Trade?
February 10, 2017
One more bit of review before returning to the outrage du jour.
Two weeks ago, President Trump apparently didn’t sign any new orders, although a big one was about to hit the planet on Friday, January 27. More on that two-weeks-ago story tomorrow.
For today, it might be worth reviewing a couple of stories as reported by The Federalist and by The Washington Post. The Federalist took the time to annotate no less than 16 fake news stories that riled up the populace over the past few months, unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your point of view) with no facts to support their messages. The theme of The Washington Post story could rightly be summed up as: “Lighten up, Francis.”
Before we get too far down this rabbit hole, Two Weeks Ago News would like to stipulate to the following: We are not fans of extremism, unless it include things like extreme loyalty to Springsteen or someone extremely dedicated to making sure we have a warm chocolate chip cookie on our desks each morning. Those two examples aside, we have almost no use for extremes because the lack the key components necessary for reasonable people to communicate and progress toward a common goal. Things like nuance. Experience. Compassion. Openmindedness. Thoughtfulness, empathy, inclusiveness, and enlightenment. Listening. Conducting reasonable debate. Presenting plausible scenarios for consideration.
People who embrace an extreme – exclusively, as almost all extremists do – are as dangerous as the villains they purport to fight against. It’s like that old saying we love: If the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. And if they only thing you can do is find more reasons to hate the President and every single person connected to the President, everything he does and every single person around him is an object of derision. And those who may disagree? Deplorable(s).
We’re not going to list the many details found in the linked articles. You’ll be more satisfied reading them on your own. But here are two we just adore:
You know what’s so weird about this??? We looked up the list of Attorneys General over the past 40-plus years. Turns out, every single President who took office after an administration of the “other” political party ended appointed a new Attorney General almost right away. In the cases where the President changed but the party remained the same, the changes were not usually as swift. Take a look at the list below. Weird, right?
No. Not weird at all. It’s what happens. This one happened pretty predictably except it happened during the first week of the most untraditional presidency most of us have ever witnessed. If Ms. Yates had been replaced with an “acting” and then with “permanent” Attorney General on February 17, it would have been page 9 news. Okay, page three. The President no doubt would have found a reason to make that into yet another outrageous announcement, as he is wont to do about everything.
President Jimmy Carter
71 Edward H. Levi Illinois
January 14, 1975 - January 20, 1977
Dick Thornburgh - -Acting - Pennsylvania
January 20, 1977 - January 26, 1977
President Ronald Reagan
72 Griffin Bell Georgia
January 26, 1977 - August 16, 1979
73 Benjamin Civiletti Maryland
August 16, 1979 - January 19, 1981
74 William French Smith California
January 23, 1981 - February 25, 1985
75 Edwin Meese California
February 25, 1985 - August 12, 1988
76 Dick Thornburgh Pennsylvania
August 12, 1988 - August 15, 1991
President George H.W. Bush
77 William P. Barr New York
August 16, 1991 - November 26, 1991
November 26, 1991 - January 20, 1993
Stuart M. Gerson Acting Washington, D.C.
January 20, 1993 - March 12, 1993
President Bill Clinton
78 Janet Reno Florida
March 12, 1993 - January 20, 2001
Eric Holder Acting - Washington, D.C.
January 20, 2001 - February 2, 2001
President George W. Bush
79 John Ashcroft - Missouri
February 2, 2001 - February 3, 2005
80 Alberto Gonzales Texas
February 3, 2005 - September 17, 2007
Paul Clement - Acting - Washington, D.C.
September 17, 2007 - September 18, 2007
Peter Keisler - Acting - Washington, D.C.
September 18, 2007 - November 9, 2007
81 Michael Mukasey - New York
November 9, 2007 - January 20, 2009
Mark Filip - Acting - Illinois
January 20, 2009 - February 3, 2009
President Barack Obama
82 Eric Holder - Washington, D.C.
February 3, 2009 - April 27, 2015
83 Loretta Lynch - New York
April 27, 2015 - January 20, 2017
Sally Yates - Acting - Georgia
January 20, 2017 - January 30, 2017
President Donald Trump
Dana Boente - Acting - Virginia
January 30, 2017 - February 9, 2017
84 Jeff Sessions - Alabama
February 9, 2017 - Incumbent
2. One more point for today and then we’ll call it a night. And we’ll admit that we were among those who were outraged – outraged!!! – at the idea of mentally ill people owning guns. How in the world is that a good idea??? But we saw the headlines! We saw them everywhere, in credible media sources including NPR, CNBC, CNN, The Washington Post and Politico. Every single one of them had some variant on this headline (from NPR): House Votes to Overturn Obama Rule Restricting Gun Sales to the Severely Mentally Ill. Or this one, from AP: BREAKING: House votes to roll back Obama rule on background checks for gun ownership
At this stage, we have to wonder: did none of us imagine that couldn’t possibly be what it sounded like? What is he doing? We don’t need background checks anymore on gun purchases? How is that a good idea? Isn’t it pretty unlikely that the words “Gun Sales to the Severely Mentally Ill” would ever appear in a headline together? Sure it is. But we all bought it.
Except it wasn’t what it sounded like. Thank you, God.
According to The Federalist, the context, for anyone still wondering, is that “The House was actually voting to repeal a narrowly tailored rule from the Obama era. This rule mandated that the names of certain individuals who receive Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income and who use a representative to help manage these benefits due to a mental impairment be forwarded to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
If that sounds confusing, it essentially means that if someone who receives SSDI or SSI needs a third party to manage these benefits due to some sort of mental handicap, then—under the Obama rule--they may have been barred from purchasing a firearm. (It is thus incredibly misleading to suggest that the rule applied in some specific way to the “severely mentally ill.”)
Turns out that when this rule was enacted under President Obama, the American Association of People With Disabilities; the Arc of the United States; the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network; the Consortium of Citizens With Disabilities; the National Coalition of Mental Health Recovery; and many, many other disability advocacy organizations and networks, along with the GOP and NRA all opposed it.
Politics makes strange bedfellows, indeed.
Coming up two weeks ago tomorrow – the ban heard round the world.
One more bit of review before returning to the outrage du jour.
Two weeks ago, President Trump apparently didn’t sign any new orders, although a big one was about to hit the planet on Friday, January 27. More on that two-weeks-ago story tomorrow.
For today, it might be worth reviewing a couple of stories as reported by The Federalist and by The Washington Post. The Federalist took the time to annotate no less than 16 fake news stories that riled up the populace over the past few months, unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your point of view) with no facts to support their messages. The theme of The Washington Post story could rightly be summed up as: “Lighten up, Francis.”
Before we get too far down this rabbit hole, Two Weeks Ago News would like to stipulate to the following: We are not fans of extremism, unless it include things like extreme loyalty to Springsteen or someone extremely dedicated to making sure we have a warm chocolate chip cookie on our desks each morning. Those two examples aside, we have almost no use for extremes because the lack the key components necessary for reasonable people to communicate and progress toward a common goal. Things like nuance. Experience. Compassion. Openmindedness. Thoughtfulness, empathy, inclusiveness, and enlightenment. Listening. Conducting reasonable debate. Presenting plausible scenarios for consideration.
People who embrace an extreme – exclusively, as almost all extremists do – are as dangerous as the villains they purport to fight against. It’s like that old saying we love: If the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. And if they only thing you can do is find more reasons to hate the President and every single person connected to the President, everything he does and every single person around him is an object of derision. And those who may disagree? Deplorable(s).
We’re not going to list the many details found in the linked articles. You’ll be more satisfied reading them on your own. But here are two we just adore:
- Acting Attorney General, Sally Yates, appointed by President Obama and about to replaced by an Attorney General to be named by President Trump, went out in a blaze of glory by defying the Executive Order Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorists Entry Into the United States.
You know what’s so weird about this??? We looked up the list of Attorneys General over the past 40-plus years. Turns out, every single President who took office after an administration of the “other” political party ended appointed a new Attorney General almost right away. In the cases where the President changed but the party remained the same, the changes were not usually as swift. Take a look at the list below. Weird, right?
No. Not weird at all. It’s what happens. This one happened pretty predictably except it happened during the first week of the most untraditional presidency most of us have ever witnessed. If Ms. Yates had been replaced with an “acting” and then with “permanent” Attorney General on February 17, it would have been page 9 news. Okay, page three. The President no doubt would have found a reason to make that into yet another outrageous announcement, as he is wont to do about everything.
President Jimmy Carter
71 Edward H. Levi Illinois
January 14, 1975 - January 20, 1977
Dick Thornburgh - -Acting - Pennsylvania
January 20, 1977 - January 26, 1977
President Ronald Reagan
72 Griffin Bell Georgia
January 26, 1977 - August 16, 1979
73 Benjamin Civiletti Maryland
August 16, 1979 - January 19, 1981
74 William French Smith California
January 23, 1981 - February 25, 1985
75 Edwin Meese California
February 25, 1985 - August 12, 1988
76 Dick Thornburgh Pennsylvania
August 12, 1988 - August 15, 1991
President George H.W. Bush
77 William P. Barr New York
August 16, 1991 - November 26, 1991
November 26, 1991 - January 20, 1993
Stuart M. Gerson Acting Washington, D.C.
January 20, 1993 - March 12, 1993
President Bill Clinton
78 Janet Reno Florida
March 12, 1993 - January 20, 2001
Eric Holder Acting - Washington, D.C.
January 20, 2001 - February 2, 2001
President George W. Bush
79 John Ashcroft - Missouri
February 2, 2001 - February 3, 2005
80 Alberto Gonzales Texas
February 3, 2005 - September 17, 2007
Paul Clement - Acting - Washington, D.C.
September 17, 2007 - September 18, 2007
Peter Keisler - Acting - Washington, D.C.
September 18, 2007 - November 9, 2007
81 Michael Mukasey - New York
November 9, 2007 - January 20, 2009
Mark Filip - Acting - Illinois
January 20, 2009 - February 3, 2009
President Barack Obama
82 Eric Holder - Washington, D.C.
February 3, 2009 - April 27, 2015
83 Loretta Lynch - New York
April 27, 2015 - January 20, 2017
Sally Yates - Acting - Georgia
January 20, 2017 - January 30, 2017
President Donald Trump
Dana Boente - Acting - Virginia
January 30, 2017 - February 9, 2017
84 Jeff Sessions - Alabama
February 9, 2017 - Incumbent
2. One more point for today and then we’ll call it a night. And we’ll admit that we were among those who were outraged – outraged!!! – at the idea of mentally ill people owning guns. How in the world is that a good idea??? But we saw the headlines! We saw them everywhere, in credible media sources including NPR, CNBC, CNN, The Washington Post and Politico. Every single one of them had some variant on this headline (from NPR): House Votes to Overturn Obama Rule Restricting Gun Sales to the Severely Mentally Ill. Or this one, from AP: BREAKING: House votes to roll back Obama rule on background checks for gun ownership
At this stage, we have to wonder: did none of us imagine that couldn’t possibly be what it sounded like? What is he doing? We don’t need background checks anymore on gun purchases? How is that a good idea? Isn’t it pretty unlikely that the words “Gun Sales to the Severely Mentally Ill” would ever appear in a headline together? Sure it is. But we all bought it.
Except it wasn’t what it sounded like. Thank you, God.
According to The Federalist, the context, for anyone still wondering, is that “The House was actually voting to repeal a narrowly tailored rule from the Obama era. This rule mandated that the names of certain individuals who receive Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income and who use a representative to help manage these benefits due to a mental impairment be forwarded to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
If that sounds confusing, it essentially means that if someone who receives SSDI or SSI needs a third party to manage these benefits due to some sort of mental handicap, then—under the Obama rule--they may have been barred from purchasing a firearm. (It is thus incredibly misleading to suggest that the rule applied in some specific way to the “severely mentally ill.”)
Turns out that when this rule was enacted under President Obama, the American Association of People With Disabilities; the Arc of the United States; the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network; the Consortium of Citizens With Disabilities; the National Coalition of Mental Health Recovery; and many, many other disability advocacy organizations and networks, along with the GOP and NRA all opposed it.
Politics makes strange bedfellows, indeed.
Coming up two weeks ago tomorrow – the ban heard round the world.