If you are disgusted by @davideastmanjr , here’s a short thread about what you can do about it, but the bottom line is to call Rep. Sarah Vance’s office
(907)465-2689
and demand that she remove this man from the Judiciary committee. #akleg#davideastman
(1/10)
While it’s understandable to be enraged and horrified by Eastman, to some extent it’s a waste of energy. He is who his. Nothing that I know of will change his behavior. Instead, direct that energy towards those who enable him.
(2/10)
That covers lots of people in both parties, but right now it’s Rep. Sarah Vance.
Because nobody wants to work with him, Eastman is not in a caucus and it’s actually procedurally incorrect for him to be on a committee. So why is he on the Judiciary Committee?…
(3/10)
…Because she has specially requested his presence. In her own words:
(4/10)
Sarah Vance wants this to go away.
She’s counting on you—yes, you—to forget about this until it’s time to be outraged by the next thing that comes along. But let’s strike while the iron is hot and national attention is on Eastman and Vance.
(5/10)
Members are responsible for their own words, yes, but only one person is responsible for giving this “one member” a platform he’s not actually entitled to: Sarah Vance. Call her, preferably today, at (907)465-2689, or email (Representative.Sarah.Vance@akleg.gov)
(6/10)
Calling is better than emailing, but something is always better than nothing. Be polite, be brief, but be firm: demand that she stop granting the special favor of a committee seat to this pro-child-abuse, pro-child-marriage white supremacist
(7/10)
Remember, the ONLY reason he has a platform to make those heinous remarks is that Rep. Sarah Vance gives it to him.
(8/10)
Rep. Eastman teaches people that representatives should be afraid of their constituents. His loyalists call and harangue anyone who doesn’t show total fealty. I don’t want Rep. Vance to be afraid: I want her to do the right thing. So be polite!
(9/10)
But she won’t unless you—yes, YOU—call and get her to take action. (907)465-2689. Call today, February 22nd, 2023.
I'm not and never have been a lawyer, but my dad was a con-law professor and the Supreme Court cases governing the area of "seditious groups" was of particular interest to him. Here are the laws and decisions relevant to the Eastman case:
(1/22)
In 1940, Congress passed a law called the Smith Act, which allowed for the imprisonment (or deportation, if they weren't citizens) of anyone who advocated or was a member of a group that advocated for the violent overthrow of the U.S. government, a familiar phrase
(2/22)
This was mostly intended to get rid of a troublesome Australian-born left-wing union organizer, Harry Bridges, and was also used on a few pro-Nazi folks during WWII, but...
Since Eastman’s views on the Holocaust have come up, it’s worth noting that he believes that it was perpetrated by a cabal of butch gay Germans. Yes I have the evidence.
When Betsy Peratrovich wrote this in response to @davideastmanjr 's creepy white-nationalist-dog-whistle Thanksgiving FB post, someone asked her "Why do you troll people who aren’t personally attacking you?" Her response is worth quoting (with her permission) in full.
(1/14)
"As an Alaska Native, I take exception to Dave describing “our heritage as Americans” as being passed on from the time of the Pilgrims.
(2/14)
In most circumstances, I would simply chalk comments like that up to ignorance, and wouldn’t take it personally. But the post was made by Dave, who is not stupid, and who certainly knows better. It is his intentional disregard that makes it personally offensive.
Homework: what are the patterns of turnout in the Valley?
(1/4)
HD 25: 51.0%
HD 26: 45.8%
SD M: 48.5%
HD 27: 41.3%
HD 28: 44.5%
SD N: 42.9%
HD 29: 50.2%
HD 30: 48.2%
(2/4)
District N—the only area in the state where only republicans ran in the senate district and both constituent house districts—had noticeably lower turnout than the others, and 27 (Eastman) had noticeably lower turnout than 28 (Sumner).
Having taken my medicine after talking out of church about Stedman, it seems to me that the *only* three extremists left in the Senate are the three who are in that little minority, with (I think) Wilson as the furthest-right member of the majority. How about the House?
(1/7)
I'm interested in the intersection of "extremists left in the House" and "vulnerable Republicans in the House." Obviously "extremist" is extremely subjective, but stuff like election denialism, vaccine paranoia, and overt LGBT/racial/ethnic bigotry are hallmarks.
(2/7)
From my perspective the extremists (from roughly furthest right to least-furthest-right) are:
--Eastman, Allard, Vance, Carpenter, DeLena Johnson, Rauscher, Prax, McCabe, McKay, Cronk, Tilton
With a couple unknown newcomers (Coulombe, Stapp) as unknowns
A fascinating phenomenon I discovered fairly late in my career as an amateur historian:
In the years of the most feverish rhetoric of the pro-slavery faction (i.e. immediately before the war), some of them were moving in the direction that northern whites weren't *really* white.
and I have zero doubt that, had the war not interrupted the ideological march, eventually someone would have suggested that Southern whites were justified in enslaving northern whites.
So too with anti-LGBT rhetoric. It's already expanding to "all teachers are groomers." I even saw one of Eastman's clownshow friends assert that "all libs are groomers."
Setting aside that you should stand with your neighbors and citizens because it's right...