Let's name prisons, landfills, and volcanos after Trump, and put his Colorado portrait on the penny
Then along comes our current band of jerks, House Republicans, who have completely surpassed anything I ever thought was ridiculous, offensive, nauseous and obnoxious.
In moves that would make even the most sycophantic courtiers of history vomit, certain Republican lawmakers are falling over themselves to lavish unprecedented — and undeserved — honors on Donald Trump.
From proposals to deface U.S. currency to desecrating Mount Rushmore with his face, these silly and stupid stunts not only strain credulity but also underscore a troubling penchant for idolizing a figure whose legacy is revolting instead of revolutionary and heinous instead of heroic.
After reading this article on Politico over the weekend, I started thinking about the proper ways we should be immortalizing him that are the antithesis of Mount Rushmore, $100 bills, and airports.
Consider U.S. Rep. Addison McDowell of North Carolina, who must have been smoking a funny vape, when he introduced a bill that seeks to rename Washington Dulles International Airport after Trump. McDowell claims that Trump "took a bullet for us" and is "going to save the country."
It's unclear how renaming an airport after a figure known for implementing travel bans and illegally deporting migrants on planes against a federal judge's order aligns with the spirit of international travel and diplomacy. The only aviation Trump cares about is his obsession with getting his new, gilded Air Force One.
Then there's Florida U.S. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, who has put forward a deranged bill to immortalize Trump's face on Mount Rushmore, placing him alongside the likes of Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt, and Lincoln. Luna praises Trump's "remarkable accomplishments," though she stops short of specifying which achievements warrant such an honor. Perhaps criminal indictments, guilty verdicts, or the incitement of an insurrection are the milestones she has in mind.
And here's one that is really off the rails. U.S. Rep. Brandon Gill of Texas introduced the Golden Age Act of 2025 bill, aiming to replace Benjamin Franklin on the $100 bill with Trump's portrait. If this happens, it can't be the portrait of Trump that hangs in the Colorado State Capitol, which for some reason infuriates our Dear Leader.
Gill asserts that Trump ushered in a "golden age" for America, a claim that many historians and economists might find, to put it mildly, debatable. Perhaps Trump's face should be put on a $502 million dollar bill, which is what he owes New York State, or the $83 million bill, which is how much he owes E. Jean Carroll.
Not to be outdone, South Carolina U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson proposed a new $250 bill featuring Trump's likeness, ostensibly to commemorate the nation's 250th anniversary. One might wonder if the irony was lost on them, that introducing higher denominations could be seen as a nod to inflationary times, much like the economic tumult associated with Trump's policies.
Not content with renaming airports, revamping currency, and reshaping national monuments, New York U.S. Rep. Claudia Tenney proposes making Trump's birthday, June 14, a federal holiday, conveniently merging it with Flag Day. I'm wondering why she didn't go the whole nine yards and just replace the 50 stars on the flag with Trump's portrait? Again, not the one in Colorado.
Tenney argues that Trump's impact on the nation warrants such recognition, akin to the federal holiday commemorating George Washington's birthday. Let me point out that Washington led the Continental Army to victory and Lincoln presided over reuniting the country, whereas Trump has a historic two impeachments and …well, everything else.
While these lawmakers trip over themselves to honor Trump, countless unsung heroes in American history remain largely unrecognized. So, for beginners, let's just point out a few LGBTQ+ heroes who have really done the hard work to ensure our freedom and democracy.
Take Bayard Rustin, a gay African American who was the chief architect of the 1963 March on Washington. His unwavering commitment to nonviolence and social justice was instrumental in the civil rights movement, yet his sexuality led to his marginalization within the movement. Trump is trashing Rustin's fight for civil rights.
Marsha P. Johnson, a Black transgender woman, played a pivotal role in the Stonewall uprising of 1969, a watershed moment for LGBTQ+ rights. Even though she faced systemic discrimination, her activism laid the groundwork for future generations in the fight for equality. Trump is wiping out Johnson's fight for LGBTQ+ and trans rights.
Similarly, Sylvia Rivera, a Latina transgender activist, was at the forefront of the struggle for LGBTQ+ rights, advocating tirelessly for marginalized communities. Her efforts have left an indelible mark on the quest for social justice. Trump is erasing Rivera's fight for Hispanic and queer equality.
Given the fervor to commemorate Trump, perhaps it's time to consider more fitting tributes. Why not rename federal penitentiaries in his honor, symbolizing the numerous legal entanglements and convictions associated with his name?
Or place his likeness on the penny. Trump hates the penny, and it is a coin so undervalued that many consider it a nuisance, much like the divisive rhetoric he popularized. And we would definitely use the likeness of his Colorado State Capitol portrait to grace the penny.
Better yet, let's carve his face into an active volcano, allowing nature to periodically cleanse itself of his image. It would be a reminder to all of us who are beside ourselves with anger that like everything else in life, Trump is only temporary.
In a nod to his penchant for spreading misinformation, perhaps April Fools' Day, rather than Flag Day, should be renamed in his honor. It's a day dedicated to pranks and falsehoods, which seems a fitting legacy for Trump.
Finally, no one quite knows what to do with our rapidly filling landfills, so perhaps a starting point could be to name them all after Trump, indicative of all his threatening and demeaning trash talk.
The Republican Party's attempts to venerate Trump through legislation are wildly unhinged and unbecoming. Honoring a twice-impeached former president, found liable for sexual abuse and defamation, whose business was convicted of tax fraud, and who has continually undermined democratic institutions, is ludicrous to the point of being demented.
I'm waiting for one of the House GOP grovelers to introduce legislation to rename the Gulf of Mexico — or the Gulf of America — the Gulf of Trump. Maybe one enterprising Democrat will counter that by renaming the Bermuda Triangle the Trump Triangle, representing the doom and disaster he represents.
Voices is dedicated to featuring a wide range of inspiring personal stories and impactful opinions from the LGBTQ+ community and its allies. Visit Advocate.com/submit to learn more about submission guidelines. Views expressed in Voices stories are those of the guest writers, columnists, and editors, and do not directly represent the views of The Advocate or our parent company, equalpride.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
a few seconds ago
Trump thinks owning a piece of Intel would be a good deal for the US
SAN FRANCISCO -- President Donald Trump wants the U.S. government to own a piece of Intel, less than two weeks after demanding the Silicon Valley pioneer dump the CEO that was hired to turn around the slumping chipmaker. If the goal is realized, the investment would deepen the Trump administration's involvement in the computer industry as the president ramps up the pressure for more U.S. companies to manufacture products domestically instead of relying on overseas suppliers. The Trump administration is in talks to secure a 10% stake in Intel in exchange for converting government grants that were pledged to Intel under President Joe Biden. If the deal is completed, the U.S. government would become one of Intel's largest shareholders and blur the traditional lines separating the public sector and private sector in a country that remains the world's largest economy. In his second term, Trump has been leveraging his power to reprogram the operations of major computer chip companies. The administration is requiring Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices, two companies whose chips are helping to power the craze around artificial intelligence, to pay a 15% commission on their sales of chips in China in exchange for export licenses. Trump's interest in Intel is also being driven by his desire to boost chip production in the U.S., which has been a focal point of the trade war that he has been waging throughout the world. By lessening the country's dependence on chips manufactured overseas, the president believes the U.S. will be better positioned to maintain its technological lead on China in the race to create artificial intelligence. That's what the president said August 7 in an unequivocal post calling for Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan to resign less than five months after the Santa Clara, California, company hired him. The demand was triggered by reports raising national security concerns about Tan's past investments in Chinese tech companies while he was a venture capitalist. But Trump backed off after Tan professed his allegiance to the U.S. in a public letter to Intel employees and went to the White House to meet with the president, who applauded the Intel CEO for having an 'amazing story.' The company isn't commenting about the possibility of the U.S. government becoming a major shareholder, but Intel may have little choice because it is currently dealing from a position of weakness. After enjoying decades of growth while its processors powered the personal computer boom, the company fell into a slump after missing the shift to the mobile computing era unleashed by the iPhone's 2007 debut. Intel has fallen even farther behind in recent years during an artificial intelligence craze that has been a boon for Nvidia and AMD. The company lost nearly $19 billion last year and another $3.7 billion in the first six months of this year, prompting Tan to undertake a cost-cutting spree. By the end of this year, Tan expects Intel to have about 75,000 workers, a 25% reduction from the end of last year. Although rare, it's not unprecedented for the U.S. government to become a significant shareholder in a prominent company. One of the most notable instances occurred during the Great Recession in 2008 when the government injected nearly $50 billion into General Motors in return for a roughly 60% stake in the automaker at a time it was on the verge of bankruptcy. The government ended up with a roughly $10 billion loss after it sold its stock in GM. U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told CNBC during a Tuesday interview that the government has no intention of meddling in Intel's business, and will have its hands tied by holding non-voting shares in the company. But some analysts wonder if the Trump administration's financial ties to Intel might prod more companies looking to curry favor with the president to increase their orders for the company's chips. Intel was among the biggest beneficiaries of the Biden administration's CHIPS and Science Act, but it hasn't been able to revive its fortunes while falling behind on construction projects spawned by the program. The company has received about $2.2 billion of the $7.8 billion pledged under the incentives program — money that Lutnick derided as a 'giveaway' that would better serve U.S. taxpayers if it's turned into Intel stock. 'We think America should get the benefit of the bargain,' Lutnick told CNBC. 'It's obvious that it's the right move to make.'
CNBC
a few seconds ago
- CNBC
Hassett likely to be Trump's pick for Fed chief, though Warsh is more qualified, CNBC survey finds
President Donald Trump will tap his top economic advisor Kevin Hassett to be the next Fed chair, according to respondents to a special Jackson Hole Edition of the CNBC Fed Survey. But when asked who the president should pick, Hassett ranked a more distant fourth. Hassett, the director of the National Economic Council, firmly led the pack when asked who the president will choose from among 11 names currently being considered. He was followed by Fed Governor Christopher Waller and former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh. But when asked who the president "should" pick, Warsh took the No. 1 spot, closely followed by Waller and former St. Louis Fed President James Bullard. Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman was in fifth after Hassett. "I think that Trump's familiarity with (Hassett) in the job that he did during the pandemic makes him a high candidate for Trump, who appreciates and awards loyalty," said Richard Steinberg, senior global market strategist with Focus Partners Wealth. While maintaining that Hassett is qualified, Allen Sinai of Decision Economics said he's concerned about Fed independence if he gets the job. "The politics of low interest rates for political reasons — a very strong view and push by the Trump administration — is a macro risk if it is seen in markets as a takeover by the administration," Sinai said. In the survey, 41% of respondents think the next Fed chair will conduct monetary policy independently of the president and 37% said it would be in coordination; 22% were unsure. Trump has campaigned hard for the Fed to cut rates, repeatedly insulting Powell, but Powell and the Federal Open Market Committee have so far resisted because of concern over potential inflation from tariffs. Bowman and Waller both dissented in July in favor of a rate cut. Survey respondents see two rate cuts this year from the Fed --- in September and December --- but also high inflation. The forecast for the consumer price index 12-month inflation rate remains at around 3% this year and 2.9% in 2026, suggesting the Fed will have to deal with above-target inflation for a while. Nearly two-thirds of respondents believe "substantial" impacts from tariffs on inflation are yet to come. "The Fed is caught between a rock and two hard places," said Richard Bernstein, CEO of Richard Bernstein Advisors. "Political pressure to cut rates and fiscal stimulus coming vs. the ongoing strength in the leading indicators of employment and inflation." As a result, Powell may not be as dovish about rate cuts as markets hope in his Jackson Hole, Wyo. speech. The Fed gathers each August for a symposium at which there are no votes but the chair traditionally delivers a keynote speech that often has indicated what's ahead. Almost 70% of respondents think the Fed chair will be neutral in his comments with 14% believing he will be dovish. Another 14% think he won't even discuss monetary policy or the economic outlook. "Powell's comments at Jackson Hole may be more balanced than the market is currently anticipating as he needs to weigh both downside risks to employment and upside risks to inflation," said Douglas Gordon, managing director at Russell Investments. Powell could discuss the Fed's effort to revisit its long-term strategy, with some expectation he addresses the Fed's controversial average inflation targeting. Respondents are divided over how to fix the central bank or whether it needs fixing at all. Just 11% say the Fed process of making monetary policy needs major reforms with 85% saying it needs either modest or little to no reform. On specific issues, a 41% plurality say the Fed should get rid of the dot plot where Fed officials anonymously indicate individual forecasts for the funds rate. But 37% say keep it as is, with another 19% saying it should be kept with individual forecasts linked to the rate outlook. When it comes to the 2% inflation target, 52% want to retain it but 44% want the Fed to adopt a range from about 1.4% to 2.7%. A 44% plurality want to eliminate the Fed's average inflation targeting, while 37% want to keep it. In average inflation targeting, the Fed takes account for prior misses in hitting its target, and could tolerate higher inflation for a while to account for inflation having run below target in previous years. Some have said this led the Fed to be more tolerant of inflation during the pandemic and slowed its decision to tighten policy.
Fox News
7 minutes ago
- Fox News
Texas GOP lawmakers poised to finalize Trump-backed map after Dem redistricting walkout ends
The Texas legislature is poised to take up a new congressional redistricting bill put forward by Republicans on Wednesday, following weeks of pushback from Democrats. It is unclear how quickly Republicans will be able to vote on the redistricting plan, as it must go through floor debate before coming to a vote. It is a victory for Republicans, nevertheless, as Democrats who fled the state in an effort to block the plan are now back in the capitol. If passed, the new congressional map would likely flip five seats currently held by Democrats over to Republicans, a reality that has unleashed cries of gerrymandering across the country. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul has vowed to "fight fire with fire," saying New York Democrats will pursue their own redistricting plan. California Gov. Gavin Newsom has followed suit, with the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) proposing a California congressional map that would flip five Republican seats over to Democrats. Meanwhile, more Republican states, including Ohio, Florida, Indiana and Missouri, are moving forward with or considering their own redistricting efforts, as are Democratic states such as Maryland and Illinois. Nowhere has a redistricting battle been more dramatic than in Texas, however, where roughly 50 Democratic state lawmakers absconded from a special legislative session to block the vote in early August. Democrats fled to Illinois and New York, but they faced a $500 fine for each day they refused to return home. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, and other state officials hit the Democratic legislators with lawsuits seeking criminal charges or to have them removed from office entirely. The walkout ended when Democrats returned on Monday, saying they had accomplished their goals of blocking a vote during the first special legislative session and persuading Democrats in other states to take retaliatory steps.
