Warning: Creating default object from empty value in /hermes/bosnaweb05a/b2509/nf.girlwiththecanecom/public_html/wp-content/themes/canvas/functions/admin-hooks.php on line 160

Tag Archives | US Election 2016

Hillary Clinton Lies about Nancy Reagan’s Record on AIDS

hillary clinton

PARIS, FRANCE – JULY 07, 2014: First appearance of Hilary Clinton on national French television channel TF1 after meeting Vladimir Putin, Russian President

Let me just preface this by saying that while I really like Bernie Sanders and have been hoping that he’ll get the Democratic nomination, I don’t go around trashing Hillary Clinton, either. I’ve been of the belief that either would make a great candidate, and that I’d support (from Canada) either of them and tell people “You need to vote for this person!” because America needs to keep a Republican out of the White House. However, even candidates that we support sometimes need to be called out on things, and Hillary Clinton needs to called out (as people have been doing, thank goodness) on remarks she made on March 11 about Nancy Reagan’s record on the AIDS crisis as it emerged in America.

I’m quite concerned about them, not just because they were utter bullshit, but because I’m not sure now what to think about Hillary Clinton.

Here’s some CNN commentary about Hillary Clinton’s remarks to MSNBC:

Judging from reactions that I’ve seen yesterday and today, it’s going to take a lot more than a weak apology on Twitter to undo the damage caused by her statements.

She did not “misspeak” about how Nancy Reagan handled the AIDS crisis.

She lied.

The Reagans and the AIDS Crisis – I Don’t Remember, But I Learned

Hillary may think that ABC’s viewers may not remember what happened when AIDS first emerged in America, but I think that she’ll learn (if she hasn’t already) that this isn’t the case. And a whole lot of people have learned about it. I wrote an essay about it in high school, totally unprepared for what I was going to find when I began my research. What I learned from (from Randy Shilts’ “And the Band Played On: People, Politics, and the AIDS Epidemic”, mainly) shocked me and broke my heart. I was just 18. I didn’t know that governments could (or would) treat sick people that way. Writing that essay had a powerful impact on me, more so than most of the writing I’ve done.

Later on, I read transcripts from the era, which Mother Jones has compiled. They fleshed out a terrible history of rampant discrimination, where people died of an unknown disease and the government didn’t  care because it was only showing up in gay people, prostitutes, and intravenous drug users. Shame on Hillary Clinton and her revisionist history that in thirty seconds swept that ugliness under the rug and made the government sound like it  was instead doing good at the time.

My Concern Now About Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton’s history is in general a blind spot for me. I don’t know a whole lot about Benghazi, except that there were a lot of investigations that found nothing. I know a bit more about the email server issue, but not enough to explain it to someone thoroughly.

I’d been giving her the benefit of the doubt on these things and assuming her innocence. But seeing her lie so easily makes me nervous. Seeing her lie about something that’s so widely known and easily disproved makes me nervous. I mean, I’m Canadian and I’ve known about this since I was 18.

What does it say about Hillary Clinton, and about what she actually thinks of the voters?

I’m quite thrown off by this, and not sure what to do with it.

ETA: Today, I found this article written by Hillary Clinton, on Medium…by accident. I see that it’s also on her Facebook page, but I only went there to check because a comment prompted me – I’ve never looked at Hillary Clinton’s Facebook page before today, It’s entirely possible that I might have missed this article if I hadn’t gone wandering on the Medium site. For that reason alone, I’m not sure what to think of it, but there are a couple of other things that leave me cold: 1) There’s no apology  2) She doesn’t explain *why* she said what she did, granted that she knows all this history.  I actually feel like she may have dug the hope deeper with this.

Comments { 0 }

“Virtually no-one has spent more money in helping the American people with disabilities than me.” – Donald Trump and Serge Kovaleski

Illustration showing American real estate magnate, television - Serge KovaleskiBecause no one’s heard nearly enough about Donald Trump, let’s talk about him a bit more. Someone asked me this week why I wasn’t blogging about his recent public mocking of disabled journalist Serge Kovaleski. I said that I’ve been filing things away on Trump that I want to address and that this would certainly be one of them, and we talked about the story a bit.

You know, this election’s crop of GOP contenders makes me miss Mitt Romney. I remember thinking in 2012, “Ugh, the next four years will be unbearable if this right-wing extremist gets in,” but I look at who’s running now and I think, “These guys make Romney look liberal. The next four years will be terrifying if one of them gets in.”

And the prospect of Trump being President scares the shit out of me. I don’t want that for you, American friends, I don’t want that for me as a resident of a country neighbouring America, I don’t want it as a world citizen. You keep him out at all costs.

He’s a liar, he’s a loose cannon, and he’s an abusive bully, and the world doesn’t need any of those things in America’s leader.

Now that I’ve made my feelings on Trump clear. 🙂

I understand why disabled people are upset about Trump mocking Serge Kovaleski, but I really think that disabled Americans need to look at this for what it truly is and then evaluate how they can work it to their advantage, for several reasons:

Reason #1: Donald Trump is a Bully

Let’s first focus on the fact that Donald Trump is truly a bully. Whenever someone doesn’t agree with him, especially when they challenge him, they’re:

  • “incompetent” (New York Times)
  • “a total joke”, “loser”, “dopey”, “all talk no action dummy” (Karl Rove, political analyst)
  •   “…one of the worst Presidential competitors in history. Can’t debate, loves Obamacare – dummy!”, “a total failure” (John Kasich, GOP Presidential candidate, Governor of Ohio)
  • “…one of the worst reporters in the business…wouldn’t know truth if it hit him in the face” (Jeff Horwitz, journalist)
  • “A wacko” – Scott Walker GOP Presidential candidate (now dropped out of race), Governor of Wisconsin
  • “…worst mayor in the United States” (Bill Deblasio, Mayor of NYC)
  • “dopey”, “boring”, “broken down” (George Will, political analyst)
  • “a total loser” (Graydon Parker, Editor Vanity Fair)
  • “failed”, “a clown” (Martin O’Malley, GOP Presidential Candidate, Governor of Maryland)
  • “lightweight choker” (Marco Rubio, GOP Presidential candidate)
  • “one of the dumbest political pundits on television”, “dope” (Christ Stitwell, political analyst)

Those are just the really blatant insults from his Twitter timeline…for November.

Other points from the highlight reel include:

  • The first GOP debate, where, when asked about his contentious relationships with women, he made a joke about long-standing feud with Rosie O’Donnell and the names that he’s called her. This led to some terribly inappropriate and sexist post-debate comments about reporter Megyn Kelly being on her period.
  • The news piece where he insulted fellow candidate Carly Fiorina, implying that she’s too ugly to be President.
  • Two occasions where he’s called fellow candidate Ben Carson  “pathological”, likening mental health issues in Carson’s past to those of pedophiles. Trump supporters argue (correctly) that he didn’t say that Carson is a child molester, only that his “pathological” issues are, like those of a pedophile, incurable. But the media picked up on the impact of the comparison (as, I’m sure, did people like me who have experience in the mental health field and find it inappropriate and downright dangerous when unqualified people start diagnosing other people as “pathological”.)

I’ve worked in schools with disabled students who’d cry over things that were said to them in the halls. We’d talk about how what bullies thought of them didn’t matter, and that if they needed something to think of to remind them of that…

“When that person calls you a name, think of them as a bug on your shoulder and just flick them away so that they can’t bother you anymore.”

American friends, be angry if you need to be, but don’t give away your power to this man and his childishness. He doesn’t deserve any space in your head.

I can’t get a good read from media accounts on how Serge Kovaleski is reacting to this (although he seems to be taking it in stride, and good for him). If I was in his place, and people were asking what I thought about what Trump did, I hope that I’d be able to say, “I haven’t thought about it. I’ve got far more important things to think about.”

I’d hope that I could flick that bug off my shoulder. Because I wouldn’t want to give my personal power as a disabled woman away to Donald Trump, and I’d certainly be resolved that my reaction to the whole thing wouldn’t carry me any further toward only being remembered as the disabled reporter that Donald Trump mocked.

I’m better than that, and even just a cursory scan of his career accomplishments indicates that Serge Kovaleski is too – far better:

  • He won a Pulitzer Prize in 2009 for breaking news for his work as part of the team that covered the Elliot Spitzer Scandal for the New York Times. He was also a finalist in the same category for a story that he covered with a team in 2008.
  • He covered the Boston Marathon Bombing and  the Aurora, Colorado shootings for the New York Times, and has done investigative reporting for NYT across the US and in the UK
  • He’s worked at The Washington Post, New York Daily News, Money Magazine, and The Miami News.

No one’s talking about those things, are they? Make Serge Kovaleski known for his accomplishments – let’s not let the reason that he becomes a household name be that he was the poor disabled journalist that Donald Trump, in a move that only a monster could make, publicly mocked (because what could be more heinous than mocking the disabled? Please read my heavy sarcasm, in case it’s not coming across).

In the interests of explaining this line of reasoning further, I’m going to make this post extra-long and include a Facebook post by disability advocate Cara Liebowitz, which she’s given people permission to share. She says it much better than I can:

This is not so much about politics as it is about how Donald Trump has inadvertently shown what society really thinks of disabled people, and so I will not be debating the relative merits or lack thereof of candidates.

No one said Donald Trump’s campaign hit an “all time low” when he implied that Megyn Kelly was on her period because she dared to ask him tough questions. No one said it hit an all time low when he said that Muslims should wear special ID badges and then was unable to say how that was different from Hitler’s policies. Yet he makes fun of a disabled person and suddenly the world is up in arms, saying his campaign is at an all time low and this will hurt his chances.

You know what? I’m an actual disabled person and I’m not offended that Donald Trump mocked a disabled person. Do I think he’s disgusting? Yup. Do I think he’s the biggest asshole to ever walk this planet? Absolutely. Am I continually puzzled as to why he’s leading in the polls? You bet your ass I am. But I’m not offended that he made fun of a disabled person, because he makes fun of everyone else. Disabled people should be no different. I’d be more offended if he made fun of everyone BUT disabled people.

What DOES offend me is people’s outrage over this, which is much more than outrage over any of the other bigoted things he’s said. Berating a disabled person is seen as morally reprehensible not because we’re people and people shouldn’t be berated, period, but because we’re seen as weak, incapable of defending ourselves, and on par with a small child or a fuzzy animal. We’re objects of pity, not diverse human beings with our own lives, goals, and ideas. We’re certainly not a voting constituency.

If Donald Trump’s poll numbers go down because of this, when they haven’t gone down because of anything else that comes out of his bigoted mouth, I will actually be disappointed, as much as I despise the man. Because it will show that the American people think disabled people are so special that they’re the one untouchable group. It shows that America thinks it’s totally A-OK for a presidential candidate to abuse and berate women, Muslims, immigrants – but not disabled people. And it shows that for those of us who straddle multiple marginalized identities, disability is the only one that’s ever going to matter.

People, get a grip. Donald Trump is a hateful bigot in the worst way, but at least he’s equally bigoted towards pretty much everyone. The least we can do is be equally outraged.

Bravo, Cara. Bravo.

I also like Bill Peace’s take on Trump and ableism.

Donald Trump is Abusive

Trump’s gut reaction is to belittle, especially when he’s defensive. Later, if it looks like what he’s said is really going to do him damage, he comes back and makes a claim about what a hero he is:

  • He may have called Mexicans rapists and criminals, but clearly he was misunderstood, because no one has more respect for the Latino community than he does.
  • A #BlackLivesMatter protester may been beaten at one of his rallies, but that was about the protester, not the cause – no one has a better relationship with the Black community than he does.
  • Women? He cherishes them. He’s committed to meeting their needs, even when a woman has got blood coming out of her “whatever”.
  • He doesn’t know who Serge Kovaleski is or what he looks like, but “Virtually no-one has spent more money in helping the American people with disabilities than me”

Clearly, we misunderstand what we’re hearing when we’re insulted by what he’s saying, and that makes us wrong and worthy of his scorn.

That’s how an abuser behaves.

I’ve worked with young disabled adults in abusive situations. If they said, “I need out and I need your help”, that became my first priority for support for them – find a way to get them out and safe, deal with the rest of it later.

You’re not in this abusive relationship yet, America – make it your priority to be sure that you stay out of it, because Presidents tend to sit for two terms.

Reason #3 – This Is About More Than Disabled People

I’m going to piggy-back on what Cara has said.

I’m upset that Donald Trump mocked Serge Kovaleski. But not because Serge Kovaleski is disabled.

I’m upset that Donald Trump mocked someone, period. A Presidential candidate should not be running a campaign where his knee-jerk response to disagreement from anyone is belittlement and abuse. If you’re going to be outraged for Serge Kovaleski, you should also be outraged for Megyn Kelly.

And George Will.

And Karl Rove.

And the other Presidential candidates, most of them a great deal more politically experienced than him and who will presumably remain his colleagues should he, God forbid, win the election, that he’s personally maligned. I may intensely dislike what the GOP candidates generally stand for, and I’m all for fair criticism of an opponent’s ideas during a political campaign. But name-calling over Twitter and cheap shots during debates makes a mockery of the political process and takes space away from the table (especially in this election, where how well a GOP contender is doing determines whether they get to be at the big evening debate or the earlier one that gets less attention) for a person with more qualifications than having the money to fund his or her own campaign.

Reason #4: Thanks to Serge Kovaleski, Trump’s Attention is On Disabled People

American friends, harness your anger and use it – you’ve got Trump’s attention. During a rally in Sarasota, Florida on Saturday, Trump really tried to backwalk on mocking Serge Kovaleski.

Here’s all you really need to hear from that article:

“People that have a difficulty, I cherish them. These are incredible people, and I just want to put that to rest.”

Blecch.

Leverage his feeling that he’s made a mistake on this and make him *run* this one back by getting him to come out to the National Forum on Disability Issues (assuming that it’s convened for the 2016 Election – hopefully it will be). Truly, I couldn’t give a rat’s ass if he’s there, and neither should you, but if he comes out, the other candidates will follow – Republican and Democrat. Count on it.

And you want them to know what your concerns as disabled voters are. Disabled Americans are a significant voting demographic, whether the candidates want to acknowledge it or not. When you add on concerned loved ones and caregivers and advocates, it’s a demographic ignored at any candidate’s potential peril. You get Trump even pretending to listen to you, and they’ll all listen to you – they can’t afford not to.

Conclusion

You’ve got power. Use it. Don’t let Donald Trump, of all people, take it from you.

Please.

Comments { 3 }

Rand Paul Doesn’t Belong Anywhere Near the White House

Rand Paul with American flag to his right and Kentucky flag to his leftWell, Election 2016 is officially underway, with Ted Cruz and Rand Paul the first two to officially declare their candidacy.

(ETA: I see now that Hilary Clinton threw her hat in the ring yesterday and that Marco Rubio is supposed to today.)

For readers that have joined this blog since the last US Election, be warned: I talk about US Elections, even though I’m Canadian citizen. I talked about Election 2012 far too much. But I was genuinely curious about how it was going to shake out for disabled people in America. Most candidates dropped some general hints in their comments about their plans to bolster (or not bolster, as the case may be) the social security net, but few addressed the disability issue directly, or took the time to address a group large group of disabled people that invited the candidates to speak to them.

I already feel confident in making some predictions about Rand Paul based on past record.  He voted “No” on the ratification of the CRPD (as did Rubio, for what it’s worth) and several months ago made some off-the cuff but inaccurate comments about SSDI and fraud:

“What I tell people is, if you look like me and you hop out of your truck, you shouldn’t be getting a disability check. Over half of the people on disability are either anxious or their back hurts — join the club. Who doesn’t get a little anxious for work and their back hurts?  Everybody over 40 has a back pain. And I am not saying that there are not legitimately people who are disabled.  But the people who are the malingerers are the ones taking the money away from the people who are paraplegic, quadriplegic. You know, we all know people who are horrifically disabled and can’t work, but if you have able bodied people taking the money, then there is not enough money for the people who are truly disabled.”

After taking some time to actually learn some statistics about disability in America, Rand Paul discovered that people get disability checks for more types of disabilities than backaches and anxiety…that the people who have these disabilities don’t make up over half the people that collect disability checks, and that the fraud rate for SSDI is actually relatively low. He tried to walk the statement back, but obviously I remember it – chances are others do as well. Besides, his Libertarian “If you haven’t prepared then I shouldn’t have to help you” leanings aren’t going to make him very sympathetic to the needs of disabled people, I’d imagine, or to those of families who have disabled children that may require costly supports and services.

But I’m actually here today to comment on another story regarding Rand Paul. It’s not disability-related, so I ask for your indulgence as I meander a bit.

I came across a video on my Facebook timeline, entitled “Rand Paul Releases Sexist Condescension on Two Women Journalists”

“Interesting,” I thought, letting the video run.

I ended up watching it several times, because I couldn’t believe what I was seeing:

Rand Paul Needs to Learn to Play Nicely with the Ladies

Now, I acknowledge that NBC’s Savannah Guthrie took a bit of time getting to her actual question, but someone needs to explain to Rand Paul that even when he feels like a like a lady journalist has smacked his ego and left a boo-boo, mansplaining proper interviewing technique to her makes him come across like a little boy throwing a tantrum because a girl bested him at the spelling bee. He’s playing in the big leagues now, where other candidates smile and move on when a journalist’s line of questioning annoys them.

He’s going to have to suck it up.

*I* can be annoyed, though, and I was. I was annoyed on Savannah Guthrie’s behalf, that he spoke to her the way he did and that because of her position, she couldn’t really say anything back to him.  I think that she was annoyed, too.

And then I saw him “shush” the second reporter, CNBC’s Kelly Evans, and my eyes narrowed, and I moved from annoyed to downright angry.

My mother was not a woman who would be “shushed” and she didn’t raise my sister and I to be “shushed”. I like to think that I could have kept it polite in that reporter’s circumstances, but I can guarantee that I would have said, “Please don’t “shush” me.”

“Shushing” anyone is rude, and disrespectful, and not what I’d expect from a man who wants to be President. He’s quite rude over the course of this whole interview, in fact, especially towards the end:

He joked about this later to a male reporter who asked about vaccines: “You don’t want to be shushed, do you?”

But I don’t think that Rand Paul would “shush” a man. I think he sees men as colleagues and women as little girls, ultimately to be tolerated, but chastised when they misbehave.

Rand Paul Didn’t “Shush” Megyn Kelly

A bunch of people have called Rand Paul on this behaviour, including Fox’s Megyn Kelly. I have a love-hate relationship with Megyn. Sometimes she’s right on. Sometimes she’s ridiculous. A Jezebel reader caught it nicely, I think, when she said that Megyn Kelly is very good at speaking about issues that affect her – well-off, white, non-disabled (my addition) women. But on these issues she’s quite vocal and can be quite compelling, and her take-down of Rand Paul during an interview with him for how he treated Guthrie and Evans was fairly gutsy – gutsy enough that he didn’t try to speak over her, although you can see he wants to.

She held his feet to the fire, and I think she caught him off-guard. Who’d have guessed that female journalists won’t always defer to you, huh, Rand Paul?

But I was waiting for him to try and talk over her. I was watching him, seething, forgetting all the times that I’ve disagreed with Megyn Kelly, seeing her the way I see my sister, my friends, my colleagues, the women I’ve supported over the years, and thinking:

“Don’t you fucking dare shush her.”

I don’t want Rand Paul in the White House (not just for the reasons I’ve talked about, but this is getting long.) I’ll try not to write too much about Election 2016…but plan on hearing that again.

Comments { 2 }

Stop Copying Plugin made by VLC Media Player