TO COMMENT CLICK HERE
welcome to reality trivia
reality is the state of things as they actually exist
MAR 28, 2024
Real News Today
(for previous day's articles see "what's inside" below)
comment/tweet of the day
LEX: WHY ARE BILLIONAIRES SO STUPID AND RACIST???
Billionaire Tells Seniors That 65 Is A 'Crazy' Retirement Age
'Out-of-Touch Billionaire' Larry Fink Blasted for Calling 65 a 'Crazy' Retirement Age
---
thom hartmann
Why Are the People Brave Enough to Hold Trump to Account Mostly Black & Brown?
There is no movement advocating political violence on the American left. It is entirely confined to the American right & the media needs to admit that…
How Billionaire's Privilege is Taking Down Our Republic
Hundreds of working class people who answered Donald Trump’s call on January 6th are sitting in prison today, but the ringleader, the guy without whom those people would not be in jail, walks free…
Meta and Google accused of restricting reproductive health information
Report claims posts on abortion and contraception have been deleted while misinformation on the feeds of social media users in Africa, Latin America and Asia has not been tackled
Weronika Strzyżyńska - the guardian
Wed 27 Mar 2024 10.41 EDT
Meta and Google are accused in a new report of obstructing information on abortion and reproductive healthcare across Africa, Latin America and Asia.
MSI Reproductive Choices (formerly Marie Stopes International) and the Center for Countering Digital Hate claim the platforms are restricting local abortion providers from advertising, but failing to tackle misinformation that undermines public access to reproductive healthcare.
Meta said it will review the report’s findings.
MSI, which provides contraception and abortion services in 37 countries, said its adverts containing information on sexual health, including cancer advice, had been rejected or deleted by the platform.
Phrases such as “pregnancy options” have been flagged as falling foul of Google community guidelines, MSI Ghana claims. MSI Vietnam said Facebook adverts promoting information about IUDs (intrauterine devices) and other contraceptive methods were removed.
Whitney Chinogwenya, MSI’s global marketing manager, said: “In Africa, Facebook is the go-to place for reproductive health information for many women. We have been scaling our digital operation to meet the demand but we’re struggling to get reliable information in front of the women who need it.
“We deal with everything from menopause to menstruation but we find that all our content is censored.”
She said Meta viewed reproductive health content through “an American lens”, applying socially conservative US values to posts published in countries with progressive policies such as South Africa, where abortion on request is legal in the first 20 weeks of pregnancy.
MSI Mexico said its Facebook posts advertising legal abortion services have been deleted by the platform. Abortion was decriminalised in September and is available on request in Mexico City and 11 other states.
Chinogwenya said Meta is not doing enough to combat anti-abortion misinformation, accepting adverts from organisations that claim medical abortions lead to “fatal vaginal bleeding” or that upload gestational images of advanced pregnancies claiming they are from earlier foetal stages in an effort to stigmatise the procedure.
The report, published on Wednesday, identified fake MSI pages on Facebook, including five in Kenya.
MSI said it tried to request that Meta delete the pages, but struggled to reach a representative of the company.
“Some of the pages belong to informal abortion providers who want to piggyback off MSI’s reputations,” Chinogwenya said. “Others will belong to pregnancy crisis centres, which pose as abortion clinics to discourage and prevent women from terminating their pregnancy. But there are also many scammers. Women often come to our clinics after being sold anything from aspirin to laxatives by online scammers.”
The report said MSI clinics in Ghana were being targeted by a disinformation campaign on the Meta-owned messaging platform WhatsApp.
“Putting a factchecking system in place for reproductive health information and services is one of the best things Meta could do,” said Esi Asare Prah, the advocacy and donor relations manager at MSI Ghana, where abortion is allowed in limited circumstances. She hopes the report will make digital platforms conscious of their responsibilities towards users in the global south. “Whether it’s content promoting health misinformation or directing women and girls towards unsafe services, there are real users being disadvantaged in the end,” she said.
The report was compiled through correspondence and interviews with MSI’s local teams in Ghana, Kenya, Mexico, Nepal, Nigeria and Vietnam, and evidence collected from Meta’s Ad Library.
A Meta spokesperson, Ryan Daniels, said: “We allow posts and ads promoting healthcare services, as well as discussion and debate around them. Content about reproductive health must follow our rules, including those on prescription drugs and misinformation, and ads promoting reproductive health products or services may only be targeted to people 18-plus.
“We prohibit ads that include misinformation or mislead people about services a business provides, and we will review the content of this report.”
A Google spokesperson said: “This report does not include a single example of policy-violating content on Google’s platform, nor any examples of inconsistent enforcement.”
The spokesperson said adverts that reference “pregnancy options” are not prohibited from running in Ghana. “If the ads were restricted, it was likely due to our longstanding policies against targeting people based on sensitive health categories, which includes pregnancy.”
MSI Reproductive Choices (formerly Marie Stopes International) and the Center for Countering Digital Hate claim the platforms are restricting local abortion providers from advertising, but failing to tackle misinformation that undermines public access to reproductive healthcare.
Meta said it will review the report’s findings.
MSI, which provides contraception and abortion services in 37 countries, said its adverts containing information on sexual health, including cancer advice, had been rejected or deleted by the platform.
Phrases such as “pregnancy options” have been flagged as falling foul of Google community guidelines, MSI Ghana claims. MSI Vietnam said Facebook adverts promoting information about IUDs (intrauterine devices) and other contraceptive methods were removed.
Whitney Chinogwenya, MSI’s global marketing manager, said: “In Africa, Facebook is the go-to place for reproductive health information for many women. We have been scaling our digital operation to meet the demand but we’re struggling to get reliable information in front of the women who need it.
“We deal with everything from menopause to menstruation but we find that all our content is censored.”
She said Meta viewed reproductive health content through “an American lens”, applying socially conservative US values to posts published in countries with progressive policies such as South Africa, where abortion on request is legal in the first 20 weeks of pregnancy.
MSI Mexico said its Facebook posts advertising legal abortion services have been deleted by the platform. Abortion was decriminalised in September and is available on request in Mexico City and 11 other states.
Chinogwenya said Meta is not doing enough to combat anti-abortion misinformation, accepting adverts from organisations that claim medical abortions lead to “fatal vaginal bleeding” or that upload gestational images of advanced pregnancies claiming they are from earlier foetal stages in an effort to stigmatise the procedure.
The report, published on Wednesday, identified fake MSI pages on Facebook, including five in Kenya.
MSI said it tried to request that Meta delete the pages, but struggled to reach a representative of the company.
“Some of the pages belong to informal abortion providers who want to piggyback off MSI’s reputations,” Chinogwenya said. “Others will belong to pregnancy crisis centres, which pose as abortion clinics to discourage and prevent women from terminating their pregnancy. But there are also many scammers. Women often come to our clinics after being sold anything from aspirin to laxatives by online scammers.”
The report said MSI clinics in Ghana were being targeted by a disinformation campaign on the Meta-owned messaging platform WhatsApp.
“Putting a factchecking system in place for reproductive health information and services is one of the best things Meta could do,” said Esi Asare Prah, the advocacy and donor relations manager at MSI Ghana, where abortion is allowed in limited circumstances. She hopes the report will make digital platforms conscious of their responsibilities towards users in the global south. “Whether it’s content promoting health misinformation or directing women and girls towards unsafe services, there are real users being disadvantaged in the end,” she said.
The report was compiled through correspondence and interviews with MSI’s local teams in Ghana, Kenya, Mexico, Nepal, Nigeria and Vietnam, and evidence collected from Meta’s Ad Library.
A Meta spokesperson, Ryan Daniels, said: “We allow posts and ads promoting healthcare services, as well as discussion and debate around them. Content about reproductive health must follow our rules, including those on prescription drugs and misinformation, and ads promoting reproductive health products or services may only be targeted to people 18-plus.
“We prohibit ads that include misinformation or mislead people about services a business provides, and we will review the content of this report.”
A Google spokesperson said: “This report does not include a single example of policy-violating content on Google’s platform, nor any examples of inconsistent enforcement.”
The spokesperson said adverts that reference “pregnancy options” are not prohibited from running in Ghana. “If the ads were restricted, it was likely due to our longstanding policies against targeting people based on sensitive health categories, which includes pregnancy.”
‘Hunger Games at NBC News’: New McDaniel revelations have ‘enraged’ staffers, report says
David Badash, The New Civil Rights Movement - RAW STORY
March 28, 2024 1:15PM ET
The backlash from NBC News' hiring of Ronna McDaniel is not over. New reporting from Puck, CNN, and The Washington Post reveals the considerable efforts from top NBC and MSNBC brass to recruit, hire, and support the former RNC chair who promoted false election claims, was allegedly involved in helping Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, and refused to say Joe Biden had been elected fairly.
Staffers at NBC News and MSNBC were outraged at McDaniel's hiring, but new details about behind-the-scenes efforts reportedly have increased that outrage.
Some critics are either calling for resignations of NBC News and MSNBC leadership, or questioning how long they can ride out the mess.
"What is Brian Roberts going to do?" CNN's Oliver Darcy asks. "The Comcast boss is watching an unceasing five-alarm fire rage at 30 Rock, scarring the reputation of NBC News and threatening to consume multiple parts of the Cesar Conde-run NBC Universal News Group."
"Conde has lost control of his organization, prompting industry insiders to wonder how he continues to remain in his role as chairman of the NBC News Group. In the words of one veteran media executive I spoke to Wednesday, 'It’s inconceivable that he should,'" Darcy writes, saying Conde's actions and those of his top executives have "hosed gasoline" on the scandal.
That scandal involves these revelations from Puck's Dylan Byers, who reports, "bringing McDaniel to 30 Rock had been part of a nearly two-month-long effort that was spearheaded by Budoff Brown and her boss, NBC News President Rebecca Blumenstein, with buy-in from Conde and his deputies at both NBC News and MSNBC."
"Rashida Jones," he adds, "the president of MSNBC, was very interested in having McDaniel appear as a contributor on her network, as well."
But this bombshell has drawn a good deal of attention. Noting how Chuck Todd led off the very public pushback against the hiring of McDaniel, Byers reports, "On Sunday, Budoff Brown reached out to McDaniel’s aide and former chief of staff at the R.N.C., Richard Walters, to see if there were any friends or colleagues who could speak up on her behalf."
"The two sides also discussed having these folks call attention to what they saw as a double standard—after all, this was the same network that was turning Psaki, a former Biden White House Press Secretary, into a Maddow-adjacent prime time star. Walters later assured Budoff Brown that they’d been able to advance conservative pushback on social media against Todd, specifically, and that this might give NBC News some cover, for which Budoff Brown thanked him."
CNN, pointing to those details, adds, "staffers inside NBC News are enraged at the fact an executive would have engaged in such behavior."
Former Chicago Tribune editor Mark Jacobs, who now writes about politics and the media, called for the firing of Jones, Blumenstein, and Budoff Brown.
Other critics are expressing concerns on multiple fronts.
"It’s like the hunger games at @NBCNews. Every day new, horrible stories of journalism & corporate malpractice. Every single one of these managers must go," observed Jennifer Schulze, a media critic who was a Chicago Sun-Times executive producer, WGN news director, and adjunct college professor of journalism.
She also highlights a Washington Post report that ropes NBC Nightly News anchor Lester Holt into the mess.
"Every @NBCNews exec who thought hiring a reputed liar & phony elector co-[conspirator] needs to resign or be fired," Schulze says.
"The @NBCNews managers who recruited & signed an election denier should be out the door, too," she adds. "Not only was it downright offensive to hire Ronna, it was journalism AND corporate malpractice."
Pointing to his newsletter, former Obama senior advisor Dan Pfeiffer writes, "NBC's ill-fated decision to hire Ronna McDaniel is a story of a media outlet unwilling to accept the ways Trump changed politics, but it's also one of the best arguments for Dems need to build our media ecosystem ASAP."
He calls McDaniel's hiring "evidence" the media has "yet to accept the reality that this is not a normal election between a Republican and a Democrat." And adds, "An [industry] that prizes objectivity above all else, is incapable of accurately covering an election where one candidate is a normal politician and the other is an insurrectionist. Many in the media would rather stumble into autocracy than take a side."
Veteran journalist and Sirius XM host Michelangelo Signorile observes, "We couldn’t have asked for a better situation to shine a bright light on the corruption of the corporate media—and its impulse to legitimize MAGA extremism and lawbreakers for profit—than NBC’s hiring former RNC chair, election denier, and Trump enabler Ronna McDaniel."
And he warns, "The forces that made the coup-plotting former RNC chair a paid contributor are still shaping news and information about this pivotal election."
Staffers at NBC News and MSNBC were outraged at McDaniel's hiring, but new details about behind-the-scenes efforts reportedly have increased that outrage.
Some critics are either calling for resignations of NBC News and MSNBC leadership, or questioning how long they can ride out the mess.
"What is Brian Roberts going to do?" CNN's Oliver Darcy asks. "The Comcast boss is watching an unceasing five-alarm fire rage at 30 Rock, scarring the reputation of NBC News and threatening to consume multiple parts of the Cesar Conde-run NBC Universal News Group."
"Conde has lost control of his organization, prompting industry insiders to wonder how he continues to remain in his role as chairman of the NBC News Group. In the words of one veteran media executive I spoke to Wednesday, 'It’s inconceivable that he should,'" Darcy writes, saying Conde's actions and those of his top executives have "hosed gasoline" on the scandal.
That scandal involves these revelations from Puck's Dylan Byers, who reports, "bringing McDaniel to 30 Rock had been part of a nearly two-month-long effort that was spearheaded by Budoff Brown and her boss, NBC News President Rebecca Blumenstein, with buy-in from Conde and his deputies at both NBC News and MSNBC."
"Rashida Jones," he adds, "the president of MSNBC, was very interested in having McDaniel appear as a contributor on her network, as well."
But this bombshell has drawn a good deal of attention. Noting how Chuck Todd led off the very public pushback against the hiring of McDaniel, Byers reports, "On Sunday, Budoff Brown reached out to McDaniel’s aide and former chief of staff at the R.N.C., Richard Walters, to see if there were any friends or colleagues who could speak up on her behalf."
"The two sides also discussed having these folks call attention to what they saw as a double standard—after all, this was the same network that was turning Psaki, a former Biden White House Press Secretary, into a Maddow-adjacent prime time star. Walters later assured Budoff Brown that they’d been able to advance conservative pushback on social media against Todd, specifically, and that this might give NBC News some cover, for which Budoff Brown thanked him."
CNN, pointing to those details, adds, "staffers inside NBC News are enraged at the fact an executive would have engaged in such behavior."
Former Chicago Tribune editor Mark Jacobs, who now writes about politics and the media, called for the firing of Jones, Blumenstein, and Budoff Brown.
Other critics are expressing concerns on multiple fronts.
"It’s like the hunger games at @NBCNews. Every day new, horrible stories of journalism & corporate malpractice. Every single one of these managers must go," observed Jennifer Schulze, a media critic who was a Chicago Sun-Times executive producer, WGN news director, and adjunct college professor of journalism.
She also highlights a Washington Post report that ropes NBC Nightly News anchor Lester Holt into the mess.
"Every @NBCNews exec who thought hiring a reputed liar & phony elector co-[conspirator] needs to resign or be fired," Schulze says.
"The @NBCNews managers who recruited & signed an election denier should be out the door, too," she adds. "Not only was it downright offensive to hire Ronna, it was journalism AND corporate malpractice."
Pointing to his newsletter, former Obama senior advisor Dan Pfeiffer writes, "NBC's ill-fated decision to hire Ronna McDaniel is a story of a media outlet unwilling to accept the ways Trump changed politics, but it's also one of the best arguments for Dems need to build our media ecosystem ASAP."
He calls McDaniel's hiring "evidence" the media has "yet to accept the reality that this is not a normal election between a Republican and a Democrat." And adds, "An [industry] that prizes objectivity above all else, is incapable of accurately covering an election where one candidate is a normal politician and the other is an insurrectionist. Many in the media would rather stumble into autocracy than take a side."
Veteran journalist and Sirius XM host Michelangelo Signorile observes, "We couldn’t have asked for a better situation to shine a bright light on the corruption of the corporate media—and its impulse to legitimize MAGA extremism and lawbreakers for profit—than NBC’s hiring former RNC chair, election denier, and Trump enabler Ronna McDaniel."
And he warns, "The forces that made the coup-plotting former RNC chair a paid contributor are still shaping news and information about this pivotal election."
nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people
Dirt Diggers Digest
chronicling corporate misbehavior (and how to research it)
Swiping Fees
3/28/2024
For the past two decades, groups of merchants have been suing Mastercard and Visa for charging excessive credit card processing fees, also known as swipe fees. That effort has now paid off with a tentative class action settlement that will reduce the fees by an estimated $30 billion over the next five years.
This deal is on top of about $6 billion the companies previously agreed to pay in damages. Together, the cases represent one of the biggest business litigation settlements ever.
As large as the amounts are, they are not putting too much of a dent in the profitability of Mastercard and Visa, which together rake in about $100 billion a year from merchants and together enjoy about $30 billion in annual profits.
The issue of swipe fees has come up in connection with the proposed acquisition of Discover, the perennial also-ran of the credit card world, by Capital One. In its announcement of the deal, Capital One claimed it would enable Discover “to be more competitive with the largest payments networks and payments companies.” It is making similar arguments in its filings with regulators to gain approval for the purchase.
While Capital One may not have caused as much grief as Visa and Mastercard, its track record shows it cannot claim to be the savior of consumers and small businesses. In 2012, for example, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau fined the company $25 million and ordered it to refund $140 million to customers following an investigation of deceptive tactics used in marketing credit card add-on products.
Capital One has also paid out tens of millions of dollars in settlements in class action lawsuits alleging abuses such improperly raising credit card interest rates after promoting low rates and charging unfair overdraft and balance inquiry fees.
The largest penalties paid by Capital One have been in cases involving deficiencies in its anti-money-laundering practices. In 2018 it was fined $100 million by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency for failing to file required suspicious activity reports.
In 2021 the bank was fined $290 million by the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network for doing business with check-cashing services known to be linked to organized crime in New York and New Jersey.
Capital One may not have accumulated penalties to the same extent as larger banks such as Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Citigroup, but its total payouts have reached nearly $1 billion.
If it succeeds in buying Discover, it will acquire a company with $275 million in penalties of its own. Most of that comes from a 2012 case in which the CFPB fined Discover $14 million and ordered it to refund $200 million to customers said to have been subjected to deceptive marketing tactics regarding credit card add-on products. In other words, practices similar to those for which Capital One was penalized that year.
The solution to excessive swipe fees will come not from allowing another player with a questionable record to join Visa and Mastercard in dominating the payments market, but rather through antitrust and other regulatory action restricting the predatory practices of that market.
This deal is on top of about $6 billion the companies previously agreed to pay in damages. Together, the cases represent one of the biggest business litigation settlements ever.
As large as the amounts are, they are not putting too much of a dent in the profitability of Mastercard and Visa, which together rake in about $100 billion a year from merchants and together enjoy about $30 billion in annual profits.
The issue of swipe fees has come up in connection with the proposed acquisition of Discover, the perennial also-ran of the credit card world, by Capital One. In its announcement of the deal, Capital One claimed it would enable Discover “to be more competitive with the largest payments networks and payments companies.” It is making similar arguments in its filings with regulators to gain approval for the purchase.
While Capital One may not have caused as much grief as Visa and Mastercard, its track record shows it cannot claim to be the savior of consumers and small businesses. In 2012, for example, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau fined the company $25 million and ordered it to refund $140 million to customers following an investigation of deceptive tactics used in marketing credit card add-on products.
Capital One has also paid out tens of millions of dollars in settlements in class action lawsuits alleging abuses such improperly raising credit card interest rates after promoting low rates and charging unfair overdraft and balance inquiry fees.
The largest penalties paid by Capital One have been in cases involving deficiencies in its anti-money-laundering practices. In 2018 it was fined $100 million by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency for failing to file required suspicious activity reports.
In 2021 the bank was fined $290 million by the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network for doing business with check-cashing services known to be linked to organized crime in New York and New Jersey.
Capital One may not have accumulated penalties to the same extent as larger banks such as Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Citigroup, but its total payouts have reached nearly $1 billion.
If it succeeds in buying Discover, it will acquire a company with $275 million in penalties of its own. Most of that comes from a 2012 case in which the CFPB fined Discover $14 million and ordered it to refund $200 million to customers said to have been subjected to deceptive marketing tactics regarding credit card add-on products. In other words, practices similar to those for which Capital One was penalized that year.
The solution to excessive swipe fees will come not from allowing another player with a questionable record to join Visa and Mastercard in dominating the payments market, but rather through antitrust and other regulatory action restricting the predatory practices of that market.
Freedom Caucus Hella Mad They Can't Shut Down The Government
Also, will NO ONE think of their two-week Easter vacation?
Joan McCarter — crooks & liars
March 21, 2024
The White House and congressional leaders announced an agreement on the last barrier to a government funding package on Tuesday, and the Freedom Caucus is not happy about it. Negotiators on the deal had been held up over funding for the Department of Homeland Security, whose funding House Republicans were angling to keep at 2023 levels.
The Freedom Caucus immediately sent a letter to Republican colleagues telling them to vote against the package, in typical foaming-at-the-mouth style. “There is an unprecedented assault on the safety of Americans and the sovereignty of our nation to do the ‘open borders’ policies of radical progressive Democrats led by President Joe Biden,” wrote the ringleaders, Reps. Bob Good of Virginia and Chip Roy of Texas. “The question of House Republicans is, what are we willing to do about it?”
The Freedom Caucus maniacs continue to demand that “core elements” of their extreme anti-immigration and anti-immigrant legislation be included in the DHS funding bill. They urge their colleagues “to join us in rejecting the appropriations package (or anything similar) slated to be before the House that will directly fund these disastrous policies, and choose instead to stand against this assault on the American people.”
Good luck getting enough of your colleagues to blow off their upcoming two-week Easter recess and allow the government to shut down, guys.
The agreement means that funding for DHS—along with the departments of Defense, Labor, and Health and Human Services, among other agencies—is now settled.
Biden announced the agreement Tuesday morning. “We have come to an agreement with Congressional leaders on a path forward for the remaining full-year funding bills,” he said. “The House and Senate are now working to finalize a package that can quickly be brought to the floor, and I will sign it immediately.”
The problem is the “quickly” part. The bill text hasn’t been written and likely won’t be available until late Tuesday or Wednesday. The House rules, which Johnson pledged to uphold, require that text be provided to all House members 72 hours before a bill comes to the floor, meaning that the earliest the House can pass it would be Friday, the deadline for funding. That would be too late for the Senate to get it in time to stop a shutdown beginning Saturday.
So Speaker Mike Johnson could either further enrage Republican extremists by dispensing with the 72-hour rule, or put another very short-term funding bill through to cover government operations until the funding package makes it through Congress, likely after their Easter recess. Either way he goes, he’s going to have pissed off MAGA members.
The Freedom Caucus immediately sent a letter to Republican colleagues telling them to vote against the package, in typical foaming-at-the-mouth style. “There is an unprecedented assault on the safety of Americans and the sovereignty of our nation to do the ‘open borders’ policies of radical progressive Democrats led by President Joe Biden,” wrote the ringleaders, Reps. Bob Good of Virginia and Chip Roy of Texas. “The question of House Republicans is, what are we willing to do about it?”
The Freedom Caucus maniacs continue to demand that “core elements” of their extreme anti-immigration and anti-immigrant legislation be included in the DHS funding bill. They urge their colleagues “to join us in rejecting the appropriations package (or anything similar) slated to be before the House that will directly fund these disastrous policies, and choose instead to stand against this assault on the American people.”
Good luck getting enough of your colleagues to blow off their upcoming two-week Easter recess and allow the government to shut down, guys.
The agreement means that funding for DHS—along with the departments of Defense, Labor, and Health and Human Services, among other agencies—is now settled.
Biden announced the agreement Tuesday morning. “We have come to an agreement with Congressional leaders on a path forward for the remaining full-year funding bills,” he said. “The House and Senate are now working to finalize a package that can quickly be brought to the floor, and I will sign it immediately.”
The problem is the “quickly” part. The bill text hasn’t been written and likely won’t be available until late Tuesday or Wednesday. The House rules, which Johnson pledged to uphold, require that text be provided to all House members 72 hours before a bill comes to the floor, meaning that the earliest the House can pass it would be Friday, the deadline for funding. That would be too late for the Senate to get it in time to stop a shutdown beginning Saturday.
So Speaker Mike Johnson could either further enrage Republican extremists by dispensing with the 72-hour rule, or put another very short-term funding bill through to cover government operations until the funding package makes it through Congress, likely after their Easter recess. Either way he goes, he’s going to have pissed off MAGA members.
Breakdown of Safety Is Not Unique to Boeing — It’s Endemic to Capitalist Society
Heads are rolling at Boeing, but new leadership doesn’t alter the labor conditions and profit motives that erode safety.
By Susan Kang , TRUTHOUT
Published March 28, 2024
In a dramatic turn of events, Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun announced on March 25, 2024, that he will step down at the end of the year following the company’s poor safety record, negative press and significant financial losses following the multiple safety problems with its 737 Max jets.
The now-infamous Alaska Airlines January flight, landing after a door panel blew off the plane mid-flight, led to the grounding of 171 737 Max jets (and subsequent mass cancellation of flights) and a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) order to suspend production on the 737 Max. The National Transportation Safety Board has made the flight an investigative priority. Since then, more dramatic accidents have occurred, including a cracked windshield, plane fires, fuel leaks, stuck rudder pedals, at least one tire failure, and other problems.
The FAA announced in a February 26 report conducted by a panel of experts including government, industry, labor and academics over the past year, that Boeing failed 33 of 89 safety audits of its 737 Max manufacturing process. The report led to a devaluation of Boeing stock, a market value of about $45 billion in 2024. To say this has been devastating for the company and for airline travelers’ confidence is an understatement.
Calhoun is not the only leader who has departed — other members of the executive leadership at the company have stepped down or announced their intention to, as well. But while the dramatic news of the deposed CEO has made many headlines, it’s also a corporate sleight of hand that obscures the ways in which corporate profit motives — including a failed “safety culture” that continues to leave workers vulnerable to reprisal as well as ongoing attempts to undercut union plants — have promoted unsafe production practices permitted by a weak regulatory state regime.
This latest corporate leadership shuffle is a signal to consumers and investors that the company means to improve confidence in Boeing’s products. But we cannot understand the Boeing controversy in a vacuum.
Boeing was once known as an industry leader in manufacturing safe and well-made jets. The Boeing 737 was the best-selling airplane in history, used by 80 airlines, with most of them operating in Asia. But in October 2018 and March 2019, less than five months apart, the Boeing 737 Max jets experienced fatal crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia, killing a total of 346 people. The FAA, under former President Donald Trump, was reluctant to ground the jets but finally grounded the 737 Max (following the lead of China’s aviation authority, Canada, the European Union, and 10 other countries) while the jet underwent a 20-month safety review process. The agency greenlit the jet to take flight again in November 2020, but concerns persist. Aviation experts argue Boeing has consistently chosen financial gains over an abundance of caution when dealing with pressing safety concerns. (Much has already been written about how financialization of Boeing, exemplified by its relocation of some production from Puget Sound in 2001, was a key turning point for the company.)
Boeing’s leaders knew there were serious safety problems with their company’s 737 Max jet and other products, yet they failed to institute systemic changes, despite the fact that workers gave them such warnings.
The American Airlines pilots union urged Boeing to address 737 safety concerns in a meeting with Boeing executives prior to the deadly 2019 Ethiopian Airlines crash. Pilots asked Boeing leadership to fix a malfunctioning anti-stall system, called “Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System” (designed to prevent the 737 from climbing too steeply and stalling) but Boeing’s vice president pushed back, claiming it wasn’t clear that a malfunctioning system caused the 2018 Malaysian Air crash. To make matters worse, Boeing also refused to honor one pilot’s requests for additional training on the 737, reprimanding him instead.
Changes in the federal safety regulation of aviation demonstrate how these endemic problems within Boeing’s safety regime were permitted. Regulatory oversight of aviation was understaffed and underresourced during the Trump administration, with the FAA’s top position vacant for 14 months and enforcement fines against airlines dropping 88 percent. Trump’s FAA gave more authority to private companies, but his administration isn’t solely responsible for the deregulatory shift, as the FAA had been moving toward “sharing” regulatory oversight with manufacturers over the years. This began in 2004, against the protests of aviation unions who warned such a move would hurt the safety of the industry and lead to more accidents.
Democratic administrations have also had a hand in dismantling regulatory oversight. During the Obama administration, the FAA continued to increasingly delegate safety monitoring and oversight to private companies. Part of the justification for continuing the practice were concerns about the increasing competitive pressure from foreign jet plane manufacturing rivals above the concerns of government watchdog investigations. This practice is now deeply institutionalized, with FAA-certified employees at private companies doing 90 percent of safety certifications. Proponents of this “sharing” of regulation seek to justify the arrangement by arguing that industry innovation is outpacing the expertise of government regulators. But even private sector regulators are suffering from a lack of sufficient personnel, with high rates of turnover and retirements after COVID-19. This was also confirmed in the February FAA report, which called the turnover of “experienced personnel” a “major concern.”
The FAA report also revealed the endemic anti-safety biases within Boeing’s production process. The February 2024 FAA expert panel’s report, based on hundreds of employee interviews and review of 4,000 pages of documents, stated: “Boeing employees across all disciplines and roles expressed concerns over the lasting power of the SMS [safety management system] program and safety initiatives. This raises concerns about the sustainability of SMS. The lack of feedback and/or delay in providing feedback jeopardizes the longevity of SMS.”
According to the report, employees did not always understand Boeing’s safety managements systems. Employees did not always know the appropriate reporting channels and were not informed about the outcomes of their reports. Employees also shared examples of retaliation and interference — especially in regard to salary and furlough ranking — that occurred when workers expressed safety concerns. These retaliatory practices exacerbated the disconnect between the goals of corporate leadership and actual shop floor practices. Workers knew that reporting safety concerns would lead to slowdowns in safety certification or production processes, which in turn could hurt economic goals. A workplace where employees cannot speak up without fear of reprisal and where their input isn’t integrated in everyday production practices cannot be a company that truly prioritizes product and consumer safety.
As much as this story is one of consumer safety, Boeing’s problems are also the result of an anti-worker culture. Rich Plunkett, who is director of strategic development at Boeing’s union, the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace, released a statement in conjunction with the publishing of the February FAA report:
Our members have long reported a disconnect between the messaging they get from Boeing headquarters in Chicago or Virginia, and the messages they get from their direct supervisors here. Quality and safety must be the Boeing Co.’s core values, embraced by everyone, but the report reflects the reality that people who see something are afraid of saying anything for fear of jeopardizing their careers.
As a result of the FAA report, the union requested the creation of an Aviation Safety Action Program, a collaboration between Boeing and FAA, that would allow workers to bring forward safety concerns, including production and design errors, without fear of retaliation.
Perhaps one of the most tragic parts of this story is the loss of whistleblower John Barnett, a former quality control manager who expressed multiple concerns about safety at the company’s 787 Dreamliner manufacturing plant in South Carolina. (The 787 has also been grounded multiple times for safety concerns, including over smoke and fire incidents.) Barnett noted the significant differences in safety reporting in his unionized plant (in Everett, Washington) in contrast to the failures of safety reporting in his nonunionized Charleston, South Carolina, Boeing plant. (There was one quality assurance inspector per 15 mechanics in Everett, but only one inspector per 50 mechanics in Charleston, and many of those mechanics were brand new to the industry.)
Barnett was participating in a deposition relating to his suit against the company for the retaliation he suffered at Boeing for his whistleblowing activities, and was found dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound in the parking lot of a Charleston, South Carolina, Holiday Inn on March 9, 2024.
Evidence of Boeing’s poor operations and organizational culture also came to light when the company declared it could not find documents related to Alaska Airlines’s blown-off door plug in response to a query from a federation investigation. It’s clear that the company’s toxicity toward safety-oriented employees has been devastating, as reflected by the February FAA report.
The poor working conditions at Boeing were amplified by a terrible contract negotiation in 2014, in which workers agreed to a contract that included givebacks on pensions, minimal wage increases (4 percent over 10 years) and that locked them in this suboptimal set of conditions for a decade. To force an end to the company’s fixed pension plan, Boeing threatened to take 777X production from Seattle to South Carolina. The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), which represents many Boeing employees (about 35 percent of its total workforce) is taking cues from the United Auto Workers and tight labor market to make strong demands.
In 2024, the union is looking for 40 percent wage increases and a return of the company’s pension plan, in addition to other workplace protections. Considering that safety problems have emerged as Boeing has shifted production away from the highly unionized Puget Sound region to the South, District 751 IAM President Jon Holden wants Boeing to commit to multiple decades of production in the Northwest. IAM machinists are also requesting a seat on Boeing’s board as a way to promote great future safety.
While the future of the 737 Max remains unclear, what is clear is that the retreat of the regulatory state, combined with Boeing’s aggressive attacks on workers — both in terms of bargaining with unions and retaliating against individual workers — has contributed to the enduring marginalization of safety culture at the company. Some consumer advocates see the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Department of Justice’s criminal investigation into the Alaska Airlines incident as progress, but this won’t be the first criminal proceeding against Boeing.
While some consumers remain understandably frightened and are deliberately avoiding Boeing flights, these problems are not exclusive to Boeing. The breakdown of consumer safety measures is endemic to the neoliberal capitalist pursuit of profit in the provision of public services, and to an employment regime that continually fails to provide adequate protections for workers.
Workers’ right to have a voice in their workplaces and to speak freely about product safety concerns is a necessary minimum for the safety of their products. Only when this basic condition is met can people in the U.S. fly safely, with confidence in the quality of their airplanes.
The now-infamous Alaska Airlines January flight, landing after a door panel blew off the plane mid-flight, led to the grounding of 171 737 Max jets (and subsequent mass cancellation of flights) and a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) order to suspend production on the 737 Max. The National Transportation Safety Board has made the flight an investigative priority. Since then, more dramatic accidents have occurred, including a cracked windshield, plane fires, fuel leaks, stuck rudder pedals, at least one tire failure, and other problems.
The FAA announced in a February 26 report conducted by a panel of experts including government, industry, labor and academics over the past year, that Boeing failed 33 of 89 safety audits of its 737 Max manufacturing process. The report led to a devaluation of Boeing stock, a market value of about $45 billion in 2024. To say this has been devastating for the company and for airline travelers’ confidence is an understatement.
Calhoun is not the only leader who has departed — other members of the executive leadership at the company have stepped down or announced their intention to, as well. But while the dramatic news of the deposed CEO has made many headlines, it’s also a corporate sleight of hand that obscures the ways in which corporate profit motives — including a failed “safety culture” that continues to leave workers vulnerable to reprisal as well as ongoing attempts to undercut union plants — have promoted unsafe production practices permitted by a weak regulatory state regime.
This latest corporate leadership shuffle is a signal to consumers and investors that the company means to improve confidence in Boeing’s products. But we cannot understand the Boeing controversy in a vacuum.
Boeing was once known as an industry leader in manufacturing safe and well-made jets. The Boeing 737 was the best-selling airplane in history, used by 80 airlines, with most of them operating in Asia. But in October 2018 and March 2019, less than five months apart, the Boeing 737 Max jets experienced fatal crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia, killing a total of 346 people. The FAA, under former President Donald Trump, was reluctant to ground the jets but finally grounded the 737 Max (following the lead of China’s aviation authority, Canada, the European Union, and 10 other countries) while the jet underwent a 20-month safety review process. The agency greenlit the jet to take flight again in November 2020, but concerns persist. Aviation experts argue Boeing has consistently chosen financial gains over an abundance of caution when dealing with pressing safety concerns. (Much has already been written about how financialization of Boeing, exemplified by its relocation of some production from Puget Sound in 2001, was a key turning point for the company.)
Boeing’s leaders knew there were serious safety problems with their company’s 737 Max jet and other products, yet they failed to institute systemic changes, despite the fact that workers gave them such warnings.
The American Airlines pilots union urged Boeing to address 737 safety concerns in a meeting with Boeing executives prior to the deadly 2019 Ethiopian Airlines crash. Pilots asked Boeing leadership to fix a malfunctioning anti-stall system, called “Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System” (designed to prevent the 737 from climbing too steeply and stalling) but Boeing’s vice president pushed back, claiming it wasn’t clear that a malfunctioning system caused the 2018 Malaysian Air crash. To make matters worse, Boeing also refused to honor one pilot’s requests for additional training on the 737, reprimanding him instead.
Changes in the federal safety regulation of aviation demonstrate how these endemic problems within Boeing’s safety regime were permitted. Regulatory oversight of aviation was understaffed and underresourced during the Trump administration, with the FAA’s top position vacant for 14 months and enforcement fines against airlines dropping 88 percent. Trump’s FAA gave more authority to private companies, but his administration isn’t solely responsible for the deregulatory shift, as the FAA had been moving toward “sharing” regulatory oversight with manufacturers over the years. This began in 2004, against the protests of aviation unions who warned such a move would hurt the safety of the industry and lead to more accidents.
Democratic administrations have also had a hand in dismantling regulatory oversight. During the Obama administration, the FAA continued to increasingly delegate safety monitoring and oversight to private companies. Part of the justification for continuing the practice were concerns about the increasing competitive pressure from foreign jet plane manufacturing rivals above the concerns of government watchdog investigations. This practice is now deeply institutionalized, with FAA-certified employees at private companies doing 90 percent of safety certifications. Proponents of this “sharing” of regulation seek to justify the arrangement by arguing that industry innovation is outpacing the expertise of government regulators. But even private sector regulators are suffering from a lack of sufficient personnel, with high rates of turnover and retirements after COVID-19. This was also confirmed in the February FAA report, which called the turnover of “experienced personnel” a “major concern.”
The FAA report also revealed the endemic anti-safety biases within Boeing’s production process. The February 2024 FAA expert panel’s report, based on hundreds of employee interviews and review of 4,000 pages of documents, stated: “Boeing employees across all disciplines and roles expressed concerns over the lasting power of the SMS [safety management system] program and safety initiatives. This raises concerns about the sustainability of SMS. The lack of feedback and/or delay in providing feedback jeopardizes the longevity of SMS.”
According to the report, employees did not always understand Boeing’s safety managements systems. Employees did not always know the appropriate reporting channels and were not informed about the outcomes of their reports. Employees also shared examples of retaliation and interference — especially in regard to salary and furlough ranking — that occurred when workers expressed safety concerns. These retaliatory practices exacerbated the disconnect between the goals of corporate leadership and actual shop floor practices. Workers knew that reporting safety concerns would lead to slowdowns in safety certification or production processes, which in turn could hurt economic goals. A workplace where employees cannot speak up without fear of reprisal and where their input isn’t integrated in everyday production practices cannot be a company that truly prioritizes product and consumer safety.
As much as this story is one of consumer safety, Boeing’s problems are also the result of an anti-worker culture. Rich Plunkett, who is director of strategic development at Boeing’s union, the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace, released a statement in conjunction with the publishing of the February FAA report:
Our members have long reported a disconnect between the messaging they get from Boeing headquarters in Chicago or Virginia, and the messages they get from their direct supervisors here. Quality and safety must be the Boeing Co.’s core values, embraced by everyone, but the report reflects the reality that people who see something are afraid of saying anything for fear of jeopardizing their careers.
As a result of the FAA report, the union requested the creation of an Aviation Safety Action Program, a collaboration between Boeing and FAA, that would allow workers to bring forward safety concerns, including production and design errors, without fear of retaliation.
Perhaps one of the most tragic parts of this story is the loss of whistleblower John Barnett, a former quality control manager who expressed multiple concerns about safety at the company’s 787 Dreamliner manufacturing plant in South Carolina. (The 787 has also been grounded multiple times for safety concerns, including over smoke and fire incidents.) Barnett noted the significant differences in safety reporting in his unionized plant (in Everett, Washington) in contrast to the failures of safety reporting in his nonunionized Charleston, South Carolina, Boeing plant. (There was one quality assurance inspector per 15 mechanics in Everett, but only one inspector per 50 mechanics in Charleston, and many of those mechanics were brand new to the industry.)
Barnett was participating in a deposition relating to his suit against the company for the retaliation he suffered at Boeing for his whistleblowing activities, and was found dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound in the parking lot of a Charleston, South Carolina, Holiday Inn on March 9, 2024.
Evidence of Boeing’s poor operations and organizational culture also came to light when the company declared it could not find documents related to Alaska Airlines’s blown-off door plug in response to a query from a federation investigation. It’s clear that the company’s toxicity toward safety-oriented employees has been devastating, as reflected by the February FAA report.
The poor working conditions at Boeing were amplified by a terrible contract negotiation in 2014, in which workers agreed to a contract that included givebacks on pensions, minimal wage increases (4 percent over 10 years) and that locked them in this suboptimal set of conditions for a decade. To force an end to the company’s fixed pension plan, Boeing threatened to take 777X production from Seattle to South Carolina. The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), which represents many Boeing employees (about 35 percent of its total workforce) is taking cues from the United Auto Workers and tight labor market to make strong demands.
In 2024, the union is looking for 40 percent wage increases and a return of the company’s pension plan, in addition to other workplace protections. Considering that safety problems have emerged as Boeing has shifted production away from the highly unionized Puget Sound region to the South, District 751 IAM President Jon Holden wants Boeing to commit to multiple decades of production in the Northwest. IAM machinists are also requesting a seat on Boeing’s board as a way to promote great future safety.
While the future of the 737 Max remains unclear, what is clear is that the retreat of the regulatory state, combined with Boeing’s aggressive attacks on workers — both in terms of bargaining with unions and retaliating against individual workers — has contributed to the enduring marginalization of safety culture at the company. Some consumer advocates see the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Department of Justice’s criminal investigation into the Alaska Airlines incident as progress, but this won’t be the first criminal proceeding against Boeing.
While some consumers remain understandably frightened and are deliberately avoiding Boeing flights, these problems are not exclusive to Boeing. The breakdown of consumer safety measures is endemic to the neoliberal capitalist pursuit of profit in the provision of public services, and to an employment regime that continually fails to provide adequate protections for workers.
Workers’ right to have a voice in their workplaces and to speak freely about product safety concerns is a necessary minimum for the safety of their products. Only when this basic condition is met can people in the U.S. fly safely, with confidence in the quality of their airplanes.
Welcome to RepublicanDebt.org
This site tracks the current Republican Debt.
The Republican Debt is how much of the national debt of the United States
is attributable to
the presidencies of Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush,
George W. Bush, Donald J. Trump,
and
the Republican fiscal policy of Borrow-And-Spend.
As of Monday, March 18, 2024 at 4:59:24PM PT,
The Current Republican Debt is:
$16,627,139,604,087.70
which means that in a total of 24 years,
these four presidents have led to the creation of
94.67%
of the entire national debt
in only 9.6774% of the 248 years of the existence of the United States of America.
'Egregious violation': Bridge collapse company fired worker who raised safety concerns
Carl Gibson, AlterNet
March 28, 2024 1:12PM ET
Maersk — the company that chartered the cargo ship involved in the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore that killed six people and injured several others — was sanctioned by the Department of Labor last year, according to a new report.
Lever News reported that cargo giant Maersk was hit with a violation in July of 2023 when it illegally fired a worker who reported safety concerns to the U.S. Coast Guard. The employee reported numerous safety concerns aboard a Maersk vessel that included leaks in a starboard-side tunnel, alcohol use by crew members and leaving a trainee unsupervised aboard the ship Safmarine Mafadi.
The worker also blew the whistle about inoperable lifeboats on board the ship and faulty emergency fire suppression equipment. The employee — who was a chief mate on the ship and occasionally served as a relief captain — told federal officials that they believed their firing was "retaliation for reporting alcohol consumption on board the vessel." Maersk was ordered to reinstate the worker and pay $700,000 in back wages and damages.
The worker was fired for violating an internal Maersk policy that required employees "to first report their concerns to [Maersk] ... prior to reporting it to the [Coast Guard] or other authorities." The Occupational Safety and Heath Administration (OSHA) slammed the company over the policy, describing it as "repugnant," "reprehensible" and "an egregious violation of the rights of employees." OSHA added that the policy "chills [employees] from contacting the [Coast Guard] or other authorities without contacting the company first."
Lever reported that during the OSHA investigation, the Department of Labor accused Maersk of violating the Seaman's Protection Act. That legislation allows for workers in the maritime industry to blow the whistle on safety violations while protecting them from retaliatory actions by their employers. The Department of Labor ordered Maersk to revise its internal policy to allow workers to contact the US Coast Guard directly about any safety concerns.
In an official statement, Maersk stated that while it was "horrified" about the crash that collapsed the bridge and expressed sympathy for those who were killed and injured, the company made it clear that responsibility for the Key Bridge collapse fell to Synergy Group, which was piloting the ship.
"We can confirm that the container vessel ‘DALI’, operated by charter vessel company Synergy Group, is time chartered by Maersk and is carrying Maersk customers’ cargo. No Maersk crew and personnel were onboard the vessel," the company stated. "We are closely following the investigations conducted by authorities and Synergy, and we will do our utmost to keep our customers informed."
The Key Bridge collapsed after the DALI vessel experienced a power outage, prompting it to crash into one of the bridge's main trusses. While the ship's crew was able to issue a mayday call to first responders who then shut down the bridge to traffic, there were still several construction workers on the bridge repairing the road. Search and rescue teams were able to save several workers, but six were killed.
President Joe Biden has vowed that the federal government will foot the bill for the repair of the bridge and will work quickly to restore both bridge traffic and shipping lanes in and out of the Port of Baltimore. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg warned that while those repairs are underway, there will be "major and protracted supply chain issues" due to the inability of cargo ships to access Baltimore's port.
The Biden administration has not yet said if it will pursue legal action against Maersk or Synergy Group to help pay for the cost of repairing the Key Bridge. If it was to issue any civil penalties, the decision could be litigated in federal courts for several years.
Lever News reported that cargo giant Maersk was hit with a violation in July of 2023 when it illegally fired a worker who reported safety concerns to the U.S. Coast Guard. The employee reported numerous safety concerns aboard a Maersk vessel that included leaks in a starboard-side tunnel, alcohol use by crew members and leaving a trainee unsupervised aboard the ship Safmarine Mafadi.
The worker also blew the whistle about inoperable lifeboats on board the ship and faulty emergency fire suppression equipment. The employee — who was a chief mate on the ship and occasionally served as a relief captain — told federal officials that they believed their firing was "retaliation for reporting alcohol consumption on board the vessel." Maersk was ordered to reinstate the worker and pay $700,000 in back wages and damages.
The worker was fired for violating an internal Maersk policy that required employees "to first report their concerns to [Maersk] ... prior to reporting it to the [Coast Guard] or other authorities." The Occupational Safety and Heath Administration (OSHA) slammed the company over the policy, describing it as "repugnant," "reprehensible" and "an egregious violation of the rights of employees." OSHA added that the policy "chills [employees] from contacting the [Coast Guard] or other authorities without contacting the company first."
Lever reported that during the OSHA investigation, the Department of Labor accused Maersk of violating the Seaman's Protection Act. That legislation allows for workers in the maritime industry to blow the whistle on safety violations while protecting them from retaliatory actions by their employers. The Department of Labor ordered Maersk to revise its internal policy to allow workers to contact the US Coast Guard directly about any safety concerns.
In an official statement, Maersk stated that while it was "horrified" about the crash that collapsed the bridge and expressed sympathy for those who were killed and injured, the company made it clear that responsibility for the Key Bridge collapse fell to Synergy Group, which was piloting the ship.
"We can confirm that the container vessel ‘DALI’, operated by charter vessel company Synergy Group, is time chartered by Maersk and is carrying Maersk customers’ cargo. No Maersk crew and personnel were onboard the vessel," the company stated. "We are closely following the investigations conducted by authorities and Synergy, and we will do our utmost to keep our customers informed."
The Key Bridge collapsed after the DALI vessel experienced a power outage, prompting it to crash into one of the bridge's main trusses. While the ship's crew was able to issue a mayday call to first responders who then shut down the bridge to traffic, there were still several construction workers on the bridge repairing the road. Search and rescue teams were able to save several workers, but six were killed.
President Joe Biden has vowed that the federal government will foot the bill for the repair of the bridge and will work quickly to restore both bridge traffic and shipping lanes in and out of the Port of Baltimore. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg warned that while those repairs are underway, there will be "major and protracted supply chain issues" due to the inability of cargo ships to access Baltimore's port.
The Biden administration has not yet said if it will pursue legal action against Maersk or Synergy Group to help pay for the cost of repairing the Key Bridge. If it was to issue any civil penalties, the decision could be litigated in federal courts for several years.
THE DAILY TRASH REPORT FEATURING TODAY'S DESPICABLES
THOMAS JEFFERSON CALLED THEM "WASTE PEOPLE" AND BENJAMIN FRANKLIN CALLED THEM "RUBBISH" WE CALL THEM "MAGA PEOPLE"
EVICTED MIKE LINDELL SAYS HE DIDN'T PAY RENT TO MAKE IT 'EASIER' ON LANDLORD
Billionaire Tells Seniors That 65 Is A 'Crazy' Retirement Age
'Out-of-Touch Billionaire' Larry Fink Blasted for Calling 65 a 'Crazy' Retirement Age
Georgia Republican Party’s Vice Chairman Guilty Of Voting Illegally
Brian K. Pritchard voted nine times while serving probation for felony forgery charges.
Charlie Kirk: Embryos should be saved from a burning building before live babies
EXCERPT: MAGA loves Trump mocking Christianity
Trump Bibles make a mockery of Christianity — and that's exactly why MAGA will eat them up
Faith without morality or theology, much less that "soyboy" Jesus? Sign MAGA Republicans up!
By AMANDA MARCOTTE - SALON
Senior Writer
PUBLISHED MARCH 28, 2024 6:00AM (EDT)
...Many Trump opponents on social media replied with video clips underscoring how Trump may be the single most ignorant person in the country about the contents of the Bible.
It's a point I've made many times myself. But it's time to consider the strong possibility that Trump's disdain towards the practice and theological beliefs of Christianity is not a surprise to his followers. It's likely a selling point that Trump's version of "Christianity" is void of faith and morality. His pitch to his followers has a certain appeal: They can have the identity "Christian," and all the power that goes with it, minus the parts they don't like. No boring church services or Bible study. No tedious talk about "compassion" and "grace," which only gets in the way of the gay-bashing and racism. And definitely no need to worry about that Jesus guy, with all his notions about "loving thy neighbor" and "welcoming the stranger."
Their new lord is Trump himself. He's a lot more fun for the redhats since his message is "kick thy neighbor" and "build the wall." Frankly, I'm sure most of them find it a huge relief, not having to pretend they ever cared about that peace-and-charity crap.
Trump products tend to be marketed with claims that range from "deeply dubious" to "FTC violation." While I am not about to waste $60 on a Trump Bible to see where it falls on the misleading advertising scale, I will note some red flags in the quality control department. The ad copy promises that, within this book cover, customers will get the "King James Version translation," as well as a copy of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and the lyrics to "God Bless America," among other texts. But it also promises an "[e]asy-to-read, large print, and slim design." People who actually read books should instantly see the contradiction.
True, Trump's stubby fingers make anything he holds look bigger. Still, anyone can see that this is a lightweight volume. Page count-wise, it looks less like "War and Peace" and more like a user manual for a can opener. Most King James Bibles have teeny-tiny print and thin paper and still are pretty heavy. The actual Bible has a lot of words — 783,137 to be exact. That makes it almost eight times as long as "The Art of the Deal," which clocks in at 384 pages. (Probably only by dint of generous font size.) It seems impossible to stuff the entire Bible — as well as all those other documents — into that sleek bit of binding, even if you do cut out every passage where Jesus does "woke" stuff like healing the sick and feeding the poor.
Not that it matters, of course. The pages of Trump's "Bible" could all be blank, and there's a good chance no one would ever know it. In the right-wing publishing industry, books are not made to be read. They are to be displayed on your shelves, unopened, so you can glance at them and feel that somewhere, a liberal is "owned." (When I visit right-wing relatives, I open the books on their shelves. I enjoy cracking the spine and getting that new book smell, even off tomes I have to blow an inch of dust off.) The point of a Trump-branded Bible is to use it like their Dear Leader does: As a photo prop, not something to turn to for guidance or wisdom.
The teachings of Jesus Christ were always a poor fit for Republicans. They're just way more into decimating Social Security than they are into loaves and fishes. What Trump offers when it comes to Christianity is what he offers his followers in every other aspect: permission to stop pretending to be good people. His gift to them is his shamelessness. Through Trump, his followers can realize their fantasies of being unapologetic bullies. This is the same schtick as MAGA members who claim to be "patriots" while attacking the rule of law and democracy. Trump tells them what they want to hear: You can be a Christian without compassion.
Even before Trump's version of a "Bible" was being sold, his hollowed-out version of "faith" had cannibalized what was left of evangelical Christianity, which had already spent decades remaking itself as the culture war arm of the GOP. This is most easily tracked in the rise of churchless Christians. Over 40% of self-described evangelicals go to church once a year or less. Instead, as the New York Times reported, MAGA is basically their religion. Instead of prayer and Bible study, they "practice" their faith by watching Christian-branded online content that is, in actuality, just about right-wing politics.
But, even that number underplays how much Trumpism has displaced traditional theology in evangelical religion. In my report on the online Christian right, former evangelical minister Brad Onishi argued that churches themselves learned they must wholly embrace the views and rhetoric of the MAGA movement if they wish to keep their parishioners. For instance, the "churches that refused to shut down during COVID" are "booming," swelling from "from 100 people to 1000 people," while churches that behaved more responsibly often found themselves shutting down. "I do think it's making it more extreme. If you're not willing to go there as a pastor, you may lose your church," Onishi told Salon.
Replacing the real Bible with Trump Bibles is a too-perfect symbol of what has happened to evangelical Christianity. The mistake is in believing Trump's followers are confused or ashamed about their devotion to a godless creep who laughs at true believers. In Trump's hands, the Bible is not a text for prayer and reflection, it's just a weapon. It's much easier to beat people down with a book if it's closed.
It's a point I've made many times myself. But it's time to consider the strong possibility that Trump's disdain towards the practice and theological beliefs of Christianity is not a surprise to his followers. It's likely a selling point that Trump's version of "Christianity" is void of faith and morality. His pitch to his followers has a certain appeal: They can have the identity "Christian," and all the power that goes with it, minus the parts they don't like. No boring church services or Bible study. No tedious talk about "compassion" and "grace," which only gets in the way of the gay-bashing and racism. And definitely no need to worry about that Jesus guy, with all his notions about "loving thy neighbor" and "welcoming the stranger."
Their new lord is Trump himself. He's a lot more fun for the redhats since his message is "kick thy neighbor" and "build the wall." Frankly, I'm sure most of them find it a huge relief, not having to pretend they ever cared about that peace-and-charity crap.
Trump products tend to be marketed with claims that range from "deeply dubious" to "FTC violation." While I am not about to waste $60 on a Trump Bible to see where it falls on the misleading advertising scale, I will note some red flags in the quality control department. The ad copy promises that, within this book cover, customers will get the "King James Version translation," as well as a copy of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and the lyrics to "God Bless America," among other texts. But it also promises an "[e]asy-to-read, large print, and slim design." People who actually read books should instantly see the contradiction.
True, Trump's stubby fingers make anything he holds look bigger. Still, anyone can see that this is a lightweight volume. Page count-wise, it looks less like "War and Peace" and more like a user manual for a can opener. Most King James Bibles have teeny-tiny print and thin paper and still are pretty heavy. The actual Bible has a lot of words — 783,137 to be exact. That makes it almost eight times as long as "The Art of the Deal," which clocks in at 384 pages. (Probably only by dint of generous font size.) It seems impossible to stuff the entire Bible — as well as all those other documents — into that sleek bit of binding, even if you do cut out every passage where Jesus does "woke" stuff like healing the sick and feeding the poor.
Not that it matters, of course. The pages of Trump's "Bible" could all be blank, and there's a good chance no one would ever know it. In the right-wing publishing industry, books are not made to be read. They are to be displayed on your shelves, unopened, so you can glance at them and feel that somewhere, a liberal is "owned." (When I visit right-wing relatives, I open the books on their shelves. I enjoy cracking the spine and getting that new book smell, even off tomes I have to blow an inch of dust off.) The point of a Trump-branded Bible is to use it like their Dear Leader does: As a photo prop, not something to turn to for guidance or wisdom.
The teachings of Jesus Christ were always a poor fit for Republicans. They're just way more into decimating Social Security than they are into loaves and fishes. What Trump offers when it comes to Christianity is what he offers his followers in every other aspect: permission to stop pretending to be good people. His gift to them is his shamelessness. Through Trump, his followers can realize their fantasies of being unapologetic bullies. This is the same schtick as MAGA members who claim to be "patriots" while attacking the rule of law and democracy. Trump tells them what they want to hear: You can be a Christian without compassion.
Even before Trump's version of a "Bible" was being sold, his hollowed-out version of "faith" had cannibalized what was left of evangelical Christianity, which had already spent decades remaking itself as the culture war arm of the GOP. This is most easily tracked in the rise of churchless Christians. Over 40% of self-described evangelicals go to church once a year or less. Instead, as the New York Times reported, MAGA is basically their religion. Instead of prayer and Bible study, they "practice" their faith by watching Christian-branded online content that is, in actuality, just about right-wing politics.
But, even that number underplays how much Trumpism has displaced traditional theology in evangelical religion. In my report on the online Christian right, former evangelical minister Brad Onishi argued that churches themselves learned they must wholly embrace the views and rhetoric of the MAGA movement if they wish to keep their parishioners. For instance, the "churches that refused to shut down during COVID" are "booming," swelling from "from 100 people to 1000 people," while churches that behaved more responsibly often found themselves shutting down. "I do think it's making it more extreme. If you're not willing to go there as a pastor, you may lose your church," Onishi told Salon.
Replacing the real Bible with Trump Bibles is a too-perfect symbol of what has happened to evangelical Christianity. The mistake is in believing Trump's followers are confused or ashamed about their devotion to a godless creep who laughs at true believers. In Trump's hands, the Bible is not a text for prayer and reflection, it's just a weapon. It's much easier to beat people down with a book if it's closed.
EXPOSING ANOTHER REPUBLICAN LIAR!!!
Ohio
Bernie Moreno says he fled socialism in Colombia for the US in 1971. What does history say?
The Republican challenger to Democrat Sherrod Brown for US Senate in Ohio has made dubious claims in his campaign
Martin Pengelly in Washington
THE GUARDIAN
Thu 28 Mar 2024 08.00 EDT
Bernie Moreno, the Republican candidate for US Senate in Ohio who expected to mount a stern challenge to Sherrod Brown, the incumbent leftwing Democrat, says his family fled socialism when they came to the US from Colombia in 1971, when he was four years old.
Though such statements formed a central part of Moreno’s campaign message on his way to securing the Republican nomination with support from Donald Trump, they do not withstand historical scrutiny.
In an interview in 2020, about his success as a car dealer in Ohio, Moreno described himself as “somebody who moved to this country a long time ago to escape what happens in most South American countries, which is socialism and the absolute prison of those ideas”.
In 2021, as Moreno moved into national politics with a first run for a Senate nomination, the Cleveland Plain Dealer said he “says he came to the United States as a child with his mother and siblings to flee socialism in their native Colombia. He believes that same ideology is rising in the United States, and he wants to fight back.”
But when Moreno was born, on 14 February 1967, Colombia was nine years into the 16-year period of National Front government, in which conservative and liberal parties alternated being in power as a way to avoid violence between the two factions.
Furthermore, the first leftwing Colombian government in modern times is the current one, headed by Gustavo Petro and in power since 2022.
Colombia has long been home to leftwing guerrilla groups. As described by the US Congressional Research Service, when Moreno lived there, the country was home to “leftist, Marxist-inspired insurgencies … including the Farc, launched in 1964, and the smaller National Liberation Army (ELN), which formed the following year”.
Such groups, the CRS says, “conducted kidnappings, committed serious human rights violations, and carried out a campaign of terror that aimed to unseat the central government in Bogotá”.
Moreno, however, has described an early childhood far removed from such worries.
By his own description, his father was secretary of health under Misael Pastrana, a conservative and the last National Front president between 1970 and 1974.
“We had a very, very, very, very incredible lifestyle in Colombia,” Moreno said in 2019, at a business event in Cleveland, adding that his mother moved the family to the US – initially against his father’s wishes – because she “didn’t want us to be raised as pampered indoor cats”.
The move was “a jump”, Moreno said, “but it was this idea of no fear”.
Contacted for comment on Wednesday, Moreno’s communications director, Reagan McCarthy, said: “No where in the [first] quote cited does Bernie say his family came to America because Colombia was a socialist country or that his family was escaping a socialist country at the time.
“He very clearly was stating that many South American countries fell to socialism and his parents came to America to ensure their kids would grow up in a free society, out of fear that Colombia would eventually move towards socialism.”
As indicated by McCarthy’s reference to “many South American countries [falling] to socialism”, Moreno has also spoken of a fear of being “surrounded” by socialist governments.
In 2021, writing in the Toledo Blade, he said: “I was born in South America, surrounded by socialist ideology.”
The same year, Moreno told the Landscape, a Cleveland podcast: “I think the [US is] going off [in] a very dangerous direction. It’s a direction I recognise. I grew up surrounded by socialist ideology, whether it’s Venezuela or Cuba [or] now Peru, and I know where this movie ends.”
And in a campaign ad, also from 2021, Moreno said: “I came from a country surrounded by the ideology of radicals like Fidel Castro and Che Guevara, who promised to give everyone all they needed and solve all their problems, just like [Vermont senator] Bernie Sanders and AOC [New York congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] are doing today.”
Such claims also shake under scrutiny.
Cuba has indeed been governed from the left since 1959, when Castro and the Communist party took power after a long fight. Castro was assisted by Guevara, a revolutionary from Argentina – who was killed in October 1967, when Moreno was eight months old.
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, when Moreno was a young child in Colombia, Venezuela was governed by Rafael Caldera, a Christian Democrat who moved to end conflict with leftwing guerrillas. Ecuador, which also borders Colombia, was also governed by a centrist at that time.
Between 1968 and 1975, Peru was led by Juan Velasco Alvarado, a general who seized power in a coup d’état but governed from the political centre. The current president of Peru, Dina Boluarte, is a former member of a Marxist party now governing with the support of rightwingers.
Between 1970 and 1973, Chile – more than a thousand miles south of Colombia – was governed by Salvador Allende, its first socialist president. He died on 11 September 1973 as the rightwing Chilean military led by Gen Augusto Pinochet attacked the presidential palace, in a coup backed by the CIA.
After coming to the US in 1971, Moreno became a US citizen at 18. In her statement on Wednesday, McCarthy, the Moreno aide, accused the Guardian of failing to celebrate “what could potentially be the first South American-born senator”.
The National Republican Senatorial Committee and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee did not respond to requests for comment. A spokesperson for Brown declined to comment.
Though such statements formed a central part of Moreno’s campaign message on his way to securing the Republican nomination with support from Donald Trump, they do not withstand historical scrutiny.
In an interview in 2020, about his success as a car dealer in Ohio, Moreno described himself as “somebody who moved to this country a long time ago to escape what happens in most South American countries, which is socialism and the absolute prison of those ideas”.
In 2021, as Moreno moved into national politics with a first run for a Senate nomination, the Cleveland Plain Dealer said he “says he came to the United States as a child with his mother and siblings to flee socialism in their native Colombia. He believes that same ideology is rising in the United States, and he wants to fight back.”
But when Moreno was born, on 14 February 1967, Colombia was nine years into the 16-year period of National Front government, in which conservative and liberal parties alternated being in power as a way to avoid violence between the two factions.
Furthermore, the first leftwing Colombian government in modern times is the current one, headed by Gustavo Petro and in power since 2022.
Colombia has long been home to leftwing guerrilla groups. As described by the US Congressional Research Service, when Moreno lived there, the country was home to “leftist, Marxist-inspired insurgencies … including the Farc, launched in 1964, and the smaller National Liberation Army (ELN), which formed the following year”.
Such groups, the CRS says, “conducted kidnappings, committed serious human rights violations, and carried out a campaign of terror that aimed to unseat the central government in Bogotá”.
Moreno, however, has described an early childhood far removed from such worries.
By his own description, his father was secretary of health under Misael Pastrana, a conservative and the last National Front president between 1970 and 1974.
“We had a very, very, very, very incredible lifestyle in Colombia,” Moreno said in 2019, at a business event in Cleveland, adding that his mother moved the family to the US – initially against his father’s wishes – because she “didn’t want us to be raised as pampered indoor cats”.
The move was “a jump”, Moreno said, “but it was this idea of no fear”.
Contacted for comment on Wednesday, Moreno’s communications director, Reagan McCarthy, said: “No where in the [first] quote cited does Bernie say his family came to America because Colombia was a socialist country or that his family was escaping a socialist country at the time.
“He very clearly was stating that many South American countries fell to socialism and his parents came to America to ensure their kids would grow up in a free society, out of fear that Colombia would eventually move towards socialism.”
As indicated by McCarthy’s reference to “many South American countries [falling] to socialism”, Moreno has also spoken of a fear of being “surrounded” by socialist governments.
In 2021, writing in the Toledo Blade, he said: “I was born in South America, surrounded by socialist ideology.”
The same year, Moreno told the Landscape, a Cleveland podcast: “I think the [US is] going off [in] a very dangerous direction. It’s a direction I recognise. I grew up surrounded by socialist ideology, whether it’s Venezuela or Cuba [or] now Peru, and I know where this movie ends.”
And in a campaign ad, also from 2021, Moreno said: “I came from a country surrounded by the ideology of radicals like Fidel Castro and Che Guevara, who promised to give everyone all they needed and solve all their problems, just like [Vermont senator] Bernie Sanders and AOC [New York congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] are doing today.”
Such claims also shake under scrutiny.
Cuba has indeed been governed from the left since 1959, when Castro and the Communist party took power after a long fight. Castro was assisted by Guevara, a revolutionary from Argentina – who was killed in October 1967, when Moreno was eight months old.
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, when Moreno was a young child in Colombia, Venezuela was governed by Rafael Caldera, a Christian Democrat who moved to end conflict with leftwing guerrillas. Ecuador, which also borders Colombia, was also governed by a centrist at that time.
Between 1968 and 1975, Peru was led by Juan Velasco Alvarado, a general who seized power in a coup d’état but governed from the political centre. The current president of Peru, Dina Boluarte, is a former member of a Marxist party now governing with the support of rightwingers.
Between 1970 and 1973, Chile – more than a thousand miles south of Colombia – was governed by Salvador Allende, its first socialist president. He died on 11 September 1973 as the rightwing Chilean military led by Gen Augusto Pinochet attacked the presidential palace, in a coup backed by the CIA.
After coming to the US in 1971, Moreno became a US citizen at 18. In her statement on Wednesday, McCarthy, the Moreno aide, accused the Guardian of failing to celebrate “what could potentially be the first South American-born senator”.
The National Republican Senatorial Committee and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee did not respond to requests for comment. A spokesperson for Brown declined to comment.
What Is the ‘Great Replacement Theory’? A Scholar of Race Relations Explains
Unmasking the Origins, Evolution and Societal Impact of the ‘Great Replacement Theory’
RODNEY COATES, MIAMI UNIVERSITY - dc report
March 16, 2024
The “great replacement theory,” whose origins date back to the late 19th century, argues that Jews and some Western elites are conspiring to replace white Americans and Europeans with people of non-European descent, particularly Asians and Africans.
The conspiracy evolved from a series of false ideas that, over time, stoked the fears of white people: In 1892, British-Australian author and politician Charles Pearson warned that white people would “wake to find ourselves elbowed and hustled, and perhaps even thrust aside by people whom we looked down.” The massive influx of immigrants into Europe at the time fostered some of these fears and resulted in “white extinction anxiety.” In the U.S., it resulted in policies targeting immigration in the late 19th and early 20th century.
In France, journalist Édouard Drumont, leader of an antisemitic movement, wrote articles in the late 19th century imagining how Jews would destroy French culture. In 1909, Filippo Tommaso Marinetti, an Italian poet and supporter of Benito Mussolini, argued that war and fascism were the only cure for the world. Fascism, then and now, worked to ensure white dominance.
This was followed by the eugenics movement, an erroneous and racist theory that supported forced sterilization of Black people, the mentally ill and other marginalized groups, who were all deemed “unfit.”
The 1978 book entitled “The Turner Diaries,” a fictional futuristic account of the overthrow of the United States government, further contributed to white nationalist ideas.
Collectively, these gave rise to a global movement that attracted a wide range of white supremacist, xenophobic and anti-immigration conspiracy theories. These theories were formally codified in the work of Frenchman Renaud Camus, first in his 2010 book “L’Abécédaire de l’in-nocence” and elaborated in his 2011 book “Le Grand Remplacement.”
Camus argued that ethnic French and white Europeans were being replaced physically, culturally and politically by nonwhite people. He believed that liberal immigration policies and the dramatic decline in white birth rates were threatening European civilization and traditions.
Why This Conspiracy Theory Matters
These false ideas promulgated the spread of white supremacy, which has contributed to terrorist attacks, state violence and propaganda campaigns in the U.S and parts of Europe.
On Aug. 11, 2017, during a “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, white nationalists chanted “You will not replace us” and “Jews will not replace us.” In spring 2019, Belgian politician Dries Van Langenhove repeatedly posted on social media, “We are being replaced.”
In recent years, nonwhite immigrants have been the target of xenophobia. Migrants, especially from Mexico, are accused of bringing criminal activities to American cities. Immigrants have also been falsely accused of smuggling fentanyl into the U.S. The reality is that immigrants commit far fewer crimes than those born in the U.S.
Impact of the Theory and Spread of Hate
In less than two decades, the theory has become a major idea, with as many as 60% of the French population believing some aspects of it. According to that survey, they are worried or at least concerned that they might be replaced. In the U.K. and the U.S., close to one-third of those polled believe that white people are systematically being replaced by nonwhite immigrants. Some in the U.S. fear that America might lose its culture and identity as a result.
Being aware of conspiracy theories and standing up to hatred, I argue, can help societies deal with the continuing fallout of extreme xenophobia, racist rants, the rise of white supremacy and the victimization of innocent people.
The conspiracy evolved from a series of false ideas that, over time, stoked the fears of white people: In 1892, British-Australian author and politician Charles Pearson warned that white people would “wake to find ourselves elbowed and hustled, and perhaps even thrust aside by people whom we looked down.” The massive influx of immigrants into Europe at the time fostered some of these fears and resulted in “white extinction anxiety.” In the U.S., it resulted in policies targeting immigration in the late 19th and early 20th century.
In France, journalist Édouard Drumont, leader of an antisemitic movement, wrote articles in the late 19th century imagining how Jews would destroy French culture. In 1909, Filippo Tommaso Marinetti, an Italian poet and supporter of Benito Mussolini, argued that war and fascism were the only cure for the world. Fascism, then and now, worked to ensure white dominance.
This was followed by the eugenics movement, an erroneous and racist theory that supported forced sterilization of Black people, the mentally ill and other marginalized groups, who were all deemed “unfit.”
The 1978 book entitled “The Turner Diaries,” a fictional futuristic account of the overthrow of the United States government, further contributed to white nationalist ideas.
Collectively, these gave rise to a global movement that attracted a wide range of white supremacist, xenophobic and anti-immigration conspiracy theories. These theories were formally codified in the work of Frenchman Renaud Camus, first in his 2010 book “L’Abécédaire de l’in-nocence” and elaborated in his 2011 book “Le Grand Remplacement.”
Camus argued that ethnic French and white Europeans were being replaced physically, culturally and politically by nonwhite people. He believed that liberal immigration policies and the dramatic decline in white birth rates were threatening European civilization and traditions.
Why This Conspiracy Theory Matters
These false ideas promulgated the spread of white supremacy, which has contributed to terrorist attacks, state violence and propaganda campaigns in the U.S and parts of Europe.
On Aug. 11, 2017, during a “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, white nationalists chanted “You will not replace us” and “Jews will not replace us.” In spring 2019, Belgian politician Dries Van Langenhove repeatedly posted on social media, “We are being replaced.”
In recent years, nonwhite immigrants have been the target of xenophobia. Migrants, especially from Mexico, are accused of bringing criminal activities to American cities. Immigrants have also been falsely accused of smuggling fentanyl into the U.S. The reality is that immigrants commit far fewer crimes than those born in the U.S.
Impact of the Theory and Spread of Hate
In less than two decades, the theory has become a major idea, with as many as 60% of the French population believing some aspects of it. According to that survey, they are worried or at least concerned that they might be replaced. In the U.K. and the U.S., close to one-third of those polled believe that white people are systematically being replaced by nonwhite immigrants. Some in the U.S. fear that America might lose its culture and identity as a result.
Being aware of conspiracy theories and standing up to hatred, I argue, can help societies deal with the continuing fallout of extreme xenophobia, racist rants, the rise of white supremacy and the victimization of innocent people.
STUCK ON STUPID!!!
elected officials who owe their offices to stupid voters
MTG LOBS 'COMPLETELY BACKWARD' NEW EXCUSE FOR TRUMP'S 'FIND ME THE VOTES' CALL
Republican slammed for cracking jokes about deadly Baltimore bridge collapse
SMOKING GUN: Video Shows Rudy Knew No Bribes From Ukraine
Hello, Merrick Garland? Get to work!
Conover Kennard — CROOKS & LIARS
March 28, 2024
Lev Parnas brought the receipts over the lie Rudy Giuliani and his Republican buddies have been pushing about Victor Shokin, a former prosecutor for Ukraine, who world leaders wanted out of office because he was so corrupt. And Donald Trump has claimed that Joe Biden had pushed for Shokin's ouster because he was "prosecuting" the company where Hunter Biden sat on the board, Burisma. Unsurprisingly, that's not true. Shokin was not prosecuting Burisma.
And this whole time that Giuliani propped up this debunked story, he knew it was false. Giuliani is caught on video asking Shokin, "Was there ever any specific act that any of these people performed?"
"Did they get a kickback?" he asked. "Did they get a bribe"?
Shokin says no.
This means that Rudy knew and pushed the fake news story anyway to hurt President Biden while trying to help a man who is facing 91 felonies.
Devin Nunes, too:
Lev Parnas
@levparnas
Devin Nunes with his aide Derek Harvey coordinated with John Solomon, Victoria Toensing, and Rudy Giuliani how to disseminate the disinformation that they sent me to go get on Hunter and Joe Biden! Stay tuned more to come! #LevRemembers #ShadowDiplomacy
And this whole time that Giuliani propped up this debunked story, he knew it was false. Giuliani is caught on video asking Shokin, "Was there ever any specific act that any of these people performed?"
"Did they get a kickback?" he asked. "Did they get a bribe"?
Shokin says no.
This means that Rudy knew and pushed the fake news story anyway to hurt President Biden while trying to help a man who is facing 91 felonies.
Devin Nunes, too:
Lev Parnas
@levparnas
Devin Nunes with his aide Derek Harvey coordinated with John Solomon, Victoria Toensing, and Rudy Giuliani how to disseminate the disinformation that they sent me to go get on Hunter and Joe Biden! Stay tuned more to come! #LevRemembers #ShadowDiplomacy
Bites from Real News
*3/28/2024*
*US Leads in New Fossil Fuel Projects Despite Climate Emergency
A report by Global Energy Monitor found the US expanded oil and gas development more than any nation from 2022 to 2023.
*“Everyone Will Die in Prison”: How Louisiana’s Plan to Lock People Up Longer Imperils Its Sickest Inmates Janice Parker has witnessed the failing medical care at Angola, the state’s largest prison, on her frequent visits to see her paralyzed son. Laws passed at the behest of Gov. Jeff Landry threaten to further strain that system.
*Washington State Enacts Comprehensive Worker Protections for Strip Club Dancers “This is a beautiful step towards decriminalization and a huge show of stripper solidarity,” one activist said.
*Philly’s Law-and-Order Policy Worsens Overdose Crisis and Hinders Harm Reduction The crisis in the Kensington neighborhood is the result of enforced deprivation and neglect of the people by the state.
*Walmart: Hidden costs, public burden
Hidden costs, public burden: The real toll of Walmart's "always low prices"
Instead of paying a living wage to their employees, taxpayers are footing the bill
Israeli Soldiers Filmed Themselves Playing With Gaza Women’s Underwear
‘DEMEANING’
Dan Ladden-Hall
News Correspondent
Published Mar. 28, 2024 9:21AM EDT
DAILY BEAST CHEAT SHEET
Israeli soldiers have shared online clips and images of themselves playing with women’s underwear inside Palestinians’ homes during the war in Gaza, according to a report. The videos, which were verified by Reuters, include footage of a soldier dangling underwear over a sleeping comrade’s open mouth, while another shows a soldier sitting on a tank alongside a female mannequin wearing a black bra. “I found a beautiful wife, serious relationship in Gaza, great woman,” the troop says. “The posting of such images is demeaning to Palestinian women, and all women,” said U.N. Human Rights Office spokesperson Ravina Shamdasani. Two legal experts also told Reuters the clips could possibly constitute breaches of international law. An IDF spokesperson said the Israeli military investigates cases that fall below the expected standards of its soldiers, including reports of videos online. “It should be clarified that in some of the examined cases, it is concluded that the expression or behavior of the soldiers in the video is inappropriate, and it is handled accordingly,” the IDF statement said.
Ship Had Electrical Issues Days Before Baltimore Bridge Collision: Report
NOT GREAT
Josh Fiallo
Breaking News Reporter
Published Mar. 27, 2024 4:57PM EDT
DAILY BEAST CHEAT SHEET
Dali, the ship behind the fatal bridge collapse in Baltimore on Wednesday, had suffered from a “severe electrical problem” for days before it lost power during its ill-fated trip out of the Maryland harbor, a port worker told a CNN affiliate on Thursday. Julie Mitchell, co-administrator of Container Royalty, a company tracks the tonnage on container ships coming in and out of Baltimore, said the massive container ship had sat in the port for two days suffering from “total power failure, loss of engine power, everything.” Now Mitchell is pointing a finger at those who gave the ship an OK to leave port despite its alleged issues. “They shouldn’t have let the ship leave port until they got it on under control,” she said, adding that she’s unsure whether decision makers thought the issue was fixed before Dali set sail. Six construction workers are presumed dead in the tragedy, which authorities say likely would have been much worst had bridge workers not shut down traffic on the Francis Scott Key Bridge just before impact after a “mayday” call came in from Dali. Ten vessels, including bulk carriers and naval ships, were stuck in Baltimore by the wreckage on Wednesday.
the key to republican support
*What's Inside*
SHATTERING DECEPTIVE MIRRORS: YOUNGER GENERATIONS HAVE THE CHANCE TO BUCK THE BEAUTY INDUSTRY SCAM(REALITY)
BOTTLED WATER CONTAINS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PLASTIC BITS: STUDY
REALITY
THE GREAT MEDICARE ADVANTAGE MARKETING SCAM
CORPORATE CRIMINALS
2023 SAW RECORD KILLINGS BY US POLICE. WHO IS MOST IMPACTED?
GESTAPO USA
AMERICA HAS NEVER BEEN UNITED. SO HOW DO WE MOVE FORWARD TOGETHER?
COMMENTARY
MEDICARE ADVANTAGE PLANS: THE HIDDEN DANGERS AND THREATS TO PATIENT CARE
REALITY
A NEW STUDY DESCRIBES IN GROTESQUE DETAIL THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE ULTRARICH HAVE PERVERTED THE CHARITABLE GIVING INDUSTRY.
REALITY
HOW TRUMP AND BUSH TAX CUTS FOR BILLIONAIRES BROKE AMERICA
REALITY
FROM 1947 TO 2023: RETRACING THE COMPLEX, TRAGIC ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT
REALITY
RED STATE CONSERVATIVES ARE DYING THANKS TO THE PEOPLE THEY VOTE FOR
REALITY
HOW TEXAS BECAME THE NEW "HOMEBASE" FOR WHITE NATIONALIST AND NEO-NAZI GROUPS
AMERICA
HOW THE GOP SUCKERED AMERICA ON TAX CUTS
REALITY
ADVOCATES SUE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR FAILING TO BAN IMPORTS OF COCOA HARVESTED BY CHILDREN(SLAVERY 21ST CENTURY)
RACISM AT HEART OF US FAILURE TO TACKLE DEADLY HEATWAVES, EXPERT WARNS
WHITE SUPREMACY
'MISLEADING': ALARM RAISED ABOUT MEDICARE ADVANTAGE 'SCAM'
REALITY
SLAVERY ISN’T JUST BLACK HISTORY — IT’S US HISTORY
RACE MATTERS
*late news of interest*
A Meditation On Practical Applications Of Stupidity
The Mystery of Anti-Vax & Anti-Mask
Kat Ignatz - DAILY KOS
Sunday August 01, 2021 · 5:00 AM PDT
...“The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity” seems as good a way as any to explain the insane situation we’re in. It’s speculative, but in my opinion, guessing is all we’ve really got right now.
In his essay, Cipolla divides human beings into four categories and builds his theory on these characteristics.
His categories are:
And he presents his theory as five laws:
Taking Cipolla’s laws and looking for correlations with anti-vax/mask behavior, you can map out anti-vax/mask actions like this:
And you could do the same matching of Cipolla’s laws with anti-vax/mask actions, and together, we could come up with a big, five-part list of parallels between Cipolla’s theory and the anti-vax/mask movement.
And it would prove nothing.
But looking at it might make you wonder, like me, if there’s anything but dangerous, illogical, and incomprehensible behavior there.
Cipolla doesn’t explain stupid people. He simply says that they exist, and they’re irrational, unpredictable, and hazardous. He states that irrational people can’t be understood by rational minds and cautions against getting involved with irrational people because it always comes with a cost that’s often a big cost.
He says the only hope is for rational people to create more gains than the losses that irrational people cause. He was an economist so his theory is all gains and losses, and another way to think about his four human traits is total gain, loss/gain, gain/loss, and total loss.
And maybe that’s the real answer here. Maybe, we shouldn’t concern ourselves with why anti-vax/maskers act like they do. Perhaps, we should simply accept them as an incredible danger to our country, states, cities, friends, families, and selves, and we should just do everything we can to do more good than they do harm.
I like Cipolla’s theory, and I find it to be a compelling model for many of the problems we’re experiencing—like, for instance, Republicans.
In this writings, Cipolla makes a point of dividing bandits into Intelligent Bandits and Stupid Bandits. Intelligent bandits cause an equal amount of loss and gain, and they get everything they take from others. Stupid bandits cause more loss than gain, and they only get part of what they cause others to lose.
When I read that, I think about how Republicans are actively working to crash the US so they can keep their wealth and power. And then I think that they’re going so far with it that they may have moved from being stupid bandits to fully stupid because it’s irrational to think they’ll keep much of anything if the country collapses.
I also start thinking about how prevalent stupid banditry is in the world—as if it’s the only way to do business. The “bigs” are especially dangerous: big agriculture, apparel, chemical, electronics, oil, pharmaceuticals, retail, etc.
We’re all losing our lives in one way or another to these dubious ventures.
But that’s my mind drifting on to a topic for another diary, and I’ll stop this one here.
In his essay, Cipolla divides human beings into four categories and builds his theory on these characteristics.
His categories are:
- Intelligent People whose actions benefit others and themselves
- Helpless People whose actions harm them but benefit others
- Bandits whose actions harm others but benefit them
- Stupid People whose actions harm others but don’t benefit them and may, in fact, harm them, too
And he presents his theory as five laws:
- Everyone always underestimates how many stupid people there are.
- Stupidity is unrelated to any other human trait.
- Stupid people cause losses to others without gain and, possibly, with losses to themselves.
- Non-stupid people always underestimate how harmful stupid people are.
- Stupid people are the most dangerous type of person.
Taking Cipolla’s laws and looking for correlations with anti-vax/mask behavior, you can map out anti-vax/mask actions like this:
- How many: 30% of the US population is hesitating, resisting, or outright refusing to get a coronavirus vaccine.
- Unrelated to other traits: Health care workers are protesting against getting vaccinated.
- No gain and possible losses: Not even the threat of death is changing anti-vax/mask behavior.
- How harmful: Who would have predicted that Missouri would end up in such terrible condition?
- Most dangerous: Anti-vax/maskers are bringing the systems we rely on for our safety and health to the brink of crashing.
And you could do the same matching of Cipolla’s laws with anti-vax/mask actions, and together, we could come up with a big, five-part list of parallels between Cipolla’s theory and the anti-vax/mask movement.
And it would prove nothing.
But looking at it might make you wonder, like me, if there’s anything but dangerous, illogical, and incomprehensible behavior there.
Cipolla doesn’t explain stupid people. He simply says that they exist, and they’re irrational, unpredictable, and hazardous. He states that irrational people can’t be understood by rational minds and cautions against getting involved with irrational people because it always comes with a cost that’s often a big cost.
He says the only hope is for rational people to create more gains than the losses that irrational people cause. He was an economist so his theory is all gains and losses, and another way to think about his four human traits is total gain, loss/gain, gain/loss, and total loss.
And maybe that’s the real answer here. Maybe, we shouldn’t concern ourselves with why anti-vax/maskers act like they do. Perhaps, we should simply accept them as an incredible danger to our country, states, cities, friends, families, and selves, and we should just do everything we can to do more good than they do harm.
I like Cipolla’s theory, and I find it to be a compelling model for many of the problems we’re experiencing—like, for instance, Republicans.
In this writings, Cipolla makes a point of dividing bandits into Intelligent Bandits and Stupid Bandits. Intelligent bandits cause an equal amount of loss and gain, and they get everything they take from others. Stupid bandits cause more loss than gain, and they only get part of what they cause others to lose.
When I read that, I think about how Republicans are actively working to crash the US so they can keep their wealth and power. And then I think that they’re going so far with it that they may have moved from being stupid bandits to fully stupid because it’s irrational to think they’ll keep much of anything if the country collapses.
I also start thinking about how prevalent stupid banditry is in the world—as if it’s the only way to do business. The “bigs” are especially dangerous: big agriculture, apparel, chemical, electronics, oil, pharmaceuticals, retail, etc.
We’re all losing our lives in one way or another to these dubious ventures.
But that’s my mind drifting on to a topic for another diary, and I’ll stop this one here.