I just cannot understand why they hate so. They refuse to understand or accept that some kids are born LGBTQ+ just as some kids are born cis and straight. They seem to think that children see LGBTQ+ people in society, in public, and in books / TV / movies then become LGBTQ+. It doesn’t work that way. They reallyhope all LGBTQ+ stay hidden either in fake loveless opposite gender marriages or stay single and celibate for life. They are not happy or content to live their lives as they wish, they demand the right to force everyone else must live as they do or by their church doctrines. Hugs
The video below shows a tRump administration nominee spews white supremacy crap, claiming the white people suffer the most discrimination in the US. Claims the white culture is being erased. But he can’t explain what white culture is except to claim that white Christians worship differently than black christians. Food and music are different and white churches and white food are being erased. Hugs
In November 1973, 10 Black models helped put American fashion on the map in an epic runway face-off with well-known French designers. In honor of the start of New York Fashion Week, here’s their story!
Models dressed in midriff-bearing tops and oversized bottoms of solids, stripes and plaids worn with headresses during the fashion show to benefit the restoration of the Chateau of Versailles, five American designers matching talents with five French couturiers at the Versailles Palace on November 28, 1973 in Versailles, France…Article title:’One night and pouf! It’s gone! (Photo by Fairchild Archive/Penske Media via Getty Images)
We know that for most people, February is all about the Super Bowl, Valentine’s Day and Black History Month. But if you love style, you know it’s also about New York Fashion Week – a time for some of the hottest designers to showcase the latest trends — kicking off Wednesday (Feb. 11).
While we’re going to be all over covering what’s new from Sergio Hudson and Public School, we thought this week was also a perfect time to show some love to the Black designers and models who paved the way for future generations.
We’re kicking things off with the story of 1973’s Battle of Versailles fashion show –an epic stand-off between French and American designers in Paris. The highly-hyped event not only put American fashion designers on the map, but it also put a spotlight on a group of 10 Black models who shut down the red carpet and showed the rest of the world the beauty in having a diverse runway that looked more like the rest of the world.
The Palace of Versailles is an iconic French landmark. The stunning estate became the official royal residence in 1682. But while it has been a tourist destination for quite some time, in the early 1970s, the 17th century palace was in desperate need of a $60 million glow-up to repair years of damage.
American fashion publicist Eleanor Lambert knew $60 million dollars wasn’t small change, so she proposed the idea of a fashion show to raise money for the Versailles repair project. Working with the palace curator, Gerald Van der Kemp, she wanted to invite some of the wealthiest elites from around the world to view collections from fashion designers from France and the United States. Lambert believed the ticket sales would help bring in much-needed funds for the palace project and give American designers a chance to prove their talent on the world stage.
Lambert’s idea got the green light, and the date was set for Nov. 28, 1973. The French assembled an all-star lineup of designers, including Hubert de Givenchy, Yves Saint Laurent, Pierre Cardin, Marc Bohan (Creative Director for Christian Dior) and Emmanuel Ungaro. Ready to show the international audience that Paris was the fashion capital of the world, they planned more than an ordinary runway show, but a production that featured live music, dance and an extraordinary set.
The American team accepted the challenge and built a roster that included designers Oscar de la Renta, Halston and Bill Blass. Unlike the French, Team USA brought a little more diversity to the event, with the only woman designer, Anne Klein, and Stephen Burrows, a Black graduate of New York’s Fashion Institute of Technology, who made a name for himself with his colorful, lightweight knit designs and signature lettuce hem.
News of the show got lots of press in both the United States and France. John Fairchild, who was the editor of Women’s Wear Daily at the time, helped add to the hype, billing the event “The Battle of Versailles.”
The budget for the event was tight, causing some of the more well-known models of the time — like Jerry Hall and Lauren Hutton — to turn down the $300 job. But their decision left the door open for a group of talented and beautiful Black models who were happy to step in and help bring the designer’s clothing to life. In the end, the American show featured 10 Black models – Billie Blair, Bethann Hardison, Pat Cleveland, Amina Warsuma, Charlene Dash, Ramona Saunders, Norma Jean Darden, Barbara Jackson, Alva Chinn and Jennifer Brice – making it one of the most diverse runways the fashion industry had ever seen at a major show.
Although they weren’t paid much for the gig, many of the Black American models chosen for the show jumped at the chance to participate in a high-profile international event. Pat Cleveland remembers how excited many of the models were when they first set foot on French soil.
“They got out of the bus and kissed the ground, they were so happy,” she said.
Although the city of lights was beautiful, the American designers and models did not feel the love in France. Designer Stephen Burrows confirmed that their accommodations were far from five-star.
“There was no toilet paper in the bathroom. It was terrible,” Burrows said. “They had the girls there working all day long and didn’t feed them.”
The French weren’t any more gracious when it came to the rehearsal time, using up most of the days leading up to the show to run through their performance –leaving the American team to make the most of the middle of the night.
The idea of a showcase featuring some of the best in American and French fashion attracted a who’s who of high-profile stars, including Elizabeth Taylor, Liza Minelli (who took the stage during the American show) and Andy Warhol.
On the night of the show, the French took the stage first, with a 40-piece orchestra, more than $30,000 worth of props and performances from well-known Soviet ballet dancer Rudolf Nureyev and legendary performer Josephine Baker along with their designer’s collections. American model Bethann Hardison remembered the French designer’s elaborate presentation that lasted for more than 2.5 hours.
“They had everything. You just couldn’t believe all the entertainment they had,” she said. “It was like a circus. The only thing they didn’t do was shoot a man out of a cannon.”
After the French showcase, it was Team USA’s turn to take the stage. Although they walked to music on a cassette tape instead of a live orchestra, they met the moment, with the Black models showing off their rhythm as they floated down the runway. Although their show was only 35 minutes, they left the audience – who gave them a standing ovation – wanting more.
While the French showcased classically tailored clothing conceived with a wealthy client in mind, the American designers were looking toward the future and embracing a growing shift towards ready-to-wear pieces that were accessible to a wider audience. The designers weren’t afraid to add color and pattern to a collection that was made for time.
Filmmaker Deborah Riley Draper captured the magic of the Battle of Versailles in the documentary, “Versailles ’73: American Runway Revolution.” In an interview with CBS, she emphasized the importance of this groundbreaking moment in fashion history.
“What America was able to do was to demonstrate that diversity and inclusion on the stage was the most powerful weapon they could have,” she told CBS in an interview.
Seriously; if you read through these stories, both are part of the work of rightwing organizations operating in every state to get their missions accomplished. No state is safe from this sort of thing; people really need to keep their eyes on ALL of their legislators. Some of these groups even write ordinances and lobby county/municipal/local governing bodies.
TOPEKA — Melissa Sabin spoke officially on behalf of Little Lobbyists Kansas and personally in the name of her son, Logan, against a Kansas Senate bill aggressively expanding the state’s process of verifying eligibility for Medicaid, SNAP and other public assistance programs.
She was among dozens of organizations or individuals supplying opposition testimony Wednesday on Senate Bill 363. It would impose new state application and reporting requirements, some exceeding federal mandates, for programs serving children, elderly people, poor people, pregnant women and people with disabilities.
On Tuesday, the Senate Committee on Government Efficiency, or COGE, heard from the lone proponent of the bill — a conservative Florida organization that has sought for more than a decade to slash participation in Kansas public assistance programs.
“I oppose this bill because it creates an expensive, inefficient and legally questionable administrative structure that will predictably result in eligible Kansans — especially children — losing access to health care and food assistance,” Sabin said. “SB 363 does not improve program integrity or efficiency. It instead builds layers of red tape that state agencies are not equipped to manage or that federal law does not permit.”
Sabin, state outreach manager of Little Lobbyists, said the bill was inaccurately touted by its advocates as a means of improving accountability in terms of serving 325,000 Kansans taking part in Medicaid and 188,000 enrolled in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
Sabin said requiring determinations of eligibility to be repeated monthly or quarterly would lead to additional paperwork errors, missed notices or administrative delays rather than documentation of alleged fraud or abuse.
She said a proposal for recipients of Medicaid to have eligibility reassessed every three months, rather than at 12-month intervals, could violate federal regulations. In terms of her son, she said the bill would compel the state to reconsider four times each year whether Logan, born with a genetic disorder characterized by intellectual disabilities, was eligible despite lack of change in his medical diagnosis.
“His condition does not fluctuate with paperwork cycles,” his mother said. “His need for skilled care does not disappear because the form is refiled or a verification is resubmitted.”
Sabin’s message of opposition was shared by representatives of Kansas Action for Children, Alliance for a Healthy Kansas, United Methodist Health Ministry Fund, LeadingAge Kansas, El Centro, United Way of Harvey and Marion Counties, Flint Hills Breadbasket, Kansas Appleseed Center for Law and Justice, InterHab, Reach Healthcare Foundation, Kansas Interfaith Action, Kansas Children’s Service League, United Community Services of Johnson County, the Disability Rights Center of Kansas and others.
Under the Senate bill, the Kansas Department of Health and Environment and the Kansas Department for Children and Families would be required to establish data-matching systems to automatically share personal information on Kansans with other state agencies. KDHE would have to submit data to the federal government on a monthly basis to determine if Kansans were enrolled in Medicaid in other states.
The bill would direct the Kansas Department of Labor to affirm employment status of beneficiaries, while the Kansas Department of Revenue would reveal details on household income. The Kansas Department of Corrections would track prison inmates who might be ineligible for benefits. The Kansas Lottery would be on alert for anyone winning more than $3,000 because the income bump could compromise eligibility for aid.
As written, the Senate bill would block state agencies from unilaterally requesting approval of exemptions to federal regulations. Instead, the Legislature would have to first endorse the request. The legislation also would block Kansas agencies from accepting as true an applicant’s statements on household size, age or residency — a provision that would require extensive document searches by state employees.
Sen. Cindy Holscher, an Overland Park Democrat running for governor, said she appreciated a recommendation from an opponent of the bill to convene a special committee of the Legislature to develop a better understanding of how Kansans dealt with the process of obtaining SNAP or Medicaid assistance.
Holscher said the House and Senate should do more than accept testimony from the only organization supporting the bill: FGA Action, which operates as an arm of the conservative Florida think tank Foundation for Government Accountability.
FGA was a proponent of the 2015 Kansas law restricting enrollment in SNAP and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. Research subsequently showed the state law undercut low-income families in Kansas, made it more difficult to prevent child abuse and contributed to a record surge in the number of Kansas children in foster care.
“We have 40 opponents to this bill who are subject matter experts based in Kansas,” Holscher said. “One proponent with an organization based out of Florida.”
The fiscal note attached to the Senate’s bill indicated state agencies would need to hire about 300 new employees to handle the revised eligibility processes. The Kansas Department of Administration estimated the cost of complying with the law would be $17 million to $18 million annually.
Sen. Doug Shane, R-Louisburg, and Sen. Mike Thompson, R-Shawnee, challenged the fiscal note.
“Quite frankly the fiscal note is, I guess we could say, hogwash,” Shane said. “There are just some pure fallacies.”
Heather Braum, senior policy adviser for Kansas Action for Children, said the additional layers of government red tape contemplated in the Senate bill would disproportionately harm children. She said the reform was introduced at a time when nearly 20% of Kansas children didn’t know where their next meal would come from and about 50,000 children lacked health insurance.
“Bottom line,” Braum said, “this bill will result in families losing Medicaid and SNAP. Families will be unable to afford their child’s medical care and kids will have less food to eat in their homes.”
Braum urged the Legislature to work toward streamlining the process of applying for aid. She said House and Senate members need a good understanding of how parents, children, pregnant women, people with disabilities and the elderly navigated the Medicaid and SNAP application processes.
Erica Andrade, president and CEO of El Centro, said the state’s plan to spend more on eligibility checks would result in loss of benefits by people qualified to receive aid.
“From El Centro’s perspective,” she said, “the most troubling aspect of SB 363 is that it prioritizes bureaucracy over people.”
The Rev. Jessica Williams, a Merriam Baptist minister with the Kairos Center for Religions, Rights and Social Justice, testified on behalf of Kansas Interfaith Action. She said Interfaith Action opposed federal SNAP and Medicaid reform signed in 2025 by President Donald Trump and likewise objected to SB 363.
She said the legislation weaponized the bureaucracy to dismantle the Medicaid and SNAP safety nets. She said paperwork traps embedded in the bill were “certainly counter to God’s law.”
“In my faith tradition we regularly pray the only prayer that Jesus taught, which says, ‘Give us this day our daily bread,’ ” Williams said. “This prayer is not an abstract nicety, but a concrete demand for survival and an indictment of unjust systems which withhold food from families.”
=====
TOPEKA — Local government leaders want more details about how to enforce a “bathroom bill” passed by the Legislature that some city officials say could cost taxpayers “millions of dollars.”
Senate Bill 244, which is awaiting Gov. Laura Kelly’s signature, forces people to use facilities matching their biological sex at birth in government buildings.
Kelly has a 10-day deadline once receiving a bill to veto it. That deadline is Friday for SB 244, a spokesperson said. Kelly is expected to veto the bill, which passed both chambers with veto-proof majorities.
The bill says local governing bodies should take reasonable steps to ensure people use restrooms, locker rooms and other private spaces tied to their biological sex at birth, said Jay Hall, deputy director and general counsel for the Kansas Association of Counties.
The phrase that concerns Hall is “every reasonable step.”
“That’s really where our questions start,” he said. “What’s the expectation of local governments, and how are they supposed to handle the enforcement? That’s not something that we know at this point.”
Spencer Duncan, Topeka mayor and government affairs director for the League of Kansas Municipalities, said his organization is exploring what the bill means for its members. Initial determinations of changing signage and other steps could cost millions of dollars, some city leaders told him.
Duncan expressed frustration with the process that eliminated opportunity for public input when SB 244 was passed out of committee. The bill, originally House Bill 2426, addressed gender markers on driver’s licenses and birth certificates, which would stop the state’s practice of allowing transgender individuals to change their sex on those documents and would roll back markers that were previously changed.
Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee added the bathroom portion of the bill and then amended SB 244 by overwriting it with HB 2426, a process called “gut and go.” That allowed the Senate, which had already approved the unrelated version of SB 244, to concur with changes rather than hold hearings on the bill.
The only public hearing was in the House Judiciary Committee regarding gender markers — which received opposition from more than 200 people. During floor debate in the House, Democratic legislators spent more than five hours trying to add amendments that were repeatedly defeated. The bill passed along party lines, with one Republican, Emporia Rep. Mark Schreiber, voting against it.
The process meant no fiscal note was put on the bill for the bathroom portion, which concerned Democrats during the House debate and also worried Duncan and Hall.
(snip-a bit more)
The conditions are on purpose to make people so miserable they give up their rights to asylum or any cases they have going. The ICE people / US government are already violating the rights of the people they kidnap off the streets. These are as bad as any concentration camp and the US government denies it all. When Democrats take power / authority back we need to investigate and punish all involved. The government flat out lies and gaslights the public as if they think nothing will ever be found out. Hugs
(You can listen to this, on the page)
January 16, 2025 6:01AM
This is Part 1 of a four-part series on the origins of the border crisis: Read Part 2, Part 3, Part 4.
During President Joe Biden’s term, Border Patrol arrested an unprecedented number of immigrants who crossed illegally into the United States. Many believe Biden caused this increase in migration by reducing border enforcement. However, data obtained by the Cato Institute through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) challenges this narrative. In fact, the border crisis began before Biden took office and ended before he left.
From his administration’s first day in January 2021, Biden actually increased border enforcement—arrests, detentions, and removals of border crossers all increased. The prevailing narrative that blames Biden overlooks the real causes of the crisis: America’s robust labor market and bad immigration policies that incentivized illegal entries. However, Trump, not Biden, mostly started those policies. Biden eventually phased out some of them; he increased legal migration, and as the labor market cooled, the problem dissipated.
Summary
The main takeaways are:
Despite Biden’s historic crackdown:
The actual causes of the increases in illegal immigration were:
The border crisis did not end because Biden signed an executive order in June 2024. If he had signed his border executive order in 2021, it would have merely duplicated what Title 42 was already doing: ban asylum. Moreover, the border executive order did not significantly change the downward trend in arrivals in 2024, which had already fallen in half during the five months before he signed it. Finally, the order did not increase removals. Rather, the crisis primarily ended because labor demand subsided significantly and because Biden expanded legal migration.
Read Biden Didn’t Cause the Border Crisis, Part 2: Did Biden Cut Enforcement?
The video below does include some information about the Epstein files redactions that clearly protect tRump. Hugs
Scottie's Playtime 