Raw Story

President Donald Trump didn't hide his disgust when asked Friday why he was allowing white South African farmers into the United States but "closed off that door" to many other refugees.

A U.S.-funded charter flight brought close to 60 Afrikaner families to the the U.S. state of Idaho earlier this week under a humanitarian program designed for people fleeing war or persecution.

Afrikaners are white South Africans of Dutch descent.

"What message does that send? Why is that fair?" the reporter is heard asking on an audio recording made aboard Air Force One as Trump returned to the U.S. after a tour of the Middle East.

EXCLUSIVE: Breastfeeding mom of US citizen sues Kristi Noem after being grabbed by ICE

“I think if I see people in distress, I don’t care what color, what they look like, what anything—their size, their height, their eyes. I don’t care,” he said.

“But, I think that from all evidence, the farmers in South Africa are being treated brutally. And it’s been reported, and nobody wants to cover it, but they happen to be white. And if they were Black, I’d do the exact same thing. And we treat people very well when we see there’s a genocide going on,” he said. “So if it’s a genocide, that’s terrible. And I happen to believe it could very well be.”

In February, the South African courts ruled that talk of a "white genocide" is merely a myth.

Trump then branded the reporter's question as “nasty.”

“And I’m not looking for reporting because, believe me, it’s easier for me not to do anything. It’s a lot easier because I don’t get nasty questions like that,” the president said.

“But the fact is that we’re about saving lives, and we’re gonna do that. So we’ve made a home, and we’ll make a home for other people that are treated badly, no matter what their color.”

Listen to the audio here.

President Donald Trump is asking the Supreme Court to lift lower court orders preventing him from continuing his mass firings of the civil service, reported The Associated Press on Friday.

These firings have been on hold in part due to a ruling by a federal judge in San Francisco last week.

The report noted that the lawsuit in question was brought by an array of plaintiffs, including "the cities of San Francisco, Chicago, and Baltimore; the labor group American Federation of Government Employees; and the nonprofit groups Alliance for Retired Americans, Center for Taxpayer Rights, and Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks."

EXCLUSIVE: Breastfeeding mom of US citizen sues Kristi Noem after being grabbed by ICE

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston, appointed by former President Bill Clinton, "questioned whether Trump's Republican administration was acting lawfully in trying to pare the federal workforce," the report noted.

She "directed numerous federal agencies to stop acting on Trump's workforce executive order signed in February and a subsequent memo issued by the Department of Government Efficiency and the Office of Personnel Management," although her order will expire on its own next week.

Since taking office, Trump has sought to slash personnel at agencies across the board, much of it with the blessing of tech billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency task force.

In many cases, these firings had to be walked back simply because critical functions broke. In one of the most high-profile cases, Trump fired hundreds of vital workers at the National Nuclear Safety Administration and had to re-hire many of them.

Republican pollster Frank Luntz tried to turn down the temperature on Friday in a heated online feud being waged by former Barack Obama campaign strategist and press official Johanna Maska.

Maska took particular umbrage over Luntz's appearance on a podcast with Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA), and said she "wanted to slap" him over it in a video posted to X.

"Frank Luntz, you may know, is a Republican pollster, he does these focus groups," Maska said. "He was also involved in Newt Gingrich's rise. He was involved in reforming welfare. He actually bragged on the podcast about reforming welfare. And if you remember in the '90s, that meant that moms, who have a job, by the way, job is being a mom, had to go find a job outside of the home.

"And on this same podcast today that I'm listening to, Frank Luntz had the audacity to say that it is moms who are causing the current political division because we're not turning off screens. I wanted to slap him!"

"He was involved in setting the stage for this division!" she continued. "He is part of the problem. And I am sorry, but moms not being able to control what is addictive, that we have allowed unregulated to take over our children's brains, not because of moms, but because of underregulation. You're going to say it's our fault? Frank Luntz, you caused this division!"

Luntz, a Trump-skeptical pollster who had been attempting to make a point that social media is doing deep social harm to the next generation, responded to the post.

"Johanna, you say you want to hurt me physically over a podcast comment. You even plan to track me down so you can hit me," wrote Luntz. "I assume you don't really mean it — but maybe you do? That's the problem with social media; it's often used by people like you to threaten people like me. And when children threaten each other the same way, moms and dads need to take the phone away and kick their kids off the computer."

"I agree with you: We need some regulations to keep children away from online toxicity. But parents who teach respect will be far more effective than any regulation," he added. "I'm sorry I made you so angry. But nothing I said deserves the response you gave — you actually made my point perfectly."

I hate how we talk about politics.

This might come as a surprise, because at least part of my day job involves writing about politics in Kansas. But the exposure has solidified my belief that lawmakers, officials, journalists and the general public all could do a better job of thinking about what they’re doing and why.

Our conversation about politics fails at least in part because it’s inevitably couched in adversarial terms. In one metaphor, Democrats and Republicans are two teams fighting for victories. This leaves less-engaged members of the public as passive spectators and suggests that ideological debate exists only to score points for one side or another. Cue the cheers and pouring of Gatorade.

I hate that.

In another metaphor, the parties and their ideological camps fight a brutal war. This has become the favored interpretation recently, as politicians nursing grudges try to crush their opponents through the machinery of government. During a war, both sides strive for enduring victory, and the ends might justify the means.

I hate that even more.

Each of these metaphors depends on fundamentally distorting the nature of governance. The game metaphor depicts statesmanship as meaningless posturing. The war metaphor insists that half of the country (pick your half) has gone to an irredeemably dark place.

In reality, we elect people to public office to make our state and nation better, representing us while they do so.

We can debate the “better,” and we can debate who that “us” includes, but politics exist to shape government.

For that reason, I think we need a new metaphor, one that doesn’t pit Americans against one another. Perhaps this metaphor could cool temperatures and increase cooperation. Or maybe not. I’m trying to be realistic here.

Regardless, we should work toward thinking of politics as a neighborhood bar. Not an ominous dive, mind you, or a place for students to pick up one another. No, a cozy neighborhood watering hole, the kind of place called a “pub” by our cousins in Britain or “Cheers” by Ted Danson and company.

If you’re not lucky enough to be familiar with such a spot, let me elaborate. It serves as a community gathering spot. It has regulars. The bartenders know the customers and chat, or don’t, as required. You can visit and read a book in the corner or debate philosophy. You can spend a couple of hours there with friends or drop by for 20 minutes. Whatever you like.

Such bars don’t primarily exist to intoxicate customers. Sure, people will have a drink or two, but the business doesn’t depend on customers imbibing to excess. No, the drinks serve as a bit of social lubricant. Folks might just have a soft drink and check up on friends.

What I appreciate about such bars is that any one person’s political leanings make no difference. The customer might be a diehard MAGA supporter or pushy progressive. Regardless, if you insult the bartender or order too many drinks, you’re not welcome. If you’re friendly and get along with others, you have an open invitation to visit. How you behave matters.

Sure, you encounter some loudmouths. You put up with some cranks. But you accept them as part of the scenery.

Our country would be stronger if we engaged in politics the way people visit such bars. A variety of people come together, with mutual respect. Differences can be aired, or not, depending on how we feel. And everyone unites if something needs to be done. In a bar like this, if someone gets sick or has an emergency, everyone springs into action. The bartender calls for assistance. Others will tend to the distressed person. Still others will watch outside for help to arrive.

You don’t see such behavior just in bars, of course.

You can see it in coffee shops or restaurants that the enjoy the patronage of regulars. You can see it in social clubs and certain houses of worship. You can see it at trivia nights and bowling leagues. You can see it among extended families.

In all of these circumstances, we primarily value one another as people — not as politicians or activists, not as Democrats or Republicans, not as liberals or conservatives. We give one another the benefit of the doubt and wish the best for them and their loved ones and families.

Unfortunately, we live in a turbocharged political world. No one benefits from unilateral disarmament, so extremism spirals. Treating government debates as pitched battles leads to extreme rhetoric and destructive actions. Policy-making suffers, and the general public pays the price.

In my job as Kansas Reflector opinion editor and columnist, I work in this context. That means I often write forcefully, passionately. Real people and their families have become entangled in the rhetoric. The consequences appear so grave that no other course makes sense. I can’t be the one man sipping a cocktail while others aim howitzers and launch Hail Marys.

I hope that in years to come we can somehow wrench ourselves away from that narrow, zero-sum approach to politics and toward a community-focused, humanistic approach. Such a change would take everyone deciding to rethink our basic approach toward local, state and federal government.

I wouldn’t hate that.

Service at high-profile MAGA supporter Kid Rock's Nashville restaurant came to an abrupt halt on a busy Saturday night after undocumented workers fled en masse to avoid rumored immigration raids favored by President Donald Trump, Nashville Scene reported.

The restaurant Kid Rock’s Big A-- Honky Tonk Rock N’ Roll Steakhouse is licensed to wealthy conservative restaurateur Steve Smith.

According to the report, managers instructed employees without legal immigration status to leave to avoid ICE detention. Two other Smith-owned restaurants were also affected by the walkout, which lasted at least through Sunday.

An employee told the publication, “We were already understaffed because of the ICE raids throughout the weekend. Then, around 9:30 p.m. on Saturday, our manager came back and told anyone without legal status to go home. Events at the Ryman, Ascend, the Savannah Bananas’ baseball game all let out, and it was crazy busy. But there was no one in the kitchen to cook the food.”

EXCLUSIVE: Breastfeeding mom of US citizen sues Kristi Noem after being grabbed by ICE

"State troopers and unmarked ICE vehicles dramatically increased nightly traffic stops on May 3 in South Nashville, where the joint operation has resulted in at least 196 arrests by ICE agents," the report continued. "These arrests included 101 individuals with no criminal history, contradicting Trump administration claims that immigration enforcement has been targeted toward violent criminals."

Kid Rock, real name Robert James Ritchie, played at President Donald Trump's inauguration and visited the White House at the end of March as Trump signed an executive order to stop "price-gouging" by concert ticket brokers.

The musician dressed up for the Oval Office visit, opting for a "loud red, white and blue American flag jumpsuit and matching hat ensemble."

The report concluded that the "recent panic" indicated that Smith's restaurant empire "relies directly on employing immigrants not authorized to work in the United States."

Smith didn't comment for the story.

Read the Nashville Scene article here.

President Donald Trump brought his fascination with the term "groceries" with him to the Middle East on Thursday.

During a trip this week, Trump told the president of the United Arab Emirates, or UAE, it's an old-fashioned word that "means basically what you're buying, food, it's a pretty accurate term, but it's an old-fashioned sound, but groceries are down."

The obsession with the word sparked confusion and mockery from those online who saw the statement.

"What ... what are the youths calling groceries these days?" joked Josh Chafetz, professor of law and politics at Georgetown.

ALSO READ: This single Trump deficiency has caused the horror of today's America

Author and former NFL player Chris Kluwe quipped, "Told my wife I was going to the grocery store for groceries and she asked why I was using that strange word and when I would be back with the victuals."

Former DOJ appointee Eric Columbus recalled, "In Trump’s first term he repeatedly insisted you need ID to buy groceries. Which was weird, but unlike now he never said the word 'groceries' was old-fashioned or anything."

Assistant professor in philosophy, Dr. Keith Wilson, commented on Trump's fascination with the word "is because Trump has never had to shop for groceries in his life, so he finds it an exotic concept."

Rolling Stone politics reporter Asawin Suebsaeng commented, "The Trump groceries things is an example of why he’s such a historic figure, you’re not getting this anywhere else, no other member of the trump clan, no other 'heir' apparent to the maga and gop throne, no influencer or conservative cable news hanger on; nobody. It rocks when JD Vance tries to sell himself as 'I’m Trump but I did the reading in school,' as if that is a thing voters want and as if those two things don’t conflict."

"For the life of me I will never understand why his mental deterioration isn't headline news every single day," remarked historian Heather Cox Richardson.

Anthropologist and archaeologist John Hoopes replied, "Trump grew up hearing his grandmother talk about 'groceries,' but his parents never troubled themselves with that stuff."

"The single thing I am most confounded with about Trump is why he thinks the word groceries is something people stopped saying in 1937," said influencer and podcaster Brendel.

"Has anyone heard of this word 'groceries' Trump keeps using? Is he demented?" asked Dan O'Sullivan.