Connect with us

Some Families Are More Equal Than Others

Published

on

Sunday morning, after trying to hail a cab for far too long, I finally got to Grand Central and boarded the Metro North train to Connecticut with my Mother’s Day gift bag in one hand, a Starbucks’ coffee and muffin in the other and my backpack on my shoulder. Shortly after grabbing a seat on the crowded holiday train a family of five (young boy, young girl, mom, dad, and dog) spread out and grabbed various non-adjacent seats near me. I grabbed my weekend New York Times for cover.

Mom and son were right across from me, and her entire conversation with the five-year-old seemed focused on this choice or that choice. “Do you want your book now or candy now?” “Do you want the book about the train or the book about baseball?” An elderly passenger asked the boy how old he was. “Five and three quarters!” “Oh, you’re going to have a birthday soon! Are you going to have a party?” To which mom chimed in, “Well, he and his sister haven’t decided yet if it’s going to be Chuck E. Cheese or pizza.”

Of course the family-of-five got me thinking about how families have changed, so on the way home when I came across the Times piece, “Immigration Status of Army Spouses Often Leads to Snags,” I thought I was ready.

What I wasn’t ready for was the huge hypocrisy I was about to read.

It seems in today’s military, there are a fair number of servicemembers married to immigrants who are in the country, for one reason or another, “illegally.” (While I hate that term, in this context it’s fitting.) The military, it seems, is hard at work, on a case-by-case basis, trying to obtain legal status for some spouses.

Now, let me say this first: I think if someone is prepared to lay down their life to protect mine, they should be paid a lot of money, given free health care and college tuition and a job, for life. And if their spouse needs citizenship papers — or if they do — it should be automatic (unless they’re a convicted felon, perhaps.)

So, hooray for the military, trying to do the right thing. I hope they extend this treatment, given the excessive tours of duty our armed forces are being forced into, for wars we should not be fighting.

But the naked hypocrisy is mind-blowing. The Times explains,

Immigration lawyers and Department of Homeland Security officials say that many thousands of people in the military have spouses or close relatives who are illegal immigrants.

Today the issue is not only personal. “It is an issue of readiness for the American armed forces,” says Representative Zoe Lofgren, the Democrat from California who leads the House subcommittee on immigration. “We have many Americans who are afraid to deploy.”

Lieutenant Tenebro would like to make a career in the military, including new missions to Iraq or Afghanistan, but for now he is not stepping forward for an overseas deployment. “Our situation has kept me at bay because of the constant worry that something might happen to my family while I am away,” he said.

The issue is not only personal, it is an issue of readiness for the American armed forces. And there are far more lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender servicemembers – an estimated 65,000 — who are stepping forward, I might add, and serving in fear, not of their spouses being deported, but of dying and their not-illegal, just not-legally-recognized, spouses not knowing because their mere existence would be grounds for termination.

(There is, of course, also the matter of same-sex couples having one member in the armed forces, and the other an “illegal,” and because they are same-sex, there are few opportunities for them to marry. Even if they do, married same-sex couples are not recognized by the federal government, so their union will not stop a deportation from taking place. More hypocrisy and injustice. And another reason why so many same-sex couples are giving up their citizenship and moving to countries that do recognize their relationships.)

Picture the city cop on a beat whose wife knows every day he goes off to work he may not come home. Think of the daily fear she has of there being a knock on the door, and two officers standing outside. Now imagine what it must be like for a military wife, knowing that the last time she saw her husband, months ago, may have been the last. Then imagine that her “husband” is a woman, and the military won’t even contact her because she isn’t legally allowed to exist.

Imagine your husband or wife being killed for serving your country, and your country not ever even knocking on your door.

Yes, in today’s military, if you are a man married to woman who is “illegal,” the armed forces will work to obtain citizenship for your “illegal” spouse, but if you are a man in a relationship with another man, the military will fire you if they find out.

Imagine the Hell America puts its 65,000 gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender soldiers and their families through every single day.

There’s that lovely MetroNorth family-of-five, swimming in choice after blissful choice. There’s the dutiful, dedicated family serving their country, one spouse legal, one spouse not.

And then there are the 65,000 gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender soldiers serving their country, dutifully, dedicated, and what do they get?

A discharge.

This is just a small part of the tyranny that is “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” We must act, now, to repeal this law that unfairly treats so many thousands of honorable soldiers who are working to protect America.

Yes, in today’s America, some families are more equal than others.


Act now! Visit Veteran’s Lobby Day for more information, and contact your Senator!

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Sundown’: Trump Shows ‘Shocking’ Noticeable Mental Decline Journalist Says

Published

on

Author Jonathan V. Last, editor of the center-right news site The Bulwark, says President Donald Trump is exhibiting what he calls a “shocking” level of “noticeable mental decline,” citing the president’s remarks during his Monday speech to McDonald’s franchise owners and suppliers as his evidence.

Several times he quotes Trump at length, including here:

“But I want to thank, uh, as you know the famous Sundar and Sergey, Sergey Brin. These are two guys that own and run a place called Google. They called me the following day after I did that McDonald’s little um, skit, because it was it wasn’t a commercial. You got it for nothing. It was a skit and they told me that it and I didn’t know them. I just I said, ‘Who are they?’ They own Google. I said, ‘That’s pretty good. That’s not bad.'”

Trump appeared to be referring to his McDonald’s drive-through event last year, which was a photo-op, not a skit or a commercial. It was deemed “condescending” by an MS NOW opinion writer and “blue-collar drag” by “Late Show” host Stephen Colbert.

READ MORE: ‘Stunning Moment’: Trump Defends MBS While Ignoring CIA’s Khashoggi Murder Assessment

“And uh that it received more hits than anything else in the history of Google and that records, it still stands,” Trump said.

Last asks, did the Google CEO and co-founder actually call Trump that day last year?

“Did they tell him that in just twenty-four hours he’d gotten more ‘hits’ than anything else in the history of Google? More than COVID? More than January 6th? More than Taylor Swift? What is a ‘hit’ on Google,” Last asked.

Last quoted Trump again:

“I’ll bet they use real sugar in your Coca-Cola. You know, they didn’t in the United States. I said to the head of Coca-Cola, you got to go to sugar. They do in other countries. And you know what? They went to sugar. Isn’t that nice? I said, ‘You got to go to sugar.’ Just like I said, why is the Gulf of Mexico called the Gulf of Mexico? I said, ‘We’re changing the name.’ And now it’s the Gulf of America. Has nothing to do with McDonald’s, but maybe it does because it’s very nice cycle.”

READ MORE: Trump Blasted After Drawing Line in the Sand in High-Stakes Health Care Clash

Last noted that Coca-Cola “has not reverted to sugar in the flagship product it sells in the United States.”

And he called Trump’s remarks “nonsense.”

He continued into Trump’s comments about the time he served a few customers at a McDonald’s drive-thru, in what was a staged event.

Last quoted Trump telling the McDonald’s event attendees:

“I’ve been on that line many times. Actually, that line was incredible in the commercial. Right. It wasn’t a commercial. It was about, but, they have the line. The people had no idea. So I made the French fries. The guy was really good. He had a great wrist. He was, nyee, ‘Sir,’ he was going like, ‘Sir.'”

“Yeah. It was not that easy but I got it sort of finally. Not the greatest but I pouring it in asking him all sorts of stupid questions but it was very interesting. Amazing, a little thing is not, it’s a little complex, right?”

By the end, Last declared Trump has “a playlist of grievances and stories in his head,” and “what seems to be happening here is that Trump can’t tell his stories apart. He starts talking about flow restrictions on faucets, which brings him to water. But the word ‘water’ triggers another of his obsessions—water supply issues and deliveries to farms in the American West.”

“And,” Last concluded, Trump’s “brain now mushes these two stories together into a single, unintelligible blob.”

The title of Last’s piece is “Sundown.”

READ MORE: GOP Fractures Reveal Fierce Internal Fight Over Post-Trump Identity

 

Image via Reuters 

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Stunning Moment’: Trump Defends MBS While Ignoring CIA’s Khashoggi Murder Assessment

Published

on

Despite his own CIA’s investigation that found that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman approved the operation that resulted in the brutal murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, President Donald Trump defended MBS and sharply criticized a reporter asking the crown prince about the killing.

“He’s done a phenomenal job,” President Trump told ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Mary Bruce when she asked about the murder.

“You’re mentioning somebody that was extremely controversial,” Trump said of Khashoggi, whose gruesome 2018 killing was investigated by the CIA in a report declassified in February 2021, just after President Joe Biden took office.

READ MORE: Trump Blasted After Drawing Line in the Sand in High-Stakes Health Care Clash

“A lot of people didn’t like that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you like him or didn’t like him,” Trump said.

“Things happen, but he knew nothing about it,” the president insisted, defending the crown prince who is the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia, as The Washington Post reported.

“And we can leave it at that. You don’t have to embarrass our guest by asking a question like that.”

CNN White House reporter Alayna Treene described Trump as “furious,” and stated that he “tried to shut down questions” from Bruce “about US intelligence (the CIA assessment was done during Trump’s first term) having concluded that MBS likely ordered the brutal murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.”

CNN Chief White House Correspondent Kaitlan Collins called it “a stunning moment in the Oval Office,” and also noted that “the CIA — under Trump, in his first term — found that the crown prince ordered it.”

The declassified CIA report stated, “We assess that Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman approved an operation in Istanbul, Turkey to capture or kill Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi.”

READ MORE: GOP Fractures Reveal Fierce Internal Fight Over Post-Trump Identity

“We base this assessment on the Crown Prince’s control of decisionmaking in the Kingdom, the direct involvement of a key adviser and members of Muhammad bin Salman’s protective detail in the operation, and the Crown Prince’s support for using violent measures to silence dissidents abroad, including Khashoggi,” the report continued.

“Since 2017, the Crown Prince has had absolute control of the Kingdom’s security and intelligence organizations, making it highly unlikely that Saudi officials would have carried out an operation of this nature without the Crown Prince’s authorization.”

In 2018, The Washington Post reported, “The CIA has concluded that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered the assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul last month, contradicting the Saudi government’s claims that he was not involved in the killing, according to people familiar with the matter.”

READ MORE: ‘Fight Back!’: Trump Demands GOP Keep the House ‘at All Costs’

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

Trump Blasted After Drawing Line in the Sand in High-Stakes Health Care Clash

Published

on

Scuttling bipartisan efforts to extend the Affordable Care Act subsidies that are set to expire at the end of the year, President Donald Trump on Tuesday declared he will not support any legislation to do so. The withdrawal of the Obamacare subsidies has sent next year’s premiums soaring for millions of Americans, and millions are expected to lose coverage due to the high cost.

In an all-caps post on his Truth Social website, the president announced that the only health care he would support “is sending the money directly back to the people, with nothing going to the big, fat, rich insurance companies.”

“The people will be allowed to negotiate and buy their own, much better, insurance. Power to the people!” he added.

Insurance companies are not known for negotiating premiums, and individual policies historically are far more expensive than group policies, such as those obtained through an employer or via the Obamacare exchanges.

READ MORE: GOP Fractures Reveal Fierce Internal Fight Over Post-Trump Identity

Noting that “senators are preparing to tee up a vote on the issue,” Bloomberg News reported that Trump’s message is now “complicating his party’s efforts to address health care costs.”

During the federal government  shutdown, Democrats highlighted the issue of skyrocketing premiums and negotiated a deal with Senate Republican Majority Leader John Thune for a vote to extend the subsidies.

“With millions of Americans facing a potential hike in their premiums and with concerns about affordability front and center among the electorate, Democrats are seizing on the issue,” Bloomberg noted. “Republicans now face the challenging prospect of either bucking the president and extending subsidies or finding another solution to the issue of health-care costs, an issue that has long vexed lawmakers.”

House Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries responded, saying: “Republicans created this healthcare crisis, and they continue to try to rip affordable healthcare away from the American people,” according to Bloomberg News’ Erik Wasson. “They are who they are, and the American people know it, and they’re gonna pay the price.”

Politico reported on Tuesday that a “senior White House official said the Trump administration intends to put forward a health bill and left open the possibility of using the fast-track legislative process of reconciliation for passage of health or tariff legislation.”

READ MORE: ‘Fight Back!’: Trump Demands GOP Keep the House ‘at All Costs’

Critics blasted the president’s refusal to support extending subsidies.

“He’s for them, Not for you,” declared U.S. Senator Ruben Gallego (D-AZ).

“Trump’s priority isn’t your health or your costs, it’s his ego,” commented House Ways and Means Committee Democrats. “He’ll watch your health care costs triple just to erase the name Obamacare.”

“Between their trillion dollar cut to Medicaid and their elimination of boosted ACA tax credits, Donald Trump and the GOP will be responsible for millions of Americans losing health coverage and tens of millions more paying much higher costs,” wrote economic policy expert Michael Linden. “Crazy, totally crazy.”

“Senate Democrats who voted to end the shutdown got played. Shocking,” remarked political strategist Andrew Laureti.

“Trump’s made some curious decisions in the past few weeks, but nothing more consequential than deciding that instead of finding some middle ground on Ocare subsidies they’re gonna go in the entire opposite direction and try to jam through their own health care bill,” The Bulwark’s Sam Stein noted, responding to the Politico report. “Wild stuff.”

READ MORE: Democrat Warns How Trump Could Engineer a Path to Stay in Power After 2028

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.