Tuesday's Most Active Threads

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.

The next most active thread was the Blake Lively thread, which, of course, I am skipping today. After that were two threads on the same topic. The first, posted in the "Political Discussion" forum, was titled, "Pause on federal grants". The second, posted in the "Jobs and Careers" forum, was titled, "Federal grant pause". Both threads were provoked by a memo from the Office of Management and Budget instituting a temporary pause on "all activities related to obligation or disbursement of all Federal financial assistance, and other relevant agency activities that may be implicated by the executive orders, including, but not limited to, financial assistance for foreign aid, nongovernmental organizations, DEI, woke gender ideology, and the green new deal." Again, as in the case of almost all communications emanating from the administration of cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump, the memo is unclear and confusing. Nobody seemed to have any idea what funding would be paused and what wouldn't. That confusion was not limited to DCUM posters either. Almost every state reported that its Medicaid funding had been stopped while Administration officials were busy telling everyone that the pause didn't affect Medicaid. Confusion was such that a second memo was released later in the day explaining which programs would not be paused. But even that one left plenty of questions. This administration really is imbecilic. There has never been a program called "the green new deal" passed by Congress or implemented by prior administrations. Which funding, therefore, might fall under this non-existent program? A poster in one of the threads put things succinctly by writing, "The memo gets basic facts about government spending wrong. These people are morons. Just some of the most objectively stupid people you could ever find." MAGA posters tried desperately to fend off criticism of their cult leader, but their usual tactic of "whataboutism" was of little help. While former President Joe Biden did pause funding for Trump's wall when he became president, there is no precedent for broad funding interruptions of this type. Even Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman, who has made it his purpose in life to paper over every Trump action, was forced to reluctantly concede that this move was ill-advised. Both of these threads were filled with posters completely in shock, fearing that important programs would not receive funding. Some of the worst MAGA posters found joy in such posts. I suspect that sowing fear and confusion among most of the population while generating adulation from his followers is exactly what Trump hopes to achieve from such efforts.

Next were two threads closely related to the previous two. The first was titled, "Trump ceasing federal aid for college", and was posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. The second was titled, "White House suspended financial aid programs", and was posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum. Both threads were started by posters who believed that the funding pause discussed above had caused federal financial aid for college students to be stopped. The memo issued later in the day clarifying which funding should be paused appeared to exempt financial aid. However, that news came after most of this discussion had already occurred. The confusion here was caused completely by the moronic memo sent out about the funding pause. In a footnote, the memo stated that "assistance provided directly to individuals" is not included in the pause. Posters were not sure what this meant with regards to such things as federal Pell Grants. Some posters argued that students receive individual Pell Grants and, therefore, that funding should not be halted. Others argued that Pell Grant funding is distributed to colleges and universities who then provide it to students. Therefore, that money is not "provided directly to individuals" and, as such, was subject to being stopped. In the clarifying memo that came later in the day, Pell Grants were explicitly exempted from the pause. However, there continue to be questions about other federal assistance programs including D.C.'s Tuition Assistance Program (DC TAG). Beyond that, posters were concerned about what constituted "DEI" or "woke gender ideology" as mentioned in the initial memo. As with the case of the Green New Deal, there are no programs named "woke gender ideology". Therefore, what is included? Many posters feared that "DEI" and "woke gender ideology" could be applied arbitrarily and used more widely with regard to those that cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump perceived as his enemies. As with everything Trump does, his cult members were quick to defend him. In this case, MAGAs showed little concern about students who might have crucial funding pulled from them, leaving them unable to afford school. Instead, they focused on imaginary or theoretical issues. For instance, one poster suggested that government assistance was encouraging cost increases in colleges and that halting the funding would cause prices to drop. Even if this is a valid theory, prices are not going to decrease in the next 30 days. Another poster fixated on "climbing walls" as an unnecessary expense that colleges undertake. In both threads, posters protested that the President cannot legally stop the distribution of funds that have been appropriated by Congress. There were repeated claims that this action violates the Impoundment Control Act. Of course, Trump doesn't care about legalities and has no incentive to follow the law.

The final thread that I will discuss was posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. Titled, "If you are MAGA, do you have contempt for empathy?", the original poster perceives MAGAs as having "contempt for empathy" and wonders if it is that way in real life. One does not have to spend very much time online before encountering MAGAs who appear to take an inordinate amount of joy in the suffering of others. Whether it is migrants being deported to countries in which they will have no support, no money, and no future, or federal employees who are facing potential job losses, MAGA posters on DCUM are eager to take pleasure in their pain. As such, the original poster's question is not without justification. While some MAGA posters feign offense at the suggestion, others are quite willing to embrace it. A number of MAGA posters argue that far from empathy being a laudable trait, it is actually employed by liberals as a cudgel to use against others. There is an interesting example used by a MAGA poster regarding migrants. The poster writes, "Taking note of the MILLIONS of illegal immigrants that are putting a huge strain on housing, hospitals, and schools ‘If only you could walk in their shoes and acted like a Christian’". This poster appears offended that by the suggestion that he empathize with migrants. Of course, were he to engage in such empathy, he would almost certainly seek other solutions than deportation. His complaint is not simply that empathy is used in the manner he describes, but frustration over the fact that it sometimes works. By this poster's logic, empathy is actually a bad thing because it makes implementing policies that cause harm to others more difficult. To be clear, this poster does not represent all MAGA posters on DCUM or even all MAGA posters in this thread. I know any number of MAGAs who are genuinely empathetic. However, where empathy is concerned, they often seem to wish that a bit more empathy were shown to themselves. In their view, liberals care about everyone but them. Still, there is no doubt that cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald Trump inspires in his supporters a desire for revenge for perceived slights. I am not sure that it is possible to simultaneously seek revenge and feel empathy with regard to the same target. One will win out over the other. To the extent that resentment is the primary driver of the MAGA worldview, empathy is probably the major threat.