While we were away:

I could go in-depth on all the tomfoolery of the last few days, but let’s let these pictures explain recent history:

And then:

unspecified

The candidate also tweeted that Mr. Khan had no right to question whether the candidate had ready the Constitution — a right found, oddly enough, in the Constitution.

And so on. Honestly, this particular presidential candidate confounds me. And that’s putting it nicely. I have spent no small amount of time arguing on Twitter — a pointless exercise, I know. But it makes me feel a little better.

Advertisements

6 responses to “While we were away:

  1. I see you retweeted Ben Norton’s link to his Salon article pointing out Khan’s critical stance on past and current US foreign policy. (“As a Muslim American I feel that these policies are not in the interest of the United States of America.”)

    Something Khan decided not to mention at the DNC. Understandable. I suppose. Since policy wasn’t really part of the DNC script at The Big Show in Philly.

    • It wasn’t, but i appreciate his saying this now. He’s right.

      • Don’t you find it a bit…inconsistent…to essentially promote a candidate and a political Party that supports expanding the type of hawkish militarism that can only result in more chaos making the United States more vulnerable? While attacking the candidate who wants to “[S]hake the rust off America’s foreign policy…invite new voices and new visions into the fold.”?

        I’m glad American Muslims have seen a little more respect from the media due to the Khan’s celebrity. In the long run, however, I don’t think Democratic Party tokenism is going to do them that much good.

        • I have said this before, and I’ll say it again: I am a reluctant Democrat, which means I can take hours sussing out the difference between a purist and a political realist (I do this presentation all the time here, at home, where I live with a purist). I have no great love for the militarism that is rife in both political parties. I have no great love when, at election time, a few people chant “No More Wars” and that’s about the extent of their actively working toward peace. I am, however, all in this political season against the Republican candidate. I appreciate that others are considering voting for Jill Stein or any other third-party candidate. One must vote one’s conscience. Mine tells me that a vote for a third-party candidate is a vote for the Republican party’s candidate. I was a purist once. We got George W. Bush.

          • I think you’re giving Nader and the Greens way too much credit…and yourself way too much blame…for the 2000 election result.

            I understand your trepidation concerning this election cycle. I don’t argue with your choice of candidate or the reason. None of us are really getting much choice. Are we?

            I just don’t think being compelled to vote for a candidate in order to defeat another candidate means you stop criticizing said candidates Party…and policies…and actions. I don’t think you have to go “all in.” Sacrifice your vote, not your principles.

            • I agree. I’ve been thinking about that, a lot, the fact that I’m so anti-one-candidate is making me not spend nearly enough time on the other.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s