Subject: The Media Freaked Out Over Project 2025 -- But They?re_Purposefully_Ignoring_The_DSA?s Plans

The press spent years trying to frame the Trump administration as an existential threat to the country. Now that a real threat has emerged,
they are nowhere to be found.

During the 2024 presidential race, we were told repeatedly that a Trump victory would mean the end of democracy as we know it. As soon as he
won, he?d implement the ?mysterious and sinister? (yes, they really
said that) Project 2025 and overhaul the institutions that protect our freedoms.

Now, as the midterms approach, the Democratic Socialists of America has released a document of its own. Unlike Project 2025, the Workers
Deserve More platform actually does call for the direct overhaul of our country?s foundational institutions. Yet there?s just a slight
asymmetry in how the media is reacting.

Let?s examine the press coverage of the two proposals.

Two years ago, The Guardian featured an accusation during the campaign
warning that Project 2025 was a ?dystopian plot? that would ?abolish
checks and balances.? There was, of course, nothing in the document
that could substantiate this claim in the slightest.

Now here?s a direct quote from the DSA platform: ?Replace the President
and Supreme Court with an executive and judiciary chosen by and
subordinate to Congress.? Now I?m no Clarence Thomas, but I?m fairly
certain that making two branches of government ?subordinate? to the
third is the very definition of abolishing checks and balances.

Still waiting on The Guardian to clear that one up for me.

In 2024, Time Magazine wrote that Project 2025 would grant President
Trump ?absolute power? and that its enactment would constitute ?the
shredding of the Constitution.?

The funny thing is, we?re halfway through the term and the Constitution
is conspicuously unshredded. Not that Time was rushing to publish a
retraction at any point over the past couple of years.

It?s especially odd that in 2025, the culminating year of right-wing autocracy, Zohran Mamdani won the mayoral election, kicking off a wave
of far-Left electoral victories.

But who can blame Time for the slight overreaction? After all, it?s the responsibility of the media to be vigilant against potential threats to
our freedoms, no matter how subtle (or imaginary) they may be.

I?m sure they?ll be here any minute to rebuke the radical project of
the DSA.

After all, the platform overtly promises to ?draft a new constitution,
and create a democratic socialist republic.?

Unlike in the case of Project 2025, where the accusations were based on
some combination of ?implications,? ?microaggressions,? and straight-
up fantasy, the DSA has outlined its intentions for all to see. The
preamble argues that ?complete victory will require building a new
society from the ground up.? They hate this country. They hate Western civilization. Ask them, they?ll tell you.

And yet despite this asymmetry, the media has consistently turned a
blind eye to the threat that the DSA poses. This is not naivete ? it?s
malice. It is an insult to the American people and to the democracy
they claim to love.

No more can the differentiator be made that these are not official
Democratic positions. Project 2025 was created by the Heritage
Foundation and a collection of independent conservative organizations.
That didn?t stop the media from treating it as Trump?s personal passion project despite his repeatedly distancing himself from it.

By contrast, an increasingly large proportion of Democratic politicians
are sworn members of the DSA. They are directly associated with this statement, yet not one notable DSA member has issued a condemnation of
it. Perhaps even more troubling, the media has not asked any of them to
issue a condemnation of it.

While President Trump was repeatedly bombarded with questions about
Project 2025, nobody has asked Zohran Mamdani to comment on his own organization labeling the ?entire structure of our society? as an
?enemy.?

One day, every reporter in Washington will be the lone dissenter who
was always opposed to the ideological mob. Well, I?m calling on all
those reporters to take some action now, while it means something.

I?ll be saving the receipts.

--
Democrats and the liberal media hate President Trump more than they
love this country.


--- PyGate Linux v1.5.18
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Subject: Re: The Media Freaked Out Over Project 2025 -- But They?re_Purposefully_Ignoring_The_DSA?sPlans

On Jul 22, 2026 at 1:30:44 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:

The press spent years trying to frame the Trump administration as an existential threat to the country. Now that a real threat has emerged,
they are nowhere to be found.

During the 2024 presidential race, we were told repeatedly that a Trump victory would mean the end of democracy as we know it. As soon as he
won, he'd implement the "mysterious and sinister" (yes, they really
said that) Project 2025 and overhaul the institutions that protect our freedoms.

Now, as the midterms approach, the Democratic Socialists of America has released a document of its own. Unlike Project 2025, the Workers
Deserve More platform actually does call for the direct overhaul of our country's foundational institutions. Yet there's just a slight
asymmetry in how the media is reacting.

Let's examine the press coverage of the two proposals.

Two years ago, The Guardian featured an accusation during the campaign warning that Project 2025 was a "dystopian plot" that would "abolish
checks and balances". There was, of course, nothing in the document
that could substantiate this claim in the slightest.

Now here's a direct quote from the DSA platform: "Replace the President
and Supreme Court with an executive and judiciary chosen by and
subordinate to Congress." Now I'm no Clarence Thomas, but I'm fairly
certain that making two branches of government "subordinate" to the
third is the very definition of abolishing checks and balances.

Still waiting on The Guardian to clear that one up for me.

I just read that in order to get the DSA's endorsement, a candidate has to promise to "co-govern" with DSA leadership if they win.

So, for example, if Nithya Rama wins her race for L.A. mayor, it won't be Nithya (bad as she is) that's running the city. It'll be some unelected
shadowy cabal of communists calling the shots on how the city is run.

And just like this article points out, none of the media has questioned Raman on this or any of the DSA nonsense she has aligned herself with.



--- PyGate Linux v1.5.18
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)