Profile avatar
donnaj.bsky.social
Artist, biologist, cat-lover, dog-lover, interested in political psychology and right-wing religious extremism
9 posts 97 followers 316 following
Prolific Poster
Conversation Starter

Roger Stone is promoting Prospera, a “Freedom City” (per Stone) in Honduras backed by Peter Thiel, Marc Andreessen (who once tweeted that “anti-colonialism has been economically catastrophic for the Indian people…”) & Balaji Srinivasan (author of The Network State: How to Build a New Country). 1/

Because this is getting downplayed in some of the coverage, the racist staffer DOGE rehired isn’t a case of “stupid things he wrote years ago as a teen.” He posted about how we should “normalize Indian hate” IN SEPTEMBER.

History doesn't repeat itself; the self...repeats history.

Odds are good that someone in your life has received vital care at a university-affiliated hospital near you. Trump and Musk want to destroy them. Call your reps and demand they push back -- especially if they're Republicans. www.house.gov/representati...

Here are the 25 institutions that receive the most NIH funding (98% of HHS is NIH). Basically, they're large schools with large hospitals. They receive 50% of all NIH funding. Source: ncses.nsf.gov/surveys/fede... (table 26) (Not going to do a whole thread but thought folks might be interested.)

Top 100 medical schools in the United States. Are you prepared for the economic devastation of many, if not all, of these medical schools going away because of Trump? https://bsky.app/profile/jonmladd.bsky.social/post/3lhmvygnu7s2r 1. Harvard (Cambridge, MA) 2. Johns Hopkins (Baltimore, MD)

OMB called up and said do 15%. The “because philanthropies cap charges at 15%” rationale is fig leaf bad faith nonsense.

While university presidents are huddling w/ teams of communications consultants and lawyers, carefully crafting statements to respond to the attack on science, the Trump administration is making massive, rapid-fire moves. An asymmetrical battlefield, where consequences only flow one way.

When you think about the institutions that would be hit hard by the cap in indirect costs from NIH, you quickly hit on research powerhouses in red states: the Cleveland Clinic, MD Anderson, UAB and more. They are core economic drivers for their states. Will this be considered?

With the NIH cuts, there’s no longer any excuse for any professor, in any discipline, to not address the moment in their classes. You don’t even have to be “political” if that’s how you roll; this changes everything. You need only observe reality. 1/

Cuts to the NIH are a strategy to strangle research universities not “reduce waste”

MAGA forces have begun what they believe to be their final offensive against everything on the Left. One way to fight back is for organized labor to become a conscious anti-fascist movement.

Creating a participatory authoritarian state and Gamifying the destruction of government and democracy sure is something else.

After Raskin issued a harsh takedown of Musk, triggering a Twitter fight between the two, Raskin pressed further, asking Musk a simple question: As someone who supposedly works for the government now, will he submit to basic financial disclosure and conflict-of-interest rules?

Executive wants to frame the NIH indirects cut as $4B in savings. But given that NIH returns $2.5 on every $1 investment, this would actually cost US economy a net $6 BILLION (per year!). Not to mention the human costs of wrecking education and research sectors and the communities they serve.

Definitive analysis of the proposed — and likely illegal — NIH rate/allowance cut from former HHS general counsel @sbagen.bsky.social buttondown.com/sbagen/archi...

From what I hear from multiple people in the space, the latest NIH indirect costs for medical research grants will basically mean the end most academic medical centers.

We are not far away from your spouse’s cancer trial stopping, your parent’s Alzheimer’s clinical trial evaporating, your teen’s mental health intervention disappearing. It’s easy to attack universities, but the recent actions from the White House will stop cutting edge medical research very quickly.

This is what a cap on “indirect costs” through NIH grants will do. Going from >50% of grant total to 15% will change how your local university healthcare systems function everyday.

Call your R reps. If you have a regional accent, make the most of it. Tell them you didn't vote for CANCER and ask them what the hell they're gonna do to stop Musk and Trump. reps.fyi

Important new reporting from @gregsargent.bsky.social @thenewrepublic.bsky.social newrepublic.com/article/1913...

I had a great conversation with @gilduran.com on the truly dystopian philosophy behind Elon Musk’s dismantling of our government. This will open your eyes. New ‘On Democracy with FPwellman’ exclusivly on MeidasTouch now! youtu.be/hnTBzgjme20?...

DOGE plans to slash about as much ($4B) from NIH, and hence from universities and medical centers, as the government gave SpaceX ($3.8B) last year. It's not about the money and government "waste." It's never been about the money or government "waste." www.usatoday.com/story/money/...

Scientists and journalists need to figure out right quick how to explain to the average person how a massive change in research indirects will impact the medical care they and their children get (eg at the local children’s hospital), the education their children will get, the price of tuition, etc.

Two biggest employers in my region are Dartmouth College & Dartmouth-Hitchcock Hospital. Jobs will evaporate, care at the hospital—anchor for much of 2 states—will wither, & effect will ripple outward through other businesses. Our fentanyl & homelessness problems will climb. Crime, too.

1. Today the NIH director issued a new directive slashing overhead rates to 15%. I want to provide some context on what that means and why it matters. grants.nih.gov/grants/guide...

Not for nothing, but this NIH indirect cost cap was in Project 2025. Just in case we weren’t already sure they were following the playbook.

If you haven’t read her work, this is a good starting point. Poetic prose on a dark subject…definitely worth the time.

“A sane government would never do this.” — the former dean of Harvard Medical School Universities are reeling. Elon Musk’s allies are celebrating. Looking at the major cut to federal research funding — which many scientists predict will be devastating With @lenasun.bsky.social and Carolyn Johnson

glad that the 19 year old who might have access to some of the government’s most sensitive data has a past of leaking documents to competitors, doing cybercrimes, and sucking at doing those crimes. good stuff.

“There is nothing I can write to derail this catastrophe that I haven’t written already. I am worn from warning. What is a warning, anyway, but a declaration of what you love and want to protect? It’s not that my heart’s not in it. It’s that my heart is in everything.”

Research universities are often the largest employers in their region. They are often the primary health care providers to communities. This funding shift will not only reduce US research leadership, it will put working people out of work and reduce healthcare access.

This is a de facto massive budget cut to research universities. We are talking Great Recession size impacts.

The confirmation vote is set for 9 PM ET tonight (Friday, 1/24). Call your Senators - including any wavering Dem Senators and tell them to vote no on Pete Hegseth.

Of course ending birthright citizenship is blatantly unconstitutional. So is a third term in office. But I thought the same thing about presidential criminal immunity and holding office after inciting an insurrection. The obvious is not so obvious anymore.

from today's post — link is here: bit.ly/4jio26l

We keep hearing about masculinity from the Zuckerbergs of the world-- this woman has shown more courage in this 60-second clip than any of the tech billionaires have shown in recent memory as they grovel at Trump's feet.

Three morals to the TikTok story so far. First, everything involving Trump 2.0 will be part of a giant con. Second, everything involving Trump 2.0 will be a grift: "What do you need; what's in it for me?" Third - everything BESIDES the con and the grift, including national security - is irrelevant.