

Science fiction, fantasy, mystery and what-not
I laughed in amazement when I read that Muslim Arabs were endorsing and voting for Trump. Really? Muslim Arabs thought he was the man for them after his 2017 Muslim ban? I couldn’t believe it. I couldn’t believe their choice.
Voter remorse is now spreading among their people as they’ve realized what they’ve done.
Muslims for Trump co-founder Rabiul Chowdhury tells “Dan Abrams Live” the nominations are concerning for his Muslim supporters who expected an “America First” approach rather than one focused on Israel.
“Some of his picks, like Marco Rubio, in our opinion, did not align with his America First and his vision of peace,” Chowdhury explained, telling NewsNation they would rather see Richard Grenell in the Cabinet.
They’re awakening to the fact that Trump conned them. They could have avoided this disappointment if they were paying attention and thinking. But they wanted to punish the Harris and the Democrats, they said.
Yes, I know. The War. Israel. I understand that. But they seriously believed Trump would do something about it? I guess, angry and frustrated, they were blindly hopeful that he would.
I’m sure that this small trickle of people waking up about who they voted into office will soon grow.
If I were religious or ascribed to a diety, I’d say that they might be pissed after Trump’s Micky D Sunday stunt. First there was an E. Coli Outbreak, forcing them to pull quarter pounders. Next came some crashing stock.
All started with Trump’s appearance there. Just sayin’. Also, as others noted, while Trump wore an apron, he didn’t have the rest of the required gear, like hairnets. Just sayin’.
Of course, under the Trump administration and Project 2025’s goal to reduce regulations, this sort of things might happen more often. Just sayin’.
Vote blue.
The signs of aging pile up,
Promising on some days to beat you up.
Hair losses, hair changes, where the hell does it go?
Why can’t I get it to look right, why won’t it look just so?
Sometimes you ponder the person you had been.
You think you see them staring back, hiding from within.
Other times you wonder, if you ever were that way?
And if you were, what can you do to look that way again?
The weight you gain, how the body thickens,
Everything sinks and sags and generally looks in ways that sicken.
Then someone tells you how great you look,
and you wonder, is that a joke?
If you think I look good today, you want to say,
you should have seen me back in the day.
I was something else.
Back in the day…
Such a broad, specific expression. Back in the day for me is specific to a time period for me and others of my age, but when you’re a different age, well, back in the day is a different time.
Quick sidebar: while the youngest generations take up the expression, or will back in the day fade away?
Well, back in the day, it was easy to keep up on the news. Read a newspaper, turn on one of the big three network’s nightly news offering, and watch the local news.
Complications arose with the information age explosion and the digital age tsunami. Suddenly, I’m clicking on a story and there’s ten thousand variations on it. What was said, who said it, and what does it mean? You click and read and click, chasing the crumbs to learn what’s right.
Tough work these days, keeping up on truth and facts, and dodging lies and misinformation.
I found myself thinking about my parents as I dressed this morning. One is from Iowa and resides in Pennsylvania. The other is from Pennsylvania and lives in Texas. They divorced way back in the mid 1960s. Were friends or friendly off and on. Now Mom is bitter and angry about Dad; Dad is reflective about Mom.
I left their homes when I was 17. I’ve visited both as they moved around, remarried, and raised other families. As they’ve aged, Dad tells me he’d like to be closer to me. Mom tells me she’d like to hear from me more often because she worries about me.
But a large elephant marches through their desires. I’ve been married 49 years. Mom visited me once, when I bought her an airline ticket and forced it to happen. Dad visited me once in my first year of marriage, dropping by with my father-in-law for thirty minutes while they happened to be in the area. It just didn’t seem like they were deeply invested in being part of my life.
I don’t feel abandoned by them. Dad admits he wasn’t a good father and wasn’t there. Mom insists she was there as much as she could be. I do see their sides but I’m indifferent to Dad’s efforts for us to be closer or to Mom’s request for me to alleviate worries. I could employ simple sophistry and claim, they made me who I am, but really, I head little from them across my decades of living. Sure, they always sent birthday and holiday cards, but mostly there were months of silence. Yes, I know they each raised other children and went on through a few more marriages.
I get all of that. My feelings about them slice along a spectrum. I love them as they love me, from a distance. I know they made sacrifices on my behalf to ensure I had food and shelter security and a place to call home. But at an early age, as I watched their fights and listened to their arguments, I made a decision to be independent of them. Sure, there are days when I surf the spectrum of our relationships when I want to help them out of guilt or empathy. They become less as I move through my life, age, and deal with my own issues.
My parents both have been supportive in many ways. They tell me they’re proud of me. My wife points out that it all would’ve probably been different if she and I had children.
But we didn’t, and this is where my parents and I stand, like many other parents and their offspring, at a complex crossroads which we never leave.
There’s a gruff guy whose house I regularly pass. About my age, he sometimes nods but never speaks as he works on his yard, house, or car. If he was a novel stereotype, he’d be a bitter former Marine who saw combat and carries wounds. Just from the way he eyed me as I passed by on my walks, I guessed he was a Trump supporter or leaned that way.
I always remind myself that I can’t judge people by how they look. Appearances deceive. Someone glancing at me, with my American flag pin on my ever-present hat, might think of me as a Trump supporter. Sad that in our polarized age, waving the flag has become associated with our political system’s right wing.
Yesterday, a Harris-Walz sign appeared in his yard. He was doing something over by his outdoor spigot and glanced up. Walking by, I nodded hello, and then added, “I like your sign. I hope Harris wins.”
He replied, “So do I. I’ve donated money to her, and I’ll keep donating to keep that orange asshole out of the White House.”
Go Harris. Vote blue.
TL/DR: The Trump/Vance mass deportation plan is morally abhorrent and fiscally disastrous, and Jamie Bouie has a column that effectively explains why.
Mr. Bouie’s column several days ago, Oct. 4, 2024, was The One Thing Not Named Trump That Trump Cares About. He captured what I’d been thinking about and addressing with friends and relatives. Jamie Bouie did it with a style and insightfulness which I lack.
The column begins, “The centerpiece of Donald Trump’s second-term domestic agenda is the mass deportation of what he and his campaign say are 20 million or even 25 million undocumented immigrants.”
JD Vance — and the GOP — are in lockstep with this policy. Mr. Bouie pulls together the disparate segments about the topic of mass deportation: what it would do to our economy in terms of labor and labor costs in different industries; and what it would mean to actually carry out such a project in concrete terms of those important elements of time, energy, and money. Citing information from a new American Immigration Council repot, Mr. Bouie brings the details:
“… a mass deportation plan designed to expel 13.3 million undocumented immigrants over about 10 years would crash the economy, immiserate millions of Americans and siphon nearly $1 trillion from the federal government.”
“To deport one million immigrants per year, the report says, “would incur an annual cost of $88 billion, with the majority of that cost going toward building detention camps.” Even assuming some measure of “self-deportation,” the federal government would have to build “hundreds to thousands of new detention facilities to arrest, detain, process and remove” all targeted immigrants, at an estimated cost of $66 billion per year.
“On top of that, the government would need to spend $7 billion per year to conduct the arrests, $12.6 billion per year to carry out legal processing for arrestees and an average of $2.1 billion to remove these immigrants from the country. None of this includes the cost of personnel, which could raise the overall price tag quite a bit. “Even carrying out one million at-large arrests per year,” the report says, “would require ICE to hire over 30,000 new law enforcement agents and staff, instantly making it the largest law enforcement agency in the federal government.” Assuming an average annual inflation rate of 2.5 percent, this deportation program would cost at least $967.9 billion over 10 years.“
I added the emphasis about the $1 trillion price tag. The GOP speaks with gusto about being financially responsible. Just recently, many Republicans in Congress voted against more funding for FEMA as hurricane season continues because of their concerns over the debt. Adding $1 trillion to our commitments must have them in a tizzy, right? They plan to lower taxes, so how are they planning to raise the cash to pay for their deportation wet dream while not incurring debt?
It’s critical to address this because this is typical of the lack of responsibility, increasing duplicity, and outright mendacity the GOP demonstrates under Trump. Lots of grand promises built on whipped cream pillars.
The American Immigration Council report notes:
Beyond the economic and business impact, Jaimie Bouie brings up a more critical aspect about the morality of such a move like mass deportation.
“I’ve been discussing mass deportation as if it’s actual policy — as if it’s just one option among many for tackling the nation’s many challenges. But that’s absurd. Whether or not it works to fix the problems at hand, and it doesn’t, the mass deportation of 20 million to 25 million people — which is to say the forced detention and relocation of about 6 percent to 8 percent of the current U.S. population — is a human rights abuse. It would make the United States a pariah state. And it would violate the fundamental principles of the American creed, the core belief that “all men are created equal,” that they are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Bingo. This is exactly why Trump is such a threat to U.S. democracy and freedom. To achieve his political ambitions, he’s willing to promote abdicating multiple basic tenets of our nation’s foundations.
And it’s so grindingly typical of the modern GOP. They’re employing doublespeak. Those of us fervently following the election campaigns and Project 2025 read of their intentions and see that they’re suggesting that to go forward, we must go backwards; to be free, we must imprison others; to follow the path set out by our nation’s founders, we must turn our backs on them.
Voting for Trump and this platform makes no sense unless you are backward, narrow-minded, bigoted, racist, and sexist, and lack critical thinking skills. Or you’re a one-issue voter, supporting, for example, ‘lower taxes’. So, tell me, or great thinker, how will the GOP accomplish their goals of mass deportation with lower taxes while reducing the debt?
Well, we know what will happen. The GOP will lower taxes for the wealthy and corporations, cause they’re the ‘wealth creators’ (a wholly disproven and laughable position). And they’ll raise taxes on the poor and middle class through service fees and local taxes. See Ohio as an example of how this works out.
The third and fourth reasons you might still vote for Trump is that ‘you like him’ (which, to me, goes back to being narrow-minded, bigoted, racist, and sexist), or as we’ve witnessing with too many voters these days, you’re not paying attention.
Read all of Jamie Bouie’s column please. And vote blue in this election cycle.
It was a weird juxtaposition.
I parked in the coffee shop’s lot. A silver SUV battle scar from its travels had the front passenger door open. I glanced that way. It seemed like the SUV was someone’s home. A woman was in the seat, her foot sticking out the open door, as she painted her toenails pink.
I thought of multiple things associated with painting nails. To feel and look attractive. Or maybe to fit in. To seem normal to others. You know, norms, values, mores, judgements. Or carrying forward from the past, trying to remain that person they were.
Then again, I could be all wrong. Might be that they’re not living in their car. They could just be a traveler, pausing to get coffee, taking advantage of a break in their schedule to do their nails.
It’s the kind of scene that inspires questions and thinking about our life and society.
I’d seen the non-answer and privately mocked it.
I’m addressing the Veep debate of 2024. In this corner, JD Vance, acknowledged purveyor of lies. In the other, a schoolteacher, Minnesota governor Tim Walz.
The non-answer was how JD Vance bobbed and weaved around the last election and Trump’s efforts to deny he’d lost and game the system to convince others that it’d been stolen. Ol’ orange skin has a thin skin. Anyone and everyone seeing him react to criticism knows he responds with vigorous childish antics. Admitting he’d lost the election was above his skillset, so he’s been conjuring an alternate reality ever since a record 80,000,000 voters told him to get lost. He just can’t take that reality.
The way Vance spoke, Trump didn’t do anything to impede a peaceful transfer of power.
Let the NY Times state it:
Mr. Walz had a question for his counterpart.
“He is still saying he didn’t lose the election,” Mr. Walz said of Mr. Trump, turning grandly to Mr. Vance. “Did he lose the 2020 election?”
“Tim,” Mr. Vance replied, “I’m focused on the future.”
Tim Walz reacted to that.
“That,” Mr. Walz said, “is a damning non-answer.”
There was a reason, he added, that Mr. Pence was not on the stage as Mr. Trump’s running mate anymore.
And it was worth asking, he said, what that could tell viewers about Mr. Vance.
“America, I think you’ve got a really clear choice,” Mr. Walz said, his eyes getting bigger, “of who’s going to honor that democracy and who’s going to honor Donald Trump.”
Just ’bout summed it up for me. Vance won’t admit the truth. Anyone ignoring reality and history won’t learn from either. That’s a person I don’t want in any leadership position.
But reading the NYTimes comments always delivers a surprise. Like expecting a birthday cake and opening the box to find a turd. Here’s one, two, and three of those comments about the non-answer.
JD Vance made some interesting points about January 6. He basically distanced himself away from the event. Of course, Walz, needs to associate Vance with January 6 and rightfully so, because the Vice President has an important role to play: they count the electoral votes. If the Vice President does NOT count the electoral votes, there cannot be a new president. Another thing, Donald Trump had to leave office on January 20 because of Mike Pence’s refusal of Donald Trump’s command not to certify the election. If Vance were VP that day, I think he wouldn’t count the electoral votes and Trump would have an excuse to stay in power. Of course, there would be the threat of impeachment, but based on how the last trial went, I’m not sure if that process works.
A plastic statement to be sure, but generally makes sense. Next.
Mr Vance was absolutely correct in his response to what took place on Jan 6. The protest at the Capitol was initiated and instigated by Democratic operatives and FBI plants and informants. The legacy media glosses over these facts in a desperate effort to convince America that the attempts by President Trump and his supporters to get to the truth about election interference prior to certification and the instigation of events at the Capitol were some nefarious plot by President Trump. No they were not and the election results and the true instigators of Jan 6 still need to be investigated and exposed. One of the biggest fears the left has is that his reelection will result in these truths being exposed. The left well knows that President Trump isn’t a threat to democracy but a threat to their hold on the levers of our governments power.
Well, someone is certainly drinking the Qanon tuna juice. They get their info from where? Delusions are deep in this one. They ignore all evidence and the facts of what happened and just 3D print some new reality.
And comment #3.
Tim Walz came across as a nice guy, good neighbor, but not VP material much less POTUS in the event he has to step up to the plate. Harris made a profound mistake by picking Walz when she had the opportunity to choose either Josh Shapiro or Mark Kelly. I am not voting for Harris and I am not voting for Trump but had Harris picked Shapiro or Kelly as VP, I would definitely have reconsidered voting for her in November.
Basically, in their opinion, ‘Harris made a mistake in Walz so she’s not good enough for my vote cause Walz isn’t good enough to Veep.’
Everyone heard the same words and saw the same scenes. But the baggage we carry always drives our perceptions. And if Trump wins, and it all turns to shit so many like me and others gag on as a possibility, that third commenter will proclaim, “Well, it’s not my fault. I didn’t vote for either of them.”
Yeah, Vance’s performance didn’t change me. I didn’t come up with shivers from his wisdom or oratory prowess. I saw none of the first and little of the second.
With all I’ve seen of Trump and Harris, I’m still voting blue. Not only do I share my values and hopes for the nation with her, but with him, I believe he and ‘his supporters’ would continue shredding the Constitution and moving us backward.
Guess that’s my baggage.