Suspicious!

We have a president who is notorious for openly despising journalists. For years, he has been shunning the White House Correspondents Dinner, where, in the past, some speakers have mocked him, and where he would be surrounded by people who write rude things about him. He finally plans to attend. Gunshots ring out, secret service agents rush in, quickly bundle the politicians out, and the whole event was cancelled.

Dog help me, I’m suspicious that the police-led shutdown of the event was the whole point. I don’t want to be a conspiracy theorist, but it was all too pat — the establishment was looking for a pretext, and they found one. No one was hurt, they had a fun kerfuffle, and this year’s WHCD was silenced while the administration gets to claim persecution.

Afterwards, the president said nothing about how there are too many guns too freely available — instead, he spoke to the press about how this justifies his ballroom, which would be more secure and safe.

I hate thinking this way, but this country feels like it’s built on money, lies, and cheap stagecraft right now.

What a waste of an evening

The White House Correspondents Dinner is happening tonight, featuring remarks by the president himself. I won’t bother listening, because not only do I despise Trump, but it’s a room full of sycophants who have, with rare exceptions, enabled him.

I think Michelle Wolf had the perfect comment:


Comedian Michelle Wolf’s joke at the 2018 WHCD
resonates more today: “I think what no one in this
room wants to admit is that Trump has helped all of
you. He couldn’t sell steaks or vodka or water or
college or ties or Eric, but he has helped you. He’s
helped you sell your papers and your books and your
TV. You helped create this monster, and now you’re
profiting off of him.”

Revealing photos

Two presidential photo ops:

The photographer who caught that one will be shot later today.

The subject for that one is the Georgia women’s tennis team. Can you tell? They’re the ones tucked away in back, behind the old white men in suits with garish red ties.

You now know everything you need to know about the current administration.

Failing upward

Remember Devin Nunes? He’s the guy who sued a parody account, Devin Nunes Cow for $250 million (I’ve seen that number before — it seems to be a standard ridiculous number used in lawsuits by members of the Trump administration.) He lost. As a member of the Trump coven, though, he couldn’t really lose, and he was appointed to be CEO of Truth Social, the absurd far right social media platform our president uses to broadcast “Truths”.

Alas, the poor man is now stepping down from his lofty position. Don’t feel sorry for him, though, because despite the catastrophic financial losses behind Truth Social, Nunes has been cleaning up.

After soaring shortly before Trump’s re-election in November 2024, stock in the company plunged 67%, wiping out more than $6 billion in investor wealth.

Since it went public two years ago, Trump Media has lost more than $1.1 billion. Nunes got total compensation of $47 million in 2024, the last year for which figures are available.

$47 million! In one year! For running a non-viable social media platform!

You know, I’m retiring one year from now, and my wife and I are both concerned about the dramatic drop in our income starting in May 2027. My plan right now is to get a cushy sinecure with some large failing company — a job I’m not qualified to handle, but that therefore cannot demand much work from me — and then retire again after a year or so, once I’ve got a few million dollars. I would never ever have any money worries if I had a $47 million nest egg, which would keep me in grand style from now until my inevitable demise.

Does anyone know of any job openings in the overpaid-with-minimal-duties category?

Or do I need to be Republican with connections to the most corrupt administration in American history?

Texas FAFO

Someone on TikTok pointed out there are more kids in Texas with measles than trans college athletes in all of America.
Guess which they want you focused on?

Texas has been playing games with their universities.

Earlier this month, Texas Tech chancellor Brandon Creighton announced plans to close all gender and sexuality programs across the system and prohibit graduate students from researching the topics. Texas A&M similarly closed its women’s and gender studies program in January. The University of Texas ordered faculty in February to refrain from teaching ill-defined “controversial” topics in class. Nearly all Texas public university systems have conducted some kind of course-review process that screens instructional materials for gender and sexuality content.

This means weird conservative administrators with no relevant experience are meddling in the content of courses…courses they would not be qualified to teach, but hey, they’ve got rubber stamps and spreadsheets, that’s all the power they need. They’re now discovering the consequences.

Texas A&M philosophy professor Martin Peterson is leaving the university after administrators told him in January that he couldn’t teach Plato’s Symposium in his philosophy class; they said the ancient Greek philosopher’s work violated the system’s restrictions on gender and sexuality content. Peterson’s colleague Linda Raznik, a philosophy professor and associate department head, is jumping ship with similar concerns about academic freedom. Lucy Schiller, a nonfiction writing professor at Texas Tech University, also has plans to leave her job.

They are just a few of the faculty members giving up their jobs at Texas public institutions as the systems deploy escalating censorship policies that restrict or explicitly ban any instruction, writing, research or discussion on gender identity and sexual orientation.

It’s almost as if they intend to demolish all of Texas higher education. Fortunately, I am no longer in the market for a job, because I wouldn’t ever consider working as an academic in Texas. I also wouldn’t encourage any students to enroll in a Texas school anymore — you don’t know where your university will be in a few years.

Texans deserve better.

“Viewpoint diversity” is a misleading way to say “conservative welfare”

Viewpoint diversity is how you get the unqualified wife of a corrupt wrestling promoter put in charge of the department of education

Harvard is suddenly more concerned with campus diversity, but specifically diversity that benefits wealthy conservatives. They’ve started a campaign asking for ten million dollar endowments.

The effort comes in response to longstanding criticism that Harvard’s faculty leans overwhelmingly liberal. Those concerns intensified last year, when U.S. President Donald Trump elevated the issue as part of a broader pressure campaign against the University.

In the now-infamous April 2025 letter, federal officials called for an audit of Harvard’s faculty to assess “viewpoint diversity” and demanded it hire a “critical mass” of new professors in departments deemed lacking. Garber rejected the Trump administration’s ultimatum, but the scrutiny has persisted.

This is nuts. Asking people to donate millions of dollars is not going to enhance diversity — that is a campaign that is only going to draw on a donor population that is going to be biased to favor extreme wealth, and is going to be populated with conservative, entitled people. Harvard is basically inviting people to buy professors to fill their faculty, at the urging of Donald Trump.

Making it even worse, they plan to set up these faculty in a special category that will be hired by the university, with 20 or 30 professors who will be selected for “viewpoint”, rather than their qualifications in their field, and that they will then be inserted into departments that don’t have the political perspective the administration desires.

I’m at a small university, and I find it hard to imagine an administration so flush that they can declare they’re going to hire a swarm of new people. But imagine if my U announced that they were hiring one or two people based on their political bias, and then they decide that there were too many people in the biology discipline who were Democrats, so we would get those new faculty without regard for the academic/curricular needs of our biology program.

Every college department can use more faculty, and offering us new hires would be wonderful, but WE know what our specific discipline needs to implement our curriculum, while the administration generally has only the vaguest of clues, and what they do know is what we tell them. I think the faculty would be horrified if we were suddenly saddled with a new face whose primary qualification is that they are Republican. This is a violation of the principle that we do not hire people on the basis of aspects of their life that are irrelevant to doing their job. We are specifically instructed that we can’t ask job candidates about their politics, their religion, their sexuality, their marital status, and on and on. “Viewpoint diversity” explicitly violates a policy implemented to remove bias from the hiring process.

It is true that that has led to more liberal viewpoints filling our ranks, but that’s because reality has a well-known liberal bias. One of the hallmarks of the conservative perspective is that it tries to deny reality in favor of prior preconceptions, and resist change. Maybe we shouldn’t put representatives of a political philosophy that despises education into the professoriate, did you ever consider that, Harvard?

We need better Supreme Court justices

Well, this is a fine how-de-do. Clarence Thomas is arguing for theocracy.

Thomas, 77, the Court’s longest-serving conservative member, laid the blame at the feet of intellectuals and the nation’s colleges and universities, which he said have allowed founding values to fall out of favor. He did not reference specific political figures or contemporary events.

He also did not reference specific values, but only platitudes. He simply took the time to condemn intellectuals, colleges, and universities — I guess he was corrupted by his time spent getting a JD from Yale.

Progressivism seeks to replace the basic premises of the Declaration of Independence and hence our form of government, Thomas said. [It] holds that our rights and our dignities come not from God, but from government. It requires of the people a subservience and weakness incompatible with a Constitution premised on the transcendent origin of our rights.

Hang on there, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, do I need to explain to you that our form of government was specified by the Constitution, not the Declaration of Independence? That document was a dramatic announcement of our grievances and intent to sever our subservience with a colonial power, England. The Declaration does have some wording about “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” and that we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights, but it is otherwise a secular document focused on civil complaints and disagreements with a government. Officials do not swear to uphold the Declaration of Independence, which would be a weird thing to do, since a list of 18th century grievances is not relevant to a 21st century state.

It’s our Constitution you should care about. You know, the document that starts out

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

You know, the document that says our government comes from the people. Not god. It doesn’t even mention god or religion except in the first amendment, where it says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” But now a Supreme Court Justice has decided that no, our rights come from a god, on the basis of reading the wrong document? And by ignoring entirely a wholly secular document that is the actual source of any authority he might have?

“Progressivism,” whatever that means in his decrepit brain, does not require subservience and weakness, nor is it dependent on a transcendent origin of our rights. Some of the founding fathers he reveres weren’t particularly religious and didn’t need a clerical excuse to see a reason for establishing a government. You can be an atheist and support the Constitution!

Thomas also took aim at officials in Washington, he said, who lack commitment to righteous cause, to traditional morality, to national defense, to free enterprise, to religious piety or to the original meaning of the Constitution.

Yes, do take aim at government officials. I don’t think Donald Trump is at all pious, and is more committed to corruption than to free enterprise or righteousness, and he’s filled the upper levels of government with selfish hacks like himself. He’s also appointed several of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’s peers. Any complaints should be rightfully directed at the institution he represents.

And hey, does taking bribes from wealthy conservatives count as a righteous cause?

Fuck your traditional morality, Clarence. It’s more like a traditional venality.

Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?

Yesterday, I said I was looking for reasons to tamp down excessive cheerfulness. No such assistance needed this morning!

Louisiana has taken care of it.

Yesterday, the Louisiana House of Representatives took the dangerous step of voting in favor of a truly disgusting anti-homeless bill. This bill is an extreme take on the already extreme copy-paste legislation peddled by the Palantir-funded, billionaire-backed Cicero Institute. In addition to making it a crime to sleep outside, this bill forces homeless people charged with a crime to make the false choice between jail or at least one year of forced treatment.

But it gets worse.

This bill requires homeless people to pay for the very treatment they are forced into. And if the person cannot pay the cost of treatment, this bill requires them to perform unpaid labor for the government or a community organization to pay off their debt. Louisiana has a long history – and present – of chain gangs, prison labor, and entrenched white supremacy. This bill clearly evokes debtor’s prisons, convict leasing, and the ugliest day of Jim Crow.

It’s a very 19th century approach to dealing with a social problem.

He was unqualified from the beginning

A few Democrats have grown a spine. They’ve filed articles of impeachment against Pete Hegseth. There is a long list of good reasons to kick his evil ass out of office.

The House Democrats also pointed at a growing number of boat strikes in the Caribbean. The military has repeatedly sought to frame individuals on the vessels as “narco-terrorists”.

House Democrats also accused Hegseth of compromising national security through “careless and improper conduct”, citing an episode where classified information was shared on Signal in 2025.

The defense secretary was embroiled in controversy last year after the Atlantic’s editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg was added to a Signal group chat about a planned airstrike on Houthi fighters in Yemen. Hegseth, vice-president JD Vance, and CIA director John Ratcliffe were also in the chat.

The articles also continued on to include Hegesth’s “efforts to withhold material facts relating to civilian casualties and operational conduct in Iran and Venezuela”; his attempt to punish the senator Mark Kelly, a retired US navy captain, for reminding service members that they can refuse illegal orders; and forcing transgender service members from the military.

“Pete Hegseth did not follow his oath to the US constitution,” Ansari told the reporter Pablo Manríquez. “He committed a war crime in Iran with the attack on a school that killed over 160 children. So not only do we need to end this war, but we need to hold accountable and prosecute anyone in the US administration who may have committed war crimes.”

Not to mention that he’s an incompetent boob who only got the appointment because he was a suck-up to Trump.

This motion will go nowhere, because the Democrats don’t have the votes, yet. It is encouraging, though, that some of them are stirring themselves to fight back against this outrageous and wicked administration, and it will highlight all those Republicans who so conscientiously neglect to recognize the deep harm their party has done to the country.