• Search for:
    19Nov, 2025
    *Late* (again) Stef’s Guerilla Need to Know

    Week of November 15, 2025

    Anti communism week – proclamation of interest:

    “In the 34 years since the end of the Cold War, the world has witnessed both the triumph of democracy and the persistence of tyranny in new forms.”

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/11/anti-communism-week-2025/

    New voices now repeat old lies, cloaking them in the language of “social justice” and “democratic socialism,” yet their message remains the same:  give up your freedom, place your trust in the power of the government, and trade the promise of prosperity for the empty comfort of control.  America rejects this evil.

    “Democratic socialism” is not communism. 

    Capitalism: individuals own their things

    Communist: the government generally owns everything

    Democratic socialism: when the people have a say, and choose what they want to give to support community growth and protection as a society while yet having the potential to own all of their own all of their business, investments and home.

    It is thought to be the both of both worlds as Capitalism leave the rich very  rich and the rest very poor without any safe guards. There isn’t a middle class.

    –Fostering the future of the American children and Families

    This is essentially making Christian based orphanages for predicting the increase in foster children as they work to make all abortions and a number of birth control options illegal and or difficult to maintain as it will not be covered by insurance if a person can afford the luxury of insurance    

    -Modifying reciprocal tariff’s for agricultural

    Specific items were not mentioned or identified in the order and other than those “deemed needed by Americans” . There have been a number of mentions of coffee products, beef and bananas on various news products but they were not actually identified in the order.  There is a lot of room for them to maneuver.   

    -Stef

    19Nov, 2025
    *LATE* Stef’s Guerilla Need to Know

    Week of November 3, 2025

    Executive Orders

    What you need to know:

    Modifying Reciprocal Tariff Rates Consistent with the Economic and Trade Arrangement Between the United States and the People’s Republic of China

    • Trump regime re-stated that he has declared emergency war status against China to impose the Tariff’s 
    • This order dropped all Tariff’s to resume pre-Tariff trading to include rare minerals.
    • Again – really took us back to where we were a year ago for some trading but not all. China will resume some trading for agriculture.  They have already agreed to purpose most of they soy beans this year from South America due to the Tariff’s. 

    Modifying Duties Addressing the Synthetic Opioid Supply Chain in the People’s Republic of China

    • Trump believes China has made some effort to reduce the amount Fentanyl into the US so he reduced the Tariff’s back to 10% from 20% 

    Very side note- if we are making all of this money from taxing Americans with Tariffs then why can’t we afford to maintain basic human needs and rights of all for food/ housing and public education?

    -Stef

    17Oct, 2025
    When “Most Read” Misses the Mark: The Associated Press and Its Curious Priorities

    By Judy T., Rescue Our Democracy

    Meet Angela Putnam (Correction: Allie Beth Stuckey)

    When “Most Read” Misses the Mark

    If journalism’s mandate is to inform the public about what truly matters, then the Associated Press’s recent headline, “In Dallas, 6,700 women rally for culture war battles after Kirk’s death,” raises serious questions. Placed under the AP’s “Most Read” section, this story elevated a small gathering to national attention. Yet 6,700 attendees in a metro area of roughly 8 million represent only 0.08% of the population. That’s a decimal point, not a movement.

    In contrast, nationwide movements like the No Kings protests, organized by Indivisible and Ezra Levin, mobilized over 2,500 locations across the U.S. and drew millions. Despite this, coverage was minimal, often relegated to brief mentions or photo galleries.

    The Throngs That Weren’t

    The No Kings protests opposed what organizers described as increasingly authoritarian actions by President Donald Trump. These demonstrations were largely peaceful, far-reaching, and clearly newsworthy. Yet the AP focused on a niche rally led by “Angela Putnam”, assigning national prominence to an event of tiny scale.

    Join the NO KINGS 2 protests on October 18th! (AP, I better see full articles on this, if you want to focus on a local small rally of extremists, I expect an article on EACH town/city for their NO KINGS event, it’s only fair.)

    (BTW, the “throngs of women” phrase — really, AP? 6,700 equals a throng, but millions nationwide barely register?)

    This disparity isn’t about numbers alone; it’s about narrative control. Elevating small, ideologically aligned gatherings while downplaying massive pro-democracy mobilizations skews public perception. Readers are left thinking fringe events have outsized influence, while widespread civic engagement disappears into the background.

    From “Angela Putnam” to Handmaid’s Tale

    Editorial choices like this suggest a troubling trend: prioritizing spectacle over substance, and amplifying voices that align with a particular ideology. By promoting “Angela Putnam” nationally, the AP inadvertently normalizes a Christian nationalist agenda.

    Consider the parallels to The Handmaid’s Tale. The Dallas rally’s messaging — and the organizer, “Serena Waterford” — evoke dystopian playbooks of gender and societal control. The AP treated it as cultural curiosity rather than a cautionary sign. Elevating such figures gives legitimacy to a philosophy that should remain strictly fictional.

    Coverage Comparison: Small Rally vs. Massive Mobilizations

    EventEstimated AttendanceAP Coverage LengthHeadline Placement
    “Share the Arrows” Rally (Angela Putnam)6,700~620 wordsHomepage, Most Read
    “No Kings” Protests (Indivisible)Millions nationwide~1,070–1,450 wordsBrief mentions / aggregated dispatches

    Word counts are approximate; placement illustrates editorial priority.

    Facts, Sources, and Methodology

    • The AP reported 6,700 attendees at the Share the Arrows event.
    • AP has previously reported on coordinated pro-democracy actions (50501, No Kings, Indivisible).
    • The DFW metro population is roughly 8 million; 6,700 attendees = 0.08%.

    Percentage calculation:
    6,700 ÷ 8,000,000 × 100% ≈ 0.08% (rounded).

    Article length estimates:

    • AP, Share the Arrows: ≈ 620 words
    • AP, 50501 coverage: ≈ 1,450 words
    • AP, No Kings: ≈ 1,070 words
    • AP, 50-state anti-Trump coverage: ≈ 1,200 words

    Interpretation: Even though AP devoted more word count to large, nationwide protests, the smaller rally received national prominence. This signals misplaced editorial priorities.

    Fiction Should Stay Fiction

    This article should have remained local, not national. By elevating “Angela Putnam” and “Serena Waterford”, the AP promotes a dystopian agenda straight out of The Handmaid’s Tale.

    Journalists should illuminate truth, not amplify fringe spectacle. If outlets want their credibility back, they must recognize that 6,700 does not equal millions. Reality, context, and proportionality matter — because democracy cannot survive if fiction masquerades as fact.

    11Oct, 2025
    ROD Site Update

    Sometimes You Have to Admit You’re Only Human

    The latest ROD site update:

    Well, folks, it’s official: the Events section of Rescue Our Democracy has been retired. We didn’t want to do it, but let’s be real—it takes a small army to keep that thing current. Right now, that “army” looks a lot like one tired person with a keyboard, a caffeine habit, and a questionable sense of time.

    Oh, and about that “vision”? Yeah. That’s funny, because I can barely see straight these days—literally. But even with blurry eyes, I can still see the big picture. This work matters, and it’s worth doing right.

    What are you getting at?

    Between maintaining the website, writing articles, tracking political chaos (sorry, “current events”), building state-by-state district tables, creating educational PDFs, and designing all the graphics—it’s a lot. Even democracy has limits, and apparently, so do I.

    Until we grow our team of contributors, editors, and volunteers, Rescue Our Democracy will focus on what it does best: education and editorials grounded in fact. We’ll keep breaking down complex issues, connecting the dots others ignore, and keeping the conversation real.

    Ok…so what’s this mean?

    This doesn’t mean we’ve given up on events forever. It just means we’re putting our energy where it makes the biggest impact for now. When more hands join the work (hint, hint—yours could be one), we’ll expand again.

    For now, Rescue Our Democracy remains a home for truth-tellers, learners, and doers who believe that facts still matter—and that democracy is still worth fighting for. Preferably without losing our collective sanity in the process.

    So stay tuned, stay active, and maybe send Dr Pepper.

    — Rescue Our Democracy Team

    4Oct, 2025
    Proposal: Why We Should Call Trumpists “Drumpf-ists”

    In today’s political climate, labeling Trump or his supporters as “fascists” is increasingly counterproductive. The historical weight of that term invites endless debate and provides an opening for opponents to pivot attention to groups like Antifa, which are not structured political organizations but loosely affiliated individuals. To focus clearly on the unique threat posed by Trump’s leadership style, we propose using the term Drumpf-ist instead.

    We already know he’s not exactly proud of his family’s original name, Drumpf. Still, we don’t want to give him the satisfaction of seeing his branding name used yet again to slather something in gold and call it “classy.” It’s less baroque elegance and more “I have no sense of space, style, or grace—and I’m compensating heavily for something else.” (Yes, I absolutely screamed “opulence!” when MC Hammer decorated his house.)

    The Trump era has redefined how quickly a leader can challenge democratic norms. Never before in modern American history has one individual amassed so much power, tested institutional limits, and reshaped public trust—all in just a few years. These rapid-fire actions, which we will call Drumpf-ist policies, are unprecedented in both speed and volume.

    At the same time, citizens and journalists must Release any information uncovered and for institutions to act quickly. Understanding the mechanisms through which power is concentrated helps Americans recognize when democratic norms are under threat. Even hidden scandals—like the ongoing investigations into figures connected to Jeffrey Epstien—highlight how powerful individuals can exploit weak oversight. Reporting on these files and ensuring transparency is crucial to maintaining democracy.

    Drumpf-ist Actions in Context

    Donald Trump’s previous presidency already bore witness to early assaults on constitutional norms, civil liberties, and institutional checks. From aggressively using executive orders to weaken regulatory protections, undermining independent agencies, to flouting congressional oversight, he signaled a readiness to bend or break longstanding democratic guardrails. Now, in his current term, those tendencies have not only resumed but accelerated—smashing boundaries at a pace few world leaders match.

    This post zeroes in on the current administration’s Drumpf-ist “achievements” — the policy shifts, power grabs, and rights rollbacks taking place in an insanely short span. The table below maps how these actions affect real people and institutions, and then situates them alongside rapid moves from global leaders who have similarly consolidated power.

    FACT-PEEK:

    Comparing Trump to other modern world leaders highlights the speed and audacity of Drumpf-ist tactics:

    Table 1: Drumpf-ist (Trump) – Current Presidency (2025– )

    Date / PeriodActions & Policy ChangesPrimary Rights / Institutions Affected
    Jan 2025Sweeping executive orders; dismantling protections across multiple agenciesFederal bureaucracy, civil service, environmental safeguards
    First 100 Days, 2025Human Rights Watch: ~100 harmful actions undermining rights (speech, immigration, education, environment)Free speech, immigration rights, education access
    2025 (Spring)Disengagement from UN Human Rights Council; threats to pull out of treatiesInternational law, global human rights accountability
    Mid-2025Attempt to revoke birthright citizenship via executive orderCitizenship, 14th Amendment, due process
    2025 (Summer)Court allowed cuts to Education Dept’s Civil Rights staffCivil rights enforcement in education
    2025 (Fall)Deportation threats against pro-Palestinian foreign students/facultyFirst Amendment, academic freedom, noncitizens’ rights
    2025 (Fall)Mass firings of federal DEI staff and contractor prohibitionsEqual protection, workplace rights, free expression
    2025 (Ongoing)Ignored Congressional appropriations; diverted funds without authoritySeparation of powers, legislative checks
    2025 (Ongoing)Interference with law firms’ contracts and attorney clearancesLegal accountability, access to counsel
    2025 (Ongoing)Broad claims of executive power over agencies and spendingChecks and balances, constitutional norms

    Table 2: Rapid Power Consolidation Abroad

    Leader / PeriodActions & Policy ChangesPrimary Rights / Institutions Affected
    Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (Turkey, 2016–2018)Post-coup purges: 100,000+ public workers dismissed; 150+ media outlets shut; judiciary overhauled; 2017 referendum expanded presidential powersJudicial independence, press freedom, military autonomy, democratic checks
    Rodrigo Duterte (Philippines, 2016–2017)“War on Drugs”: thousands of extrajudicial killings; targeted political opponents; withdrawal from the International Criminal CourtRight to life, due process, international accountability
    Viktor Orbán (Hungary, 2010–2013)New constitution adopted; gerrymandered elections; packed Constitutional Court; “media laws” restricted independent outletsElectoral fairness, judicial independence, press freedom, minority rights

    Drumpf-ist Rapid-Action Timeline vs. Other Leaders

    Even among authoritarian-leaning leaders, Trump’s velocity of disruption stands out. Rapid appointments of federal judges, attempts to overturn election results, and attacks on long-standing norms all happened in a compressed timeline, putting U.S. institutions under unprecedented strain.

    Why Adopting “Drumpf-ist” Matters

    Calling Trump or his supporters “fascists” risks:

    1. Distracting from actual behaviors.
    2. Shifting the conversation toward groups like Antifa.
    3. Diluting the meaning of the warning.
    4. Being labeled a “terrorist” and potential ramifications

    Using Drumpf-ist instead:

    • Precisely names the threat tied to Trump-style authoritarianism, albeit a name he doesn’t use or like to be reminded of.
    • Highlights speed and audacity of attacks on norms.
    • Focuses public attention on defending democratic institutions rather than debating historical accuracy.

    Drumpf-ist tactics are dangerous not only for what they do, but for how fast they do it. When democratic checks are tested repeatedly in months rather than years, citizens and institutions are forced into reactive stances, often without sufficient time to respond. Rapid disruption erodes public trust, normalizes attacks on independent oversight, and encourages followers to view democratic institutions as optional or illegitimate.

    Call to Action

    To resist this unprecedented speed of erosion, citizens must stay informed, engaged, and proactive. Rapid action from a Drumpf-ist leader requires rapid, coordinated responses from the public, civil society, and democratic institutions. Understanding Drumpf-ist strategies helps identify threats before they become irreversible.

    As we continue our work at Rescue Our Democracy, it’s essential to recognize that defending the Constitution requires vigilance not just against actions, but against the velocity of those actions. The lesson is clear: democracy is not only about laws—it is about timing, response, and collective engagement.

    Head Guerilla, Judy T.

    Proud to be an Anti-Drumpf-ist

    **P.S. Release the Epstein files!

    References:

    References

    29Sep, 2025
    Shutdown Theater

    Republicans Have the Keys, But the Lights Still Go Out


    Goodnight, Sweetheart
    Well, it’s time to close
    Goodnight, Sweetheart
    Lock the doors, I suppose
    We hate to leave you, but we just won’t pay
    Oh, goodnight, Sweetheart, goodnight

    Parody lyrics by Judy T.

    It’s September 29, and Washington is once again dangling over the edge of a government shutdown. By October 1, the lights may flicker off across federal agencies, leaving millions of Americans wondering why the most powerful government in the world can’t even pay its own bills.

    And here’s the kicker: Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the White House. They have the votes. They have the keys. And yet, they’re acting like someone else has their hands on the wheel. It’s like giving someone the car keys — and then watching them refuse to drive.

    How We Got Here: A Timeline of Dysfunction

    To understand why this mess keeps happening, let’s rewind.

    • Spring 2025: House Republicans put forward a temporary funding bill, but it came loaded with cuts Democrats refused to swallow.
    • Summer 2025: With the clock ticking, both parties played chicken. Republicans demanded stripped-down funding; Democrats pushed for subsidies to stay. Neither blinked.
    • September 2025: The White House called leaders together. Talks collapsed in a haze of finger-pointing. Senate Republicans declared Democrats’ proposals “totally unserious.” Democrats accused Republicans of steering straight toward a shutdown on purpose.

    Now, with less than 48 hours to go, Republicans are still holding the votes — but not using them.

    Why a Shutdown With One-Party Rule?

    This is the absurd part. Normally, gridlock happens when government is divided. But today? One party holds it all. So why would Republicans allow a shutdown anyway?

    First, there are fractures inside their own caucus. Some Republicans see a shutdown as leverage to push deeper spending cuts. Others are terrified of being primaried if they “compromise.” So they let the extremists hold the wheel, while the rest of us brace for impact.

    Second, there’s politics. A shutdown creates chaos — and chaos can be spun. If Republicans can convince voters to blame Democrats, it doesn’t matter that they were the ones holding the pen when the funding bill sat unsigned.

    Finally, there’s the culture of outrage. Governing is boring. Crisis gets headlines. And some Republicans seem addicted to the theater of shutting the government down, no matter the cost.

    It’s like having the keys to the house and deciding the best option is to set off the smoke alarm.

    What It Means for Everyday Americans

    For most people, this isn’t about political games. It’s about paychecks, services, and stability. Federal workers could be furloughed or even laid off. Small business loans stall. Inspections freeze. National parks close. And let’s not forget — the courts have warned they may run out of cash to keep their doors open after October 3.

    It’s as if the most powerful government in the world is declaring, “Sorry, we’re out to lunch. Indefinitely.”

    The Ridiculousness of Shutdown Theater

    Starting to think a certain someone likes to scorpion, and not just on stairs.

    We’ve been here before, and the pattern is painfully familiar. Both parties point fingers, but history shows the public usually blames the side in charge. And this time, Republicans are squarely in the driver’s seat.

    Yet instead of steering us clear of disaster, they’re swerving closer to it — almost as if the crash is the point. It’s political theater dressed up as fiscal responsibility.

    So when October 1 rolls around, remember this: the government didn’t shut down because there were no votes. It shut down because the people who had the votes refused to use them. That’s not governance. That’s sabotage with a smile.

    It’s like having the power to flip the light switch and choosing instead to sit in the dark, complaining about the electricity bill.

    In Closing

    If the government does slam shut on October 1, don’t let the spin fool you. This isn’t “both sides” refusing to cooperate. This is one party with every tool at its disposal choosing chaos over compromise. Republicans hold the House, the Senate, and the White House — yet they’re letting the lights go out anyway. It’s like having the keys to the car, the gas tank full, the road clear — and still deciding to sit on the curb, arguing over who gets to drive. That’s not leadership. That’s reckless theater, and the rest of us are stuck paying for the tickets.

    Parting Thought

    And here’s the piece nobody wants to say out loud: what happens if the courts themselves have to shut down? Justice stops. Alleged criminals never see a courtroom. Cases pile up. Victims wait, defendants linger, and the system groans to a halt. That’s not just inconvenient — that’s chaos. And chaos, history tells us, is the perfect stage for more dangerous plays. If the legal system is paralyzed, it hands Trump exactly the excuse he’s been itching for: a chance to argue that only military power can restore order. That’s not fiscal conservatism. That’s a road straight into authoritarian rule, paved by something as absurd as refusing to keep the lights on.

    He’s creating reasons to stay in charge, using military force.

    How many reasons do you need to help stop him?

    Head Guerilla, Judy T.

    Resources:

    29Sep, 2025
    Coal Leasing on Federal Lands

    Selling America’s Backyard for a Quick Buck

    “Oh, Coal-Scarred Land of Plenty” Lyrics by Judy T. Song created by Suno.

    Release of new coal leases on federal lands is more than bad energy policy. The consequences extend beyond energy, threatening rivers, mountains, and wide-open spaces that belong to everyone. Epstein connections may dominate other headlines, but the files here reveal political favoritism benefiting coal companies. Files obtained from public records show millions of acres handed to corporations with close ties to the administration. This is not patriotism — it is a sell-off of America’s future.

    Coal leasing is a step backward for the nation

    For decades, the U.S. made steady progress toward cleaner, more affordable energy. That progress reduced pollution, created jobs, and built stronger local economies. Now the White House is pushing us in reverse. By reopening 13 million acres for coal leasing, green-lighting massive mine expansions like Montana’s Rosebud Mine, and scheduling new lease sales across Alabama, Utah, and the Powder River Basin, leaders are locking communities into pollution and decline until 2039 and beyond.

    This push is not about reliable energy. Markets already moved past coal because renewable power and natural gas are cheaper. Instead, this is a bailout for a dying industry, funded with taxpayer dollars and taxpayer land.

    Source: The Guardian

    Why every American should care

    Coal mining does not just scar landscapes. It scars communities. The jobs promised today often disappear tomorrow, while the damage lasts for decades. Families are left with polluted water, rising health costs, and fewer opportunities in industries like tourism and clean energy.

    Meanwhile, corporations profit from land that belongs to the American people. Conservatives and progressives alike should see the problem: stewardship matters. Leaving something better for the next generation is not partisan. It is a core American value.

    What we stand to lose

    • Powder River Basin (WY/MT): New leases could unleash massive new coal tonnage.
    • Rosebud Mine (MT): A major expansion adds 33.75 million tons of federal coal and extends operations until 2039.
    • Lease sales in Alabama, Utah, Montana: Thousands of acres pushed to auction.
    • Federal protections revoked: Barriers once blocking mining near sensitive areas are being stripped away.

    Every one of these moves takes public wealth and hands it to private interests.

    A betrayal disguised as leadership

    Coal’s decline is not about politics. It is about economics. Energy markets rejected coal years ago. Propping it up now is not leadership — it is looting. It is giving away America’s future for a short-term headline and a campaign talking point.

    This betrayal should matter to anyone who values jobs, water, or land. If you have ever believed in conserving what is good about America — from the family farm to the national park — this fight belongs to you.

    What you can do right now

    • Stay informed: Follow public notices from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Department of the Interior (DOI) about lease sales.
    • Speak up: Submit comments during lease review periods, attend local hearings, and share verified information with your community.
    • Build bridges: Talk with neighbors across party lines. Stress shared values like clean water, healthy land, and jobs that last.
    • Demand accountability: Ask local representatives to oppose giveaways of public lands for coal leasing.

    Closing: A choice about America’s future

    The fight over coal leasing on federal lands is not about nostalgia for the past. It is about who controls America’s future. Do we leave our children polluted rivers and gutted landscapes, or do we hand them thriving communities built on clean, lasting energy?

    The White House has made its choice. Now it is up to us to make ours.

    Head Guerilla, Judy T.

    P.S. In case you missed it, Release the Epstein Files!

    Resources:

    28Sep, 2025
    Des Moines Superintendent: On ICE

    They call it “On ICE.” But this isn’t family entertainment — it’s state-sanctioned cruelty.

    Des Moines Superintendent Arrested by ICE

    Date Updated: October 14, 2025

    Location: Des Moines, Iowa

    This article was originally critical of Ian Roberts’ arrest, primarily reflecting community shock. However, since then, verified facts have come to light that require correction. Therefore, the content below has been updated to reflect accurate information regarding his deportation, credentials, and legal circumstances. As a result, please disregard any previous calls to free him based on the original version. At the same time, while evidence suggests he may have been targeted as a person of color, his criminal record remains a significant factor in this case.

    Overview

    Ian Roberts, former superintendent of Des Moines Public Schools (DMPS), was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on September 26, 2025. Subsequently, recent investigations revealed that Roberts was living in the United States illegally and had falsified key elements of his professional credentials.

    Therefore, this article has been updated to reflect verified, accurate information about his deportation status, educational background, and related legal matters. Importantly, readers can now review the facts directly.

    Immigration Status

    Roberts entered the United States on a student visa in 1999. Later, in May 2024, an immigration judge issued a final order of removal. As a result, Roberts was considered in the U.S. illegally at the time of his arrest. Additionally, these developments highlight broader challenges in immigration oversight and compliance.

    Educational Credentials

    Ultimately, investigations confirmed that Roberts misrepresented his academic achievements. He claimed to have earned a doctorate from Morgan State University, but the university confirmed that he did not hold that degree. Furthermore, other claimed credentials could not be verified. Consequently, the district has updated official records and revoked his professional license. Thus, the accuracy of public records is reinforced.

    Criminal and Safety Considerations

    Roberts has an extensive criminal record, including previous arrests for narcotics and firearms possession. Moreover, during the ICE arrest, authorities found a loaded handgun, a fixed-blade hunting knife, and approximately $3,000 in cash. Together, these facts clarify the legal context surrounding his detention. In addition, they underscore why authorities acted when they did.

    District Response

    Since the arrest, the Des Moines Public Schools board has faced criticism for inadequate vetting during the hiring process. Therefore, they are reviewing procedures and may face legal action regarding Roberts’ employment. In the meantime, the district is also evaluating ways to improve future hiring practices.

    Community and Education Impact

    Roberts had worked in education for over two decades. Consequently, his arrest highlights the challenges school districts face when verifying employment credentials and legal status. As a result, the community is examining policies to strengthen oversight and ensure the safety and stability of educational leadership. Additionally, parents and staff are seeking reassurance that schools remain safe and well-managed.

    Correction Notice

    As a result, this article has been updated on October 14, 2025, to include verified details about Ian Roberts’ deportation, falsified credentials, and related legal proceedings. In addition, we are committed to providing accurate and up-to-date information for our readers. Finally, this notice clarifies any previous statements made in the original version.

    Head Guerilla, Judy T.

    References

    PS. We haven’t forgotten the Epstein Files. Release them now.

    P.P.S. Honestly, still the greatest piece of modern art to date!

    P.P.P.S. This was originally posted on 9.27.2025, due to a need for a backup installation, it had to be reposted.

    Original References:

    1. Des Moines Public Schools. (2025, September 26). Ian Roberts detained by ICE. Retrieved from https://www.dmschools.org/2025/09/announcements-on-detention-of-dr-ian-roberts/
    2. KCCI. (2025, September 26). Des Moines superintendent detained by ICE. Retrieved from https://www.kcci.com/article/ian-roberts-des-moines-public-schools-superintendent-bio/68081908
    3. Iowa Public Radio. (2025, September 26). Des Moines superintendent Ian Roberts detained by ICE. Retrieved from https://www.iowapublicradio.org/ipr-news/2025-09-26/des-moines-public-schools-superintendent-ian-roberts-detained-by-ice-immigration-agents
    4. Ferghana Partners. (n.d.). Ian Roberts. Retrieved from https://ferghanapartners.com/staff-member/dr-ian-roberts/
    5. University of Warwick. (n.d.). Dr. Ian Roberts. Retrieved from https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/modernlanguages/academic/ianroberts/
    6. Des Moines Register. (2025, September 26). Who is Dr. Ian Roberts? A closer look at the Des Moines Public Schools superintendent. Retrieved from https://www.desmoinesregister.com/videos/news/2025/09/26/who-is-dr-ian-roberts-iowa-a-look-at-the-des-moines-public-schools-superintendent-dmps/86375017007/
    7. The British Academy. (n.d.). Professor Ian Roberts FBA. Retrieved from https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/fellows/profiles/ian-roberts-FBA/
    22Sep, 2025
    Boycotts for Policy Changes

    Introduction to the Boycott Landscape

    In 2025, a significant wave of consumer activism has emerged, particularly among left-leaning and progressive communities, in response to perceived political shifts and corporate policy changes. This movement has led to widespread boycotts targeting companies and media outlets that are seen as aligning with or supporting the current administration’s agenda. The following table provides a comprehensive overview of these boycotts, categorizing entities into “Use,” “Avoid,” or “Caution” based on their involvement in controversial policies or actions.

    Comprehensive Boycott Table — Left-Leaning / Progressive Focus (2025)

    Company / ServiceReason / ContextRecommended ActionOutcome of Boycott
    Amazon / Prime VideoDEI rollback, labor practices, political donationsAvoidFinancial impact minimal; no policy change
    Walmart / Sam’s ClubDEI rollback, labor practices, corporate greedAvoidFinancial impact minor; no policy change
    TargetDEI rollback, withdrawing diversity goals / supplier programsAvoidSignificant financial impact (~$12B loss); no policy change
    McDonald’sDEI rollback, supplier diversity changesAvoidMinor financial impact; no policy change
    PepsiCoPausing DEI programs, reducing minority partnershipsAvoidMinor financial impact; no policy change
    Constellation BrandsRemoval of DEI initiativesAvoidMinor financial impact; no policy change
    Barclays (US)Dropped gender/ethnicity representation targetsCautionFinancial impact unclear; no policy change
    FordDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    Lowe’sDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    Harley-DavidsonDEI rollback; production move to ThailandCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    ToyotaDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    MetaDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    AT&TDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    Victoria’s SecretDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    State StreetDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    UnitedHealthDEI rollbackCautionNo confirmed financial impact; no policy change
    Paramount+ / CBSCancellation of Colbert; perceived political pressureAvoidSocial/financial impact minor; no policy change
    ABC / Disney (TV)Suspension of Jimmy Kimmel Live! after political pressureCautionSocial impact minor; no policy change
    Disney+ / HuluLabor disputes, union recognitionCautionMinor subscriber impact; no policy change
    Starz (standalone)Minimal controversyUseNot targeted; safe
    AMC+Minimal controversyUseNot targeted; safe
    NetflixLabor issues (strikes)UseNo boycott impact; safe
    No Music For Genocide / BDS-aligned platformsCultural / human rights boycottCautionSymbolic impact; no policy change
    AirbnbListings in settlementsCautionMinor impact; no policy change
    Booking.com / ZARA / Inditex brandsOperations in settlementsCautionMinor impact; no policy change
    Economic Blackout / 24-hour spending pauseProtest of DEI rollback, corporate greedAvoidSymbolic financial impact; no policy change

    Impact of Current Boycotts

    Recent studies and surveys indicate a notable shift in consumer behavior:

    • 36% of Americans report participating in or planning to participate in boycotts, with 53% of Gen Z and 51% of Hispanic Americans leading this trend. Stagwell
    • 24% of U.S. shoppers have abandoned their favorite stores due to political stances taken by these retailers. The Guardian
    • A 6.8% year-over-year decline in foot traffic at Target stores was observed during a week coinciding with a major boycott. Forbes
      • 12.4 billion lost during 40 day boycott
    • In the entertainment sector, over 1,800 actors, entertainers, and producers, including Olivia Colman, Emma Stone, and Mark Ruffalo, have signed a pledge refusing to work with Israeli film institutions, condemning them as complicit in alleged genocide and apartheid against Palestinians during Israel’s military actions in Gaza. Reuters

    These statistics underscore the growing influence of consumer activism and its potential to impact financially, due to corporate policies and practices.

    Side-note

    Many of the boycotts reflected in this table generated measurable financial impact (e.g., Target’s ~$12 billion market value decline), yet for most companies, no substantive policy changes were made. The primary effect of activism in these cases has been economic, without producing the policy outcomes that organizers had sought.

    So How Do We Affect Real Policy Change?

    Activist Toolkit for Driving Policy Change in Targeted Companies

    StrategyHow to ApplyTools / ExamplesNotes / Tips
    1. Public Pressure CampaignsAmplify the issue via media, social channels, and public statements.Social media campaigns (#BoycottTargetDEI), press releases, open letters to CEOs, influencer partnerships.Focus on clarity: what policy you want changed, why, and how ignoring it harms reputation.
    2. Petition & Signature DrivesGather large-scale public support to demand policy changes.Online platforms (Change.org, MoveOn), email lists, community signups.Include specific, measurable policy requests (e.g., “Reinstate supplier diversity program by Q2 2026”).
    3. Shareholder AdvocacyPurchase minimal shares to gain voting rights or submit proposals at AGMs.Publicly traded companies (Target, Walmart, Amazon).Even small shareholder proposals draw attention and can be reported in financial news.
    4. Direct Corporate EngagementAttend public meetings, Q&As, and send letters/emails to leadership.Town halls, investor days, corporate social responsibility (CSR) contact forms.Be professional but firm: reference reputational risks, customer loyalty, and public expectations.
    5. Employee / Insider CoalitionsSupport or organize employees who advocate for policy change internally.Employee networks, unions, whistleblower protections.Insider voices often sway corporate decisions more than external boycotts.
    6. Regulatory / Legal PressureHighlight potential legal or regulatory risks tied to current policies.Complaints to EEOC, OSHA, consumer protection agencies; ESG rating agencies.Focus on transparency, compliance, and reputational risk.
    7. Positive Incentives & PRShow companies that acting on the request can generate goodwill and customer growth.Highlight successful companies that improved DEI and gained positive media coverage.Encourage a “win-win” narrative: policy change = better brand perception + loyalty.
    8. Conditional Financial PressureTie boycotts or spending reductions to clear, achievable policy goals.Public statements: “We will resume purchases/subscriptions if X happens by Y date.”Deadlines and measurable objectives make boycotts actionable rather than symbolic.
    9. Coalition BuildingPartner with advocacy groups, unions, and NGOs to increase pressure.People’s Union USA, labor advocacy groups, DEI-focused organizations.Coordinated campaigns increase credibility and visibility.
    10. Monitoring & ReportingTrack progress, make updates public, and celebrate successes.Websites, newsletters, social media updates on compliance or lack thereof.Transparency helps maintain momentum and holds companies accountable.

    While boycotts can produce measurable financial impact, as seen with Target and other companies, they often do not result in substantive policy changes on their own. To create meaningful change, it is essential to combine economic pressure with coordinated public advocacy, direct engagement, shareholder activism, coalition-building, and clear demands for specific policy outcomes. Activists can maximize their influence by making it clear what must change, setting measurable goals and deadlines, and publicly tracking progress. In this way, consumer activism becomes more than a symbolic gesture—it becomes a strategic tool for holding companies accountable and driving real, lasting change in corporate policies.

    21Sep, 2025
    Weekly Digest: September 2025

    Recent Executive Actions and Policies

    The last two weeks have brought a wave of executive actions, proclamations, and new policies from the White House. Each of these decisions reflects broader political, economic, and cultural debates shaping the country today. Below is a summary of what happened since our last weekly digest, when it was signed, and why it matters.

    TikTok Enforcement Delay Extended

    @azra.aars

    fast gegen die tür gelaufen am ende #inmyfeelings #kikidoyouloveme #drake #2018 #fyp

    ♬ original sound – chachaslide
    Apparently this is super important to people, being able to do short videos to music and lip sync. Or for challenges that usually end up getting people hurt.

    Date: September 13, 2025
    President Trump signed an executive order delaying enforcement of the forced sale or ban of TikTok until December 16, 2025. This move gives the company, lawmakers, and regulators more time to reach an agreement about ownership and data security. Critics argue the extension postpones a decision on national security concerns, while supporters say it prevents disruption for millions of U.S. users.

    Emergency Board for Long Island Rail Road Dispute

    Date: September 15, 2025
    The President issued an order establishing a three-member emergency board to investigate an ongoing labor dispute at the Long Island Rail Road. The board members cannot be affiliated with either the company or the unions. The order does not detail the precise nature of the dispute but confirms involvement from multiple unions, including the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. The board has 30 days to report findings.

    U.S.–U.K. Technology Prosperity Deal

    Date: September 16, 2025
    A memorandum of understanding was signed between the United States and the United Kingdom. The deal emphasizes cooperation in nuclear energy, artificial intelligence, and quantum technologies. While framed as a partnership, some analysts question whether the U.S. intends to use the deal to advance domestic interests or push British adoption of American technologies.

    Constitution Week Proclamation

    Date: September 17, 2025
    President Trump proclaimed September 17–23, 2025 as Constitution Week. Traditionally, this observance encourages reflection on the U.S. Constitution and civic education. Critics, however, note the irony of celebrating constitutional principles at a time when many civil liberties and democratic norms are under strain.

    The Gold Card and Platinum Card Immigration Programs

    Date: September 18, 2025
    The administration announced new immigration pathways — the Gold Card and Platinum Card — which allow wealthy individuals to gain U.S. residency if they invest $1 million or more. While promoted as a way to attract capital, the policy has sparked backlash. Opponents argue it favors the wealthy while restricting opportunities for working-class immigrants and skilled technical workers.

    National POW/MIA Recognition Day

    Date: September 19, 2025
    The White House recognized National POW/MIA Recognition Day, honoring U.S. service members who were prisoners of war or remain missing in action. Ceremonies across the country underscored the enduring commitment to account for those who never returned home. This observance has bipartisan support and remains one of the least controversial presidential proclamations.

    Restrictions on Non-Immigrant Workers

    Date: September 20, 2025
    A new executive action targeted H-1B visa holders and other non-immigrant workers in the tech sector. The order requires foreign workers to pay $100,000 for every 12 months of employment and limits their eligibility to remain in the U.S. The administration framed this as a jobs protection measure for Americans. However, critics say it will destabilize industries that depend on high-skilled foreign labor.

    Other Observations: Heritage Foundation and Project 2025

    Beyond executive actions, public attention also turned to the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, a policy blueprint for the next conservative administration. A recent chapter calls for ending federal funding of National Public Radio (NPR) and moving children’s programming like Sesame Street entirely off public television. The proposal reflects broader conservative opposition to public education and government-funded broadcasting. Supporters argue it corrects perceived left-wing bias, while opponents warn it undermines free and balanced reporting.

    Works Cited