The God-King and his white supremacist base really hate the Statue of Liberty…. (More)

“That was added later and is not part of the original Statue of Liberty”

Avowed racist and Outhouse senior policy advisor Stephen Miller doesn’t think Emma Lazarus’ famous poem belongs on the Statue of Liberty:

Secondly, I don’t want to get off into a whole thing about history here, but the Statue of Liberty is a symbol of American liberty lighting the world. The poem that you’re referring to was added later (and) is not actually part of the original Statue of Liberty.

Like so many things that spew out of the God-King’s administration, Miller’s claim is trivially true and fundamentally false. It’s trivially true that “The New Colossus” plaque was added to the statue in 1903, 17 years after the statue was unveiled. But the idea that Lazarus and her poem had nothing to do with the original statue is a lie, as the National Park Service website attests:

In 1883, William Maxwell Evarts and author Constance Cary Harrison asked Lazarus to compose a sonnet for the “Art Loan Fund Exhibition in Aid of the Bartholdi Pedestal Fund for the Statue of Liberty” – an art and literary auction to raise funds for the Statue’s pedestal run by the American Committee for the Statue of Liberty. In turn, Lazarus, inspired by her own Sephardic Jewish heritage, her experiences working with refugees on Ward’s Island, and the plight of the immigrant, wrote “The New Colossus” on November 2, 1883. After the auction, the sonnet appeared in Joseph Pulitzer’s New York World as well as the New York Times. She died in New York City on November 19, 1887, most likely from Hodgkin’s lymphoma and was buried in Brooklyn.

In other words, the proceeds from auctioning “The New Colossus” helped build the statue. And while it’s true that her poem is not law, 62% of Americans think it should guide our immigration policy.

“Things Trump thinks he is but really isn’t”

Miller’s appearance was part of the rollout of the God-King’s new bill to cut legal immigration in half:

Trump appeared with Republican Sens. Tom Cotton (AR) and David Perdue (GA) at the White House to unveil a modified version of a bill the senators first introduced in February to create a “merit-based” immigration system that would put a greater emphasis on the job skills of foreigners over their ties to family in the United States.

The legislation seeks to reduce the annual distribution of green cards awarding permanent legal residence to just over 500,000 from more than 1 million. Trump promised on the campaign trail to take a harder line on immigration, arguing that the growth in new arrivals had harmed job opportunities for American workers.

Above the Law’s Elie Mystal offered a cutting critique of the particulars:

Trump wants to limit immigration to skilled workers, and has devised as “skill point system” to determine who can get into the country on this round of American Survivor:

— Education
— English speaking ability
— High-paying job offers
— Age
— Record of achievement
— Entrepreneurial initiative

You’ll notice that the list doubles as a list of “things Trump thinks he is but really isn’t.”

It’s also a list of things that a person from Western Europe or Canada is going to be most likely to show, but things that a person from the developing world is going to have a hard time illustrating to Trump’s satisfaction. But, you know, that’s the point, isn’t it.

The New York Times’ Lynn Vavreck puts that last paragraph in context:

Are you an American?

Chances are your answer to this question depends on whether you have (or could get) a U.S. passport. That is one way many people think about what it means to be American. Another way is to think less literally and more culturally. Being an American, in this sense, can conjure up images of apple pie, baseball and summer picnics. It may evoke ideas about working hard and being rewarded, or treating people equally and extending everyone opportunities. We teach these notions to schoolchildren and hold them up as essentially American.

But the 2016 election made clear that there’s not universal agreement on what it means to be an American, with restrictive views centered on ethnicity and religion playing a major role in the Trump campaign. And yet trends in public opinion suggest that the nation as a whole is moving away from an exclusionary notion of American identity.
[…]
Most Americans agree on certain things that are objectively important to calling yourself an American. Across party lines, there was strong support for the importance of respecting American political institutions and laws, having citizenship, and accepting people of diverse backgrounds. Well over half the people in both major political parties agree that these things are fundamental to being American. More than 90 percent of self-described Democrats think openness to diversity is important to American identity, and 80 percent of Republicans agree.

And then there are the issues that the God-King and his minions hammer away at – whiteness, native birth, and Christianity:

Within the Republican Party, however, differences emerged with respect to the importance of European ancestry. Only 9 percent of G.O.P. primary voters who reported supporting John Kasich (when asked in a July 2016 wave of the survey) thought European background was important to being an American, while 16 percent of Ted Cruz’s supporters, 22 percent of Marco Rubio’s supporters and 30 percent of Mr. Trump’s supporters thought so.
[…]
Between the parties, the most significant disagreements about American identity centered on the importance of living in America for most of one’s life, being born in America, and being a Christian. Forty-nine percent of Democrats thought it was important for people who want to call themselves American to have lived here most of their lives, and 47 percent believed being born here was important. In contrast, 63 percent of Republicans weighed spending one’s life here or being born here heavily. Among those who supported Mr. Trump in primary votes, those numbers rose to 69 and 72 percent.

The role of religion in American identity revealed another divide. A third of Democrats and just more than half (56 percent) of Republicans thought being a Christian was important to being an American. Within G.O.P. primary voters, Mr. Trump’s voters once again stood out. Nearly two-thirds (63 percent) of his primary supporters thought being a Christian was important to being an American.

But hey, don’t take the ‘liberal’ Times’ word for it. Here’s the same message, straight from the horse’s ass:

Study the face of sniveling CNN reporter Jim Acosta (it’s only too bad his ancestors weren’t turned away at the United States border), and observe just exactly what getting utterly REKT is supposed to look like on the personal level.

In just a few minutes, the entire worldview of those seeking the destruction of the West was shattered beyond repair, and that includes the words inscribed on the Statue of Liberty by Jewess Emma Lazarus – essentially an invite to the foreign hordes that was not added until nearly a generation after the Statue’s installation.

The horse’s ass also explains what Miller meant by “cosmopolitan bias”:

While not a Jew himself, Acosta is the end result of the education and programming pushed by the Rootless Cosmopolitans wherever they dwell – even Stalin grew wise to them near the end of his life.

Think Progress’s Rebekah Entralgo offers a roundup of other white supremacists who praised Miller yesterday.

“The victims are ignored”

The God-King’s plan came out just as the Washington Post reported that budding soccer phenom Lizandro Claros Saravia was held for deportation when he informed immigration authorities that he would be attending college on a soccer scholarship:

Foster McCune will play Division I soccer at Georgetown University this fall. Matt and Ben Di Rosa, twins from the District’s Chevy Chase neighborhood, will play for the University of Maryland.

On Monday night, they stood with other members of their elite Bethesda Soccer Club outside Department of Homeland Security headquarters in Northwest Washington, protesting the arrest and pending deportation of a beloved teammate: Lizandro Claros Saravia.

Claros Saravia, 19, who had a scholarship to play college soccer in North Carolina, was detained along with his older brother, Diego, in Baltimore on Friday following one of their regular check-ins with immigration officials.

Claros Saravia and his brother arrived in the U.S. when they were 8. Their family fled the violence in their homeland of El Salvador and no one in the family has a criminal record. They would not have been prioritized for deportation under Obama-era rules, but the God-King is throwing them all out because … well … a Washington Post reader explains:

It’s easy to win the hearts of people when the view of the victims are ignored. On the surface this story is heartbreaking but consider what the journalist chose to ignore.  

What about the child in El Salvador?  

When these brothers entered the US illegally in 2009 $4 million people were on the wait list to enter legally including 70,000 from the same country these brothers fled. What about the child in line who is still in El Salvador waiting their turn? 

What about the child in Toledo? 

These brothers lived in one of the most affluent areas of the world and the schools and soccer camps that attended are considered some of the best in the nation. As a result, one of them was awarded a scholarship to play soccer and further his education. What about the citizen in Toledo that may not be as good at soccer but was denied a scholarship to attend college because it was given to an illegal immigrant?

First, not a single child is stuck in El Salvador, waiting for legal admission until all of the undocumented immigrants from El Salvador are sent back. Indeed as the God-King’s new bill makes clear, he doesn’t want any El Salvadorans to immigrate to the U.S. unless they meet his “merit” qualifications.

The commenter’s real gripe is about the hypothetical “citizen in Toledo that may not be as good at soccer but was denied a scholarship to attend college because it was given to an illegal immigrant.” That is, some mediocre white kid who can’t get into college because a brown-skinned kid took “his” scholarship away.

But that mediocre white kid won’t get that scholarship regardless, because Claros Saravia would have attended North Carolina’s Louisburg College on an athletic scholarship. Louisburg is a two-year school with a NJCAA Division I soccer program, meaning they can offer full scholarships to athletes they recruit to play soccer. Mediocre athletes from Toledo, Tulsa, or Tempe won’t get those scholarships … not even if every undocumented immigrant is thrown away.

“Empathy for one party is always prejudice against another”

But a whole lot of Trump voters are certain that brown-skinned people are stealing “their” opportunities:

The Justice Department’s plan to investigate and sue universities over affirmative action admissions policies they determine discriminate against white students represents a shift in the department’s civil rights division. But the move also addresses a central concern for voters who fueled President Trump’s victory last year: that whites are losing out in today’s society.

In the midst of Republicans’ primary contest last year, a Washington Post-ABC News poll asked Americans which is the “bigger problem in this country – blacks and Hispanics losing out because of preferences for whites, or whites losing out because of preferences for blacks and Hispanics?”

Among the public overall, more people said blacks and Hispanics losing out was a bigger problem than whites by 40 percent to 28 percent. But attitudes were reversed among registered voters who supported Trump against Clinton, with 44 percent saying whites losing out because of preferences for blacks and Hispanics was the bigger problem, more than twice as said the opposite (16 percent). The margin was even wider among Republican-leaning voters who supported Trump for the party’s nomination – 54 to 12 percent.

No college or university has an admissions “quota” – the U.S. Supreme Court struck down those 40 years ago – but just two years ago the Court held that colleges and universities can include race in a “holistic” admissions assessment. In that case, a mediocre white woman – she didn’t qualify for Texas’ automatic admissions for high school graduates in the top 10% of their classes – had to (gasp!) attend another university because the University of Texas at Austin didn’t accept her. She was sure some black or Hispanic student got “her” spot and she took her case all the way to the Supreme Court. And lost.

But now the Klanmaster General is setting up a special political office to address “investigations and possible litigation related to intentional race-based discrimination in college and university admissions.” That is, sue colleges and universities for applying affirmative action policies. Because if admissions committees weigh the exceptional challenges that many black and Hispanic applicants must overcome to reach the point of applying for college

… well, that’s discrimination against white people. Don’t believe me? Just ask the Klanmaster General himself:

A 2011 study found that white people believe anti-white bias has worsened over the decades, to the point that they think it’s now a more serious problem than bias against blacks. That study opened with a prescient 2009 quote from then-Sen. Jeff Sessions, who will oversee the DOJ’s bias investigation as attorney general: “Empathy for one party is always prejudice against another.”

So yeah, the God-King and his minions want to decapitate the Statue of Liberty. Or better yet, rewrite the opening words of the U.S. Constitution:

We the White Christians, in order to form a more perfect Union….

+++++

Image Credit: Edel Rodriguez (Der Spiegel)

+++++

Good day and good nuts