Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Another Real Advance in the Culture War Counteroffensive

 

Scale justice TrumpPresident Trump just went from ordering the federal government not to peddle woke lies to leveraging existing law and policy to force all federal contractors to toe the same line. This means no more defense contractors putting their white male employees through reeducation sessions. For a moment, I was worried when I saw the title. Then I started reading and remembered why I voted for Donald J. Trump four years ago, and why I will be working to re-elect him this year. Read and enjoy, emphasis added.

Executive Order on Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping
LAW & JUSTICE Issued on: September 22, 2020

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, 40 U.S.C. 101 et seq., and in order to promote economy and efficiency in Federal contracting, to promote unity in the Federal workforce, and to combat offensive and anti-American race and sex stereotyping and scapegoating, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Purpose. From the battlefield of Gettysburg to the bus boycott in Montgomery and the Selma-to-Montgomery marches, heroic Americans have valiantly risked their lives to ensure that their children would grow up in a Nation living out its creed, expressed in the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” It was this belief in the inherent equality of every individual that inspired the Founding generation to risk their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to establish a new Nation, unique among the countries of the world. President Abraham Lincoln understood that this belief is “the electric cord” that “links the hearts of patriotic and liberty-loving” people, no matter their race or country of origin. It is the belief that inspired the heroic black soldiers of the 54th Massachusetts Infantry Regiment to defend that same Union at great cost in the Civil War. And it is what inspired Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., to dream that his children would one day “not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

Thanks to the courage and sacrifice of our forebears, America has made significant progress toward realization of our national creed, particularly in the 57 years since Dr. King shared his dream with the country.

Today, however, many people are pushing a different vision of America that is grounded in hierarchies based on collective social and political identities rather than in the inherent and equal dignity of every person as an individual. This ideology is rooted in the pernicious and false belief that America is an irredeemably racist and sexist country; that some people, simply on account of their race or sex, are oppressors; and that racial and sexual identities are more important than our common status as human beings and Americans.

This destructive ideology is grounded in misrepresentations of our country’s history and its role in the world. Although presented as new and revolutionary, they resurrect the discredited notions of the nineteenth century’s apologists for slavery who, like President Lincoln’s rival Stephen A. Douglas, maintained that our government “was made on the white basis” “by white men, for the benefit of white men.” Our Founding documents rejected these racialized views of America, which were soundly defeated on the blood-stained battlefields of the Civil War. Yet they are now being repackaged and sold as cutting-edge insights. They are designed to divide us and to prevent us from uniting as one people in pursuit of one common destiny for our great country.

Unfortunately, this malign ideology is now migrating from the fringes of American society and threatens to infect core institutions of our country. Instructors and materials teaching that men and members of certain races, as well as our most venerable institutions, are inherently sexist and racist are appearing in workplace diversity trainings across the country, even in components of the Federal Government and among Federal contractors. For example, the Department of the Treasury recently held a seminar that promoted arguments that “virtually all White people, regardless of how ‘woke’ they are, contribute to racism,” and that instructed small group leaders to encourage employees to avoid “narratives” that Americans should “be more color-blind” or “let people’s skills and personalities be what differentiates them.”

Training materials from Argonne National Laboratories, a Federal entity, stated that racism “is interwoven into every fabric of America” and described statements like “color blindness” and the “meritocracy” as “actions of bias.”

Materials from Sandia National Laboratories, also a Federal entity, for non-minority males stated that an emphasis on “rationality over emotionality” was a characteristic of “white male[s],” and asked those present to “acknowledge” their “privilege” to each other.

A Smithsonian Institution museum graphic recently claimed that concepts like “[o]bjective, rational linear thinking,” “[h]ard work” being “the key to success,” the “nuclear family,” and belief in a single god are not values that unite Americans of all races but are instead “aspects and assumptions of whiteness.” The museum also stated that “[f]acing your whiteness is hard and can result in feelings of guilt, sadness, confusion, defensiveness, or fear.”

All of this is contrary to the fundamental premises underpinning our Republic: that all individuals are created equal and should be allowed an equal opportunity under the law to pursue happiness and prosper based on individual merit.

Executive departments and agencies (agencies), our Uniformed Services, Federal contractors, and Federal grant recipients should, of course, continue to foster environments devoid of hostility grounded in race, sex, and other federally protected characteristics. Training employees to create an inclusive workplace is appropriate and beneficial. The Federal Government is, and must always be, committed to the fair and equal treatment of all individuals before the law.

But training like that discussed above perpetuates racial stereotypes and division and can use subtle coercive pressure to ensure conformity of viewpoint. Such ideas may be fashionable in the academy, but they have no place in programs and activities supported by Federal taxpayer dollars. Research also suggests that blame-focused diversity training reinforces biases and decreases opportunities for minorities.

Our Federal civil service system is based on merit principles. These principles, codified at 5 U.S.C. 2301, call for all employees to “receive fair and equitable treatment in all aspects of personnel management without regard to” race or sex “and with proper regard for their . . . constitutional rights.” Instructing Federal employees that treating individuals on the basis of individual merit is racist or sexist directly undermines our Merit System Principles and impairs the efficiency of the Federal service. Similarly, our Uniformed Services should not teach our heroic men and women in uniform the lie that the country for which they are willing to die is fundamentally racist. Such teachings could directly threaten the cohesion and effectiveness of our Uniformed Services.

Such activities also promote division and inefficiency when carried out by Federal contractors. The Federal Government has long prohibited Federal contractors from engaging in race or sex discrimination and required contractors to take affirmative action to ensure that such discrimination does not occur. The participation of contractors’ employees in training that promotes race or sex stereotyping or scapegoating similarly undermines efficiency in Federal contracting. Such requirements promote divisiveness in the workplace and distract from the pursuit of excellence and collaborative achievements in public administration.

Therefore, it shall be the policy of the United States not to promote race or sex stereotyping or scapegoating in the Federal workforce or in the Uniformed Services, and not to allow grant funds to be used for these purposes. In addition, Federal contractors will not be permitted to inculcate such views in their employees.

Sec. 2. Definitions. For the purposes of this order, the phrase:

(a) “Divisive concepts” means the concepts that (1) one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex; (2) the United States is fundamentally racist or sexist; (3) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously; (4) an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex; (5) members of one race or sex cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race or sex; (6) an individual’s moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex; (7) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex; (8) any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex; or (9) meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist, or were created by a particular race to oppress another race. The term “divisive concepts” also includes any other form of race or sex stereotyping or any other form of race or sex scapegoating.

(b) “Race or sex stereotyping” means ascribing character traits, values, moral and ethical codes, privileges, status, or beliefs to a race or sex, or to an individual because of his or her race or sex.

(c) “Race or sex scapegoating” means assigning fault, blame, or bias to a race or sex, or to members of a race or sex because of their race or sex. It similarly encompasses any claim that, consciously or unconsciously, and by virtue of his or her race or sex, members of any race are inherently racist or are inherently inclined to oppress others, or that members of a sex are inherently sexist or inclined to oppress others.

(d) “Senior political appointee” means an individual appointed by the President, or a non-career member of the Senior Executive Service (or agency-equivalent system).

Sec. 3. Requirements for the United States Uniformed Services. The United States Uniformed Services, including the United States Armed Forces, shall not teach, instruct, or train any member of the United States Uniformed Services, whether serving on active duty, serving on reserve duty, attending a military service academy, or attending courses conducted by a military department pursuant to a Reserve Officer Corps Training program, to believe any of the divisive concepts set forth in section 2(a) of this order. No member of the United States Uniformed Services shall face any penalty or discrimination on account of his or her refusal to support, believe, endorse, embrace, confess, act upon, or otherwise assent to these concepts.

Sec. 4. Requirements for Government Contractors. (a) Except in contracts exempted in the manner provided by section 204 of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965 (Equal Employment Opportunity), as amended, all Government contracting agencies shall include in every Government contract hereafter entered into the following provisions:

“During the performance of this contract, the contractor agrees as follows:

1. The contractor shall not use any workplace training that inculcates in its employees any form of race or sex stereotyping or any form of race or sex scapegoating, including the concepts that (a) one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex; (b) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously; (c) an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex; (d) members of one race or sex cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race or sex; (e) an individual’s moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex; (f) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex; (g) any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex; or (h) meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist, or were created by a particular race to oppress another race. The term “race or sex stereotyping” means ascribing character traits, values, moral and ethical codes, privileges, status, or beliefs to a race or sex, or to an individual because of his or her race or sex, and the term “race or sex scapegoating” means assigning fault, blame, or bias to a race or sex, or to members of a race or sex because of their race or sex.

2. The contractor will send to each labor union or representative of workers with which he has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice, to be provided by the agency contracting officer, advising the labor union or workers’ representative of the contractor’s commitments under the Executive Order of September 22, 2020, entitled Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping, and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment.

3. In the event of the contractor’s noncompliance with the requirements of paragraphs (1), (2), and (4), or with any rules, regulations, or orders that may be promulgated in accordance with the Executive Order of September 22, 2020, this contract may be canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part and the contractor may be declared ineligible for further Government contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in Executive Order 11246, and such other sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided by any rules, regulations, or orders the Secretary of Labor has issued or adopted pursuant to Executive Order 11246, including subpart D of that order.

4. The contractor will include the provisions of paragraphs (1) through (4) in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor, so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontractor or vendor. The contractor will take such action with respect to any subcontract or purchase order as may be directed by the Secretary of Labor as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for noncompliance: Provided, however, that in the event the contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction, the contractor may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States.”

(b) The Department of Labor is directed, through the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP), to establish a hotline and investigate complaints received under both this order as well as Executive Order 11246 alleging that a Federal contractor is utilizing such training programs in violation of the contractor’s obligations under those orders. The Department shall take appropriate enforcement action and provide remedial relief, as appropriate.

(c) Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Director of OFCCP shall publish in the Federal Register a request for information seeking information from Federal contractors, Federal subcontractors, and employees of Federal contractors and subcontractors regarding the training, workshops, or similar programming provided to employees. The request for information should request copies of any training, workshop, or similar programing having to do with diversity and inclusion as well as information about the duration, frequency, and expense of such activities.

Sec. 5. Requirements for Federal Grants. The heads of all agencies shall review their respective grant programs and identify programs for which the agency may, as a condition of receiving such a grant, require the recipient to certify that it will not use Federal funds to promote the concepts that (a) one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex; (b) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously; (c) an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex; (d) members of one race or sex cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race or sex; (e) an individual’s moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex; (f) an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex; (g) any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex; or (h) meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist, or were created by a particular race to oppress another race. Within 60 days of the date of this order, the heads of agencies shall each submit a report to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that lists all grant programs so identified.

Sec. 6. Requirements for Agencies. (a) The fair and equal treatment of individuals is an inviolable principle that must be maintained in the Federal workplace. Agencies should continue all training that will foster a workplace that is respectful of all employees. Accordingly:

(i) The head of each agency shall use his or her authority under 5 U.S.C. 301, 302, and 4103 to ensure that the agency, agency employees while on duty status, and any contractors hired by the agency to provide training, workshops, forums, or similar programming (for purposes of this section, “training”) to agency employees do not teach, advocate, act upon, or promote in any training to agency employees any of the divisive concepts listed in section 2(a) of this order. Agencies may consult with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 4116, in carrying out this provision; and
(ii) Agency diversity and inclusion efforts shall, first and foremost, encourage agency employees not to judge each other by their color, race, ethnicity, sex, or any other characteristic protected by Federal law.

(b) The Director of OPM shall propose regulations providing that agency officials with supervisory authority over a supervisor or an employee with responsibility for promoting diversity and inclusion, if such supervisor or employee either authorizes or approves training that promotes the divisive concepts set forth in section 2(a) of this order, shall take appropriate steps to pursue a performance-based adverse action proceeding against such supervisor or employee under chapter 43 or 75 of title 5, United States Code.

(c) Each agency head shall:

(i) issue an order incorporating the requirements of this order into agency operations, including by making compliance with this order a provision in all agency contracts for diversity training;

(ii) request that the agency inspector general thoroughly review and assess by the end of the calendar year, and not less than annually thereafter, agency compliance with the requirements of this order in the form of a report submitted to OMB; and

(iii) assign at least one senior political appointee responsibility for ensuring compliance with the requirements of this order.

Sec. 7. OMB and OPM Review of Agency Training. (a) Consistent with OPM’s authority under 5 U.S.C. 4115-4118, all training programs for agency employees relating to diversity or inclusion shall, before being used, be reviewed by OPM for compliance with the requirements of section 6 of this order.

(b) If a contractor provides a training for agency employees relating to diversity or inclusion that teaches, advocates, or promotes the divisive concepts set forth in section 2(a) of this order, and such action is in violation of the applicable contract, the agency that contracted for such training shall evaluate whether to pursue debarment of that contractor, consistent with applicable law and regulations, and in consultation with the Interagency Suspension and Debarment Committee.

(c) Within 90 days of the date of this order, each agency shall report to OMB all spending in Fiscal Year 2020 on Federal employee training programs relating to diversity or inclusion, whether conducted internally or by contractors. Such report shall, in addition to providing aggregate totals, delineate awards to each individual contractor.

(d) The Directors of OMB and OPM may jointly issue guidance and directives pertaining to agency obligations under, and ensuring compliance with, this order.

Sec. 8. Title VII Guidance. The Attorney General should continue to assess the extent to which workplace training that teaches the divisive concepts set forth in section 2(a) of this order may contribute to a hostile work environment and give rise to potential liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq. If appropriate, the Attorney General and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission shall issue publicly available guidance to assist employers in better promoting diversity and inclusive workplaces consistent with Title VII.

Sec. 9. Effective Date. This order is effective immediately, except that the requirements of section 4 of this order shall apply to contracts entered into 60 days after the date of this order.

Sec. 10. General Provisions. (a) This order does not prevent agencies, the United States Uniformed Services, or contractors from promoting racial, cultural, or ethnic diversity or inclusiveness, provided such efforts are consistent with the requirements of this order.

(b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to prohibit discussing, as part of a larger course of academic instruction, the divisive concepts listed in section 2(a) of this order in an objective manner and without endorsement.

(c) If any provision of this order, or the application of any provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of its provisions to any other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

(d) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(e) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(f) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,
September 22, 2020.

Published in Politics
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 19 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. CB Toder aka Mama Toad Member
    CB Toder aka Mama ToadJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Papa Toad and I were talking the other day about the so-called civility of people like the Bushes and Romney, and how nothing like this would ever have occurred with any of them. None of them would have Betsy DeVos calling Princeton to task for its phony self-aggrandizing claims of systemic racism.

    I am so glad that a New York City real estate developer who honed his skills on reality television is our president. Who knew?

    • #1
    • September 25, 2020, at 3:34 AM PDT
    • 18 likes
  2. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown

    CB Toder aka Mama Toad (View Comment):

    Papa Toad and I were talking the other day about the so-called civility of people like the Bushes and Romney, and how nothing like this would ever have occurred with any of them. None of them would have Betsy DeVos calling Princeton to task for its phony self-aggrandizing claims of systemic racism.

    I am so glad that a New York City real estate developer who honed his skills on reality television is our president. Who knew?

    He fights.

    • #2
    • September 25, 2020, at 3:41 AM PDT
    • 15 likes
  3. Hartmann von Aue Member

    This is freaking brilliant and should be written into law. Executive orders can be reversed. 

    • #3
    • September 25, 2020, at 5:19 AM PDT
    • 9 likes
  4. Pony Convertible Member

    Love it. 

    In the interest of doing what the leftest want us to do, which is turn in our friends and neighbors who violate laws we like (while praising people who violate laws we don’t like), how do I turn in my company, and my county government in for violating this order?

    • #4
    • September 25, 2020, at 5:54 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  5. Stina Member

    @garyrobbins

    This is why we voted for Trump.

    • #5
    • September 25, 2020, at 5:59 AM PDT
    • 10 likes
  6. Rodin Member

    President Trump is reminding us daily of how far into the swamp we have gone and how rough a slog it is to get out. And that he can’t do it without our help.

    • #6
    • September 25, 2020, at 7:43 AM PDT
    • 7 likes
  7. Stad Thatcher

    I have to admit before 2015, all my knowledge of Trump was based of tabloid rumors and his TV shows. My vote for Trump in 206 was the triumph of “the devil you don’t know” over “the devil you do.” I guess that makes me a Yellow Dog Republican.

    But 2020 is different. Trump has met and exceeded my expectations over the last four years. This country will never get back to normal as long as there are Democrats in charge of anything. The left has so infused the Dems with their looney ideas and outright fascist behavior that their party can never recover to what it once was – reasonably sane opposition that didn’t hate this country.

    • #7
    • September 25, 2020, at 7:45 AM PDT
    • 14 likes
  8. Rodin Member

    Stad (View Comment):
    This country will never get back to normal as long as there are Democrats in charge of anything. The left has so infused the Dems with their looney ideas and outright fascist behavior that their party can never recover to what it once was – reasonably sane opposition that didn’t hate this country.

    There is no going back to “normal”. Normal was the ability to pretty much ignore politics and put up with government intrusion into our lives gradually and incrementally. Normal was letting government take over local education. Normal was watching Hollywood entertainment that was nudging your moral compass. Normal was credentialing the workforce by higher education that we less and less critical thinking and more and more indoctrination. Normal was churches emptying out bit by bit. Normal was… (you get the picture).

    We cannot settle for normal because the struggle to wrest the forces of power and culture away from those in control is going to be vicious and the outcome is uncertain. If successful, and it is not assured, we are going to be on high alert against going back to “normal”.

    • #8
    • September 25, 2020, at 7:52 AM PDT
    • 9 likes
  9. Stad Thatcher

    Rodin (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):
    This country will never get back to normal as long as there are Democrats in charge of anything. The left has so infused the Dems with their looney ideas and outright fascist behavior that their party can never recover to what it once was – reasonably sane opposition that didn’t hate this country.

    There is no going back to “normal”. Normal was the ability to pretty much ignore politics and put up with government intrusion into our lives gradually and incrementally. Normal was letting government take over local education. Normal was watching Hollywood entertainment that was nudging your moral compass. Normal was credentialing the workforce by higher education that we less and less critical thinking and more and more indoctrination. Normal was churches emptying out bit by bit. Normal was… (you get the picture).

    We cannot settle for normal because the struggle to wrest the forces of power and culture away from those in control is going to be vicious and the outcome is uncertain. If successful, and it is not assured, we are going to be on high alert against going back to “normal”.

    Well since you define “normal” that way . . .

    • #9
    • September 25, 2020, at 8:08 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  10. Bryan G. Stephens, Trump Aveng… Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens, Trump Aveng…Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Stina (View Comment):

    @garyrobbins

    This is why we voted for Trump.

    Yes it is.

    Not that he will give him any credit.

    • #10
    • September 25, 2020, at 9:10 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  11. Stina Member

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):

    @garyrobbins

    This is why we voted for Trump.

    Yes it is.

    Not that he will give him any credit.

    He’s an NPC. He is not an honest interlocutor and he is non-responsive. He has his talking points and will repeat no matter what questions are put to him.

    I care less about him than those still defending him, though.

    • #11
    • September 25, 2020, at 11:40 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  12. Full Size Tabby Member

    CB Toder aka Mama Toad (View Comment):

    Papa Toad and I were talking the other day about the so-called civility of people like the Bushes and Romney, and how nothing like this would ever have occurred with any of them. None of them would have Betsy DeVos calling Princeton to task for its phony self-aggrandizing claims of systemic racism.

    I am so glad that a New York City real estate developer who honed his skills on reality television is our president. Who knew?

    Certainly not what I expected from him in 2016.

    In 2016 I voted against Hillary Clinton by pulling the lever for Donald Trump.

    In 2020 I will be voting for Donald Trump as someone with a demonstrated ability to advance at least some conservative principles. 

    • #12
    • September 25, 2020, at 12:25 PM PDT
    • 10 likes
  13. Rodin Member

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    In 2016 I voted against Hillary Clinton by pulling the lever for Donald Trump.

    In 2020 I will be voting for Donald Trump as someone with a demonstrated ability to advance at least some conservative principles. 

    There are a lot of us sharing the same reality.

    • #13
    • September 25, 2020, at 12:54 PM PDT
    • 6 likes
  14. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil FawltyJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    It’s nice to have a pen.

    • #14
    • September 25, 2020, at 2:53 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  15. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown

    Hartmann von Aue (View Comment):

    This is freaking brilliant and should be written into law. Executive orders can be reversed.

    Precisely. Every Republican candidate should cowboy up and own this. Senator McSally could energize her non-campaign with this as a bill.

    • #15
    • September 25, 2020, at 3:32 PM PDT
    • 6 likes
  16. MichaelKennedy Coolidge

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    Hartmann von Aue (View Comment):

    This is freaking brilliant and should be written into law. Executive orders can be reversed.

    Precisely. Every Republican candidate should cowboy up and own this. Senator McSally could energize her non-campaign with this as a bill.

    Yes, she could. Her 2018 campaign was a mess.

    • #16
    • September 25, 2020, at 7:24 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  17. Hartmann von Aue Member

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    CB Toder aka Mama Toad (View Comment):

    Papa Toad and I were talking the other day about the so-called civility of people like the Bushes and Romney, and how nothing like this would ever have occurred with any of them. None of them would have Betsy DeVos calling Princeton to task for its phony self-aggrandizing claims of systemic racism.

    I am so glad that a New York City real estate developer who honed his skills on reality television is our president. Who knew?

    Certainly not what I expected from him in 2016.

    In 2016 I voted against Hillary Clinton by pulling the lever for Donald Trump.

    In 2020 I will be voting for Donald Trump as someone with a demonstrated ability to advance at least some conservative principles.

    I didn’t vote for him in 2016 but like you I did (absentee voting…I live in Germany) this time and his newest counter offensive in the war of ideologies has confirmed my conviction that it was the right vote.

    • #17
    • September 26, 2020, at 1:18 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
    • This comment has been edited.
  18. Z in MT Member

    It is very clear that the left are all about power.

    The civil rights movement of the 50’s and 60’s were classically liberal movements freeing individuals from state and institutional discrimination.

    The current leftist movement is about using institutions and the state to discriminate against some groups in favor of other groups. The main goal being not to oppress those groups or raise up other groups, but to obtain the reins of government to impose Marxist ideology.

    • #18
    • September 26, 2020, at 5:37 AM PDT
    • 6 likes
  19. Gossamer Cat Coolidge

    I am taking out my checkbook to contribute to Trump’s campaign. This language “avoid racial scapegoating” should be written into every code of conduct for all scientific societies to stop young women flipping their ponytails and spouting off about old white males with impunity. I’m going to push for it. 

    • #19
    • September 26, 2020, at 11:00 AM PDT
    • 6 likes