Showing posts with label John Kerry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Kerry. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 13, 2015

The GOP's Hypocrisy on France





Remember how Republicans used to malign France and "Old Europe"?  Everything from France's health care system - one of the most cost efficient in the world - to liberal ideas to the decline of religiosity was open to attack and parody.  Now, a vast case of amnesia has seemingly set in as Republicans attack Obama for not attending the weekend march in Paris or at least not sending a high ranking American as a representative.  Perhaps it was a mistake, or maybe it was better not to give Islamic terrorists a chance to say America orchestrated the whole thing.  That's something open to debate.  What's not open to debate is the hypocrisy of suddenly French loving Republicans.  A column in the Washington Post takes deserved note of the hypocrisy overload.  Here are highlights:


There is a certain je ne sais quoi in conservatives’ criticism of the Obama administration over last week’s terrorist attack in France. 

A decade ago, Republicans in Congress were renaming French fries “freedom fries” and French toast “freedom toast” because of that country’s refusal to support the Iraq war. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld belittled the “old Europe” French, President George W. Bush mocked an American reporter for speaking French to the French president, and conservative critics called the French “weasels,” “appeasers” and worse. John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, was ridiculed by the Bush administration for being “too French” and looking French, and his fluency in French was a liability in the campaign.

And now, that very same Monsieur Kerry, the secretary of state, and his boss, President Obama, are being condemned by conservatives for . . . not being nice enough to the French.
Quelle horreur!
 
The cause célèbre this time is the failure of the Obama administration to send anybody of higher rank than the U.S. ambassador to attend Sunday’s march in Paris showing solidarity against the terrorists.

“Our president should have been there, because we must never hesitate to stand with our allies,” proclaimed Sen. Ted Cruz, the Republican agent provocateur from Texas.

Fox News’s Greta van Susteren said the absence was “embarrassing” and that “Obama should not have snubbed Paris.”

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) — like Cruz a would-be presidential contender — declared it “a mistake not to send someone.” (For the record, neither Cruz nor Rubio attended the march.)

Largely absent from this condemnation of the American government’s slight of the French were the French themselves. French President François Hollande said Obama had been “very present” in the response to last week’s attacks on the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo and a Jewish market. 

Officials I spoke to said it was a simple screw-up: They didn’t understand how significant the event would be, with leaders of some 40 countries in attendance.

But the notion that Kerry, of all people, was slighting the French is a bit incroyable. The son of a diplomat, Kerry has close family in France and learned the language at a Swiss boarding school. After the initial massacre in Paris last week, he addressed the shooting at an appearance with the Polish foreign minister, in both English and in French. French TV channel TF1 said that Kerry’s “poignant statement in French” would “go down in history.”

Not too long ago, Kerry’s Francophilia earned him ridicule. Tom DeLay, a House Republican leader, would greet crowds by saying, “Hi. Or, as John Kerry would say, ‘Bonjour.’ ”

But now Kerry is being called insufficiently pro-French . . . The conservatives are guilty of a bit of inconsistency, if not hypocrisy, in criticizing the Obama administration for snubbing a people they not long ago called cheese-eating surrender monkeys.

Saturday, August 03, 2013

Visas Are Now Available For Same-Sex Couples




Among the clear winners in the aftermath of the Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Windsor are bi-national same sex couples who had heretofore been unable to get visas for the non-U.S. spouse and often faced having to move abroad to stay together.  Yesterday, the State Department announced that effective immediately same sex spouses would be treated equally and have the same visa rights as heterosexual couples.  We can expect flying spittle and hyperventilating among the Christofascists in reaction to this development.  Metro Weekly has details:


In a policy change announced Friday by Secretary of State John Kerry, the United States will begin processing visa applications for same-sex couples effective immediately. 

"If you are the spouse of a U.S. citizen, your visa application will be treated equally. If you are the spouse of a non-citizen, your visa application will be treated equally. And if you are in a country that doesn’t recognize your same-sex marriage, then your visa application will still be treated equally at every single one of our 222 visa processing centers around the world," Kerry said during an appearance at the U.S. embassy in London.

The announcement is the latest repercussion following the Supreme Court's June decision striking down Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

"Now, as long as a marriage has been performed in a jurisdiction that recognizes it so that it is legal, then that marriage is valid under U.S. immigration laws, and every married couple will be treated exactly the same, and that is what we believe is appropriate," Kerry added.

According to Freedom to Marry, sixteen countries permit same-sex marriage — Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Norway, Sweden, Portugal, Iceland, Argentina, Denmark, France, Brazil, New Zealand, Uruguay and Britain — while certain regions of the U.S. and Mexico also allow same-sex couples the right to marry.

The new State Department policy will also impact the children of the foreign national spouse by considering them "step-children" of the parent who is a U.S. citizen.

"Today, the State Department, which has always been at the forefront of equality in the federal government, I'm proud to say, is tearing down an unjust and an unfair barrier that for too long stood in the way of same-sex families being able to travel as a family to the United States."

Sunday, April 06, 2008

Kerry to Vote for ENDA Without Trans Language

Not to be labor the issue, but John Kerry's announcement of his support for a non-all inclusive version of ENDA shows the practical need of getting some version of ENDA through the U. S. Senate this year. The battle for trans inclusive language can continue unabated, but during the interim, millions of gays and lesbians will have employment discrimination protections that they now lack. Yes, I know that the nay sayers will argue that the Chimperator will veto the bill. Maybe he will, maybe he won't. I think a veto is absolutely assured if the transgender language is included since it sets the fundies foaming at the mouth. With the transgender language deleted, the Christianists lose the ability to run around saying ENDA would force employers to hire "men wearing dresses and heels." Such statements are hateful, but they are nonetheless effective with spineless members of Congress. Part of the political process is moving forward incrementally to get as much as possible at the particular moment in time. Here are some highlights from Bay Windows (http://www.baywindows.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=blog&sc2=news&sc3=&id=72642):

Sen. John Kerry told Bay Windows today that if ENDA comes up for a vote in the Senate in its current form, granting protections based on sexual orientation but not gender identity, he will support it. He said he strongly supports adding the transgender-inclusive language, but in the short term he believes it is important to pass the bill as is.
In a statement to Bay Windows Kerry said: We’ve been fighting more than twenty years to get these civil rights protections passed, and Massachusetts has always been in the forefront. After more than a decade of trying to pass ENDA under Democratic and Republican administrations alike, I think we’re finally at a point where, under Democratic leadership and with support from Massachusetts leaders, we finally have a good chance of passing a bill this year.
We all want to see transgendered workers included, and I guarantee that day will come and we’ll get there, but this year it’s vital that we get the most protection for the greatest number of employees that we can. People are being discriminated against today in the workplace and the law needs to make it clear that’s a violation of civil rights and human rights, now.