eppur_se_muova
eppur_se_muova's JournalHow Project 2025 plans to reshape the American family (Velshi/MSNBC) ***IMPORTANT READ***
So much for Republicans being the party of limited government. The next GOP administration wants to dictate what your family should look like.Aug. 12, 2024, 5:02 PM CDT
By Ali Velshi
This is an adapted excerpt from the Aug. 11 episode of “Velshi.”
Project 2025, the authoritarian blueprint for dismantling federal agencies in the next Republican presidency, has a lot of thoughts on what your private relationships should look like and whom you should marry.
In fact, a Christian nationalist vision of the family is a key centerpiece of the 922-page manual. It describes proposals for the American family as “central to the next conservative President’s agenda:"
According to Project 2025, not all families are created equal. On page 451, it defines the “right” kind of family as “a married mother, father, and their children.” It claims this is the “foundation of a well-ordered nation and a healthy society.”
Promoting this biblical concept of family is cited as a top-five goal for a revamped Department of Health and Human Services, which it criticizes for “having lost its way” by “promoting equity in everything we do.”
The document says efforts at promoting diversity should be repealed and replaced with policies that support what it calls the formation of “stable, married, nuclear families.”
***
more: https://www.msnbc.com/top-stories/latest/project-2025-reshape-family-christian-nationalism-trump-rcna166276 (lots of links in the story)
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who will guard these guardians?)
Although often attributed to a quote or paraphrase from Plato's Republic, it does not explicitly appear in that work. The version we are familiar with is attributed -- with some debate -- to the Roman poet Juvenal, where the guards in question are guaranteeing the marital fidelity of women (apparently men didn't need similar guards, which suggests Juvenal had a thing or two to learn). The question is inherently unanswerable, but for centuries, many have offered their own "solutions". Today's crop of radical reformers, parading under the ludicrously inaccurate banner of "conservatism", includes people like Kevin Roberts, who wants government to decide when women should have children (the more the merrier), and Curtis Yarvin and his billionaire backer Peter Thiel who want to replace American democracy with a (presumably all-wise) absolute dictator. In short, we are to place the power to make all the important decisions in our lives (or at least the most important ones) in the hands of strangers who have been given the power to make these judgments based on --- what, exactly ? Why believe these (mostly) unnamed authorities are more knowledgeable or more capable of good judgment than free adult citizens ? Religions pull the ultimate pass-the-buck here by saying their leaders take orders from an all-powerful, all-knowing deity, but they can't agree on even the basics of what this deity (or deities, depending) has to say. So why should we think some "conservative"-approved functionary -- let's call him (you know it'll be a him) the "National Nanny" -- is going to be better at the job than the people actually doing the job now ? If their choices of leaders so far are any indication, I'd say all indicators are that that would be a VERY, very, very BAD IDEA.
People have been struggling with this idea for millennia. What gives these looniest of the lunatic fringe (i.e. the heart of the current GOP) the hubris to hold that suddenly, they, alone in the history of mankind, have got it all figured out ? That they, have at last, something which they can barely restrain themselves (for now) from calling "The Final Solution"?
I don't often quote scripture, but when I do I look it up first, and sometimes discover that the usual "quote" is in error, or at least incomplete. So this time. The quote I actually found was this:
Proverbs 16:18 (KJV)
It's a more insightful proverb than I realized, because it doesn't place any limits on who, or what, gets destroyed.
How Kevin Roberts' new book shows Project 2025's intent to "control" women -- and even worse **IMPORTANT READ**
Written by Media Matters Staff
Published 08/14/24 7:08 PM EDT
Well, the progressive media watchdog group, Media Matters, got its hands on an advanced copy of that book that Roberts has written. It's titled "Dawn's Early Light, Taking Back Washington to Save America."
And in it, they find this: "Roberts repeatedly invokes revolutionary rhetoric. 'It's time for a conservatism of fire,'" he writes. Roberts also proposes a question to his readers asking this, "What's your Alamo? What are you dying for? There's a time for writing and reading and a time to put down the books and go fight like hell to take back our country and build our future."
***
ANGELO CARUSONE (MEDIA MATTERS PRESIDENT): One thing that always sticks out at me since we went through the copy is this one part in the book. And it'll sound familiar because it -- and it explains partly why Vance was so willing to write the foreword -- where Roberts writes about the fact that he doesn't believe -- and argues -- that having a child should not "be an optional individual decision."
And what he argues for is that it's a societal one. That did not only take -- they should use soft means like pressures, but they should do everything possible from a policy perspective to take away that choice from individuals. That means banning contraception. That means taking a whole suite of issues against reproductive health and, you know, banning abortions. That is a massive overhaul.
And to me, the one through line throughout the book -- whether he's railing against education or he's arguing for rolling back unions and eliminating them and rolling back workplace safety protections, or even when he goes into this massive tangent about dog parks, which he's sort of angry about the fact that there are more people that have dogs than children which can't be entirely true -- that feels like one of the through lines, which is that fundamentally, if you just read it and you let it absorb, you're left with this idea that there's a bunch of childless people out there that are destroying the country, and that something really drastic is needed. And that is a theme that we've heard throughout Project 2025 and Roberts in order to stop them from ruining the country.
***
more: https://www.mediamatters.org/project-2025/msnbcs-deadline-white-house-angelo-carusone-explains-how-kevin-roberts-new-book-shows
https://www.nbc.com/deadline-white-house/video/deadline-81424/9000374447 (you need to sign up for an "NBCUniversal Profile" for permission to watch)
Kevin Roberts is one deeply misguided individual. His thinking that "whoever has the most population, wins" is out of date by centuries. Education, science, technology, and freedom from superstition and suffocating religious oppression have made the individuals in modern society so much more powerful than their predecessors that an average American can accomplish things that an ancient king with thousands of slaves and thousands of soldiers could never do. WE DON'T NEED additional human bodies to achieve great ends -- more population only sucks the resources from the planet and threatens to exhaust our ability to live the lives that we do. Great ideas and great movements thrive and grow when individuals grow inwardly, more than when they grow in numbers. Conservative DO NOT recognize internal growth -- other than being "born again" -- as a factor in people's lives, nor as a desirable end. As Mr. Roberts makes clear, people (presumably "ordinary" people, not their self-annointed leaders) can not serve any worthwhile function other than breeding. Their only contributions come from their bodies; the authority to make contributions from the mind is reserved for the entitled who lead them.
The whole idea of conservatism is to keep things as they are -- those who are comfortable don't want to risk their comfort, so just don't change anything! But ANY form of improvement requires growth and change -- which is complete anathema to conservatives.
Conservatism is the idea that not only do things not need to improve, but that no change in their imagined "ideal" society can possibly constitute an improvement.
Is that 7 out of 9 likely voters, or 7 out of 9 registered voters ? nt
(I know, just kidding)
When was the last time - and in what century - that no previous POTUS or VP attended their party's National Convention ?
Dubya and Cheney have been pretty quiet since leaving office, but normally you might expect one of them, or a previous nominee (such as Romney or Ryan or even Dan Quayle) would put in an appearance. Even Sarah Palin couldn't make it. And of course we didn't expect Mike Pence to be invited.
It just emphasizes the complete rupture between today's GOP personality cult and the party of the past.
Sorry JD Vance, but being a 'childless cat lady' is actually not a bad thing (Guardian)
Arwa Mahdawi
***
Anyway, I’m not really here to write about what a hateful and self-serving hypocrite Vance is*. A million thinkpieces have been published on that already. If you’re in a masochistic mood please do read up on how excited he is to force rape victims to give birth and how he thinks divorce laws have gone too far and how he reckons Britain is an “Islamist country”.
No, what I’m really here to say is that, rather than being the insult conservatives seem to think it is, “childless cat lady” is a state that more women actually ought to aspire to. Rather than being “miserable”, as Vance said, women who are childfree by choice are often happier and healthier than men and married women with children. This isn’t my opinion; there’s data that backs this up. Back in 2019, Paul Dolan, a professor of behavioural science at the London School of Economics, made headlines when, during a speech at Hay festival, he cited evidence that women are happier without kids or a spouse.
“[I[f you’re a man, you should probably get married; if you’re a woman, don’t bother,” Dolan joked about the longitudinal data suggesting “the healthiest and happiest population subgroup are women who never married or had children.” Dolan didn’t say anything about cats but I’m sure there’s a case to be made that a feline friend only adds to life satisfaction. Of course, there’s no point telling the likes of Vance that their misogynistic and anti-cat assumptions are wrong. Republicans don’t like to have facts get in the way of their feelings.
***
more: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jul/20/jd-vance-childless-by-choice
*But she does a pretty good job of that, with links in the article.
Excerpt from NYT Op-Ed today: I think this may be the best part to share with friends & family who may vote for Trump.
III.Character
Matters
Character is the quality that gives a leader credibility, authority and influence. During the 2016 campaign, Mr. Trump’s petty attacks on his opponents and their families led many Republicans to conclude that he lacked such character. Other Republicans, including those who supported the former president’s policies in office, say they can no longer in good conscience back him for the presidency. “It’s a job that requires the kind of character he just doesn’t have,” Paul Ryan, a former Republican House speaker, said of Mr. Trump in May.
Those who know Mr. Trump’s character best — the people he appointed to serve in the most important positions of his White House — have expressed grave doubts about his fitness for office.
His former chief of staff John Kelly, a retired four-star Marine Corps general, described Mr. Trump as “a person who admires autocrats and murderous dictators. A person that has nothing but contempt for our democratic institutions, our Constitution and the rule of law.” Bill Barr, whom Mr. Trump appointed as attorney general, said of him, “He will always put his own interest and gratifying his own ego ahead of everything else, including the country’s interest.” James Mattis, a retired four-star Marine general who served as defense secretary, said, “Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people — does not even pretend to try.”
Mike Pence, Mr. Trump’s vice president, has disavowed him. No other vice president in modern American history has done this. “I believe that anyone who puts themselves over the Constitution should never be president of the United States,” Mr. Pence has said. “And anyone who asked someone else to put them over the Constitution should never be president of the United States again.”
These are hardly exceptions. In any other American administration, a single cabinet-level defection is rare. But an unprecedented number of Mr. Trump’s appointees have publicly criticized his leadership, opposed his 2024 presidential candidacy or ducked questions about his fitness for a second term. More than a dozen of his most senior appointees — those he chose to work alongside him and who saw his performance most closely — have spoken out against him, serving as witnesses about the kind of leader he is.
***
more: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/07/11/opinion/editorials/donald-trump-2024-unfit.html?unlocked_article_code=1.6U0.j99V.BtTSOE-G_g53
Is there any truth to the rumor that Trump's team are keeping him out of the public eye because ...
... he's finally suffered that "complete psychotic break" that the mental health professionals have been warning us about for years ?
Just asking for a friend.
Here's wishing you and yours a happy, safe, and prosperous National Gorilla Suit Day* !
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorilla_suit#National_Gorilla_Suit_Day
* This statement is not meant to imply any promise, contract, or covenant on the part of the poster. Poster cannot be held legally liable for failure to achieve happiness, safety, or prosperity. If anything goes wrong it's your own damned fault.
Kinzinger: "A lot of my colleagues are going to have kids who are ashamed of their last names"
This is an excellent interview of Adam Kinzinger by anchor John Ono on the show "BookTV". Kinzinger comes across as really thoughtful and insightful, and a very nice, very sincere guy. If it had not been for the MAGAts I think he would have been on a fast track to the top leadership of the GOP. I could easily see him as a candidate for VP, or even President, if only the GOP had remained sane.
I strongly encourage everyone to watch this interview. He drops all kinds of interesting tidbits -- such as possibly running against Ted Cruz, and possibly becoming a Dem. Makes me want to run out and buy his book.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?531898-1/renegade
Profile Information
Gender: Do not displayHometown: Alabama
Member since: Fri Sep 9, 2005, 07:39 PM
Number of posts: 36,897