Of Kindness

https://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2019/04/absolutism-as-defense-against-challenge.html



↧
↧

How Mayor Pete Buttigieg Handled Two Homophobic Hecklers

April 18, 2019, 10:22 am
$
0
0
Image result for Hour-Long Interview With Pete Buttigieg On His Book "Shortest Way Home"
Hour-Long Interview With Pete Buttigieg On His Book "Shortest Way Home"
Buttigieg came out in 2015, months before he was re-elected as South Bend's mayor. He has talked about the fact that he was uncomfortable with being gay early in his life and told an audience at an LGBTQ event earlier this month that "if you had shown me exactly what it was that made me gay, I would have cut it out with a knife."
He added later: "Thank God there was no pill. Thank God there was no knife."



↧

American Conservatives Are The Apotheosis Of Pharisaism. (Conservatives, Please Weigh In)

April 18, 2019, 10:39 am
$
0
0
Image result for pax on both houses, pharisee
Have you ever wondered what Fox News might sound like if they were truly covering this president, not just carrying his tainted water? Now This has released a super cut of actual commentary from Fox News hosts and guests and quite simply, you have to hear this.  All of it. Every bit of commentary in this clip is so deadly, hilariously, frustratingly accurate … about Donald Trump.
Looking back, isn’t it shameful how they covered President Obama? We can laugh about the absurdity of their statements now, but the truth is, until Fox News stops acting as a wing of the Republican party, a full and equal partner in their agenda, this country can never be healed, never be fully united. 
Image result for pax on both houses, rednecks


↧
Search

Pro-Life Advocates Cause Abortion To Rise While Pro-Choice Advocates Cause It To Plummet

April 18, 2019, 11:06 am
$
0
0
Image result for abortion
Outlawing abortion will not make it less frequent.
Outlawing abortion will make it more dangerous.

"The Profoundest Truths Are Paradoxical"
Tao Te Ching
Lao Tzu (Laozi)

Alan: Abortion is the cornerstone of American conservatism's self-righteous contempt for liberalism.

Those Americans who have "fallen prey" to Trump's seduction are certain that abortion will disappear - or at least be minimized - if abortion is made illegal.

In fact, abortion has always been with us and will always be with us. (Interestingly, there is not one reference to "abortion" in the Old Testament or the New. http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2016/05/christians-ignore-jesus-commandments.html)

Since abortion is not going away, the "political question" (wich is different from the "individual moral question") is how to minimize it.

Here is where the plot thickens.

Conservatives --- ever loathe to contextualize truth and, by nature, unable to compromise -- are unable to contemplate the hard, problematic and often ambiguous work of contextualized understanding. 

Where abortion is illegal, the actual number of abortions soars. 

Whether or not liberals intend to limit the incidence of abortion (or if such limitation is just a happy coincidence) it is a paradoxical fact -- plain as potatoes -- that advocates of safe, legal abortion contribute to the minimization of abortion.

Right now, the steep and ongoing decrease in America's abortion rate is bringing it below the abortion rate prior to Roe v. Wade. (2019 update: The U.S. abortion rate is now lower than it was on the eve of Roe v. Wade.)

In the current election cycle, conservatives -- particularly "Christian""conservatives" -- will argue that "the end does not justify the means" and therefore legal abortion is not a permissible option regardless its beneficent side effect.

However, Christian conservatives'"reason" for supporting Trump depends -- intrinsically and existentially -- on the selfsame argument that "the end does justify the means."

To be clear...

It is incontrovertibly true that "conservative""Christian""pro-Life" advocates increase the abortion rate so that the "stack of fetal cadavers" becomes "Himalaya-high," whereas pro-Choice advocates (whether they intend it or not) contribute to a political-and-cultural milieu that actually diminishes per capita abortions with a resulting "cadaver pile" that is only "Allegheny-high."

Looking objectively at the number of aborted fetuses, we find that "pro-Life" advocates are the bloodiest "killers" exhibiting a mindset (and consequent political determination) that makes them far more deadly than pro-Choice advocates.

Here are the details:

Thinking Housewife: Supporting Trump Makes You Bedfellows With Pro-Choice Advocates


Updated Compendium Of Best Pax Posts On Abortion

Given Conservative Fondness For "The End Justifies The Means," Note That Legal Abortion...

Abortion, Donald Trump, Conservative Christians And Marley's Chains

Abortion Rates Reach Historic Lows In Developed Countries (Where Abortion Is Legal)

It is most unlikely that pro-life advocates will be "converted" by this line of thought. 

Nevertheless, the argument that pro-life advocates promote abortion while pro-life advocates discourage abortion is very strong - so strong that in the minds of reasonable people it would, at minimum, throw kneejerk absolutism into doubt.

Notably, pro-choice advocates will not admit that this doubt since they are fundamentally interested in justifying categorical condemnation of Liberalism, the underlying goal for which the proscription of abortion is the particular on which their blanket condemnation depends.

So long as absolutism remains unchallenged, there is no need for political conservatives (and Christian conservatives) to engage compromise.

And without compromise, conservatives can continue to conceive themselves as "always and absolutely right" while their liberal counterparts are "always and asbolutely wrong."

What would happen to "conservative""Christianity" if it were no longer possible to get on the "baby killer" soap box.

At bottom, that self-righteous soapbox is all they've got - the cornerstone on which their whole House of Cards is built.

Liberalism: "Satanic Rebellion Against God?" (The Thinking Housewife)


My Correspondence With A Christian Fundamentalist: "The Best... Becomes Evil"

http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2014/12/my-correspondence-with-christian.html

"What's Wrong With The World? Conservatism To The Exclusion Of Liberalism"




George McGovern: "The Case For Liberalism, A Defense Of The Future Against The Past"




↧

Despite A Number Of Loose Screws, Trump Isn't Crazy Enough To Collude. (He Didn't Have To.)

April 18, 2019, 10:07 pm
$
0
0
When The Murderous Thug-Leader Of A Hostile Nation Is Committed To Using Every Dirty Trick To Get You Elected, Why Run The Risk Of Collusion | made w/ Imgflip meme maker

The Mueller Report's Findings On Russian Influence In The 2016 Election.

Mueller "described in page after damning page a dramatic pattern of Russian outreach to figures close to the president, including to Trump’s campaign and his business; Mueller described receptivity to this outreach on the part of those figures; he described a positive eagerness on the part of the Trump campaign to benefit from illegal Russian activity and that of its cutouts; he described serial lies about it all...


Image result for pax on both houses putin trump

Results of the Russia Investigation
Consistent with the special counsel’s mandate, the first volume of the Mueller report focuses on “the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.” Toward this end, its first two substantive sections go into depth on Russia’s “active measures” social media campaign, as well as the “hacking and dumping” operations through which it accessed and disseminated private e-mails from the Democratic National Committee and others. Both provide a fascinating account of Russian influence operations, but neither adds much to the indictments that the Mueller team has previously filed against involved persons. Instead, the important element of Volume 1 is the discussion of “Russian government links to and contacts with the Trump campaign”—or the possibility of what some might describe as “collusion”.

Image result for pax on both houses putin trump
As the report is careful to explain, “collusion” is neither a criminal offense nor a legal term of art with a clear definition, despite its frequent use in discussions of the special counsel’s mandate. Mueller and his team instead examined the relationships between members of the Trump campaign and the Russian government through the far narrower lens of criminal conspiracy. To establish a criminal conspiracy, a prosecutor must show, among other elements, that two or more persons agreed to either violate a federal criminal law or defraud the United States. This “meeting of the minds” is ultimately the piece the Mueller team felt it could not prove, leading it not to pursue any conspiracy charges against members of the Trump campaign, even as it pursued them against Russian agents.

Related image
This conclusion is far from the full vindication that chants of “no collusion” imply, a fact driven home by the detailed factual record the Mueller report puts forward. In some cases, there was indeed a meeting of the minds between Trump campaign officials and Russia, just not in pursuit of a criminal objective. In others, members of the Trump campaign acted criminally—as evidenced by the guilty pleas and indictments that the Mueller team secured—but did so on their own. At times, these efforts even worked toward the same objective as the Russian government, but on seemingly parallel tracks as opposed to in coordination. None of this amounted to a criminal conspiracy that the Mueller team believed it could prove beyond a reasonable doubt. But the dense network of interactions, missed opportunities, and shared objectives between the Trump campaign and the Russian government remains profoundly disturbing.

Image result for pax on both houses putin trump
This report shows that the Trump campaign was reasonably aware of the Russian efforts, at least on the hacking side. They were aware the Russians sought to help them win. They welcomed that assistance. Instead of warning the American public, they instead devised a public relations and campaign strategy that sought to capitalize on Russia’s illicit assistance. In other words, the Russians and the Trump campaign shared a common goal, and each side worked to achieve that goal with basic knowledge of the other side’s intention. They just didn’t agree to work together toward that goal together.

Image result for pax on both houses putin trump
Republicans Need To Ask Why Putin Wanted Trump To Win
Importantly, the report includes several areas in which the Mueller report really does meaningfully exonerate the Trump campaign.
First, while the report notes that some Trump campaign members shared tweets from Internet Research Agency (IRA)-controlled accounts and even agreed to assist in promoting IRA-devised rallies, the special counsel investigation did not conclude that any official of the Trump campaign was aware the solicitations were coming from foreign persons. Being duped is not the same as committing a crime, and Mueller conclusively puts to rest the question of whether the Trump campaign was somehow aiding the Russian social media operation." https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-mueller-found-russia-and-obstruction-first-analysis


Fact Trump Invites Putin To Hack U.S. Government | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
Redactions Heavier On Russian Meddling Than On Obstruction

Image result for republican support for russia
Republican Support For Russia Has Doubled

Image result for pax on both houses putin trump
How Russian Money Helped Save Trump's Business
(Western banks wouldn't lend a dime to Trump)
Foreign Policy Magazine
Image result for pax on both houses putin trump monkey

Helsinki Summit: President Trump Backs Vladimir Putin On Election Interference | NBC Nightly News


Image result for "pax on both houses" putin trump

"Trump Refuses To Impose Russia Sanctions Despite Law Passed By US Congress Over Election Hacking"

Image result for "pax on both houses" hack
The day the Mueller Report was released:
"George Conway Calls Trump A 'Cancer' That Needs To Be Removed
Fox News

Image result for "pax on both houses" hack
Trump Is A Bald-Faced Liar
There Is No Other Word For It


↧
↧

My Facebook Discussion With Friend ZZ About The Alleged Impropriety Of The Word "Trumpista"

April 19, 2019, 12:26 pm
$
0
0
Image result for trumpista "pax on both houses"

(This fully contextualized Facebook exchange is "below the fold.")

ZZ: It's a stretch for me to accept one line from a larger exchange and say, "That means it's OK/effective to make personal attacks."

Welch stood firm and showed principal, in public, at a time when people were waiting for someone to do that. It seems to me that his principled stand was the critical element, and even if his attack on McCarthy's decency played a role, that was in the context of a veteran and Army lawyer talking to Congress and addressing a specific person, known to the public. You pointing to it as a singular example underlines my point--are you really going to base a general practice on such a specific, one-time event?

On the basis of a single event with the given particulars, you are defending making blanket name-calling statements against 40ish % of the American voting public (calling them "Trumpistas").

It's possible to actually address Trump's flaws without name-calling, and certainly possible to do so without making sweeping accusations against his base.

You wrote: Concerning your assertion: "I know for a fact that not all of (Trump's followers) are stupid, nor ignorant, nor racist."
You asked: Where is your demonstration of proof?

My proof is that I personally know people (not many, granted--a total of 2) who fall into those categories. One of them is someone who voted for Trump because the most important thing to him was avoiding foreign wars at all costs, and Clinton is a hawk. They didn't like the sexism and racism, but decided it was less important than warmongering. I don't agree with him, but he's neither stupid nor ignorant, and I am unsure as to his racism. The other is a libertarian with an almost monomaniacal hatred for taxes. Again, I know him to be neither stupid nor ignorant, and I do not know him to be racist.

You make a long chain of theoretical arguments including civil/criminal law, Jung, Hitler/the 3rd Reich (which could lead you to lose this debate due to Godwin's Law), and . It all amounts to defending the idea that somehow insulting people can have positive results, or is some sort of civic duty when the target is sufficiently awful.

Yet we have both sides making constant personal attacks, character assassinations, and feeling oh-so-sure of themselves and here we are. I have yet to see the progress.

Where I DO see progress is in Democratic candidates focusing on issues, facts, and a positive way forward. In the 2018 elections, Trump was not often mentioned by the candidates who won in swing or even red districts.

As to Trump's character, I agree with you--he's despicable and terrible for this country.


Alan Archibald: 

To begin...

I just did a brief review of the literature: ad hominem argument is as effective as intellectually-rigorous argument.

In politics, where -- as I see it -- the core aspiration is to "keep crazy people out of office," I will to write political commentary that is well-documented and intellectually rigorous.

But I will also use "ad hominem" argument as an effective adjunct. 

Consider.

"In a study, scientists had people evaluate scientific claims paired with attacks. They found that attacks on positions based on ad hominem fallacies were just as effective as attacks based on evidence." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5790247/ (published by the National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health)

"Ad hominem attacks have the potential to be both fallacious and effective." https://www.thoughtco.com/ad-hominem-fallacy-1689062

Then there is this "Scientific American" article,  "Character Attacks: How To Properly Apply The Ad Hominem": https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/character-attack/

In passing, I will note that "ad hominem" argument is a "logical fallacy" when its sole purpose is to replace rigorous, well-documented argument. 

I use "ad hominem" argument as an adjunct to rigorous well-documented argument.


*****

You question the validity/pertinence of my claim concerning the epochal efficacy of U.S. Army Chief Counsel Joseph Welch's ad hominem attack on Senator Joseph McCarthy during the Red Scare of the 1950s..  


I was born in 1947 and grew up in a social and political milieu saturated by references -- all across the culture -- to the fact that Welch's attack was single-handedly responsible for toppling Trump's ideological and methodological forebear, Joseph McCarthy. 

Consider "Joseph McCarthy Meets His Match" from the editors of History.com. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/joseph-mccarthy-meets-his-match 

Or consider Encyclopedia Brittannica's entry on "McCarthyism." https://www.britannica.com/topic/McCarthyism


10,000 More Examples Of Ad Hominem Efficacy
(... one for each of Trump's documented lies while in office.)

It is a fact -- plain as potatoes -- that Trump's successful presidential campaign used ad hominem attack as its cornerstone and fountainhead. 

Indeed, "The Deplorable One" is a living advertisement for the efficacy of "ad hominem" savaging. 

Check out "Trump, King Of The Ad Hominem" - https://silvertonguetimes.com/2016/03/14/trump-king-of-the-ad-hominem/

Or, explore "Trump, In A Series Of Scathing Personal Attacks, Questions Clinton's Mental Health." https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-20160806-story.html

Concerning your "intelligent, non-ignorant" friend who voted for Trump because Hillary was a hawk... 

I think your time would be better spent acknowledging the proven utility/efficacy of ad hominem attacks, while dedicating your suasive efforts to the routine fallacy of "single issue voting." 

Clearly Hillary would have been a "hawk on Putin," whereas Trump, without a whimper, pre-surrendered to the murderous, KGB thug-kleptocrat leader of a hostile power. 

And why not? 
https://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2019/04/despite-number-of-loose-screws-trump.html

As a native New Yorker, I have always known Trump to be this generation's "P.T. Barnum." He is constantly on the lookout for the "sucker born every minute," and this personal history enables me to say confidently that any "smart, non-ignorant" person who simply took the time to probe Trump's past would have seen -- "with the clarity of Lake Baikal" -- that Cheater-in-Chief was a narcissist megalomaniac with multiple character flaws who could not -- in any way -- be trusted.

As for your other Trump-supporting friend - the libertarian - it is objectively "stupid and ignorant" to "hate taxes." 

"Taxes are the price we pay for civilization" and your friend doesn't want to pay them. 

The math here is not complicated.

Again, I encourage you to invite your "smart, non-ignorant" friends to participate in this conversation so they have opportunity to state their reasons for supporting Trump.

Why do I have "this feeling" you will either not extend the invitation, or they will refuse to participate.

That said, I am always ready to be surprised and hope I'm very surprised in this instance.

As for Godwin's Law... 

You insinuate that it is somehow unfair to reference the 20th century's most important politician because doing so is, apparently, a "rhetorical no-no" that only serves to muddy the waters. 

Consider.

Hitler is a transcendentally significant historical, political and cultural touchstone bearing an unusual resemblance to Trump particularly in light of Hitler's alliance with Mussolini. 

Do your agree? 

Or do you disagree?

(Even a broken clock is right twice a day...)

In any event, the question you artfully dodge still stands: "Who knows what might have been different if 'the good Germans'had lifted their voices en masse in ad hominem attack on Adolf Hitler?" (Notably, an analogous en masse shout kept Hillary Clinton out of power.)

Finally, I had originally overlooked the importance that you (and Fred) place on my reference to "Trumpistas," even though the central importance of this term was "hiding" in plain sight.

I believe that "Trumpista" and "Trumpism" are the specific referents most needed so contemporary Americans can "call things by their true name."

Note.

Trump and his followers are neither "Republican" nor "conservative." In consequence, these old referents fundamentally mis-represent what's taking place on "the right side of the aisle."

On the other hand, in a nation which would wisely follow Canada's bilingual lead by making Spanish an official language, the lexical method of Spanish is to denominate followers of a political movement by adding the suffix "-ista" to the corresponding noun. 

"English Is Not The Official Language Of The United States": https://miami.cbslocal.com/2018/06/16/english-is-not-the-official-language-of-the-us/  

And according to Europe's late 18th century "treaty system," Hillsborough was incorporated while North Carolina was still a Spanish colony. https://northcarolinahistory.org/encyclopedia/lucas-vasques-de-ayllon-1475-1526/

In Mexico, where the best-known political parties are PRI and PAN, members of the former are called "Priistas," and members of the latter are called "Panistas." 

"Trumpista" is not only a PERFECT expression for a movement led by an egomaniac who wants his name emblazoned on every tall, phallic building he owns. (I have no doubt Trump himself would agree.)

It is also true that the Spanish "tinge" of the word "Trumpista" is unusually apt for devotees whose cause celebre is building a Tex-Mex wall as ineffective as the Maginot Line in World War II.

Why are you being so "precious" about an excellent neologism -- at the very moment a neologism is needed?

If nothing else, people should be reminded that Trump's followers are members of a personality cult, and that it is as much of a dodge to avoid the word "Trumpista" as it is to use "White Nationalism" where "White Supremacy" is more accurate.

A "Trumpista" is exactly what a Trump supporter is.

Two personal observations...

1.) When "Obamacare" emerged as a right-wing epithet, I delighted in the term -- and still do. 

"Obamacare" was a much better "handle" for the discussion of changing American healthcare than "The Affordable Care Act." (I will note in passing that currently Obamacare has 28% more citizens who approve it than oppose it.)

2.) When Trump made political hay out of his ad hominem attack on Elizabeth Warren's Native American ancestry, "Pocahantas" immediately became my name of choice. Go Pocahantas!

Perhaps the most important "background element" to keep in mind is that I have written more well-documented, intellectually-rigorous criticisms of "Trumpistas" and "Trumpism" than anyone you know. (I refer you to my blog: http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/)

Make no mistake.

I am completely in favor of using the time-honored tools of intelligent, factually-detailed argument to illuminate "The Lord of Lies." ("Trumpistas Don't Just Lie. They Are Hostile To Truth." http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2018/10/lies-lies-lies-lies-compendium-of-pax.html)

But since "The Lord of Lies" embodies living proof of "ad hominem" efficacy, we would be foolish not to take a page from "The Master's" playbook.

Like many important issues, Truth is not always straightforward. 

We are all aware of the phrase "fighting fire with fire." There are times when it is the best -- if not only -- effective technique.

But we are less aware of another truth -- frequently manifest in pharmacology -- that "paradoxical effects" are both real and powerful. (Ancient Chinese sage Lao Tze -- the unwitting founder of Taoism -- said "The profoundest truths are paradoxial.")

Let's not fight this battle with one hand tied behind our backs.

Rather, let us learn from Trump who, if nothing else, is a genius at using ad hominem attack to decisive political advantage. 

********************************************************

On a lighter note...

If you do not know "The Borowitz Report," I encourage you to explore his political genius -- a genius that sees "everything" as grist for the comedic mill. 

It is my longstanding observation that a signal difference between "the left and right side of the aisle" is that "leftist" comedians are routinely funny, whereas "right-wing""comedians" recall petulant middle-schoolers trying to restore the dimwitted "magic" of early adolescence.

In any event, I am confident Borowitz would howl at the proposition that there is no ground to be gained by using the word "Trumpista."

Of course Borowitz could be wrong. Even counterproductive.

Nevertheless, he's my man.

It's okay to take off the gloves Zach.

Remember: "A liberal is someone who refuses to take his own side in a fight."












↧

Colbert Hits Trump After Mueller Report: Innocent People Don't Say "I'm Fucked"

April 19, 2019, 6:27 pm
↧

"Los Cuerpos En El Desierto" - Muriendose De Sed Y Del Frio - El New York TImes

April 20, 2019, 8:16 am
$
0
0
Uno de los lugares más peligrosos de la frontera en Estados Unidos
Por THE NEW YORK TIMES
La semana pasada, los agentes de la Patrulla Fronteriza avisaron que el cuerpo de una mujer había aparecido cerca de una cerca de alambre en un rancho.
La semana pasada, los agentes de la Patrulla Fronteriza avisaron que el cuerpo de una mujer había aparecido cerca de una cerca de alambre en un rancho. Oficina del alguacil del condado de Brooks

"California Snow"
An Illegal Immigration Song By Tom Russell, America's Other Bob Dylan
The New York Times
The New York Times

sábado, 20 de abril de 2019


Bienvenidos a esta edición especial de El Times, donde compartiremos por algunas semanas la versión en español de Cruzar la frontera, una nueva entrega semanal de The New York Times sobre la vida en la frontera entre México y Estados Unidos.
Aquí puedes suscribirte para recibir la próxima edición [en inglés] en tu correo. Los suscriptores de El Times podrán acceder a la versión en español todos los sábados en su bandeja de entrada.
Los Cuerpos En El Desierto
Por Manny Fernández desde Falfurrias, Texas
La semana pasada, durante su visita a San Antonio, el presidente estadounidense Donald Trump les dijo a los reporteros que estaba consternado porque se enteró de que los migrantes morían en el desierto al sur de Texas, después de cruzar la frontera de manera ilegal.
“No tenía idea”, dijo Trump. “Nadie sabe lo mal que están las cosas”. Y agregó: “Muchos, muchos mueren. Eso fue lo que me sorprendió”.
Trump estaba dando un discurso en un club privado el miércoles pasado a las 12:56 y, en ese preciso momento, a 299 kilómetros al sur, Bianca Mora, quien trabaja como asistente del alguacil del condado de Brooks, conducía una patrulla por un camino rústico. Estaba respondiendo a una denuncia de que se había encontrado el cuerpo de una migrante en un rancho. Era el segundo caso que atendía ese día en el que había un cadáver involucrado.
“No sé cómo explicarlo, pero una se acostumbra”, dijo Mora, de 25 años. “Acudí a una denuncia el año pasado y no tuve suficientes bolsas para meter los cuerpos. No estaba preparada para la cantidad de personas que encontramos. Inicialmente fuimos por uno pero levantamos tres”.
El condado de Brooks se encuentra en la zona desértica del sur de Texas: una inmensa franja de ranchos donde abundan los arbustos espinosos, los cactus y los robles. La cabecera municipal, Falfurrias, tiene una población de 4981 habitantes. Un solo rancho tiene 3840 hectáreas, más de diez veces el tamaño del Central Park de Nueva York. Brooks está más al norte de la frontera —como a una hora en automóvil—, pero ahí se encuentra un ajetreado puesto de control de la Patrulla Fronteriza.
Los migrantes, guiados por traficantes de personas, tratan de rodear el control fronterizo. Cientos de ellos, mal preparados para la travesía de varios días en el desierto inhóspito, algunas veces sin suficiente agua ni comida, han muerto en los ranchos privados del condado de Brooks, lo que ha convertido a este lugar en uno de los más mortíferos de la frontera sur de Estados Unidos.
Desde enero de 2009, en Brooks se han encontrado los cuerpos o restos óseos de 642 migrantes. El frío los mata en el invierno y el calor en el verano. Mueren de deshidratación, insolación e hipotermia. En general fallecen solos. Pero algunas veces mueren juntos, como los cinco migrantes cuyos cuerpos se encontraron bajo un árbol durante un invierno. En lo que va de año se han encontrado ocho cuerpos. En 2018, la oficina del alguacil recuperó cincuenta; en el 2017 fueron 52 y en 2016, 61.
Esos 642 cadáveres son solo una fracción del total a lo largo de toda la frontera. De octubre de 1997 a septiembre de 2018, la Patrulla Fronteriza registró 7505 muertes de migrantes en sus nueve sectores a lo largo de toda la frontera sudoeste. La cantidad real de muertes tal vez sea mayor, debido a que la cifra de la Patrulla Fronteriza solo incluye los casos que se informan a las autoridades (nadie sabe cuántos cuerpos se encontraron).
El alguacil de Brooks, Urbino “Benny” Martínez, dijo que no le sorprendía que algunas personas no supieran lo que estaba sucediendo en su condado, incluido el presidente de Estados Unidos.
“Es el típico problema de siempre, pero que nadie ve; algo en lo que no se piensa y a lo que no se le presta atención si no ocurre en tu patio trasero”, dijo Martínez.
El día del discurso del presidente, la primera llamada llegó a la oficina del alguacil poco antes de las 10 de la mañana, unas cuantas horas después que empezara el turno de Mora, de doce horas. Los agentes de la Patrulla Fronteriza llamaron para informar sobre el hallazgo del cuerpo de una mujer cerca de una cerca de alambre en el extremo trasero de un rancho. Su esqueleto estaba boca abajo. Llevaba dinero de Honduras, México y Estados Unidos. A su alrededor había tarjetas con oraciones esparcidas en la tierra y también había algunas en los bolsillos de sus jeans.
“Los agentes de la Patrulla Fronteriza estaban siguiendo a un grupo de migrantes indocumentados que se dirigían al norte, hacia la autopista, y el grupo se encontró con el cuerpo y siguió adelante”, afirmó Mora. “Los agentes se toparon con el cadáver y nos llamaron”.
Mora estaba de vuelta en su oficina, escribiendo un informe, cuando llegó la segunda llamada poco antes del mediodía. Un trabajador había encontrado el cuerpo de un hombre en otro rancho. El migrante estaba boca arriba, con los brazos extendidos, sobre un camino arenoso. En su cartera tenía una identificación hondureña.
Corinne E. Stern, jefa del servicio médico forense del condado de Webb en Laredo, quien realiza las autopsias para el condado de Brooks, dijo que los cuerpos todavía no se habían identificado de manera segura. Era posible que la mujer fuese una persona desaparecida en Honduras. Y era muy probable que el hombre fuese hondureño por lo que decía la identificación, afirmó Stern.
“La causa de muerte más probable es la deshidratación”, sugirió Stern sobre ambos cuerpos.
Unos familiares en Honduras dijeron que creían que el hombre que fue encontrado la semana pasada era su pariente, Rudy Donaldo Martínez Arias, de 21 años, un esposo y padre que vivía en la ciudad de San Pedro Sula, al norte de Honduras. Los familiares de Martínez afirmaron que él había muerto de sed en el sur de Texas después de que el coyote lo abandonara a él y a otros migrantes.
Rudy Donaldo Martínez Arias y su hija en una foto que publicó en Facebook en enero.Rudy Donaldo Martínez Arias y su hija en una foto que publicó en Facebook en enero.
“Se fue de nuestro país, Honduras, porque los sueldos no alcanzan para nada aquí”, dijo en una entrevista por Facebook Maricela Amador, de 24 años, prima de Martínez. “Es pobreza pura. Por eso la gente emigra a Estados Unidos sin saber lo que le espera. Quería irse para encontrar un buen empleo con el que le alcanzara para mantener a su familia”.
La hija de Martínez tiene 3 años. En enero, publicó una selfi con ella en su página de Facebook. Una pariente publicó un comentario sobre lo bonita que se veía la niña.
“Así es”, escribió en español Martínez, “la más bella mi princesa”.
Nubia Reyna colaboró con este reportaje desde Brownsville, Texas.
—Manny es parte del equipo de periodistas del Times que actualmente se encuentran en la frontera. Cada semana, ellos compartirán parte de su reporteo sobre la frontera y las personas que pasan tiempo en ambos lados de ella.
¿Tienes preguntas sobre cómo es la vida en la frontera o sugerencias sobre este boletín? Escríbenos: crossingtheborder@nytimes.com
↧
Viewing all 30150 articles
Browse latest View live
Search