Hopefully this will not happen. It's probably a lie or a false innuendo or just plain bluster.
But if Trump actually follows through with his campaign promise to register Muslims, we'll all just register as Muslims.
Right?
Here is the photo of the Republican Senators and members of Congress following the election:
It reminds me of the photo taken by Paul Ryan this summer of Republican interns, but I can't qwhite put my finger on why.
Substitute "toilet paper" with "Donald Trump's skin" in this bit by Ellen DeGeneres and you will have a perfect description of the man's inability to accept feedback or criticism of any kind.
The description of no one in particular seems incredibly apropos in this historical moment.
This is what I know:
There is an enormous segment of the American public who I do not understand. That's on me. If we are to unite and move forward, I need to understand them better. Find commonality. We all do.
An enormous segment of the American public voted for an indecent human being yesterday. That's on them, and it always will be. No matter what level of success he may have going forward, his lack of decency will never be in doubt. I may not understand the underlying reasons for the support of his voters, but there is no question about the character of the man who they have elected. He has made his indecency and failure of character abundantly clear.
An enormous segment of the American public also voted for Hillary Clinton yesterday. The overall vote was nearly even. Please remember this if you share my beliefs. It will be easy to feel alone today. Easy to feel like you live in a country populated by people who you can't possibly understand. Remember that fully half of America stands with you in your beliefs.
I am the saddest for my two children, who had so much hope for today. They were both so happy and so hopeful less than 24 hours ago when we all stood in line to cast our vote. It seemed like such a perfect day. A historic day of light and joy. In less than an hour, they will awake, and I will have to tell them this news. It is the first time as a parent that I do not know what to say to my children.
I have students who fear our President-elect because of the color of the skin and the way they worship. They have expressed these fears to me. Today will be hard on them. They are afraid of the future leader of their country, and their fear is not unfounded. It is the result of what he and his supporters have said. I must make them feel safer than ever today and all the todays going forward.
I saw this fear last night in Brooklyn as we watched the election results at The Bell House. I saw disappointment and sadness in the faces of so many, but amongst the people of color, the Muslims and the Jews, and the gay and lesbian folks standing with me, there was also real fear. This fear is not unwarranted or unjustified. It is the result of specific things said by our President-elect and his supporters. Be sure to stand by these people today. Help them to feel a little safer.
America has stood for 240 years. It will continue to stand. We have suffered through indecent, inept, incompetent, crooked leaders before. While I acknowledge that this time is different than any time before, America will continue to stand.
Let this day serve as a clarion call for those who believe that this nation is a land for all people. Remember this moment when it comes time to elect our next leader. We cannot be complacent. We cannot rely on the hard work of others. We cannot sit on the sidelines and think that our vote is enough. We must all pull hard on the rope so that all Americans feel safe and happy and free in this land.
Clara's very first words to me on this historic Election Day:
"I know that I came out of Mommy's tummy when I was born, but did Charlie come out of her tummy, too? Or was it her vagina?"
Brave new world, my friends.
And I know exactly what kind of world I want this crazy little girl growing up in.
This is not a normal Presidential election. Much is at stake. These are not two serious-minded, highly qualified people with differing opinions about the direction of our country. Donald Trump is the first candidate in my lifetime who was not fit to hold the office of President (or any position in government). If I did not speak out against this ignorant, racist, xenophobic, misogynist in order to curry favor with both sides of the political aisle and sell a few more books, I couldn't live with myself.
For this reason, I cannot stand to see celebrities - sports figures, TV and movie stars, talk show hosts, musicians - sitting on the sidelines, keenly aware that half of their audience is Republican and conservative and choosing to protect their brand by remaining silent.
This time it's different.
This is why I admire the hell out of celebrities like Beyonce, Jay-Z, Amy Schumer, Justin Timberlake, Bruce Springsteen, Jon Bon Jovi, Robert DiNero, Lady Gaga, Colin Powell, George Clooney, Elton John, Brian Cranston, JJ Abrams, Steven Spielberg, Scarlett Johansson, Kerry Washington, Sam Jackson, Jaime Foxx, Stephen Curry, Mark Cuban, and many, many more. These are celebrities who are willing to risk the ire of a large constituency in order to do what is patriotic and right.
I've never been a fan of Lebron James, but after his avid and active support of Hillary Clinton, I have to admit that even he is growing on me. He may never be a better ballplayer than Michael Jordan, but he might be a better patriot than the man who famously makes donations to both political parties in equal amounts and avoids talking positions on politics whenever possible.
Jordan began his history of sideline sitting in 1990 when he inexplicably chose not to endorse black North Carolina Democrat Harvey Gantt in his Senate race against openly racist incumbent Jesse Helms and has continued to remain relatively silent in terms of politics ever since.
To his credit, Lebron James hasn't placed his brand ahead of his country, and I admire him for that.
And I love the hell out of this guy, who could probably benefit professionally by walking the middle of the road but has chosen to take a stand as well.
Brilliantly so.
I have a friend who approached me a couple weeks ago and said, "Do you know why Michael Jordan never endorses political candidates? Because Democrats and Republicans both buy shoes."
He went on to say that he was surprised that I was writing so many politically-minded posts when I have books to sell. "Everyone reads," he said. "Democrats and Republicans."
I understood his point. While I always stand on a platform of authenticity and extreme honestly, I have been more politically minded on my blog this year than any other year before, but I explained to my friend that this election cycle is different. These are not two serious-minded, highly qualified people with differing opinions about the direction of our country. Donald Trump is the first candidate in my lifetime who was not fit to hold the office of President (or any position in government). If I did not speak out against this ignorant, racist, misogynist in order to sell a few more books, I couldn't live with myself.
This is why I am so disappointed in Tom Brady, who was asked by a reporter yesterday how he would respond if his children heard Donald Trump's version of "locker room talk."
Brady thanked the reporters and stepped away, dodging the question completely.
My hope is that Brady refused to answer the question because it required him to speak about his children, and he often avoids questions related to his family. Perhaps today a reporter will simply ask, "What did you think of Donald Trump's version of locker room talk?" and he will answer.
I hope so. But I also know that Brady and Trump have been friendly over the years. My fear is that he dodged the question because of their previous and perhaps ongoing relationship.
I hope not. I love Tom Brady and expect a hell of a lot more from him.
I wish more athletes would speak out against Trump's attempt to excuse his claims of sexual assault as "locker room talk." I wish every athlete in the world would.
I realize that they all have shoes to sell and games to win and fans to appease, but there are times in life when you must stop caring about the dollar and start caring about this country.
About the perception of how men behave in private.
About the way we want our sons to speak about girls and women.
About what constitutes sexual assault.
I have been in many locker rooms and on many golf courses over the course of my life. I have worked in fast food restaurants and diners and on construction sites. I have attended hundreds of college parties. I have been poor and homeless and lived on the streets.
I have never heard a man speak like Donald Trump on the recently released Access Hollywood recording.
Not a friend or an acquaintance or a stranger. Not once. Not even close.
Clara just hung this on the pantry door and announced that she's running for President of the Upstairs.
"Upstairs needs some rules," she says.
Her platform:
She's currently keeping 50% of her promises.
Not bad for a politician.
It demonstrates Trump-level hubris to suppose that I might have something to say about Hillary Clinton's performance during the debate last night, but at the risk of sounding a little too certain of myself, I have a few notes for Clinton that I think would help a lot.
And while I'm sure that she has incredibly skilled experts working with her, I have spent much of my life preparing for arguments like these. I have been debating lunatics for years. Going toe-to-toe with anyone who I could find. I started battling my evil stepfather at the tender age of eight and have been battling ever since.
I've been training for a debate like this for all my life.
I was also the Connecticut collegiate debate champion two years in a row.
This is something that I do well.
I've reached out to the Clinton campaign via Twitter with all sincerity, hoping that they will contact me and hear what I have to say, but if not (and it's highly unlikely), here are a few things I would tell her.
I've got more - including things that she did very well that she should continue doing - but these are four of the best pieces of advice I have.
____________________________________
Your website fact-checking idea was a good one. Many people watch television with a laptop in front of them, and this idea creates a second channel, not bound by space or time, for viewers to hear from you. However, when you introduce it - and you should again at the next debate - you must do so forcefully. Say it like you mean it. Last night you made it sound like an after-thought. You actually laughed a little while explaining it. Instead, say this:
"Look, this debate is only 90 minutes long, so there is no way that I am going to be able to refute all of the lies that Donald has told and will undoubtedly continue to tell tonight, so please, go to my website, where we will debunk his lies in realtime. We cannot allow falsehoods to stand when so much is at stake."
Say that with force. Say it like it is a moral imperative.
____________________________________
Open more your statements with a single word or phrase like "Look" or "Let me explain something to you" or "Make no mistake about it." Even stating the moderator's name, as if you are speaking to him or her, works well. Trump either does this naturally or understands the value of focusing an audience on him. Short, imperative words and phrases like these do that. They command attention. Too often you are easing into your point, slow at the start and gaining momentum throughout. Instead, open with a punch. A single word or phrase that commands the audience's attention and demonstrates authority and the importance of what is to come.
____________________________________
When Trump is categorically lying, like when he states that he opposed the Iraq War from the onset, a simple and effective way to dismiss this lie is to turn one of his own tactics against him. Trump loves to imply that everyone is in agreement with him. He uses phrases like, "People tell me..." or "I'm hearing from a lot of people..."
Do the same. Say this:
"It doesn't matter what Donald says was his initial position on the Iraq War. We all know what the truth is. The American people decided that issue a long time ago."
Not only will this put Trump in opposition with the American people, but it will likely poke the bear, because one of the best ways to hurt an opponent is to use his words or strategies against him. And this is a bear you want to poke. You want to knock him off his game. You want him to get angry. You want him to show his true colors.
____________________________________
Trump scores points when he talks about your 30 years in office and how much time you've had to fix America but haven't. You must have a rebuttal for this, and the rebuttal is simple and should come in three parts.
Use a different rebuttal each time he brings it up.
1. State your achievements over the last 30 years.
Say this:
"If Donald is going to blame me for everything that has gone wrong since I entered public office, then I deserve to take the credit for what has gone well."
Then start listing these things. Trump says the country is a disaster. This is your chance to point out all the incredible things that have been achieved while you have been in office.
2. Trump presents a simplified version of the government. He presents an image of the world in which walls that America doesn't pay for can be built and concessions can be added to international negotiations with ease. He wants people to believe that you could've fixed the world over the last 30 years but didn't. This is the time to expose his inexperience.
Say this:
"Making deals with countries in possession of nuclear weapons or attempting to develop nuclear weapons is not the same as making deals with architects who you then stiff or big banks looking to make a buck on the backs of the American worker. You don't get to declare bankruptcy and start over when dealing with a country like Iran or Russia or North Korea or China. These are not countries that can be pushed around like the painters and builders who you push around daily. But you don't understand that, because while I have been serving America for 30 years, traveling to 112 counties, negotiating complex deals that you would never understand with people you have never met, and sitting in rooms watching and waiting and praying while American troops are risking their lives going after the likes of Osama Bin Laden, you have been dodging income taxes, appearing on reality TV shows, and closing failing casinos. This world is a complex and changing place, Donald. You don't understand that, and you never will."
Say that, damn it. Just like that.
3. Make damn sure that you point out that government is a three branch system, and no matter what you want to do, you need Democrats and Republicans to come together to do so. In the last 30 years, we've had Republican Presidents, as well as Senates and Houses controlled by Republicans. Don't let him hang every failure on you.
Say this:
"This is not a monarchy, Donald. Or a dictatorship. Perhaps you need a lesson on civics. You're not happy with the last eight years of the Obama presidency? Your own party has made it their point to oppose anything that our President has attempted to make happen. They stated this explicitly before he ever came into office. It's a miracle that he's done as much as he has. And when John Boehner attempted to reach across the aisle and make a deal with Democrats and make government work again, your party threw him out."
Not only will this tie Trump to Republican obstructionism, but it will also demonstrate that there are Republicans who are willing to make government work again. Good Republicans who we need in office. Just not Republicans like Donald Trump.
If you really want to get daring (and you should), you could add:
"I feel bad for my Republican friends. People like ... (list well known Republicans who you can call your friends) who deserve better than this. These are people who have been serving our country for years. People like John McCain who you don't consider a war hero. And now they are tied to a man who calls women pigs and believes that judges can't be impartial because they are of Mexican descent. They deserve better. The country deserves better."
This isn't a post about the athletes who are kneeling or sitting during the singing of the national anthem. When it comes to that particular form of protest, I would personally prefer that they find a different way to draw attention to a very important issue, but I also recognize and respect their right to protest in the way they choose.
No, this is about the jackass who was four rows behind me at the Patriots game on Sunday and all the jackasses like him who I have seen and listened to over the years. As the national anthem began to play, this man began shouting at several fans in the seats below us who had forgotten to remove their caps, ordering them to do so in a harsh, arrogant, and unforgiving fashion.
During the singing of the anthem, mind you.
Most of these fans sheepishly removed their caps, some motioning apologies to the jackass for their mistake, but one man left his hat atop his head. Instead of removing it, he slowly turned and smiled at the jackass behind me, who was still shouting even though the world famous opera singer who was singing the anthem was at least 16 bars into the song by now.
I don't think the smiling man's refusal to remove his cap was a genuine protest. I don't think he decided to leave his cap on during the singing of the national anthem to make a statement.
I think he just forgot to take it off.
I also suspect that he was annoyed by the jackass a dozen rows up who had declared himself to be the cap police. I suspect that he - like me - thought that the decision to interrupt the national anthem by barking out orders was more disrespectful to our nation's flag than any failure to remove a head covering.
I admired the smiling man who chose to leave his hat on. I loved that guy. His was not a protest against police violence or racial disparity or economic inequality. His was a protest against the idea that the guy with the loudest voice and the thickest neck gets to tell anyone what to do, regardless of location or circumstances. His was a protest against the idea that conformity cannot be dictated by some self-righteous, self-assigned arbiter of what is right and wrong.
That smiling man's decision to leave his cap on his head and grin at the jackass was both courageous and admirable. In almost every other circumstance, I would have preferred for the smiling man to remove his cap. But when faced with a barking jackass who thinks he can dictate the behavior of others through volume and aggression, I think he did the right thing.
Honestly, I almost put my cap back on. Had I been farther away from the jackass and slightly more courageous, I might have done exactly that.
Respect for the nation's flag means removing your cap during the national anthem, but it also means shutting the hell up while the anthem is being sung and allowing people to leave their caps on if they so choose.
There's nothing more enjoyable than watching a beefy, loud-mouthed jerk be neutered by a hat and a smile.
I knew some of this history but not all of it.
Very relevant and fascinating, particularly if you're someone like me who's been wondering if he's been dropped into some alternate universe or possibly living within a Simpsons cartoon.
You have to wonder the thinking behind Bill O'Reilly's decision to fact-check Michelle Obama's assertion in her Democratic National Convention speech that she has been living in a home built by slaves.
Michelle Obama said:
"I wake up every morning in a house that was built by slaves. I watch my daughters — two beautiful, intelligent, black young women — playing with their dogs on the White House lawn."
O'Reilly acknowledged that Obama was correct, but in doing so, said the following:
"Slaves that worked there were well-fed and had decent lodgings provided by the government, which stopped hiring slave labor in 1802. However, the feds did not forbid subcontractors from using slave labor. So, Michelle Obama is essentially correct in citing slaves as builders of the White House, but there were others working as well. Got it all? There will be a quiz."
As you might expect, his assertion that slaves were "well-fed and had decent lodgings" didn't go over very well with a lot of people, including me.
Slavery - regardless of your slave master's meal plan and accommodations - is still slavery, and it should never be made to sound like anything but the stripping away of a person's freedom, dignity, and basic human rights.
Also, how the hell does Bill O'Reilly know what was happening to those slaves at the time?
Honestly, what was O'Reilly thinking?
Did this Fox News talking head find Michelle Obama's assertion so rhetorically effective that he just had to find a way to undermine it?
Is it simply instinct for him to attempt to mitigate anything that comes out of the mouth of a Democrat?
Was he so frustrated that Michelle Obama's speech (and almost every other speech delivered at the DNC) was almost infinitely better than the 75 minutes of vitriol spittled from the gaping maw of Donald Trump?
Even if all this were true, you don't defend slavery, even in a tiny way under the guise of fact checking. Find something else to attack. Find another way to undermine your opponent.
Here's a party game you can play sometime:
Try to make a list of things you could say that are as stupid and awful as saying that slavery wasn't as bad as you might think.
It's hard to do. It's a very short list.
Here's some good news:
In response to Paul Ryan's blindingly white photo of Capitol Hill interns, Democratic Representative E.B. Johnson asked her intern to take a selfie with her fellow Democratic interns on the Hill.
A slightly different image when you compare the two, and hope that our future leaders might not all be one color.
Donald Trump is the Republican nominee for President.
Kind of hard to believe. Right?
I am not a Republican, nor I am pleased by this harrowing turn of events, but back in February, I predicted this outcome. I explained to friends that there were too many Republican candidates and no clear frontrunner, so the one with the most notoriety was likely to win.
I saw Trump as being that guy.
I also saw Trump getting free air time on all the major cable news networks. Even MSNBC was covering his every move.
That sealed the deal for me.
Most people disagreed with this opinion. A few folks scoffed. But two of my friends told me that I was stupid. An idiot. A moron. They disparaged my intellect and my common sense. For those who chose to express their disagreement with aggressive, verbal abuse, I added them to my "I told you so" calendar and set the date for Friday, July 22, 2016.
Turns out I miscalculated by three days.
So today I will send out two emails, reminding my friends of their so-easily-produced insults back in February and letting them know that their words had not been forgotten and they were wrong.
In each email, I will write, "I told you so."
Petty? I don't think so. We allow people to dismiss, disregard, and marginalize our ideas, opinions, and predictions all the time because they enjoy the safety and security of time. They get to call you an idiot or a buffoon because they have a six month buffer from being proven wrong, so they assume almost no risk. Say something rotten today because it will probably be forgotten tomorrow.
It's name-calling and intellectual bravado without any stakes.
Except, that is, when you're dealing with someone like me with an "I told you so" calendar.
If you disagreed with my on the Trump nomination civilly, no problem.
If you thought my prediction was ludicrous and expressed as much without berating or insulting me, no worries.
Disagreements are normal in this world.
But when you call someone names and insult their intelligence because you think that you're right and know there are months of buffering before the outcome, during which time the target of your barbs is likely to forget your unkind words, this is not okay with me.
I will be waiting. Biding my time. Counting the days.
Two pleasure-filled emails will be sent off today.
I'm worried about our country and frankly saddened for many of my Republican friends, who I know are feeling lost right now with the direction their party has turned, but at least I can take solace in these four beautiful words today:
I told you so.
I'm sure that Paul Ryan isn't responsible for hiring Capitol Hill interns, but this selfie, posted to his Instagram account, should have been an enormous red flag for him.
Is there a single person of color in this photo?
Reportedly, there is one, but I have yet to find him or her.
As Speaker of the House, Ryan might actually have some say over how the process that Capitol Hill interns are selected, but even if he doesn't want to involve himself in that process, he should at least have enough savvy to know that this photo - chock full of smiling, privileged white folk - does not belong on his Instagram feed unless he wants to appear like he's living in a tone-deaf bubble of whiteness.
The United Kingdom has a lot of problems right now. I don't mean to pile on.
But can't we all agree that the need to meet and curtsey before some nonsense Queen who only earned her position through a series of ancestral sexual encounters in order to officially be declared Prime Minister is a ludicrous way to transfer power?
I'm not anti-British in any way, but I'm anti-royalty in every way.
Not only is genetics a stupid way to confer power, but the British monarchy costs the UK approximately £35.7 million per year, even though they own more property than anyone else in the United Kingdom.
This whole situation is ridiculous.
I have this dream that when Prince William assumes the throne someday, his first and only act would be to declare the British monarchy null and void.
"I am the King of England because of a sexual encounter between my mother and my father, and because I was lucky enough to be born first. This is just stupid. This idiocy of the monarchy ends now."
He'd turn Buckingham Palace into a museum, stick a photo booth over the throne for future visitors, hand over almost all of the royal estates to worthy charities, and retire to one of the no less than eight other royal residences (including at least three castles) that his family owns.
That might be one of the most selfless and impressive things a person could ever do.
Paul Ryan has called the Democrat recent sit-in "a publicity stunt."
This was stupid thing to say.
I am a Democrat, but I also can't stand bad communication and poor messaging. Despite our political differences, Paul Ryan needs me.
There were highly effective ways of responding to the Democrats' sit-in strategy, but calling it a publicity stunt was not one of them. Ryan is in an interesting position at the moment. Thanks to Donald Trump, he is perceived by many as a fairly rational Republican who would be much more palatable than Trump. Regardless of what happens with the Presidency, he has an opportunity to take a serious leadership role in this country in the minds of Republicans and many independents. More importantly. he has a chance to reach across the aisle and become a dealmaker.
Instead, he calls the Democrats strategy "a publicity stunt."
If I was a Democrat, here is what I would've said in response to Ryan:
“Paul Ryan has called our sit-in a publicity stunt.
Was Rosa Parks refusal to sit at the back of the bus a publicity stunt?
Were the lunch counter protests by the Friendship Nine a publicity stunt?
Was Martin Luther King’s march on Washington a publicity stunt?
Was Gandhi’s hunger strike a publicity stunt?
Were Betty Williams and Cezar Chavez and Nelson Mandela engaged in publicity stunts?
Come down to the well of Congress, Mr. Ryan, and tell the great John Lewis to his face that this is nothing more than a publicity stunt. And while you are at it, turn the C-SPAN cameras back on. Turning them off was the act of a coward who is afraid of what the American people might think if they could witness our protest. Only villains fear the clear light of sunshine.”
The Democrats are just as foolish for not making this argument (unless they did and I missed it), and I'm more than willing to help them as well if they want to hire me.
I promise you, Congressional and Senate Democrats, that I could craft a powerful, effective, cohesive, and inclusive message for your party as well. And I'm always quick with a stinging comeback.
But here is what Paul Ryan should have said:
“I admire my Democratic colleagues for their passion and perseverance. I disagree with them on their positions regarding gun control and cannot stand by as they attempt to erode the Constitutional rights of Americans, but I can certainly acknowledge the strength of their conviction, as misguided as it may be. Unfortunately this is not the way to pass legislation, and it hasn’t been the way to pass legislation for more than 200 years. We have rules and procedures that allow for lawmakers to vote on bills, and these rules and procedure have helped this Republic to stand strong when so many have faltered. I understand their frustration. I understand their desire to push forward their agenda. But there are agreed-upon ways of doing this, and this sit-in is not one of them. Congress cannot and will not operate under mob rule. ”
This was the statement that you should've made, Paul Ryan. It would've been measured, thoughtful, convincing, and effective.
It also doesn't run the risk of implying that people like Rosa Park and Martin Luther King were engaging in publicity stunts. Ryan is lucky that I am not running the messaging apparatus of the Democrats or I would've blasted his "publicity stunt" statement to smithereens.
And I'm ready to help. Even though I am a Democrat, I would be more than willing to assist Paul Ryan. We need Republicans willing to make deals and legislate, and if working for Paul Ryan helps to make that happen, I'm ready to assist.
In fact, I tried to reach out to Paul Ryan a couple weeks ago to offer my services but can only send him an email if I live within his district. I was unable to contact him.
His loss. Sincerely. I would kick ass at messaging and communications for these politicians.
If you're smart, hire me. I will cost you a fortune, but I will help to craft an effective, compelling message that works.
Clara tells me that she doesn't like Donald Trump. She says that she heard him say mean things to "a lady named Megyn Kelly" on CBS Sunday Morning.
"Megyn asked a question, and Donald Trump started making mean compliments about her."
Then she told me that she doesn't like Ted Cruz because he's not nice to mommy-mommy and daddy-daddy families.
Not to get too political, but if Clara can figure this stuff out...
