Par for the course. Trump's legacy is basically tripping over his own feet and yelling at his shoes.

Probably work out as well as the rest of the DOGE cuts. They'll start hiring back.
Why appeals to moral virtue flop in political fights
By Ahmed Bouzid
In the American political conscience, there lingers a myth: That real change comes from
exhortation — passionate, unyielding exhortation — that moves the hearts of men and
women. According to this story, virtuous citizens advocate relentlessly for what is right until
the sheer moral force of their persistence breaks through.
This sentiment is epitomized in the classic film “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.” There, Mr.
Smith spends himself on the Senate floor, filibustering without rest, shaming his colleagues,
refusing to give up even when all seemed lost. And when victory finally arrives, it arrives not
because the people organized and seized their rightful power, nor because of any tactical
maneuvering, but because his nemesis, Sen. Joseph Paine, unable to bear the lashings of
his awakened conscience, succumbs in guilt and confesses defeat. The triumph is moral,
almost spiritual: Conscience conquers corruption.
1/3
American history is full of examples where moral appeals alone failed to bring about change,
and where transformation only came once power shifted on the ground. Take the abolition of
slavery.
For decades, abolitionists like William Lloyd Garrison and Frederick Douglass filled the air
with fiery speeches and scathing indictments of America’s sin. Their words pricked
consciences, but slavery endured. It did not end because Southern planters were shamed
into repentance. It ended only after decades of political struggle, the rise of a mass antislavery party, and finally a civil war that rearranged the balance of power. Moral exhortation
lit a fire, yes, of course, but it was power, not guilt, that settled the question.
Or consider the labor movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Workers did not
win the eight-hour workday, the weekend or the right to organize by shaming industrial titans
like Andrew Carnegie or J.P. Morgan into sudden pangs of conscience. They won these
gains through strikes, boycotts and the slow building of unions strong enough to demand
recognition. When politicians acted, passing the Wagner Act or setting minimum-wage laws,
it was not because their souls had been stirred by eloquent speeches on the House floor. It
was because they faced a mobilized working class that made inaction politically impossible.
Even the civil rights movement, often remembered through the soaring oratory of Martin
Luther King Jr., was not, at its core, a triumph of speech over silence. King’s eloquence
mattered, but without the Montgomery bus boycott, the sit-ins, the Freedom Rides, and the
sheer organizational power of Black churches and student groups, his words would have
remained poetry rather than policy. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was not passed because
segregationists had been shamed into decency; it was passed because mass protest,
television coverage and the fear of escalating unrest forced Congress to act.
History teaches this lesson again and again. Change does not come from the mighty
suddenly rediscovering their moral compass. It comes from ordinary people seizing their
collective power and leaving the mighty no choice.
In such a system, speeches and shaming aimed at politicians are distractions.
Representation is a mirror: What the majority demands, it receives. If the minority is
dissatisfied, they have their recourse: to debate, to educate, to persuade — to win real
converts rather than to “own” opponents with a meme, a viral video or a cutting phrase. In
other words, the exhortations that matter are the ones between mutually respecting citizens,
not the ones aimed at stirring the heart of politicians whose calculus has little room for moral
considerations.
“Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” might be viewed as a vision of something better: politicians
who are moral, who can be moved by argument and conscience.
2/3
But history has proven this to be naïve. Democracy, when it works, does not depend on
moral awakenings in the hearts of so-called leaders. It depends on the organized will of the
people, expressed clearly and directly, without begging, without shaming, and without
illusions.
Bouzid is founder/CEO of Witlingo, a Northern Virginia-based tech firm, and the co-founder
of The True Representation Movement. He wrote this for The Fulcrum news organization
Lee Zeldin (born 1980), Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency; former U.S. Representative from New York and New York state senatorGoCubsGo wrote: ↑Sun Sep 28, 2025 11:51 amThey are all fucking nuts.
https://x.com/atrupar/status/1972323713296085022
LolVrede too wrote: ↑Tue Oct 07, 2025 9:25 am![]()
![]()
![]()
Trump calls on Democrats to reopen government, will then work on health care
I'm not even bothering to read the article. We all know that Dementia Don can't be trusted on anything. He routinely breaks promises to his own MAGA base.
Release the health carestein files. Thank you.
https://apnews.com/article/government-s ... c851fea1cfThe White House budget office said Friday that mass firings of federal workers have started in an attempt to exert more pressure on Democratic lawmakers in the ongoing government shutdown.
Racist MAGA is having a meltdown over it, much as they would have with Biden.GoCubsGo wrote: ↑Fri Oct 10, 2025 1:53 pmGuess this is what a 747 buys you.
https://x.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/19 ... 9101198734
https://x.com/JoJoFromJerz/status/1976705363391996048