4 Comments on “Sunday Cartoons: Tru Dat”

1. dakinikat says:

   December 7, 2025 at 11:23 am

   It’s another dark, gloomy, damp, rainly day. It’s in me too. I feel cold and sad. So, ICE is after our Vietnamese community now. I know these people. The grandparents came here after Saigon fell and their kids were in nearly every undergrad lecture I ever did. My roles were full of Jeffersons, Jacksons, and Nugyens. We’re making whistles for one of the Mosques. I’m now using zines with more than just Spanish and English.

   All these people want is the same peaceful, happy, life where they can thrive. I do not get this at all.

   It’s not about what these people have done that have brought about this much hatred. It’s just that the outburbs have a shitload of racists. Just waiting to see who they single out next. Hate should never win. People are people.

   • dakinikat says:

     December 7, 2025 at 11:29 am

     Trump’s latest anti-immigration push echoes the nativism of the 1920s

     The president and his aides have escalated anti-immigrant rhetoric and policies in recent weeks.

     Analysis by Karen Tumulty

     “Somalis are “garbage,” and “we don’t want them in our country.” Migration from “all Third World countries” should be halted. Any foreign national deemed “noncompatible with Western civilization” must be deported.

     Recent days have seen President Donald Trump escalating and amplifying his anti-immigration rhetoric, which in the past has included declarations that immigrants are “poisoning the blood” of the country and an infamous 2018 statement that Haiti, El Salvador and African nations are “shithole countries.”

     Trump delivers such sentiments with increasing frequency in public appearances and on social media, linking immigration policies to the shooting on Thanksgiving eve of two National Guard members in downtown Washington and a massive fraud scandal in Minnesota in which members of the Somali community have been among the dozens implicated.

     The administration has paused immigration applications from 19 countries in response to the National Guard shooting — allegedly carried out by an Afghan national — even as it continues to expand its divisive mass deportation efforts to a widening group of cities.

     Those around Trump have joined in the nativist fervor. The president’s comments about Somalis, made during a Cabinet meeting Tuesday, had Vice President JD Vance banging the table in approval. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt called it an “epic moment.”

     Trump’s homeland security adviser Stephen Miller says holding most immigrants blameless for the acts of a few is “the great lie of mass migration.”

     “You are not just importing individuals. You are importing societies. No magic transformation occurs when failed states cross borders,” Miller recently wrote on X. “At scale, migrants and their descendants recreate the conditions, and terrors, of their broken homelands.”

     To students of U.S. history, Trump’s contention that people from some countries — Norway, for instance — are desirable, while others are not, is nothing new.

     Language such as that used by the president and those around him harks back more than a century ago to the passage of a series of laws, capped by one in 1924, known as the Johnson-Reed Act. The statute put in place a quota system in which visas would be allocated by nationality, according to the proportion that each country’s immigrants and their descendants had in the 1890 census.

     Its explicit goal was to turn back the calendar to a time when America’s racial and ethnic mix was dominated by people from Northern and Western Europe. The law sharply limited the number allowed in from southern and eastern parts of the continent and almost entirely excluded people from Asia and Africa. One intended effect was to effectively close the door to Catholics and Jews.

     “AMERICA OF THE MELTING POT COMES TO END,” a New York Times headline declared on April 27, 1924. Underneath it: “Effects of New Immigration Legislation Described by Senate Sponsor of Bill — Chief Aim, He States, Is to Preserve Racial Type as It Exists Here Today.”

     More at the link to WAPO. It’s open to reading.

2. dakinikat says:

   December 7, 2025 at 11:47 am

   Brotocracy

   A Palantir billionaire just called for public hangings.“It's time to bring back masculine leadership to protect our most vulnerable,” writes Joe Lonsdale.This is where Silicon Valley authoritarianism is heading:www.thenerdreich.com/joe-lonsdale…

   — Gil Durán (@gilduran.com) 2025-12-06T21:15:19.167Z

3. dakinikat says:

   December 7, 2025 at 4:16 pm

   https://bsky.app/profile/unlawfulentries.bsky.social/post/3m7gcf7ng2222

   https://time.com/7300066/why-birthright-citizenship-is-important/

   History Shows Why Birthright Citizenship is so Important

   by

   Anna O. Law / Made by History

   )n Jan. 20, 2025, President Donald Trump’s first day back in the White House, he issued Executive Order 14160 “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship.” The directive attempted to nullify birthright citizenship, as enshrined by the Fourteenth Amendment for over 150 years, and restore an older understanding of U.S. citizenship not seen since before the Civil War.

   The framers of the Amendment worried about such an effort. They consciously chose to go through the rigors of the amendment process—instead of just passing a law—precisely to prevent future Congresses from repealing principles like birthright citizenship and to avoid future Supreme Courts from improperly interpreting them.

   They wanted to permanently ensure that American law would be more inclusive by extending U.S. citizenship—and the federal protections that came with it—to African Americans. The goal was to protect Black Americans against state discrimination after the abolition of slavery. Section One of the Amendment accordingly stated “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

   Trump’s order aims to eliminate this guarantee of citizenship for people born in the U.S. whose mothers were “unlawfully present” or when the mother’s presence in the U.S. was “lawful but temporary.” While multiple legal challenges wind their way through the federal judiciary, the Supreme Court ruled on June 27 that a nationwide injunction halting implementation of the Executive Order was inappropriate. Then, last week, a federal judge temporarily blocked Trump’s order and allowed a class-action suit on behalf of children and parents impacted by Trump’s order to proceed.