Political Roundtable Part XII

[closg00]

Watch on YouTube

Since they have their man Bannon running the White House, is this the face of the modern conservative movement *green font*


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[montestewart]

Remember when liberals were pro free speech?

http://www.breitbart.com/milo/2017/02/01/protesters-gather-uc-berkeley-milo-show-police-helicopters-appear/

Nothing says you're an inclusive, tolerant leftist more than assaulting anyone, including females, wearing a MAGA hat, smashing ATMs, and setting your school on fire, because you don't agree with a speaker's political views.

I hope Trump builds that wall and brings it up to California.

Edit-I know most leftists don't support violence like this. I wonder if these idiots know how bad they are making themselves look? Doesn't UC Berkeley give out homework? I thought it was a good school.

I noticed at the womens' march these guys around the fringes, all looked young (17-25) and dressed like ninjas, no exaggeration, they were dressed in black, with black hoods and face masks. I could see people keeping an eye on them, as if most people there regarded them as juvenile trouble makers that had to be monitored so the couldn't start incidents. Intolerance and destruction of property, sure but the most disturbing thing about them: they acted like they thought they were cool! Like it was some badass role playing game!

Just about every descent-into-dystopia sci-fi movie has a scene where violent riots are shown on the state-run news to justify a crackdown on the last shreds of civil liberties. Haven't people figured out the optics of such incidents, especially in the readily recorded and disseminated information age? There is a history, going back to the 60s (probably further), of non-Democrat voting anarchists, communists, etc. being lumped in with Democrats, and often starting trouble. It's not always liberals/Democrats starting the trouble, sometimes it's groups with a different political agenda, or really immature kids dressed as ninjas.

Where are these guys coming from and who is funding them? (Answer: Soros.) The media tried their hardest to associate violence with Trump supporters throughout the campaign, but nobody is buying it. 99% of the violence is from the left and everyone knows it.

Democrats need to ask themselves if this is the type of image they want to associate with. If not, they better put a stop to it. Otherwise, it'll be Trumpslide 2020. The riots in the late 60's didn't lead to McGovern. It led to a Nixon landslide.

History repeating itself? Trump kind of reminds me of Nixon.

[DCZards]

Remember when liberals were pro free speech?

http://www.breitbart.com/milo/2017/02/01/protesters-gather-uc-berkeley-milo-show-police-helicopters-appear/

Nothing says you're an inclusive, tolerant leftist more than assaulting anyone, including females, wearing a MAGA hat, smashing ATMs, and setting your school on fire, because you don't agree with a speaker's political views.

I hope Trump builds that wall and brings it up to California.

Edit-I know most leftists don't support violence like this. I wonder if these idiots know how bad they are making themselves look? Doesn't UC Berkeley give out homework? I thought it was a good school.

I noticed at the womens' march these guys around the fringes, all looked young (17-25) and dressed like ninjas, no exaggeration, they were dressed in black, with black hoods and face masks. I could see people keeping an eye on them, as if most people there regarded them as juvenile trouble makers that had to be monitored so the couldn't start incidents. Intolerance and destruction of property, sure but the most disturbing thing about them: they acted like they thought they were cool! Like it was some badass role playing game!

Just about every descent-into-dystopia sci-fi movie has a scene where violent riots are shown on the state-run news to justify a crackdown on the last shreds of civil liberties. Haven't people figured out the optics of such incidents, especially in the readily recorded and disseminated information age? There is a history, going back to the 60s (probably further), of non-Democrat voting anarchists, communists, etc. being lumped in with Democrats, and often starting trouble. It's not always liberals/Democrats starting the trouble, sometimes it's groups with a different political agenda, or really immature kids dressed as ninjas.

Where are these guys coming from and who is funding them? (Answer: Soros.) The media tried their hardest to associate violence with Trump supporters throughout the campaign, but nobody is buying it. 99% of the violence is from the left and everyone knows it.

Democrats need to ask themselves if this is the type of image they want to associate with. If not, they better put a stop to it. Otherwise, it'll be Trumpslide 2020. The riots in the late 60's didn't lead to McGovern. It led to a Nixon landslide.

You don't have one shred of evidence that the ninja-looking types at the Women's March in DC were funded by Soros. Not one. There were close to 1 million people in DC for that March and there was not a single arrest or act of violence. Not one. Nationwide there were more than 3 mil people protesting that day and I believe I heard there were 3-4 arrests nationwide.

So your ongoing narrative that these protests by people whose politics you disagree with devolve into violence is wrong...again.

Meanwhile, there are almost daily reports of individual Muslims and Hispanics (often children) being taunted, verbally abused and threatened by those who have embraced Trump's anti-Islam, anti-immigrant rhetoric. Yet you choose to either ignore that or believe it isn't happening.

As your hero Trump would say: Sad.

[dckingsfan]

History repeating itself? Trump kind of reminds me of Nixon.

You didn't strike me as that old!!! Welcome to the club wrinkly guy

[payitforward]

IQ is between 50-80% hereditary. Furthermore, that other 30-50% isn't even "environment". Two adoptive siblings raised in the same family and going to the same schools are no more alike in IQ than two total strangers. I know it's comforting to believe that we can control these things and make everyone much smarter if we just try harder, but it's simply not the case.

But that still misses the point. Manufacturing jobs are trending toward needing "smarter" individuals and the other industries are going the other way.

Manufacturing jobs are decreasing.

Individuals with lower intelligence can be pigeon holed into the new economy more easily. For example some that test high with Q-factor emotional intelligence might test low with IQ testing. Perfect sales people.

So, even if we accept the premise, it doesn't matter.

Yup, all this is entirely beside the point. The issue isn't what kind of people are available, it's what kinds of jobs. A useful 4 part matrix divides jobs into manual vs. cognitive & routine vs. non-routine.

That's 4 kinds of jobs:

1. routine/manual -- e.g. assembly line manufacturing jobs
2. nonroutine/manual -- e.g. low level healthcare, personal service, cleaning, etc.
3. routine/cognitive -- a huge swath of jobs fit here; keeping all the products in a warehouse organized & easily available would be one example.
4. nonroutine/cognitive -- planning an advertising campaign; building a successful NBA team, writing novels, doing science, much of teaching, etc.

When we talk about "automation" in e.g. manufacturing, mostly we are talking about robots & robotic systems. Basically, all category 1 (routine/manual) jobs are capable of being done robotically -- of being automated. As soon as it's cheaper to do them that way, they'll be automated. The pace of that accelerates all the time & will continue to accelerate for as long as Moore's Law holds -- & it shows no sign of going away. This is as certain as the events of the Industrial Revolution: the moment it was cheaper to do just about anything with a machine rather than by hand (weaving, knitting, setting type for a book), that's what happened.

Category 3 jobs (routine/cognitive) can and will be automated; some already are (think about robotic warehouses). Most routine business process jobs are now automated (payroll department, accounting, etc.).

Category 2 jobs (nonroutine/manual) are the lowest-paid jobs in existence: emptying bed-pans....

Category 4 jobs (nonroutine/cognitive) OTOH are the highest paying jobs. But comparatively they are very few in number.* They can't be automated. We could replace Ernie with a better GM, but it couldn't be a robot! Note that "cognitive" does not imply a reduced or constricted idea of what cognitive skills are. Companies won't be replacing their sales forces with robots any time soon!

(* Curiously to some perhaps, I think being an NBA player fits into the nonroutine/cognitive category. Waaay more guys have the required athleticism than have the cognitive skills (imagination, creativity, ability to work cooperatively, etc.) required for success in the game. Nor will we be watching robots hit 3-pointers any time soon!)

Just as the Machine Age, or Industrial Revolution, completely changed human work, we're seeing a 2d version of that now, & it's moving very fast -- esp. in those routine/manual contexts that make up manufacturing. For that reason, even if protectionist policies force manufacturing to return here, that's not going to help the disaffected "white working class" part of Trump's core.

In fact, given the US is the largest market for manufactured goods, automated manufacturing is the most powerful motivation for returning manufacturing to this country. If a robot is making something you're going to sell here, why have the robotic work done in China? All that does is add cost to transport, complicate supply chain management, etc.

China got all that manufacturing work because labor was cheap there. Right now, however, they are concentrating on automating their factories. Reducing the labor component. I assume anyone reading this understands that for the US economy to prosper, we have to be the leaders in that automation.

edit: i.e. no we won't be creating lots of new manufacturing jobs.

[TGW]

Looks like the FBI is investigating the infiltration of white supremacist groups in law enforcement:

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/02/01/fbi-investigated-white-supremacist-infiltration-of-law-enforceme/21705014/

I found this to be a good point...from a former Seattle chief-of-police:

"This is a fundamental problem in this country: We simply do not take this flexible, and forgiving, and exceptionally understanding approach for combating any other form of terrorism," said Samuel Jones, a professor of law at the John Marshall Law School in Chicago . "Anybody who's on social media advocating support for ISIS can be criminally charged with very little effort."

"For some reason, we have stepped away from the threat of domestic terrorism and right-wing extremism," Jones continued. "The only way we can reconcile this kind of behavior is if we accept the possibility that the ideology that permeates white nationalists and white supremacists is something that many in our federal and law enforcement communities understand and may be in sympathy with."

Of course President Biff wants to change the focus of the investigations completely to Muslim extremism.

[TGW]

Watch on YouTube

Since they have their man Bannon running the White House, is this the face of the modern conservative movement *green font*


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I think all neo-nazis should be punched in the face. It would be signed into law if I was president.

[dckingsfan]

edit: i.e. no we won't be creating lots of new manufacturing jobs.

nice post - and just adding to this - the jobs that are created will be high-tech. No reason not to go after them, it just isn't the panacea that some would think.

And those jobs require education - Germany has been at the forefront of that training - it wouldn't be difficult to copy - except we don't have teachers for the material.

[payitforward]

Looks like the FBI is investigating the infiltration of white supremacist groups in law enforcement:

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/02/01/fbi-investigated-white-supremacist-infiltration-of-law-enforceme/21705014/

I found this to be a good point...from a former Seattle chief-of-police:

"This is a fundamental problem in this country: We simply do not take this flexible, and forgiving, and exceptionally understanding approach for combating any other form of terrorism," said Samuel Jones, a professor of law at the John Marshall Law School in Chicago . "Anybody who's on social media advocating support for ISIS can be criminally charged with very little effort."

"For some reason, we have stepped away from the threat of domestic terrorism and right-wing extremism," Jones continued. "The only way we can reconcile this kind of behavior is if we accept the possibility that the ideology that permeates white nationalists and white supremacists is something that many in our federal and law enforcement communities understand and may be in sympathy with."

Of course President Biff wants to change the focus of the investigations completely to Muslim extremism.

Have you noticed that the name Timothy McVeigh is never mentioned?

[payitforward]

edit: i.e. no we won't be creating lots of new manufacturing jobs.

nice post - and just adding to this - the jobs that are created will be high-tech. No reason not to go after them, it just isn't the panacea that some would think.

And those jobs require education - Germany has been at the forefront of that training - it wouldn't be difficult to copy - except we don't have teachers for the material.

Whatever else is true, we will be losing manufacturing jobs over the next decade, not gaining them.

10 years ago, GM employed some large multiple of the 114,000 people it employs in the US today. Google had just been founded back then. Google has a market cap of $555+b -- @ 4 times that of GM -- & employs 60,000 people. Economic growth does not mean growth in jobs any more. At the time SnapChat was bought by FB, it was worth $22b & employed 55 people.

Of course, if we get rid of all those nasty job-taking immigrants we won't have to worry about so many new companies being founded, will we? & lets get rid of those visas for gifted Indian techies. That's another thing distorting our economy. Then put up some tariff walls, and believe me, it'll be beautiful, a beautiful thing.

[nate33]

You don't have one shred of evidence that the ninja-looking types at the Women's March in DC were funded by Soros. Not one. There were close to 1 million people in DC for that March and there was not a single arrest or act of violence. Not one. Nationwide there were more than 3 mil people protesting that day and I believe I heard there were 3-4 arrests nationwide.

So your ongoing narrative that these protests by people whose politics you disagree with devolve into violence is wrong...again.

I wasn't talking about the women's march. That was an example of protesting done right. If that's all we see, it'll work out great for the Democrats. I'm talking about the Milo protest, the Inauguration protest, the JFK airport protest and the dozens of Trump campaign speech protests that resulted in riots, looting, tear gas, car fires and assaults on Trump supporters.

Meanwhile, there are almost daily reports of individual Muslims and Hispanics (often children) being taunted, verbally abused and threatened by those who have embraced Trump's anti-Islam, anti-immigrant rhetoric. Yet you choose to either ignore that or believe it isn't happening.

As your hero Trump would say: Sad.

Because most of those are hoaxes. And the ones that aren't are mere taunting by individuals, which is nothing compared to the actual, literal assaults and property damage being perpetuated by organized groups of Democrat supporters. Indeed there is video proving that some of these organized violent protests are being directed by DNC operatives.

[dckingsfan]

edit: i.e. no we won't be creating lots of new manufacturing jobs.

nice post - and just adding to this - the jobs that are created will be high-tech. No reason not to go after them, it just isn't the panacea that some would think.

And those jobs require education - Germany has been at the forefront of that training - it wouldn't be difficult to copy - except we don't have teachers for the material.

Whatever else is true, we will be losing manufacturing jobs over the next decade, not gaining them.

10 years ago, GM employed some large multiple of the 114,000 people it employs in the US today. Google had just been founded back then. Google has a market cap of $555+b -- @ 4 times that of GM -- & employs 60,000 people. Economic growth does not mean growth in jobs any more. At the time SnapChat was bought by FB, it was worth $22b & employed 55 people.

Of course, if we get rid of all those nasty job-taking immigrants we won't have to worry about so many new companies being founded, will we? & lets get rid of those visas for gifted Indian techies. That's another thing distorting our economy. Then put up some tariff walls, and believe me, it'll be beautiful, a beautiful thing.

Well, that's it isn't it. On the one hand we have a group that doesn't want immigrants (skilled or otherwise) and on the other hand we have a group that isn't willing to break the log-jam on our failing educational system.

Watch on YouTube

[nate33]

IQ is between 50-80% hereditary. Furthermore, that other 30-50% isn't even "environment". Two adoptive siblings raised in the same family and going to the same schools are no more alike in IQ than two total strangers. I know it's comforting to believe that we can control these things and make everyone much smarter if we just try harder, but it's simply not the case.

But that still misses the point. Manufacturing jobs are trending toward needing "smarter" individuals and the other industries are going the other way.

Manufacturing jobs are decreasing.

Individuals with lower intelligence can be pigeon holed into the new economy more easily. For example some that test high with Q-factor emotional intelligence might test low with IQ testing. Perfect sales people.

So, even if we accept the premise, it doesn't matter.

Yup, all this is entirely beside the point. The issue isn't what kind of people are available, it's what kinds of jobs. A useful 4 part matrix divides jobs into manual vs. cognitive & routine vs. non-routine.

That's 4 kinds of jobs:

1. routine/manual -- e.g. assembly line manufacturing jobs
2. nonroutine/manual -- e.g. low level healthcare, personal service, cleaning, etc.
3. routine/cognitive -- a huge swath of jobs fit here; keeping all the products in a warehouse organized & easily available would be one example.
4. nonroutine/cognitive -- planning an advertising campaign; building a successful NBA team, writing novels, doing science, much of teaching, etc.

When we talk about "automation" in e.g. manufacturing, mostly we are talking about robots & robotic systems. Basically, all category 1 (routine/manual) jobs are capable of being done robotically -- of being automated. As soon as it's cheaper to do them that way, they'll be automated. The pace of that accelerates all the time & will continue to accelerate for as long as Moore's Law holds -- & it shows no sign of going away. This is as certain as the events of the Industrial Revolution: the moment it was cheaper to do just about anything with a machine rather than by hand (weaving, knitting, setting type for a book), that's what happened.

Category 3 jobs (routine/cognitive) can and will be automated; some already are (think about robotic warehouses). Most routine business process jobs are now automated (payroll department, accounting, etc.).

Category 2 jobs (nonroutine/manual) are the lowest-paid jobs in existence: emptying bed-pans....

Category 4 jobs (nonroutine/cognitive) OTOH are the highest paying jobs. But comparatively they are very few in number.* They can't be automated. We could replace Ernie with a better GM, but it couldn't be a robot! Note that "cognitive" does not imply a reduced or constricted idea of what cognitive skills are. Companies won't be replacing their sales forces with robots any time soon!

(* Curiously to some perhaps, I think being an NBA player fits into the nonroutine/cognitive category. Waaay more guys have the required athleticism than have the cognitive skills (imagination, creativity, ability to work cooperatively, etc.) required for success in the game. Nor will we be watching robots hit 3-pointers any time soon!)

Just as the Machine Age, or Industrial Revolution, completely changed human work, we're seeing a 2d version of that now, & it's moving very fast -- esp. in those routine/manual contexts that make up manufacturing. For that reason, even if protectionist policies force manufacturing to return here, that's not going to help the disaffected "white working class" part of Trump's core.

In fact, given the US is the largest market for manufactured goods, automated manufacturing is the most powerful motivation for returning manufacturing to this country. If a robot is making something you're going to sell here, why have the robotic work done in China? All that does is add cost to transport, complicate supply chain management, etc.

China got all that manufacturing work because labor was cheap there. Right now, however, they are concentrating on automating their factories. Reducing the labor component. I assume anyone reading this understands that for the US economy to prosper, we have to be the leaders in that automation.

edit: i.e. no we won't be creating lots of new manufacturing jobs.

Good post, PIF. Well articulated.

I don't disagree with much, except I think there is progress to be made on the margins. Manufacturing jobs in the aggregate are in decline, but appropriate protectionism policies can increase our share of total manufacturing jobs more than what would otherwise be the case if protectionism policies were not in place.

[AFM]

I think Trump should force all manufacturing companies to make everything by hand. Bring back those jobs, that the robot overlords stole from us.

[AFM]

PIF, you are forgetting that Chinese robots are powered by Chinese electricity...cheap Chinese electricity, powered by Chinese child laborers sprinting on a giant hamster wheel hooked up to an alternator. Our robots can't compete!!

[sfam]

Ever since the first two days of his Presidency, Trump has had non-stop success.

Nonstop success is of course measured by whether Trump is the center of conversation. He wasn't during his inauguration as the talk was on crowd size. Nor was he the next day, as the protests dominated. Since then however, Trump is dominating international conversation, and probably will for the foreseeable future.

As an aside, having worked on countering violent extremism for the past few years, if you had a group of data scientists with as much data as they could consume, they would be hard pressed to come up with a strategy the resulted in worse geopolitical consequences and global instability than this one.

In the last 24 hours or so, more and more counter terrorism experts have come forward to question the wisdom of the ban because of the concern that you raise. Here's what a couple of Republicans have said related to that:

"We fear this executive order will become a self-inflicted wound in the fight against terrorism," Sen. John McCain and Sen. LIndsay Graham said in a joint statement, adding that Trump's executive order "may do more to help terrorist recruitment than improve our security."

This is and has been pretty much a shared perspective across both parties in the national security establishment. We are in effect lighting a fire cracker and tossing it in a public space where lots of people have guns. The chances of blow back, perhaps deadly, is near certain.

[sfam]

Trump should condemn them. He probably will today. It's worth noting that the circumstances of the attack and the identity of the attacker weren't really figured out until late in the evening last night.

Ah, yes, it totally matters whether or not he jumped to conclusions that validated his pre-existing beliefs without worrying about the facts would or wouldn't say as opposed to just making up the facts entirely. Or maybe it doesn't.

So far, his instincts have been right. When he "jumped to conclusions" during events like San Bernadino, and Nice, he was right in concluding that it was Muslim terrorism. He judiciously refrained from jumping to conclusions in Canada back when there was reason to believe that it was Muslim terrorism. Turns out he was right again. Even when he is right, he can't win with you people. You don't want him to jump to conclusions when he is accurate about Muslim terrorism. And you do want him to jump to conclusions when he would have been wrong in assuming Muslim terrorism.

What bearing do a presidential candidate's guessing on events that occur have anything to do with devising and implementing policy to address the problem? Like literally, what's the connection?

[sfam]

Meanwhile, there are almost daily reports of individual Muslims and Hispanics (often children) being taunted, verbally abused and threatened by those who have embraced Trump's anti-Islam, anti-immigrant rhetoric. Yet you choose to either ignore that or believe it isn't happening.

As your hero Trump would say: Sad.

Because most of those are hoaxes. And the ones that aren't are mere taunting by individuals, which is nothing compared to the actual, literal assaults and property damage being perpetuated by organized groups of Democrat supporters. Indeed there is video proving that some of these organized violent protests are being directed by DNC operatives.

I actually have worked with and know lots of Muslims in the US and overseas. Muslim Americans and greencard holders I know, in a very liberal location like Washington DC have been subject to harrassment to the point that many have changed their approach walking down the street. Muslim peacebuilders to have training to work in conflict zones now feel the need to use this training in navigating unfamiliar public spaces in the US. I had a conversation a few weeks ago with a Muslim american I worked with who's daughter asked if they were going to get deported. She had to answer, "I don't know".

The worst of this is those who are targeted - women with scarves on their head - are like the least dangerous and most afraid. My Great grandmother wore a scarf on her head most of her life - for some reason, this didn't scare folks in Indiana that much. Apparently the ordinance capability of textiles has improved somewhat - I'm not sure why else a Hijab inspires such fear.

My wife is Korean. What's really strange is the blowback racism hitting there. My daugher and a group of friends were out and about in Sarasota, FL shortly after the election, and were yelled at by a group of 20 somethings to "Go back to China now, We don't want you here anymore."

Bottom line, among most Muslims and many brown skinned foreigners, since the election, white men have now become the "other". This didn't use to be the case, but clearly is now. Apparently we look pretty scary. This has the chance of becoming a real driver of instability. Self-fulfilling prophecies will follow.

[DCZards]

This is not a hoax or "mere taunting." Trump has created a climate where this type of thing is happening more and more to immigrants and Muslims across the country. The fact that we don’t read about it in the newspaper or see it on the nightly news doesn’t mean it’s not real.

These attacks on innocent Americans who happen to look different or worship differently is dangerous and scary. And those who are in denial about it happening are even scarier.

Muslim woman attacked and humiliated at JFK Airport

A BUSINESSMAN is accused of attacking a female Muslim worker at New York’s John F. Kennedy Airport, kicking her, shouting obscenities at her and saying that President Donald Trump “will get rid of all of you,” authorities said.

Robin Rhodes, of Worcester, Massachusetts, had arrived from Aruba and was awaiting a connecting flight to Massachusetts on Wednesday night when he allegedly approached Rabeeya Khan, who wears a hijab, at the Sky Club in Terminal 2 while she was sitting in the utility office.

She told police he came to the door and went on a profanity-laced tirade, asking her if she was praying, prosecutor Richard A. Brown said. Rhodes then punched the door, which hit the back of Khan’s chair, he said.

The 60-year-old Khan asked Rhodes what she had done to him and Rhodes said she’d done nothing, authorities said. He then cursed at her and kicked her in the leg, Khan told police.

When another person tried to calm him down, Rhodes moved away from the door and Khan ran out of the office to the front desk at the club, authorities said.

Rhodes, 57, followed her, got down on his knees and began to bow down to imitate Muslim prayers and shouted obscenities, investigators said.

Khan recalled Rhodes saying: “Trump is here now. He will get rid of all of you. You can ask Germany, Belgium and France about these kinds of people. You see what happens,” prosecutors said.

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/muslim-woman-attacked-and-humiliated-at-jfk-airport/news-story/b654bd17d2ba8308d1061dc245f8e23d

[tontoz]

Meanwhile, there are almost daily reports of individual Muslims and Hispanics (often children) being taunted, verbally abused and threatened by those who have embraced Trump's anti-Islam, anti-immigrant rhetoric. Yet you choose to either ignore that or believe it isn't happening.

As your hero Trump would say: Sad.

Because most of those are hoaxes. And the ones that aren't are mere taunting by individuals, which is nothing compared to the actual, literal assaults and property damage being perpetuated by organized groups of Democrat supporters. Indeed there is video proving that some of these organized violent protests are being directed by DNC operatives.

I actually have worked with and know lots of Muslims in the US and overseas. Muslim Americans and greencard holders I know, in a very liberal location like Washington DC have been subject to harrassment to the point that many have changed their approach walking down the street. Muslim peacebuilders to have training to work in conflict zones now feel the need to use this training in navigating unfamiliar public spaces in the US. I had a conversation a few weeks ago with a Muslim american I worked with who's daughter asked if they were going to get deported. She had to answer, "I don't know".

The worst of this is those who are targeted - women with scarves on their head - are like the least dangerous and most afraid. My Great grandmother wore a scarf on her head most of her life - for some reason, this didn't scare folks in Indiana that much. Apparently the ordinance capability of textiles has improved somewhat - I'm not sure why else a Hijab inspires such fear.

My wife is Korean. What's really strange is the blowback racism hitting there. My daugher and a group of friends were out and about in Sarasota, FL shortly after the election, and were yelled at by a group of 20 somethings to "Go back to China now, We don't want you here anymore."

Bottom line, among most Muslims and many brown skinned foreigners, since the election, white men have now become the "other". This didn't use to be the case, but clearly is now. Apparently we look pretty scary. This has the chance of becoming a real driver of instability. Self-fulfilling prophecies will follow.

Ever been to Sweden? If you ever go there be sure to ask the women how they feel about Muslim immigration. You might get a different side of the story.