I took a look at CNN Politics this morning and saw this blurb which I found profoundly disturbing:
But then I realized that the president had been on Twitter disputing the accounts of what he said. In one tweet, he claimed that what he said was “tough” but different from what was being reported. In two other tweets he expressed his view that the immigration deal under discussion would force America to accept large numbers of people from “high crime countries which are doing badly.” And, then, finally, he tried to contextualize his shithole remarks to make them less personal to the people of Haiti.
Never said anything derogatory about Haitians other than Haiti is, obviously, a very poor and troubled country. Never said “take them out.” Made up by Dems. I have a wonderful relationship with Haitians. Probably should record future meetings – unfortunately, no trust!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 12, 2018
So, saying Haiti is a “shithole” is not derogatory? Saying a whole continent is a “shithole” is not derogatory?
The whole spectacle makes me want to vomit.
What is driving me mad is so much of the media is back peddling faster than Trump is on statement. Suddenly those white house sources that have been leaking since day one are untrustworthy and we’re all supposed to take his word on this thing.
Trump’s response to Puerto Rico has been vengeful hate tweet’s and public statement’s of “You should have seen it BEFORE the hurricane” so how is him calling Haiti a “shithole” and, probably with support from Miller, wanting to block more Black people from coming here, out of character?
When are Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh, the liars who have been going at it the longest going to apologize to every person of color who has to listen to this dreck and to every white person that Trump, Gingrich, and Limbaugh smear with the depiction of their behavior as “superior”?
Calvinball has really gotten out of hand.
Sadly, too many of his staff signed up for exactly this sort of experience.
But they were expecting the cheering crowds, not the dead silence.
“makes me want to vomit…”
You will have to develop a somewhat stronger stomach, sadly. The modus operendi with elected Repub “I’m not PC” extremists is to make the racist statement and then play the parsing denial game, while the apologists rush to the defense. This is what the 46% expect.
25th Amendmenters shouldn’t miss Prof Graber’s latest at Balkanization, in which he argues that the amendment(properly construed) is NOT restricted to physical or mental impairment(s), but that Der Trumper’s overt racism and habitual uncontrollable lying render him “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office”. Very interesting.
Since Der Trumper’s white voters clearly agree with his latest shithole sentiments (and his trademark anti-(non white) immigrant theme), our noble majority-party Repubs will keep their blinders on, and the discussion remains regrettably theoretical—but no less interesting for that!
“I have a wonderful relationship with Haitians.”
Well, of course.
Not difficult to imagine that Trump does a happy dance (mostly in his mind because he can’t dance) every time he thinks he’s pulled one off.
He really believes that he’s very clever. “Hey, I’ll prove that my build a yuuge wall to keep out the bad hombres isn’t racist. I’ll say they’re coming from shithole countries.”
Except everybody heard what he really meant — now it’s both ‘bad hombres’ from bad countries. So, he again retreats to “That’s not what I said. And even if I had said that, which I didn’t, it’s true that immigrants are coming here from bad countries.” Then we all again start screaming from our own corners.
Sometimes it’s more constructive to address the face value of a comment or question.
Trump: “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” “Why do we need more Haitians?”
Answer: For the same reason your grandfather and mother fled shithole countries. Americans weren’t clamoring for more Germans and Scots in their day either.
Trump is a shithole President with a shithole character, supported by a shithole party, embraced by shithole people, who want to Maka America a Shithole Again!
Journalists need to burn sources who share such vile, vile news. Seriously: that White House official who shared that “victory lap” quote with a reporter is a human being. In fact, he is a human being working in service to our President. Staffers who share such things, regardless of their motivations for doing so, must be made accountable. Time for journalists to respond to the moment.
Trump is testing all our systems.
Journalists need to burn sources who share such vile, vile news.
While true, it will never happen. There is a reason some of us refer to the press by the terms “The Beltway” and “Versailles.” They want access. They don’t care to inform people. If the press in this country really informed people as to what is happening here the ghost of Eugene Debs would be president and not some prop from the Barnum and Bailey Circus.
. . . what you mean or are trying to say.
What, specifically, is the “vile, vile news” you refer to?
Whatever the answer, is that news true or not?
If it’s true Trump took a “victory lap” for saying what he denied saying, what’s the source of that information to be “made accountable” and “burned” for? Are you saying he/she was wrong to divulge this? Why?
I don’t get it. Unless you’re privy to info I’m unaware of, looks more like a public service “regardless of their motivations for doing so” (which motivations could indeed be condemnable).
The reporter should name the White House official who described Trump as having taken a “victory lap” with his racist supporters.
The gaslighting by many Republicans is happening at this moment. Trump claimed obliquely that he didn’t say what he was reported to have said, and Senators Perdue and Cotton, who were in the meeting with Trump where this was said, essentially claimed this morning that Senators Durbin and Graham lied and that Trump had not said what he said.
But my most specific answer to your question is that it is vile for the Administration to take a “victory lap” after saying “why do we want people from these shithole countries?” A White House staffer who reports this as having happened does not deserve anonymity. When someone documents something so very harmful to our nation, they should be made personally accountable for their Administration’s betrayal of our nation. Allowing them to speak on background is an abusive use of journalistic practices. This is not business as usual.
Journalism is reacting very poorly to this Presidency. It’s been an even sharper decline in their coverage of the conservative movement, which has been quite bad going back to the 1980’s.
. . . now that I can make sense of what (I think) you’re saying. Part of my initial difficulty was that I found it hard to believe you were intentionally saying what you seemed to be saying. This seems to confirm that you were, though.
E.g.:
The first sentence earns you a nomination for Captain Obvious. Of course it’s vile . . . though the “victory lap” as I understand the reporting is attributed directly and personally to Trump; personal accountability shouldn’t be diluted by euphemistic attribution to the “Administration”, imo.
The rest is just wrong, and in fact what you describe as “not business as usual” is instead exactly that. Sources providing information to reporters under condition of anonymity may be an unpleasant, even ugly form of co-dependence, but it’s also an utterly routine and long-standing practice without which the citizenry would be even more poorly informed about abuse of power than we already are.
So, no, the problem isn’t anonymous sourcing per se, it’s when anonymous sources lie to get their false propaganda into the public consciousness by manipulating media into giving it credibility. They’re the ones who must be outed and burned for media to regain any credibility.
For example.
What is not business as usual is the President’s conduct in his “shithole countries” statement, and the Administration’s various positions in response to it. I think it’s harmful to the people of the United States for a White House official to say they’re taking a “victory lap” and allow that official to maintain moral credibility because they have been allowed to remain anonymous.
“The President likes watching the rape of children. He enjoys talking about the aftermath with his political allies. We think it’s a good thing.” Should a White House official be allowed to say such a thing on background?
While the President’s statement and his “victory lap” are legally permitted, these actions shock the conscience to extreme degrees, as does the rape of children. There simply has to be a bottom to what journalists allow public servants to invoke while using anonymity.
The fact that at least one Administration official and two Republican Senators who were in the meeting are now saying that Trump did not say “shithole countries” during the discussions on what should be done with immigrants currently living in the United States and elsewhere makes it even less appropriate to allow anonymity from the CNN source here. In fact, now that Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen is claiming publicly that Trump did not say this, it raises the possibility that the anonymous source lied.
I don’t think the anonymous source lied. But we see the moral and logical quandries which are enabled in part by the anonymous sourcing in this specific situation, and by acting as if this is all business as usual.
. . . insisting on arguing with things I haven’t said, and in fact have rather stipulated agreement with you. E.g.,
A little thought experiment to illustrate how hard this isn’t:
You’re Woodward/Bernstein (take your pick). Your choice is between granting Felt/Deepthroat anonymity and exposing Nixon’s crimes or letting the coverup succeed, and thereby allowing Tricky Dick to finish out his term.
As I said, it’s an often unpleasant/ugly co-dependence between media and anonymous sources, but it serves the public interest, as long as those sources aren’t lying (even if they often have ulterior motives other than the public’s right to know, e.g., political infighting).
A reporter, particularly an investigative reporter, can’t go on doing his/her job if they burn sources who haven’t deceived/misled them. If they do, sources just won’t give them info, to the detriment of the public’s right to know. Likewise if they refuse anonymity to sources.
Yeah, it sucks that GOPers can then just lie about the meeting and turn it into a he said/she said dispute. But that’s not sufficient reason to burn the source who gave you the “shithole countries” quote after having granted that source anonymity.
I’m almost entirely in agreement with this. I’ve run for myself some of the same thought experiments you recommend. There clearly is a need for anonymous sourcing of stories, even when the behavior exposed is extremely reprehensible and/or illegal. I agree that you shouldn’t grant anonymity when taking the information/quote and reverse it later unless there’s compelling evidence the source knowingly lied.
Perhaps we are better informed by hearing from various Administration officials and Congressional Republicans as they have cast out contradictory accounts of the meeting in the last 72 hours. Nonetheless, I believe there must be a bottom where a journalist should refuse to grant a source anonymity to make particularly immoral statements. I gave an example of a statement I think clearly meets that standard.
A question for you: if you were the CNN journalist posting the story BooMan highlights here, how would you measure whether your source lied to you? Three people who were in the room at the meeting have essentially made subsequent claims that Trump didn’t make the statement. Let’s note that if Trump didn’t make the statement in the meeting with Congressmembers the lie by the anonymous source is pretty elaborate, since the source claims both the initial Trump statement and the follow-up calls by the President to confirm to allies he made the statement and to gauge reactions.
First, reviewing a few things:
Summing that all up: there’s no good reason for any sane, sentient, non-brainwashed person to doubt that Trump referred, as reported, to Haiti, El Salvador, and all of Africa as “shithole countries”. None (including denials by GOPers present).
So to finally answer your question: if I’m that CNN reporter, I need bulletproof documentary evidence (e.g., audio recording that refutes it) to out and burn my anonymous, Trump [mal]administration source.
With you on your conclusions here. My conclusion is slightly different from where I started here. I think it was a bad idea for the CNN to allow their source to leak the reprehensible “victory lap” crap into print anonymously. If the White House official wanted to launder their morality in this way, they should have been made to go on the record.
I concede that once CNN went to print unnamed with this sourced info, they should protect the source unless the info they provided was knowingly false.
. . . anonymity) we still wouldn’t know Trump said it. I think it’s better that we do know, i.e., that the reporter granted the source anonymity in order to make the facts public.
Two responses:
– We didn’t rely on the White House official to learn of the “shithole” statement. It was reported out from multiple other sources before this CNN report came out. It’s possible to likely we also could have found out about the “victory lap” without relying on the White House official. For example, from a prominent conservative journalist:
Erick Erickson
@EWErickson
It’s weird that people in the room don’t remember Trump using that word when Trump himself was calling friends to brag about it afterwards. I spoke to one of those friends. The President thought it would play well with the base.
7:54 AM – 14 Jan 2018
– I stick by my proposal that there needs to be a bottom to what journalists are willing to allow people to say on background. In the real world I believe there are some things that journalists do not allow people to place in stories as an unnamed source. My worry is that this is among the many things that the Trump Administration and their Republican Party allies are degrading in real time.
One thing we have learned (or should have learned) over the last 20 years is that there IS NO BOTTOM. It does not matter if you mean the media, or Republicans, THERE IS NO BOTTOM.
The `media’ will happily follow the republicans down the rabbit hole to hell, because it gives them something to endlessly discuss. Trump was right..he COULD shoot someone on the street and still have support. Republican leadership and Fox News would proclaim the person deserved it, the other media would discuss if Trump hit where he was aiming, and the reality show that is the administration would insist he DID hit his target, and that he is the best shot…ever.
There is no bottom.
.
Whoever it was, the point still stands: the public interest is better served by it being public knowledge that Trump called Haiti, El Salvador, and all of Africa “shithole countries”; then simultaneously denied and took a “victory lap” for doing so.
To my knowledge, both facts were originally anonymously sourced (with “shithole countries” subsequently confirmed on the record by Durbin), so it doesn’t seem to me to matter who first granted anonymity. Knowledge of both is in the public interest and both are important enough that they are quite appropriate cases for granting a source anonymity in order to obtain the info.
As for withholding publication in case the info might come out some other way, sorry but that borders on silly. No news org is ever going to forego such a scoop on those grounds — it is, after all, a competitive business. Nor would that be in the public interest. In fact such withholding would very arguably be its own form of journalistic malpractice.
(Shouldn’t be necessary, but just in case: my presumption throughout is that the source and info are credible. If the reporter has good reason to doubt the veracity of the info, then yeah, sure, that’s where reportorial/editorial judgment, discretion, and due diligence are invoked, including withholding publication if veracity is doubtful.)
So, again, it’s better that we know these things than that we don’t, and the only way we know them is by reporters granting anonymity to sources in order to learn and then report them.
Thanks for this discussion. I’ve become more uncomfortable with my position through our exchange, but I remain uncomfortable with the far implications of your position as well.
In the end, it was the majority of the American people who chose in 2008 and 2012 a President whose Administration never created questions like this, and it was a minority of the American people who chose in 2016 by thin Electoral College margins a President who openly campaigned on creating questions like this. From the despicable racism to the shameless lying and culturally damaging gaslighting and more, the Trump campaign laid it out there and over 60 million Americans said “Sure!”
Every day before November 6th, Election Day, and every day after that. There’s much repair and work to do.
And now Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen, who was also in the “shithole countries” meeting, said she didn’t remember the President saying it either. So we’ve got a public statement from the Administration that he said it, and a background statement from the Administration that he not only said it but took a “victory lap” about it afterwards.
This is an additional and important reason why the granting of anonymity in the CNN report BooMan highlights here is harmful to the public.
Apologies for the editing error: I meant to write “So we’ve got a public statement from the Administration that he didn’t say it, and a background statement from the Administration that he not only said it but took a “victory lap” about it afterwards.”
Trump is a self-deluded compulsive liar and I expect no higher standard of behavior of him.
The vomit might be directed at his handlers who accommodate Trump but they have no demonstrable sense of integrity or honesty, either.
My prediction: Trump’s behavior will get worse.
Despite his “retractions,” I suppose that he is pleased with the attention to his racist self, and that his inner circle is pumping him up by telling him how supported he is with his shitstorm comment. In addition to being a narcissistic racist, his declining mental state is a contributing factor.
As a result, like a little kid who is pleased by the shock effect he receives from adults when he uses a dirty word, Trump will repeat the behavior again and more publicly and with worse language.
Of course. As senile dementia develops, people lose their self-control and become more open, less tactful, about saying what they really think. Trump’s condition is progressive, so no doubt it gets worse, his behavior will become more erratic, more unusual.
This whole thing is a good example. Trump should have known that racist comments that would NOT get reported if he were only speaking to Rs WOULD get reported when speaking to a mixed group of Rs and Ds. Apparently he did not have the cognitive flexibility to adjust to the presence of a single D in the room.
I think a non-demented politician would know that as a politician it is too risky to talk even in private the way non-politicians feel safe talking privately – too much risk a private conversation might leak out.
Trump and his fellow Republicans are really speaking to the economic anxiety of all Americans.
Today and every day to 11-6-18, and every day after that.
The racists I know won’t mind this. They “aren’t racists” — they just are unwilling to hide from “reality” (as they see it; they regard “PC” thinking as the imposition of willful blindness).
As its been described to me, The American continent illustrates how white European immigrants created a first-world nation while dark-skinned European immigrants created a bunch of third-world nations…if I can’t see this, it’s because I don’t want to, since I’m a liberal, which means I ignore reality (as they put it).
So, telling them they’re racists accomplishes nothing. We’re the racists because we use Affirmative Action techniques to rob from deserving whites and give to undeserving colored people for no reason other than their race.
We need to bring back as many people as possible. Polls are showing the Trump movement is not monolithic.
What’s clarifying about this President is that people with racist views who are offended to be called racists are now having their social and policy views taken up by a President who is a proud, vile, open racist. His gaslighting isn’t fooling everybody in his base, and his gaslighting is making those who dig into their Trump support uniquely unpersuasive in converting more Americans to board the Trump Train.
Trump supporters of my acquaintance continue to insist, not just that Trump isn’t a racist, but that his election had “nothing to do with race.”
I hear you. And one of my responses is that people who are so willing to be gaslit and so anxious to attempt to gaslight others are going to have big, big problems persuading more Americans to join their movement.
If the 2017 elections had turned out differently, I would have had less confidence in my view here. But Republicans are bleeding support everywhere as they become more firmly associated with the racist, sexist President and his unpopular policy views.
That said, we’re going to have to hold our movement together and turn out voters in November and beyond. It’s supremely important.
Not only are polls showing the Trump movement is not monolithic, the 2017 elections showed the Trump movement has severely weakened electoral prospects for all Republican Party candidates, even in deep red States.
Dolt 45’s hardcore base will no doubt love the vile racist things he says and will gladly smirk at the prospect of offending those they hate. Those whose support was “soft” might be a different matter. Will continue to follow the polls over the next few months. The GOP is in too deep at this point.
I disagree. Dog Jones was a flawless, well-known candidate against a monstrous, twice-defeated “judge” and still managed to win only in a squeaker. So I’m thinking most of the red state reps and Senators will do fine. It’s all about turnout so the only hope is that Trump voters will be discouraged about turning out and voter suppression will be less than feared. I still feel that the “Wave” will be seriously curtailed by all kinds of GOP nastiness and may end up being just a big ripple.
I’m not just thinking about the Alabama Senate race. It’s been happening everywhere- Kansas, Oklahoma, Virginia, New Jersey, and elsewhere. Democratic Party candidates have over-performed and Republicans have under-performed, often by double digits.
It’s up to us to make it a wave. If we don’t do the work, the wave won’t be as big as it needs to be.
Also, too, Roy Moore had not been defeated in Statewide elections before. He under-performed other Republicans in the State electorally, but he won his previous Statewide campaigns. He lost his State Supreme Court seat twice through other means, not because he lost elections.
Dick Durbin confirmed and condemned Trump. He was the Democrat in the room when Trump made his most recent racist comments.
Trump wants it both ways, where he plays innocent and persecuted by the press and then brags about his comments to his followers. He’s about as rotten as anyone can be and the media still keeps propping him up. The Republicans are secretly glad he’s broadcasting racism, but publicly they’re “disappointed” by his “alledged”comments.
Get out the votes. Get people registered to vote this fall. No one is coming to our rescue from this nightmare of a president or the Repulsive Republicans.
Well, looks like Ryan/McConnell have no interest in defending the donald. I would not be surprised they just put the current plan in some CR and send it to the donald to veto and everyone gets a shut down to blame on the donald. Lets not forget that the donald gets to pull out of the Iran nuke deal this week and then travel to Davos. Will the truly wealthy of the world greet the donald with enthusiasm?
Big money loves political power.
There is going to come a tipping point when enough people have grandchildren, nephews, nieces, cousins, etc. who are multi-racial. Then Trumps denigration hits home for them. This isn’t far away. About 10% of children, I believe, are bi-racial. The example of how fast public opinion can change (from not caring to being offended) is the LGBT movement.
Trumps victory dance is only that he riled up the liberals. In his zero sum view of the world, if liberals are upset, then he’s a winner. Sad!
Well, I just spent a long and challenging day teaching children from those “shithole countries.”
All of them heard about Trump’s comments through social media, mostly within minutes of the stories hitting the wires. I was probably the last to hear the news in our school community.
They are tough kids, from tough neighborhoods, with plenty of teen bravado and bluster. But under their hard shells, I could see that many of them had taken the words of the president to heart. They did not perceive Trump’s words as referring to a “poor and troubled country.” They took his words personally, as a judgement of them, and of their value to the USA.
The comment by the “leader of the Free World” was not the worst thing that happened to these kids today. Most of them have bigger, more immediate fears and concerns. However, it was one more blow to their fragile teen sense of identity and belonging.
I’ve commented here before that I didn’t hold much personal animus against Trump. I saw him as a clown, as a caricature. My fury was directed at the ignorant, fanatical, or gullible Americans who voted for him.
The travel ban (which directly affects my students) plus the recent comments, have broken through the mental barriers I tried to construct. God, I hate the man – but that hatred it unproductive. It is also contrary to my personal religious beliefs.
Still, if you mess with “my kids,” all 150 of them, you’re gonna bring out my inner asshole. I’ve defended American institutions and the rule of law, but screw it. Let’s have a coup, a 25th Amendment farce, or any other extra-constitutional silliness necessary to be rid of this sonofabitch.
I’ll hate myself in the morning for saying that, but I’m just fed up. Today, I’m willing to endorse anything, except violence, to be rid of this pig. Generalissimo Mattis, maximum leader of our new banana republic, I salute you!
I’m already feeling contrite about my last comments. It was cathartic, but unbecoming a citizen of this once-great Republic. On the eve of the MLK holiday, I feel Dr. King gazing down with disapproval.
Booman, please feel free to delete my last comments. I don’t see any way for me to delete them myself.
I’m going to have a drink and simmer down. Hope everyone has a great weekend.
I am glad to have seen both your comments, actually. It’s hard not to bounce around in one’s emotions given the extre stress we (nationally and personally) are experiencing at this moment.
And thank you for your service!
No need to apologize. You expressed what many of us are thinking and feeling. He hurt your students. You care about them so you responded with anger, which IMHO speaks well for you.
Hopefully by Monday you can go back to your class room and continue to do a great job teaching children who really need a dedicated and capable teacher like you to be on their side.
I personally imagine that the soul of Dr. King post-bullet-to-the-head might be thinking along different lines than it was pre-bullet, AT.
Non-violence simply does not work long-term in the institutions of mankind. One way or another, the crucifix is always waiting to contradict that ambition, and the hustle is always on to take over non-violent movements and turn them into “just wars.” Just look at the Crusades to see that tendency in action.
So it goes.
Your anger is totally justified.
AG
P.S. Where do you teach? My significant other has been teaching music in similar neighborhoods to similar kids, and my own life models have mostly been survivors of the same conditions. Teach on. i admire your efforts and I admire your anger. If enough people shared it, Trump would already be gone.
Get Dr. King’s name out of your filthy hateful mouth.
Lecturing Martin Luther King’s soul. Really, now. It would have been better if you had kept to yourself what you “personally imagine”.
Your ideas are bad.
History is littered with the names of the saintly, non-violent assassinated, centristfield. From Socrates on down through to Jesus Christ, MLK Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi. Look around. Has there ever even once been non-violence across this world overall? Not one minute of it. I am more of a Malcolm X man, myself. You don’t like it? Lump it.
AG
Arthur is lecturing Malcolm X’s soul now, and showing a poor grasp of history in doing so.
The old white man’s going to keep furiously digging that hole of his, we see.
MLK, Jr. on the eve of his assassination:
He was keenly, presciently aware of the potential consequences to himself. And still he persisted. And quite literally gave his life to and for the principles he believed in.
You, by contrast (the least-woke person to ever put in an appearance here) [paraphrasing] “personally imagine” telling the martyred Dr. King to WTFU.
Words fail.
Failure after faIlure after failure to manage to “Get on up to the mountain.” And…hopefully…over it. From Socrates…if not earlier…right on through the most recent victims of this misconception.
There is no “peace,” oaguabonita.
Just continuing war in the hope of peace.
Are we any closer to that imagined peace than we were 50+ years ago?
5000+ years ago?
I don’t see it.
You?
Show me your evidence.
Please.
AG
P.S. Read my sig again. And fucking think on it this time!!!
If you can…
Nothing for me to “bet on it”?
Wow, apparently my enlightenment surpasses MLK’s!
We are all smarter than the dead, oaguabonita…at least on this plane of existence.
Even you.
AG
Nothing for me to “bet on it”?
Wow, my enlightenment must surpass Dr. King’s! (I.e. — obviously, — when he was still alive and following his principles in full knowledge of and despite the fatal risk — you fucking deflecting, disgusting, dishonest, dumb, diversionary waste of electrons, pixels, space, and time.)
WaPo It’s not just Trump: Western media has long treated black and brown countries like `shitholes’
Treated and write 3,000 word essays in “respectable” journals and magazines that use 3,000 words to say “shithole.” Then wonder why so many people prefer a politician that uses one word.
When is “shithole” racist and when is it xenophobic? And when is it (in any of it’s many variations) totally cool to use denigrate an officially designated US enemy (making if far easier for Americans not to object to dropping bombs on the shithole and/or sap any sense of national pride and purpose from the people of the shithole?
not just trump and not just U.S. media.
if you use the firefox browser, it gives you a news feed from the bbc. the beeb is very possibly worse than any US outlet in the colonialism of its Asia and Africa coverage.
True, but doesn’t speak to my larger point. Everybody is so busy pointing fingers that they can’t see the spoke in their own eyes.
Trump’s disgusting words don’t make me want to throw up. What did was ‘shock and awe.’ What also did was all the devout, practicing christian men getting off on seeing the awesome power of ‘shock and awe.’ That day I wasn’t a good little, flag-waving American cheering on the war, but a heartsick American pointing out to those men that innocent people were under those ‘awesome’ bombs that were destroying their lives, homes, and for many their bodies. I’m not about to forget or forgive those that perpetrated that atrocity.
. . . in your eye it’d be pretty damn hard to see said spoke, not to mention anything else!
Bet it hurts like hell, too.