The Seventh Sense

Palin Left College In Hawaii Because Of The Slighty-Eyed People

Seriously.... what would cause a young woman to quit college in Hawaii?

In The New Yorker review of Sarah Palin's Going Rogue, Sam Tanenhaus touched on the reason, as re-reported here in The Huffington Post:

Palin, though notoriously ill-traveled outside the United States, did journey far to the first of the four colleges she attended, in Hawaii. She and a friend who went with her lasted only one semester. "Hawaii was a little too perfect," Palin writes. "Perpetual sunshine isn't necessarily conducive to serious academics for eighteen-year-old Alaska girls." Perhaps not. But Palin's father, Chuck Heath, gave a different account to Conroy and Walshe. According to him, the presence of so many Asians and Pacific Islanders made her uncomfortable: "They were a minority type thing and it wasn't glamorous, so she came home." In any case, Palin reports that she much preferred her last stop, the University of Idaho, "because it was much like Alaska yet still 'Outside.' "

Well, if it's true, I'm sure that will endear her to her base even more.

Update: The Salvation Army/Immigration Issue

A couple of commenters have pointed out, in response to an earlier post, that the Salvation Army does not check the immigration status of donees.  Rather, the Salvation Army is "simply trying to ensure people are not signing up for toys at more than one location" by checking Social Security numbers.  They point to this article, which I reprint in its entirety:

The Salvation Army's Houston Command is defending its practice of requiring a Social Security number for families who register for gifts through an Angel Tree program. They said its policy prevents duplication of services.

The Austin command said it achieves that goal by asking for photo ID cards, instead of social security numbers.

A spokesman said the charity is not concerned with any applicants legal status. They are concerned with donation levels. People have given less food and thrift store items this holiday season.

The Salvation Army is hoping donations of things including blankets pick up before the next cold snap.

Well, it certainly makes sense to parse out the toys so that people don't abuse the charitable giving.  But I have two questions:

(1)  In the original article I cited, it plainly reads:

The Salvation Army also verifies the immigration status of anyone who comes to their shelter.

That certainly indicates that someone at the Salvation Army told this to the news organization specifically.  Were they wrong?  Did the news organization make it up?

(2)  Secondly, intentions aside, the "checking the Social Security number" rationale still has the effect of denying toys to illegal immigrants, does it not?  What happens, for example, if an illegal immigrant, or even one here on a legitimate visa, comes to the Salvation Army to receive a donated toy for their child?  They have no SSN; are they turned away?

UPDATE -- Well, I think this puts the matter to rest.  Released today from the Greater Houston Salvation Army:

Today, The Salvation Army Greater Houston Area Command announced it will no longer require Social Security numbers as part of the registration process for its Christmas assistance program known as the Angel Tree program. The Angel Tree is the nonprofit organization’s annual holiday gift giving program that provides new unwrapped gifts to disadvantaged children and seniors in the Greater Houston region.

“It was never our intention to offend anyone with our registration requirement to provide a Social Security number, or to give the impression that we were discriminating against those individuals and families who do not have a Social Security number,” says Major Chris Flanagan, Area Commander for The Salvation Army Greater Houston Area Command. “The Salvation Army has been in this community for over 120 years now, serving the needs of all, and we will continue to do so. Immigration status is not a detractor for providing assistance.”

Prior to this announcement, The Salvation Army Greater Houston Area Command required proof of income, one form of identification and a Social Security number for at least one member of a family in order to register for the Angel Tree program. With the single Social Security number, The Salvation Army registered all members of the same household regardless of whether they had a Social Security number or not.

In most cases, individuals and families who were not able to provide a Social Security number were still provided assistance by The Salvation Army Greater Houston Area Command. Valid forms of identification include school registration, Medicaid cards, Consular cards, food stamps cards, and birth certificates.

The Social Security numbers provided were never used to verify legal status.

Instead, Social Security numbers were entered into a Salvation Army Greater Houston Area Command database that searched for matches on the same number. If a match was found, families were informed they had already registered for the Angel Tree program, that they would receive the help they were asking for, but that they could not register more than once for the same program.

So while they maintain no wrongdoing, they are changing their practices to avoid the appearance of impropriety.  Fair enough.

This raises the issue -- a common business practice -- of using one's SSN for identification purposes not related to the administration of social security.  But that's a topic (perhaps) for another day.

Texas Lawmaker Thinks Asian-Americans Should Change Their Last Names

...in order to make them understandable to "Americans" (thereby implying that Asian-Americans aren't "Americans"):

A North Texas legislator during House testimony on voter identification legislation said Asian-descent voters should adopt names that are “easier for Americans to deal with.”

The comments caused the Texas Democratic Party on Wednesday to demand an apology from state Rep. Betty Brown, R-Terrell. But a spokesman for Brown said her comments were only an attempt to overcome problems with identifying Asian names for voting purposes.

***

“Rather than everyone here having to learn Chinese — I understand it’s a rather difficult language — do you think that it would behoove you and your citizens to adopt a name that we could deal with more readily here?” Brown said.

She asked this question at a hearing being held by the Texas House Elections Committee, on which she serves.  The question was placed to Ramey Ko, who was testifying as a representative of the Organization of Chinese Americans.

Let me repeat that.  She asked that to an Asian-American named Ko.  Pronounced.... "Ko".  She asked Ko if it would behoove Asian-Americans to change their names to make it easier for poll workers.

And if that isn't enough irony for you, the Texas House Elections Committee on which Brown serves includes state legislators with names like Hensarling and Neugebauer.

Oy.

Since When Is Ignorance A Virtue?

So here's the latest scandal rocking the Obama campaign....

Last week, Obama said this:

Instead of worrying about whether immigrants can learn English — they'll learn English — you need to make sure your child can speak Spanish. You should be thinking about, how can your child become bilingual? We should have every child speaking more than one language.

You know, it's embarrassing when Europeans come over here, they all speak English, they speak French, they speak German. And then we go over to Europe, and all we can say [is], "Merci beaucoup." Right?

Obama was attacked for his statements by right wing radio talk shows and conservative bloggers. But in many cases he was not quoted correctly. For example, the Americans for Legal Immigration PAC took aim by claiming that "Barack Obama has stepped on a political land mine by stating that Americans should be forced to learn Spanish."

That is not what Obama said, of course. But for the conservatives, truth doesn't matter.

Commentary from the right went something like this:

Note that Obama isn't merely saying, "learning foreign languages is swell," or, "those who speak a second language deserve a pat on the back." He's saying that monolingualism or English-only is an insufficient condition for American citizens.

This is a very dramatic change from the position of American leaders for most of our history. It used to be, if you spoke a language besides English, a thriving life outside of immigrant enclaves would require effort to speak the mother tongue. American culture as a whole said to the immigrant, "You have to get with the program." Now, Obama is pointing to Americans who speak only English and saying, "Now you have to get with the program."

And soon came the inevitable "gotcha" game where it was revealed that Obama hmself isn't fluent in a language other than English!!!  Gee, but I thought Barrack Hussein Obama was a Muslim who was reared in medrassas.

Of course, responding to the (ridiculous) criticism, Obama answered smartly:

While the Obama campaign says that Obama speaks a little bit of Indonesian, Obama himself admits that he isn’t bilingual.

“I know because I don’t speak a foreign language. It’s embarrassing!” he said.

Indeed.  That's the kind of candidate he is.  He recognizes the flaws in him that come about from an inadequate education system.

What the hell is going on?  Is being uneducated supposed to be a virtue for this culture all of a sudden?  What Digby said:

There was a time when Obama's comment was considered completely mainstream. It's true that Americans have never learned new languages easily, but they respected the idea that kids should learn as much as possible so they could better themselves. Clearly Obama didn't get the memo that we have embraced cretinism and that all knowledge is suspect.

Ironically, this mini-brouhaha happened just as the military was complaining:

Every service member needs some minimum foreign language skills before deploying — but that capability could require an extensive change in language and cultural training that would have to start long before they enter the military, a House subcommittee was told Wednesday.

The House Armed Services oversight and investigations subcommittee, which has been looking at military programs for current and future operations, is now focused on language and cultural awareness training.

The Defense Department has been working for years to expand language capabilities, both by training people already in the service and recruiting people who are proficient in another language.

Bilingualism also helps American businesses compete in a global market.

It makes perfect sense, to anyone with a brain.  But no...... xenophobia rules some segments of society.  If it's fer-in, it ain't no good.

I'll leave you with the sentiments expressed at Sadly No:

Not to get all elitist or nothing, but our culture is fucking stupid. The fact that presidential campaigns gain advantage from attacking their opponents for sounding too smart is one of the most astounding traits of modern American politics. Maybe the Democrats should just nominate Larry the Cable Guy next time to avoid these sorts of controversies in the future.

Indeed.

Dunkin Donuts Is Being Ridiculous

OMG!  Look!  It's celebrity spokesperson Rachael Ray talking about Dunkin Donuts!!  And look what she's wearing around her neck!  That looks vaguely middle eastern!  It looks like a keffiyeh.  Is she a terrorist-supporter?!?  Does Dunkin Donuts (by inference) support terrorism?!?!?

Some observers, including ultra-conservative Fox News commentator Michelle Malkin, were so incensed by the ad that there was even talk of a Dunkin’ Donuts boycott.

‘‘The keffiyeh, for the clueless, is the traditional scarf of Arab men that has come to symbolize murderous Palestinian jihad,’’ Malkin yowls in her syndicated column.

‘‘Popularized by Yasser Arafat and a regular adornment of Muslim terrorists appearing in beheading and hostage-taking videos, the apparel has been mainstreamed by both ignorant and not-so-ignorant fashion designers, celebrities, and left-wing icons.’’

The company at first pooh-poohed the complaints, claiming the black-and-white wrap was not a keffiyeh. But the right-wing drumbeat on the blogosphere continued and by yesterday, Dunkin’ Donuts decided it’d be easier just to yank the ad.

Said the suits in a statement: ‘‘In a recent online ad, Rachael Ray is wearing a black-and-white silk scarf with a paisley design. It was selected by her stylist for the advertising shoot. Absolutely no symbolism was intended. However, given the possibility of misperception, we are no longer using the commercial.’’

Hunter at dKos:

Now, what's important to grasp here is that the scarf in question (see link) is rather clearly just a scarf. It is admittedly black and white, which apparently would be symbolic in the Palestinian world, except I'm not sure if something frilly and paisley can ever really count as being as menacing as we are supposed to believe. And there's clearly no pro-terrorist vibe being intended by Dunkin Freaking Donuts -- Ray is holding a latte, which I'm pretty sure is like kryptonite to jihadists. I don't know, I'm not up on all the comic-book-style interpretations of what we should and shouldn't be afraid of these days.

No, the issue was that there was a scarf that looked sortof like something Islamic. That's it. That was enough to dampen pants and blister typing fingers across the great and paranoid conservative nation. Maybe it was a scandalous example of unintended cultural tolerance? Maybe it was a secret message to terrorists that they could count on Dunkin' Donuts to cater their next meeting? Or, maybe, it was just a goddamn scarf.

So this is what we've (well, I say "we", but I mean a small subset of American patriots who, having absolutely no intention of doing anything meaningful for their country that involves getting out of their chairs, spend their days looking for secret terrorist messages in television commercials) been reduced to. We're examining the fashion statements of donut ads and parsing them for hints of surreptitious Islamic culture. We're locked into a mortal combat against those that casually accessorize without remembering that we are at war; we're mere weeks away from probing the hidden alliances of the doilies on our grandmothers' coffee tables

My response?  I'm going to boycott Dunkin Donuts for bowing to the stupid pressures of alarmist wingnuts.

Immigrant More Law-Abiding Than The Rest Of Us

One of the right wing’s favorite anti-immigrant claims is that immigrants are dangerous and commit high levels of crime.

A new report by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California, however, finds that these claims are baseless:

“In California, as in the rest of the nation, immigrants … have extremely low rates of criminal activity,” said Kristin Butcher, a co-author of the report, “Crime, Corrections and California: What Does Immigration Have to Do With It?”

Available data, the report’s authors said, “suggest that long-standing fears of immigration as a threat to public safety are unjustified.”

Starting with the fact that immigrants make up 35 percent of the state’s adult population but only 17 percent of its prisoners, researchers said they discovered several “striking” findings.

Indeed

Yglesius writes:

Harold Meyerson asks the question that's on every secular liberal's mind: How is it that the political mobilization of Christianity in the United States seems to have gotten us so much torture, aggressive warfare, and xenophobia? Where's the humane, universalistic ethic of the Gospels go?

Shorter Jonah Goldberg

"America, fuck yeah!"

UPDATE:  Sorry, I can't just leave it at that.  In this thinly-veiled "liberals hate America" article, Goldberg writes this:

The dirty, embarrassing secret is that this sort of multiculturalism has made Europe a wellspring of Islamic radicalism and terrorism, but America's Muslim community has remained overwhelmingly peaceful. Why? Well, if the answer doesn't lay in President Bush's "outreach" -- and few think it does -- or in Euro-style multicultural condescension, maybe it has something to do with the American "we" that Couric and so many others seem so embarrassed by.

This strikes me as totally, completely, utterly wrong.  The U.S. has been able to assimilate Muslim immigrants because it has a long tradition of accepting and ignoring cultural differences (despite the efforts of Goldberg and others).  In other words, America doesn't have the overpowering sense of ethnicity-based national culture that European countries tend to have. 

Look at multicultural Canada -- that's not exactly become a hotbed Islamic fundamentalism.  Now look at France which seems to takes strides to segregate minorities (particulary Muslims) from its culture, which causes the "wellspring" of Islamic discontent.  Or Germany.  Or even the Swiss.

UPDATE:  Ezra gets it...

I already said a bit about this bizarre Jonah Goldberg column at Tapped, but I hadn't yet seen this doozy of a concluding paragraph:

The dirty, embarrassing secret is that this sort of multiculturalism has made Europe a wellspring of Islamic radicalism and terrorism, but America's Muslim community has remained overwhelmingly peaceful. Why? Well, if the answer doesn't lay in President Bush's "outreach" -- and few think it does -- or in Euro-style multicultural condescension, maybe it has something to do with the American "we" that Couric and so many others seem so embarrassed by.

So the causal factor behind Islamic radicalism in Europe is...."multiculturalism." Namely, the type of multiculturalism that allows for hookah bars, the wearing of Muslim symbols to school, and honor killings. It is not, mind you, that immigrants have a much harder time economically integrating into European society, the consequence of post-World War II guest worker programs, or that Europe is much closer to Turkey, Algeria, and a host of other Muslim nations, and so receives poor, marginalized immigrants from Muslim nations, while America's distance prohibits all but highly skilled, relatively educated, Muslim immigrants from financing the trip over. Nope. It's hookah bars, which America totally doesn't have any of, at all.

Congrats To All Who Urge Strict Border Control

Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh and others -- your message is getting through:

The video, filmed with night-vision equipment and low in quality, is not always easy to understand. Here is a detailed description:

The footage starts by showing a single figure wearing a backpack sneaking along a rugged desert trail. A male voice, off-camera, says: “I got him. He’s low crawling. Guy with a backpack. I betcha it’s probably full of dope.”

As the figure crests a hill, the man shouts out loud: “Hey, puto [“faggot”]!” The backpack-wearer ducks behind the far side of a rocky outcropping, then pops up and peers over it a few times. “I got him,” the off-camera voice says. “He’s prairie doggin’ now. He heard me.”

A walkie-talkie crackles and a second male voice that sounds like it’s coming from an off-camera walkie-talkie says: “All right, where you at? What’s your 20?”

“He’s up there on the, uh, smuggler’s trail,” the first voice responds.

The second male voice says, “I don’t have a visual.”

At this point in the video, the backpack-wearing figure begins to slowly emerge from behind the rock outcropping. “You know what? I’m going to take a fucking shot,” the first voice says. There are two flashes of light and the sound of two semi-automatic rifle shots in quick succession. The figure wearing the backpack appears to fly backward and drop from view.

“Oh fuck, I got him dude!’ the first voice says. “I fuckin’ got him!” There is a pause, then the first voice says, “Dude, what are we gonna do?” The voice on the walkie-talkie replies, “Get the shovel, get some lime, and hey, grab me a 12-pack, too, while you’re up there.”

“Roger that,” the first voice answers between chortles. “We fuckin’ nailed him, dude! We fuckin’ nailed him!” That’s where the video ends.

The Youtube video (now unavailable), if authentic, showed a murder -- pure and simple.  A murder.