Diversity Hire

Trump visited a meeting of black journalists, and tripped over himself while trying to make the point that Kamala Harris was a DEI hire.  This describes someone who is hired for the sake of making the workforce of some organization more diverse.

When Tea Partiers, Trump, and other MAGA-heads accuse someone of being a DEI-hire, they mean that the person concerned has no skills or qualifications except that of being a minority.  (Belonging to an underrepresented minority.)  So they're accusing Kamala Harris of having been selected as Biden's running mate solely because she was non- white. 

They're saying more: they're implying that she was unqualified for any of the positions she has held.  Well, she has been a senator, I believe, and done an excellent job, but I don't know enough to argue the case. 

But, you know, this brings up the question: has Trump been qualified for any post he has been elected to?  Hasn't he been elected solely because of being a TV personality?  And he got on TV solely because he was rich?  And he was rich solely because he got a lot of money from his father, and cheated on his taxes?

So they're trying this tactic, a slight variation on the 'Birther' attack. They're probably going to call for Kamala's birth certificate next.  Bear in mind that Trump refused to make public his college records, which suggests that he bought his way into a college diploma. 

Arch

Bamboo!

I had a fellow student in graduate school who had a broad Western PA accent.  One time, I said that something was made out of bamboo, and she exclaimed "Biyam-BEW??"

That was the first time I really noticed her accent, and of course there was no going back after that!

We were very fond of each other, but I was—essentially—happily married, and I never drank beer, which she regarded as a serious shortcoming.  One afternoon, she hauled me out to a little bar, and ordered a pitcher of Stroh's.  I had never seen a pitcher of beer, and I was intimidated.  We started out drinking the health of mathematicians in alphabetical order, starting with Archimedes!  By the time we had got to Helmholtz, the beer tasted pretty good.  (For those of my readers who haven't tasted beer, try a pitcher.  Or what is known as a flight, which is just a sampler, a tray of small-ish glasses filled with a variety of different beers that the bar stocks.  You might find one to your taste.)  Beers are not intended to be sweet.  If you're only comfortable with sweet drinks, you'll have to get the advice of your friends.  Very few beer drinkers are inclined to take the time to work with a non-drinker, unfortunately.  I'd say they're more interested in getting you well and truly sozzled that to help you find a beer you'd really like to drink.  Sue me, beer drinkers. 

Which is why I was so impressed by my friend helping me to get my feet wet.  (She also wanted me to smoke, but that wasn't happening.)

Not Every Republican Politician Talks Rubbish All the Time

I don't know what switches on these important flashes of reason, but they are often wonderful, and far too infrequent.

What made me sit up and take notice is a quote from Nikki Haley reported in the New York Times.  Neil Vigdor, writing for The Times, says:

Nikki Haley, who was one of Donald J. Trump’s Republican primary opponents, and is the daughter of Indian immigrants, rebuked members of her party for calling Vice President Kamala Harris a “D.E.I. hire,” using the abbreviation for diversity, equity and inclusion. “It’s not helpful,” Haley, who was South Carolina governor and United Nations ambassador during the Trump administration, told CNN. Haley, who endorsed Trump months after she lost a bitter primary campaign, urged Republicans to focus instead on Harris’s record, which she said was far left. “You don’t need to talk about what she looks like or what gender she is.”

I could not have expressed this any better than Nikki Haley has.  Nikki Haley has echoed lots of Donald Trump's idiocies; a greater number than any intelligent person should have been able to make herself go with.  But politicians are a strange animal; sometimes they make themselves say things that are really weird, for the sake of positioning themselves politically.  But evidently, maligning Kamala Harris's and her own cultural backgrounds was going just too far for Nikki to tolerate.  By describing Kamala as having no qualifications except for her racial identity (which is, I think, a typical racist miscalculation) suggests that all people of foreign descent currently in politics owe their positions merely to DEI considerations. 

Of course, that's the type of consideration that Trump's allies sorely miss being able to make.  When they were kids, insulting immigrants was allowed.  But in this uncomfortable New World (out of which they have faith that Trump will lead them) they've got to watch what they say.  PC.  This is why they've hated PC so much. 

Arch

Kamala Harris is the Democrat Nominee?

Just got the news that Biden has dropped out, and endorsed Kamala Harris to be the nominee. 

I'm excited; the more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that this choice will work.  Some Democrats ,unfortunately, will be acutely discomfited by the prospect of the nation—and the Party—being led by a black person.   There will be, no doubt calls to verify her passport, and so on.  Well, on principle, I don't object to that sort of thing: see what happened with George Santos.  More on this later. 

They won't like the fact that Kamala Harris had Indian parentage, either.  Remember that Britain survived a Prime Minister of Indian descent (even if not very well). 

This situation has so much going for it!  I don't want to get too excited; I still have reservations about how dynamic the DNC is, and whether they have the vitamins to jump in and capitalize on the circumstances. 

I know that Bernie Sanders wanted Biden to run; I'm not sure exactly why; perhaps he had some instinct about how well Biden would do against Trump.  I also know Pete Buttigiege (?) was solidly behind Biden.  I would guess that those who were rooting for Biden to hang on were mainly opposed to having the party force him out, and we could say that the party didn't; it was probably COVID that did it. 

Let the wheels resume turning!  It is a good day. 

Arch

Philosophy from Teacher

When I was a student, and just getting interested in politics, I was told about Paulo Freire, the author of the book "Pedagogy of the Oppressed".  He wrote:

The oppressors do not perceive their monopoly on having more as a privilege which dehumanizes others and themselves. They cannot see that, in the egoistic pursuit of having as a possessing class, they suffocate in their own possessions and no longer are; they merely have. For them, having more is an inalienable right, a right they acquired through their own "effort," with their "courage to take risks." If others do not have more, it is beause they are incompetent and lazy, and worst of all is their unjustifiable ingratitude toward the "generous gestures" of the dominant class. Precisely because they are "ungrateful" and "envious," the oppressed are regarded as potential enemies who must be watched.

There Are (a few) Downsides to Switching Out Biden

Various experts—notably Jon Stewart—have been urging the Democrat Party to urge Biden to step aside, and field a fresh candidate/nominee.

I know where Jon Stew is coming from.   He is, ultimately, a member of the Press, and their stock in trade is: words.  When Trump spouts his nonsense and lies, there has to be someone who jumps down his throat conclusively.  Someone who can spot a non-sequitor, and debate.  A lot of Democrats can do this.  It would be nice to even have a speaker who can articulate why Biden stuttered at the podium.  It was because of Trump's onslaught of lies.  Trump talked fast, but they were all the standard lies of his stump speech.

But there are negatives.  If Biden is switched out, the Trumpees will twist it to look as if the Democrats are admitting the failure of Biden's administration.  Obviously this is not the case, but something doesn't have to be true for the Republicans to make it convincing. 

If, however, Kamala Harris is the nominee, there are lots of advantages.  Trump will try to make fun of her as a woman, and that will not go down well with Suburban women.  I suspect there is a little racism in the Democrat Party as well.  They'll just have to deal with it.  There is a little sexism in the party as well.  They'll have to deal with that, too.

Arch

Despise and Detest, Without Hating!

The title of this post was written with tongue in cheek!  But the motives of the Republican leadership is very opaque, and we have to wonder: are these motives as despicable as they seem?

Soon after the Covid pandemic broke out, and the administration was trying to get as many citizens vaccinated as possible, I remember the Republicans accusing certain Democrats' vaccinations as "Theatre"!  You know, that gives us some insight into the thinking of the Republicans; at least some Republicans.  Some of what they do is theatre.  Trump indulges in a lot of theatre.  I sometimes wonder whether the marginal Republican members of Congress, such as these sundry Bobert's, Taylor greens, and Gaetz, recognize the Theatre for what it is.  Also, do the MAGA faithful recognize the Theatre?  Or do they think it's all theatre?

Well, I digress.  If we're driven by hate, it actually detracts from our effectiveness.  Some people can motivate themselves by hate, and keep focused on what has to be done, like Madame Defarge.  Others get distracted and derailed, and lose sight of their tasks.  I'm one; hate just distracts me.

Our task is to keep aware of the Republican theatre, and vote.

Arch

If not Biden, then Who?

One major argument for keeping Biden on as the candidate for 2024 is that a change of candidate (or nominee, or whatever it's called) will be disruptive.  That was an idea invented when people began to realize that the US voter was not the sharpest pencil in the box. 

Is it true that people would get confused by seeing other names than 'Biden' on the ballot?  Will Republican poll workers capitalize on the situation, and design a ballot that would result in huge numbers of spoilt votes?  Who knows?

I was watching Bill Maher just now, and this is what he was saying.  Ignore the off-color jokes:

https://youtu.be/tCKNlj1uDyc?si=fPwvTk3BbLY8royC

Political Violence

Donald Trump was just shot at during a rally yesterday.  Lots of letters are being written to newspapers; people have a variety of concerns: how to protect presidential candidates; are the secret service guys trustworthy; are there too many guns out there; but most of all—are people losing trust in the political process, especially younger people???

Many are probably thinking: tell us something we don't know, why don't you?  The fact is clear to see.   To be president, you must either be rich, or come from a wealthy family, or have the support of a wealthy cabal.

Why  did the SCOTUS give the Citizens United decision?  Money has such blatant power over everything that it's hard to believe the voters have any power at all.  Asking the Demicrats, the ones who most often speak for those who have little or no wealth, those who represent the poorest constituents, are marginalized as The Ultra Left.

Get guns out of the hands of violent people. 

Get money out of politics.

Presidential Teams

The news media has been anxious about the Democrats' presidential nominee ever since the first Debate, between Trump, and Biden.   Not just the Press; we've all been stunned: what will we do?  What will we do?

It's really not up to us, the common people, the so- called 'rank and file', to do something.  The party elites, as Biden called them, made a miscalculation.  Instead of declaring that Biden had gone past his Elect By date, they had taken him at his word, when he said "Lemme at him!  I'll beat him again!!" partly, I think, so as not to be rude.  Who wants to be rude to an elderly gentleman?  We understand.  But it was a serious miscalculation. 

If the only ones voting in this election are going to be the Demicrat Faithful, and the GOP Faithful, it would be unpredictable enough.  But these so- called Undecideds are out there, being confused and frustrated in the fringes, and they could run in any time and vote!  But they probably ain't gonna do it. 

But today, I want to talk about the two Presidential Teams.  You see, we must take into account the entire packet of President and Vice President. 

In the case of the Democrats, we know the team well.  In the case of the GOP, we know Trump, and that's all. 

Trump, we know, had a tendency to pick people and things as if they're accessories; will they look good together?  Will the accessories be easy to manage?  We don't know, but Biden just might be doing something that's distantly related to the same idea, except that it has far more to do with electability, representation, politics, and experience. 

And we know Trump tends to lie.  Lies come easy to him, and his electorate expects him to lie.  So the decision is easy for us. 

For the Undecideds: Democrats have historically tried to make things cut and dried for them.  Well, this time we have to take a deep breath, and let them make their own calculations.  Abortion?  Gun Control?  The SCOTUS?  Up to the Undecideds.

Arch

Paper Towels

In my opinion, the paper towel sheets that our rolls come pre-perforated with, are too wide.  It wasn't too long ago that they were about a half-inch narrower, which seemed a perfect size to me.  But someone must have whispered in the ear of the manufacturers: "Hey, are you crazy?  Are you trying to sell them more paper, or less?  Make those strips wider!"

"How much wider?"

"Well, the tree-huggers wanted narrow paper towels, to save paper!"

"Make them as wide as you can, without attracting the attention of the tree-hugger police."

Too bad; the tree-hugger police is on to you.

Perhaps in the Project 2025 Appendix they probably have 'Make paper towels wider, so you can wipe your butt with a single sheet.'  (Never mind that you're not supposed to use paper towels as toilet tissues.)

Arch

Biden

We all were dismayed after watching the debate between Trump and Biden.  Each of us to a different degree, because we've been getting accustomed to unsteadiness, the unpredictability, the inconsistency, and the lack of mental stamina of the two debaters.  (In the case of Trump, the word stamina doesn't even really apply, because he doesn't really exert himself intellectually at all.  But during certain public appearances, Trump's physical effort has failed, and he has relapsed into total unintelligibility.  The MAGA crowd does not mind, because they're motivated mostly by his appearance: he looks like a president of the good old days, and is a lot of fun, too!)

I was thinking that perhaps Biden ought not to debate anymore.  Biden can only reliably duel using moves he has prepared in advance, and Trump throws too much at him, too rapidly (a deliberate strategy) for Biden to prepare for.  Trump doesn't need to properly duel Biden; he just needs to generate the right kind of noise, and his people will love it!

So, as far as voters who watch the debates to choose the man with the superior ideas, it's time to abandon that hope.  Trump won't stop lying, so that's out of the question.  Biden has realized that seriously refuting Trump is tiring, and doesn't get him anywhere.  The only thing that will work against Trump is (?) more and better insults, but that does not come naturally to Biden.  It would also do permanent damage to the idea of the debate itself. 

Thinking people are going to be terribly disappointed with live debates this election year; I for one will vote without reference to debates.  But we all fret about the undecided voters. 

Well, the very fact that someone is undecided, that someone even entertains the possibility of voting for Trump, or worse, Kennedy, tells us that these are people who cannot be trusted with any damn thing. They must be so desperately feeble-minded that they may as well be MAGA. 

In other words, nobody's mind is going to be changed.  It's just a matter of getting out the vote. 

Arch