GOP Rep. Tim Burchett calls Kamala Harris a 'DEI vice president'
By: NBC News
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., blasted Kamala Harris in a social media post Monday, calling her a "DEI vice president," using the initialism for "diversity, equity and inclusion" programs.
"The media propped up this president, lied to the American people for three years, and then dumped him for our DEI vice president," Burchett said on X.
He also referred to Harris as "a DEI hire" in a brief interview Monday, telling CNN that during the 2020 campaign candidate Joe Biden said "he was going to hire a Black female for vice president."
"What about white females? What about any other group?" Burchett added.
Biden said at a March 2020 Democratic debate that he'd choose a female running mate but did not mention race or ethnicity. Other top running mate contenders at the time included Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan.
Biden announced Sunday that he was dropping his re-election bid. He endorsed Harris for president the same day.
Burchett,a longtime state legislator in Tennessee and former Knox County mayor who was first elected to Congress in 2018,has previously cited DEI in disparaging Harris. In an interview with Newsmax this month, he said: "When I hear her talk, I just scratch my head and think this is what DEI is really about. It clearly is. She checks all the boxes. She'll say she's of Indian descent one day, then she'll say she's of Black descent. It's just box-checking."
Harris is the first female and Black vice president. She is the daughter of an Indian mother and a Jamaican father, with a resume that includes being elected district attorney of San Francisco, attorney general of California and U.S. senator.
Burchett, one of eight House Republicans who successfully voted to oust Rep. Kevin McCarthy, of California, as House speaker last year, also used a DEI attack line at a heated House committee hearing Monday about the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump. "You are a DEI horror story," Burchett told Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle.
Conservatives have widely accused Cheatle, a 27-year veteran of the agency, of being unqualified for the top job and said female agents on Trump's Secret Service team were physically incapable of protecting him.
The comments directed at Cheatle follow a pattern at other recent news events where conservative lawmakers and pundits have cited DEI programs as a contributing factor in disasters as disparate as the Boeing-made airplane problems and the Baltimore bridge collapse.
Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, asked Cheatle during the hearing whether the July 13 attempt to assassinate Trump was "due to DEI or rather systemic failures in communication and potentially safety protocols."
"The incident on the 13th has nothing to do with DEI," Cheatle responded. "The incident on the 13th has to do with a failure or a gap either in planning or communication."
Trolling, taunting, spamming, and off topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. NT members that vote up their own comments, repeat comments, or continue to disrupt the conversation risk having all of their comments deleted. Please remember to quote the person(s) to whom you are replying to preserve continuity of this seed. Any use of the phrase "Trump Derangement Syndrome" or the TDS acronym in a comment will be deleted. Any use of the term "Brandon", "Traitor Joe", or any variations thereof, when referring to President Biden, will be deleted. Right wing trolls can expect to have their irrelevant questions and comments deleted.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Tags
Who is online
30 visitors
Rep. Tim Burchett (Racist-Tennessee) is a typical Republican DEI politician:
DUMB
EMBARRASSING
IGNORANT
So you agree that Harris is a DEI vice president?
I think that Joe saw her as a safe bet.
that doesn't really answer the question posed
DEI isn’t an issue to me[✘]
neither to i, but i would have agreed she checked a lot of boxes for Biden, and wasn't a very strong candidate. I do not know that much about her, as with Trump in the race, the news cycles tend to forget others. She will have Trumps' and all of ours, attention now. She can show US if she measures up or not, but since her opponent and next possible POTUS is Trump, there wouldn't be too many things that could lower her below Trump, as she would have to do some super extra extraordinaries, to become less desirable, compared to the miscreant maniacal menace with the Evander ear peace, who should now sport one of those giant rings in his lobe like they do in Africa, as I believe it is a measure of a man, what ye say ?
What qualities do you think she was selected for?
well old white guys were already represented, so she would be representative of other not old white guy people, plus she was a former DA and AG and seems competent enough, to me, so do tell why U believe she was selected Greg ...?
yeah. we need more english challenged, tattoo covered, fat dumb ass maga goobers in gov't... /s
[✘]
I can remember when politics was not so divisive and the candidates were chasing the numbers. Now dialog around and about campaigns has made them toxic as well..
You have to go back before the awful Newt Gingrich for that.
gee, a maga moron white guy from the south complaining about american diversity. whatever could he mean?
Well, there you have evidence that Trumpists have no respect for liberal women; this kind of rhetoric and attitudinal conduct is what Donald and his Trumpists want the whole of the country to DEVOLVE back to being when it was immature and not well-enlightened. This is what they 'fight' for our community to be: Savage, boorish, and unrefined.
It's embarrassing for the country that the GOP ousted proper conservatives (William F. Buckley, Jr. would be shocked) from the GOP for. . .Donald ("Mothball") Trump and Trumpism.
in it's present form, even exists. They are a pathetic old white guy group of Trump worshipping, ethically mal adjusted nut a busted on Donny's leg, basically willing to beg, for a Trump trinket or bat of the eye, as they litter up our country in a fashion that would make more than an Indian cry..... all over WHAT ? A pppppppeeeeeeeeing prop for some Russian play on what was Putin place as the won't, normust case of we showed those educated , real good, bout ignorance, asz we know it well, as we xshuffle off to hell oh dolly, like a 45 figurine, all flexible and stuff for to take to the next extremely simple said minion bled turna kit cattywompuss dishevelled pussy grabba backastabba vile of puss, that is uzzee inn out of any of US
. .. wannabe autocrats .
Check it out!
Publisher's summary
From the Pulitzer-prize winning, New York Times bestselling author, an alarming account of how autocracies work together to undermine the democratic world, and how we should organize to defeat them
We think we know what an autocratic state looks like: There is an all-powerful leader at the top. He controls the police. The police threaten the people with violence. There are evil collaborators, and maybe some brave dissidents.
But in the 21st century, that bears little resemblance to reality. Nowadays, autocracies are underpinned not by one dictator, but by sophisticated networks composed of kleptocratic financial structures, surveillance technologies, and professional propagandists , all of which operate across multiple regimes, from China to Russia to Iran. Corrupt companies in one country do business with corrupt companies in another. The police in one country can arm and train the police in another, and propagandists share resources and themes, pounding home the same messages about the weakness of democracy and the evil of America.
International condemnation and economic sanctions cannot move the autocrats. Even popular opposition movements, from Venezuela to Hong Kong to Moscow, don't stand a chance. The members of Autocracy, Inc, aren't linked by a unifying ideology, like communism, but rather a common desire for power, wealth, and impunity . In this urgent treatise, which evokes George Kennan's essay calling for "containment" of the Soviet Union, Anne Applebaum calls for the democracies to fundamentally reorient their policies to fight a new kind of threat.
Anne Applebaum is very knowledgeable. I always appreciate her commentaries. Probably should get her book.
She was on this morning, "Morning Joe." -wee hours Pacific Time. Very interesting. I will get the book. (Everand does not have it yet for audible. Hopefully soon.)
She pointed out that Donald is 'palin' around with Hungary's autocratic President in recent weeks and its not an accident. . . Donald is studying up on taking over this republic.
As I said yesterday in another thread, if I started a drinking game based on the racists, misogynistic things the MAGA faithful will say about Harris my liver will give out before the election. It's all some of them know. Which is sad, because there are plenty of things on her record they can bring up for debate, but that's not how the MAGA base operates.
No, they don't. They just want to throw out racist, misogynistic rhetoric because their base wouldn't know what they were talking about otherwise.
yeah, they've made so many inroads towards minorities and suburban women as of late. why blow it... /s
[✘]
Honest person:
Harris was the ELECTED District Attorney of San Francisco
Harris was the ELECTED Attorney General of California
Harris was the ELECTED U.S. Senator from California
Idiotic reactionary, racist propaganda:
Harris is a DEI pick
[✘]
An HONEST person would not pretend that Biden said he would only consider black women to be his VP. A reactionary propagandist would, of course.
In fact, Biden said he would not guarantee that a black woman would be his running mate. Anyone paying attention should know that.
This week's reactionary catch phrase. Last week it was "lawfare". The week before it was "wokeism". The weeks before that it was "groomers", then "gay agenda", then "George Soros".
Whoever they hired to write that stuff is definitely getting overpaid.
How liars create the ‘illusion of truth’
Repetition makes a fact seem more true, regardless of whether it is or not. Understanding this effect can help you avoid falling for propaganda, says psychologist Tom Stafford.
“Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth”, is a law of propaganda often attributed to the Nazi Joseph Goebbels. Among psychologists something like this known as the "illusion of truth" effect. Here's how a typical experiment on the effect works: participants rate how true trivia items are, things like "A prune is a dried plum". Sometimes these items are true (like that one), but sometimes participants see a parallel version which isn't true (something like "A date is a dried plum").
After a break – of minutes or even weeks – the participants do the procedure again, but this time some of the items they rate are new, and some they saw before in the first phase. The key finding is that people tend to rate items they've seen before as more likely to be true, regardless of whether they are true or not, and seemingly for the sole reason that they are more familiar.
So, here, captured in the lab, seems to be the source for the saying that if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes the truth. And if you look around yourself, you may start to think that everyone from advertisers to politicians are taking advantage of this foible of human psychology.
But a reliable effect in the lab isn't necessarily an important effect on people's real-world beliefs. If you really could make a lie sound true by repetition, there'd be no need for all the other techniques of persuasion.
The 'illusion of truth' can be a dangerous weapon in the hands of a propagandist like Joseph Goebbels (Credit: Getty Images
Recently, a team led by Lisa Fazio of Vanderbilt University set out to test how the illusion of truth effect interacts with our prior knowledge. Would it affect our existing knowledge? They used paired true and un-true statements, but also split their items according to how likely participants were to know the truth (so "The Pacific Ocean is the largest ocean on Earth" is an example of a "known" items, which also happens to be true, and "The Atlantic Ocean is the largest ocean on Earth" is an un-true item, for which people are likely to know the actual truth).
Their results show that the illusion of truth effect worked just as strongly for known as for unknown items, suggesting that prior knowledge won’t prevent repetition from swaying our judgements of plausibility.
To cover all bases, the researchers performed one study in which the participants were asked to rate how true each statement seemed on a six-point scale, and one where they just categorised each fact as "true" or "false".
Repetition pushed the average item up the six-point scale, and increased the odds that a statement would be categorised as true. *
For statements that were actually fact or fiction, known or unknown, repetition made them all seem more believable .
Repetition can even make known lies sound more believable (Credit: Alamy)
At first this looks like bad news for human rationality, but – and I can't emphasise this strongly enough – when interpreting psychological science, you have to look at the actual numbers.
What Fazio and colleagues actually found, is that the biggest influence on whether a statement was judged to be true was... whether it actually was true. The repetition effect couldn’t mask the truth. With or without repetition, people were still more likely to believe the actual facts as opposed to the lies.
This shows something fundamental about how we update our beliefs – repetition has a power to make things sound more true, even when we know differently, but it doesn't over-ride that knowledge.
. . . .
If repetition was the only thing that influenced what we believed we'd be in trouble, but it isn't. We can all bring to bear more extensive powers of reasoning, but we need to recognise they are a limited resource.
Our minds are prey to the illusion of truth effect because our instinct is to use short-cuts in judging how plausible something is. Often this works. Sometimes it is misleading.
Once we know about the effect we can guard against it. Part of this is double-checking why we believe what we do – if something sounds plausible is it because it really is true, or have we just been told that repeatedly? This is why scholars are so mad about providing references - so we can track the origin on any claim, rather than having to take it on faith.
But part of guarding against the illusion is the obligation it puts on us to stop repeating falsehoods. We live in a world where the facts matter, and should matter.
More at link:
* Emphasis by CB .
Goebbels is the inspiration and role model for most reactionary propagandists.
Not Black just a woman when in March 2020 he pledged unequivocally to name a woman as his running mate.
By June 2020, pressure was growing across the Party that the running mate bust be Black.
In July Biden announced that he had four Black woman as possible running mates.
[✘]
He did, and your fraudulent comment pretended like he said "I'm only going to consider black women to be my VP". You were called out for your fraudulent comment and now you are trying to cover for the falsehood. Sorry, but your fraud is still there for everyone to read.
Thanks for confirming where your sympathies lie.
It's good that you can laugh at yourself despite the sheer stupidity of your comments.
Doesn’t it depend on the timeline you’re looking at?
No, it doesn't. If he never said it, then he never said it. Why is something as simple as that so difficult for right wingers to understand?
Candidate Biden did commit to picking a black woman for his running mate. It was a professional choice without any regard for semantics . It was his choice. His running mate selection. It was his freedom of speech to state. It was his presidential campaign RISK to take.
The rhetoric about how Biden semantically verbalized it. . . or should not have done so . . . is 'dazzle bull' and is not fit for arguing over. The selection itself, did not negatively change a damn thing in the 2020's election result!
Democrats and Others: Be prepared and nimble enough to separate the real from the dazzling bull and images that will be flung out from the center (or rear) of Trumpists :
Dazzling Bullshit
This image conveys and communicates NOTHING : It's only beauty is in the eyes of a beholder .
The Democratic Party is made up of coalitions of many diverse people groups (in the millions), many organizations, which form its community. Trumpists are tribalists, whom decry diversity, inclusion, and equity. . . and seek ideological hierarchical dominance over its members where 'everybody' should know their place their lane, and are expected to conform to doing that.
They both have the same look in their eyes...