DCUM Weblog

Political topics again dominated the list of yesterday's most active threads. The most active thread overall yesterday was titled, "Do MAGA not realize that cancelling DEI will greatly affect women’s careers?", and was posted in the "Jobs and Careers" forum. The original poster linked to a story about Google dropping its diversity hiring program. This move is consistent with cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump's efforts to stop measures promoting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) within the federal government. The original poster argues that this will have a very negative effect on women's careers and wonders whether Trump supporters don't understand that or if they do understand it and simply want women to return to traditional roles. Many of those responding agree with the original poster that dropping DEI will negatively impact women. A number of those, perhaps most, even contend that ridding the workplace of women — at least in higher positions — is a goal of scrapping DEI. The argument that diversity initiatives have tended to primarily benefit White women has repeatedly come up in DCUM discussions. However, a number of the posters in this thread reject that notion. Some resent being pigeonholed as "DEI" hires and others believe that women have made gains due to their qualifications rather than DEI preferences. Part of the disagreement is due to varying perceptions of what construes "DEI". DEI is a fairly new term. Before it came into vogue, we had affirmative action and even before that various women's rights movements. Many women have come to age without a full understanding of the gains such efforts made. To them, the way things are is the way things have always been. They don't have fears about going back to an earlier era in which women had fewer rights. Moreover, DEI has come to refer to prioritizing racial and ethnic minorities rather than women. Many of the female posters in this thread see their competition as unqualified minorities rather than unqualified White men. Therefore, they welcome an end to DEI, not realizing that before women made the gains they have, qualified women often lost out to lesser-qualified White men. Many of the posters in this thread appear to be putting a lot of faith in the gains that women have made not being reversed. There is considerable evidence that their faith may be misplaced. Even when women are promoted within the current administration, it seems to require a combination of Barbie doll looks and a willingness to pose with a machine gun (and maybe even shoot your own dog). Anyone who thinks we've suddenly become a society that promotes purely on merit needs to have their head examined.

Yesterday was another day in which the actions of cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump and Shadow President Elon Musk dominated discussions. All of the threads that I will discuss today deal with that topic. The most active thread yesterday was titled, "How can we prepare our children for the coming storm?", and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. The original poster asks, in light of the apparent oligarchy that seems to be seizing control of our country, how do we prepare our children? She asks whether her family should flee the country or open foreign bank accounts for their children. In response to almost any thread in which posters show concern about Trump, a few different camps of posters emerge. There are, of course, those who agree with such concerns. For instance, in this thread, one poster says that she is stockpiling Plan B for her daughters and saving every penny in order to be able to send her children abroad for college. There are also a few posters whose concerns might even exceed those of the original poster, such as one who is worried about her 17-year-old son being drafted. Then there are the posters who are convinced that the original poster is overreacting. One example of that was the very first poster to reply, who wrote, "Some of you have lost your damn minds." Another poster has very simplistic views of things, writing, "Astounding that Democrats are opposed to saving money, getting rid of waste and fraud, ensuring women compete in women’s sports, and working toward world peace." Whatever that poster is smoking, she should share. Nobody opposes saving money, getting rid of waste and fraud, or world peace. But if that poster believes that is what Trump and Musk are doing, she is quite delusional. As for women's sports, the small number of trans athletes was probably never going to impact that poster's life, and Trump's actions have been motivated by bigotry rather than by real-life justification. While this poster believes that Trump is striving for world peace, another MAGA poster laments in response to concerns about a draft that the U.S. is raising "generations of softies" because not enough of our sons have been fighting wars. Many times, politics exists on an almost completely theoretical level. It is discussed more like a board game on which pieces are moved around, and it is simple entertainment. But Trump's and Musk's bulldozing of the federal government has made it real to a number of our posters, many of whom stand to lose jobs or otherwise be impacted. This, therefore, is another division among posters in this thread. It is between those who sit comfortably elsewhere calling others "chicken littles" and those for whom the sky is actually falling.

The most active thread yesterday was the Blake Lively thread that I've already discussed. The thread was the most active despite being locked for part of the day. Another thread in the "Website Feedback" forum was created about that thread — I think that makes four now — and there was some interesting back and forth in that discussion. I ordinarily would not address a thread that has been discussed already, and the Website feedback thread is not even close to being among the most active. However, between the two threads, there are some issues that might be worth discussing. Some posters feel the Lively thread — and indeed many threads on DCUM — is overwhelmed by misogyny. This has spurred repeated requests, including one in the latest Website Feedback thread yesterday, that I lock the thread. In response, I did lock the thread, but only to then face an onslaught of requests that I unlock it or allow a new thread on the topic. These posters accused the original poster of making claims of misogyny simply because she didn't like the anti-Lively tone of the thread. That allegation is remarkably similar to the ones being made about Lively herself. As I understand the controversy — and believe me, I wish I did not have to understand it — Lively accused her "It Ends with Us" co-star Justin Baldoni of sexually harassing her during the production of the movie. Baldoni defenders, in turn, have argued that Lively is exploiting the power of "#metoo" claims to retaliate against Baldoni due to other grievances. In both the Lively/Baldoni controversy and on DCUM, women are being accused of making spurious claims of anti-woman behavior for nefarious reasons. Being a White male, I am often accused by members of various minority groups of not being sensitive to bias and prejudice towards them that appears on DCUM. Generally, though not always, I try to defer to such posters and give considerable weight to what they see as such bias. However, as I explained in the Website Feedback thread yesterday, this presents a problem when, as is the case here, both sides of a dispute are from the same marginalized group. Both those supporting Lively and those supporting Baldoni are largely women. Some of them think the discussion is full of misogyny, others don't. So where does that leave me? My solution was simply to create guidelines prohibiting the most blatant sorts of misogyny. This is not to say that I condone more subtle forms of misogyny, but simply a recognition that I have neither the interest nor the qualifications to do more than that.

Yesterday's most active thread was titled, "Congresspersons and Senators Denied Entry to US Government Building" and was posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. A common theme of today's blog post is going to be the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Three out of four of the topics I will discuss today deal with that agency, which Shadow President Elon Musk has attempted to disband. Musk has completely flouted the law with his actions, so much so that simply describing them makes you sound like a conspiracy theorist. Try telling a normal person that, with absolutely no legal authorization, Musk has sent his minions into the U.S. Treasury and taken over the government's payment system, set up a personal email server in the Office of Personnel Management, and started sending government-wide emails inviting federal employees to resign, and — again with absolutely no legal authorization and in direct contradiction to the law — attempted to eliminate a U.S. agency. They will look at you as if you are a wild-eyed lunatic and steer a wide circle around you. Unless they are a MAGA, in which case they will show extreme excitement and exclaim about what a great job Musk is doing. While Musk has been on a rampage of illegality, elected Democrats have been asleep at the wheel, holding meetings to learn about creating viral social media posts and occasionally addressing an issue that has already been superseded by more recent developments. Yesterday, that changed somewhat as a group of Members of Congress and Senators held a protest outside the offices of the USAID. USAID employees had been informed at midnight that they should not come to the office yesterday because the building would be closed. After giving a round of speeches, a group of officials led by Senator Chris Van Hollen attempted to enter the building to meet with whomever was in charge. The group was denied entry on the order of Musk. Again, let me be clear, Musk has no legal authority to do such a thing. Posters in this thread are outraged, with several predicting that Musk will eventually end up in jail. This is unlikely given the complete collapse of the rule of law that we have experienced. Who is going to do anything about Musk? Certainly not the executive branch that he has taken over or Congress, which is in the hands of Republicans who have prostrated themselves at the feet of cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump. MAGA posters remain stupid. For instance, one posted a "NEWS FLASH" claiming that USAID had been created by an executive order. In fact, the agency was created by Congress with the passage of the Foreign Assistance Act in 1961. Having been created by an act of Congress, USAID can only be dissolved by an act of Congress. By the end of the day, Musk and Trump seemed to have accepted this fact and began talking about merging USAID with the U.S. Department of State rather than shutting it completely. Even that, however, is illegal.

I had a doctor's appointment Friday morning (just routine), and by the time I got back, DCUM required so much of my attention that I skipped the blog post. I wasn't sure whether I should discuss the most active threads since Friday as I would normally do or the most active threads since Thursday. But, as it turns out, there really isn't much difference. So, I'll do Thursday. Regardless of whether it is a three- or four-day timespan, the most active thread was the one about the mid-air crash over the Potomac River. I've discussed that thread previously, and, frankly, not much has changed. Most of the thread is simply posters repeating the same things. The next most active thread was closely related to that one. Titled, "Trump blaming minorities for the crash." and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum, the original poster quoted Vice President J. D. Vance as saying air traffic controller candidates were turned away due to the color of their skin and cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump saying that he has "some very strong opinions" about what caused the crash. In Trump's press conference following the crash, he suggested that the collision had been caused by air traffic controllers who were not up to the job because they had been hired due to diversity, equity, and inclusion policies rather than their abilities. He went on to criticize Federal Aviation Administration policies that encouraged hiring those with disabilities. The FAA did until recently have a policy to attract disabled candidates to apply for jobs. However, that program was launched during the first Trump administration. Trump's targeting DEI as the cause of the crash fed directly into MAGA ideology, which holds that qualified White men have been denied opportunities in favor of lesser-qualified minorities. When air traffic control transcripts suggested that the controllers actually seemed to have done a pretty good job — despite being understaffed at the time — and the pilots of the American Airlines flight were identified as two White men, focus shifted to the crew of the Army Blackhawk helicopter. The the crew chief and instructional pilot were quickly identified by their families and also were revealed to be White men. Attention then focused on the pilot who was known to be a woman. Posters repeatedly posted the name of an individual who they said was a transgender woman and claimed that she was the pilot. I think we removed close to 100 posts making this allegation. The poster most responsible for those posts claimed that I was trying to "hide the truth". When the woman in question posted a "proof of life" video, the poster who had made so many false posts fell strangely silent. The truth doesn't appear to have been his priority. While the pilot was eventually identified and turned out to be a cis-gendered White woman, attention has continued to focus on her as a possible DEI hire. Trump has a large number of flaws, but one of the most frustrating is his tendency to jump to conclusions and then refuse to adjust to reality as facts are revealed. His MAGA cult members happily join him in trying to make the facts fit his conclusions, rather than the other way around. Whether it involves using a Sharpie to change the course of a hurricane or placing blame on the sole non-White male participant, Trump and his supporters will shape their own realities.

Yesterday's most active thread was titled, "Plane crash DCA?" and posted in the "Off-Topic" forum. This thread was created just after 9:00 p.m., within minutes of a collision involving American Airlines flight 5345, originating in Wichita, KS, and an Army Blackhawk helicopter. Both aircraft plunged into the Potomac River. It is believed that all 67 passengers and crew aboard the two craft perished. This thread is already nearly 50 pages long and probably will exceed that number by the time this post is published. The thread is moving very quickly, and it is nearly impossible to keep up with it. Despite the tragedy of what occurred, a number of posters were not able to control their behavior, and we have been forced to remove multiple pages' worth of posts. The initial posts in the thread were mostly aimed at determining what had happened and sharing information. But fairly quickly, posters engaged in promoting their own personal agendas. Much of the thread is a series of unrelated, parallel conversations. One was a debate about Reagan National Airport and whether or not it is too busy. According to several posts in the thread, one of the airport's runways is the busiest in the nation. Another discussion involved recent personnel moves by the administration of cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump. Just over a week ago, Trump fired the head of the Transportation Security Administration and the head of the Coast Guard. In addition, he fired all members of the Aviation Security Advisory Committee. This week, Shadow President Elon Musk has been busy trying to convince federal employees to resign, threatening the jobs of new federal employees who are still serving their probationary periods, and firing any staff employed in roles related to DEI. Many posters are convinced that these moves may have negatively impacted air safety. Other posters focused on the role of the helicopter, which many considered responsible for the collision. This triggered another parallel discussion involving the large numbers of helicopters that routinely fly around the area. Several posters argued that the number of helicopter flights increased during Trump's first administration and have increased again during his second. There was also considerable speculation about new Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. While other area leaders rushed to Reagan National Airport to be on the scene, Hegseth confined himself to two perfunctory tweets, despite a military aircraft being involved. DCUM being what it is, I would expect days of finger-pointing with many posters unwilling to miss turning a tragedy into an opportunity to score political points.

The first step for preparing to write these blog posts is to get a list of the top ten most active threads from the previous day (or week, if it is a Monday). Today's top ten threads are all related to the actions of cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump. Except one. That thread is about Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni (although the subject line of the thread calls him Jason). Of course, I discussed that thread yesterday. So, that leaves nine threads related to Trump to discuss today. Moreover, several of these threads duplicate each other. That is the case with the most active thread yesterday. Titled, "Buyouts for Feds?" and posted in the "Jobs and Careers" forum, the thread is on the same topic as another one posted in the "Political Discussion" forum and titled, "Trump buyout: resign by Feb 6, get paid until Sept 30". That thread was yesterday's 5th most active and would normally be the last one I discuss today due to skipping the Lively thread. But, since the threads are on the same topic, I'll discuss both together. The original poster of the first thread posted nothing but a link to Axios, which is a violation of DCUM policy. We require that some discussion be included when starting a thread. But since I didn't notice this thread until it was about 20 pages long, I let it go. The original poster of the second thread provided the same link, but also went on to say that several of his coworkers would likely take the deal that was being offered because they were close to retirement anyway. There was considerable confusion about exactly what was being offered. Axios reported that the Trump administration was offering "buyouts" of federal employees. That is not correct. Instead, what was offered was deferred resignation. Employees who resign before February 6 will remain employed until September 30, but be relieved of all "in-person work requirements". On the face of it, the only benefit to accepting this offer is not being required to return to the office. The email sent to employees describing this offer, however, hinted that those who submit their deferred resignations might be placed on administrative leave. The OPM operation is being run by Shadow President Elon Musk and, in making this offer, he copied directly from his past actions at Twitter. He even used the same name, "Fork in the Road", for OPM's offer that he used at Twitter when he invited employees there to resign. Feds who wanted to accept the offer were told to reply to the email with the word "Resign" in the body of the text. Musk and company have a complete inability to write clear memos and this email, like earlier OPM memos, left employees confused and bewildered. Nobody was completely clear what was being offered. Much of the early discussion was based on the understanding that employees were being offered buyouts, as Axios reported. They are not. As many posters pointed out, federal law limits the legal amount of a buyout and there is no money appropriated for such a thing in any case. The benefits of Musk's offer are so meager that many posters determined that they would be better off getting RIF'd.

Yesterday's most active thread was titled, "Schedule F Memo is Out" and posted in the "Jobs and Careers" forum. The original poster linked to an Office of Personnel Management memo regarding the reclassification of career civil service employees as essentially political appointees. As has happened before, the original poster's link has stopped working. The MAGA crew into whose hands cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump has placed the future of our government is supposed to revolutionize federal service but can't manage to keep a web link operational for more than 24 hours. This is a repeat, on steroids you might say, of an action Trump took during his first term. Career civil servants are supposed to be non-political and enjoy job protection. Trump reclassified certain positions as so-called "Schedule F" which removed normal civil service job protections, making the employees easier to fire. Those positions could then be filled with political loyalists. Among the avalanche of executive orders Trump issued during the first days of his new term was one reinstating the Schedule F reclassification. The OPM memo fleshes out that EO and provides more detail about the positions to be reclassified. As the original poster says, "It is very broad". Not surprisingly, a number of posters are not happy about the changes. Some question the legality of the effort. It is very likely that this move can be legally contested but it is equally likely that Trump doesn't care. As I have commented in multiple recent blog posts, Trump is clearly breaking the law on a near-daily basis without any real pushback. Therefore, we can expect him to continue doing so. It is understandable that many posters are upset because their jobs are at risk. But, while that is obviously, and justifiably, an important issue to them personally, it is not really the most important issue here. A non-political, professional civil service is critical to a stable government. If Trump removes experienced professionals and replaces them with loyalists, it is almost a sure bet that the next president will do the same, especially if that president is a Democrat. Does anyone believe that a nearly complete change of management every four years is really the best way to run the government? Trump's move will transform a professional service into one in which the upper — and in many cases, middle — echelon is simply a patronage system filled by those chosen for their loyalty rather than competence.

The most active thread over the weekend was titled, "Colombia blocks deportation flights, Trump responds with tariffs" and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. This thread was started soon after U.S. flights repatriating Colombian citizens were turned back by the Colombian government. Cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump reacted angrily to Colombia's refusal to accept the flights and threatened immediate tariffs on Colombian imports to the U.S. as well as immigration restrictions. Within hours, both sides announced that the impasse had been resolved, with the White House suggesting a complete capitulation by the Colombians. However, that account is likely overstating things. What is known is that the U.S. has conducted regular deportation flights to Colombia for years. The flights have generally been non-events. In this case, Colombian President Gustavo Petro seems to have been angered by two factors. One, while the U.S. normally uses civilian aircraft for the deportations, these flights consisted of military aircraft. Central and South American countries are particularly sensitive to the use of military aircraft, something that Trump, in contrast, considers important. Second, video of the Colombian nationals being loaded onto the aircraft that circulated widely on social media showed them shackled on their hands and feet. Many Colombians perceived the treatment as dehumanizing. The tariffs that Trump threatened would have caused significant harm to Colombia's economy, which relies heavily on exports to the U.S. However, the tariffs would likely have been problematic for the U.S. as well. The largest Colombian import to the U.S. is oil, with coffee being second. Any price increases in those two goods would have been immediately noticeable to U.S. consumers. Moreover, the third largest Colombian import is cut flowers. Tariffs on those just before Valentine's Day would also not be welcome. Trump's reaction of essentially going nuclear thrilled a number of the posters in this thread. They see this as a sign of strength and the reported Colombian capitulation as a demonstration of respect for a strong American President. It is almost assured that Colombia did not cave completely as Trump is suggesting. Rather, there has likely been some sort of agreement that satisfies Colombian objections. Convincing Trump supporters of this, however, will be impossible. Other posters are concerned about the long-term damage Trump may be doing. Colombia had already shown interest in establishing closer relations with China and the BRICS countries. This episode will likely push the nation further in that direction. A common retort by those who oppose immigration is to tell immigration supporter to house immigrants in their own homes. Based on this logic, a reasonable solution would have been to ask proponents of deportation to load migrants into their cars and drive them to Colombia.

The three most active threads yesterday were all ones that I've previously discussed and will, therefore, skip today. The fourth most active thread was titled, "What are your favorites of Trump’s early accomplishments?" and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. The original poster is a diehard fan of cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump. He considers Trump's first term to have been "unquestionably successful". The original poster could not be happier with the beginning of Trump's second term, specifically noting Trump's revocation of former President Lyndon B. Johnson's Executive Order 11246. To say that the original poster is delusional is to put things extremely mildly. According to the original poster's understanding, Executive Order 11246 was one of the "starting points of affirmative action and discriminatory hiring practices". What the EO does is require U.S. government contractors to "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin." I would be very interested in hearing exactly why the original poster opposes that language, especially because the original poster describes himself as "being a minority". The original poster provided an explanation for his completely backwards understanding of this issue when he concluded his post by saying, "I’ve been glued to my TV and X". Well, no wonder. Trump's avalanche of executive orders was largely aimed at pleasing his supporters like the original poster. They have been very effective in that regard. Their real-world impact is another question. Trump's EO regarding birthright citizenship has already been blocked by a federal judge. His EO dealing with electric vehicles reversed a mandate that didn't exist, paused funds that have already been disbursed, and didn't touch EV tax rebates. Trump's federal employee return to office order will primarily create chaos and may not actually result in many employees returning to their offices. Certainly, Trump has done some real damage — something the original poster would probably consider an achievement — but that is buried under a mountain of illegal, unworkable, and meaningless bluster. Simply separating fact from fiction will be a significant challenge. Never mind trying to convince those like the original poster that their understanding of things is the complete opposite of reality.