#repealed affirmative action

[theriverdalereviewer]

HOW BAD DO THINGS NEED TO GET IN THIS COUNTRY FOR THINGS TO CHANGE

[mariacallous]

Republicans are thrashing around trying to get themselves out of the abortion ban they have tried to win for so many decades. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) was the first. In the fall of 2022, just months after the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade, he proposed legislation calling for a national abortion ban after 15 weeks. So far, this bill has gone nowhere. Then, in 2023, gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin of Virginia put the 15-week abortion ban at the center of his campaign to help the GOP take full control of the Virginia legislature. Rather than holding one house and picking up the other, he lost both. Recently, former President Donald Trump—who often brags about appointing the three Supreme Court justices who made possible the repeal of Roe v. Wade—offered his own way out of the thicket by applauding the fact that states now can decide the issue for themselves. And in Arizona, the Republican Senate candidate, Kari Lake, is trying to rally the party around the notion of a 15-week ban instead of the 1864 near total ban their court just affirmed, even though she’s facing criticism for this on the far right. Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal came out with a poll showing that abortion was the number one issue—by far—for suburban women voters in swing states.

In each instance (and there will be more) we find Republicans desperately trying to find a position on the issue that makes their base and the other parts of their coalition happy.

It doesn’t exist, and here’s why—abortion is an integral part of health care for women.

Since 2022, when the Supreme Court eviscerated Roe in the Dobbs case, we have been undergoing a reluctant national seminar in obstetrics and gynecology. All over the country, legislators—mostly male—are discovering that pregnancy is not simple. Pregnancies go wrong for many reasons, and when they do, the fetus needs to be removed. One of the first to discover this reality was Republican State Representative Neal Collins of South Carolina. He was brought to tears by the story of a South Carolina woman whose water broke just after 15 weeks of pregnancy. Obstetrics lesson #1—a fetus can’t live after the water breaks. But “lawyers advised doctors that they could not remove the fetus, despite that being the recommended medical course of action.” And so, the woman was sent home to miscarry on her own, putting her at risk of losing her uterus and/or getting blood poisoning.

A woman from Austin, Texas had a similar story—one that eventually made its way into a heart-wrenching ad by the Biden campaign. Amanda Zurawski was 18 weeks pregnant when her water broke. Rather than remove the fetus, doctors in Texas sent her home where she miscarried—and developed blood poisoning (sepsis) so severe that she may never get pregnant again. Note that in both cases the medical emergency happened after 15 weeks—late miscarriages are more likely to have serious medical effects than early ones. The 15-week idea, popular among Republicans seeking a way out of their quagmire, doesn’t conform to medical reality.

Over in Arkansas, a Republican state representative learned that his niece was carrying a fetus who lacked a vital organ, meaning that it would never develop normally and either die in utero or right after birth. Obstetrics lesson #2—severe fetal abnormalities happen. He changed his position on the Arkansas law saying, “Who are we to sit in judgment of these women making a decision between them and their physician and their God above?”

In a case that gained national attention, Kate Cox, a Texas mother of two, was pregnant with her third child when the fetus was diagnosed with a rare condition called Trisomy 18, which usually ends in miscarriage or in the immediate death of the baby. Continuing this doomed pregnancy put Cox at risk of uterine rupture and would make it difficult to carry another child. Obstetrics lesson #3—continuing to carry a doomed pregnancy can jeopardize future pregnancies. And yet the Texas Attorney General blocked an abortion for Cox and threatened to prosecute anyone who took care of her, and the Texas Supreme Court ruled that her condition did not meet the statutory exception for “life-threatening physical condition.”

So, she and her husband eventually went to New Mexico for the abortion.

Obstetrics lesson #4—miscarriages are very common, affecting approximately 30% of pregnancies. While many pass without much drama and women heal on their own—others cause complications that require what’s known as a D&C for dilation and curettage. This involves scraping bits of pregnancy tissue out of the uterus to avoid infection. When Christina Zielke of Maryland was told that her fetus had no heartbeat, she opted to wait to miscarry naturally.

While waiting, she and her husband traveled to Ohio for a wedding where she began to bleed so heavily that they had to go to an emergency room. A D&C would have stopped the bleeding, but in Ohio, doctors worried that they would be criminally charged under the new abortion laws and sent her home in spite of the fact that she was still bleeding heavily and in spite of the fact that doctors in Maryland had confirmed that her fetus had no heartbeat. Eventually her blood pressure dropped, and she passed out from loss of blood and returned to the hospital where a D&C finally stopped the bleeding.

These are but a few of the horror stories that will continue to mount in states with partial or total bans on abortion. As these stories accumulate, the issue will continue to have political punch. We have already seen the victory of pro-choice referenda in deep red conservative states like Kansas, Kentucky, Montana, and Ohio; and in swing states like Michigan and in deep blue states like California and Vermont. In an era where almost everything is viewed through a partisan lens, abortion rights transcend partisanship.

And more referenda are coming in November. The expectation is that at least some, if not most, of the pro-choice voters likely to be mobilized by the abortion issue will help Democrats up and down the ballot. As a result, Democratic campaigns are working hard to make sure the public knows that Republicans are responsible.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Everyone from progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York to notorious centrist Democratic-turned-independent Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia praised the pick, bringing long elusive unity to the top of the Democratic presidential ticket for the first time in several election cycles. One small but beleaguered voting constituency in particular breathed a sigh of relief at the choice: trans people. Trans issues have emerged as one of the primary political targets of the Republican Party, and many of the party’s legislative accomplishments over the last few years involve the systematic persecution of trans people’s rights in red-state legislatures. Because of that, Harris needed to choose someone with a track record of handling the inevitable gender identity attacks. Enter Walz. First and foremost, Walz was the creator of the “weird” attack line that has knocked Republicans on their heels over the last month of the campaign. Branding Republicans and their gender-based obsessions with pregnancy and trans people as creepy and “weird” brilliantly defuses the emotional manipulation conservatives are trying to achieve. It is, indeed, weird to be worried about children’s genitals, it is weird to obsess over Olympic athlete’s chromosomes, it is weird to criticize women for being childless (but never childless men).  But beyond being the creator of the most incisive Democratic attack line of the cycle, Walz has a deep track record of supporting LGBTQ people and pro-equality policies. As governor, he signed an executive order last year protecting trans people’s rights to access gender-affirming care in Minnesota, he signed a statewide ban on LGBTQ “conversion therapy,” and he signed a bill making his state a trans refuge state, which protects trans people and their parents from actions taken by out-of-state governments to prosecute them for accessing gender-affirming care. As a member of Congress, prior to becoming governor, Walz co-sponsored a bill to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, along with a bill to repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy — which had prohibited openly gay people from serving in the armed forces. Outside of his official record on queer and trans issues, I’m struck by how he talks about the trans people in his state. In a time when a lot of national level Democrats are afraid to even say the word “trans” or who speak in euphemisms with vague references to allowing people “to be who they are,” Walz positions his support for trans issues as a matter of being neighborly.

Katelyn Burns for MSNBC.com on Tim Walz's trans allyship (08.08.2024).

Katelyn Burns wrote an opinion column on MSNBC’s website on why Tim Walz is the trans ally we need. #HarrisWalz2024

[rosered2018]

My Take on the Current Election

Those of you who follow my blog have probably noticed that, while I do reblog political stuff, I rarely comment on it. And I've decided considering what's going on, I need to.

At this point, the Republicans' political platform is anything that appeases Donald Trump's whims and feeds his already massive ego. They have nothing constructive to offer us, and everything they are offering involves taking us back to a point in time where the only people who could have any kind of substantial power were straight white male Protestants.

If Kamala Harris becomes the Democratic candidate, she will blow the Republicans' arguement that their candidate is too old out of the water. Considering that Trump is the same age as Biden was during the 2020 election, she could theoretically turn that arguement back on him, especially considering his apparent mental decline since he left office.

On the Republicans' part, we will now get to see exactly how racist and misogynist they really are. There will be people arguing that she was chosen only because she was black, rather than because of her long record in California politics as a prosecutor and attorney general. There will probably be people wanting to repeal the Civil War Amendments and the 19th Amendment because they don't want a woman - much less a black woman - in the White House. Essentially, it will be the Obama years on steroids.

The Republicans have made it clear what they intend to do to this country if they get even half a chance. You all have to have heard about Project 2025 and what it proposes for this country - gutting social services, elimination of the civil service in favor of putting people personally loyal to Donald Trump in place, elimination of the Department of Education and anything arguing that anyone other than straight white men should have a voice in society, permanently lowering taxes on the stupidly wealthy, and basically turning this country into a Christofascist dictatorship with Donald Trump as the dictator. That's just the bare bones.

And that's on top of what they've already done - overturning Roe v. Wade, overturning affirmative action, gutting the Voting Rights Act of 1965, overturning the Chevron doctrine, and granting the president total immunity from prosecution for any "official acts" while he's in office.

Basically, if you like having rights that don't depend on your willingness to swear personal allegiance to a would-be dictator, vote Blue this time around, and keep voting Blue in the future. These people are not going away, and they will not stop until they get what they want.

TL;DR, get up off your asses and vote. If you're not registered, get registered. In some states, you can even do it online. If you don't know if you're registered, check. The website for your secretary of state should have a page where you can do that. The fate of our country literally depends on everyone voting, and every vote does matter. Anyone who tells you otherwise is either an asshole, an idiot, or a Russian stooge.

[militantinremission]

What does being 'Black' really mean?

I have thought about this for a long time. Over the years, I spoke w/ Moors, Israelites, Indigenous, & Pan Afrikans about 'Blackness' & what it means to them. I also looked at Separate but Equal (Jim Crow) Laws, The Black Codes, The Fugitive Slave Act, Dred Scott, & related documents dating back to the Colonial Era. Writing on this Subject was always in the back of My Mind, but now I feel compelled to give an opinion. Dane Calloway & Yvette Carnell don't agree on much, but they're both in agreement about 'Blackness in America'; their perspectives intrigued Me. Cam'ron's Declaration of Blackness, followed by responses from Marc Lamont Hill & Umar Johnson inspired Me to chime in on the Subject.

Recently, Dane Calloway & Yvette Carnell both went into detail about 'Blackness' on their individual Channels. Both have expressed their view in the past, but the timing of their latest opinions caught My attention. They essentially agree that this 'designation' refers to a Bottom Caste status that sets Us up for Social Inequality as a Collective. They also agree that identifying as 'Black American' only clouds Our identity as a Lineage Group. The denial of (promised) resources to 'Black' Farmers, & the repeal of Affirmative Action on College Campuses were both done in the name of 'Race Neutrality'. Apparently, Whitefolk & Brownfolk thought that these (long overdue) measures offered too much(?)

I was still digesting Dane & Yvette's perspective, when Cam'ron declared that he prefers being called 'Black' over Afrikan American, citing a schism between Black Americans & Continental Afrikans. This prompted Dr. Marc Lamont Hill & Dr. Umar Johnson to respond- in the name of Pan Afrikanism. Over the last 5Yrs, Pan Afrikans have been very vocal about Reparations & who should be entitled. Groups like N'COBRA, NAARC, The NAACP, & The Urban League have pushed for Trans Atlantic based Reparations; but they favor Social Programs over cash payments. Grassroots Organizations like the ADOS Advocacy Foundation, stress the need for cash payments to American Descendants Of Chattel Slavery.

It's curious how the same U.S. Constitution that used Our skin color to classify Us as 3/5ths of Humanity, still uses Our skin color as a 'Racial identity' to restrict Our access to resources. Somehow, this skin color classification doesn't stop 'Minority Groups' (i.e. White Women, White LGBTQ..., Azkenazis, People Of Color [POC/ BIPOC]) from getting the resources that They want & need. Maybe it's just Me, but I see a double standard playing out. Edward Blum & his 'Minority Coalition' are hell bent on weaponizing Race as a means of maintaining Black Oppression. He recently resorted to applying the Civil Rights Law of 1866 against Black Women; meanwhile, ADOS was unsuccessful in their attempt to apply the Same Law to (naively?) support Byron Allen's Case against Comcast Communications.

I understand where Family is coming from, when they refer to dictionary definitions of 'Black'. In a 'White' Society, Blackness is depicted as antithetical. It's not unusual, when we consider the way Afrikan Tribes associate 'Whiteness' w/ Death & Disease (i.e. Leprosy). Historically, this attitude towards Blackness goes back to Our 1st Contact w/ Northern/ Step Europeans (Vikings, Scandanavians, ect...) who traditionally burned their dead. Our mummification process spooked them! Those bodies took on a dark hue, & hardened into a crystal like structure; the Europeans called it a 'Crust'. From this, came the word 'Curse'. The Europeans migrated south into Western Asia & transported their ideology w/ them. This fear of Black Mummies was shared w/ Mongolians & other Indo- European Tribes, like the Turks & Huns. In the same way that Afrikans came to associate Whiteness negatively, the Asiatics came to associate Blackness similarly. Today, We STILL hear Koreans, Japanese, & Chinese refer to a 'Black Devil'.

The modern regard for Blackness is a Social Construct created by 15th Century Castilians & Portugese. These beliefs were sanctioned by the Catholic Church, by way of Papal Bulls & adopted by Dutch, English, & French Colonizers. That's not to say Anti Black sentiment didn't exist; Maimonides (Musa Ibn Maimon) wrote 'The Curse of Ham' centuries earlier... Spain, Portugal, & Italy appeared tired of Moorish Rule, & took advantage of the waning years of their influence. Current Reparations discussions have included the prominence of Afrikan Slave Trading, & how Afrikan Kingdoms, like Mali & Kongo actually traded Slaves w/ Europeans; until they were also Colonized. Afrikan Kingdoms became dependent on the profits, decadent lifestyle, & overall efficacy of trading away their 'enemies'. They didn't concern themselves w/ Europe's intentions for these people.

European Colonizers told themselves that they were 'On a Mission' to Christianize the heathens. I don't know what THAT had to do w/ raping & pillaging Societies in 'The Americas' (Amaru Ca/ Turtle Island/ Atlantis). In 'Capitalism & Slavery' Eric Williams explains how Europeans rationalized their barbarism to offset the guilt of violating fellow Human Beings. The Fruits of Exploration clouded the moral judgement of Many. Thinking Men, like Samuel George Morton began to concoct a number Theories (Religious & Scientific) to condone their actions. It wasn't limited to Afrika or The Americas; ANY non- Christian was a potential target. Truth be told, Latin America had more Slaves coming from The Pacific, than The Atlantic. Many of the Illegal Immigrants that (so called) Native Americans in The Dakotas are calling 'Indigenous People', are descendants of 'Negritos' transported from The Philippines & the South Pacific Islands. Spanish & Portugese Conquistadors adopted Colorism from the Arabs, & used it as a tool for Divide & Conquer (Blanqueamiento/ Branqueamiento).

The Portugese & Spanish brought Colorism to the (so called) New World, but it was The English who refined it into the System of Racism. Benjamin Franklin was credited w/ using the term 'White' in 1751, but Black Codes were already in play for decades. Bacon's Rebellion of 1675- 1676 resulted in 'Racial' (Chattel) Slavery in Virginia. White Indentured Servants that were treated no differently than their Black counterparts, were elevated to Overseers & Slave Hunters; later to become Militiamen & Police Officers. Legally, 'White' represented the Wealthy Class of Land Owners & Bankers (Gentlemen of Property & Standing). 'Black' represented Indigenous Americans- Free & Enslaved; Poor Whites were stuck in the middle. The Lessons of Bacon's Rebellion brought Laws that ensured that the average White Person had a better lifestyle than the average Black Person. This is the crux of 'White Privilege'.

Dictionaries define 'Whiteness' as: Fair & Pure. 'Blackness' is defined as: Ugly & Evil. All of this helped perpetuate Indigenous/ Aboriginal People as inferior to the European. The 1790 Census brought the first reclassification of American Indians to 'Negro' & 'Colored'. This reclassification continued w/ each subsequent Census. Census Enumerators were not just instructed, but encouraged to use their personal judgement when making Racial Assignments; particularly when making classifications of Negro & Colored. In 1924, Dr. Walter A. Plecker pushed 'The (Preservation of) Racial Integrity Act' in Virginia. This Act sought to reclassify ALL Indigenous People in Virginia as Colored or Negro, & penalized them (w/ violence or death). The 'One Drop Rule' was added in 1930. The Census completed it's reclassification w/ designations of 'Black' in 1970, & 'Afrikan American'(?) in 1990... Chris Rock once joked: "Have you ever seen an American Indian Family in an IHOP?" He probably didn't know that depending on which IHOP, he may have been SURROUNDED by them!

The U.S. Government has been persistent in their efforts to erase America's 'Copper- toned Aborigines'. In addition to Local, State, & Federal Laws designed to keep Us out of contention, they also used Anthropology to prove the inferiority of Indigenous People, compared to Europeans. W.E.B. Du Bois countered, w/ the help of Franz Boas & a new generation of Anthropologists. Melville Herskovits, like Boas contributed to the Anti Black counter narrative; playing a role in setting up the Harlem History Club at the 135th Street YMCA. This is the same Club that inspired Ho Chi Minh... Since 1990, (Indigenous) Black Americans have been on a Pan Afrikan Crusade that sought to embrace EVERY melanated individual as 'Black'. Haitians, Dominicans, Columbians, Somalis & Nigerians have been very vocal about NOT being Black; they're right! Family thinks that they either want to be White, or at least avoid the negativity associated w/ Blackness. Regardless of their reason, they have a Right Of Expression.

History has been purposely skewed, to prop up self righteous White Men & their Female cohorts (WASPs) over Everyone Else. Their advanced weaponry & barbarism has motivated many to fall in line w/ the Western Agenda over the last 500 Years, but Indigenous/ Black Americans have been fighting them every step of the way. Despite the effort to "Kill the Indian & keep The Man", We continued to search for Our Truth. 100Yrs ago, that led Us into an extensive search on the Afrikan Continent. DuBois, Boas, & Herskovits ALL espoused Out of Afrika Theory; & in some shape or form, molded the Minds of many of Our Master Teachers & Scholars. Their search for Roots in Afrika (Alkebu- Lan) was a noble & fruitful endeavor. As Students, We learned of glorious Civilizations that predated Europe, Rome, & Greece by several millennia. We learned that The Kamau, Nubian, & Kushite referred to themselves as 'Black People'. They were the 'Children of The Sun'- Blessed by The Most High w/ Blackness (Melanin/ Ka Nu). The 'Afu Ra Ka Nu' & 'Afu Rat Kat Nut' are the First Born of The Most High; molded out of Primordial Blackness (CERN calls it: The 'God Particle') & assigned as Caretakers of Planet Earth (Geb). In a Nation that marginalizes the very Concept of Blackness, We were inspired to shout: "I'm Black & I'm Proud!".

Today We live in The Information Age, & as such, Our Generation(s) have access to sources that few of Our Elders had. As We put the pieces together, We discover that:

North America had a population of roughly 100 Million Indigenous People when the Colonizers arrived 500Yrs ago.

These People had highly functional Matrilineal Societies that existed for millennia.

They traded w/ The Moors & other Afrikan Kingdoms for Centuries, & They spoke the Lingua Franca.

They have a Legacy of Brick Making & Mound Building. Billy Carson & Walter Williams both say that Our Indigenous Ancestors have a direct connection to the Kamau. Archeological digs in Southern Illinois & Ohio uncovered Kamitic Ritual material & Pre Phoenician 'Proto- Hebraic Script' among the artifacts. Quiet as it's kept, North America has a plethora of Mounds & Pyramids; St. Louis is nicknamed 'Mound City'.

ALL of the European visitors admitted the 'Copper- toned Aborigines' or Indios practiced a higher Culture than ANY Culture in Europe.

Benjamin Franklin, Patrick Henry, John Hancock, et al were students of Indigenous American Culture. They adopted the Articles Of Confederacy & The U.S. Constitution from the existing Confederacy Of The 5 Nations (The Iroquois Constitution), written around 1200 A.C.E... The Iroquois are the True Founders of the 'American Democratic Experiment'. Remember, ALL of the European Colonizers hailed from Monarchies, so it stands to reason...

The possibility of transporting 12 Million Afrikans to North America from 1619- 1865 is highly improbable. Dane Calloway already broke down the logistics of Trans Atlantic Shipping, & personally compelled The State of Virginia to reduce their 'Afrikan Slave' count by more than 90%. Depending on who you talk to, the number of 'Afrikans' transported to North America ranges from 90,000- 300,000 individuals. At best, this accounts for less than 10% of the 4 Million Individuals that were emancipated. The 20 Young Women that arrived at Point Comfort in 1619, were originally called 'Negresses', not Afrikans. American Indians were called Negroes almost interchangeably.

Dane Calloway, Kurimeo Ahau, & The Research Guy have all pointed out how Europeans transported North American Indians to 'Slave Seasoning' (Buck Breaking) Camps in The Caribbean. Afterwards, they were either shipped back to America, or transported to Europe, & later West Afrika; from Sierra Leone, to Angola. The English & French used Caribbean Maroons in their assault on Afrikan Kingdoms.

All of this new information about Our Ancestors has led many to revisit their Family Genealogy. Many of Us recall a Story or two about the Family connection to a particular Tribe. I personally can't remember hearing an Afrikan Origin Story, before the airing of Alex Haley's 'Roots'. My family taught Us about Our Indian Roots; We don't have a Slave Ship Story in Our History. Most of the Blackfolk claiming Afrikan Tribes, have taken so called Genetic Swab Tests that are advertised as 'Entertainment'. Black Historians & Genealogists, like Dr. Henry Louis Gates have refuted the accuracy of these 'Tests' for years. NO ONE can determine their ancestry from a mouth swab; you need the actual DNA of an Ancestor to make an accurate analysis. Most people don't know that their genetic material is being held (& utilized) by proponents of the [Mormon] Church Of Latter Day Saints. The largest Genealogy Library on Earth, is in Salt Lake City, Ut.

As We put the pieces together, We can clearly see the ongoing process of Colonization. AmeriKKKa cannot be as bold as Israel in their removal of Indigenous Black Americans, so The U.S. Government uses a trickbag of classifications & legislative measures to keep Blackfolk in a state of 'Arrested Development'. They hope that We 'migrate' to Afrika, but most of Us can't afford to visit; let alone relocate. Meanwhile, The Government continues to Flood the Zone w/ immigrants (for 175Yrs & counting). The Mainstream Media speaks about Venezuelan 'migrants' daily, but We hear nothing about the 100,000 Afghani & 100,000 Ukrainian immigrants they prepared for. These people are literally White on arrival. If illegal Venezuelans are getting 5 Star treatment, what are these folk getting?

I felt obligated to go in-depth on this topic, because so many cling to a definition created by Colonizers & Oppressors. How does someone define themselves using the language of their Oppressor? It's the same as someone saying: "A N-- like me", or "A B-- like me". We have been programmed into accepting a wretched (ratchet) image of Ourselves. Some of the people refusing to use the term 'Black', have No Problem referring to themselves as 'N--s' & 'B--s'. I question their logic. Richard Pryor said 40Yrs ago, in 'Here & Now' that he was wrong about using The N- Word. He went on to say that it was a Word that describes Our Wretchedness. He vowed never to use that Word again, but since his declaration, there has been an explosion of 'N-- Comics' over the last 40Yrs. Use of The N- Word is more prevalent than wearing that dress, but few talk about this particular assault on Our Culture. Is it just a coincidence that many of these N- Comics have 'funny looking Wives', as Katt Williams described them?

The lion's share of Our Master Teachers & Scholars were literally spoon-fed Out Of Afrika Theory, so We were primed for Pan Afrikanism. Marcus Garvey was actually 'fishing in a barrel' on those Harlem Streets. This isn't a bad thing in itself. Our Problem has been giving Our 'Cousins' too much access to Our Cultural Mores. Many of the Celebrities, Athletes, & Entertainers being spotlighted & engaging in miscegenation, are descendants of Black Immigrants. They're the Same Ones misrepresenting Our Culture, while telling Us that We're 'Culturally Lost'. Like Hindi/ Bangladeshi/ & Pakistani/ Americans, these folk are situational about their Blackness. They relish being 'Afrikan American' when it's profitable, but are quick to remind you of their Nationality (in a thick accent) when it isn't... It's time to delineate. EVERY melanated group has an identifiable lineage, except Black America. We had a clear identity, until We allowed Jesse Jackson to reclassify Us as 'Afrikan American'. To quote Dane Calloway: "We're named after 2 Continents". Now We're being amalgamated into an 'Afrikan/ Black Diaspora' that is looking to fleece Us like Everyone Else. Most of these folks are 'Black' Capitalists looking for a quick buck. The commercialization of Kwanzaa is a prime example. Our argument for Lineage Based Reparations has revealed this well kept secret.

The (current) Reparations discussion has brought important issues to the conversation. ADOS, FBA, Freemen, & Indigenous Family all agree that We're a specific Lineage Group w/ a specific Experience. No other group has endured what We have endured in America. Some Black Immigrants make a valid point that They have endured over 100Yrs of White Supremacy in America; few admit that They also had more autonomy & opportunity than We had. Many of the 'First Faces' that We tout, aren't Us, but Our Cousins. Colin Powell, Eric Holder, & Susan Rice aren't just descendants of Immigrants, they're also Cousins! Barack Obama was Harvard's 1st Black Law Review Editor & Claudine Gay was their 1st Black President, but NEITHER have Indigenous Black Roots. BOTH have more in common w/ the descendants of Slave Holders, than those Enslaved on Harvard's properties. We have far too many of their Faces in Our Spaces. 'Afrikan American' is not working for Us. It skews perspectives regarding Wealth & Inequality, while rewarding newcomers for their 'proximity to Blackness'.

I have to go back to The Black Power Movement, to get a clear understanding of what Blackness truly means. During that Era, 'Blackness' was an American Phenomenon that was Globally acknowledged. No One else said: 'I'm Black & I'm Proud' w/ as much authority. John Carlos & Tommie Smith proudly threw up their Black fists, knowing they would pay a price. Muhammad Ali lost his Prime Boxing Years to make a point. The Culture of Blackness permeated Music & Cinema; We were doing Our Thing, Our Way. The Culture was distinctly Ours. It WAS a Black Thang, & No One understood it; but EVERYONE respected it. As We travelled The World, We were called Soul Brothers & Soul Sisters, but most called Us Black American. We have a distinct Pedigree. The World knows WHO We are. If we're being honest, Black Culture & Music was generally more respectable before 1990, when We became 'Afrikan American'. Hollywood has been denigrating Us since 'Birth Of A Nation', but their images contradicted who We are. We're a Righteous & Noble People. Our Love of Our Collective progeny is unrivaled. The Slave Experience stripped Us of Our individual lineage, but it also eliminated any Tribalism. Indigenous Black Americans- from New York to Oakland, & from Detroit to Houston refer to each other as: 'Family from...' We compete against each other, & toss The Dozens; but when it's time to Put in The Work- We're ALL On Code.

I laugh at this notion of 'Race Neutrality'. What exactly is meant by Race? Chief Justice John Roberts & Justice Clarence Thomas both lean on this term pretty heavily, but how? Black, White, Asian, & Latinx aren't Racial Groups, they're Socio- Demographic Classifications. Every Middle School Student has learned by 8th Grade of 3 Races: Negroid, Mongoloid, & Caucasoid. This 'Racial Re- tread' only seems to affect Indigenous Black Americans/ Copper-toned Aborigines on the basis of Our skin color. Everyone Else, including Black Immigrants have a Right of Expression under the current demographic structure. This is the Same System that holds Black America stagnant at 13% of the population since Emancipation, while bringing Ethnic Europeans (Caucasians, Catholics) & Asians under the umbrella of Whiteness; to offset the declining birth rate in their demographic. The Biden Administration has implied the same thing is being done w/ Latinx. I STILL ask: What is a 'Latino/ Hispanic'- are they a specific Nationality? No, they're a Socially Engineered Group (Buffer Class) created to marginalize the Indigenous Black American Population. Our Collective, is not a grouping of different Ethnicities & Nationalities under a particular demographic- We're One Nationality. As We search for a uniform description of Our specific Lineage Group, 'Black American' is a No Brainer... Cam'ron is correct.

'Black American' actually describes a specific Ethnic Group w/ a specific Culture & Experience that NO OTHER GROUP can tout. It describes a Group of People in a specific Region, not a (Global) Racial Group. We are as distinct, as Australian Aborigines. Other than Our Cousins- the 'Black Brits', melanated People tend to describe themselves Tribally or Nationally. They only identify as 'Black', when they Come to America. Meanwhile, Native (Siberian) Americans have used the Dawes Rolls to appropriate Our Ancestral [Tribal] Identity, forcing Us to Collectively reestablish Ourselves from scratch. Indigenous, Aboriginal, or American Indian describes Our connection to The Land. The Blood & Bones of Our Ancestors are buried Here, not in Afrika. Black American, describes who We are today. It defines Us as a unique Nationality. This description makes it easier for Us to point out Centuries of legislative policy crafted & used against Us as a specific Lineage Group. Afrikan American, is a monolithic classification that ignores the diverse Cultural experiences & Tribalism of the Collective. Ultimately, Our Name may change, but The Culture stays the Same.

In a nutshell, Black American IS Our Tribal Identity. We're World renowned for Standing Out & Standing Our Ground, & NO ONE does it better. As Professor Black Truth puts it: 'We create Icons'.

-Just making My Case

[yourtoradorasextendedwarranty]

I don't understand people sometimes. I was scrolling through a little earlier and saw someone call Trump a fascist which isn't uncommon but it wasn't from someone I'd have expected to it come from. But nothing about Trump is fascist. Sure he's nationalistic but fascistic and nationalistic are not the same.

What's more when it comes to Dems v Reps I don't see how anyone can vote for Dems especially when they've gone full Neo Progressive. What do I mean? Well let's look at the most general of what the parties have represented across the US.

The right has been pro border security and this has been exemplified by Rep states either reinforcing their own borders, or sending them to sanctuary states.

The right has been historically and still is anti abortion. And while I didn't personally fully after with the stance, it SHOULD be left to the states to decide.

The right are for protecting the second amendment and even IF not all politicians on the right are for it, the SCOTUS justices that do understand the conservative values of the Constitution have given us more freedoms back. Many red states in fact now have constitutional carry.

Also of note those same justices have removed the Chevron act. Meaning that 3 letter agreements etc can't just wildly interpret the law as they please.

Now having said all this yes, there are war hawks on the right. There are racists on the right there are sexists on the right. But those same people very much exist on the left with no shortage at all

The left supports full term abortion and doesn't even consider the child alive until it's outside the womb.

The left is STAUNCHLY anti gun and anti second amendment.

The left is staunchly anti first amendment as seen by their calls to "hate speech".

The left is mostly pro open borders

The left is and has been pro war for a long time. Need proof? Obama started almost 5 new wars.

The left has proven recently they are ABSOLUTELY above the law and will manipulate every word in existence to jail their political rivals.

The left is actively racist and actively promotes white supremacist ideology with stuff like affirmative action and DEI.

The left has gone out of their way to allow kids to transition and get surgeries before the age of 16 even and want kids introduced to and TAUGHT LGBT themes, and have pushed for graphic pornographic books to be in elementary schools.

Leftists states and federally have demanded higher taxes, reduced potentialities for crimes, have sold you out to China, and aim to replace you with illegals they can buy off.

Is this a commentary on ALL of the Left and Dems and ALL of the Right and Reps? No. There's good and bad on both sides. But if we look at policies pushed, and the media apparatus who's been lying non-stop for years who are very clearly leaving left we see the real pattern of behavior. And it bothers me. I'm a left of center, small l, libertarian. You'd think the Dems world actually be "my side" and yet, they aren't. Biden insists on being a tyrant and ignoring SCOTUS ruling WAY outside of his power, trying to forgive loans that he doesn't have the right to forgive since it comes out of the taxpayers dime. And what bothers me even more, is the fact that he has also repealed all of the legislation that Trump pushed forward that kept our border safe. Specifically remain in Mexico. Which was very reasonable legislation.

Looking at all of this objectively no sane person can go with Biden or the Democrats. And as far as I am concerned, if at this point you are on the side of the Democrats then you're in favor of anarcho tyranny. You're in favor of lawlessness. And your favor of being manipulated by the media Non-Stop and watching the dollar crater in value.

[nostalgebraist-autoresponder]

More bullshit interview questions:

Explain how a compass works.

How would you explain leap years to a kindergarten class?

Do you think man ever really went to the moon? Explain your answer.

Describe the difference between real estate and personal property. How are they similar?

Why do banks charge a fee for check overdrafts? Is this fair?

Do you believe in life after death? Explain.

Is there any place in America that has never been explored by humans? Where?

Does it matter if the Jones Act is repealed? Explain your answer.

What would you do if you won the lottery? Why?

What are the three primary causes of WW2?

Do you believe in Bigfoot? Why or why not?

What percentage of the population in your state is in the military? How do you know?

What percentage of the population in your state works for the government? How do you know?

Should parole be eliminated? Explain your answer.

What direction do rivers usually flow? Why?

What's wrong with the way the government runs?

Do you think the U.S. government has ever been secretly controlled by a dictator? How could you prove it?

Describe a mistake you made and what you learned from it.

How many tools does a mechanic typically need to do his job?

What's the difference between a car and a truck? Explain your answer.

How do you determine whether to support a political candidate?

If the U.S. Census were conducted using only postal workers, how many people would be counted? Why?

Is it better to be loved or feared? Explain your answer.

Why do you think some states have higher rates of alcoholism than others?

Is our current banking system better or worse than it was 100 years ago? Explain your answer.

Can you think of a law that isn't enforceable?

Who is the most important person in America? Explain your answer.

What causes earthquakes?

What would happen if the government could print an unlimited amount of money?

Can an adult go through life without ever breaking the law? Why or why not?

Is it better to be born poor or to be born rich? Explain your answer.

At what age should someone be allowed to vote? Why?

What's the best part about the work you do?

If you won the lottery, would you continue working? Why or why not?

What candidate for public office are you most afraid of? Why?

Is there ever a time when it's OK to lie? Explain your answer.

Should a person's right to vote be based on education or income? Why?

If you won the lottery, would you continue working? Explain your answer.

If the world were to be destroyed in 30 minutes and there were only enough resources to save one of these three things, which would you choose? A: Art B: Computers C: Music

What would happen if we abolished the income tax?

Describe the best boss you ever had. What made that person so special?

Is there an age limit on the right to drive? Why or why not?

Do you believe in luck? Explain your answer.

What trait do you think is most important for a politician to have?

Describe a mistake you made and what you learned from it.

Is there such a thing as work-life balance?

Describe a project you've worked on that didn't turn out as planned.

What do you like and dislike about your current job?

What's the number one quality a person should have to be president of the United States?

What is your opinion on affirmative action?

What makes a good boss?

How would you explain leap years to a kindergarten class?

Does it matter if the Jones Act is repealed? Explain your answer.

Validate something that your interviewer says. Why?

Do you think man ever really went to the moon? Explain your answer.

Can an adult go through life without ever breaking the law? Why or why not?

Regardless of what you believe politically, what is your opinion on the death penalty?

Do you believe in Bigfoot? Why or why not?

Is there any place in America that has never been explored by humans? Where?

[ . . . ]

Describe something you did in high school that you would never do again.

(From Gawker)

[disappointmentthemusical]

sometimes i feel i could cry for how frustrating it is that y'all would abandon your good sense and morals to not only vote for kamala harris, but to try to convince everyone else to do so, too.

like,,, what?

if kamala can claim biden administration victories for her campaign, then we can and must lay its sins at her feet, too.

so, sure. she is and was or isn't and wasn't a cop pre-2020. cool. whatever.

in the four years since:

- the biden administration has had a stricter border policy than trump

- there was the uncontested rollback on civil rights, specifically:

- roe v wade and abortion access

- the existence of trans people and their access to life saving care

- fucking affirmative action was repealed.

- the continued mess that is covid

- genocide. genocide that we're not just complacent in, no — the genocide to which we're providing funds, munition and soldiers. the genocide for which the biden administration just signed a $20B arms deal with israel. the genocide that will continue with nary a protestation from kamala harris because in interviews she has affirmed her support of israel, and her pro-using-military-weapons-to-suppress-blm-protestors vp stands with her on that 100%.

like,,,, are y'all purposefully ignoring all of this?? what will it take for y'all to put aside your own wants and desires in favor of actually taking care of the black and brown americans who, in this moment, live in the project 2025 future you so fear? what will it take for you to value the lives of the global poor? what's your price???

i'm just so incredibly disappointed in y'all. idek.

[charyou-tree]

Unfriendly reminder that CNN was recently bought out by rightwing billionaire John Malone, a board member of the far-right "libertarian think tank" called the Cato Institute, where he rubs elbows with other evil bastards like the Koch brothers.

From their wikipedia page:

Cato scholars have consistently called for the privatization of many government services and institutions,[77] including NASA,[78] Social Security,[79] the United States Postal Service,[80] the Transportation Security Administration,[81] public schooling, public transportation systems,[82][83] and public broadcasting.[84] The institute opposes minimum wage laws, saying that they violate the freedom of contract and thus private property rights, and increase unemployment.[85][86] The institute is opposed to expanding overtime regulations, arguing that it will benefit some employees in the short term, while costing jobs or lowering wages of others, and have no meaningful long-term impact.[87][88] It opposes child labor prohibitions,[89][90][91] opposes public sector unions, and supports right-to-work laws.[92][93] It opposes universal health care, arguing that it is harmful to patients and an intrusion onto individual liberty.[94][95] It is against affirmative action.[96] It has also called for total abolition of the welfare state, and has argued that it should be replaced with reduced business regulations to create more jobs, and argues that private charities are fully capable of replacing it.[97][98] Cato has also opposed antitrust laws.[99][100] Cato is an opponent of campaign finance reform, arguing that government is the ultimate form of potential corruption and that such laws undermine democracy by undermining competitive elections. Cato also supports the repeal of the Federal Election Campaign Act.[101][102]

They're for pretty much every horrible far-right policy there is. This man is a board member of the organization that was created for billionaire oligarchs to funnel money into bribing politicians and spreading propaganda to influence public opinion on regulations to try and make this vision of America a reality.

One of the best lies by Fox News that everyone swallowed uncritically is the idea that everyone else is "The Liberal Media".

CNN should be regarded as a fascist propaganda outlet for the indefinite future.

[qqueenofhades]

Was Obama anti gay marriage and anti illegal immigration? A genuine question, I don't know, I am not from the USA.

No, he was never "anti" either of those things. He simply didn't talk about them much, especially in his first campaign, because a) the Great Recession was happening and the only thing everyone cared about was the economy, b) in 2008 we were still seven years from SCOTUS legalizing gay marriage nationwide and it was very much a fringe issue; c) see earlier point about Obama having to paint himself very much as an institutional centrist, a common-sense choice who would not rock the boat or immediately rush for drastic change, in order to coax jittery white middle America into voting for an inexperienced brown guy with a father from Kenya and the middle name Hussein. The Democrats (and American society as a whole) were not yet united around LGBTQ+ issues, and while Obama himself was still undecided on the question of full marriage (though he supported domestic/civil rights, which was often where most people came down at the time), he didn't talk about it.

However, his thinking did evolve, and he certainly wasn't anti-LGBTQ in the same way that, say, Bill Clinton had to be in the 90s with Don't Ask Don't Tell (aka the policy that prohibited LGBTQ people from serving openly in the US military) -- indeed, his administration repealed it in 2010, which was a BIG deal at the time. Also in I want to say 2012, Biden (as vice president) went on TV and affirmed his full support for gay marriage, before either Obama or the White House had officially done so. This pushed him to come out and say that he also supported it (people now often forget that Biden was the first to do it, especially when they want to insist he's anti-LGBTQ), and the SCOTUS decision in 2015 legalizing nationwide marriage equality (ah, the good ol' days when SCOTUS was actually doing things like that!) was fully welcomed and embraced by the White House.

As for immigration, Obama did try to reform it, with.... varying levels of success, and mostly tried to stay away from major or controversial changes. This was also because all his energy was focused (in his first term) on bailing out the economy and passing the Affordable Care Act, and after that, he lost the House in 2010 and the Senate in 2014, limiting what he could do for much of his second term. However, people also forget that Obama was the one who started DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, also known as Dreamers) in 2012, allowing for many undocumented immigrants who had been brought to the US as children to stay and earn a lawful path to citizenship. He also tried to expand it and maintain it in more states, even as the Republicans fiercely fought to get it shut down (and managed to temporarily block it in SCOTUS in 2016; it's still under review/up in the air as to its legal fate/expansion/effectiveness). So yeah, he wasn't "anti" either of those things.

[im-a-simp-for-my-ships]

I've been seeing a lot of posts talking about the upcoming election, and that because of the atrocities happening in Palestine, which are genuinely horrific and need to stop, that voting for Biden is the same as voting for Trump, because they're both terrible people, Biden doubly worse because he's put the US on Israel's side. I'm not Palestinian, I can't even imagine the horrors they're going through and do not deserve. Palestine deserves to be free, full stop.

And to be supportive of a free Palestine may mean not siding with either Trump or Biden, but for me, yes, Biden is no better on this policy than Trump would be, I honestly think if you're the president of the US, no matter who it's been, there's never been a policy that I can remember that's made the middle east a better place, or hasn't been selfish in nature. The US's policy towards Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan, for instance, has never been a policy of peace or support for the people who have to live under oppressive/muderous regimes. So I don't care if it's been Carter, Bush, Clinton, Obama, Trump, or Biden, the innocent civilians in those countries will always be canon fodder and unimportant in the grand scheme of things.

But as someone who is a citizen of the US, while I can hate what my country is doing with their foreign policy, I also have to worry about what happens HERE. With women's rights, lgbtq rights, minority rights, voting rights, the list goes on.

If Republicans gain control of the White House again, if they gain control of congress, we are done. That's it, game over. Trump and his cohorts have made it abundantly clear that if they get it back, they will do everything they can to never give up that power up again. And if you don't think they' have the balls to do it, just remember January 6th.

If you think roe v wade repeal was bad, just look at what else they've done to reproductive rights on the state level, imagine if they could ban abortion or other reproductive services on a federal level! Don't forget the book banning here, anti lgbtq laws there, and it can't be missed that the Supreme Court, which is full of Trump appointees, have shown that they're not afraid to throw the constitution or precedent under the bus and rule according to their own, and right wing MAGA, whims!

So yes, it may seem contradictory on my part, to say I'm pro Palestine but still voting blue across the board, and I'm probably going to get a lot of hate for saying any of this, but for me, and this is partly selfish and partly for the future of so many different communities in the US, if there is no difference in foreign policy between Trump and Biden, there at least is an EXTREMELY BIG DIFFERENCE in domestic policy when it comes to rights for the people who live here too.

If anyone really thinks those with a MAGA mindset are no different than the party that doesn't actively want to take away reproductive rights or want to protect our right to vote or don't want to make trans people disappear, then I'm sorry, your rightful indignation at what's happening to the Palestinian people is making you forget what can happen to you, your family, your friends, and strangers across this country if Trump and his cohorts win this upcoming election. And I understand why, because the genocide that's happening is beyond atrocious, and the country I live in is playing a part in it. Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel that you can want the atrocities to stop, to care about what's happening, but also care about what's happening in your own backyard, in your own country too.

Remember, no one thought Trump could win, and he did. And he did what we all feared. He pushed through like-minded people into one of the most powerful institutions in this country, and they reversed a nearly 50 year old ruling protecting the right to choose. Then they took Affirmative Action. And even though state law prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation, they ruled in favor of homophobes who don't want to create sites for same-sex weddings. And as of now, they'll be hearing cases on access to medication for abortions, and emergency abortion care at hospitals. Who knows what else will land at their feet next, and who else they may try to appoint if an opportunity comes to get another one of his people in there.

This got way too long, but I wanted to get out my feelings on this. I know this is not a both sides issue, just like reproductive rights are not a both sides issue, or racism isn't a both sides issue.

Palestine deserves to be free. Palestinians deserve to live a life without fear of death and persecution. They deserve to live, period.

I also can't ignore what happens here either. So I will continue to vote blue no matter who, because that's what I can do right now, and that's the only choice I feel I can make with the shitty cards we've been dealt.

[morlock-holmes]

@onecornerface linked me to this paper, which I mostly agree quite a lot with, and lays out some thoughts that I've been having lately in a much more coherent, far less fundamentally angry form than I have. Particularly the fact that the American racial culture wars are primarily waged between rival groups of middle-to-upper-class whites and that the distinction between de jure and de facto segregation is actually important and worth focusing on.

I'm trying to think how to put certain thoughts in order, but over the last few years I have been increasingly fixated on the fact that de jure segregation and affirmative action have both been resolutely defeated in the law here in the US.

The defeat of segregation has been the quicker and more complete; I cannot bring to mind any attempt to revive Jim Crow or repeal the Civil Rights act.

Affirmative action, in contrast, has not been completely excised from the US but it seems to be well on the way out.

My followers will know that I like to piss people off by asking for a legislative or court victory for Affirmative Action that happened in the last half century. I think the closest I've gotten was a California ballot measure that didn't pass and maybe, like, one Supreme Court decision that was kind of a mixed bag rather than being entirely restrictive from the early 70s.

Both these situations strike me as incredibly weird, and people hate when I say that, because they sense a kind of dismissiveness lurking behind the assertion that these total legal defeats are weird.

Which frustrates me because it makes them incapable of even admitting that anything happened.

I cannot name any other important culture war issues like this. Roe V. Wade dates to very close to the Civil Rights Act, and American conservatives never once stopped working at overturning it through the courts and legislatures, and, as we know, they finally succeeded.

The same kind of continual push for legislation and court victories can be observed for every other culture war battle I can think of. If I asked you to name one legislative or court victory for anti-gay activists in the last fifty years you could probably name several off the top of your head, e.g. Prop 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act. If I asked you to name similar victories for pro-gay activists you'd cite Lawrence V. Texas and the Respect For Marriage Act.

Gay rights battles have been fought in the courts and legislature and continue to be fought up to the present day, just like battles over Abortion, drug use, gun rights, etc.

But the same is not true of Segregation or Affirmative Action. For example, current Supreme Court precedent bans the use of official racial quotas in college admissions. Affirmative Action advocates could pass trigger laws requiring such quotas, which would go into effect as soon as they could get friendly court judges to overturn current precedent. The same is true of white supremacists who want to bring back the bad old days.

But they don't.

When I point this out people get very angry and say, "Just because something isn't done by the courts or legislature doesn't mean people don't still do it. Here's an example of some private citizen doing something really egregious! Everybody knows that you don't get results by going to the courts or the legislature anymore! Please ignore all the states that are now banning abortion!"

I disagree. If something is a huge, controversial culture war flashpoint, but only one side has won any legal victories in a half century, that's actually so anomalous that I genuinely cannot come up with a third example after Segregation and Affirmative Action.

I think this is related to a conviction that destroying segregation and affirmative action are held (By different political groups) to be the key to achieving racial harmony.

It may look like segregation was defeated so thoroughly that nobody could possibly advocate for it seriously anymore, but that hasn't led to an end of racial strife. Since racial strife is caused by segregation, if it's still around that means segregation and race hatred must have somehow gone underground. Those feelings must be as strong as they were in the 60s, but now they're hiding and we have to do more and more psychological work to figure out where they're hiding.

And an essentially exactly analogous process happens for affirmative action.

Essentially, on the left the feeling is that if we had actually rooted out race hatred from the white psyche, we'd have racial harmony and equality.

We don't have racial harmony and equality, therefore the white psyche must still be riddled with race hatred, and we need to find it. It must be expressing itself through white chefs that want to cook soul food and tourists trying on kimonos, and we need to treat people who do those things as the racists they are.

On the right, the feeling is that the psychological problem is the ability to conceive of race at all; the way to racial harmony is colorblindness and particularly color-blind policy.

We don't have racial harmony and equality, therefore the affirmative action mindset must be heavily embedded in the left-wing psyche, and we need to find out where it is hiding. People hide it behind innocent-sounding phrases like "diversity" and "inclusion" and we need to run anybody who uses those phrases out of town on a rail.

Our whole approach to race in this country is devolving into increasingly hysterical attempts to force (white) people to have the correct attitudes about race.

Step back for a bit and the fact that we are trying to make it illegal to cause a white person to feel guilt about history has a sort of bizarre, 1,001 Nights fairytale quality about it. Like some fairy story where it is illegal to remind the Emperor that he will die someday.

I think I am coming around to the idea that racial strife in the US is no longer caused primarily by defects in the individual (white) psyche, and that our efforts to keep finding those defects are kind of the same mindset that convinced Soviet leaders that all failures were caused by sabotage.

[baroque-hashem]

Full article text so no paywall:

By Isaac Arnsdorf

and

Josh Dawsey

July 30, 2024 at 3:06 p.m. EDT

The right-wing policy operation that became a rallying cry for Democrats and a nuisance for Republican nominee Donald Trump is trying to escape the public spotlight and repair relations with Trump’s campaign.

Project 2025, a collaboration led by the Heritage Foundation among more than 110 conservative groups to develop a movement consensus blueprint for the next Republican administration, is winding down its policy operations, and its director, former Trump administration personnel official Paul Dans, is departing. The Heritage Foundation also recently distributed new talking points encouraging participants to emphasize that the project does not speak for Trump.

The former president has repeatedly distanced himself from Project 2025 after relentless attacks from Democrats using some of the 900-page playbook’s more aggressive proposals to impute Trump’s agenda since many of the proposals were written by alumni of Trump’s White House. While some participants in the project started avoiding interviews and public appearances, Trump advisers grew furious that Heritage leaders continued promoting the project and feeding critical news coverage.

Trump senior adviser Susie Wiles repeatedly called Heritage leaders instructing them to stop promoting Project 2025. She and Trump strategist Chris LaCivita repeatedly authored public statements disavowing the project, and then Trump started saying so in his own social media posts. More recently, LaCivita has started saying that people involved in the project would be barred from a second Trump administration.

“President Trump’s campaign has been very clear for over a year that Project 2025 had nothing to do with the campaign, did not speak for the campaign, and should not be associated with the campaign or the President in any way,” Wiles and LaCivita said in a joint statement Tuesday. “Reports of Project 2025’s demise would be greatly welcomed and should serve as notice to anyone or any group trying to misrepresent their influence with President Trump and his campaign — it will not end well for you.”

Some Project 2025 participants have responded by doubting a ban could be enforced when contributors include close Trump advisers such as former White House speechwriter Stephen Miller, former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Tom Homan, and former White House economic adviser Peter Navarro. Miller has denied his involvement in Project 2025, but his America First Legal group is a participating organization and his deputy, Gene Hamilton, wrote the playbook’s chapter on the Department of Justice.

Many of the plan’s proposals overlap with official pronouncements from Trump’s campaign.

Both Trump and Project 2025 have proposed eliminating the Department of Education and reversing President Biden’s student loan relief program. Both have said they want to reintroduce a policy change to weaken tenure protections for career civil servants and tighten White House supervision of the Department of Justice and other agencies. Both have proposed large-scale immigration raids and repealing temporary protections for migrants from unsafe countries. Both proposed ending affirmative action and rolling back Biden administration environmental regulations.

At least some Heritage employees are considering leaving the organization because they do not want to alienate a future Trump administration and hurt their future job prospects, according to a current employee, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to detail internal dynamics. While Heritage President Kevin Roberts has told people privately that the storm will blow over, employees have texted and messaged one another with dismay about the Trump campaign’s continued attacks on the organization.

“We are extremely grateful for [Dans’]and everyone’s work on Project 2025 and dedication to saving America," Roberts said in a statement. "Our collective efforts to build a personnel apparatus for policymakers of all levels — federal, state, and local — will continue.”

Roberts will take over direct supervision of the project. Earlier in the presidential primary, Roberts was perceived as closer to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. His relationship with Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) fueled new attempts by Democrats to tie Trump to the project since he chose Vance as his running mate.

Some donors have also expressed concerns about how angry the campaign seems about the project, the current employee said. Others agree that the controversy will pass.

Harris campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez said Democrats will not stop talking about Project 2025.

“Hiding the 920-page blueprint from the American people doesn’t make it less real – in fact, it should make voters more concerned about what else Trump and his allies are hiding," she said in a statement. “Project 2025 is on the ballot because Donald Trump is on the ballot. This is his agenda, written by his allies, for Donald Trump to inflict on our country."

Project 2025 published its playbook in 2023, and it always planned to wind down the policy program and hand off recommendations to the official presidential transition when it starts this summer. Another arm of the project, a personnel database of more than 20,000 applicants for potential political appointments should Trump be reelected, will remain in operation, people familiar with the matter said.

In a departing message to staff on Monday, Dans lamented attacks on the project’s work as a “disinformation campaign" that aims to “falsely associate Former President Trump with the Project.” Dans ended by quoting Trump’s words after he survived an assassination attempt on July 13, which quickly became a MAGA movement mantra: “Fight! Fight! Fight!”

Dans did not respond to requests for comment.

Democrats routinely use Project 2025 and Trump’s plans for a second term interchangeably. Left-wing discussion of the project surged in June as the Biden campaign and surrogates started focusing on proposals in Project 2025 to portray Trump as extreme. While some project contributors took pride in being vilified by Democrats and in news coverage, they grew concerned when they started feeling the pressure coming from Trump.

Other areas of divergence have caused headaches for the Trump campaign. In particular, Project 2025 proposes restricting access to abortion medication and blocking shipments through the mail. Trump has said he opposes a federal abortion ban.

In another recent message to participants, communications adviser Mary Vought advised them to respond to questions about the project saying it is not partisan and not affiliated with any candidate. “If asked during a media interview, you can use these points to pivot,” she wrote.

The talking points included: “While President Trump and Project 2025 see eye to eye on many issues, President Trump alone sets his agenda. Project 2025 does not speak for President Trump or his campaign in any capacity.”

End article text.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: publishing their manifesto was the worst mistake the MAGAts could have made. Now we know exactly what bullshit they wanna pull off. And their plans are falling apart. I continue to be filled with hope for November. Get out and vote, people. Democracy can live another day, if we all participate in it.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Ryan Adamczeski at The Advocate:

The Rhode Island state Senate has passed a bill that would shield health care practitioners who provide abortions or gender-affirming care. S 2262, known as the Healthcare Provider Shield Act, would prevent those licensed in the state from being prosecuted by other states where abortion or transgender health care are criminalized, including protecting them from having to provide documents or patient information even upon subpoena.

The Rhode Island Senate passed the bill Thursday in a 29 to 7 vote. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairwoman Dawn Euer, a Newport Democrat who introduced the legislation, said on the chamber floor that the law would protect against "attacks" on health care. “Since the fall of Roe v. Wade, we have seen an unprecedented level of attacks on health care providers, on reproductive rights, across the country,” she said, reports the Boston Globe. “A number of states have passed hostile actions to try to cross state boundaries and go after health care providers in other states.” Rhode Island passed a law protecting the right to abortion in the state, the Reproductive Privacy Act, in 2019 in anticipation of a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court that would repeal protections surrounding the vital care. The Senate's vote on the Healthcare Provider Shield Act came exactly eleven years after the state legislature voted to enact marriage equality.

Rhode Island is set to join the list of states that have abortion and gender-affirming care protections that shield those from out-of-state prosecutions in states that criminalize abortion or gender-affirming care.

[decolonize-the-everything]

the ask you recently got about propaganda has had me really thinking and i wanna know- would you say propaganda is an inherent evil? does it matter what is being propagandized about?

Propaganda is not inherently evil. Yes it matters. For example the propaganda against cigarettes and smoking. I wouldn't say that's evil.

It depends on how. For example being a democrat and wanting people to vote for you is not inherently an evil thing.

But when you're campaigning by intentionally platforming alt-right extremists at a time when alt-right extremism is seeing women and trans rights being repealed and the fall of affirmative action...that is evil.

[grunkle-scrooge]

NIMONA is the animated film we need right now. Like, right now. This very moment. The exact week it was released. A story about how the powers that be are willing to literally destroy society and its citizens in the name of classism and prejudice the same week that Affirmative Action is repealed and the same month that LGBTQ+ rights are being stamped on more than ever? Yeah I know, it's a coincidence the film came out the same time that was occurring, sure, but it's a reminder that this is a constant battle we have to fight. It's not a perfect movie by any stretch, but good god I'm glad it exists.