Link. And yes, it is an appearance by Kevin Roberts to discuss his radical Project 2025 Presidential agenda on MSNBC, so he is entering a venue hostile to his biases and beliefs. Hostile to his agenda, where he intended to discuss his agenda, his way.
Hosting people did interject some non-sophistry, and he tried to outshout them, so, watch and see. From time to time, interjected hosting interruptions, fair or not?
Bottom line, his speaking chops are better than Biden's these days. But . . .
UPDATE: More MSNBC re PROJECT 2025. Yes, Chris Hayes having opposing views to the Heritage putsch. Giving that notice to whoever would view it, nine minutes of your time, watch or don't.
This AP online item, read it or don't. If you do read it, a report of Trump weaseling in an unlikely way, then watch this; or as far into it as you need to notice the man says "Trump" a lot. Who to believe? Or more to the point, who to fear and loath.
YouTube, you have to watch it. The man is an unabashed abortion hater. Women have no autonomy, because it would be evil to allow abortion to go unfought. Abortion is a betrayal, quoting Genesis, etc. The whole shtick.
A Catholic, a Christian nationalist bound into the Roman Church viewpoint, Roberts is unyielding. And hence a menace to freedom of choice. Stymie one freedom, you threaten all freedom. Especially where gender bias inescapably attaches to the Roberts viewpoint.
"Straight from Hell" said by Roberts, to applause. Spinning. Talking smoothly, no halting hesitation as Biden at debate. He is clear. Get his drift. We are evil people for wanting it different than he and his Church see things. Simplistic? Unyielding? Sure.
It is either his way or our way and no station between can be a compromise.
That being so, our way. Separation of church and state. Tolerance of rights. An expansive viewing of a range of rights. He can live his life, we will not intrude and force him to do something he'd not want to do.
A two-way street. Don't tell us Kevin to live your bad trip. Nobody named you boss. End of discussion.
That man, behind the Heritage hard turn far right after long posing as a "Think Tank" but now dropping the pose and coming out full shark mode, blood in the water, no think about it. (Sorry mixing metaphors, pigs, sharks, land and sea, but cut me some slack.)
Full pig mode, let's say it that way. ("Pigs With a Blood Lust," as a possible New Heritage slogan.}
And that man, getting Daily Beast attention for the beast he is, Kevin Roberts, has a revealing Wikipedia page.
Clear and present dangers sometimes require following links, when convenient quotes are purposely being withheld. Two links already given. Do a search. Enjoy.
Last, Crabgrass - as a blind guess - suggests Kevin Roberts is close to Leonard Leo; house guests of one another, frequenting the same bar; sharing the same confessorship, etc. No link for that, but, go figure. And don't blame Francis. He does what he can with what he's got. The pair are nominally Rome's, but move as independent allies of whatever forces, dark or darker. Having Bannon, John Roberts, on the rolodex. Maybe past/present social guests of the Mercers. It's speculation.
___________UPDATED___________
Clearing detritus. This Kevin Roberts is a different person. Comparing Wiki sidebar birthdates showed it. Both rooted in Texas recently, both middle initial D. but two separate bald headed white guys.
Back in 2021 when Roberts took over leadership of the Heritage adventure, Real Clear Politics wrote of Roberts' selection:
Barb Van Andel-Gaby, chairman of foundation’s board of trustees,
succinctly described the new president as a “DC Outsider.” [...]
After RealClearPolitics broke the story earlier this year that Kay
Coles James would be stepping down as president, the conservative
editorial board of the Wall Street Journal observed
that “[w]hoever replaces her will say a good deal about the future of
the political right.” In his first interview since accepting the
position, Roberts told RCP that his selection means that the
conservatism of the next decade and the next century will “not only be
less DC-centric, it will be one that gets back to its roots of being
hostile, hostile, hostile to the centralization of power in the national
capitol.”
Not merely hostile, but multiply so. Continuing, RCP text:
Talk of renewal punctuated by references to civic virtue helped the
self-described “recovering academic” win over foundation trustees.
Competition was stiff, and speculation over who would take the helm
of Heritage became a favored parlor game in conservative circles. A
headhunter helped compile a list of more than 100 names. The board then
narrowed it down to about half-a-dozen finalists before interviewing candidates in person.
Former White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney was interested but
didn’t make the final cut. A former secretary of labor, Eugene Scalia,
was also considered. Other Trump alumni such as Russ Vought, previously
the director of the Office of Management and Budget and currently the
head of Center for Renewing America, had already moved on to other
pursuits before the search began. That the board would look to Trump
World for recruits is not surprising. “We were Ronald Reagan's favorite
think tank,” Ed Feulner, the founding president of Heritage, privately
told foundation staff four years ago. “And today we are, and will
continue to be, Donald Trump's favorite think tank.”
Got that? DonaldTrump's favorite. Pay attention.
Even Trump’s vice president was floated as a potential pick for a
time. “Mike Pence was actively being courted for a position in
December,” a source directly involved in the talks told RCP. Pence
ultimately took a post at the organization as a distinguished visiting
fellow. In any event, the guesswork is now over. Foundation employees
will soon meet Roberts for the first time as president. Heritage prides
itself on defining “the truth north” for the right, and Roberts was quick to reorient the organization as an ideas shop.
“A think tank occupies the space between policy making and politics
and, on the other side, the academy writ-large,” he told RCP. “In other
words, a think tank at its best — and Heritage has set the standard for
48 years — is one where you have academic quality research.”
Yet, critics who have complained in recent years that the organization had become too political and less cerebral
may be disappointed. “A think tank, at its best, doesn’t merely leave
its thinking on paper,” Roberts said. Heritage sought an answer to that
problem by ratcheting up pressure on lawmakers during the Obama years,
angering establishment Republicans in the process. A political arm of
the foundation, Heritage Action for America, was founded in 2010. Its
paradigm wasn’t strictly scholarly: “If you can’t make them see the
light, make them feel the heat.” Does the new foundation president see
Heritage as an ideas factory or a lobbying shop then? Both. “It is an
institution of civil society, and as such, I wouldn't ever think about
splitting that baby,” Roberts said.
“We have got a real opportunity in the near term, not just for the
2022 and 2024 election cycles, but for the next decade,” Roberts said of
the organization’s political and policy goals “to help define what
institutions who are center right do — not just what they say and not
just who they hire, but what they do and how they act.”
The intellectual orbit on the right has expanded since the 1980s when the Reagan administration borrowed heavily from the foundation’s “Mandate for Leadership.” A constellation of new
groups, many of them founded by Heritage alumni, have exploded on the
scene. [...]
Heritage will have its work cut out. Donald Trump tore the
ideological curtain, and a number of factions have rushed in to
introduce new, competing orthodoxies. While Roberts sees some
innovations in the populist moment to be embraced, like skepticism of
“an overly proactive foreign policy,” he also warned of the “excesses of
populism," a temperament defined by an “inclination for really quick
solutions.”
[...] Roberts will have plenty of policy to wrestle with soon enough. But the
academic returns to one issue in particular — and not surprisingly given
that he founded his own K-12 school in Louisiana (John Paul the Great
Academy) before going on to lead a university, Wyoming Catholic College.
“People expect me as an educator to always start with education,” he
said when asked about the most pertinent political debate on the
horizon, “but I actually happen to believe that's true.”
And the headline quote, that is Roberts speaking, per the opening cite. So ---
Now, 7/5/24, what's next? Well, TheHill:
Former President Trump sought to distance himself from the
conservative Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 on Friday, saying he has
“nothing to do” with the initiative and disagrees with some of its
aspects.
Trump said in a post on Truth Social that he is not involved in the right-wing think tank’s proposal,
which outlines various policies and initiatives that some conservatives
hope a future Republican administration would administer.
“I know nothing about Project 2025. I have no idea who is behind it,”
he said. “I disagree with some of the things they’re saying and some of
the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal.
Anything they do, I wish them luck, but I have nothing to do with
them.”
The 900-page 2025 Presidential Transition Project is a “governing
agenda” filled with conservative priorities and insight from scholars
and policy experts. It is divided into sections based on five main
topics — “Taking the Reins of Government,” “The Common Defense,” “The
General Welfare,” “The Economy” and “Independent Regulatory Agencies.”
The project makes a wide range of policy proposals, perhaps most
notably reshaping the powers of the executive branch. It also calls for
striking various small government agencies and rolling back funding for
abortions and approval of the abortion pill mifepristone.
Another proposal is reimplementing Schedule F, a classification for
federal workers that makes it easier to fire them and replace them with
loyalists. The Associated Press has estimated this could affect 50,000
workers.
The Heritage Foundation is the once-staid think tank that, since
Roberts’ arrival in 2021, has leaned into the culture wars with gusto.
The group has organized the infamous Project 2025, mapping out an extremist agenda for a prospective second Trump term.
Roberts spoke Tuesday
on the show Real America’s Voice with guest host and former Tea Party
congressman Dave Brat, and uncorked comments that made him sound like a
member of the Oath Keepers militia.
“Let me speak about the radical left,” Roberts said, insisting it “has
taken over our institutions.” He said that the reason progressive are
“apoplectic right now” — in the wake of the Supreme Court decision
granting the president immunity from criminal prosecution — “is because
our side is winning.”
Roberts then declared himself an insurrectionist who is open to
violence: “We are in the process of the second American Revolution,” he
said, “which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be.”
Heritage
Foundation president celebrates Supreme Court presidential immunity
ruling: "We are in the process of the second American Revolution, which
will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be" https://t.co/ndMJlNlUKH
Roberts comments underscore the threat of authoritarianism that is
looming over the 2024 election, and immediately caught the attention of
experts on fascist movements. Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a history professor at
NYU, called out Roberts in a pair of posts on X, describing
him as a “fascist” who was “celebrating” the newfound power of the
president to “kill people and pay no penalty” while “feeling empowered
by the ruling to threaten the American people.” Ben-Ghiat decoded “the
left” as applying to “everyone who is not MAGA.”
The NYU professor, whose expertise is in Italian fascism, added
that “Heritage does not have an in-house paramilitary” and that by
“using ‘we,’ Roberts is suggesting that Heritage is aligned with armed
entities that could be activated if there is resistance to their coup.”
She called this a “classic intimidation tactic: submit or else.”
The Biden campaign denounced Roberts comments in a statement: “248
years ago tomorrow America declared independence from a tyrannical king,
and now Donald Trump
and his allies want to make him on [sic, one] at our expense.” The statement
described Roberts as “dreaming of a violent revolution to destroy the
very idea of America.”
Later in the broadcast, Roberts predicted that his “second revolution”
would be complete by 2050, and that would it would coincide with a new
“great awakening” that would bring America to God — underscoring the
extent to which Heritage and its Project 2025 is entwined with Christian
nationalism.
Which has Trump saying, "Not me." But Trump poses as many things, depending on which audience he faces. But as a bottom line, if Trump says Project 2025 is full of it, then believe, it is. Nonetheless, were Trump to win, what then, being who he is?
Wholly unrelated, Scorpions are invading Texas, (not coming from there invading elsewhere.) Whatever. And, yes. Saying no quotes, and then quoting. Maybe lying is infectious. Put a MAGA hat on my head and who knows what I'd write? No. One of those things on my head would make my hair cringe.
FURTHER: Link. Whether Trump and Project 2025 are cojoined, or not, both are deplorable (Oops, the Hillary word, oh dear. Apologies.)
It is fair to note that Trump has never (not yet?) released a video of him holding up a copy of Project 2025 (900 pages) and touting it as a thing he promotes, endorses and urges you to buy; unlike here and here.
Having Billionaire investors suggest things will work out. Wiki continuing -
The company grew to manage 23 businesses, including
wineries, restaurants, and hotels. Newsom began his political career in
1996, when San Francisco mayor Willie Brown appointed him to the city's Parking and Traffic Commission. Brown then appointed Newsom to fill a vacancy on the Board of Supervisors the next year and Newsom was first elected to the board in 1998.
Newsom's parents divorced in 1971 when he was three years old.[4]
Newsom has said he did not have an easy childhood, partly due to dyslexia.[3] He attended kindergarten and first grade at École Notre Dame Des Victoires, a French-American bilingual Catholic
school in San Francisco, but eventually transferred out, due to the
severe dyslexia that still affects him. It has challenged his abilities
to write, spell, read, and work with numbers.[3] Throughout his schooling, Newsom had to rely on a combination of audiobooks, digests, and informal verbal instruction. To this day, he prefers to interpret documents and reports through audio.[5]
Newsom attended third through fifth grades at Notre Dame des
Victoires, where he was placed in remedial reading classes. In high
school, he played basketball and baseball and graduated from Redwood High School in 1985. Newsom was a shooting guard in basketball and an outfielder in baseball. His skills placed him on the cover of the Marin Independent Journal.[6]
Tessa Newsom worked three jobs to support Gavin and his sister Hilary Newsom Callan. In an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, his sister recalled Christmases when their mother told them they would not receive any gifts.[6] Tessa opened their home to foster children, instilling in Newsom the importance of public service.[6][7] His father's finances were strapped in part because of his tendency to give away his earnings.[7] Newsom worked several jobs in high school to help support his family.[8]
Newsom attended Santa Clara University, graduating in 1989 with a Bachelor of Science with a major in political science. In his first two years, he tried out for the university's baseball team
(and received a small scholarship in his freshman year), but he had
elbow surgery in late 1985 and never played on the varsity team.[9][10] He has reflected on his education fondly, crediting Santa Clara's Jesuit approach with helping him become an independent thinker who questions orthodoxy. While in school, Newsom spent a semester studying abroad in Rome, Italy.[11]
A duke of Brunswick in German was so shocked by the methods used by
Inquisitors in his realm that he asked two famous Jesuit scholars to
supervise. After careful study, the two 'told the Duke, "The Inquisitors
are doing their duty. They are arresting only people who have been
implicated by the confession of other witches."' The Duke then led the
Jesuits to a woman being stretched on the rack and asked her, "You are a
confessed witch. I suspect these two men of being warlocks. What do you
say? Another turn of the rack, executioners." “No, no!” screamed the
woman. “You are quite right. I have often seen .. . They can turn
themselves into goats, wolves, and other animals. ... Several witches
have had children by them. ... The children had heads like toads and
legs like spiders." The Duke then asked the Jesuits. "Shall I put you to
the torture until you confess, my friends?" One of the Jesuits was Friedrich Spee, who thanked God he had been led to this insight by a friend, not an enemy.
But I digress. Back to Gavin, Getty's friend (if you get it wrong, get it right next time)
Business career
Newsom and his investors created the company PlumpJack Associates L.P. on May 14, 1991. The group started the PlumpJack Winery in 1992 with the financial help[12] of his family friend Gordon Getty. PlumpJack was the name of an opera written by Getty, who invested in 10 of Newsom's 11 businesses.[3] Getty told the San Francisco Chronicle
that he treated Newsom like a son and invested in his first business
venture because of that relationship. According to Getty, later business
investments were because of "the success of the first".[3]
One of Newsom's early interactions with government occurred when Newsom resisted the San Francisco Department of Public Health's requirement to install a sink at his PlumpJack wine store.[13]
The Health Department argued that wine was a food and required the
store to install a $27,000 sink in the carpeted wine shop on the grounds
that the shop needed the sink for a mop. When Newsom was later
appointed supervisor, he told the San Francisco Examiner: "That's the kind of bureaucratic malaise I'm going to be working through."[10]
The business grew to an enterprise with more than 700 employees.[6] The PlumpJack Cafe Partners L.P. opened the PlumpJack Café, also on Fillmore Street,
in 1993. Between 1993 and 2000, Newsom and his investors opened several
other businesses that included the PlumpJack Squaw Valley Inn with a
PlumpJack Café (1994), a winery in Napa Valley
(1995), the Balboa Café Bar and Grill (1995), the PlumpJack Development
Fund L.P. (1996), the MatrixFillmore Bar (1998), PlumpJack Wines shop
Noe Valley branch (1999), PlumpJackSport retail clothing (2000), and a
second Balboa Café at Squaw Valley (2000).[3] Newsom's investments included five restaurants and two retail clothing stores.[6] Newsom's annual income was greater than $429,000 from 1996 to 2001.[3] In 2002, his business holdings were valued at more than $6.9 million.[6]
Newsom gave a monthly $50 gift certificate to PlumpJack employees whose
business ideas failed, because in his view, "There can be no success
without failure."[10]
Newsom sold his share of his San Francisco businesses when he
became mayor in 2004. He maintained his ownership in the PlumpJack
companies outside San Francisco, including the PlumpJack Winery in
Oakville, California, new PlumpJack-owned Cade Winery in Angwin,
California, and the PlumpJack Squaw Valley Inn. He is the president in
absentia of Airelle Wines Inc., which is connected to the PlumpJack
Winery in Napa County. Newsom earned between $141,000 and $251,000 in
2007 from his business interests.[14] In February 2006, he paid $2,350,000 for his residence in the Russian Hill neighborhood, which he put on the market in April 2009 for $3,000,000.[15]
Actually, possibly a good Clyburn mini-conglomerate substitute candidate. The part of the bio about his mother working to raise the kids suggests he knows about paying dues. A good starting point, but -- convince me.
UPDATE: It would be a plus for him, if the successor, if he was not Clyburn's first choice. We'll never know.
It used to be the smoke-filled-room cliche. Now smoking is outside only, so, the Inner Lords of the Inner Party of the Democrats of the U.S. of A. shall assemble to name a new successor to the present Party Pope, Biden I. Something like that.
NEW YORK (AP) — He is often credited as the man who delivered the
Democratic nomination to Joe Biden with a pivotal endorsement four years
ago.
That simplifies how Bernie and Liz each were done in by surrogates, until S.C. when Clyburn the Great spoke. But let it rest. Move on, as the Soros guy says. Bernie was only the popular choice, which doesn't matter, so - continuing opening paragraphs -
But on Wednesday, Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., sent a
resounding message to the president and elected officials across the
nation that it may be time to move on.
Trumpets blared.
Clyburn, a Biden campaign
co-chair, outlined a process to replace Biden during an interview with
CNN. Should Biden step aside, Clyburn said, he expects a “mini-primary”
featuring Vice President Kamala Harris, governors and others in the
run-up to the Democratic National Convention in August.
“You can
actually fashion the process that’s already in place to make it a
mini-primary and I would support that,” said Clyburn, who also spoke to
Biden on Wednesday in a conversation his office refused to discuss.
The Lord of Lords has spoken and so shall it be. "Mini" means select few, and "primary" means you and everybody else is secondary, right?
Clyburn’s decision to spell out in detail how Biden might be replaced
was viewed as a clarion call by some top donors, party insiders and
even members of Biden’s campaign who increasingly believe that the
81-year-old president will be forced to step aside following a debate
performance that shook the party’s confidence in his ability to defeat
Republican former President Donald Trump in November.
The
extraordinary remarks echoed throughout the private conversations of
donors, Democratic National Committee members and even Biden’s campaign
staff, according to multiple participants who spoke on the condition of
anonymity to share sensitive discussions.
"increasingly believe" So that's how the shit gets done, eh? They stabbed Caesar. This is bloodless, but subject to mockery from the opposition leader, who mocks while unable to lead. Too mean-minded to lead. Too mediocre.
Great world. Glad to live in it.
___________UPDATE____________
Cooled down a bit. But this Clyburn setting a roadmap seems to say done deal, while Biden is still saying he is The Candidate.
Something may happen, but it can be dragged out so that Dems get all the press and Trump goes rally to rally. Who knows intentions and outcomes.
It galls, however, to see, yet again, Inner Party cramdown via a mini-whatever.
Clyburn is as Inner Party as they come, and none of the ugly ambitions will be aired publicly. Just a get together with an outcome. Then, GOTV.
But who are we, the people, to question Father knowing best. Shit.
FURTHER; Same story -
Clyburn’s comment came a day after former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
sent shockwaves across the party by raising questions about Biden’s
fitness to serve. “It’s a legitimate question to say, is this an episode
or is this a condition?” Pelosi said on MSNBC.
Nancy. Inner Party? - an episode or a condition she poses the comparison -
Speaking of conditions, might things develop to where Biden said he'd not pardon nor commute any sentence Hunter finds imposed; but as a condition of stepping aside, nobody's asked about that yet. Will it slide, as detail is subsumed by big News.
Substitution would also put Jordan and Comer back to work as Reps, vs scandal mongering suggesters. Letter writers. Whistleblower whisperers. Will they find fun in real work? Tune in next week to find out. Next month. Whenever. Before the Dems convene, but other than that time is flexible.
Can you imagine that pair, big fanfare, we have more to say about the tired old guy who left. Biden stays, they stay happier. Happy 4th.
FURTHER: Look backwards a bit. Biden demurs early. A public scrum. Biden says, "I want it. Four more of me is best to beat TRUMP." Primaries fall in line. Then Joe is "urged" out. Huffs a little. Doors close - substitution is issued, clean as a whistle.
Scrum free selection. Neato. Keeno. No "Harris problem" public stuff. Resolved in other ways. However things shake out, expect Trump is wondering, who next? What next? Posting junk on Trump Social, nobody caring. Biden's straddle being the news. Stretched out over however many news cycles it can carry.
Two items published by Guardian today, here and Mehdi Hasan suggesting there would be sense to Biden to stand down in favor of VP Harris. Noting that, while saying he'd never been in the Harris cheerleading camp.
Crabgrass thinks Biden should stay the candidate, but if forces are arranged against that, then what of Harris, yet one more career politician, taking over?
So binary comparisons, Harris vs Gavin California, Harris for certain.
Harris vs Gretchin Whitmer, not knowing who Whitmer is beyond the office she holds, a tossup, likely favoring Harris.
Harris vs Klobuchar, Harris for certain.
You look around, there are not many good choices.
Harris vs Maria Cantwell, Cantwell for certain, although nobody else is pushing Cantwell as a prospect.
Harris vs Dean Phillips, who spoke up early, likely Harris, but Phillips would be okay.
Harris vs AOC - AOC in an eyeblink.
Harris vs the Crabgrass favorite, non-career politician, Al Franken, that choice has been made, it being a shameful thing Franken got Gillibranded out of office for what was really no good reason. Franken is smart. Capable. Able to earn a living without being locked forever in State or DC politics - a great calling card. Nobody else seems to see it that way, from online MSM.
Harris vs Elizabeth Warren - Warren, but she does not have a chance.
Harris comes out of things okay, when you do the binary options.
Who'd be her VP? That's a damned good question which needs answering before any Biden step-down is seriously at play.
And, again, Biden staying vs Harris replacing, Biden's best. And the thought here is Biden should have a clear hand to pick a successor, and not be constrained to Harris as the VP and hence clear successor. Harris was picked as a political move, and Biden should be honored with the controlling voice. To pick somebody he and his people in his administration are wholly comfortable with.
Biden or Harris vs Bernie. Bernie, obviously, but as with Warren, no chance.
In a Crabgrass ideal world, a new ticket, Franken and AOC for second spot. Ready for AOC to take over her two terms after two Franken terms. Cory Booker? That one would really need thinking. Harris over Booker seems the instinctive Crabgrass reflex reaction. But with thinking needed.
Joe is more cogent than he gets credit for, he has an intact administration that has delivered, and if his speech giving is like Bob Dylan's or Lou Reed's present singing voice, there is substance behind any deficiency.
Joe can win against Trump. Harris likely could. That part seems solid, despite consternation some have expressed. Trump is that bad, after all. When facing a blank ballot in a voting booth, anybody previously undecided would go with the non-Trump. It is sanity to do that, after all.
As an UPDATE, a Harris - AOC ticket would be fine with me. It would balance mainstream Dem with progressive, and four X chromosomes on a ticket might bother some, but it's fine with Crabgrass. A geo-balance too, as an ancillary benefit. I think they'd fit well together, and good government would result. Good government is what it is all about.
FURTHER: Harris vs Mayor Pete? Get serious. Harris of course. McKinsey can fend on its own, it does not need a foot in the door. Beyond where it already is. Transportation is pork barrel, big time so. South Bend my one time on the interstate around there was fine. I was treated well. But, . . .
So, the obvious question, do you have any cause to believe Biden's alternative choice, Trump, is in any way substantial? Or is Trump a poster child of insubstantial hand waving obfuscation and misleading blather? If elected Trump will try, with his aides and related people, to implement Project 2025.
That nefarious screed was written by corporate lobbyists who want a world easier for them and their clients, and less protective of the general population. "Drain the swamp" is easy to say, but it would be as easy to say what is intended behind that phrase, "disimpower the very beneficial constraints that regulatory administrative agencies doing their job put upon naked business exploitative possibilities in order to have a sounder economy which works better for average people." More words. Yes. Not as cute. But honesty sometimes needs more.
Throughout the item Biden never says anything about the specific threat to Democracy posed by the Heritage Foundation and its lobbyist roots and cares, put into many pages of things lobbyists would like to see happen, and bound up into a package called "Project 2025."
It will not be that way, with Biden reelected, which is the explanation for these people with their agenda ready against us, for their embracing an asshole such as Donald J. Trump.
Wake up. Smell the coffee. Enjoy the coffee. Vote.
Vote, vote, vote, vote, vote. Not to say multiple times which is unlawful. But when the time comes, do your clear and pressing duty, vote however you think best to vote, but don't dodge the duty. Don't say, this or that is more important. Yes life has important personal things. But voting is no real burden and everybody knows that. Including those shirking the duty. Just. Do. It.
It is no burden. You are not too busy. Early voting is fully available. JUST DO IT.
Vote against the gigantic threat to ordinary people which Project 2025 glibly presents. Yes. Read as much of it as you can take. It is long. It is turgid. It is an exercise in deceptive wording. Propaganda always is. But bottom line, it is for the likes of Koch interests, smoothing their agenda's implementation, not for you.
Vote against it by voting for Joe Biden, who sees and speaks to threats to Democracy, which is what Project 2025 is.
It is wrong that the video so far has had so few views. It should have been viewed millions and millions of times. As frequently as a Taylor Swift video posted to YouTube. It has more substance, after all.
Running against Trump is running against the man, his style, his offensiveness.
Running against Trump AND against Project 2025 is all that and exposing Trump as not being the populist rebel he poses himself to be, but rather against Trump as the funded frontrunner for a big corporate takeover of government, posed as something populist because posing as a populist is what got Trump to where he is.
And because those wanting to make corporate rule easier prefer to pursue that aim indirectly and sneaking around, because to say upfront what's going on would doom their agenda - - - that agenda being, full monty, Project 2025 - what it would do aside from how smoothly it is packaged and promoted.
No sane regular person would want those paying for Heritage Foundation bullshit to have their way with us.
Clearly so. Knowing that, they wrap things in ribbons and bows. And, why not if it works, wrap the entire anti-populace business in populism.
