Behind the Curtain — Scoop: The Trump job applications revealed

https://www.axios.com/2023/12/01/trump-government-job-applications-2025

 
 

Illustration of a curtain with a tassel in the shape of the Axios logo

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

We told you in a “Behind the Curtain” column last month that Trump allies are pre-screening the ideologies of thousands of potential appointees and employees in case he wins back the White House. Now we have copies of the exact questionnaires Trump allies are using — and that then-President Trump used himself during his final days in office.

Why it matters: These future Trumpers would staff an unprecedented effort to centralize and expand presidential power at every level of the administration.

  • Trump insiders are planning a far more targeted and sophisticated sequel to his haphazard first term, when internal feuding deterred policy wins or permanent changes to government.
  • The 2020 questionnaire — paired with the application the Heritage Foundation is currently collecting from job prospects for a future administration — points to a top-down government-in-waiting that would be driven more by ideology than by policy expertise or innovation.
  • Trump, the overwhelming favorite for the Republican nomination, is being explicit about his plans for retribution and disruption if he wins the 2024 election. So how he would staff his government is of immense consequence.

Driving the news: The 2020 “Research Questionnaire,” which we obtained from a Trump administration alumnus, was used in the administration’s final days — when most moderates and establishment figures had been fired or quit, and loyalists were flexing their muscles. Questions include:

  • “What part of Candidate Trump’s campaign message most appealed to you and why?”
  • “Briefly describe your political evolution. What thinkers, authors, books, or political leaders influenced you and led you to your current beliefs? What political commentator, thinker or politician best reflects your views?”
  • “Have you ever appeared in the media to comment on Candidate Trump, President Trump or other personnel or policies of the Trump Administration?”

The big picture: Similar questions are being asked for the Talent Database being assembled by the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 — the most sophisticated, expensive pre-transition planning ever undertaken for either party:

  • “Name one person, past or present, who has most influenced the development of your political philosophy.”
  • “Name a book that has most significantly shaped your political philosophy, and please explain its influence on your thinking.”
  • “Name one living public policy figure whom you greatly admire and why.”

Between the lines: An alumnus of the Trump White House told us both documents are designed to test the sincerity of someone’s MAGA credentials and determine “when you got red-pilled,” or became a true believer.

  • “They want to see that you’re listening to Tucker, and not pointing to the Reagan revolution or any George W. Bush stuff,” this person said.

See for yourself: As an exclusive for Axios readers, at the bottom of this story you can read both the Trump questionnaire and 2025 application in full.

Both documents are striking for their emphasis on what you believe rather than your credentials or accomplishments.

  • They reflect a vision for a centralized administration where people throughout the administration would pick up the phone and say: “Yes, sir.”
 

Details: The Heritage Foundation told us Project 2025 officials have collected more than 5,000 applications — months before a Republican nominee is locked in.

  • Heritage president Kevin Roberts said recently that Project 2025’s mission is to get the next conservative president “ready to govern in the most aggressive, ambitious, audacious way to destroy the Deep State and devolve power back to the individual Americans.”

The groundwork by Heritage, which is nonpartisan in its tax designation, is technically available to any future conservative nominee. We’re told Project 2025 officials have briefed the Republican campaigns of Trump, Ron DeSantis, Nikki Halley and Vivek Ramaswamy — and even the independent campaign of Robert Kennedy Jr.

  • But the presence of Johnny McEntee, former director of Trump’s White House Presidential Personnel Office, as a senior adviser to Project 2025 reflects the Trump-centric planning.

Behind the scenes: We hear Trump has been irritated by all the attention Heritage and other outside allies have gotten for the prefab administration that’s being assembled.

  • The Trump campaign’s top two officials, Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita, issued a statement in mid-November saying that “none of these groups or individuals speak for President Trump or his campaign. We will have an official transition effort to be announced at a later date.”
  • “Unless a second term priority is articulated by President Trump himself, or is officially communicated by the campaign,” they added, “it is not authorized in any way.”

Go deeper: Trump allies pre-screen loyalists for unprecedented power grab

  • “Behind the Curtain” is a column by Axios CEO Jim VandeHei and co-founder Mike Allen, based on regular conversations with White House and congressional leaders, CEOs and top technologists.
 
 
 
 
 
Go deeper
 

Fascism creeps …

Please read the quote below from the post on Ten Bear’s site.  Then think of the things tRump and his supporters claim they plan to do.   Hugs.   Scottie

White Rose survivor Jürgen Wittenstein described what it was like to live in Hitler’s Germany: “The government – or rather, the party – controlled everything: the news media, arms, police, the armed forces, the judiciary system, communications, travel, all levels of education from kindergarten to universities, all cultural and religious institutions. Political indoctrination started at a very early age, and continued by means of the Hitler Youth with the ultimate goal of complete mind control. Children were exhorted in school to denounce even their own parents for derogatory remarks about Hitler or Nazi ideology.”

Klanned Karenhood Lady Has Her Own Sex Tape, Go Figure

Tengrain has a great post on the hypocrisy of the family values republican crowd.  Well worth the visit.   Hugs.  Scottie

Florida says the purpose of school libraries is to “convey the government’s message”

https://popular.info/p/florida-says-the-purpose-of-school

Thanks again to Ten Bears for the link.   This shows the claim they are against indoctrination in schools is not true, but instead the goal is to indoctrinate kids in a hard right wing fundamentalist Christian ideology.  It is a return to the fake myth of the 1950s society and the removing of everything LGBTQIA and gender identity.  Total authoritarian back to the dark ages regression.  It is a rejection of all the social advancements of the modern age.   Hugs.  Scottie


DEC 5, 2023
 
 

One thing that is seldom mentioned about the removal of books from Florida classroom libraries: much of this activity may be illegal. 

The school board in Escambia County, Florida, for example, is being sued over their decision to remove And Tango Makes Three and other books from public school libraries. And Tango Makes Three is the true story of two male penguins, Roy and Silo, who lived in the Central Park Zoo and raised an adopted chick. The woman who challenged the book, notorious Escambia County English Teacher Vicki Baggett, told Popular Information she was concerned it exposes students to “alternate sexual ideologies.” Baggett said “a second grader would read this book, and that idea would pop into the second grader’s mind… that these are two people of the same sex that love each other.” The school board appeared to have similar concerns. “The fascination is still on those two male penguins,” school board member David Williams said. “So I’ll be voting to remove the book from our libraries.” 


Florida English teacher pushing book bans is openly racist and homophobic, students allege

Florida English teacher pushing book bans is openly racist and homophobic, students allege

·
JAN 9
Read full story
——————————————————————————–
 

In May, Penguin Random House, five authors, two parents, and the non-profit group PEN America sued the Escambia County school board in federal court, alleging that the school board’s actions violated the United States Constitution. The lawsuit alleges that the school board banned and restricted books “based on their disagreement with the ideas expressed in those books.” In so doing, the school board has “prescribed an orthodoxy of opinion that violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments.”

The lawsuit is ongoing, and Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody (R) has intervened in the case, arguing that it should be dismissed. In an extraordinary filing earlier this year, Moody argued that the First Amendment does not apply to public school libraries and that school boards can remove any book for any reason — even if the motive is discriminatory. 

In Moody’s filing, Florida argues that the purpose of public school libraries is to “convey the government’s message,” and that can be accomplished through “the removal of speech that the government disapproves.” The issue of what books are allowed to be carried by school libraries, Florida states, should be settled at the “ballot box.” According to the state’s filing, public school libraries “are not a forum for free expression.” 

Florida’s argument has serious flaws. Indeed, Florida’s filing acknowledges that no court has ruled, as Florida argues, that public school libraries are a form of government speech. The issues with Florida’s legal position were detailed in an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs filed by two dozen law professors. 

Florida is arguing for an expansion of the definition of “government speech” to include public school libraries. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito — one of the court’s most conservative members — warned in the 1996 case of Matal v. Tam that the concept of “government speech” is “susceptible to dangerous misuse.” Alito, writing for the Supreme Court, wrote that “we must exercise great caution before extending our government-speech precedents” because it could be used as a pretext to “silence or muffle the expression of disfavored viewpoints.” 

Currently, “the government speech doctrine only applies to state programs in which the government conveys an official message that the public would recognize as such.” Public school libraries do not exist “to carry official messaging” for the government, the law professors note. Therefore, “[a]pplying the government speech doctrine to school libraries would create a dangerous incompatibility with the nature and purpose of those libraries.” 

A federal judge recently rejected a similar argument made by the Arkansas government regarding the removal of books from public libraries. “Defendants are unable to cite any legal precedent to suggest that the state may censor non-obscene materials in a public library because such censorship is a form of government speech,” the judge ruled. 

The law professors highlight that there is a Supreme Court case that directly addresses the government’s role in curating school libraries, the 1982 case of Island Trees School District v. Pico. In Pico, the Supreme Court recognized that school boards have significant flexibility in determining the contents of school libraries. However, the Supreme Court was clear that the scope of the school board’s power over school libraries is limited by the First Amendment. 

Citing previous Supreme Court decisions, the plurality opinion in Pico notes that “students must always remain free to inquire, to study and to evaluate” and the “school library is the principal locus of such freedom.” As a result, it is unconstitutional for school boards to remove books from a school library in a “narrowly partisan or political manner.’” This appears to be exactly what is happening. And Tango Makes Three was removed from Escambia County school libraries because it didn’t conform to the school board’s political opinions about LGBTQ people. 

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit note that the precedent goes beyond Pico: “Every court that has addressed that issue… has rejected the position that libraries — including school libraries — constitute Constitution-free zones in which government officials can freely discriminate based on viewpoint.”

Florida realizes that Pico and related cases present a serious challenge to its position. In its filing in support of the Escambia County School Board, Florida argues that Pico should be ignored because it was a plurality decision. But the fact is that, in the 40 years after Pico was decided, the Supreme Court has never repudiated the case.

From “parental rights” to “authoritarianism”

 

The significance of Florida’s filing was recently covered in the Tallahassee Democrat, which interviewed several experts about the implications of the state’s arguments. 

Ken Paulson, the director of the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University, noted that proponents of removing books from school libraries frequently say they are fighting for “parental rights.” But “[if] government speech determines what books can be in the library, the government is essentially saying your children can only see the ideas that the government has approved.” That is inconsistent, Paulson argues, with parental rights. “It’s authoritarianism,” Paulson said. 

Deborah Caldwell-Stone, director of the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, said Florida’s position goes against the fundamental principle “that no government entity can engage in viewpoint discrimination.” Caldwell-Stone said, if Florida prevails, it would transform schools from a place dedicated to “preparing individuals… to make decisions about their own lives” to “indoctrination centers for only one viewpoint.”

Agenda 47: Trump’s & the GOP’s Dystopian Nightmare Plan for America Revealed

Thanks to ten Bears for the link.  This is a scary and important read, and people need to understand what will happen this time if tRump and his ilk get into power again.  We must put small time bickering of age and other things aside until the threat posed by these people are gone.  If we don’t stand together and vote for Biden and other democrats in large numbers or democracy goes away and the US becomes a hell of inequality, no rights, no personal freedoms, and required living as you are ordered to do so.  The LGBTQIA will be illegal, as will other personal freedoms.  Reading material and movies will have to be state sanctioned and follow party lines, like in China.     Hugs.  Scottie


If you thought it can’t happen here, I have an old Sinclair Lewis book to share with you…

Florida County School District Removes 673 Books

DeathSantis keeps claiming that no books are being banned in Florida, that it is a hoax spread by groomers and democrats.  Which to him and his ilk are the same thing.  But he also claims the don’t say gay laws don’t target the LGBTQIA, but the way the laws are written they do have the effect of wiping out any representation of the LGBTQIA or the symbols of those groups from schools.  Even anti-bullying programs had to be stopped because the way the laws are being interpreted they can not tell cis kids not to target or bully LGBTQIA kids.  The real object is to drive any kid who is not cis or straight into the closet, into hiding, and instead of teaching respect, tolerance, and acceptance it teaches hate and bigotry.   Hugs.   Scottie

A quote from the linked article. 

“It’s creating this culture of fear within our media specialists and even teachers who just want to have a library in their classrooms, so kids have access,” said Castor Dentel, a former OCPS elementary school teacher.

Parents, she said, can restrict what their own children read, making it hard to justify pulling so many books from classrooms. “They’re in a pile of we’ll-get-to-it-later and in the meantime, no one can read those books.”

The harm of so much censorship far outweighs the benefits of finding “a book or two that is offensive,” Castor Dentel added. “Look at all the chaos that has been created. It’s not worth it.”


December 21, 2023

The Orlando Sentinel reports:

A total of 673 books, from classics to best-sellers, have been removed from Orange County classrooms this year for fear they violate new state rules that ban making “sexual conduct” available to public school students.

The list also includes popular novels by Stephen King, Sue Monk Kidd and Jodi Picoult, classics like “A Tree Grows in Brooklyn,” “Jude the Obscure,” and “Madame Bovary,” and award-winning books like “A Thousand Acres,” “Beloved,” and “Love in the Time of Cholera.”

The rejected books include ones teachers say were once regularly taught in high school classes, such as “The Color Purple,” “Catch-22,” and “Brave New World.

Read the full article.

 

I found this site with the list:

https://www.nbcmiami.com/ne…

Banning books is something only fascist regimes typically do.

Yet as bad as these bans are, the thing that truly does piss me off the most about what Governor Puddingmitts and his fascist Rethugs are doing is they then LIE about it and insist they aren’t banning any books at all, not a one.

Motherfuckers.

What ticks me off is the Cuban Republicans and others who scream about stuff like are OK if it’s their side doing it.

 

They’re Republicans. Nothing is a problem until it’s a problem for them.

“It’s not censorship, if we do it. It’s restoring ‘parents’ rights’ to approve the curriculum.” That would be certain right-wing parents’ rights, and no one else’s.

Not forgetting that Red States are ONLY allowed to watch Fox *news* and nothing else .

To give you an idea. “A Tree Grows in Brooklyn” was mentioned in an old Bugs Bunny cartoon

So much for being of a sexual nature

But we all know that

Yeah, well that rabbit performed in drag! So there !

 

As well as Elmer Fudd.

Thumbnail
 
 

As I recall, there was also some kinky interspecies action.

Thumbnail
 
 

Fudd looks kinda like Vivian Vance, like in that wonderful story from Tim Gunn’s childhood about meeting Miss Vance in J Edgar Hoover’s office, except that J Edgar wasn’t there too.

 

Yosemite Sam was in a dress at least once

 

And Daffy

Too much sex, not enough trees?

 

A tree can’t grow in Brooklyn unless its mommy and daddy had sex. Treesex = bad!

Paradise Lost, a 17th Century epic poem by John Milton which has been banned along with dozens of other absolutely classic works of literature, has NO sexual content, gay or otherwise.

It is being removed solely because radical fundamentalist Evangelicals object to its subject matter, namely the depiction of a former high angel who becomes jealous of Yahweh’s new favorite hominid toys and leads a revolt. As a consequence, Lucifer and his allies are cast down to Hell. That’s it. That’s the story.

But fundies hate it because Lucifer isn’t portrayed entirely as an unsympathetic character and because the story it tells doesn’t comport with their biblical dogma.

 

I’ve was suspicious that the buybull only tells one side of the story about Lucifer’s fall and his mission against humanity. Shouldn’t we hear from the other side too? I just love mythology.

 

The real message in Milton’s poem is a common but very true theme: “No one believes they are the villain in their own story.”

Essentially, what he was trying to do was to create a framework, a rationale to explain how and why a figure like Satan could come to be. In the end, the conclusion really was that the former angel Lucifer essentially got what he deserved.

But like I said, this whole story gets in the way of radical fundamentalist dogma, which when you think about it is at the core of all these book bans.

But wait, according to the Book of Job, Satan is god’s gambling buddy.

 

 

The police officer who searched for a book in a Great Barrington classroom also used a body camera. The ACLU has ‘deep concerns’

https://www.berkshireeagle.com/news/southern_berkshires/great-barrington-gender-queer-book-police-ban-classroom-du-bois-middle-school-aclu-rights/article_14ba4abc-9eb9-11ee-83c9-0b3ff1c1b9dd.html

Is the point we are at now, the anti-LGBTQIA haters can’t get the books they hate out of schools or public libraries, so they call the police and lie that porn is being shown to kids?  These groups did a sneak attack and got into positions to act on their racism and their bigotry.  But now people understand who they really are and the public is fighting back.  The majority doesn’t believe what the haters do, just as the majority of the public doesn’t agree with the maga republicans and what they are claiming and want to do.  Just as the maga republicans keep claiming that they speak for the country, they represent what the people want, which is clearly not true, it is the same with the haters.  They also claim to represent the people, the public, the parents, everyone!  Yet their ideas and what they want are very unpopular, so clearly they don’t speak for the majority, do they?    This is like calling in bomb threats to stop drag shows.  Just because you don’t like something doesn’t give you the right to deny it to everyone else.  Hugs.  Scottie


Challenged Books-Libraries (copy)

The ACLU is concerned about a police officer’s having searched a classroom at W.E.B. Du Bois Regional Middle School for the coming of age novel, “Gender Queer” after receiving a complaint. The incident has prompted outrage in the school community.

GREAT BARRINGTON — The plainclothed police officer who entered an eighth grade classroom to search for a book wore a body camera and recorded the incident, leading to more legal questions and concerns. 

The American Civil Liberties Union and other free speech advocates say they are alarmed by the recording, as well as the entire Dec. 8 incident that took place after classes let out at W.E.B. Du Bois Regional Middle School.

 

They also say they cannot recall any instances of police going to a school to search for a book. Schools and libraries have internal procedures for book challenges. 

“That’s partly what is so concerning,” said Ruth A. Bourquin, senior and managing attorney for the ACLU of Massachusetts. “Police going into schools and searching for books is the sort of thing you hear about in communist China and Russia. What are we doing?”

The Berkshire Hills Regional School Committee and Superintendent Peter Dillion have, in a statement sent to the school community Tuesday, apologized for how it handled the situation, stating “clearly and unequivocally” that it does not support book banning, and committed to making all of its students feel safe.  

“The recent incident at the middle school has challenged and impacted our community,” according to the statement. “Faced with an unprecedented police investigation of what should be a purely educational issue, we tried our best to serve the interests of students, families, teachers, and staff. In hindsight, we would have approached that moment differently. We are sorry. We can do better to refine and support our existing policies. We are committed to supporting all our students, particularly vulnerable populations.”

 Someone complained about a book in a Great Barrington classroom. Then the police showed up

The ACLU has requested that body camera footage and other records related to the complaint and the investigation, Bourquin said.

It was an anonymous complaint that led Great Barrington Police to open a probe about whether parts of the book, “Gender Queer” by Maia Kobabe, could be considered obscene material or pornographic.

Police then notified the Berkshire District Attorney’s Office as per the department’s policy.

They also notified school and district administrators they were coming to the classroom, and the officer was escorted there by the school principal. The teacher, who kept the book in her resource library, was surprised to see the officer. The officer announced he was turning on his body camera and then looked for the book and did not find it.

The DA ordered the investigation closed. The matter of whether the book is appropriate now rests with the schools.

In its letter, the BHRSD School Committee said the incident “has challenged and impacted our community.”

“Faced with an unprecedented police investigation of what should be a purely educational issue, we tried our best to serve the interests of students, families, teachers and staff. In hindsight, we would have approached that moment differently. We are sorry,” the letter said.

The committee said it would work to collect feedback on how it can do better, starting by hosting a community meeting on Jan. 11. 

“It is the obligation of the district to use its policies, existing or amended, to select curriculum. In this case, the content was not the issue. The process challenging it was. We want to ensure that students and staff feel safe and supported and that families’ voices are heard.”

But questions remain, and the ACLU, parents, students and others remain shocked by the police involvement. Gov. Maura Healey also expressed disapproval of the incident and of book banning in general.

Kobabe’s award-winning illustrated novel is frequently the target of bans. It was the No. 1 one most banned book last year, according to American Library Association data.

‘The freedom to read’

 

“Gender Queer” is a coming-of-age memoir about reckoning with confusion about gender and contains sexually explicit illustrations and language.

It is this that many in LGBTQIA+ community say they believe is the reason for the censorship — not so-called “obscenity” concerns.

In Massachusetts the test for obscenity is if the material is of interest sexually, depicts or describes sexual conduct “in a way that is patently offensive to an average citizen of this county,” and “has no serious value of a literary, artistic, political or scientific kind,” according to the state.

It was a complaint about so-called obscene materials in the classroom that police say led them there — something they said they had a duty to investigate.

But the ACLU’s Bourquin disagrees.

“We’re very troubled by this notion,” she said. “They say anytime someone could call they have an obligation to go marching into places wearing a body cam, and you know, interrogating people,” Bourquin said.

State laws, she said, are “pretty clear about police not having roles in this situation.”

Both the state and federal constitutions also protect the rights of students to receive information, she added, noting the ACLU and GLAD — Legal Advocates & Defenders for the LGBTQ Community — sent an open letter in January to school superintendents statewide given the rise in attempts to ban school library books.

The letter, also sent to the Massachusetts Association of School Committees, noted that legally such bans “may constitute unlawful discrimination.”

The letter says the courts “have recognized that the fact that some parents do not want their children to read certain books cannot justify depriving other students of their rights of access.”

The ACLU’s letter serves as a legal guide for schools and students’ rights to have access to information that is “free of censorship,” and says the ACLU stands “ready as a resource in this fight.”

The librarian at Du Bois middle school, Jennifer Guerin, made another point about that access. She said that it is “critically important for concerned community members to remember that the current situation is not about forcing a book into students’ hands.”

“It’s about the freedom to read,” Guerin said. “It’s about providing voluntary access to a well-written, highly acclaimed resource in a safe place for a teenager who might want or need it.”

Monument High protest book ban

A complaint that led police to search a middle school classroom for the book, “Gender Queer,” sparked a demonstration by Monument Mountain Regional High School students on Friday. The ACLU and other free speech advocates are worried both about the police involvement and about book banning in general.

Using obscenity as an excuse to censor books with literary value is a heavy legal lift, said Bourquin. Obscenity laws have been “carefully crafted to ensure not tromping on constitutional free speech rights.”

If a book has value and isn’t meant to sexually arouse it will be hard for it to fail the legal test for obscenity, she said. 

That test is “very specific,” and not something the average person or police officer necessarily would know, said Justin Silverman, executive director of the New England First Amendment Coalition.

“It’s not a very easy test,” Silverman said. “And just because you have a community member pointing to something and saying, ‘That’s obscene,’ well, that doesn’t mean that it is obscene under the First Amendment.”

Like Bourquin, Silverman is stunned by the police involvement and thinks it wise to set a precedent for the future given the uptick in school book challenges.

“While it might be rare now, it doesn’t mean that it will be rare in the future,” Silverman said of police involvement in school literature. “I think the school and the police department have to come forth with a policy to make sure that this doesn’t happen again.”

 
 

Heather Bellow can be reached at hbellow@berkshireeagle.com or 413-329-6871. 

5 Words And Phrases Democrats Should Never Say

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2012/03/18/1075582/-5-Words-And-Phrases-Democrats-Should-Never-Say-Again

 
 

And What To Replace Them With

We talk about the “Death Tax” and not “Estate Tax.” Two little words “Death Panels” were capable of nearly derailing the best thing that’s happened to health insurance in this country in decades. Harvard-educated President Obama is universally considered “elite,” while Yale-educated George W. Bush is considered “down home.”

Many Democrats buy into the old saw that the Democratic party has had a history of “tax and spend” policies that needs to change or be lived down somehow. Until the Occupy movement brought the topic front and center, even most Democrats accepted the notion that businesses were “job creators” and worried more about distracting the opposition from this “fact” than debunking it for the lie it actually is.

Unfortunately, this is because Democrats have failed to speak in a language strong enough to rebut Republicans who have defined who we are and what we want, in a way that doesn’t even remotely reflect an iota of the truth, and instantly conjures up the negative in the mind of the listener.

HOW TO TALK LIKE A REPUBLICAN

Professional media strategist Frank Luntz has been providing Republicans with a detailed handbook on exactly what language to use and not to use for decades. He has built up a lexicon that is not only far-reaching and deeply ingrained, but also very, very successful. As Progressive Democratic linguist George Lakoff explains it, this “framing” is crucial to how they’ve managed to win so much of the debate.

Here are some examples  from Luntz’s handbooks, of how the Republican party has been taught to frame the way they talk:

Don’t say “bonus!”

Luntz advised that if [corporations] give their employees an income boost during the holiday season, they should never refer to it as a “bonus.”

“If you give out a bonus at a time of financial hardship, yo4’re going to make people angry. It’s ‘pay for performance.'”

Don’t say that the government “taxes the rich.”

Instead, tell [people] that the government “takes from the rich.”

“If you talk about raising taxes on the rich,” the public responds favorably, Luntz cautioned. But “if you talk about government taking the money from hardworking Americans, the public says no.”

This sleight-of-tongue has managed to manipulate at least half the country into believing things that simply are not true. And this type of language mash-up has been so successfully drilled into the vernacular, that Democrats have been hard-pressed to come up with a simple and just-as-effective way to expose the lies beneath them.

See the 5 Words Democrats Should Never Say Again after the jump.

 

DEMOCRATS NEED A HANDBOOK OF OUR OWN

How can Democrats and Progressives fix this? Start by never saying any of the following five words or phrases again.

1. Never say Entitlements.

 Instead, say Earned Benefits.

While the word “entitlement” was originally coined by Democrats as a way to illustrate that the receiver of the attached benefits was entitled to them by having worked to earn them, or having been taxed to support them, it has been re-defined by the right as akin to a spoiled child who acts as if they’re “entitled” even though they are not.

“Earned benefits,” on the other hand, cannot be twisted or misconstrued to mean anything other than what what they are: something the recipient has actually earned, as opposed to something they are being given. Social Security and Medicare are paid into through taxes deducted from employees’ paychecks, or the paychecks of one’s spouse or parent. No one who hasn’t either personally paid into these programs, or been the spouse or child of someone who has paid into these programs, or, in the case of Medicare Part B, paid a monthly premium in order to receive them, can extract benefits from these programs.

Here is a perfect example of how the right wing uses the word “entitled” as a pejorative associated with Democrats (emphasis mine):

Fluke is an entitled liberal, which is both emblematically typical and essentially required for one to be a liberal in today’s American political landscape …  Her talking points represent a very real attitude quickly manifesting itself into mainstream American thought process: that a person literally deserves the resources of another. This, of course, is the entitlement and dependency culture on which the Democratic Party has rallied around, encouraged, campaigned, and insisted.
Democrats have done nothing of the sort. Recall that the subject at hand is insured individuals. That means that they have paid into the pool in order to be able to take resources out later when needed. Even if the check was dispersed by their employer, it’s still their benefit as employees, paid out in the form of insurance coverage in lieu of cash compensation. Not to mention any shared responsibility the employee, or in Sandra Fluke’s case, the student, may have in paying the monthly premium. (For the record, students at Georgetown University where Sandra Fluke is a student, pay 100% of their own premium toward their student health insurance.)

Do not allow the right wing to frame this issue in their terms. These are Earned Benefits. Say that.

2. Never say Redistribution of Wealth.

 Instead, say Fair Wages For Work.

When we hear “redistribution,” we think in terms of simply moving things around, not something earned by someone. And when you tack the word “wealth” onto it, everybody’s hackles immediately go up. “What do you mean, redistribute my wealth? You don’t get to take something from me and give it to someone else! I work hard for what I get; let other people work for their own money, not mine!”

But when we hear “fair wages for work,” we know instantly that we are talking about paying working people a fair wage for the work they’re doing, not giving them something they haven’t actually earned. Since at least 1965, Republican policies have created a corporate culture that only rewards those at the very, very, very top of the pyramid. While the average “hourly wage” equivalent for CEOs has gone from $490.31 to $5,419.97 ($11,273,537.00 / year), the average hourly wage for workers has stagnated at $19.71. That’s just $40,997.00 / year. The same $40,997.00 that we were earning in 1965. At 2012 inflation. We need fair wages for our work* in today’s dollars. Say that.

3. Never say Employer Paid Health Insurance.

Instead, say Employee Earned Health Insurance.

When we say “employer paid,” we immediately think of it as something that’s given to the employee by their employer. But as I pointed out in my blog post, “It’s Not About Who Writes The Check—Stop The Republican Lie About Who Pays For Contraceptives,” all employee health insurance is earned by virtue of the employee’s labor. That makes it “paid for” by the employee, even if they aren’t the ones writing the checks to the insurance companies themselves. Employee health insurance is just one of several forms of compensation in exchange for labor, that include cash, retirement funds, long- and short-term disability coverage, etc.

Employee health insurance is not a “gift,” it is compensation in exchange for labor. Cease the labor and the compensation ceases right along with it. Employees earn their insurance. Say that.

4. Never say Government Spending.

Instead, say we Invest in America.

When we hear “spending,” we automatically think of going shopping and whipping out the credit card. And while government at every level often leverages their ability to borrow at low interest rates to fund their spending, it’s hardly the same thing as going out and buying a dress you’re only going to wear once and then hanging in the closet until it’s out of style.

What governments actually do is invest in our cities, states, country and our people. Government invests in infrastructure that affords us the ability to move around freely. It invests in programs that train people with job skills. It invests in research that cures diseases. There is an actual benefit to “spending” when a government does it, which actually makes it an investment in all our futures.

And who is “the government”? We The People. It’s a Constitutional phrase that evokes strong support for whatever follows. Democrats need to take Constitutional language back from the Republican party and make it ours again, since Democratic principles of equality and liberty were the driving forces behind the creation of this great nation in the first place.

We are investing in our future.

Say it this way. Every time.

5. Never say Corporate America.

Instead, say Unelected Corporate Government.

Calling businesses “Corporate America” gives the impression that somehow corporations are the same as human Americans. But in spite of what the current Supreme Court would have you believe, they aren’t.

In fact, in many ways in our daily lives, we are governed far more by corporations than we are by governments. Corporations govern where we shop, what we pay for goods and services, who gets access and who doesn’t, how we communicate and what we pay for that privilege, and so on.

But more importantly, Corporations govern us by buying our legislators to do their bidding with campaign donations, and by actually writing legislation that makes it into our law books. Corporations govern when they privatize formerly-public, taxpayer-funded institutions, like schools, prisons and military operations. And unlike actual governments, they do it solely for their benefit and profits, not those of real American citizens.

And if there’s one thing we know the right wing zealots claim not to like the most, it’s “government interference in our lives.” So what’s worse than the government we actually elect to make our laws “interfering in our lives”? It’s a government structure that we didn’t even elect interfering in our lives.

Corporations are not “Corporate America,” they are Unelected Corporate Government. Describe them that way and people will come to resent their presence in our public policy-making.

In closing, turning once again to Professor Lakoff, “Unfortunately, Luntz is still ahead of most progressives responding to him. Progressives need to learn how framing works. Bashing Luntz, bashing Fox News, bashing the right-wing pundits and leaders using their frames and arguing against their positions just keeps their frames in play. … Progressives have magnificent stories of their own to tell. They need to be telling them nonstop. Let’s lure the right into using OUR frames in public discourse.”

Let’s start doing that by never saying any of the above five words and phrases again.

 

Texas has banned more books than any other state, new report shows

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/09/19/texas-book-bans/

 

Across the country, more books have been challenged and removed as religious and conservative groups target LGBTQ and race issues.

 
Books at Vandegrift High School's library on March 2, 2022.
Books at Vandegrift High School’s library on March 2, 2022. Credit: Lauren Witte/The Texas Tribune
 
 
 
 

In the Beginning: Christianity, Deism, and the Founding Fathers

https://www.politisage.com/p/in-the-beginning-christianity-deism

Thanks to Ten Bears for the link.   I wish more Christian people inclusing Christian school teachers would read this.   But then it is not about facts for them, it is about creating the biblic nation they desire.   Hugs.   Scottie


 

The United States Was Designed NOT To Be a Theocratic State