DC's Black Lives Matter Plaza to be renamed after GOP rep introduces bill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump plaza

Here's a radical idea. How about nothing political for a change?

This is the way.

There is no appropriate place for racial content in public spaces.

You are missing the forest for the trees. Per update yesterday, they want all art gone under the false guise of "driving safety."

Does a painting that involves any POC mean racial content? You bet it does in the eyes of this administration. Maybe you too. Eff you all. We going to get rid of the African American museum while we're at it? Must be causing crashes galore.

But also, perhaps redirect some energy to getting MD and VA to have reciprocity for their hundreds of thousands of dollars in driving offenses in DC? If they actually cared about making DC safe and "law and order," this is what they would be doing rather than just making Black people in Chocolate City feel unwelcome.

I don't know. I imagine a fair number of the public schools students have to slow down to read whatever slogan has been painted on the road. That should improve public safety.

Do you want to get rid of the African American and Native American museums while you're at it?

Irrelevant. Nobody has to go inside those to view their messaging. But, I imagine you'd react differently to a White People Museum for some reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's long past due. What an appallingly divisive, pandering, puerile gesture that was. "Look at D.C.! We don't support law enforcement, love criminals, and see everything through a racial lens".

Thanks for sharing the racist a-hole interpretation of "BLM". You are probably anti"CRT" and anti"DEI" as well.

Both CRT and DEI are inherently racist.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion is not a "Black and white" issue. DEI is also:
1) Lactation rooms in workplaces
2) Maternity/paternity leave
3) Accessibility considerations for people with different abilities at events and in public spaces
4) Federal holidays centered on religious accommodation (ahem, Christianity)
5) Books available in large print and in Braille and in audiobook formats at your local library
6) Services and special considerations for veterans

Which of these things are you opposed to? Be specific.

Generally speaking, my observation is people don't have a problem with diversity (broadly defined, and not just limited to race and gender) or inclusion. What the have a problem with is equity, particularly they way it's defined and implemented by those in the industry, so to speak. That's where it comes off the rails, IMO.

But you didn’t say “I have a problem with equity the way it is implemented in many cases.” You said DEI is inherently racist. That’s what you said, and now you’re backpedaling, because oopsie, maternity/paternity leave FOR ALL, services and considerations FOR ALL VETERANS, and accessibility FOR ALL persons with different abilities is not “inherently racist.”

Say what you mean, mean what you say.

I know this an an anonymous forum, so it's hard to tell who posts what. For the record, I'm the poster who said people don't like the "equity" bit, but I'm not the person who said it's all inherently racist. I'm not sure how the accessibility and veterans stuff suddenly came into the picture, but it's the Kendi-style antiracism lunacy that is turning people off, not making sure we enforce ADA or civil right laws that have been on the books for a half century.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump plaza

Here's a radical idea. How about nothing political for a change?

This is the way.

There is no appropriate place for racial content in public spaces.

You are missing the forest for the trees. Per update yesterday, they want all art gone under the false guise of "driving safety."

Does a painting that involves any POC mean racial content? You bet it does in the eyes of this administration. Maybe you too. Eff you all. We going to get rid of the African American museum while we're at it? Must be causing crashes galore.

But also, perhaps redirect some energy to getting MD and VA to have reciprocity for their hundreds of thousands of dollars in driving offenses in DC? If they actually cared about making DC safe and "law and order," this is what they would be doing rather than just making Black people in Chocolate City feel unwelcome.

I don't know. I imagine a fair number of the public schools students have to slow down to read whatever slogan has been painted on the road. That should improve public safety.

Do you want to get rid of the African American and Native American museums while you're at it?

Nice try & stupid, obnoxious logical fallacy.

No it isn't. Bowser complied with the BLM removal and now they upped the ante to ALL art because of driving safety.

It depends upon the art. If its removing a mural.of black children playing in a predominantly black neighborhood, you probably have a point.
If its obvious political messaging, you don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump plaza

Here's a radical idea. How about nothing political for a change?

This is the way.

There is no appropriate place for racial content in public spaces.

You are missing the forest for the trees. Per update yesterday, they want all art gone under the false guise of "driving safety."

Does a painting that involves any POC mean racial content? You bet it does in the eyes of this administration. Maybe you too. Eff you all. We going to get rid of the African American museum while we're at it? Must be causing crashes galore.

But also, perhaps redirect some energy to getting MD and VA to have reciprocity for their hundreds of thousands of dollars in driving offenses in DC? If they actually cared about making DC safe and "law and order," this is what they would be doing rather than just making Black people in Chocolate City feel unwelcome.

I don't know. I imagine a fair number of the public schools students have to slow down to read whatever slogan has been painted on the road. That should improve public safety.

Do you want to get rid of the African American and Native American museums while you're at it?

Irrelevant. Nobody has to go inside those to view their messaging. But, I imagine you'd react differently to a White People Museum for some reason.

White people ends up being Italian heritage or Irish or Swedish or whatever. So nope, not offensive either.

But African American is apparently offensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's long past due. What an appallingly divisive, pandering, puerile gesture that was. "Look at D.C.! We don't support law enforcement, love criminals, and see everything through a racial lens".

Thanks for sharing the racist a-hole interpretation of "BLM". You are probably anti"CRT" and anti"DEI" as well.

Both CRT and DEI are inherently racist.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion is not a "Black and white" issue. DEI is also:
1) Lactation rooms in workplaces
2) Maternity/paternity leave
3) Accessibility considerations for people with different abilities at events and in public spaces
4) Federal holidays centered on religious accommodation (ahem, Christianity)
5) Books available in large print and in Braille and in audiobook formats at your local library
6) Services and special considerations for veterans

Which of these things are you opposed to? Be specific.

Generally speaking, my observation is people don't have a problem with diversity (broadly defined, and not just limited to race and gender) or inclusion. What the have a problem with is equity, particularly they way it's defined and implemented by those in the industry, so to speak. That's where it comes off the rails, IMO.

But you didn’t say “I have a problem with equity the way it is implemented in many cases.” You said DEI is inherently racist. That’s what you said, and now you’re backpedaling, because oopsie, maternity/paternity leave FOR ALL, services and considerations FOR ALL VETERANS, and accessibility FOR ALL persons with different abilities is not “inherently racist.”

Say what you mean, mean what you say.

I know this an an anonymous forum, so it's hard to tell who posts what. For the record, I'm the poster who said people don't like the "equity" bit, but I'm not the person who said it's all inherently racist. I'm not sure how the accessibility and veterans stuff suddenly came into the picture, but it's the Kendi-style antiracism lunacy that is turning people off, not making sure we enforce ADA or civil right laws that have been on the books for a half century.

Too bad for you that you fell for the Fox News talking points that “DEI is bad,” thinking “DEI” means simply Black people “taking” jobs that belong to white people. Too bad for you that when someone points out that DIVERSITY, EQUITY and INCLUSION also means things that you, personally, benefit from, such as lactation rooms in workplaces, wheelchair ramps, allowances for service animals, and different formats of books and multimedia materials at the library. Oops, don’t you look stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's long past due. What an appallingly divisive, pandering, puerile gesture that was. "Look at D.C.! We don't support law enforcement, love criminals, and see everything through a racial lens".

Thanks for sharing the racist a-hole interpretation of "BLM". You are probably anti"CRT" and anti"DEI" as well.

Both CRT and DEI are inherently racist.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion is not a "Black and white" issue. DEI is also:
1) Lactation rooms in workplaces
2) Maternity/paternity leave
3) Accessibility considerations for people with different abilities at events and in public spaces
4) Federal holidays centered on religious accommodation (ahem, Christianity)
5) Books available in large print and in Braille and in audiobook formats at your local library
6) Services and special considerations for veterans

Which of these things are you opposed to? Be specific.

Generally speaking, my observation is people don't have a problem with diversity (broadly defined, and not just limited to race and gender) or inclusion. What the have a problem with is equity, particularly they way it's defined and implemented by those in the industry, so to speak. That's where it comes off the rails, IMO.

But you didn’t say “I have a problem with equity the way it is implemented in many cases.” You said DEI is inherently racist. That’s what you said, and now you’re backpedaling, because oopsie, maternity/paternity leave FOR ALL, services and considerations FOR ALL VETERANS, and accessibility FOR ALL persons with different abilities is not “inherently racist.”

Say what you mean, mean what you say.

I know this an an anonymous forum, so it's hard to tell who posts what. For the record, I'm the poster who said people don't like the "equity" bit, but I'm not the person who said it's all inherently racist. I'm not sure how the accessibility and veterans stuff suddenly came into the picture, but it's the Kendi-style antiracism lunacy that is turning people off, not making sure we enforce ADA or civil right laws that have been on the books for a half century.

Too bad for you that you fell for the Fox News talking points that “DEI is bad,” thinking “DEI” means simply Black people “taking” jobs that belong to white people. Too bad for you that when someone points out that DIVERSITY, EQUITY and INCLUSION also means things that you, personally, benefit from, such as lactation rooms in workplaces, wheelchair ramps, allowances for service animals, and different formats of books and multimedia materials at the library. Oops, don’t you look stupid.

You really need to know that this sort of disingenuousness harms the cause and is why the average voter dismisses Trump's constant lying as normal or even rhetorical equity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump plaza

Here's a radical idea. How about nothing political for a change?

This is the way.

There is no appropriate place for racial content in public spaces.

Racist, I assume you mean? Otherwise what is "racial content?"

And again, most people who live in D.C. don't think Black Lives Matter is racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump plaza

Here's a radical idea. How about nothing political for a change?

This is the way.

There is no appropriate place for racial content in public spaces.

You are missing the forest for the trees. Per update yesterday, they want all art gone under the false guise of "driving safety."

Does a painting that involves any POC mean racial content? You bet it does in the eyes of this administration. Maybe you too. Eff you all. We going to get rid of the African American museum while we're at it? Must be causing crashes galore.

But also, perhaps redirect some energy to getting MD and VA to have reciprocity for their hundreds of thousands of dollars in driving offenses in DC? If they actually cared about making DC safe and "law and order," this is what they would be doing rather than just making Black people in Chocolate City feel unwelcome.

I don't know. I imagine a fair number of the public schools students have to slow down to read whatever slogan has been painted on the road. That should improve public safety.

Do you want to get rid of the African American and Native American museums while you're at it?

Nice try & stupid, obnoxious logical fallacy.

No it isn't. Bowser complied with the BLM removal and now they upped the ante to ALL art because of driving safety.

Who upped the ante? Can you send a link?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's long past due. What an appallingly divisive, pandering, puerile gesture that was. "Look at D.C.! We don't support law enforcement, love criminals, and see everything through a racial lens".

Thanks for sharing the racist a-hole interpretation of "BLM". You are probably anti"CRT" and anti"DEI" as well.

Both CRT and DEI are inherently racist.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion is not a "Black and white" issue. DEI is also:
1) Lactation rooms in workplaces
2) Maternity/paternity leave
3) Accessibility considerations for people with different abilities at events and in public spaces
4) Federal holidays centered on religious accommodation (ahem, Christianity)
5) Books available in large print and in Braille and in audiobook formats at your local library
6) Services and special considerations for veterans

Which of these things are you opposed to? Be specific.

Generally speaking, my observation is people don't have a problem with diversity (broadly defined, and not just limited to race and gender) or inclusion. What the have a problem with is equity, particularly they way it's defined and implemented by those in the industry, so to speak. That's where it comes off the rails, IMO.

But you didn’t say “I have a problem with equity the way it is implemented in many cases.” You said DEI is inherently racist. That’s what you said, and now you’re backpedaling, because oopsie, maternity/paternity leave FOR ALL, services and considerations FOR ALL VETERANS, and accessibility FOR ALL persons with different abilities is not “inherently racist.”

Say what you mean, mean what you say.

I know this an an anonymous forum, so it's hard to tell who posts what. For the record, I'm the poster who said people don't like the "equity" bit, but I'm not the person who said it's all inherently racist. I'm not sure how the accessibility and veterans stuff suddenly came into the picture, but it's the Kendi-style antiracism lunacy that is turning people off, not making sure we enforce ADA or civil right laws that have been on the books for a half century.

Too bad for you that you fell for the Fox News talking points that “DEI is bad,” thinking “DEI” means simply Black people “taking” jobs that belong to white people. Too bad for you that when someone points out that DIVERSITY, EQUITY and INCLUSION also means things that you, personally, benefit from, such as lactation rooms in workplaces, wheelchair ramps, allowances for service animals, and different formats of books and multimedia materials at the library. Oops, don’t you look stupid.

You really need to know that this sort of disingenuousness harms the cause and is why the average voter dismisses Trump's constant lying as normal or even rhetorical equity.

The kind of disingenuous where you willfully misunderstand what words and acronyms mean to fit your agenda and the talking points handed down to you from your favorite podcast bro?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's long past due. What an appallingly divisive, pandering, puerile gesture that was. "Look at D.C.! We don't support law enforcement, love criminals, and see everything through a racial lens".

Thanks for sharing the racist a-hole interpretation of "BLM". You are probably anti"CRT" and anti"DEI" as well.

Both CRT and DEI are inherently racist.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion is not a "Black and white" issue. DEI is also:
1) Lactation rooms in workplaces
2) Maternity/paternity leave
3) Accessibility considerations for people with different abilities at events and in public spaces
4) Federal holidays centered on religious accommodation (ahem, Christianity)
5) Books available in large print and in Braille and in audiobook formats at your local library
6) Services and special considerations for veterans

Which of these things are you opposed to? Be specific.

Generally speaking, my observation is people don't have a problem with diversity (broadly defined, and not just limited to race and gender) or inclusion. What the have a problem with is equity, particularly they way it's defined and implemented by those in the industry, so to speak. That's where it comes off the rails, IMO.

But you didn’t say “I have a problem with equity the way it is implemented in many cases.” You said DEI is inherently racist. That’s what you said, and now you’re backpedaling, because oopsie, maternity/paternity leave FOR ALL, services and considerations FOR ALL VETERANS, and accessibility FOR ALL persons with different abilities is not “inherently racist.”

Say what you mean, mean what you say.

I know this an an anonymous forum, so it's hard to tell who posts what. For the record, I'm the poster who said people don't like the "equity" bit, but I'm not the person who said it's all inherently racist. I'm not sure how the accessibility and veterans stuff suddenly came into the picture, but it's the Kendi-style antiracism lunacy that is turning people off, not making sure we enforce ADA or civil right laws that have been on the books for a half century.

Too bad for you that you fell for the Fox News talking points that “DEI is bad,” thinking “DEI” means simply Black people “taking” jobs that belong to white people. Too bad for you that when someone points out that DIVERSITY, EQUITY and INCLUSION also means things that you, personally, benefit from, such as lactation rooms in workplaces, wheelchair ramps, allowances for service animals, and different formats of books and multimedia materials at the library. Oops, don’t you look stupid.

You really need to know that this sort of disingenuousness harms the cause and is why the average voter dismisses Trump's constant lying as normal or even rhetorical equity.

The kind of disingenuous where you willfully misunderstand what words and acronyms mean to fit your agenda and the talking points handed down to you from your favorite podcast bro?

Um no. Equity versus equality is the issue at hand. You know this but don't care because, to be frank, you are no differerent than MAGA.

[Anonymous]

Lord, another maga busywork project that will easily be reversed in a couple of years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump plaza

Here's a radical idea. How about nothing political for a change?

This is the way.

There is no appropriate place for racial content in public spaces.

You are missing the forest for the trees. Per update yesterday, they want all art gone under the false guise of "driving safety."

Does a painting that involves any POC mean racial content? You bet it does in the eyes of this administration. Maybe you too. Eff you all. We going to get rid of the African American museum while we're at it? Must be causing crashes galore.

But also, perhaps redirect some energy to getting MD and VA to have reciprocity for their hundreds of thousands of dollars in driving offenses in DC? If they actually cared about making DC safe and "law and order," this is what they would be doing rather than just making Black people in Chocolate City feel unwelcome.

I don't know. I imagine a fair number of the public schools students have to slow down to read whatever slogan has been painted on the road. That should improve public safety.

Do you want to get rid of the African American and Native American museums while you're at it?

Nice try & stupid, obnoxious logical fallacy.

No it isn't. Bowser complied with the BLM removal and now they upped the ante to ALL art because of driving safety.

Who upped the ante? Can you send a link?

https://x.com/SegravesNBC4/status/1897780914706321435

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's long past due. What an appallingly divisive, pandering, puerile gesture that was. "Look at D.C.! We don't support law enforcement, love criminals, and see everything through a racial lens".

Thanks for sharing the racist a-hole interpretation of "BLM". You are probably anti"CRT" and anti"DEI" as well.

Both CRT and DEI are inherently racist.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion is not a "Black and white" issue. DEI is also:
1) Lactation rooms in workplaces
2) Maternity/paternity leave
3) Accessibility considerations for people with different abilities at events and in public spaces
4) Federal holidays centered on religious accommodation (ahem, Christianity)
5) Books available in large print and in Braille and in audiobook formats at your local library
6) Services and special considerations for veterans

Which of these things are you opposed to? Be specific.

Generally speaking, my observation is people don't have a problem with diversity (broadly defined, and not just limited to race and gender) or inclusion. What the have a problem with is equity, particularly they way it's defined and implemented by those in the industry, so to speak. That's where it comes off the rails, IMO.

But you didn’t say “I have a problem with equity the way it is implemented in many cases.” You said DEI is inherently racist. That’s what you said, and now you’re backpedaling, because oopsie, maternity/paternity leave FOR ALL, services and considerations FOR ALL VETERANS, and accessibility FOR ALL persons with different abilities is not “inherently racist.”

Say what you mean, mean what you say.

I know this an an anonymous forum, so it's hard to tell who posts what. For the record, I'm the poster who said people don't like the "equity" bit, but I'm not the person who said it's all inherently racist. I'm not sure how the accessibility and veterans stuff suddenly came into the picture, but it's the Kendi-style antiracism lunacy that is turning people off, not making sure we enforce ADA or civil right laws that have been on the books for a half century.

Too bad for you that you fell for the Fox News talking points that “DEI is bad,” thinking “DEI” means simply Black people “taking” jobs that belong to white people. Too bad for you that when someone points out that DIVERSITY, EQUITY and INCLUSION also means things that you, personally, benefit from, such as lactation rooms in workplaces, wheelchair ramps, allowances for service animals, and different formats of books and multimedia materials at the library. Oops, don’t you look stupid.

You really need to know that this sort of disingenuousness harms the cause and is why the average voter dismisses Trump's constant lying as normal or even rhetorical equity.

The kind of disingenuous where you willfully misunderstand what words and acronyms mean to fit your agenda and the talking points handed down to you from your favorite podcast bro?

You're making a 2020 argument in 2025, and it's just not making much sense. It's like someone still clinging that "Defund the Police" makes perfect sense, but people just don't understand what it really means. That ship has sailed, folks. Let's focus on the present, shall we?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump plaza

Here's a radical idea. How about nothing political for a change?

This is the way.

There is no appropriate place for racial content in public spaces.

You are missing the forest for the trees. Per update yesterday, they want all art gone under the false guise of "driving safety."

Does a painting that involves any POC mean racial content? You bet it does in the eyes of this administration. Maybe you too. Eff you all. We going to get rid of the African American museum while we're at it? Must be causing crashes galore.

But also, perhaps redirect some energy to getting MD and VA to have reciprocity for their hundreds of thousands of dollars in driving offenses in DC? If they actually cared about making DC safe and "law and order," this is what they would be doing rather than just making Black people in Chocolate City feel unwelcome.

I don't know. I imagine a fair number of the public schools students have to slow down to read whatever slogan has been painted on the road. That should improve public safety.

Do you want to get rid of the African American and Native American museums while you're at it?

Nice try & stupid, obnoxious logical fallacy.

No it isn't. Bowser complied with the BLM removal and now they upped the ante to ALL art because of driving safety.

Who upped the ante? Can you send a link?

https://x.com/SegravesNBC4/status/1897780914706321435

It's obviously the same play. One was a Congressional proposal and the other is an Executive demand for the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"A spokesperson for D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser confirmed to News4 that Black Lives Matter Plaza will be renamed."

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/black-lives-matter-plaza-being-renamed-after-gop-rep-introduced-bill/3858417/

This was one of the concessions Bowser made to Trump when she went to Mar a Lago to kiss the ring.

Great! Traffic is picking up in DC, we need the space/streets. That "plaza" was always an annoyance for every drive going through it.

Name change and a new mural won't change traffic you Dolt!

You wish it will be "repainted" that is the language that Bowser uses to fool naive people and avoid a huge outcry, but the Bill clearly says "remove"

"U.S. Rep. Andrew Clyde, a Republican from Georgia, introduced a bill on Monday that would withhold certain funds from the District if BLM Plaza wasn't removed."

https://www.axios.com/local/washington-dc/2025/03/04/black-lives-matter-plaza-removed-america-250

What the heck does that have to do with traffic. You missed the message.

In the end, it is about traffic:

"Another apparent shot at Black Lives Matter Plaza from Trump Administration. Secretary of Transportation sends @MayorBowser letter demanding report on “murals and other forms of artwork” on public roads. @nbcwashington"

https://x.com/SegravesNBC4/status/1897780914706321435