Seven years ago I had a complete knee replacement of my right knee.
While I’m glad that I had it done, it did change some things.
I can no longer run and kneeling has its challenges but the biggest change came in flying anywhere.
After sitting in Kennedy Airport in New York City six years ago, watching a clock tick down on my flight departure, while waiting someone to wand me, I vowed that I’d never fly to any destination that I could drive to.
I’ve followed that plan ever since then.
I tried to fly to Washington, D.C. this year and learned that TSA had not improved their screening of joint replacements one bit.
So, I’m back to driving.
I was reminded of the wisdom of this plan as I watched the implementation of Donald Trump’s Executive Order restricting travelers from seven Muslim countries from entering the United States.
The countries that were selected for the ban were curious ones. The list did not include Saudi Arabia which was the home of the majority of the 9/11 hijackers.
Indeed, it didn’t include any of the countries that these hijacker originated from.
It also didn’t include Pakistan, United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Lebanon, Kuwait or Russia, all countries that were home to all of the terrorists who committed attacks inside the United States after September 11, 2001.
It didn’t include Turkey, which for years was a gateway for ISIS fighters entering Syria.
It didn’t include Dubai, which, like Turkey is the home of a Trump Hotel.
Indeed, it didn’t include any Muslim country that has a Trump property located in it.
I’m sure that is just a coincidence.
Like most of the actions taken since the Trump Administration has taken office, the travel ban was rolled out in chaotic fashion.
Announced on a weekend, the various agencies which had to implement it were caught by surprise and had little or no guidance on who was covered under it.
Green card holders who are permanent residents were prohibited from returning home.
Scientists that had visas and were working on potential medical breakthroughs were refused entry.
In some instances the order had potentially lethal consequences in which Muslims who had aided U.S. troops during the Iraq war and the campaign against ISIS, at great peril to themselves and their family members, were turned away at foreign airports.
Reaction from Congressional leaders varied from condemnation by Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Chuck Schumer, to criticism from Senate Foreign Relations Chair, Bob Corker, to silence from Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell to support for it from House Speaker Paul Ryan.
Legal challenges to the ban abounded with lawsuits being filed by opponents in cities all across the country. In the State of Washington, a federal Judge enjoined enforcement of the ban nationwide and some of those who were excluded were allowed entry into the United States.
Trump, in typical Trump fashion, lashed out at the judge, referring to him as a “so-called” judge, accusing him of putting the country in peril” and placing blame on him for any attacks that might happen.
It wasn’t the first time that Trump has gone after a judge.
During the presidential campaign he maligned the impartiality of an American born judge of Mexican descent, after he ruled against Trump in a civil suit over his ongoing fraud known as Trump University.
This past Thursday, a panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the injunction issued by the “so-called” judge, once again, prompting Trump to criticize the court for being “political” claiming that our “security is at “risk today.”
Echoes of the late Senator Joe McCarthy could be heard across the mall.
I’ve never understood the logic of Trump’s strategy of attacking judges who rule against him while the matter is still in the courts.
His own nominee for the vacant Supreme Court seat Judge Neil Gorsuch, described Trump’s attacks on the judiciary as “demoralizing” and “disheartening.”
One would think that Trump would recognize this as a signal that his strategy is not furthering his position and, perhaps, emboldening the judiciary to assert its independence and authority as a co-equal branch of government.
A reading off the 27 page opinion of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upholding the injunction against Trump’s travel ban, makes it clear that the judiciary does not agree that Trump’s executive actions are unreviewable or beyond their reach.
That is truly comforting.
In a related development, the Westminster Dog Show is going to create a new category this year.
Best in Lap Dog.
Trump is going to enter Paul Ryan.