Daily Archives: February 6, 2017

So why did Trump enact these measures, in particular given that numerous experts believe they will weaken, not strengthen, our national security? Feelings. Nothing more than ...sorry. Trump, and many other Republicans, have long sought to fire up their base with charges that, for example, President Obama wouldnt use the words radical Islam when talking about terrorist acts committed by Muslims. That was 100 percentabout politics, about playing on fear to gin up anger.

Obama, like George W. Bush before him, made a sober, strategic assessment that not saying those words would make us safer, stronger, and help us in the fight against ISIS, al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups acting in the name of Islam. Would you like to know who else agrees with Obama and Bush, and thinks Trump is just plain wrong? Vladimir Putin:

I would prefer Islam not be mentioned in vain alongside terrorism, he said at a news conference in December, answering a question about the Islamic State, a group he often refers to as the so-called Islamic State, to emphasize a distinction with the Islamic religion.

At the opening of a mosque in Moscow in 2015, Mr. Putin spoke of terrorists who cynically exploit religious feelings for political aims.Terrorists from the so-called Islamic State are compromising a great world religion, compromising Islam, sowing hatred, killing people, including clergy, and added that their ideology is built on lies and blatant distortions of Islam.

He was careful to add, Muslim leaders are bravely and fearlessly using their own influence to resist this extremist propaganda.

Putin is an authoritarian thug, to be sure. I am loathe to cite him for, well, anything. The point is that if he, Bush, and Obama all agree on which approach works best on this issue, that says something. What it says is that Trumpno doubt influenced by his own personal Rasputin, i.e., Steve Bannon, is pursuing a policy that makes the American people less safe. Hes doing so because it makes a segment of his base feel good, feel like they are the ones whose ideas are in charge. Its nothing more than right-wingpolitical correctness.

Along similar lines, Judge James Robarts order that blocked Trumps travel ban gave him another opportunity to play to the emotions of his base. He attacked the judge, and thus the constitutional principle of an independent judiciary, in incendiary terms. The clear message hes able to send is that he wants to keep you safe, but the establishment just wont let him.

If Democrats want to beat Trump, its not enough to talk only about the fact that his policies are immoralas important as that is. People are scared of terrorism, specifically coming from Muslims, especially after San Bernadino and Orlando. From the perspective of political strategy, to deny that reality is unhelpful to say the least. We must talk about morality and American values, but we also have to talk about effectiveness.

Like it or not, there are Americans who are willing to sacrifice their morality for their safety. We can convince them that Trump is making them and their loved ones less safe by targeting Muslims with his policies, and that hes doing so in a cynical way to appeal to their fears and win their votes. In a close election, that could make the difference between a one-term failed Trump presidency that discredits everything he stands for, and a re-election that is painful to evencontemplate.

Ian Reifowitz is the author of Obamas America: A Transformative Vision of Our National Identity (Potomac Books).

See original here:

Trump's right-wing political correctness makes us less safe - Daily Kos - Daily Kos

"Some Americans see religious liberty as code for discrimination," a reporter asked Spicer at a daily briefing. "Can you comment, give us a sense of how the President views this tension?"

"I think there is a line," Spicer said."I think people should be able to practice their religion, express their religion, express areas of their faith without reprisal. And I think that pendulum sometimes swings the other way in the name of political correctness."

He said that "too often" small business owners and employees are not allowed to express their faiths.

"Too often those voices get pushed out in the name of political correctness," Spicer said. "So he is going to continue to make sure that we not only speak up for it but find ways in which we can keep that line a little less blurred and make sure that the pendulum doesn't swing against people."

"If you could give us an example, if you could, of a pendulum swinging in the direction of political correctness?" a reporter asked.

"I think if you look back to the Little Sisters case, if you look back to other businesses that were under Obamacare" Spicer began.

"Would you put Hobby Lobby in that category?" the reporter pressed.

"I would, yeah, absolutely," Spicer said. "I think there is several businesses and several institutions, Catholic institutions and others, that have been mandated or apparently attempted to mandate certain things that they may or may not do or how they have to treat their employees."

He said those are "instances where clearly the pendulum is swinging a different way" as an effect of federal "regulations and policies that have frankly denied people the ability to live according to their faith."

The two cases he cited both involved institutions which brought lawsuits challenging the Affordable Care Act's contraceptive mandate on the basis that it ran counter to Christian beliefs.

In 2014, the Supreme Court ruled that "closely held" for-profit corporations such as Hobby Lobby cannot be forced to abide by Obamacare's mandate to cover contraception for female employees in their insurance plans at no extra cost.

And in May 2016, the Supreme Court sent Zubik v. Burwell, a consolidation of cases brought by religious nonprofits including The Little Sisters of the Poor, back to lower courts.

See original here:

Spicer Says Religious Liberty Is Getting 'Pushed Out' By Political Correctness - TPM

To the Editor:

Heres an update on an old joke I heard in the early sixties. Two politically correct people were on a dude ranch watching two horses in the corral.

One said he favored the taller horse to ride. The other asked if he thought the taller one was the one on the left or right. The first P.C. man said the taller one was on the right. The second man said he thought the black one on the left was taller than the white one on the right.

If that sounds silly, think about the white singer or actor in a Popeyes restaurant. One server asked another who was next. The second said the white boy was. In the sea of black faces it was the obvious remark to make.

Isnt it silly to make a big deal out of trying to differentiate who is next by the color of skin and not by the color of socks or height? I say political correctness has gone too far when you cant use skin color to identify a person. Thats why the news gives a detailed description of a criminal people should be looking for and leaves out skin color.

Chuck Johnson

Morris

Get breaking and town-specific news sent to your phone. Sign up for text alerts from The Herald-News.

Continue reading here:

Letter: Political correctness has gone too far - The Herald-News

USA TODAY 5:03 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2017

Cub Scouts in New York's Times Square.(Photo: Mary Altaffer, AP)

The Boy Scouts of America announced Monday that, effective immediately, it will accept and register transgender youth into its organization. Facebook comments are edited for clarity and grammar:

How long before any one of the new gender types sues to change the name from Boy Scouts of America to Snowflake Scouts?

Jackson Wilson

Its called Boy Scouts of America for a reason. Just start another one called the misinformed!

Stanley Baker

First you begin to wobble, then you fall. The U.S. is on a downward trajectory. There is no good that can come from supporting this kind of recognition from the Boy Scouts.

I think it is child abuse to allow a child to pretend to play the role of the opposite sex, and it is even worse when parents and school officials support and encourage it.

A child living under my roof will follow my rules, until he is of legal age and can live on his own. Thats the way it has always been. That is what a normal parent would do. But we live in a very sick society today. Parents do not want to parent, they want to be a childs friend.

Larry Hubble

USA TODAY

Policing the USA

I agree that forcing a child to play the role of the opposite sex is bad. But transgender children have been forced to pretend to be something they are not for a very long time.

It is time for that nonsense to stop, and let trans children be who they are without having to pretend to be someone they are not.

Bryan Oakley

As an Eagle Scout, Im proud of this decision from Boy Scouts. It was long overdue.

Andy Linn

This is absolutely sickening. It seems like every parent wants his child to grow up a fruitcake.

Politically correct culture is destroying American youth and emasculating our young men. Get some guts and stand up to this liberal agenda.

Edgar Fuss

Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/2jSpoZR

Read more:

Boy Scouts ruined by political correctness: Your Say - USA TODAY

Washington Post

Spicer says 'political correctness' infringes on 'freedom of religion' Washington Post February 2, 2017 3:14 PM EST - White House press secretary Sean Spicer on Feb. 2 said that Americans who wish to express their religious views sometimes tend to be prevented from doing it in the name of political correctness. (Reuters) ...

Visit link:

Spicer says 'political correctness' infringes on 'freedom of religion' - Washington Post

There has been a great uproar in this country over the use of political correctness. I feel that this is part of the reason that Mr. Trump was elected; because many Americans feel that "he speaks his mind" or "says the harsh truths." While one may agree or disagree with those statements, I speak with confidence when I say that Mr. Trump is far from politically correct. But those of us who choose to believe that the actions of a few do not speak for the actions of the many and fight for equal rights and protections for our Muslim brothers and sisters, we are not simply being politically correct. When we refuse to refer to the self-proclaimed "Islamic State" as such and when we refuse to follow the racially and ethnically divisive lead of Mr. Trump, we are not just being politically correct. By taking these, albeit small, steps we are saying that truth matters. Principles matter. Justice matters.

If any of the terms or descriptions that Mr. Trump used accurately conveyed the truth of the situation, even if it was unpleasant, I would use those terms. But this is not the case. The so-called "radical Islam," as Mr. Trump refers to it, is as much related to Islam as the Charleston, S.C., church shooter Dylann Roof is to Christianity. The term "radical Islam" is vague, contradictory, confusing and divisive. It clarifies nothing about this supposed threat to the United States and instead conveys only stereotypes and prejudice to further divide an already divided nation. Mr. Trump has an expansive vocabulary to choose from now that he has access to the greatest minds in the nation and 140 characters to tweet them in. He should not have all that much trouble finding some other words that clarify the reality of our complex world.

So I have taken the liberty of creating a brief list of terminologies that would be better suited than "radical Islam" to describe the self-proclaimed "Islamic State": terrorists; a group of actors using violence and fear against civilian and government targets for political gain; a violent group who use the banner of Islam falsely to create chaos and distrust among people.

When given a choice between words that express the truth clearly and precisely and words that convey "alternative facts" with vague and divisive tones, we should always choose the former over the latter.

Sadie Allgeier

Westminster

View original post here:

Letter: A guide to political correctness - Carroll County Times

Americas escape into sports is increasingly an escape from political correctness. The contrast between the objectivity of the one and the subjectivity of the other could not be clearer or more welcome to ever-growing crowds. Sport has always been a retreat from lifes drudgery, and that drudgery has never been more comprised of self-conscious societal censorship than it is today.

The Super Bowl is closing its two-week reign as Americas undisputed sovereign of spectacle. Nothing comes close. Other television broadcasts cannot rival it, and have not for years. Yet in its ascendancy, it is easy to overlook that while the Super Bowl is king, there is a large aristocracy of athletics surrounding it.

Americans have a seemingly insatiable desire to watch sports. Professional or amateur, it differs only by degrees, but the trend is the same: More. It dominates television with more channels than most thumbs can endure clicking through. It is the same on radio and in print. The internet offers only more opportunities for America to partake.

So great is demand that America races to repackage it into even more exciting offerings. We slice and dice the old sports, adding fantasy leagues and Nobel-level statistical analysis, to wring more enjoyment from them. And we add new ones MMA and made-to-order individual competitions. America always wants more.

How can demand still rise? It does because the need is growing. No society is as pretzeled by political correctness as America. And no escape from political correctness is as quick or complete as sports.

Sport demands objectivity. It yields a definitive outcome, and does so in a manner all participant and spectator accept and understand. Political correctness is subjectivity itself. Having a goal of no winners or losers only victims its rules are ever-changing and written by an elite who do not play by them.

Sport is clear-cut. Its outcomes are immediately known. A stadium instantly groans over a bad play by their team even as they wish it otherwise because they know and implicitly accept the consequences. Political correctness is only relative. What is permissible in one circumstance is not in another, for one group but not another, in one moment but not the next. Tomorrow its rules will be rewritten.

Sport is ever the unknown. Sports biggest story is the upset. It proves that, however much we think we know, we dont its why they play the game and on any given Sunday. Because it aint over til its over.

Political correctness is predetermined. We know the accepted answer even as we know its wrong before the question is asked. And that answer will eventually be extracted by hook or crook. It is not about discovering how events will turn out, but about arranging them as to how they should turn out.

Sport is about proper process. As much as it may be hated, a loss is accepted so long as the game was fair. And in their depths, no one wants to win by a bad call and even less by cheating. Political correctness is about proper outcomes. Only the accepted outcome will be allowed. However much the process must be manipulated to attain it is acceptable. Its only rules are the moments means that ensure it happens.

Little wonder Americans love sports they are called fans, short for fanatics, for a reason. They increasingly yearn for a clear-cut outcome with which they agree. There is a winner and a loser they can tell which is which, and celebrate a contest by which it is fairly, quickly, and clearly determined. And no, they do not abandon the losers at least half of every sporting event is comprised of them but continue cheering for them and eagerly await the next event.

Of course some will argue that there is political correctness in sports. Yes, it intrudes, but it remains the exception. It is the awkward interruption of the reason Americans flock to sports. There is a get it over with quality when it interlopes.

To appreciate sports attitude toward political correctness, compare it to the arts. There social commentarys absence is the exception. Almost every performance is a Wheres Waldo exercise to find it and you do not have to look hard, because it amounts to one of Waldos weakest efforts. No, avoiding it is the difficult part. Little wonder so many Americans do.

The comparison between sports and the arts could not be starker. While the arts go hat-in-hand in search of public support to fund themselves, sports are actually supported by the public. American sports do not need its performances subsidized by patrons or have government dollars channeled to the media to get themselves broadcast.

Nor do sports then turn back on those who foot its bills and insult them and their preferences. When Meryl Streep recently turned her broadside on Trump and threw down the threat So Hollywood is crawling with outsiders and foreigners. And if we kick em all out, youll have nothing to watch but football and mixed martial arts, which are not the arts it was an empty one to most. Not watching the arts is the choice Americans overwhelmingly make and in large part because of such performances as Streeps emoting.

Americans instead hunger for objective excellence, not political correctness subjective substitute. Innately, Americans do not care who produces excellence. They simply love it being clearly determined, and they find those qualities less and less reflected in a society ruled by remote elites.

In a society increasingly being pushed toward becoming one without winners and losers, Americans are desperate to seek asylum in a sanctuary where there is nothing else.

Continued here:

Sports: America's Great Escape from Political Correctness - American Spectator