Skip navigation

Monthly Archives: July 2020

 November 2020- Day of Reckoning for the GOP who are not losing a dime and apparently a wink of sleep but looking to take your money and health. MA.

This is a link to the sample demand letter referenced below, this is an 18 page letter so I am just providing the link.

Michael Hiltzik

July 29, 2020, 12:29 PM

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), left, and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) don’t really want employees to be safe at work. (J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press)

If you were looking for evidence that Republicans in Congress have no sympathy for workers facing illness or worse from the coronavirus pandemic, look past the party’s proposal to cut unemployment benefits.

Instead, focus on the provision in its coronavirus relief bill that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) calls a must-have in any bill that passes: It’s liability protection for employers whose employees get sick at work.

This proposal has received scant attention in coverage of the GOP plan. But it’s more vicious than you could possibly imagine.

Ensuring that workers and consumers can hold companies accountable for their actions is critical to establishing a safe reopening of our economy.

Celine McNicholas and Margaret Poydock, EPI

The GOP proposal would erect almost insurmountable obstacles to lawsuits by workers who become infected with the coronavirus at their workplaces.

It would absolve employers of responsibility for taking any but the most minimal steps to make their workplaces safe. It would preempt tough state workplace safety laws (not that there are very many of them).

And while shutting the courthouse door to workers, it would allow employers to sue workers for demanding safer conditions.

This is the provision that McConnell has described as his “red line” in negotiations over the next coronavirus relief bill, meaning that he intends to demand that it be incorporated in anything passed on Capitol Hill and sent to President Trump for his signature. The provision would be retroactive to last Dec. 1 and remain in effect at least until Oct. 1, 2024.

The GOP proposal would make workplaces immeasurably more hazardous for workers, and also for customers. That’s because litigation — or the threat of litigation — is one of the bulwarks of workplace safety enforcement.

Without confidence that workplaces are safe, employees will be reluctant to come to work and customers reluctant to walk in the door.

“Ensuring that workers and consumers can hold companies accountable for their actions is critical to establishing a safe reopening of our economy,” Celine McNicholas and Margaret Poydock of the labor-associated Economic Policy Institute have observed.

The proposal would supersede such federal worker safeguards as the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008, among others.

In plain English, the Republicans are proposing to eviscerate almost all workplace protections at the moment when the threat to workers’ health may be its highest in a century. Let’s not overlook that federal enforcement of workplace safety is anything but strong to begin with. The maximum OSHA penalty is $13,494 per violation.

That’s “insufficient to serve as a deterrent,” McNicholas and Poydock say. “Companies merely factor these penalties into the cost of doing business.”

In a surfeit of irony, or perhaps cynicism, the GOP titled its measure the “Safeguarding America’s Frontline Employees To Offer Work Opportunities Required to Kickstart the Economy Act,” or the “SAFE TO WORK Act.”

The measure, which was formally introduced by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), states that it’s aimed at “discouraging insubstantial lawsuits relating to COVID-19.” It doesn’t define “insubstantial,” however.

The Republican proposal is more draconian than measures in some of the nine states that have given businesses immunity from lawsuits in the COVID-19 pandemic. It reflects a long-term conservative goal of absolving businesses from responsibility for conditions in their workplaces.

The campaign has been spearheaded by the Koch-backed American Legislative Exchange Council, which has been developing a model law on the subject for state legislatures.

Like the federal proposal, the state laws generally allow lawsuits only in cases of “gross negligence or willful misconduct,” and requires that plaintiffs show the defendant’s fault by “by clear and convincing evidence.”

That’s a higher bar than the typical requirement of “preponderance” of the evidence, which has sometimes been described as a balance in which one side’s case outweighs the other by even a smidgen.

Let’s take a look at the particulars.

The bill would move all liability cases to federal court, which instantly would increase the costs for plaintiffs. But it also imposes huge obstacles to even filing a claim.

In their initial pleadings, plaintiffs would have to list “all places and persons” they had visited and all persons who visited their home during the 14 days before they suffered symptoms of COVID-19.

They would have to explain specifically why they believed that none of those persons or places were the cause of their infection. They would have to submit “proof” of the employer’s “particular state of mind.”

What requirements would employers have to meet to be immune from a lawsuit or from any enforcement action by a federal, state or local regulator? Not many.

They’d have to show that they had been “exploring options” to comply with federal employment law, or had determined that the risk of harm to public health or the health of employees could not be “reduced or eliminated by reasonably modifying policies, practices, or procedures.”

In other words, an employer could exempt itself from federal labor law by examining its “options” or deciding that maintaining a safe workplace was just too darned hard to achieve. If a business issued or posted a written policy on limiting transmission of the coronavirus, that would be enough to achieve immunity from lawsuits.

“If a business printed out a [Centers for Disease Control] guideline and called it a policy, voila, they get a presumption they made reasonable effort,” observes Max Kennerly, a Philadelphia plaintiffs’ attorney who examined the GOP measure in detail and posted his concerns on Twitter.

But the measure also says that a lack of a written policy can’t be held against the business in court.

The measure incorporates another item on the GOP’s wish list of litigation obstacles: a limitation on damages. It says that plaintiffs can only collect for actual damages unless they can show “willful misconduct” by the employer, and that even in that case punitive damages can’t exceed actual damages.

This is a familiar stratagem aimed at making it uneconomic to bring so-called tort lawsuits. Plaintiffs’ lawyers typically work on contingency arrangements — they shoulder the costs of a lawsuit with the expectation that they’ll cover those costs, plus a profit, from a jury’s punitive award if they win.

Limiting punitive awards means that in many cases there won’t be enough money even to break even, much less earn a living. Ergo, tort lawyers will be loath to take COVID cases. For the GOP, this is mission accomplished.

The most obnoxious provision of the GOP proposal is one that shifts the liability in COVID cases from the employer to employee. This provision allows employers to sue employees or their representatives for bringing a claim for a COVID infection and offering to settle out of court.

Most specifically, the measure mentions “demand letters.” These are communications to a prospective defendant setting forth the facts of the claim, evidence assembled by the plaintiff, a reckoning of the potential damages and a statement of how much the plaintiff would accept to make the case go away. Here’s a sample letter published by the San Francisco law firm Rouda Feder Tietjen & McGuinn.

These documents are often designed as an opening brief in a negotiation; since neither side in an injury case really wants to go to trial, they make sense. The GOP bill would make anyone offering to settle, either through a demand letter or otherwise, liable to be sued for damages if the case they’re making is “meritless.” That’s another term that’s undefined in the measure.

Unlike the limitation on damages elsewhere in the bill, by the way, the punitive damages that can be awarded to employers bringing these lawsuits aren’t capped.

The measure also gives the attorney general the right to bring his own lawsuit in such cases. As a result, Kennerly observes, Atty. Gen. William Barr would get the right “to sue unions, labor activists, lawyers, doctors — everyone involved in coronavirus claims.”

So let’s not pretend that the Republicans have the welfare or health of working Americans at heart. They may talk about the virtues of work and the need to get workers back on the job for their own health and that of the economy.

The “SAFE AT WORK Act” proves with every line that they’re lying. Democrats on Capitol Hill should draw their own red line against it, and not budge an inch.


Please Donate


Quack President promoting Quack Doctor. MA.


Dickens Olewe – BBC News

July 29, 2020, 12:20 PM


Stella Immanuel – the doctor behind unproven coronavirus cure claim

Stella Immanuel, a doctor at the centre of a controversy over unproven and potentially dangerous claims that an anti-malaria drug can treat Covid-19, is no stranger to conspiracy theories.

Facebook and Twitter have taken down the viral video in which she appears, saying it violates their policies about misinformation – but not before it was retweeted by Donald Trump and one of his sons.

The US president defended himself, saying he found Dr Immanuel, who was born in Cameroon and is based in the Texan city of Houston, “very impressive”.

“She said that she had tremendous success with hundreds of different patients, I thought her voice was an important voice but I know nothing about her,” he said on Tuesday.

Dr Immanuel, who is also a Christian pastor, gave a speech on the steps of the US Supreme Court in Washington, captured in a video first published by right-wing website Breitbart on Monday.


‘Don’t leave Africa behind in coronavirus battle’

Along with other medics from a group called America’s Frontline Doctors, she said that Americans were being denied a potential cure for Covid-19.

“Nobody needs to get sick. This virus has a cure – it is called hydroxychloroquine, I have treated over 350 patients and not had one death,” said Dr Immanuel.

Despite some early studies raising hopes that the drug could be used to cure coronavirus, one subsequent larger scale trial has shown it is not effective as a treatment.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has halted its trials, saying it doesn’t reduce death rates in patients with coronavirus.

Last month, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cautioned against using the drug to treat coronavirus patients, following reports of “serious heart rhythm problems” and other health issues.

And Dr Anthony Fauci, a leading member of the White House coronavirus task force, has reiterated these views.

“We know that every single good study – and by good study I mean randomised control study in which the data are firm and believable – has shown that hydroxychloroquine is not effective in the treatment of Covid-19,” he told the BBC on Wednesday.

But Dr Immanuel has insisted taking hydroxychloroquine is not harmful because it is widely taken in her home country of Cameroon, where malaria is endemic.

Witches and demons

Born in 1965, Dr Immanuel graduated with a medical degree from the University of Calabar in neighbouring Nigeria – and has a valid doctor’s licence, according to the website of the Texas Medical Board.

Hydroxychloroquine has long been used as a treatment for malaria

She is also a pastor and the founder of Fire Power Ministries in Houston, a platform she has used to promote other conspiracies about the medical profession.

Her sermons are available on a YouTube account set up in 2009.

Five years ago, she alleged that alien DNA was being used in medical treatments, and that scientists were cooking up a vaccine to prevent people from being religious.

Some of her other claims include blaming medical conditions on witches and demons – a common enough belief among some evangelical Christians – though she says they have sex with people in a dream world.

“They turn into a woman and then they sleep with the man and collect his sperm… then they turn into the man and they sleep with a man and deposit the sperm and reproduce more of themselves,” she said during a sermon in 2013.

Another issue that Dr Immanuel targets is gay marriage, saying it can result in adults marrying children, according to the Daily Beast.

She also offers a prayer to remove a generational curse, originally received from an ancestor, but transmitted through placenta, the news website’s profile of her says.

‘Jesus will shut Facebook’

In her latest video posted on Twitter on Tuesday, she asks patients she says she has cured of Covid-19 to come forward.

“If you don’t speak up we are getting trashed,” she says, encouraging them to use a hashtag when they post their video messages.

Her tweet has had more than 27,000 retweets.

After Facebook took down the America’s Frontline Doctors’ video on Tuesday, she declared that Jesus Christ would destroy the social media giant’s servers if her videos were not restored to the platform.

Facebook has not reported an interruption on its services.

Who are America’s Frontline Doctors?

It is a collection of physicians critical of the scientific consensus around the Covid-19 pandemic. The event on Monday was backed by the Tea Party Patriots, a conservative organisation seeking to re-elect President Trump.

The doctors believe neither masks nor shutdowns are necessary to fight the spread of coronavirus.

The group’s founder, Simone Gold, organised a letter to Mr Trump calling for an end to lockdown measures in May.

Participants were encouraged to seek out interviews with social media influencers, as this was determined to be the best way to reach Americans.

Ralph Norman, a Republican member of the House of Representatives, was standing alongside the doctors when they delivered their news conference.

The debate has been increasingly dividing Americans along political lines, with proponents of hydroxychloroquine pointing to President Trump’s support of it while accusing critics of covering up its potential effectiveness.


Please Donate

Another COVID denier placing blame elsewhere-good luck on his disproved method of treatment. MA.
James Walker  
Representative Louie Gohmert suggested that wearing a face covering may have somehow led to him becoming infected with the novel coronavirus, despite repeated refusals to wear a mask.

a man wearing a suit and tie: Rep. Louie Gohmert adjusts his face mask during a House Judiciary Committee markup on Capitol Hill on June 17, 2020 in Washington, DC.© Kevin Dietsch-Pool/Getty Images Rep. Louie Gohmert adjusts his face mask during a House Judiciary Committee markup on Capitol Hill on June 17, 2020 in Washington, DC.In a clip posted to social media by NBC News producer Charlie Gile, the Texas Republican is heard arguing that COVID-19 may have somehow got trapped in his mask and led to him becoming infected with the disease.

The congressman also said predictions of his demise after following news of his asymptomatic coronavirus diagnosis were “very premature.”

Speaking to the KETK local news station, Gohmert said: “I can’t help but wonder if by keeping a mask on and keeping it in place if I might have put some of the virus onto the mask and breathed it in. I don’t know.

“But I got it, we’ll see what happens from here. The reports of my demise are very premature.”

The Texas representative said in June that he would only wear a mask when he was diagnosed with COVID-19 after CNN asked why he had not been wearing one on the House floor.

“I keep being tested and I don’t have it,” he told the network at the time. “So I’m not afraid of you, but if I get it I’ll wear a mask.”

Footage posted by The Hill reporter Olivia Beavers on Wednesday showed Rep. Gohmert walking into Attorney General William Barr’s House Judiciary Committee hearing on Tuesday without wearing a mask. He was close to the administration official at the time.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend that face masks be worn by everyone in public, stressing that wearing a face covering can prevent a person from spreading COVID-19 to others around them.

“Cloth face coverings may help prevent people who have COVID-19 from spreading the virus to others,” the CDC says. “Wearing a cloth face covering will help protect people around you, including those at higher risk of severe illness from COVID-19 and workers who frequently come into close contact with other people (e.g., in stores and restaurants).”

Gohmert was diagnosed with COVID-19 after testing positive in a White House screening test ahead of a scheduled flight to Texas on Wednesday morning.

Speaking to Fox News about his diagnosis, the representative said he planned to treat it with hydroxychloroquine, despite the World Heath Organization and CDC refuting that the anti-malaria drug or any other drug is a known cure for the disease.

“I got a text just before I came on [Fox News] from a friend doctor who just found out he had it, and he started the regimen too—zinc, azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine. And that will start in a day or two, so thank you,” Gohmert said.

Newsweek has contacted Rep. Gohmert’s office for comment and will update this article with any response.


Please Donate

A case can be easily made for the idea that this is the most divided administration and Congress since? With the advent of TOTUS, it appears that GOP  (aka Trump) party loyalty is more important than representing all of the people in their respective districts. It is particularly evident in the GOP (save a few). Rather than act in the interest of  their districts these folks have sided with the miscreant administration against the interests of the people  who voted for them. The rampant self service of this Congress is a disgrace and an affront to the population of the United States. It is sad  that we have an administration that is essentially a criminal enterprise abetted by the same people who persuaded us to vote for them with the promise of good government. The actions over the past 3 plus years by this administration have shown how little our representatives care about the voters no matter what they state in public. The crime is that these representatives elected by the people based on what they promised never intended to fulfil any of the promises made during the run for office. Not all voters are liberal, conservative or any other labels, what we have have is a diverse population with  many opinions and beliefs. Unfortunately some of us in frustration fall into the vacuum of  “label” space. Bear in mind that facts are always facts and only change when proven false.


Please Donate

The stable genius has once again proven his inability to lead, in an effort to bolster his unfounded belief in the efficacy of a debunked Corona Virus treatment. His backing of a “voodoo” Doctor has verified his desperation in looking good to the voters. MA

The doctor in a COVID-19 disinformation video endorsed by Trump belongs to a fringe Tea Party-backed group of medics whose founder said the virus is not a major threat

Dr Immanuel
A still from a video showing Dr. Stella Immanuel speaking with other members of a group called America’s Frontline Doctors. 
  • Dr. Stella Immanuel, who promoted an unproven COVID-19 treatment in a video shared by President Donald Trump this week, is a member of a controversial Tea Party-backed group of medics.
  • The group, America’s Frontline Doctors, has called for the lifting of lockdown restrictions and criticized measures to slow the spread of the disease.
  • Its founder, Dr. Simone Gold, told the AP in May that there was “no scientific basis that the average American should be concerned” about COVID-19.
  • The group is backed by Tea Party Patriots, a conservative group that has supported protests against lockdown measures.

Dr. Stella Immanuel, who appeared in a controversial video promoting an unproven COVID-19 treatment, is a member of a group of pro-Trump medics who have for months been pushing misinformation about the virus.

In the video, clips of which were shared this week by President Donald Trump, Immanuel appears at a news conference outside the Supreme Court with other members of the group, America’s Frontline Doctors, and GOP Rep. Ralph Norman. The members promote the drug hydroxychloroquine as a preventive treatment and a cure for COVID-19.

The Food and Drug Administration has said that hydroxychloroquine is not an effective COVID-19 treatment and that it should not be used for coronavirus patients because of a risk of dangerous heart problems.

The founder of America’s Frontline Doctors, who also appears in the video, has been a vocal critic of measures to slow the spread of COVID-19 and said in May that most Americans need not worry about it. Immanuel has also questioned the effectiveness of wearing masks to stop the spread of the disease — despite mounting evidence that it is one of the best protective measures people can take.

The Daily Beast reported on Tuesday on Immanuel’s other outlandish claims, including that sex dreams involving demons cause illnesses and that alien DNA is used in medications.

The hydroxychloroquine video was shared widely on social media, and the right-wing site Breitbart promoted it. The president’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., had his Twitter account temporarily limited for sharing it; the site said it violated its rules against promoting coronavirus misinformation. Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube also removed the video.

The press conference that the medics spoke at was hosted by Tea Party Patriots, a right-wing nonprofit group that backed protests against lockdown measures in several US states earlier this year. The group has raised $24 million in the past six years to support Republican candidates and causes, NBC News reported.

America’s Frontline Doctors was started by Dr. Simone Gold, whose Twitter profile describes her as a “doctor-lawyer-writer-mom” in Los Angeles. On social media she has argued against lockdown measures.

The Associated Press reported in May that Republican operatives were recruiting medics to argue in favor of reopening the US economy as soon as possible — while public-health experts called for phased, gradual reopenings to prevent a resurgence of the virus — and that Gold was the first signatory of 400 on a letter calling for an economic reopening.

She told the AP that there was “no scientific basis that the average American should be concerned” about COVID-19. She denied that she working in coordination with the Trump campaign.

She did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Wednesday.

As of Wednesday, the US had reported nearly 150,000 COVID-19 deaths.


Please Donate

Michael Hiltzik

Social Security advocates who breathed a sigh of relief when Senate Republicans rejected President Trump’s demand to place a payroll cut in the latest coronavirus relief bill exhaled too soon.

The version unveiled Monday by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) incorporates a provision even more menacing for Social Security (and Medicare too).

This is the so-called TRUST Act, which was crafted by Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) and has been bubbling along in Capitol Hill corridors since last year.

They are plotting to use the cover of the pandemic to slash Social Security.

Nancy Altman, Social Security Works

The TRUST Act is a device to tamper with Social Security behind closed doors and in a way that would allow senators and members of Congress to wreak havoc on the program without leaving fingerprints.

The TRUST Act is now a provision of the HEALS Act — the Senate GOP’s opening bid on coronavirus relief. So it’s timely to give it a close look.

We’ll start by pointing out that Social Security advocates are universally opposed to the measure, which they see, correctly, as an expression of longtime conservative hostility to the program.

“In the midst of a catastrophic pandemic,” says Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works, Republicans “should be focused on protecting seniors, essential workers, and the unemployed. Instead, they are plotting to use the cover of the pandemic to slash Social Security.”

The TRUST Act — the acronym stands portentously for “Time to Rescue United States’ Trusts” — would work by ginning up a sense of near-term emergency about the finances of Social Security, Medicare and the federal highway trust fund.

The crisis is largely imaginary, for the Social Security trust fund, by far the biggest of the reserves with $2.9 trillion today, is not in danger of exhaustion for at least 15 years. Nevertheless, the TRUST Act would require the Treasury to issue a report on the status of the funds within 45 days of the measure’s passage.

Congress would then appoint bipartisan committees mandated to “draft legislation that restores solvency and otherwise improves each trust fund program,” as Romney has described the process. Whatever proposals these panels produced would be fast-tracked in Congress and not subject to amendment. (The bills would need 60 votes in the Senate.)

On the surface, this seems almost innocuous — so much so that the act has attracted co-sponsorships from a handful of inattentive and somewhat conservative Democrats, including Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona. They should pay better attention.

Romney has stated that his model for the TRUST Act is the Simpson-Bowles fiscal commission empaneled by Barack Obama in 2010. That should be a dead giveaway of the dangers.

That commission, which was headed by former Sen. Alan K. Simpson (R-Wyo.) and Erskine Bowles, an ex-investment banker claiming Democratic Party cred from a stint as President Clinton’s chief of staff, was a mess. Its goal was to produce some putatively bipartisan recommendations for deficit reduction, but it was unable to come up with any that could garner a majority vote, so it never actually produced any recommendations.

The proposals that did surface were generally good for the wealthy, not so good for the middle class or low-income Americans. Matters weren’t helped by Simpson’s ignorance about Social Security, which he expressed in unbelievably crass language — at one point referring to the program, which provides more than half the income for two-thirds of all American retirees, as “a milk cow with 310 million tits.”

Since the TRUST panels’ deliberations will be offered to Congress on a take-it-or-leave-it basis, the process rather serves what the GOP refers to as the need to gut Social Security “behind closed doors,” to quote an unwittingly revealing line uttered last year by Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa).

It should be obvious that if fiscal changes in Social Security are favorable for the broad public — say by raising payroll taxes on wealthier Americans who currently get a break on them — they don’t have to be crafted behind closed doors or outsourced to a committee that absolves most senators and representatives of responsibility.

If they involve cutting benefits, a step that would harm the majority of retirees and rank-and-file workers, then it pays to do the work in secret.

So it shouldn’t come as any surprise that the biggest fans of the TRUST Act are water-carriers for richer Americans. They include the Committee for a Responsible Budget, which was supported for years by the late hedge fund billionaire Pete Peterson, by both Simpson and Bowles, and by the Koch-financed organization Americans for Prosperity.

One shouldn’t be fooled by these TRUST Act advocates’ assertions that Social Security needs to be “fixed.” Down deep, they mean “fixed” in the sense that one “fixes” a cat or the Mafia “fixes” a snitch. Democrats on Capitol Hill should keep their wits about them, and “fix” the TRUST Act before it goes any further.


Please Donate


See article on:
Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., defended controversial comments he made over the weekend after coming under fire for claiming that America’s Founding Fathers considered slavery a “necessary evil.”

Tom Cotton wearing a suit and tie: Sen. Tom Cotton attends a press conference announcing Senate Republicans' opposition to D.C. statehood on Capitol Hill July 1, 2020 in Washington.© Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images Sen. Tom Cotton attends a press conference announcing Senate Republicans’ opposition to D.C. statehood on Capitol Hill July 1, 2020 in Washington.

Cotton attempted to explain comments he made during an interview with the Arkansas Democratic-Gazette, in which he criticized The New York Times over an initiative that would reframe U.S. history lessons by marking the country’s founding as 1619, the year the first enslaved Africans arrived in Virginia. “This is the definition of fake news,” Cotton tweeted Sunday. “I said that *the Founders viewed slavery as a necessary evil* and described how they put the evil institution on the path to extinction, a point frequently made by Lincoln.”

Cotton faced fierce backlash over the weekend after the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette published an article about the senator’s efforts to target the Times initiative.

“We have to study the history of slavery and its role and impact on the development of our country because otherwise we can’t understand our country,” Cotton said in the interview. “As the Founding Fathers said, it was the necessary evil upon which the union was built, but the union was built in a way, as Lincoln said, to put slavery on the course to its ultimate extinction.”

In response, Cotton, a strong ally of President Donald Trump, said he’s working on legislation that would withhold federal funding from schools that implemented the 1619 curriculum.

Cotton said he drafted the “Saving American History Act of 2020”, claiming that America was founded on the ideals of the Declaration of Independence rather than on the history of enslaved people, which began more than 100 years before the Declaration was signed. His bill would also make schools that teach the 1619 Project ineligible for federal professional-development grants.

MORE: en. Tom Cotton bill would prohibit federal funding for teaching The 1619 ProjectThe New York Times’s 1619 Project is a racially divisive, revisionist account of history that denies the noble principles of freedom and equality on which our nation was founded. Not a single cent of federal funding should go to indoctrinate young Americans with this left-wing garbage,” Cotton said in a release.

“Curriculum is a matter for local decisions, and if local left-wing school boards want to fill their children’s heads with anti-American rot, that’s their regrettable choice,” he told the paper. “But they ought not to benefit from federal tax dollars to teach America’s children to hate America.”

Cotton called the proposed reinterpretation “a distortion of American history,” according to the paper. He dismissed the 1619 Project as “left-wing propaganda” and “revisionist history at its worst,” the paper reported.

MORE: Backlash after Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton pushes Trump to invoke Insurrection Act in NYT op-ed: ‘Send in the Troops’Cotton said he doesn’t, personally, support the concept that slavery was a “necessary evil,” but Times reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones pushed back on those claims via Twitter, saying, “You said, quote: ‘As the Founding Fathers said, it was the necessary evil upon which the union was built.’ That ‘as’ denotes agreement. Further, if by path to extinction you mean growing the enslaved (population) from 500k to 4 million at Civil War, a war fought over slavery, then, ok.”

Cotton responded to Hannah-Jones’ tweet on Sunday, calling it “more lies from the debunked 1619 Project.”

“Describing the *views of the Founders* and how they put the evil institution on a path to extinction, a point frequently made by Lincoln, is not endorsing or justifying slavery,” he tweeted. “No surprise that the 1619 Project can’t get facts right.”

ABC News’ Bobby Gehlen contributed to this report.


Please Donate


Taken from another land

Put into Bondage under the whip

Prevented from Access to education

Made to sit in the back of Public Transportation

Made to drink from separate fountains

Could not eat in Restaurants- except outside or take to go (even if we were the cooks)

Made to live in substandard housing and neighborhoods

Cheated at banks and stores with no redress

Hung on a whim

Land taken just because

Last hired first fired

Paid less even though more qualified

Hired or admitted (to schools) on a quota system

Restricted to certain neighborhoods in renting or buying

Restricted to menial jobs in the service of a country that barely acknowledged us

All of this not just  then but NOW!


Please Donate

So…it was OK to steal people from their homeland to work for nothing in another country for 400 years., then relegate their existence to the trash pile of history. This is an elected official who is supposed to represent EVERYONE in his electoral district.MA

07/27/2020 12:23 am ET Updated 6 hours ago

Slavery “was the necessary evil upon which the union was built,” the Arkansas senator said in an interview.

By Mary Papenfuss

Controversial Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) called slavery the nation’s “necessary evil” in a new interview published Sunday.

The senator told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette that slavery was the evil ”upon which the union was built.”

He made the stunning comment while discussing how slavery should be taught in schools.

“We have to study the history of slavery and its role and impact on the development of our country because otherwise we can’t understand our country,” Cotton said. “As the Founding Fathers said, it was the necessary evil upon which the union was built.”

Cotton also noted that the “union was built in a way, as Lincoln said, to put slavery on the course to its ultimate extinction.”

Instead of portraying America as “an irredeemably corrupt, rotten and racist country,” the nation should be viewed “as an imperfect and flawed land, but the greatest and noblest country in the history of mankind,” he added.

Cotton delved into his twisted view of the history of slavery as he discussed his bill — the Saving American History Act of 2020 — that would cut off federal professional development funds from any school district that teaches a curriculum linked to the 1619 Project.

The 1619 Project — which refers to the year slaves were brought from Africa to colonial America — was a series of pieces by writers for the New York Times Magazine that examines the American history of slavery and its critical role in the nation’s founding.

Nikole Hannah-Jones, a Pulitzer Prize-winning Times reporter and director of the 1619 Project, blasted Cotton’s comments justifying slavery, “where it was legal to rape, torture and sell human beings for profit.” It’s “hard to imagine what cannot be justified if it is a means to an end,” she added.


Ida Bae Wells



If chattel slavery — heritable, generational, permanent, race-based slavery where it was legal to rape, torture, and sell human beings for profit — were a “necessary evil” as @TomCottonAR says, it’s hard to imagine what cannot be justified if it is a means to an end.

AR Democrat-Gazette


Bill by Sen. Tom Cotton targets curriculum on slavery…

1:36 PM · Jul 26, 2020


5K people are Tweeting about this



Cotton shot back in a tweet — retweeted by President Donald Trump — that his comments were not “justifying or endorsing slavery” because he claimed to be merely “describing the views of the Founders.”


Tom Cotton



US Senate candidate, AR


More lies from the debunked 1619 Project. Describing the *views of the Founders* and how they put the evil institution on a path to extinction, a point frequently made by Lincoln, is not endorsing or justifying slavery. No surprise that the 1619 Project can’t get facts right.

Ida Bae Wells


If chattel slavery — heritable, generational, permanent, race-based slavery where it was legal to rape, torture, and sell human beings for profit — were a “necessary evil” as @TomCottonAR says, it’s hard to imagine what cannot be justified if it is a means to an end.…

3:33 PM · Jul 26, 2020


7K people are Tweeting about this



Ida Bae Wells



Were the Founders right or wrong, @TomCottonAR, when they called slavery a “necessary evil upon which the Union was built”? Because either you agree with their assessment of slavery as necessary or you admit they were lying and it was just an evil and dishonorable choice. Which?

Tom Cotton


US Senate candidate, AR


More lies from the debunked 1619 Project. Describing the *views of the Founders* and how they put the evil institution on a path to extinction, a point frequently made by Lincoln, is not endorsing or justifying slavery. No surprise that the 1619 Project can’t get facts right.…

5:52 PM · Jul 26, 2020


Ida Bae Wells



Replying to @nhannahjones

Actual historian and scholar of slavery.…

Joshua D. Rothman


Contra Sen. Cotton, slavery was neither a “necessary” evil nor destined for “ultimate extinction.” Slavery was a choice defended or accepted by most white Americans for generations, and it expanded dramatically between the Revolution and the Civil War.…

6:22 PM · Jul 26, 2020


388 people are Tweeting about this




In his interview with the Gazette, Cotton criticized the 1619 Project as “left-wing propaganda,” and “factually, historically flawed.”

“Even a penny is too much to go to the 1619 Project in our public schools,” Cotton said. “The New York Times should not be teaching American history to our kids.”

If “local, left-wing school boards want to fill their children’s heads with anti-American rot, that’s their regrettable choice,” said Cotton. “But they ought not to benefit from federal tax dollars to teach America’s children to hate America.”


Please Donate

Apparently the 1960’s have been roiling in the country for years as this current administration has in essence “released the Kraken”. The culmination of the life experiences of TOTUS has influenced his administration and drawn the baser elements of our society to it. Somehow  the miscreants have coalesced into an administration and Congress ( in part) which mirrors some Dictatorial governments.

Our Direction is clearly stated below:

“Do not get lost in a sea of despair. Be hopeful, be optimistic. Our struggle is not the struggle of a day, a week, a month, or a year, it is the struggle of a lifetime. Never, ever be afraid to make some noise and get in good trouble, necessary trouble.” — John Lewis


Please Donate

%d bloggers like this: