Charlotte's Web Thoughts

Hey folks, this evening, I joined my dear friend Allison Gill (MuellerSheWrote) for a lively discussion about Pope Leo XIV, the new head of the Catholic Church. We discussed his politics and ideology, the shadow of the sex abuse scandals of the Church, and why this new pontiff is a direct opponent of Trump's worldview.Earlier today, I published this piece about the rightwing outrage directed at the new pope — basically, that these folks are never happy. Check it out.Thank you Reda Rountree (she/her), Kim B., A. Hofferkamp, Joanne, MagnaAnimus, and many others for tuning into my live video with Allison Gill! Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]You may have missed it in the chaos of our current news environment, but this week, the bodies of four American soldiers were pulled out of a peat bog—basically a swamp—in Lithuania about a week after they went missing there while on a training mission.Last week, while a search was still underway for the missing soldiers, Trump was asked in the Oval Office by a reporter about the unfolding crisis and he responded that he didn't know anything about it.Yesterday, the bodies of the four soldiers arrived at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware and were received in a ceremony known as a “dignified transfer,” which is attended by senior government officials and often the sitting president.Last night, it was reported by NBC News that instead of attending the dignified transfer to honor the deceased soldiers, Trump flew to Florida to watch a LIV Golf tournament and attend a reception being hosted at his resort.I understand many of you aren't familiar with dignified transfers and why what Trump has done here is so disgusting and unbecoming and insulting to the memories of these soldiers.During my time in the 3rd U.S. Infantry Regiment (The Old Guard), I was honored to take part in many dignified transfers at the height of our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.So, I'll explain:The straight-line distance between Washington, D.C., and Dover, Delaware, is less than 85 miles. It takes a helicopter about 40 to 45 minutes to make the trip. I was 19 years old, and it was my first time riding a helicopter. I barely remember any of it. I was distracted.I was more nervous than I've ever been in my life about what was to come next, and so, as this Black Hawk floated above the earth with my casket team, me the youngest and most junior, I could only think: What if I mess this up? What if I fail? How will I live with myself?That's how it should be in a moment like this. You should be nervous. You should let that sharpen your focus. Because there is no room for error when handling the remains of a service member returning to the United States after they've died. You should strive for perfection.The helicopter landed, and my anxiety spiked.In retrospect, I recall noticing the silence of the rest of the casket team. These were young men, mostly early 20s, loud and boisterous and chests puffed. Now, they were quiet. It was unnerving.When you're a new enlisted soldier in an infantry unit (the FNG) you're treated like you know nothing. Because you don't. Everyone around you is older and vastly more competent and confident. Yet, in this moment, despite having done this before, they were all nervous, too. It was unsettling.We were brought into a holding area near the tarmac on Dover Air Force Base in Delaware, where the remains of service members who have died in a theater of operations arrive on a C-17 transport plane. We rehearsed our steps. And did it again. And then again. No room for error.The plane arrived. The ramp was lowered. The transfer vehicle that would complete the next leg of the journey was parked. Our casket team was positioned. We were now each wearing ceremonial white cotton gloves we had held under the bathroom faucet. Damp gloves have a better grip.We're a casket team, but these are not caskets. They're transfer cases: rectangular aluminum boxes that bear a resemblance to a crate for production equipment. Yet, the dimensions are obvious. Any given civilian would take only a few moments to realize that's for carrying bodies.It's called a "dignified transfer," not a "ceremony," because officials don't want loved ones to feel obligated to be there while in mourning. But it is as highly choreographed as any ceremony, probably more so. It is done as close to perfection as anything the military does.I was positioned in formation with my casket team, and I could see the transfer cases precisely laid out, military dress-right-dress, in the cavernous space of the C-17, each draped with an American flag that had been fastened perfectly. I remember my stomach dropping.There is simply no space for other thoughts. Your full brain capacity is focused on not screwing up. The casket team steps off in crisp, exact steps toward the plane, up the ramp (please, oh God, don't slip), aside the case, lift up ceremonially, face back and down the ramp.During movement, everyone else is saluting: the plane personnel, the OIC (officer in charge), any senior NCOs (noncommissioned officers) and generals, and occasionally, the president. The family is sometimes there. No ceremonial music or talking. All silent, save for the steps of the casket team.You don't see the family during this. You're too focused. There are other distractions. Maybe they forgot, but no one told me there'd be 40-60 pounds of ice in the transfer case to prevent decomposition over the 10-hour plane ride. You can sometimes feel it sloshing around a bit.Some of the transfer cases feel slightly heavier, some slightly lighter. The weight is distributed among six bearers, so it's not a big difference. But then you carry a case that's significantly lighter, and you realize those are the only remains they were able to recover.It probably takes all of 30-40 seconds to carry the transfer case from the plane to the mortuary vehicle, but it feels like the longest walk ever each time. The case is carefully placed in the back of the mortuary vehicle, and the casket team moves away in formation.When it's over and you're on your way back to Washington, you're overcome with a mixture of intense relief that you didn't screw up and profound sobriety over what you've just done and witnessed. I wouldn't call it a good feeling. Maybe a numbed pain.From the outside, the most egalitarian place in America is a military transfer case. They all look exactly the same: an aluminum box covered with the American flag. We didn't know their names, rank, race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation — none of it. All the same.Whatever cruel and unfathomable politics had brought all of us to that moment, from the killed service member in the box, to those of us carrying it, to the occasional elected official who attends to pay respects, there were no politics to be found during a dignified transfer.The fallen service members I helped receive and carry during this part of the journey to their final resting place were not "losers" or "suckers" — as Trump has infamously called them. They were selfless and heroic, and I had the honor of being among the first to hold them when they returned home.There are service members and civilians around the world involved in caring for our war fatalities: the mortuary specialists, the casket teams, the family liaisons — so many people who work to ensure that this final act is done with the greatest amount of dignity and honor, seeking perfection.I suppose the one thing we all took for granted is that dignity would always be affirmed by all our civilian leaders to those service members who gave everything. I never would have predicted any official, let alone a sitting president, would insult fallen service members.This is not to say the four American soldiers who died in Lithuania were not honored by a sitting president.On Thursday, when the bodies of the soldiers were being transported to the airport in Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania, thousands of people there lined the streets to pay their respects.Among them was Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda, who, apparently, has more respect for our troops than our own commander-in-chief.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]Today is International Transgender Day of Visibility, often shortened to Trans Day of Visibility (or TDOV).It was created by Rachel Crandall Crocker in Michigan in 2009, and it's now celebrated in countries around the world. Most estimates put trans and nonbinary people at between 0.5 and 1 percent of the total U.S. population, but some data suggests we may be as high as two percent. Personally, I think it's higher than that. I believe there are millions of closeted trans and nonbinary and gender-expansive and gender-questioning people in our country who don't have the necessary encouragement and resources to live authentically. I don't need to elaborate on how our political climate has been saturated with an ongoing campaign of fear and terror against trans people. That's why visibility is so important: it saves lives, it gives voice to the voiceless, and it offers joy and hope and comfort where scarce.I would not be alive today were it not for three primary blessings: 1) friends of all backgrounds who ensured I had love and safety and dignity, 2) the grace of a merciful and loving God who kept me buoyed through many difficult years of feeling incongruent with the world around me, and 3) every trans and nonbinary person whose visibility gave me strength and confidence to come out in my own time.I exist today in my authenticity because of the visibility of trans and nonbinary people whose selflessness and courage paved roads that have permitted me to navigate the world with an expansive liberation in broader society they never got to experience.I think of the closeted trans girl in Central Texas who once felt so alone and scared and ashamed of how I was born. For many years, I prayed every day that God would cleanse me of my desire to be who I really am, and it took a long time to recognize that being trans is a gift from God and part of my soul's commission.I thank God that I'm trans. I can't help but feel sympathy for the tens of millions of non-trans people in our country who are constantly burdened and tortured with struggling to meet the gendered expectations demanded of them by so much of society.I think many non-trans people struggle with how our culture successfully and cruelly controls them, forcing them to be who they're not, shaming them who they really are, all in service to a painful and unnecessary gendered framework that insists on an unforgiving rigidity solely meant to avoid discomfort based on irrational fear.I think non-trans people who hate those of us who are trans are really motivated by a taught fear of themselves. It has to be terrifying to suppress oneself, only to witness people who have rejected that painful suppression. Every transphobic argument can basically be boiled down to: "I actually don't know the science at all or have a good argument here, but trans people challenge my long held view of the world and it's very uncomfortable and everyone should be expected to move around my discomfort."There's obvious bigotry in that mindset, of course, but there's also an extraordinary and unyielding and obvious pain, too.Trans people are a constant reminder that there's an entire world outside of what most non-trans people have been aggressively and irrationally conditioned to accept.Today is about trans visibility and trans joy, to be sure, but I would also like to believe it can mean so much more. It can mean that non-trans people feel greater comfort and acceptance in embracing their own authenticity—however that may look—by the example trans and nonbinary people set.I want every trans and nonbinary child in this country to be safe and loved and empowered, and I also want that for every non-trans child. I want every trans and nonbinary adult to be safe and loved and empowered, and I also want that for every non-trans adult.I think that's an essential North Star worthy of any compass. That's why I'm visible, and that's what I wish for all of you, too.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]This evening, I sat down with my dear friend, the brilliant Shannon Watts, author of the Playing with Fire Substack (among many other hats), for a live discussion on why we both strongly believe the time has come for Sen. Chuck Schumer to step down as leader, why we're supporting a boycott of contributions to Senate Democrats until they force him to do so, and what all Democrats can do to make this happen.Shannon and I walked through the understandable concerns some of our fellow Democrats have felt over this effort and why, after all our discussion and introspection, we still believe Mr. Schumer needs to step down.If you're unsure of why so many of us want Mr. Schumer to step down, I've outlined my reasons in this essay.And if you, too, are angry over our current situation with Democratic leadership and believe Mr. Schumer needs to step down, please sign our petition and join the 42,000 (and growing) Democrats (including a number of elected officals) who are calling on Mr. Schumer step aside for the good of our democracy.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]Last night, I spoke with Democratic strategist Julie Roginsky, author of Salty Politics, longtime political commentator, and founder of Lift Our Voices.For ninety minutes, we had a frank discussion on trans rights, the state of the Democratic Party, and what it means to have effective messaging in this moment.I enjoyed chatting Ms. Roginsky because we're two proud Democrats who believe our party could be doing a hell of lot more in this moment and demanding that is an act of love and respect.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

Yesterday afternoon, the bodies of Gene Hackman, Betsy Arakawa, and their dog were found at their home in Santa Fe, New Mexico. The County Sheriff's Office did not have reason to suspect foul play this early in the investigation, and there's no official confirmation on the cause of their deaths. Many have suggested it may have been carbon monoxide poisoning. The couple had been married since 1991.Betsy Arakawa, 63, was a retired classical pianist and co-owned Pandora's Box, a home furnishings store in Santa Fe which she launched with her friend Barbara Lenihan. She resolutely avoided the spotlight and cherished her privacy, never giving public interviews and preferring to live a quiet life with her husband.Gene Hackman, 95, was a Marine Corps veteran who had wanted to act since he was ten years old and pursued that dream several years after he left the service. At the Pasadena Playhouse, Mr. Hackman and his friend Dustin Hoffman were voted “The Least Likely to Succeed” and shortly thereafter moved to NYC to prove the doubters wrong and make their way into the industry. They befriended Robert Duvall, and the three struggling actors shared apartments for much of the ‘60s.All three became some of the best actors of their generation and among the greatest of all-time. Mr. Hackman won Oscars for Best Actor (The French Connection, 1971) and Best Supporting Actor (Unforgiven, 1993), along with additional nominations for Best Actor (Mississippi Burning, 1989) and Best Supporting Actor (Bonnie & Clyde, 1968; I Never Sang for My Father, 1971).He also won three Golden Globes (five additional nominations, plus the 2003 Cecil B. DeMille Award), two BAFTAs (five additional nominations), and a Screen Actors Guild Award along with the rest of the cast of The Birdcage (1997).That's all swell, but itemizing accolades doesn't come close to doing justice to the spell cast by Gene Hackman onscreen.The magic of Mr. Hackman is that he somehow played the same person and a completely different person, simultaneously, in every movie, and it always felt exactly right. If you saw his face in a movie when you were flipping channels, you stopped to watch. Because it's Gene Hackman. I mean, Hoosiers (1986). C'mon, now.Every big character Mr. Hackman has done is so individually compelling whilst simultaneously bearing hallmarks that can only be done by Gene Hackman and wouldn't be as good without them, and we completely bought it every time.It never felt like he broke himself down for characters. He seemed to just put on a costume and act his ass off. And it always worked.My favorite performance by Mr. Hackman is Captain Ramsey in Crimson Tide (1995), the commander of a nuclear submarine who is clearly emotionally unstable and paranoid.I've watched that movie so many times, and even when he's not onscreen, Mr. Hackman looms large in every frame, somehow stealing scenes he's not even in. The pettiness and resentment and narcissism of the character is so palpable that the thought still briefly crosses my mind during every rewatch: “Damn, he's gonna get ‘em all killed.”One of the more interesting “what ifs” in the history of film casting is how Mr. Hackman almost played Calvin Jarrett, the father in Ordinary People (1980), but withdrew due to a financial disagreement with the studio.The late, great Donald Sutherland was cast instead and gave a superb performance—which was infamously snubbed for a Best Actor nomination that year—but just for a second, try to imagine Mr. Hackman in that particular role. I want to see that movie, too.Mr. Hackman fully stepped away from acting in 2004 and confirmed his retirement in subsequent years, only making a guest appearance in an episode of “Diners, Drive-ins, and Dives” in 2008 and lending his voice to two Marine Corps documentaries.Ms. Arakawa and Mr. Hackman remodeled a home in Santa Fe and built a quiet and peaceful life there over the past 35 years, away from all the glitz and glamour and gossip of Hollywood and the film industry, for which neither had much patience.Their idea of a good time was spending every Friday night watching stand-up comedy, Susie Izzard being one of their favorites. Their family and friends are in my thoughts today.What a year, y'all. What a year.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

On Friday, actress and model Hunter Schafer posted an eight-and-a-half minute video on TikTok in which she revealed that the replacement passport she had just received had the gender marker changed from female to male.Ms. Schafer is a trans woman, widely beloved among Gen-Z for her acting—particularly her performance in “Euphoria”—and broadly considered one of the most beautiful women in the world. Over the years, she's modeled for Prada, Vera Wang, Marc Jacobs, Alexander McQueen, and many other houses. She came out as a teen girl and has renewed previously with the correct gender marker, with no issues. That means the State Department is either intentionally flagging all American passports with record of a gender marker change and/or they're intentionally cross-referencing passports with birth certificates, some of which are issued by states that ban gender marker changes.Not to mention: the ridiculous complexity for intersex Americans.Florida, Kansas, Montana, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas all prohibit gender marker amendments on birth certificates. Their number will very likely grow by the end of this year. Last week, the Arizona House approved a bill banning residents from amending their birth certificates to reflect their authentic gender identity.I'm worried for all the obvious reasons: the government tracking, the likely surveillance of trans people, the grave risk of an incorrect, “outed” passport for any trans person who needs to travel internationally, the potential for confusion and obstruction over government documents for things like security clearances, etc.That same day, the Bureau of Prisons announced that trans people incarcerated in federal prisons would be moved to facilities that align with their sex assigned at birth, as early as next week. There are nearly 2,300 trans people incarcerated in federal prisons at the moment.Trans women transferred to men's prisons will obviously be at substantially greater risk of violence.The same day—yes, all on Friday—Iowa Republicans announced a bill that, if successful, would remove ‘gender identity' as a protected class in the Iowa Civil Rights Act, thus eliminating anti-discrimination protections for all transgender Iowans. It would make Iowa the first state to remove a protected class from civil rights law.Meanwhile, at the White House—yes, same exact day—Trump was speaking to a large, bipartisan group of governors and went after Maine Gov. Janet Mills from behind his podium.“Is Maine Here? The governor of Maine?”“Yeah, I'm here,” she said from her seat in the audience.“Are you not going to comply with that?” Trump demanded of her, referencing the executive order he signed on Feb. 5th that bans trans girls and young women from competing on girls' and women's sports teams.“I'm complying with the state and federal laws,” she responded.“We are the federal law,” snapped Trump. “You better do it… You better comply , you better comply, because otherwise you're not getting any federal funding.”“See you in court,” she retorted from her seat.“Good,” said Trump. “I'll see you in court. I look forward to that. That should be a real easy one, and enjoy your life after governor, because I don't think you'll be in elected politics.”It was yet another moment Trump attempted to intimidate elected officials across the political spectrum over trans issues. On Saturday, Trump spoke to the 2025 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), where he took a victory lap for ending “transgender insanity.”“It's all out now — critical race theory and transgender insanity. It's all gone from our schools and from our military and I believe it's gone, too… I believe that it's all gone.”Today, Bill Maher appeared on the “Pod Saves America” podcast and argued with co-host Jon Lovett about trans issues, urging him that Democrats would “lose every election” if they don't give up more on trans equality.Side note here: anti-trans punditry that claims to be offering the “reasonable middle” argument always seems to intensely focus on what they don't want. There is never a good faith framing of what they believe should be legal. There are reasons for that: either they don't actually believe in minimum rights for trans people or they fear being targeted by extremists for offering support for even a modicum of trans equality.The relentless pace of anti-trans actions and rhetoric have become overwhelming.That's how I'm doing.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

I had the great pleasure of chatting with my dear friend, the incomparable, brilliant, and wonderful Shannon Watts, about the, um, state of Democratic politics at the moment.And I promise, despite all the things, y'all will feel a bit better after watching.Also: subscribe to Shannon's blog. She's a gem.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com.]The state funeral for James Earl “Jimmy” Carter, Jr., the 39th President of the United States, was as well attended by dignitaries as one might expect — or hope.Among the hundreds in attendance at the Washington National Cathedral were Presidents Biden, Obama, Bush, and Clinton; Vice Presidents Harris, Pence, Gore, and Quayle; Secretaries of State Clinton and Kerry; first and second spouses; Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Jackson; current and former heads of government from Canada, Colombia, Japan, Portugal, and the United Kingdom; Prince Edward, Duke of Edinburgh; Antonio Guterres, Secretary General of the United Nations; and scores of senators and members of Congress and ambassadors and other luminaries.I may be missing a notable name or two. Perhaps at least two. That is possible.Garth Brooks and Trisha Yearwood sang “Imagine" — one of the late president's favorite songs.Steve Ford, the son of President Gerald Ford, whom Pres. Carter defeated in the 1976 election, delivered a beautiful eulogy in which he said to the Carter family: “God did a good thing when he made your dad.”President Biden, in what is likely the final major public speech of his tenure, summed up President Carter in three words: “Character, character, character.”It all felt right and good. It felt fitting. It felt rare and maybe fleeting. It felt like we may not see this kind of easy agreement across the political spectrum for a long time.But with all due respect, it didn't come close to matching the quiet and hardy adoration that could be observed in the previous 36 hours on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol and surrounding streets.It is cold in D.C. this week, enough during the day to aggressively bundle up and enough at night to find any excuse to be indoors and immediately reject that one friend's insane invite to go out for a drink, much less an evening stroll. It is, for most of us, bitterly cold. It is so cold—at least to this Texas gal—that nothing less than the threat to life and limb to a loved one would be enough to convince me to venture into the elements. It is so cold that “outside” is wholly inadequate and only the word “elements” carries a sufficiently adequate connotation.Last night, at 9pm, the temperature was easily below 20 degrees with the wind chill. I understand some of you up north consider this balmy. You must understand that most of us think you're crazy.So, it was painfully cold and uninviting, and yet, even late into the night, there were thousands and thousands of people across all walks of life waiting in line outside for several hours just to enter the Capitol Rotunda for a few moments and walk around the flag-draped casket of one Jimmy Carter and pay their respects to a model human being.There were those who were off for the federal holiday and those who came after a long day of work—suits and dresses and military uniforms—young and old, Democrats and Republicans and independents, the working class and the wealthy, entire families, all of them standing outside in the freezing cold for several hours.That's not an exaggeration. The wait was several hours. At best, one could reasonably hope to get through the line and the quick orbit within the Rotunda in just over three hours. Some folks waited longer, some as many as five hours depending on when they got in line. When was the last time you waited five hours in line for anything? When was the last time you waited three hours in line? When was the last time you did this in the bone chilling cold? When was the last time you did this without any expectation of a tangible reward?They all knew there was no material incentive to be had here. It wasn't like everyone who made the journey got a cookie or gold star after leaving the Rotunda. There were no certificates of appreciation conferred upon completion. No dinner coupons. No drink tickets. No free t-shirts.Need to use the restroom? Walk a few blocks to a nearby restaurant or bar and hope someone is kind enough to hold your spot in line.It was so cold that even the usually familiar sight of phones capturing every angle of any given political event for social media was scarce. Gotta keep those hands warm.People heard the updates. It's gonna be three hours. Maybe four. Maybe five.They stayed in line.It wasn't as though Pres. Carter could do anything for these thousands upon thousands of people who came to say goodbye beyond what he did for them in life, deeds already completed and offered without any assumption of reciprocity.This man who hadn't been president in more than four decades, who had a 31 percent approval rating the month he lost reelection, who was unfairly maligned for many years over his job performance, who was unjustly a punchline to much of the country afterward for so long after leaving office — it was this man they came to honor.They stayed in line, freezing, probably hungry, probably needing to use the restroom at some point, many of them probably wishing they were at home with a hot beverage and blanket in hand.They stayed in line.This one-term president, who went back to his peanut farm after leaving office, who was detested by the bulk of D.C. political circles, who didn't cash out and join a bevy of corporate boards, who didn't feel it necessary to say what was popular or easy, who navigated his life thereafter as a private citizen with such grace and integrity that even his most ardent detractors had to tip their hats and acknowledge his decency.I realize there are so many reasons to feel pessimistic about the future of our country at the moment, but if such decency is so honored as we've seen by everyday Americans on the ground in our Nation's Capitol over these past few days, tell me that isn't cause for hope.Tell me that isn't a glimmer of what we could still be. Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com.]First of all, if you're not online all the time and don't understand the reference in the title, I'd like to congratulate you on your excellent mental health hygiene.Nearly a decade ago, Twitter user Cavalorn put out a simple and clever joke that has become one of the all-time great memes, generally used in reference to people who vote against their own interests out of pettiness or bigotry or the belief that they're special and exempt from consequences and then whine about those consequences when they find out they're not so special after all. Honestly, it might be the greatest micro-commentary on the Trump era, perfectly encapsulating the offense and incredulity of folks who support him when things don't go their way.Over the past several days, a vicious debate that had been brewing among Trump supporters regarding the visa program for highly skilled immigrant workers escalated when Vivek Ramaswamy—who is co-leading the adorably named Deparment of Government Efficiency (DOGE) with Elon Musk—inexplicably dropped a long rant on Twitter defending immigrant workers.Mr. Ramaswamy was born in America to immigrant parents, and Mr. Musk is a first-generation immigrant.As much as I can't stand Vivek Ramaswamy because of his relentless pandering to the Trump base through the most cynical and opportunistic lens—practically speaking, he sounds like a desperate, watered down version of a Trump impersonation spat out by a beta version of ChatGPT—I don't disagree with his larger points here.He's not wrong. There is a pervasive laziness and entitlement among many (white) American families who have been here for many generations that is thoroughly outshined and outpaced by immigrant families who arrive in this country ready to work hard to get what they want.I don't think that's controversial to say. I think it's previous obvious. I grew up in Central Texas around immigrant families from all over the world, and on balance, my peers from those families did work harder, were more ambitious, tended to get better grades, etc.Now, are there generally critical nuances around ambition and belonging and mental health regarding children who are raised in immigrant communities that are important to note? Sure, but I'm definitely not the person to speak on that. Check out this primer from psychotherapist Imi Lo for a good place to start.Anyway, Mr. Ramaswamy's commentary is expressed in a way that's cringey and distracting—the pop culture references are certainly ham-handed—but he's not wrong on the overall points.His thesis isn't the problem. It's his audience. Mr. Ramaswamy, who has gone all-in on a full MAGA true believer schtick—apparently forgot that Trump's base have zero interest in hearing hard truths. None. Sir, where do you think you are in the political landscape? Do you need a map and compass? This is the speech you give if you're the main character in an Aaron Sorkin vehicle, not when you're working for someone who was just elected on the most xenophobic and racist platform in modern history.Let me ask you, Sir: don't you think it's a little strange that J.D. Vance, who made literally the same damn argument in the book that catapulted him to fame, the husband of an Indian American woman born to immigrant parents, hasn't said anything about all this?Why do you think that is? Do you think it's possible that he understands your boss's core supporters are pretty damn xenophobic and hypersensitive when presented with truths about the enduring mediocrity of many white Americans?Listen, Mr. Ramaswamy: we aren't gonna hear a peep about Hillbilly Elegy for the next four years. Mr. Vance would be thrilled if no one ever mentions it again. There are reasons for that, Mr. Ramaswamy, and you know those reasons if you're being completely honest with yourself.Rarely have we seen a public figure so completely misread the room. It would be like Hank Hill setting up a vendor booth for Strickland Propane at a PETA convention, which he would never do because Hank Hill is a Republican with common sense and sure as hell knows vegans aren't his target demo for propane and propane accessories. Hell, I'm a progressive trans woman, and I could have told Mr. Ramaswamy this attempted “come to Jesus” pitch to Trump supporters about American laziness and immigrant excellence was never gonna fly.Predictably, the MAGA backlash has been swift and severe. Rightwing influencers across social media have been raking Mr. Ramaswamy and Mr. Musk across the coals for the past few days over the visa program and their support for immigrants in high skilled professions.The notoriously unhinged Laura Loomer has been using her influence over the far-right to viciously blast Mr. Musk online. More troublingly, the sheer racism against Indian Americans and immigrants that's currently permeating rightwing spaces is disturbing, spurred by the obvious and entirely misplaced resentment of white Americans who are furious that people who don't look like them and work harder are getting better jobs.The open bigotry on display by the MAGA base has understandably unsettled many first- and second-generation immigrants who voted for Trump, like this gentleman who was apparently shocked to discover the backbone of the GOP is powered by racism.Sir, you're absolutely right about all this, but where the hell have you been?We told y'all this would happen. Repeatedly. Incessantly. We could not have been more clear that this was inevitable.I have no idea if Trump has specifically spoken out against the visa program for skilled immigrants—he probably has but I'm too lazy to look it up—but even if he hasn't, his long record of racist and xenophobic pandering to his fans was always leading to this place.Trump has made hundreds of statements over the years that were clearly racist, and the spiritual distance between those statements and this current mayhem is definitely shorter than the eighteen inches between the head and the heart.It's as though all these folks, including the gentleman above, intentionally voted for a proud arsonist and are now shocked to find kindling and matches being staged on their front doors. Honestly, what did y'all think was gonna happen? Did you think the tech industry would get a pass? Did you think excellence would be enough to avoid the wrath of xenophobes?Hell no. Their whole thing is being xenophobic and racist, or did you miss when the leader of your party spent years accusing our first Black president, who was born in this country and raised by a white mother and white grandparents in a working class family, of being ineligible for the presidency because of the absurd, b******t, racist claim that he was born in Kenya?We're surprised that you're surprised.Maybe this will finally be enough for you to stay away from leopards because final piece of advice: their stomachs will never be full.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com.]It's been six days since UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was murdered outside the New York Hilton Midtown just before 7am.The assassin, 26 year-old Luigi Mangione, was apprehended yesterday at a McDonald's in Altoona, PA after an employee there recognized him from publicly released images and called the police.He was carrying a 3D printed gun, a 3D printed silencer, several fake IDs, and a three-page manifesto in defense of the murder. Was he hoping to get caught? It sure seems like it.As with so many other issues in our increasingly divided country, the incident has become far less about discussing the particulars in good faith and more about aggressively rationalizing our biases and shutting down anyone who challenges them.America's health care system is severely broken, held in place by insurance companies who routinely engage in unethical practices for which the primary goal is prioritizing corporate profits over sick people, enabled by enough lawmakers who directly benefit from preserving that status quo.Meanwhile, the country is quite clearly veering into an era in which political violence is increasingly seen by many as not only acceptable but necessary.In his manifesto, Mangione wrote: “I do apologize for any strife or traumas, but it had to be done. Frankly, these parasites had it coming.”Bizarrely, in his Goodreads four-star review of “Industrial Society and Its Future” by Ted Kaczynski—better known to us plebs as “The Unabomber Manifesto”—he wrote that Kaczynski was “rightfully imprisoned” but also:“When all other forms of communication fail, violence is necessary to survive. You may not like his methods, but to see things from his perspective, it's not terrorism, it's war and revolution… […] Peaceful protest is outright ignored, economic protest isn't possible in the current system, so how long until we recognize that violence against those who lead us to such destruction is justified as self-defense.”Yeah, that's certainly one way to sum it up.Here's another way: Ted Kaczynski was a vile, self-absorbed piece-of-s**t who intentionally murdered and maimed innocent people from the comfort of his remote cabin and justified it with a narcissistic pseudo-intellectualism instead of, you know, having the guts to engage in the hard work of advocacy.He was not a revolutionary. He was a terrorist and a coward whose actions only served to inspire a generation of more self-absorbed extremists, and I'm really glad he's no longer walking the earth.Of course, some will whine this is unfair framing because Mangione targeted a horrible enabler of this unfair system rather than innocent people, he's merely agreeing with Kaczynski on the principle of violence as necessary, and our disgust should be with corporations who have willingly bankrupted and/or enabled the deaths of millions.Of course we should be disgusted with these corporations. They're cruel and predatory and inhumane. They knowingly exploit the suffering of innocent and sick people to maximize profit.But just for the sake of argument, let's briefly allow these other things to be true: Mangione was right to murder Thompson, health care executives deserve any violence coming to them, etc.Okay, so, what now? Tell me what happens next. Because in the past week, I have read zero commentary that answers this with any degree of sufficient reason.The hopeful wish—and I think even that's generous—is that health care executives will somehow be intimidated into curbing their unethical practices out of fear being targeted next. Are you kidding me? Health care executives aren't going to let a little homicide get in the way of their profits. They'll beef up security, hire the best PR professionals money can buy, increase lobbying to complicit lawmakers, and leverage this murder for sympathy.And it will work. You know how I know that? Because we just had an election in which an openly corrupt champion of corporate greed who still hasn't released his supposed health care plan since he first ran for president eight years ago was picked over a policy expert who had a defined health care plan and was nominated by a political party that achieved the greatest health care reform in modern history.How many millions of people openly cheering on Mangione stayed home or even voted for Trump? How many of them had time to share memes online but not organize family and friends and neighbors to get out the vote because of purity politics or VP Harris just isn't likable or Democrats aren't good enough or both parties are the same (they are clearly not) or, hell, someone else will do that work, so why bother?Mangione is one of them. Here's this Ivy League educated young man from a privileged family and an impressive social network who could have tried to use those resources to change the system. But he didn't even try. He didn't venture into health care advocacy or do any political organizing on this. He read a manifesto written by a violent clown and decided it better served either his ego or convenience to murder a health care executive on the street than undertake the difficult work of reform.My issue is not with the millions of people in this country who have said over the past week that they're not mourning the murder of Thompson because Thompson sure as hell didn't mourn their loved ones who have been cruelly victimized by corporations like UnitedHealthcare. They're well within their right to feel that way. I come from a family background in which it was obvious growing up that insurance companies would sooner allow us to die or be financially ruined than grant us the care we need. I get it.My problem isn't with the millions people who are rightly pointing out all the ways in which UnitedHealthcare is evil and openly asking: where is the sympathy for the most vulnerable in this country when they perish because executives have decided their lives and livelihoods aren't profitable?That is absolutely necessary to ask and demand an answer to it.My problem is with Mangione and people like him who don't do the work that needs to be done and encourage political violence as a supposed last straw—not having really tried other approaches in good faith—which, in the end, will only further normalize a growing culture of political violence that overwhelmingly harms the innocent and most vulnerable.Murdering people in the street is ultimately wrong not because it's a question of whether or not the person murdered deserves it but because it further erodes the social guardrail, which is thinning at an alarming rate, that it's immoral to inflict violence on others out of political and policy disagreements.Political violence solves nothing. It never has. All it does is offer a brief sense of smug satisfaction for some, fuel for the worst people to continue doing what they do, and more than enough room for dead innocents after that.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com.]I wouldn't say I'm surprised that retired General Mark Milley, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is consistently being attacked online by clowns who claim he never served in combat.It's part of a long pattern of rightwing extremists shamelessly undermining the military service of veterans who disagree with them, reaching its apex in Donald Trump, who has made it fashionable among his supporters to denigrate the service of his critics and, well, veterans generally.No, it's not surprising, but I would say I'm certainly disgusted and more than that: perplexed by the shamelessness and ignorance of these hypocrites.Five days ago, a disinformation account on Twitter that's popular among the MAGA masses posted this image about Gen. Milley, which, as of this morning, had been viewed more than 5.5 million times on the site:It's perfectly primed to condone and enable outrage among Trumpers. In one fell swoop, it implies Gen. Milley is cowardly, hypocritical, elitist, attention-seeking, and undeserving, creating a permission structure to dismiss his service record as unearned and his expertise as false and unworthy.But per usual, the lack of curiosity and introspection among Trump supporters offers yet another example of their inexplicable tendency to ignore evidence staring them right in the face — or simply pretend it's not there.Military dress uniforms are a walking resumé. If you spend no more than a minute glancing at one (and know what you're looking at), you can typically sketch out a fairly accurate career bio of the service member.Since the creator of this disinformation account clearly didn't serve and, well, I did, I'll explain a few things about Gen. Milley's uniform they obviously don't understand.See that blue thing above his ribbons?That's the Combat Infantryman Badge. It's awarded to Army soldiers in the Infantry or Special Forces in the rank of colonel or below who have engaged in direct combat.You don't earn that by being a senior officer in the rear. There are plenty of senior officers who deployed and never earned a CIB, including general officers.If you look really close, his badge has a star at the top, which means it's his second CIB. You only get to earn one per war. He engaged in direct combat in both Panama (1989) and the Global War on Terrorism, and thus, he earned that rare star.Interestingly, as a side note, there have been at least 325 recipients of the extremely rare third award of the CIB, all of whom engaged in direct combat in World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. It is highly unlikely we'll ever see another three-time CIB. For those interested, it looks like this:Anyway, going back to Gen. Milley, if you look closely at his ribbon rack—and I'll grant you, that photo of him above is a bit grainy—you'll notice he's earned, among his many decorations, three Legions of Merit and four Bronze Stars.On his left shoulder are the Special Forces tab and the Ranger tab, meaning he's both a former Green Beret and Ranger-qualified.There are some other cool things: both the Master Parachutist Badge and Special Operations Diver Badge, the latter of which is a very hard course.It's not readily visible in that image, but on the bottom-right side of his torso is the 101st Airborne Division Combat Service Identification Badge, which means he's completed a combat deployment with the 101st Airborne Division.But all of that pales in comparison to what you can't see in this photo: on his right sleeve, a quarter inch above the sleeve braid, are 10 overseas service bars. I found a different photo in which these are visible, circled in red:Each one of those bars represents six months of completed service while deployed in a theater of war.Gen. Milley spent five years of his career serving in combat zones: Panama, Bosnia, Haiti, Iraq, and Afghanistan.I imagine it must make a lot of these Trump supporters feel pretty damn insecure that a leader who has committed his entire adult life to service in uniform thinks their orange daddy is a coward who avoided military service, but that's not a good enough reason to lie about Gen. Milley's service record.This man is a patriot who has spent his lifetime honorably serving our country, and there's no excuse for tolerating such slander.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com.]Yesterday, GOP Congresswoman Nancy Mace introduced a resolution to the House rules package that would require all people to use only restrooms corresponding with their sex assigned at birth, essentially intended as a ban on trans women from using women's restrooms in the U.S. Capitol. This is being done as Sarah McBride of Delaware is set to become the first openly-trans Member of Congress. It remains very unclear how this rule would be enforced, and when Rep. Mace was asked that exact question last night, she refused to offer anything in the way of a direct answer. What I find most interesting about all this is that trans women have been using women's restrooms in the Capitol and the House and Senate office buildings and the White House and the Pentagon for many years now, including during all four years of the Trump Administration. Under Donald Trump's leadership, trans women were permitted to use women's restrooms in federal buildings in D.C. and there was never any issue. I have attended hundreds of political events in D.C. over the years and used the restroom at many of them, including in all the buildings listed above.I have washed my hands countless times at the sink next to conservative and Republican women and even had pleasant and brief conversations with many of them.There's never been an issue. Because the whole point of going to the restroom is to do your business in a private stall and then wash your hands and maybe touch up your make-up and, on occasion, with friends, there might be conversations at the sink.That's it. I'm sorry there's no mystery here. It's pretty straightforward and banal.In fact, the only time I need to worry about using a public restroom is when I travel outside of D.C., always double-checking to see if there are non-discrimination protections in airports during a layover. If there aren't, I need to locate a single-occupancy restroom and/or carefully plan what I eat and drink during that leg of the trip.In the four years that Rep. Nancy Mace has been in Congress, she's known that trans women use women's restrooms in federal buildings in D.C. and it's never been an issue for her. Not once. In all this time. Until the first trans woman was elected to Congress. Then it suddenly became an issue. Doesn't it seem like this is an incredibly cynical and cruel attempt on the part of Congresswoman Mace to manufacture outrage and divide people over something that hasn't been a problem?Congresswoman-elect Sarah McBride offered an astute and admirable response:Every day Americans go to work with people who have life journeys different than their own and engage with them respectfully, I hope members of Congress can muster that same kindness.This is a blatant attempt from far right-wing extremists to distract from the fact that they have no real solutions to what Americans are facing. We should be focused on bringing down the cost of housing, health care, and child care, not manufacturing culture wars. Delawareans sent me here to make the American dream more affordable and accessible and that's what I'm focused on.I'm glad at least one elected official in this story has the character and discipline to keep focused on the needs of her constituents. She sees petty and cruel distractions for what they are: small and sad. But I do feel bad for Congresswoman Mace, who is so desperate for attention that she resorts to policing how others pee and being obsessed with their genitals.I shall genuinely pray for her growth.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com.]Another day in this election, another weird claim about trans people.On Wednesday, J.D. Vance sat down for a long interview with Joe Rogan, doing his usual schtick of making a litany of absurd claims, among them that high school students are “becoming trans” to secure an advantage in the notoriously competitive Ivy League admission process, explaining it this way:“If you are a middle-class or upper-middle-class white parent and the only thing that you care about is whether your child goes into Harvard or Yale, like, obviously, that pathway has become a lot harder for a lot of upper-middle-class kids.”Sigh… okay, so, let's all take a breath and put on our thinking caps.For any trans person or someone who has a trans loved one, the first question that comes to mind is: how on earth would this be worth it?Because even in the most progressive areas of the country, trans youth and their families still face intense cultural obstacles. Even where non-discrimination laws exist for trans people, anti-trans sentiment doesn't simply disappear.Any trans person can tell you that even in places where 99% of folks have no issues with trans people, all it takes is one transphobic person to cause trouble.And they do! Let's be clear about that: anti-trans harassment and discrimination happen everywhere in the United States. Simply residing in a progressive place doesn't insulate trans people from bigotry.Last month, Jo Yurcaba of NBC News reported on the CDC's 2023 Youth Risk Behavior Survey, data gathered last year but published about three weeks ago.In regards to trans high school students, the data is predictably horrifying. About a quarter of trans and questioning students surveyed had attempted suicide in the past year, 40 percent reported being bullied, and about 70 percent reported persistent sadness or hopelessness.Bottom line: it really ain't great to be a trans youth in the current climate.So, even if a non-trans high school student were presenting as “trans” to obtain a mythological advantage (more on that in a sec), they would quickly find out that transphobia still very much exists.I just can't see how it would be worth it. It doesn't make sense.Okay, so, what if a non-trans student didn't publicly come out as "trans” but lied on their college application about being trans in order to gain that mythological advantage?That's a hell of a roll of the dice, isn't it? A family would basically be betting that their college applicant could keep their false representation a secret, limited only to the admissions committee, risking all the consequences that would come with any future revelation that they lied on their application.That doesn't make sense, either.But here's the kicker to all this: trans youth are woefully underrepresented at Ivy League universities and clearly don't have an admissions advantage when applying.That CDC national survey also reported that about 3.3 percent of high school students identify as transgender.Harvard's entering freshmen class this year has 0.7 percent trans students, a fifth of the national average.UPenn's entering class is 1.0 percent.Princeton's entering class is 1.4 percent.Dartmouth's entering class is 1.6 percent.Brown and Cornell have neither publicly-available, official statistics nor student surveys on trans students matriculating this year.The entering classes of Yale and Columbia are tied for the highest rate of trans students among the Ivies: two percent, nearly half the national average of high school trans students.Most of these college stats were gathered from student surveys conducted by campus newspapers. I was unable to find any evidence that these institutions factor in an aspiring matriculant's gender identity when considering their application.Maybe a top university outside the Ivies does?Stanford has no publicly available data on this, so I called their admissions office, and after explaining my inquiry, a polite but understandably incredulous staffer told me: “We don't collect that information during the admissions process.” They directly confirmed that trans applicants have no advantage.Not wanting to waste anyone else's time on this—or mine—I left it there. It's abundantly clear that being transgender offers no clear advantage when applying to our nation's top universities.But I also have to ask: why shouldn't being transgender make an aspiring applicant stand out a bit?Being trans is a rare life experience which has constantly been at the center of American public life over the past several years and certainly shows no signs of going away in the national discourse.If a college education is meant to include developing social skills for their future place in the workforce and learning from other students of widely different backgrounds, doesn't it seem reasonable that all college students, regardless of gender identity, benefit from having trans classmates?I feel the same way about conservative students. Having young people of varying political backgrounds and viewpoints in good faith conversation with each other is a necessary thing for civic engagement and professional development, and it should be encouraged.It reminds me of a heartwarming conversation I read recently between two friends who met each other as law school students, one of them a trans progressive and the other a non-trans conservative.The conservative had a written a memoir in which he described his trans friend in a manner that he realized might not accurately reflect their identity. He wrote the friend an email apologizing for the error.The trans friend wrote him back with a kind reply, offering grace and understanding and good faith.The two signed off their respective emails with love, reflective of a long friendship that was built on trust, despite their divergent political views.The conservative in this story is J.D. Vance, and his trans friend—whom he would later betray by selling out to to horrific anti-trans views—is Sofia Nelson.So, maybe this expectation of sociocultural exchange doesn't guarantee good outcomes, especially when one of the parties throws away their value system for fame and power. It's almost as though J.D. Vance knows what he's saying about trans people is flat-out wrong and hateful and counterproductive, and he's decided that betraying people he claims to love—let alone an entire vulnerable community—is worth it.And that does beg the conclusion: if this is how he's used his Ivy League degree, it probably makes sense he imagines anyone else would lie to get one.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com.]I love baseball. It's my favorite sport to watch. I've enjoyed the World Series every year for as long as I can remember.Some of you aren't into baseball. Some of you find it incredibly boring, which is completely understandable. America's national pastime isn't for everyone. There are long stretches during which, on its face, there's no obvious excitement on the field.If you love baseball, every moment is interesting because the intricacies are quite fun to watch. The dueling between pitcher and batter—the competing strategies—alone is fascinating.Anyway, this year is particularly fascinating because of the storylines. The Los Angeles Dodgers and the New York Yankees are facing off in the World Series for the 12th time in the history of their storied rivalry, which stretches back to when the Dodgers were still in Brooklyn.Playing for the Dodgers are Shohei Ohtani, widely considered the best ballplayer since the days of Josh Gibson and Babe Ruth (some think he's the greatest ever) and the phenomenal Mookie Betts and the electrifying Freddie Freeman.Playing for the Yankees are Aaron Judge, one of the greatest hitters in the game, and Giancarlo Stanton (also one of the greatest hitters in the game) and Juan Soto (also one of the greatest hitters in the game).Two of the most iconic franchises in baseball representing the two biggest media markets in the country, with numerous likely-future-Hall-of-Famers on the field, a jaw-dropping 34 World Series titles between them (though the Dodgers have a mere seven of those), and it's all very, very fun for baseball fans.So, it's not surprising that 16.28 million viewers saw last night's Game 4 (the winner goes to best-of-7 for you non-baseball folks), the highest single game viewership for the World Series since 2019, contributing to the highest average World Series viewership for a series since 2017.And, of course, I'm watching. It's delicious. It's a beautiful drip of serotonin in a year of political and existential morass when I could use the distraction from all that's awful. But then the commercials come, and during just about every break, it's the same campaign ad: a disembodied, angry voice essentially tells 16 million viewers that trans people are the cause of their problems, that “Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for you.”It's the same ad aired during NFL games and NCAA football games and other sporting events, and if you're a trans person who loves sports like I do—and I really love sports—it profoundly sucks to be bombarded with this hateful rhetoric, day after day, for many weeks now.Transphobia is so open and commonplace these days that it's easy to become somewhat desensitized to it. There's the campaign rhetoric. There are political articles. There are talking heads. There are bans. There are court cases. There's street harassment. There's online harassment. There are death threats.There's the overwhelming sense that millions of people in the United States truly wish that the trans community would simply disappear, by any means possible. That much is obvious.But what doesn't get nearly enough attention these days—and I firmly believe this as strongly as anything—is that the vast majority of the country does not support transphobia.I know that's hard for some folks to accept. It's a close election, and if the polls are to be believed (and I am quite skeptical of polls), nearly half of likely voters support a presidential ticket that is stridently anti-trans. Ergo, I am supposed to accept that half the country hates the existence of the trans community.But I don't accept that. I don't think it's true because I've had numerous conversations with conservatives—some of them Trump supporters—who don't have anything against trans people specifically. Some probably think I shouldn't say that because if someone is supporting an anti-trans candidate, does it really matter if their support isn't because of any transphobia on their part?Totally fair question. I think it does matter. Although anecdotal, the conversations I've had with these folks signal, at minimum, a lot of hope for transphobia becoming less prevalent over time in the near future.But that's not why I'm talking about this ad. Because it's honestly not an issue that I believe will be effective in this election despite the GOP's firm belief that most Americans care about this more than other central topics. Because I believe most Americans, regardless of political beliefs, will not be voting based on their personal feelings toward trans people. They just won't. Republican leadership have woefully miscalculated the effectiveness of disgusting bigotry as an electoral motivator.It'll drive out a lot of the GOP's base, sure, but it's not the kinda thing that resonates with most Americans. If anything, I believe that most Americans are repulsed and incredulous that considerable space is being given to this issue, in the final stretch of the election, that could far more effectively address the actual struggles of working class families.It's why I'm glad that Vice President Harris and Gov. Walz are laser-focused on the struggles facing all working class families. It's why I'm glad their messaging is about uniting the country and saving democracy and lifting people up. The contrast is powerful and most importantly: it will win the election.Regardless, the ads do work in quite a visceral way: for those who already hate trans people, it's further enabling their bigotry. It's further encouraging the blatant and searing dehumanization of trans people among a segment of the population who are already inclined to consider us sub-human. The ads are building an obvious permission structure for virulently anti-trans people to treat us like we are unworthy of protection against violence and discrimination.I'm a grown adult, and as much as it sucks to see this unapologetic hatred every day, I know I'm gonna be alright. I'm in an area of the country with solid protections against discrimination. I have access to health care. I'm doing okay financially. I have a good support system. I'm very fortunate and privileged in all these ways.But what about those trans people living in areas of the country without non-discrimination protections? What about trans folks without health care? What about trans people who are unemployed and unhoused and encountering other forms of discrimination, like racism and xenophobia, that compound the violent bigotry they experience? What about trans youth and their families?What about trans people who are especially vulnerable? Even if most of the country doesn't want to see them hurt, is that enough to protect them from the significantly smaller portion of the country that does want harm to come to them?It is not enough. It, alone, will never be enough. I know this. It's gonna take a hell of a lot more than that to achieve progress. It will take patience and grace and authenticity and confidence and assertiveness for many years. It will take a lot of teamwork for a long time coming. That's just the truth.But I can't just stop watching baseball. I refuse to stop watching baseball.I love my country. I love being an American. I have always believed our nation has the potential to achieve a greatness that is only limited by our imagination and most importantly: our sense of unity. I'm glad Vice President Harris embodies that.I'm watching baseball tonight because it gives me joy, just as it does to the many millions of other Americans who are watching.We are all watching a bunch of exceptional athletes work together and experience some of the best moments of life together and encourage each other—just like a family should—toward their common, sole purpose of getting home safely.And I think that's far too important to let the smallness and pettiness and ugliness of some very sad people get in the way of my joy.They will say what hateful things they say and openly speak of what hateful things they desire and they will spin their wheels in such desperation for however long they'll spin them.But they don't get to take baseball from me. Not a chance.I'm at home here.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com.]Dear Mr. Bezos: We've read the explanation you published this evening for your decision to kill The Washington Post's presidential endorsement.We don't believe you. At all. We don't think this is about encouraging news neutrality or building trust or fighting disinformation or competing against indie media. You know why? Because you did it 11 days before the election, after your editorial board came to a conclusion and drafted an endorsement, after your senior brass gave a green light internally. If this were somehow about principle, you could have nixed the endorsement before the general election began. Hell, you could have done it the day Pres. Biden stepped aside as an understandable moment for a reset. But you didn't. You claim major newspaper endorsements largely don't matter in a presidential election. And honestly, I'm inclined to somewhat agree. I think their influence is overrated. Unless it's an outlet endorsing their perceived ideological opposite (ex: NYT or WaPo for Trump, WSJ or New York Post for Harris), it doesn't matter a whole lot. Although it's quite curious you claim to believe WaPo's presidential endorsements are too impotent to matter in elections, yet too powerful over public attitudes to be allowed to continue. That doesn't make sense. But it's also missing the point. People aren't angry at you because we think Vice President Harris will somehow lose based on WaPo not endorsing her. We're furious because you, one of the richest people in the world, bought one of the leading newspapers in our country--a storied bulwark against censorship and corrupt governing--and abused that power to kill the autonomy of the staff of that newspaper. You have subverted the free press right before a presidential election in which one of the candidates is aggressively totalitarian in outlook, and you now pretend to be surprised at the shock and outrage. We do not trust you. We now find it very difficult to trust your newspaper despite the many excellent journalists who work there. And we believe you either ultimately care only about your own greed OR you are dangerously incompetent regarding the importance of a free press. Maybe both. In any case, I'm glad I cancelled my subscription, and there's no way in hell I'm paying for The Washington Post while you still own it.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com.]Yesterday, just before noon, The Washington Post, through CEO William Lewis, announced it would not endorse a candidate in the 2024 presidential election, the first time the nation's third-largest daily newspaper by circulation hasn't done so in nearly four decades.The announcement was shocking for two immediate reasons.The most grave—and, frankly, terrifying—reason is that the United States is obviously at threat of sliding into a horrific dictatorship from which it's difficult to see how we'd ever recover. Donald Trump and J.D. Vance have made it abundantly clear that they aspire to devolve our nation into the world's most powerful authoritarian regime. One need look no further than the chilling plans outlined in Project 2025.But there are many other warning signs, too. A small sampling:There's Trump openly praising Hitler's generals, according to his former chief-of-staff John Kelly (himself a retired four-star Marine Corps general), just the latest marker of fascist narcissism in Trump's very long and documented history of being obsessed with dictators.There's Trump repeatedly pledging to carry out the largest deportation of undocumented migrants in American history, a sweat-lipped plan made in blustering tones that somehow manages to exceed its inherent cruelty with an inexplicable failure to understand basic economics.(Not only is it logistically impossible to deport our nation's 11 million undocumented migrants, not only would it cost taxpayers an estimated quarter trillion to do so, but the American economy would completely collapse from the loss in labor force.)There's Trump's flagrant disregard for the Constitution and the rule of law: an indictment that resulted in a guilty verdict on 34 felony counts (his sentencing for that is on Nov. 26th), three other pending indictments on 52 more felony counts, two impeachments, being found liable for defamation of a woman he raped, etc.Oh, and, of course, there's Trump's frequent statements to serve past the constitutional limit of two terms as president (I'm sure he's just kidding), and the extremist conservative majority of the Supreme Court ruling last year that Trump is essentially a king beyond accountability for official acts in office.That's all an abbreviated version of why Donald Trump is obviously unfit.The second reason is The Washington Post's abdication of journalistic integrity under the ownership of Jeff Bezos, a development that is especially chilling for a publication that has long prided itself on being the vanguard for American democracy and free speech.The storied newspaper has won 76 Pulitzer Prizes over its history—second only to The New York Times—one of which was for the investigative reporting by Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein that eventually led to the resignation of Richard Nixon. Another was for the reporting on the Jan. 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol.The Washington Post has long been synonymous with the essential role of the free press in a healthy, functioning democracy in the same manner we associate Babe Ruth with baseball or July Fourth with fireworks or Dolly Parton with a clean soul.And so, it was with great confusion and incredulity that I read Mr. Lewis' painfully shameless attempt to justify the decision. He sure did try to put on a powdered wig and insist that the bowl of s**t he wanted to feed to the American public was actually chicken soup for the American soul.Most curiously, in writing about The Washington Post's history of largely declining to endorse presidential candidates prior to 1976, he stated that year's endorsement for then-Gov. Jimmy Carter was made “for understandable reasons at the time…”Did you catch that? He's obliquely referencing Watergate, the scandal that brought down Nixon with reporting by the paper — Nixon, who, by any measurable standard, comes across like Lincoln when compared to Trump.Mr. Lewis, for some odd reason, thought it persuasive to essentially say: “Look, we don't regret endorsing Carter because Nixon was terrible, but also: Trump is not nearly terrible enough to justify continuing this dangerous practice of presidential endorsements.”Furthermore, aside from the dollar store cheap imitation of logic, he failed to mention in his desperate, sorry excuse for rationalizing that The Washington Post, for the past several weeks, had been drafting an approved endorsement for Vice President Harris.He failed to mention that the endorsement was still on track a week ago, and there was no indication that it would be halted for any reason, let alone on the rather cringe-inducing reasoning he put forward in his announcement.He failed to mention that Trump met today with corporate leaders of aerospace company Blue Origin—also owned by Bezos—which is, at best, godawful timing or a pretty clear signal of Bezos' reasoning in killing the endorsement. Maybe both.Probably both.If none of this makes sense, you're far from alone. It completely failed to persuade the staff and alums of The Washington Post. Conservative columnist and editor-at-large Robert Kagan immediately resigned in protest. Sixteen other Washington Post columnists—Perry Bacon Jr., Matt Bai, Max Boot, E.J. Dionne Jr., Lee Hockstader, David Ignatius, Heather Long, Ruth Marcus, Dana Milbank, Alexandra Petri, Catherine Rampell, Eugene Robinson, Jennifer Rubin, Karen Tumulty, and Erik Wemple—published this statement on the paper's website:The Washington Post's decision not to make an endorsement in the presidential campaign is a terrible mistake. It represents an abandonment of the fundamental editorial convictions of the newspaper that we love. This is a moment for the institution to be making clear its commitment to democratic values, the rule of law and international alliances, and the threat that Donald Trump poses to them — the precise points The Post made in endorsing Trump's opponents in 2016 and 2020. There is no contradiction between The Post's important role as an independent newspaper and its practice of making political endorsements, both as a matter of guidance to readers and as a statement of core beliefs. That has never been more true than in the current campaign. An independent newspaper might someday choose to back away from making presidential endorsements. But this isn't the right moment, when one candidate is advocating positions that directly threaten freedom of the press and the values of the Constitution.Mr. Woodward and Mr. Bernstein issued this statement:We respect the traditional independence of the editorial page, but this decision 12 days out from the 2024 presidential election ignores the Washington Post's own overwhelming reportorial evidence on the threat Donald Trump poses to democracy. Under Jeff Bezos's ownership, the Washington Post's news operation has used its abundant resources to rigorously investigate the danger and damage a second Trump presidency could cause to the future of American democracy and that makes this decision even more surprising and disappointing, especially this late in the electoral process.Retired WaPo executive editor Martin Baron, who led the paper from 2012 thru 2021, including the tumultuous years of Trump's presidency, responded with a scathing statement: “This is cowardice, with democracy as its casualty. Donald Trump will see this as invitation to further intimidate owner Jeff Bezos (and others). Disturbing spinelessness at an institution famed for courage.”The Washington Post Guild—the paper's employee union—had this to say:We are deeply concerned that The Washington Post—an American news institution in the nation's capital—would make the decision to no longer endorse presidential candidates, especially a mere 11 days ahead of an immensely consequential election. The role of an Editorial Board is to do just this: to share opinion on the news impacting our society and culture and endorse candidates to help guide readers.The message from our chief executive, Will Lewis—not from the Editorial Board itself—makes us concerned that management interfered with the work of our members in Editorial. According to our own reporters and Guild members, an endorsement for Harris was already drafted, and the decision to not publish was made by The Post's owner, Jeff Bezos. We are already seeing cancellations from once loyal readers. This decision undercuts the work of our members at a time when we should be building our readers' trust, not losing it.Washington Post editorial cartoonist Ann Telnaes published this jarring work on the paper's website, titling it “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” referencing WaPo's official slogan that was introduced in 2017, just a month after Trump took office.As of 7:30pm yesterday, Semafor's Max Tani reported that at least 2,000 subscriptions to the paper had been canceled in the previous 24 hours, the overwhelming bulk of those likely being in the seven-and-a-half hours following the announcement from Mr. Lewis. Numerous public figures—including Stephen King, Mark Hamill, Jon Cryer, and former Congresswoman Marie Newman—publicly announced they were cancelling their own subscriptions.Last night, I made the same decision. I had heard rumblings early in the morning from friends in media that WaPo was about to announce a non-endorsement, credible enough that I mentioned it during a 10am meeting with colleagues and they were understandably shocked.I spent most of yesterday morning and afternoon, in the midst of a very busy schedule, privately agonizing over what I would do as a subscriber.Over the years, I've published a number of op-eds in The Washington Post, pieces of which I'm quite proud in a paper I've put on a pedestal since I was a kid, and I've worked with numerous editors and reporters at the outlet whom I admire for their professionalism and public service.It is not lost on me that cancelling a newspaper subscription will not hurt Jeff Bezos but will hurt those employed at the paper.And yet, as much as my heart breaks for the staff of The Washington Post, who haven't done anything to deserve this, I am still left with the simple truth that if Bezos is willing to kill an endorsement 11 days out, whether out of fear or ambition, what else is he willing to do with the paper?There are numerous journalists at the outlet doing critical work, but how we do know anymore when Jeff Bezos is putting his thumb on the scale, backed up by a complicit CEO who blatantly lies about the paper's direction?There have to be consequences for an action this brazen and irresponsible and dangerous for our democracy. Something's gotta give. I respect the decisions of other subscribers, but I simply cannot stomach giving another dime in reward to a publication with such great influence that can be used to do such great harm moving forward.It is my hope that there will be a time, after Vice President Harris is elected, after Trump is held accountable, after the craven capitalists of media have learned there's not much to be made in the long run from these corrupt and shameless tactics, that The Washington Post will be restored to its former glory.In the meantime, I will pay for my news elsewhere.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com.]I'm writing this after traveling back from the future, specifically Nov. 12th.It's a long story, but I know a lady who knows a lady who has a friend with a DeLorean souped up with an off-market flux capacitor and the trip got made.Anyway, we don't have much time, so I'll cut to the chase.I got some good news and some bad news and some more good news.Here's the first good bit: Election Night went mostly okay, though not without a lot of stress. By 1am on the East Coast, it was basically clear that Vice President Harris and Governor Walz were going to win the bulk of the swing states, all of them by pretty small margins.Michigan, Wisconsin, and Nevada wound up in Harris-Walz column by fewer than 140,000 votes combined, about two-thirds of their total margin in 2020.Arizona was called for Harris-Walz by the following evening with a razor thin 0.53 percent lead, just outside the threshold for an automatic recount. It's generally accepted this will hold after absentee/mail-in ballots. Trump-Vance are challenging the results, of course.Trump-Vance won Georgia by 0.61 percent, just outside the state's recount request threshold. As in 2020, there are widespread reports of voting inaccessibility and voters standing in line for many hours, some of them turned away, some of them given inaccurate polling place information.North Carolina was one of the biggest heartbreakers of the night. Harris-Walz wound up losing by just 8,000 votes, relatively small compared to Biden-Harris losing by 74,000 votes in 2020. This will probably hold, too.But the biggest surprise for everyone from the past week in my timeline—and arguably the biggest heartbreak for Democrats—was Florida, where Harriz-Walz are currently on track to lose by a tantalizing 19,000 votes after the initial recount. Maybe the recount will flip it but most likely not.Biden-Harris lost Florida by 371,686 votes in 2020. Even in losing, the 2024 margin is a remarkable achievement for Florida Democrats.As it stands, Harris-Walz are currently at 268 electoral votes (including a surprisingly strong margin in NE-02) compared to Trump-Vance's likely total of 251.All that's left now is Pennsylvania, far too close for comfort, where the margin is shockingly close: just 0.04 percent in favor of Harris-Walz, compared to 1.16 percent for Biden-Harris in 2020.This, of course, triggered an automatic recount. PA Secretary of State Al Schmidt ordered it to begin today in accordance with state law. He's a Republican who was appointed by Gov. Josh Shapiro last year, partly due to his refusal to cooperate with efforts by Trump to overturn the valid results of the 2020 election.The political world is in a full state of rage and anxiety. Pundits are combing through the bizarre nature of Pennsylvania being this ridiculously close, far closer than anyone expected. Trump and Vance have vowed to fight it all the way to the Supreme Court, where, if accepted, they may prevail.Many observers say the smart money is on Harris-Walz, that the lead of just a few thousand votes should hold, even with a recount, but at this margin, with the furor of Trump World screaming sabotage and this extremist Supreme Court, who the hell really knows?So, that's the bad news. The automatic recount could very well flip it to Trump-Vance, and even if it doesn't, political violence, to some degree, is almost certainly guaranteed.That's why I'm here. I've traveled back in time with the second bit of good news: we now know this election is very winnable, and with two weeks until Election Day, there's absolutely no reason why every adult who cares about this country shouldn't be doing all they can to expand these margins.Even if you take a few hours this weekend to call voters or knock on doors in these swing states—especially your family, friends, and neighbors—that could prove the difference in the states we lost in my timeline and cement our victories in the states we won.Two more weeks. Just two more weeks to prevent the cruel anxiety and depression and despair we've all been feeling over the past seven days in my timeline, the gnawing regret in knowing that each of us could have probably done a little more and some of us could have done a lot more.I traveled back in time to get y'all do a little more, so that you can rest easy on the morning of Nov. 6th, knowing you saved democracy from the brink.Don't know where or how to volunteer? I got you. Go here: https://go.kamalaharris.com/There are so many ways to get involved, and for some of them you don't even have to leave the comfort of your own home. Take a few hours this week and help us out.Alright, I promised to get this DeLorean back in one piece. It's a pretty sweet ride but scary as hell.Don't let us down. Don't let the future down. Get involved. Your future self will thank you for doing so.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]Well, hot damn, today is my birthday. I'm now 38, which is old enough to know I'm still quite young and learning.That's a blessing, but I don't need to give much thought to know what I want for my birthday.I know exactly what I want, and it's straightforward.Every year on my birthday, for the past decade, I've done a fundraiser for Running Start, an organization that trains young women in high school and college to run for elected office someday. It's a highly effective org and bipartisan.This year, I've decided to focus exclusively on covering the travel and food costs for all 80 participants in the 5th Annual HBCU Women's Leadership Summit, jointly organized by Running Start and Xceleader, being held next month here in Washington, D.C.The Summit is bringing together young Black women leaders from 31 HBCUs (historically Black colleges and universities) for political training that will empower them to grow into our country's next generation of elected officials and other public service leaders.Black women make up about seven percent of the U.S. population but only 5.4 percent of Congress and 3.2 percent of state executive offices. There is only one Black woman in the Senate (Sen. Laphonza Butler) and no Black woman has ever served as a governor.So, Black women are drastically underrepresented in our country's political leadership, which is odd to me because 1) the contributions of Black women to our nation are outsized and essential and 2) I would not be where I am without the leadership and mentorship of Black women.........from my 8th grade English teacher, Mrs. Mabry, who made me fall in love with writing, to the Black women officers under whom I served in the Army and invested in my leadership development, to Vice President Harris, who's consistently fought for my rights her entire career.Early engagement and targeted training help overcome societal and cultural barriers, empowering Black women to run for office, excel in corporate environments, and lead with confidence.Thus, it's only sensible to dedicate my annual birthday fundraiser for Running Start to this remarkable program that will train and empower the next generation of Black women leaders in the United States, especially in a year when we're about to elect a Black woman president.So, for my birthday, my goal is to raise $24,000 today to cover all necessary travel and food costs for these participants, ensuring they have access to this program, regardless of cost.Friends, I would be so honored and delighted and grateful if you would make a donation to this fundraiser, and, of course, I have further incentives:Anyone donating at least $500 will get a one-on-one Zoom with me, and I'll treat an in-person lunch to anyone donating at least $1,000.I have a damn good feeling we can hit this goal today, and you will forever have my gratitude.So, please kindly donate here: https://runningstart.org/charlotteRunning Start is keeping track of all donations, and we'll be reaching out to all donors with thanks.Please wish me a happy birthday by supporting this program!Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]Are there things about AI that I find cool and interesting and hopeful?Of course.From medicine to education to national security, artificial intelligence has made once improbable strides seem possible, seemingly, to most of us, overnight.It hasn't been overnight. The technological advances we're witnessing—and those on the horizon—are the culmination of decades of the labor of determined and brilliant people.Yet it sure does feel like it landed here quickly, doesn't it? And that makes it hard to keep up. We're being inundated with stories about AI that seem to saturate the topic with a rate of complexity far outpacing our efforts to understand it.As with every binary-coerced issue these days, the discourse around AI largely beckons us all into two camps: either you're an AI optimist or an AI pessimist. I am neither. I see a lot of promise, and I see a lot of challenges. So, I want to be clear that what I'm about to say isn't a universal indictment of AI, nor should you let my commentary on this particular aspect of AI muddy the waters in every other aspect.I am not a technologist or a scientist. I will be the first to admit that I have as much business discussing the finer details of tech policy and regulation as I do being behind the wheel at the Indy 500. But I do know mass communications. More specifically (and tragically), I'm an expert on social media, and what I've been seeing, particularly over the past several weeks, has me very worried about how AI is accelerating disinformation online.I have been especially concerned with a growing attitude among many progressives and Democrats that AI disinformation is a problem limited to conservatives, particularly Trump supporters.There seems to be this perception among many that being progressive makes one immunized against being tricked by disinformation. We're too smart for that. Too informed. Too moral.But make no mistake: no matter your politics or beliefs or values, you will be tricked by AI. It's gonna happen. It's inevitable. I guarantee it.I'll give you an example. In recent weeks, I've seen this particular image circulating online in progressive and Democratic spaces:Now, before all the yelling starts, I wanna be clear that this particular image is not what bothers me.There are plenty of real photos online of insecure gun nuts bringing their firearms into spaces where it's completely unnecessary. This isn't about that. I am not saying this doesn't happen. We know this happens.The issue is how easily grown adults immediately perceived, without any second thoughts, that this image is real. And it's not. It's AI-generated.It may not be obvious at first or second or third glance, but if you look closely, it ain't that hard to confirm.Some tells are more conspicuous than others.This is not a foot:This appears to be an arm that belongs to no one, unless the lady on the right is astonishingly flexible OR the lady on the left has an especially long and multi-angular forearm:Less conspicuous is that cup on the counter. It bears a strong resemblance to the brand design of Chick-fil-A, but it's not. You will not find this brand design in the real world on any fast food beverage because it doesn't exist:And for most folks, far less conspicuous are all the scribblings on the overhead menu and countertop computer screen that are meant to represent words but are, in fact, just creepy gibberish generated by AI.Now, look, if you shared this image somewhere online, believing it's real, I'm not here to shame you. This is not a lecture intended to make you feel foolish or clownish. Because as I pointed out above, we've all seen real images similar to this one: complete dorkass losers carrying assault rifles to get a burger. It's understandable why someone would see this image, immediately accept it, and then share it with the folks in their life.What worries me is how easy it has become to generate a believable image that tricks people who think themselves to be so well-informed on disinformation that they refuse to admit they've been had when it's pointed out, however gently and respectfully.When this image started going viral, a friend of mine posted it on Facebook. I pointed out the above tells that it's AI-generated, and one of his friends got very defensive. He said he's a professional photographer, he knows real images versus fake ones, and I can't argue with his expertise.And he wasn't alone. Every time I saw this image across social media, I would check out the comments, and the same defensive response could be observed: Democrats and progressives who were absolutely incensed they'd been tricked and could not accept, even with the obvious errors, that this is AI.They knew, of course, that it was AI-generated after the inconsistencies were highlighted. They knew they had been tricked. But the shame of being tricked was so visceral—the realization that being on the left doesn't mean they're not vulnerable to disinformation—that they couldn't admit it.Because for them to admit they can be tricked by AI might mean they're not savvier than some—not all but some—Trump supporters who have also been genuinely tricked by fake images and videos.And also: it's probably pretty scary to realize it's this easy to be tricked.Here's why I'm saying all this: the best defense against AI-generated disinformation (and disinformation generally) is a good faith centering of personal humility. It's an understanding that we're all humans dealing with unprecedented technology and it's easy to make mistakes.There shouldn't be any shame in acknowledging that our brains are wired in such a way that it's not especially difficult for AI content to manipulate us. The shame should only come when our own pride prevents us from acknowledging our vulnerability to tech that is rewriting mass communications with every passing day.You're not a bad person or uncaring or “stupid” because you're susceptible to AI disinformation. You're just a human being in a changing world. And that's okay.It's important to embrace this mindset because there are, unfortunately, no obvious fixes to what's coming. Any clown can generate a believable AI image and share it online and simply call it “art” and it will more than likely be protected speech.Today, it's a fake image of gun nut caricatures that simply look like real images we've all seen of actual gun nuts in the real world. Tomorrow, it's a fake image of something that hasn't happened but looks real and plays to our biases and suddenly, without warning, disinformation becomes active harm.Here's my best advice: if you see an image going viral, before deciding to share it, take a few more moments to look closely for clues. Take the time to develop recognition of obvious and less-than-obvious tells that it's AI-generated.You don't need a computer science degree or an expertise in photography to develop this skill. You just need adequate eyesight and humility and the willingness to engage in good faith.If we're all committed to that approach and offer each other more grace, it'll be much harder for disinformation to spread.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com.]Hurricane Milton is currently poised to slam into the western side of Florida in a matter of hours. It will be one of the strongest hurricanes to ever make landfall in the United States, putting the lives of many millions at risk.President Biden had led an extraordinary operation by the federal government to prepare, as best it can, for the destruction and aftermath of Milton, less than two weeks after Helene tore through several states, devastating those regions.And yet, we all know what's about to occur in Florida will be far beyond any suffering the vast majority of us could imagine — and that it will occur in the United States again in the future. And again. And again.A few years ago, I watched "Five Days at Memorial" on Apple TV, a miniseries about the days at Memorial Medical Center in New Orleans following Katrina, based on the book by Sheri Fink.I immediately regretted watching it. Sometimes, I wish I hadn't. I don't think "brutal" comes close to adequately describing it.I will never watch it again. Once was more than enough. Honestly, I'm not sure how I managed to finish it.It's probably the single most haunting show I've ever seen — so painful to watch that I decided, at the time, that it may be wrong of me to tell others to watch it. Since then, I've often thought it might be the most persuasive and compelling argument for addressing climate change.Forgive me for saying this, but maybe melting glaciers and increasingly hot summer days and wet bulb temperature and Al Gore's genuinely brilliant PowerPoint may not be enough to reach those who are too stubborn and too incurious to recognize that climate change is caused by human beings.But what happens when the social framework breaks down, for any number of reasons, and innocent people are forced to navigate the consequences?What happens when people are forced to realize that even the most powerful country on earth cannot possibly stop a hurricane and they may someday find themselves, suddenly and unexpectedly, starving and dehydrating in flooded rubble, with no hope of being saved?Right now, we have a president who's dedicating himself to helping the victims of these hurricanes, but that may not always be true in the future. And at some point, catastrophes become far too large to be met with even all the resources at our disposal.So, that show is what I think about when climate change comes up, and it's what I've been thinking about during these hurricanes.As we pray for those in Florida and throughout these hurricane-ravaged states in the coming days—as we donate our money and our blood and our time—it might be wise to also reflect on how profoundly ill-prepared we are to manage the coming disasters that are difficult, if not impossible, to imagine in their horrific scope.And if you do choose to watch that show, don't say I didn't warn you.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com.]The vice presidential debate between Gov. Tim Walz and Sen. J.D. Vance is tonight, and, perhaps unsurprisingly, network host CBS News has announced that moderators Margaret Brennan and Norah O'Donnell will not be fact-checking the candidates.Instead, the network says, it will be up to the candidates to fact-check each other, and the moderators will “facilitate those opportunities” during candidate rebuttals.And thus, being a CBS News vice presidential debate moderator seems like a pretty sweet gig. You just sit there, read some debate rules you don't really have to enforce, ask a few questions that were approved by network execs, do absolutely no fact-checking (journalism), and get a paycheck. Sweet.In other words, instead of focusing on an informative policy discussion and laying out the Vice President's vision for the country, Gov. Walz will be expected to do both that AND being the only person holding accountable Mr. Vance's constant lying on national television.Mr. Vance, as you'll recall, has made relentless disinformation his primary strategy as Trump's running mate. Most notably, he's pushed the repeatedly debunked and deeply racist claim that Haitian migrants are stealing and eating household pets, refusing to back down even when confronted with the fact that there is zero evidence to support this anti-immigrant propaganda.In fact, a quick short story on that:Anna Kilgore, a resident of Springfield, Ohio, filed a police report in late August that her cat, Miss Sassy, had gone missing. She suspected her Haitian neighbors had taken the cat.The Trump campaign used the police report as the strongest evidence for their unfounded, racist claim about Haitian migrants.A spokesperson for J.D. Vance provided the police report to The Wall Street Journal.Two weeks ago, WSJ spoke with Ms. Kilgore, who admitted her cat had returned a few days later, found safe in her basement. Ms. Kilgore, a Trump supporter, said she had apologized to her Haitian neighbors.Lovely.Let's be clear about something: the only reason that CBS News is declining to fact check the vice presidential debate is because they're terrified of Trump and his supporters retaliating for being held accountable on the candidate and his running mate's relentless lying and disinformation.For a prepared moderator, fact-checking a debate should be easy. It really should. It's not complicated. If the candidate says something demonstrably wrong, you correct the record. Either the moderator is unprepared or the network is cowardly. CBS News has no excuses.But after ABC News fact-checked Trump in real time during the Sept. 10th presidential debate, the Trump campaigned whined about him being treated, like, you know, an adult who's running for president. The Nepo-Baby-in-Chief and his supporters cried over being held accountable, and in response, CBS News got cold feet.I wanna be clear that I do have high respect for tonight's moderators, Ms. Brennan and Ms. O'Donnell. I think they're both good journalists who challenge nonsense far more than most of their colleagues in broadcast news.This isn't about them. This is about their network. In a moment of great peril for American democracy, CBS News decided the worst sin that could be committed isn't failing to inform the public—you know, journalism—but offending Donald Trump and his acolytes by ensuring the public is informed.I'll be watching (and live-tweeting) tonight's debate, of course, and I sincerely hope that Ms. Brennan and Ms. O'Donnell—the latter of whom will soon end her tenure as anchor of CBS Evening News—decline to remain passive in the face of deeply harmful propaganda.The American people are owed that. Otherwise, what's the point in having journalists?Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]While she was at Howard University, Vice President Kamala Harris worked at McDonalds to earn spending money, and now that she's the Democratic nominee for president, the rightwing blogosphere is attempting to push the absurd conspiracy theory that she lied about it.They apparently realize it's not great that Donald Trump—infamously gifted enormous sums of money from his father coming out of college—is being juxtaposed with VP Harris making french fries and working the cash register, and they're freaking out about it.And they should be freaking out about it. While Trump was born with a silver foot in his mouth (thank you, Ann Richards), Vice President Harris has had to actually, you know, work in a job familiar to working class families who are struggling to make ends meet.Here's the heart of their claim: because VP Harris didn't put McDonalds on resumés and job applications after college, this must mean she's lying. They're now demanding proof that the Vice President worked at the Golden Arches almost 40 years ago.Okay, lemme explain why this is ridiculous.During my junior and senior years in high school, I worked at Papa John's Pizza, and in case you're wondering, yes, it definitely sucked. I took orders, dealt with angry customers, made pizzas, folded boxes, and spent a lot of time simply cleansing the store of dough dust and marinara. I earned $5.15 an hour the entire time I was there—about 18 months—and despite two excellent job reviews (perfect scores, thankyouverymuch), I was denied a pay raise on both occasions because our regional manager was a greedy little man who cared more about his margins than his employees.But the thing is… despite this being less than 20 years ago, with a corporation that very much still exists, I have zero proof that I worked at Papa John's. None. Zilch.I have no name tags, no uniform shirts or hats, no pay stubs or copies of my W-2 or employee documents. I have no pictures of myself in a Papa John's polo and khaki shorts. I have no way of contacting my former colleagues and boss because I've forgotten their last names. Because, you know, 20 years and all.The location itself was shuttered by Papa John's many years ago, probably somewhere around the end of the Bush Administration.I never put my time there on any resumé or applications, including for the few odd jobs I worked between high school graduation and joining the Army. All I have to prove that I worked this shitty minimum-wage job as a young lass are the promise of an affidavit from my grandmother, the permanent muscle memory earned from folding many thousands of pizza boxes, and a lingering resentment toward late stage capitalism.In the eyes of the rightwing blogosphere, I never worked at Papa John's, and to be fair, in the spirit of bipartisanship, I'd love to forget that I ever worked there, so, maybe, in my particular case, their bad faith could be obliquely read as a blessing.This is a pretty common experience for minimum-wage laborers from working class families who have the opportunity to get a college degree and enter the salaried ranks, long separated from keeping corporations afloat for dollars an hour.So, if I, twenty years down the road, can offer no tangible proof that I worked at a fast food joint, it's not one bit surprising that the sitting Vice President hasn't offered up a McDonalds cap wore almost 40 years ago.It's also not one bit surprising that so many in rightwing media don't understand this common experience of those who came from working class families and hunched over an oil vat for hours at low pay to make ends meet.These are the same people who claim raising the minimum wage and mandating universal health care and requiring paid family leave for working class families will somehow irreparably harm our economy.They are detached from the struggles of workers, led by an egregiously entitled and effete Nepo-Baby-in-Chief, and to compensate, they've decided to show their asses by attempting to erase the experiences of a progressive politician who understands, firsthand, what workers experience.And they'll do this while sitting in fast food drive-throughs and being served by the same folks whose livelihoods they spend every waking moment of their privileged lives trying to make harder.Same as it ever was. By the way: Papa John's Pizza sucks. Get your pies elsewhere.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]Folks, we've been here before. We know how this will end. It's no mystery what happens next. I will never begrudge anyone who offers a good faith critique of elected officials, even ones I really love, because good faith criticism is essential to a healthy democracy.There are plenty of valid reasons to critique Vice President Harris and Governor Walz because I recognize that the Democratic Party and the progressive movement are not monoliths and certainly not cults. I would say it's absolutely correct to claim that the Democratic Party's biggest strength is that its a “big tent” — there are a wide range of opinions and priorities, and so often, these clash in disagreement. And that's a good thing.That disagreement makes us stronger. We can have hard conversations and come out the other side better for it. We are the party of iron sharpens iron.But where I draw the line in this election is the completely absurd, selfish, absolutely ridiculous claim that “both parties are the same” and then making the profoundly selfish and narcissistic decision to sit this one out because Vice President Harris isn't saying and doing everything you want.Good faith criticism is fine, even healthy, and certainly encouraged when it's actually productive. But threatening to not vote or signaling to others that it's fine to not vote doesn't make you a progressive; it makes you a childish clown who clearly doesn't understand the stakes.Pick your issue, any of them, and there's a chasm of difference between Vice President Harris and Trump. And it's not even close.Angry about late stage capitalism? Trump will brag about making billionaires richer, laugh off the struggles of working class families, and sell the state to the highest bidder, all for his lining his own pockets. Angry about Gaza? Anyone being even the least bit honest with themselves knows that the horror inflicted on Palestinian civilians through Netanyahu's cruelty and incompetence will be several magnitudes worse under Trump. If you wanna give Bibi a blank check, root for a Trump victory.Angry and worried about climate change? If you think progress on that has been soul-crushingly slow, wait until Trump strips away every existing environmental regulation and jokes about it in the Oval Office. Angry about our two party system? Pissed about our duopoly? Hey, Trump's got you covered there, too. If he wins, you'll never have to be angry about two parties ever again. Under Project 2025, there'll only be one party, and it really won't be a party. It'll be an insecure tyrant costuming as a party.You won't have to worry about voting because even if you technically get to vote, it won't be counted. You won't have to worry about protesting, either, because the growing, fascist Supreme Court majority will figure out a way to curtail that to a toothless action, if not outright banned.The most anodyne thing that can be said about this election is that it's the furthest thing from normal; the most honest thing that can be said about it is that our country—and the world—will never recover from a Trump victory.If you thought the first Trump term was horrible, trust me when I say the suffering inflicted on innocent people by a second Trump term is only limited by your imagination.Actually, that's not wholly accurate. Describing it as a “second term” implies he'll leave office when his actions and words have consistently suggested otherwise.Pretending that you'll sit this one out because Vice President Harris doesn't meet your threshold of political purity and you'll simply back a more progressive candidate in 2028 against then-President Trump is the height of selfish naiveté. Expecting anything approaching a free and fair election in 2028 with Trump back in office would almost be comical in its absurdity if it weren't so terrifying. Nothing matters more than stopping Trump this November.Every progressive cause, every progressive conviction, every progressive goal you have will fare many, many times worse under Trump.Our definitive purpose right now should be electing Vice President Harris.If you think this is “vote bullying” or whatever, I really and truly don't give a s**t. I could not care less about the feelings of people who are so stridently self-absorbed that they would intentionally put the lives of countless millions of vulnerable people at direct risk because of their insufferable performativity.Be critical about our elected officials and be loud about it. That's encouraged.But claiming there “isn't really a choice here” is b******t, and that's why every reasonable adult is furious at anyone who frames this election on any one issue when Trump and his far-right acolytes could not be more clear that every issue you care about will be unimaginably worse under his power.There are no other options on the table. Either you choose the brilliant, experienced, and progressive Vice President—who actually cares about what happens to all of us and is hellbent on doing something about it—or you get the aspiring fascist who will literally sacrifice anyone for his own ego and ensure you don't ever get a choice again.I would tell you to consider and choose wisely, but in this election, it shouldn't take considerable wisdom to figure this one out. Basic common sense will do just fine.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]Today, CNN's Andrew Kaczynski and Em Steck dropped a major story detailing North Carolina GOP gubernatorial candidate Mark Robinson's particularly troubling history of online posts in a messaging forum.Made between 2008 and 2012, the posts include Mr. Robinson referring to himself as a “Black Nazi,” expressing support for the reinstatement of slavery, fondly reminiscing when he enjoyed “peeping” on women in public gym showers as a teenager, and admitting that he enjoys watching transgender porn. The first three of these things are completely and undeniably wrong, but, of course, I have a terrible feeling we're about to see a news cycle in which considerable shaming will be projected on Mr. Robinson from various corners for his private porn viewing habits.And that would not only be missing the point but harming trans people in the process.I don't give a damn what any consenting adult is or isn't into, does or doesn't do, when it comes to their sexual interests. It's absolutely none of my business, nor is it anyone else's. It's not my place to judge the consensual and private sexual practices of any other adult. If a non-trans adult has a kink for trans people, I really don't care, and moreover, I really don't wanna know. I would prefer not knowing how they privately fetishize trans folks, and also: I see nothing wrong with them doing what they want in private, so long as they keep it to themselves and act in a consensual manner.The problem here is that central to Mr. Robinson's political brand is an aggressive and cruel dehumanization and shaming of trans people, in addition to the LGBTQ community generally.Mr. Robinson has called for trans women to be arrested for using public women's restrooms and went further than that, stating that if trans people need to use a public restroom, we should “find a corner outside somewhere.”Like dogs, of course.Mr. Robinson has promoted the completely absurd, misogynoir conspiracy theory that former first lady Michelle Obama is secretly a trans woman (he called her a “man”) and implied that she and former president Obama are secretly a gay male couple, slander which is often thrown at Black women public figures. In the aftermath of the Pulse nightclub shooting, in which 49 people were brutally murdered and 53 wounded, Mr. Robinson posted on Facebook: “…homosexuality is still an abominable sin and I WILL NOT join in ‘celebrating gay pride' nor will I fly their sacrilegious flag on my page. Sorry if this offends anyone, but I'm not falling for the media/pop culture ‘okey-doke.'”Mr. Robinson has stated that LGBTQ people are the downfall of civilization and referred to us as “devil worshippers,” which, I must say, as a Christian trans woman, is certainly news to me.This is all in addition to his Holocaust denialism, frequent invocation of horrible antisemitic tropes, beliefs that women should neither have the right to vote nor breastfeed in public, statement that Muslim Americans are “invaders,” and consistently holding that abortion should be entirely outlawed, without any exceptions, despite having paid for an abortion himself. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. There's so much more this sad, cowardly, insecure person has said and done throughout his public life that makes him beyond disqualified, many times over, to run for any elected office. So, am I surprised that Mr. Robinson viciously attacks trans people publicly while enjoying transgender porn privately? Not even a little. It is the opposite of shocking.He is simply part of a long pattern of MAGA extremists who weirdly sexualize the bodies of trans people and are deeply unsettled by their own desires and bizarrely address that internal quagmire by projecting their conditioned self-loathing and resulting rage on those of us who are trans.I don't care about Mr. Robinson's sex life, and I really don't want to know anything about it. And I certainly have no interest in shaming him for his consensual sexual interests, mostly because that would require knowing about them and again: I don't wanna know. Nor do I have the right to know.If we were the last two people on earth, and it were his dying wish to confide in me his transgender kink, I would politely decline, wish him a smooth exit of his own, and mercifully alone, wait for Death's sweet embrace, peacefully and blissfully unaware of his interior life.I just wish he and other Trump acolytes wouldn't feel the need to make their sex lives our business through this constant and cruel projection.Perhaps that's an extraordinary request for extremists like Mr. Robinson, and yet, here I am, naively hoping they'll someday understand such a simple concept.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]A few months ago, in the midst of the national fervor over President Biden's debate performance, I was in a pretty terrible mood listening to it all and decided to take a long walk through D.C.I put on some sunscreen, popped in my earbuds with a good playlist, and took a stroll around town, about an hour later finding myself on a residential street.As I was wandering down the sidewalk, I saw a cyclist approaching from the opposite direction pretty fast and carrying a 7/11 Big Gulp in one hand, his other paw on the handle bar. Before I could process my curiosity over the balance and hand-eye coordination it takes to do that, he tossed the cup, underhand, in a high arc, right onto the grass divider between the street and the sidewalk. He had passed by a public trash can not thirty yards away at the intersection. He simply decided to deposit his garbage there, on the grass, and let someone else clean it up for him.Like I said, I was already in a bad mood, and this just pissed me right off. I was also stunned because who the hell does that? Without really thinking, I tried shouting something, but all that came out was a weak, anger-tinged “Hey!”He heard me, and without turning his head around, tossed up his right middle finger, formerly holding up the Big Gulp, and sped away.So, now, I felt both angry and ridiculous for saying something, and then I felt angry at myself for feeling ridiculous for saying something.Did I mention I was in a terrible mood and the whole point of this walk in the D.C. summer heat was to reset and clear my head?I took a few moments to calm down. I told myself that I was probably making way too much out of the actions of this dorkass, inconsiderate weirdo, and then, I walked over and picked up the ice-rattling Big Gulp and threw it in the trash.I was still incredibly annoyed, but if I can be emotionally undone by some random, littering clown, isn't that on me? That's what I told myself, anyway.A week-and-a-half later, my friend Gautam invited me to a matinee showing of “Funny Girl” at the Kennedy Center, a much needed reprieve from the never-ending hell that had become July. It was fantastic. We had a great time. I felt better than I had in weeks.I walked for several blocks after the show and decided to call a ride home. While I was sitting in the outside section of a restaurant on that street and waiting, out of the corner of my eye, I noticed a woman slowly making her way down the sidewalk.She was wearing a floppy hat and carrying a trash bag and a litter picker (there are, apparently, many names for this device, but I'm going with that one). I watched as she meticulously made her way down the sidewalk, grabbing every bit of trivial debris she could find and tossing it in the bag.She was clearly focused on her task of cleaning the street, and I didn't wanna interrupt but my curiosity got the better of me.“Excuse me, Ma'am, can I ask: are you with an organization?”There were probably more elegant ways to inquire, but my sleep-deprived brain was doing the best it could.She looked up at me, offered a kind (and perhaps bemused) smile, and said: “Nope, this is just something I like to do.”Ah.“Well, thank you for doing that,” I replied. “I hope you have a lovely day.”“Of course! You have a lovely day, too.”My ride pulled up a moment later. On the way home, as I sat in the backseat, I couldn't help but regret letting myself get angry at Trash Cyclist a few weeks prior, allowing, even for a second, someone that uncaring to get to me. What a waste of my emotional energy.Our country has always had people like Trash Cyclist, folks who have given up on moving through the world with empathy and consideration for those around them, people whose chronic nihilism has metastasized into the public square and everyone around them is forced to clean up their mess.That's the uncharitable take, of course. Maybe the charitable take is that Trash Cyclist was having a bad day, too. Maybe tossing his garbage on the street and flipping off a complaint was uncharacteristic. Maybe his life sucks right now because the world hasn't shown much consideration and empathy for him.That's possible. I don't personally know the guy. Perhaps if I ever got to know him, I'd learn that he's got a lot of pain inside from any number of unfair things life has thrown his way and has no idea how to deal with it and tossing a Big Gulp in the street like a complete dillweed is his response.It ain't likely, mind you, but I can't deny that's possible.But the thing is: when I felt enraged that day, furious at our political environment and then taking out my anger on this dipstick-on-wheels for throwing his trash on the sidewalk, I made choices myself. I chose to get angry. I chose to remain annoyed. Sure, I threw away the cup, which took all of ten seconds, but I could have made the choice to get a trash bag and clean up that whole sidewalk myself. It wouldn't have taken long, maybe ten minutes total.I could have done something kind and thoughtful in response to something maybe done out of hurt. It probably would have made me feel better. But I didn't make that choice. No one asked that woman in the floppy hat to spend her afternoon cleaning up the sidewalks in her neighborhood as an unappreciated public service. She simply chose to do it because it needed to be done, and it made her feel better. I think we're living through a time in which it's much easier for us to decide that the world sucks and society is exhausting and why even bother? It may not manifest in tossing our garbage in the streets, but maybe it does manifest when we let that distract us to anger rather than service to each other.I think there's often a great courage in consistently centering an imperative to serve others we don't know, especially when it's thankless. I admit it's not a quality I've yet mastered. I promise these two individuals are not shoehorned stand-ins for Vice President Harris and Trump. I don't know the respective politics of the Lady in the Floppy Hat and the Trash Cyclist. They're complete strangers, and I only saw them both in mere snapshots of their lives.But I do think that conscious effort to serve others, to do something for the greater good as an antidote for existing mess, an often thankless approach, is magnificently embodied by Vice President Harris and Gov. Walz.I think if they're consistently doing that and I'm not, when I certainly have the time and space to do so, any grievances I have over our national community maybe don't hold as much water as I'd like to think.Maybe I need to carry a folded-up trash bag with me on those long walks and do something about it. Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]All of us kids were sleeping in my mother's room when the gunshot went off. The three of us who weren't holding a gun woke up almost immediately. My mother, improbably, slept through it.I sat up, obviously startled and a bit foggy, and saw my younger stepbrother, almost four at the time and barely over three feet tall, standing next to me and facing the bedroom window. He was holding a small revolver, a faint trace of smoke billowing from it. I turned in the direction of the window, and there, in the early morning light, was a bullet hole in the center of the glass and a spider web of cracks extending in each direction. Being the eldest, five at the time, I immediately woke up my mother, who took a few seconds to absorb the situation and then quickly grabbed the gun. Everything after that is a blur, like a photograph misted with bleach. I vaguely remember the cops paying a visit. I vaguely remember my mother in a frantic state, but I don't remember what was said.Her second husband—my first stepfather—kept the handgun in the top drawer of their nightstand. It was not secured in any way. No trigger lock. Loaded, obviously. And my stepbrother and I knew it was there. We knew it was there because he didn't keep it a secret.I don't know remember exactly what happened next. I don't recall either of them being arrested or detained. I don't think CPS was called. No one had been hurt, and so, I guess it was decided there would be no further consequences. My mother and I only spoke about it once. I must have been nine or ten. She had escaped that abusive marriage a few years prior. We were sitting in the living room, just the two of us, watching television. I asked her if she remembered it.She took a drag from her cigarette, never breaking eye contact with the television, offered a long exhalation into the air, and said: “I don't know what you're talking about.”And that was that.Maybe six months later, my father moved back to Texas, and we'd visit him on the weekends. He'd decided I was at the age where I needed to start learning about gun safety. He bought me a .22 caliber rifle for Christmas, and the education began immediately.He drilled four rules into my head: 1) always treat any firearm like it's loaded (keep it on safe), 2) never point a firearm at anything you don't intend to shoot; keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction, 3) never put your finger on the trigger unless you intend to shoot, and 4) always store the firearm properly.He took me to the gun range numerous times. He showed me how important it is to wear proper ear and eye protection. He taught me how to shoot and the proper terminology and gun range etiquette and how to clean a firearm. “This is not a toy,” he told me. “This could kill someone. You could kill another person or yourself if you're not careful. Don't ever let me catch you treating this like it's not a deadly weapon.”He taught me that there are no accidents, only irresponsible gun owners. Firearms may malfunction, but if you're following a handful of common sense rules, no one will be killed. There are no “accidental deaths” when gun owners are responsible.He kept my firearm and all of his locked in a safe in his bedroom. He showed me the trigger locks he put on the firearms. He never told me the combination to the safe or where the keys were kept. He told me I didn't need to know, and that was that.He also did something else: he told me that any time, no matter what he was doing, if I wanted to see any of the firearms, hold them, check them out, whatever, all I had to do was come to him and ask.My father and I struggled to connect. We didn't have the same interests, he was not one to be vulnerable, and trying to talk to him about life was like pulling teeth. We were not close, to say the least.But the five or six times I asked to see the firearms, he immediately stopped what he was doing, led me over to his bedroom, asked me to stand completely outside of eye line while he punched in the combination, and then, he would hand over the guns and let me check them out.He never rushed me, never left me alone with them, and patiently answered every single question that came to my mind about guns or shooting. I don't mind admitting that I would occasionally ask to see the firearms because it was consistently the closest we ever got to bonding.When I was done, he'd store the firearms back in the safe, remind me of the rules of gun safety, and we'd go on with our day.I never did tell him about the incident with the revolver when I was younger, and I never told him that his educating me on gun safety removed any and all anxiety I had about firearms from that incident. He absolved the fear I had about them. I've never been afraid of guns since.But I am afraid of the wrong kind of people having access to guns. I'm afraid of irresponsible people owning firearms. I fear for children in homes in which guns are left out in the open, displayed behind glass panes or kept on a wall rack. I fear for children whose parents keep a handgun in an unlocked glove compartment with no trigger lock or under a pillow or nestled in the top drawer of a nightstand. It is impossible for children to steal firearms from responsible gun owners. If an adult who owns firearms does everything they're supposed to do—keep them secured in a safe, use trigger locks, teach about the importance of gun safety, etc.—no child, regardless of age, would steal them.I firmly believe that any adult whose child “steals” their firearm and kills another person should be held criminally liable to the fullest extent. At minimum, they should be charged with involuntarily manslaughter. I think if any adult fails to properly secure their firearm and its theft leads to the murder of another person, they should be required, on top of criminal charges, to publicly apologize to the loved ones of that slain human being and pay for their funeral expenses.I think firearm ownership in our country should be as strictly regulated as car ownership and driving privileges, and I feel this is common sense.I believe in responsible gun ownership under a rational application of the Second Amendment, and I realize there are some progressives who aren't exactly thrilled with that position.I also believe that civilians shouldn't be permitted to legally own AR-15s and their variants or any other weapon that has no reasonable justification being in civilian hands, and I realize there are some conservatives who aren't thrilled with that opinion.The gun reform debate has room for many valid viewpoints, and yet, somehow, it's become the most absurd public policy discussion in our country, overwhelmingly due to the bad faith witnessed on the right in response to children being horrifically and needlessly slaughtered at their schools.None of the NRA loons are able to reasonably explain how a 14 year-old had access to a firearm in an environment with supposedly adequate gun laws, so instead, they'll yell as loudly as they can that an amendment written in the time of muskets is more important than your kids' lives.I sure as hell don't buy it, and I don't think any responsible adult does, either.We owe the children of this country a lot more.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]It always amuses me when some folks who are into hyper-traditional marriages claim that progressives are out to destroy them or that we're somehow offended by their existence.Folks, I don't know how else to tell you this: we don't give a damn how you decide to proceed with married life. You're grown adults. As long as you both enthusiastically consent, we don't care what you do.If you both want to build and decorate your home to early Eisenhower America specifications, with only the husband working while the wife stays home in heels, a polka dot dress, and an apron, and you both gleefully seek to live out your Lucy & Ricardo fantasy life, go for it!If your ultimate dream is finding a spouse whose conservative views on marriage and family would make the ghost of Phyllis Schlafly pay a midnight visit to warn that maybe you're going too far, enjoy! Go chase your happiness. If you both want that life, no one else's opinion matters.It ain't none of my business. I couldn't care less.The problem comes when you need everyone around you--not just friends, not just family, but every person in the country--to personally validate, and seek emulating, your home life.The problem is when your entire personality revolves around aggressively proselytizing your marriage and family structure to everyone else, and should anyone decline, they immediately become an enemy of America and Sweet Baby Jesus and all that is good.J.D. Vance is really not that much of an outlier. There are millions of conservative men in this country who clearly can't stand the thought of marriages that look very different from theirs, let alone the concept of any grown woman living her best independent life.Or the fact that these men are so deeply threatened by husbands who stay at home and take care of the kids and don't anticipate any longterm consequences to their sense of masculinity should they pick up a broom and dustpan occasionally.Then there's the whole TradWife phenomenon, in which all these women who post TikToks claiming to solely desire having a godly submissive role in their marriage inexplicably need all other women to want exactly the same thing.I don't know about y'all, but I've never met a confident person whose worldview precariously hinges on the outlook of every stranger they meet.The weirdness isn't the part where two adults enthusiastically agree to a life together that happens to work best for them but isn't my cup of tea; it's when they become obsessed with weighing every other marriage against theirs that it gets very weird. I don't think I've ever given two seconds to wondering about consenting adults in a hyper-traditional marriage. If that's what they want, great! Why would I care?But when you turn your hyper-traditional marriage into a relentless PR campaign and political movement for which the obvious end goal is to exercise some degree of control over the marriages of others, we're gonna think that's pretty damn weird.Because it is.As the next Vice President of the United States so eloquently says it: Just mind your own damn business.I hope this helps.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]Tell me if you've heard this one before.A Navy SEAL, a doctor, and an astronaut walk into a bar. They're all the same guy.Last week, NASA announced that 40 year-old U.S. Navy Lieutenant Commander Jonathan “Jonny” Yong Kim will deploy to the International Space Station in March onboard the Roscosmos Soyuz MS-27 with cosmonauts Sergey Ryzhikov and Alexey Zubritsky for eight months. It's the latest extraordinary chapter in the life of Dr. Kim, who previously served as an enlisted Navy SEAL early in the Global War on Terrorism before completing undergrad, whilst earning an officer commission, and subsequently graduating from Harvard Medical School.While finishing an internship in emergency medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dr. Kim applied to the NASA Astronaut Corps after meeting physician-astronaut Dr. Scott Parazynski and was selected as part of Astronaut Group 22 in 2017.Okay, so, obviously, this is an all-timer professional trajectory, so profoundly accomplished that it's hard to imagine it inspiring any degree of career jealousy in the hearts of his peers because, honestly, any reasonable adult has to ask: what caliber of human being could even do all this?If the LinkedIn summary of this man's life was all you had to go on, maybe certain assumptions would be front-of-mind. Maybe you'd think he had an especially nurturing childhood. Maybe he had particular advantages, even with hard work, that made the above possible.That's where his story, at least for me, gets even more mind-boggling.Dr. Kim was born to Korean American immigrants a few years after they arrived in the United States. They were a working class family. His father struggled with alcoholism and was abusive. His mother attempted to make the very best of a volatile home life. Neither had a college education.Growing up, Dr. Kim took on the role of a protector for his mother and younger brother, constantly shielding them from the violent outbursts of his father. In high school, this came to a head when his father, armed with a handgun, threatened to kill his mother.Rushing to his mother's aid, Dr. Kim was pepper-sprayed and bashed in the skull with a dumbbell by his father. The police were called to their home. After learning he was barricaded in the attic and likely still armed, authorities cordoned off the house. There was a standoff, shots were exchanged, and his father was killed.Despite the overwhelming trauma of this early horrific experience, Dr. Kim kept focused on his childhood dream of serving as a Navy SEAL. He enlisted in 2002 after high school graduation, eventually completed training with BUD/S Class 247, and got assigned to SEAL Team Three.He was primarily trained as a combat medic but soon completed the highly competitive SEAL Sniper Course and then deployed twice to Iraq, undertaking over a hundred combat missions and earning the Silver Star and Bronze Star (w/ valor) along the way for life-saving actions.So, you got this guy who went through an especially rough childhood but overcame it to flesh out a sterling career any of us would admire. The odds were long, yet the success has been off-the-charts. So, as a person, it wouldn't really be surprising to find out he's a bit cocky, right?I've watched several interviews with Dr. Kim and dozens of video snippets of his fellow Navy SEALs discussing the man's character and professional competence. I highly recommend the five-hour podcast chat he did with retired SEAL officer Jocko Willink.(By the way, Mr. Willink is an exceptional interviewer and does a fantastic job of guiding the conversation throughout.)There's also a standout, hilarious clip in which two of his fellow SEALs talk about a presentation Dr. Kim made during Sniper School that was so deeply impressive that all they could do was laugh when remembering it. Definitely watch it. Here's what's abundantly clear: there may not exist a greater chasm between the professional achievements of one human being and the unyielding humility and selflessness they inhabit. Dr. Kim's fellow SEALs have nothing but high praise for him in a community that is not known for its penchant to publicly acclaim any of its living brothers given all who have made the ultimate sacrifice. So many clips I've watched were SEALs bringing up Mr. Kim unprompted and in glowing terms.In watching his interview with Mr. Willink, I was quite taken with the numerous times Dr. Kim answered questions about his service in the framing of his SEAL brethren and other fellow service members, always reverting back to those lost and their sacrifices. I don't know how else to put it, but there's such a pure humility in this man that comes across as steadfastly authentic, almost appearing to be embarrassed that his accomplishments would be discussed at all. As I've done research on Dr. Kim, I've come across too many predictions to count that he may one day—and should be—president, which struck me as not only true but somehow—ironically—unlikely.It's not for his lack of ability. If Dr. Kim could understandably be described as a political novice given that his entire career has been spent outside of formal politics, it's difficult to think of any political novice more likely to be equal to the task.You get the sense that if he were thrown into the Oval Office tomorrow and without warning, Dr. Kim would find a way to make it work. Hell, you get the sense that if you told the man he needs to learn how to juggle flaming swords, he'd come back an hour later with a routine set to music.No, it's the relentless selflessness so clearly at the core of his being that might be the only factor of skepticism, particularly in a political system disinclined to reward selflessness as a prevailing characteristic. In Dr. Kim's own analysis, he's not perfect. He's made growth-ready mistakes throughout his storied career, listened to advice, made adjustments as necessary, and always focused on self-improvement and most importantly: the team, the team, and the team.While speaking with Mr. Willink, he said this: “I'm not gifted. I'm not smarter than everybody else. I'm not stronger. I just have the ability to stick to a plan and not quit."And that's a great value statement, but in honor of Labor Day, here's one that resonated even more with me:“You should never think you're too good to do a job. And I think you should be like that in everything you do. 'Be a forever new guy' is what I try to emulate… never think that you are above taking out the trash.”Well said, Sir.Jonny Kim is the kind of American who makes me hopeful about the future of our country and the kind of leader who best expresses, by example, the greatness we should all aspire to.I can't wait to see what he does next.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]I've had a nagging feeling over the past several years that there's an important aspect to evangelical church culture in the United States that's been consistently overlooked, or simply unknown to most of the public.I was a senior in high school when I became a Christian, and while I was certainly primarily motivated by Christ's teachings, there was another factor that played an enormous role in keeping me going to church: the warmth of community.My family had been fractured and fraught all throughout childhood, so when I was invited by a friend to her church service, I was taken aback by the easy embrace of belonging there. I say that in the general sense, of course. Being queer, for example, was not-so-welcome. More on that in a second.I was in that church for nine months prior to my enlistment in the Army, but when I arrived at my duty station in Washington, D.C., I eventually found myself attending another church on a friend's invitation, which was also evangelical.This was in 2006, and back then, the public's understanding of political motivation behind predominantly-white evangelical congregations was not nearly as savvy as it is now. Being invited to that church didn't carry with it immediate alarm bells. If anything, it felt like a welcome invitation.I had been trying for a year to find community in D.C. because I certainly wasn't gonna find it on base. The soldiers of my age and rank were far more interested in partying all the time, which is perfectly alright, but it just wasn't my thing. I had a hard time finding human connection. I was lonely.Walking into that D.C. church on the first Sunday was a balm. There was so much joy and excitement. I could tell that folks wanted to be there, and it didn't take long to figure out why. There was a very strong familial vibe to it all, and it didn't feel forced at all. Quite the opposite.I was immediately greeted at the door. Throughout the service and afterward, so many folks I didn't know came up to introduce themselves. They were kind and lovely. I would later learn this was simply the culture. New congregants were readily embraced and made to feel at home.Before I knew it, I was spending all my time with folks in their 20s and 30s who attended the church. Being just 19—and thus, one of the younger folks in the group—I never felt pressured or put upon. I was just one of the gang. They quickly became my friends, and at long last, I found community. I found family.I still keep in touch with many of those friends, and I certainly don't regret that period in my life. Most of these folks were good people who simply loved Jesus and enjoyed spending time around others who felt the same. We all had friends outside the church, but that particular bond was (mostly) rock solid.The problem came over time in ways that were unexpected and often jarring. Some people I met through the church would occasionally bring up, say, LGBTQ rights in not-so-kind ways. Same for abortion and other hot button issues. They would offer unsolicited political opinions to me that, quite frankly, even then, at my relatively young age, felt half-baked at best and asinine at worst.Gender roles were an ongoing theme. The pastors would often allude to the purpose of faithful men and faithful women. Men were supposed to be the leaders: in church, in family, in society. Women were supposed to lift up men. This was all quite curious to me because our congregation had no shortage of women who were leaders outside the church: doctors, lawyers, military officers, Hill staffers, and a few academics. One woman in our church would eventually be elected to Congress.And yet, it felt like we all constantly got the message from the pulpit that women should essentially defer to men in all areas of life. It would be couched in softer tones, but the thrust of that ideology was undeniable.I recall a married couple inviting me to dinner at their home on the Hill. The husband was a former White House staffer, and the wife was an attorney. They both worked, but he explained to me that he made all the decisions for the direction of their family because that was God's intention.I was obviously closeted at the time, and his wife not only seemed perfectly at ease with the conversation but made a point in insisting to me that when I get married someday, I should understand that my godly responsibility is leading my future wife in all ways. This accomplished lawyer told me she doesn't make any decisions without her husband's approval. She encouraged me to understand my future role in that regard.To be abundantly clear, it didn't work the other way around. They told me that her job was to advise him in their marriage but that he got the final say on everything. His relationship with God gave him a divinely-conferred authority to which, as a woman, she did not have access.They were otherwise nice people, but that was the first night I recall feeling deeply uneasy. These were grown adults, and I still believe that what they consensually do in their own marriage is none of my business. But it was their insistence to a 19 year-old on what I should be doing that felt a bit off.I think “grooming” is perhaps too strong a word, but looking back, it did feel more than a little inappropriate. It felt borderline manipulative. It felt like the dining room table at which we sat was within shouting distance of cultish behavior.I would soon learn that this was pretty normal in the congregation: married couples telling young congregants what is and isn't godly in marriage. And what their position should be on LGBTQ rights. And how they should feel about abortion. And any number of other things the far-right obsesses over.I kept hanging out with friends in the church my own age, but I soon stopped accepting dinner invites to the homes of married couples. Something about it felt oddly orchestrated, like a pipeline in which lonely young people were taken under their wing and turned into God's soldiers. I was definitely a Democrat back then, and I wasn't alone. There were a number of Democrats in our congregation, but they weren't vocal, that's for sure. They certainly weren't as politically vocal as the Republicans, including all the pastors.I realize a lot of folks reading this will say “and yet, you still stayed there,” but I promise you it's not that simple. Imagine you're a young person away from home, especially a young person like myself without a healthy family to fall back on, and these wonderful people take you in and make you feel like one of their own—safe and welcome and worthy of love—and offer the warmth of family.Try to imagine you're a young person who has never been so loved, and suddenly, here are all these older folks who would do anything for you: help you find an apartment, coach you through a job application, take you out to dinner or a ball game, offer a personal loan.Suddenly, you have loving parental figures for the first time in your life. How do you let that go? How do you reject their advice? How do you not seek their approval?And meanwhile, even aside from that, you love your similarly-aged friends in church. You love being around them. They cheer you on, they show up when you need them, they make a point of being supportive. They're simultaneously fun and grounding.Yet at some point, I had to accept that my values were not compatible with this church, and I eventually left, which, I gotta tell y'all, was really hard. But what about the young person who, for whatever reason, can't leave — perhaps afraid to lose that sense of family, despite misgivings?Evangelical churches are exceptionally skilled at building loyal communities, and central to that dynamic is offering emotional nourishment to young people who are starved for a (mostly) judgement-free environment in which they receive the care and attention they've never had.It's not just young people. I knew plenty of older, unmarried adults—some without children, some with children—who seemed quite cemented in the social structure of the church, and I often wondered if they had anywhere else to go outside of it.I'm not talking about older adults who are simply obsessed with their church community. That's different. I'm talking about older adults who don't have anything in the way of a support system outside their church community because they don't know how to create one. I believe loneliness is a highly effective driver of the evangelical movement.In his book The Great Good Place (1989), the sociologist Ray Oldenburg popularized the concept of “the third place,” or spaces that most nourish us outside of home and work. Your home is your first place, work is your second place, and third places are all the other spaces that allow for creative human engagement.Your third place is your book club, your recreational softball team, your local bar, maybe the park around the corner where you see friends regularly — all spaces which don't have any explicit obligation to hold you but to which you voluntarily and regularly go for nourishing human interaction.More and more Americans are now constantly online as their sole third place. This can be fine in moderation, of course, but do I really need to point out all the ways in which this could go very wrong? And often does?The Surgeon General released a report last year that found about half of surveyed adults experienced “miserable levels of loneliness” even before the pandemic and that young people aged 15-24 had “70 percent less interaction with their friends” than American youth 20 years ago. I often wonder how many folks in this country truly understand what it means to feel utterly lonely, unmoored and socially malnourished. And if folks who feel that way come across a community that does nourish them socially, can we really be surprised they make concessions to stay? Maybe you would?I want to be clear: I am not suggesting that loneliness is to blame for the extremism coming out of pre-dominantly white evangelical circles. That's absurd. What I'm saying is that there are absolutely vulnerable people who are driven into nonsense environments because that's what's readily available.One reason the Harris-Walz campaign excites me is that it feels like a demonstrable inflection point for the country's sociological infrastructure, particularly faith in public life.The campaign honestly feels welcoming in ways that, arguably, no previous presidential campaign has been able to accomplish: the excitement of Obama ‘08 combined with the “we're all one big family” vibe of Biden ‘20.More than anything, this moment in our history feels like a rare opportunity to build bridges with others, reconcile our differences, and heal old wounds that have been so cynically inflicted by bad faith actors in elected office and political media. It feels like a possible Era of Non-Weirdo Community.This is why I can't seem to stop talking online about Evangelicals for Harris, the group that has stood tall against Trump—despite admonishments from other evangelicals—because they, too, see in Vice President Harris and Govennor Walz kindred spirits who are more aligned with Christ's teachings.The group has exploded in popularity over the past month on Twitter (now boasting more than 24,000 followers — definitely follow them), released several ads, been featured on MSNBC, and even got a surprisingly positive segment on Christian Broadcast News (CBN), a channel not exactly known for its progressive bent.A few weeks ago, they organized a zoom call for VP Harris that was attended by thousands of evangelical voters and featured as a speaker Jerushah Duford, the granddaughter of the late Rev. Billy Graham, alongside numerous other evangelical clergy and leaders.Ever since the group launched, I've regularly wondered how many lonely people in evangelical circles might, for the first time, be seeing a non-judgmental offramp to faith spaces that can be nourishing and inclusive and reality-based.I don't know, y'all… this moment in our history really does feel quite different, and I have to believe it isn't coming a moment too soon. Because where we're going, we're gonna need more bridges built. We're gonna need welcoming spaces for people who don't know where else to go.There are a lot of stranded, lonely folks looking for a community they can call home but no apparent way to get there.If we're not reaching out to them and offering a bridge they can cross into the light, how can we ever blame them for sticking with the dimly-lit haunts they've only ever known?Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]We practiced with caskets that were stored outside our barracks building. To simulate the weight of honored remains, we'd toss several full sandbags into the belly of the casket, and then, for hours and hours, we'd go through our exact movements. Over and over and over and over. Those were hot and humid D.C. summers, and it didn't matter. Drink water. And then back at it. We'd march up crisply, pick up the casket, go through the entire funeral protocol—with an earned coordination that would rival any synchronized swimming team—and then do it again.The first summer I was in the 3rd U.S. Infantry Regiment (The Old Guard), the A/C stopped working in our barracks. Think of the most depressing college dorm you've ever seen and remove air conditioning. We'd wake up in sweat in the middle of the night and open the fridge and stick in our face for a little relief.We'd run through flag-folding drills at night in those hot barracks. We'd stand in the hallway in our casket teams, and we'd fold and fold and fold until we could do it in our sleep. Whatever you've seen in movies doesn't come close. It is an exacting choreography. No movement wasted or erred.Does the flag look perfect in presentation? Are the red and white stripes hidden? Are the stars symmetric? Is the cloth tight in the final form? No? Why the hell not? You'd give this to a mourning relative? Do it again. We will be here all goddamn night until you get this right.Your exhaustion doesn't matter. Better get some sleep. No excuses. I arrived at the unit as a 19 year-old Army private, not even being close to knowing that I didn't know what I didn't know. You sure as hell better learn and quick. Figure it out. Get yourself right. Pray if you're the praying type.Because families are flying in from all across the country for what will be one of the absolute worst days of their lives, shattered, maybe beyond repair, and all we can meagerly offer them is choreographed dignity in place of irreparable loss. It will never be close to enough. Perfection is never enough.We'd spend so much time on our uniforms. There were presses in the basement. You think your barracks room is hot? Go downstairs and be hugged by steam. Learn how to use the press. Get those creases sharp. Eradicate all wrinkles. Ignore the sweat dripping into your eyes.We carried micrometers with us to ceremonial details to ensure our uniforms were right — down to the centimeter. We'd shine every metallic surface on our bodies. What are fingerprints? We don't know. We'd coat the soles of our shoes with edge dressing to turn them from grey to black.I can't believe I'm saying this now, but learning rifle manual and element marching was taking a break from everything else. Tedious as all hell. We wore steel plates on our shoes to click as we marched. They'd bang into our ankles at times, and you'd try not to swear. That was our break.It was constant stress, all day, every day, and yet, we had it easy. If you want hard, go volunteer for the Tomb Guards. Go ahead and throw yourself into the actual deep end and find out if you can swim. Just raise your hand when they ask for volunteers.Go to the Tomb, and work 18-hour days for months and months. You will learn everything there is to know about Arlington. You will memorize pages and pages of information. You will recite it all from memory, or you will fail. You will barely get sleep. You will have no life. There is only the Tomb.I knew, deep down, I wasn't ready for that. I respected it too much to raise my hand. I didn't volunteer. My roommate volunteered. It was a curious decision on his part given that he struggled more than any other private. He definitely wasn't ready, but God bless him for stepping up. It takes nine months to earn the Tomb Badge, which, at the time, in terms of rarity within the U.S. military, was second only to the Astronaut Badge. Only 500 military personnel have earned the Astronaut Badge. Only 864 have earned the Tomb Badge. Walk in space or walk in front of the Tomb. That's rarity.My roommate was back with us in three months. He didn't make the cut. Sink or swim at the Tomb. There is one standard: it is perfection and that's all there is to it. He came back to us and had the sharpest, most squared away uniform in our entire company until the day he got out.But the truth is that the Tomb Guards had it easy, too. We all had it easy. Because the hardest job in Arlington National Cemetery doesn't involve wearing a uniform. The hardest job is being a cemetery official who is given the impossible task of bringing comfort to families.I arrived at the unit in April of 2006. In January of 2007, Pres. Bush announced a dramatic increase in troop deployments to Iraq, now known as the Surge. For three consecutive months that year—April, May, and June—there were over 100 U.S. military fatalities in Iraq — the deadliest year for U.S. service members in the Global War on Terror.They came back in transfer cases on a C-130 at Dover Air Force Base, and I honestly don't know how many of them wound up buried in Arlington. But I know there were a lot. I know we were pretty busy. All day carrying caskets or leading the caisson horses or marching behind them.That's not including the many fatalities in Afghanistan. That's not including the old veterans who had passed and long ago earned the right to be buried there or their family members who qualified for burials, too. Funerals, funerals, and more funerals. That sums up 2007 for The Old Guard. Who leads on caring for the families on one of the worst days of their lives? Who plays the painful combination of clergy and therapist to the aggrieved? Who does whatever they can for the ceremonial units? Who enforces respect for that hallowed ground?Cemetery officials.Day after day, month after month, year after year, it's the cemetery officials, the civilians, some of them veterans, who undertake the ludicrously impossible task of cobbling together comfort and dignity for families who have had their hearts ripped out and stomped on by tragedy.I can't imagine doing what they do. If I were forced to make a choice between the public service they carry out for grieving families OR putting on a uniform to join a marching element, I'm going back to the steam room. At least in that procession, there's an available freedom to be numb.On Monday, according to reporting by NPR's Quil Lawrence and Tom Bowman, a cemetery official was allegedly assaulted and harassed by members of Donald Trump's presidential campaign because the official was enforcing a common sense regulation restricting filming or taking photographs.Cemetery officials had issued clear guidance that only Arlington personnel are permitted to take video or photos in Section 60, the final resting place for those service members who were killed in Iraq or Afghanistan. Trump campaign staffers thought it didn't apply to them. They were wrong.Moreover, Arlington National Cemetery released a public statement confirming a report had been filed over the incident and included this bit:“Federal law prohibits political campaign or election-related activities within Army National Military Cemeteries, to include photographers, content creators or any other persons attending for purposes, or in direct support, of a partisan political candidate's campaign. Arlington National Cemetery reinforced and widely shared this law and its prohibitions with all participants.”What were Trump's campaign staffers attempting to do that was so flagrantly in violation of this law that a cemetery official, in the midst of all their other necessary responsibilities, felt it necessary to step in and put a stop to it?This comes almost two weeks after Trump, during remarks at a campaign stop, called the Presidential Medal of Freedom “better” than the Medal of Honor, a moment so completely and weirdly disrespectful that the VFW National Commander issued a statement condemning him. This comes almost four years, nearly to the day, after reporting by The Atlantic that Trump had called American war dead “losers” and “suckers,” which was corroborated by several other news organizations, a senior official in the Defense Department, and a senior Marine Corps officer.This comes more than eight years after Trump attacked and insulted the parents of U.S. Army Captain Humayun Khan, who was killed in a roadside bomb in Iraq in 2004, drawing widespread condemnation from leaders in his own party.This comes more than nine years after Trump slandered the military service of the late Sen. John McCain, who spent five-and-a-half years in captivity as a prisoner of war, being tortured, refusing to sell-out his fellow service members.As you'll probably recall, Trump stated: “He's not a war hero. He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren't captured.”I fully admit to being a partisan, but for me, none of this is about politics because none of the Republicans or conservatives I have ever known would so much as consider showing anything but respect and admiration for our service members, our veterans, and their families.This is not about favor for any party or campaign because the moment you enter Arlington, politics are to be left at the gate. It's not about you or me or anyone other than those buried in that ground and their loved ones who will never see them again because of their collective sacrifices.But Donald Trump is unwilling or unable to understand that because he cannot conceive of offering the highest degree of selfless service to our nation. The concept of “all gave some, some gave all” is entirely incomprehensible to him. And therefore, he cannot extend proper respect to our military.I cannot wait for the time to come when this self-absorbed coward will permanently exit public life into a tarnished and thoroughly mediocre legacy that will haunt him for the rest of his days.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.][NOTE: THIS IS A SATIRE PIECE WHICH I REALIZED MANY FOLKS WHO DON'T FOLLOW SPORTS TOOK QUITE SERIOUSLY AND EXPRESSED THEIR CONCERNS — I GUARANTEE YOU I WON'T MIX SPORTS, POLITICS, AND SATIRE AGAIN BUT FOR THOSE GET IT, DO ENJOY THE PIECE]Minnesota Governor and Democratic vice presidential candidate Tim Walz has made a big deal about coaching high school football. The Harris-Walz campaign has boasted numerous times about his prominent role in leading the Mankato West High School football team to a state title in 1999.This part of his public narrative has been so central to the campaign's roll-out of his selection as Vice President Kamala Harris's running mate that supposed former members of the team he claims to have coached were featured onstage at the Democratic National Convention last week.Yet records show that not only did Gov. Walz never coach a football team at Mankato West—let alone win a state title with said squad—but there is no proof of any football team at Mankato West prior to 2006, according to a very quick Google search done right before publication of this reporting.But first, some background for our readers.The sport of football in its current form was invented in the 8th century on an island just west of the European continent that is now called Great Britain.For many centuries, the game shifted sloppily into various offshoots with inconsistent playing frameworks until 1863, when a nine player committee representing a number of English boarding schools introduced a new set of regulations, now known as the Cambridge rules.This coincided with the founding of The Football Association (FA), the world's first national governing body for the sport, which still oversees the professional and amateur game in England and the Crown Dependencies of Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man to this day. According to the FA, the first sanctioned match under these rules took place on December 19th of that year between “Barnes and Richmond at Limes Field in Barnes,” which resulted in a scoreless tie, showing that even then the European sporting mindset was averse to outright victory.Over time, the game spread beyond the borders of the island into other countries, which created their own regulatory bodies, and in 1904, the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) was established in Paris as the global authority for the sport, though England would not become a member until the following year.Today, football is considered the world's most popular sport, with billions of fans and established governing bodies in nearly every country. Every four years, in an offset schedule, the World Cup and the Men's World Cup are played in a selected host nation and attract billions of viewers. There is no record of Gov. Walz having ever been involved in football at any level, let alone coached a team in this sport to a championship, and repeated requests via phone and email to the Harris-Walz campaign for comment went unanswered.When asked for comment or any documentation establishing the spurious claims made by Gov. Walz, the receptionist at Mankato West High School appeared to be confused by the request and then hung up.We attempted to reach out to the supposed former players coached by Gov. Walz, but they were said to still be recovering from afterparties at the DNC and unavailable for comment.A source close to Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump offered that maybe Gov. Walz lied about his supposed coaching past because he hates America, which we duly report here to offer both sides an equal perspective on the matter. We would like to directly ask Vice President Harris why her running mate blatantly lied to the public about his sporting achievements, but she refuses to hold a press conference, her campaign instead engaging with social media influencers on topics like national security, housing expansion, abortion rights, health care, and gun reform.The next presidential debate is scheduled for Sept. 10th at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, where we hope moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis of ABC News will address Gov. Walz's fabricated coaching record.More on this story as it develops.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]On Wednesday night, at the Democratic National Convention, America was introduced to 17 year-old Gus Walz, the son of Gwen Walz and Gov. Tim Walz, who instantly became a national treasure due to an unexpectedly emotional moment of pride and joy for his father.When Gov. Walz told his family, seated in front of the stage, that they were “his whole world,” the young man was so overcome with emotion that he stood up, tears streaming out of his eyes, pointed toward the podium, and shouted: “I love you, dad! That's my dad!”There was a collective sense in the United Arena that what we were witnessing was immediately iconic, even in a week with no shortage of iconic moments. I was on the third floor of seating, watching Gus loudly praise his father through tears on the big screen and instantly found myself tearing up. I looked around me, and I wasn't alone. Parents and their teenagers, old and young, across the gamut of America's profile, were tearing up, too. It's as though someone had pushed a button in all of us simultaneously.Beyond Vice President Harris's all-time great acceptance speech last night, it would be hard to identify a moment more unifying than the sight of Gus sobbing with joy and pride for his father.Many Democrats, myself included, have jokingly referred to Gov. Walz as “America's Dad” in light of his playful and endearing nature (see the viral clips bantering with their daughter Hope), but it wasn't until Weds. evening that it really hit home how loving and wonderful a father he must be. I didn't know in that moment that Gus has a non-verbal learning disability, which basically means that he experiences the regulation of his emotions and the space around him atypically compared to most of the general population. It's not a disorder; he just has a different lens on the world from most folks.Truth be told: in that moment, I honestly didn't know Gus is a teenager. I didn't know much about Gus at all. Who goes randomly searching for info on a candidate's child?To my eyes, right then, watching Gus on the big screen, he looked like a tall, college-aged young man who was very proud of his father and unafraid to show it.A number of rightwing commentators did not feel the same. Ann Coulter, famous for her sterling empathy, tweeted “Talk about weird…” in response to a clip of Gus's moment, which she has since deleted. She later wrote that she took it down because someone told her Gus is “austistc” (she misspelled autistic) and, of course, ranted about Democrats calling others weird.Radio host Jay Weber tweeted: “Sorry, but this is embarrassing for both father and son. If the Walzs represent today's American man, this country is screwed.” Following a swift backlash, Mr. Weber tweeted an apology this morning:“This is a fuller apology for something stupid and hurtful I said yesterday. I said it without thinking or having the facts. No excuses. Having been a teacher, I've had a standard of never involving children, I broke that and I'm disappointed with myself. I apologize to the Walz family and anyone who was offended. I feel horrible, I am so sorry.”This rang more than a bit hollow when it was revealed that Mr. Weber has, in fact, involved children in the past. In 2015, he tweeted an article about a man offering numerous cattle as a dowry for then-16-year-old Malia Obama, with the caption: “It's not a bad deal.”I'll be completely honest in that I find this all especially weird because the red line for these very sad people somehow wasn't to refrain from saying something like that in the first place.The rightwing's mocking of Gus Walz is especially disgusting because he's a kid and neurodivergent, of course, but even if he were a neurotypical, grown man, why is a son crying with joy and pride for his father seen as anything other than a wonderful moment?These people--particularly the men--are so cemented in their repressed feelings and ignored trauma and mocking of vulnerability that they honestly think a son openly adoring his father is somehow bad. And while they're at it, they'll have the gall to tell you that Christ is their North Star.Did Jesus not publicly weep with joy and pride in His Father? Did they not read that part of the Bible? Did Jesus not say that the meek shall inherit the earth and that humility is a righteous state and that children should honor their parents? I swear, if these people never talked a big game about supposedly loving Christ, their actions would never indicate to me that they know anything about Him.Regardless of all this, I don't feel sorry for Gus Walz. He doesn't need my sympathy. A young man who has that much confidence and strength in his own skin, so much that he readily and tearfully cheers for his father on national television, doesn't need any pity from the rest of us. If anything, we should be following his lead.On Thursday morning, I attended the Women for Harris Brunch, where hundreds of ladies gathered to hear Mrs. Walz talk about the campaign and a vision for our country and our nation's children.When she mentioned Gus, the entire venue of women spontaneously broke out in a chant of his name for several moments as Mrs. Walz beamed with pride and misty eyes. It was a truly wonderful moment and a highlight of a week that will be long remembered for the joy on display throughout.We weren't chanting his name because we feel sorry for him. We were chanting his name because we wish some men in this country who seem weirdly obsessed with masculinity had as much strength and confidence as Gus. We wish they would care more about being good human beings than blustering, insecure caricatures.We adore Gus because even at such a young age, he's already figured out a basic lesson that still eludes millions of grown men in this country: cheering on your loved ones and tearing up with joy for them is what a strong man looks like.Keep being you, Gus. The world needs it.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]I haven't written in a minute because I've been exhausted — a happy exhaustion to be precise. The past week has taken on an acceleration of volunteer campaign work: zoom rallies, emails to write and respond to, calls to be made, fundraising to be organized, traveling as a campaign surrogate, and all the rest of it.Completely worth it, of course. Everything I do—everything we all do—over these final ten weeks will be worth the feeling of inexpressible joy the morning after the Election.That point was driven home last night as I was waiting with friends in line to enter the United Arena in Chicago for Night Two of the Democratic National Convention.The entrance line is quite a long one, and in the final stretch, just outside the Arena, there are protestors of all kinds. Some of them are rightwing extremists who are hoping to provoke a viral moment in service to their incessant, endless, incredibly sad grifting.I was in line with five friends, each of them gay men in Democratic politics, each of them professionals on various issues with the common goal of ensuring no one gets left behind. I was wearing a rather beautiful pantsuit and pearls and red lipstick, and I have to say I looked quite gorgeous. And, in hindsight, certainly conspicuous. I wanted my fashion to reflect how joyous I felt entering the Arena to hear, among others, Pres. Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama speak later in the evening.As we were patiently waiting for the line to progress—and I mean patiently because it moved so slowly through security—a rightwing extremist came walking along the line and asking all of us if we believe in God.I answered: “Yes, I do. I'm a Christian.”And he stopped, clearly surprised, and said: “What do you mean?”We started talking, and I honestly felt like this was a moment to engage with someone in good faith. No judgment or harshness. He seemed amenable to chatting respectfully, and so, for several minutes, he asked polite questions about my spiritual journey and I told my story of believing in Christ's teachings.There was no apparent animosity. He seemed genuinely interested. Although I will say it was somewhat unnerving when another man walked up and started filming our conversation for a few moments, and perhaps realizing this wasn't going to be a viral moment because we were chatting calmly and politely, he got bored and walked away in search of other content.The man to whom I was speaking wanted to engage in a Scriptural discussion, and I was all too happy to respond in kind. But at some point, I did notice a wrinkle of frustration in his face. It occurred to me that he may be trying to deploy some sorta Trojan Horse tactic through an initial kindness before upping the ante, but every time he got more specific about the Bible, I responded with clarity and knowledge. In retrospect, I can now see that his desire for a biblical gotcha was falling flat, and he increasingly wasn't happy about it.But of course, at the time, the conversation was peaceful enough that I honestly felt we were having the sort of exchange that illuminates perspectives. And I cherish those moments, so much so that my naiveté can have a bad habit of getting in the way.Without warning, his frustration became much more evident and he suddenly pivoted to a question completely unrelated to our conversation:“But you're a man, right?”And my heart sank. Here we go. This was the true objective. Fool me twice, etc.“No, Sir, I'm a woman.”I then expressed my disappointment that he felt the need to exploit what could have been a truly kind and respectful conversation in order to—it was now clear—provoke for provocation's sake.I walked away and rejoined my friends, hearing him shout the same question, over and over: “But you're a man, right?”I thought that would be the end of it, but a moment later, another rightwing extremist came up and began taking pictures of me and asking for my name. He seemed quite angry, and he was not looking to engage with kindness or respect. Within moments, his questions became more vicious and pronounced. I ignored him and began chatting with my friends. It seemed absolutely pointless to engage further, and I knew there's nothing more these people hate than being ignored when their blatant attempts at provocation fall flat.But he wouldn't leave me alone, and soon, a few others joined him, shouting anti-trans nonsense just feet away from me. It was at that point that my friends, without saying a word to each other, quickly surrounded me and stood between me and the extremists. They shielded me and made it clear to the extremists that they needed to back away. I continued to stare straight ahead and pretend it wasn't happening.Various refrains of “you will never be a woman” became louder, and as a group, we decided to move away, up the line, as their shouting increased in volume and venom.We waded into the crowd in front of us, and the extremists, understanding they wouldn't get the viral moment of their dreams, finally left us alone.Later in the evening, I watched as former First Lady Michelle Obama delivered an address that will go down as an all-time great convention speech. She said, in part:This is up to us, all of us, to be the solution that we seek. It's up to all of us to be the antidote to the darkness and division. Look, I don't care how you identify politically—whether you're a Democrat, Republican, Independent, or none of the above. This is our time to stand up for what we know in our hearts is right. To stand up, not just for our basic freedoms but for decency and humanity; for basic respect, dignity, and empathy; for the values at the very foundation of this democracy. Mind you, her point here was not to simply accept vitriol and hatred, only responding with kindness and love. In fact, I would encourage y'all to watch her whole speech, which was quite critical of Trump.The point of her wisdom, so eloquently expressed, is that we can champion our values and also refuse to back down in defense of ourselves and the common good, being happy warriors against hatred, for a future in which no one gets left behind.I love my friends who surrounded me and shielded me last night. I love the LGBTQ community. I love Democrats. I love America. I'm grateful God made me a trans woman and for the lens of empathy and faith earned along with that.We are gonna win in November and keep making this country better for all people, even the sad extremists who deeply struggle to find a peace in their own skin that I have in mine.I hope those wayward souls will someday find such peace.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

The Medal of Honor is so revered that it's the only decoration specially emblazoned on headstones in Arlington National Cemetery. The Medal of Honor is so revered that when an Active Duty recipient wears it in uniform, it is customary, though not technically required, for all officers, no matter their seniority, to initiate a salute. If a buck sergeant is in uniform and wearing their Medal of Honor, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will more than likely salute first. The Medal of Honor is so revered that the children of recipients are guaranteed a nomination to Service Academies, such as West Point. They still must compete for final admission, but the incredibly difficult nomination process is entirely waived for their application. The Medal of Honor is so revered that recipients and their dependents are entitled to special military ID cards for particular privileges at commissaries and priority on military air travel. The Medal of Honor is so revered that every state offers some degree of special license plate for drivers who are recipients. The Medal of Honor is so revered that recipients receive an automatic special pension from the VA that's tacked on to any other pensions, retired or medical, they may have. Adjusted for cost-of-living regularly, it's currently $1671.16 per month. The Medal of Honor is so revered that all living recipients are entitled to an invitation to every presidential inauguration and inaugural ball. The Medal of Honor is so revered that a fragile, cowardly, insecure, and deeply narcissistic piece-of-s**t like Donald Trump can't stand knowing he'll never receive a similar universal respect.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]According to a survey released by Pew Research Center in late 2021, a whopping 44 percent of childless males say it is unlikely or not at all likely that they will have children someday. Of those, about 50 percent simply (and selfishly) offer a simple reason: they just don't want kids.America stands in a grave moment: the institution of the family is increasingly threatened by the instability of social change, birth rates in the United States have been declining for decades and reached their lowest point last year, and of course, masculinity has been in a freefall for quite some time.Rather than building a family and contributing to the God-gifted structure of a home with many children, more and more young males are declining to fulfill their natural roles and instead seek purpose through careers and other personal ambitions.Some radicals will point out that the survey highlights how males and women are “equally likely to probably not have kids” in the future, but this brazen progressive framing masks a basic scientific truth: it's much easier for males to have children.As Gabrielle Blair writes in her excellent book “Ejaculate Responsibly,” it is only logical to point out that males encounter no significant health threats during the process of pregnancy and childbirth, have far greater control in managing their fertility status, and bear ultimate responsibility for all pregnancies.After all, without emission of sperm, how can a pregnancy occur? Any given male's sexual production should be magnitudes greater than any given woman, for she has only one uterus with a limited ovulation window during her life, while the male can produce sperm repeatedly and very late into his lifetime.And yet, radical lawmakers would have us believe that young males should “have a choice” over whether or not they become parents. Sounds to me like they're enabling an ungodly narcissism that undermines their sole purpose.I can already hear the radicals now: “But what about males who are impotent and thus incapable of impregnating women?”Look, I suppose there should be some compassion for males who are born without a meaningful and real masculinity, but while that's unfortunate, it doesn't negate their lack of usefulness in God's divine will that large families be grown.It's not only young males who are letting down God and country. Shockingly, according to data gathered by the U.S. Census Bureau, more than 18 percent of males ages 55 and older don't have children. What purpose in life could they possible have by that point?Males should be carrying out the Lord's imperative by having lots of children, and when they grow older and their children have kids, it's only right that they drop everything and dedicate themselves to help raising those newborns.I mean, c'mon, it should be obvious that the whole purpose of the post-andropause male is to help raise children.As you may have expected, J.D. Vance and likeminded male radicals have said nothing about all this, pretending that our country isn't being made vulnerable by a generation of young males who reject their calling to be at home with many babies.I wonder why Mr. Vance is so viciously anti-child. It sickens me. I weep for our country.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]It's been a surprising three weeks in American politics, to say the very least. After President Biden announced his decision to step aside as the Democratic nominee on July 21st and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris, she informally secured the nomination through party support in fewer than 32 hours.Ever since then, Trump and J.D. Vance and the Republican Party have been perpetually on the back foot, seemingly unable or unwilling to take common sense steps to stabilize their campaign.Meanwhile, the energy for Vice President Harris and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz has been off-the-charts: hundreds of millions raised through grassroots fundraisers, packed rallies in swing states with tens of thousands of people—many of them driving hours to see the Democratic Party's ticket in person—and a remarkable swing in polling.And my goodness, the affinity groups. It all started with Black Women for Harris (organized by Win With Black Women), which was organized within hours of President Biden's announcement. They organized more than 44,000 Black women and raised more than $1.5 million in under three hours, a jaw-dropping achievement.The following night, Black Men for Harris picked up the baton, organizing 53,000 Black men on their own Zoom call and raising $1.5 million.Quick reminder: this was all done within two days of Pres. Biden's endorsement of VP Harris. Soon, other groups followed their lead: White Women for Harris, Latinas for Harris, AAPI Voters for Harris, White Dudes for Harris, and so many more, all featuring elected officials and celebrities.They raised boatloads of money, signed-up hundreds of thousands of volunteers, and made it clear that the joy and enthusiasm for VP Harris is undeniably evident and contagious.But arguably the most surprising support has come from Republicans and conservatives who have announced their support for the Harris-Walz campaign. A group called Haley Voters for Harris, led by former supporters of Nikki Haley, announced their endorsement of the Vice President.This so angered Nikki Haley that she publicly ordered Haley Voters for Harris to “cease and desist.” Their response: “Our rights to engage with voters and encourage them to vote for Vice President Harris – who in our view is the clear better choice for the country – will not be suppressed.”Amazing.A group named Republicans for Harris has made significant waves, topping 100k followers on Twitter. They're organizing a Zoom chat at 9pm *tonight* and will feature Mark Hamill, who is not a Republican but was so moved by their efforts that he agreed to join.Okay, so, that's all fantastic. We love to see it. But are you sitting down? Because this may blow your mind.There's now a group called Evangelicals for Harris, who have broken away from the well documented base of support Trump has among evangelical voters, rejecting his candidacy as the opposite of Christ's teachings.Y'all know that there has been no group more supportive of Donald Trump than white evangelicals, who have overwhelmingly backed him over the past eight years, propelling his campaign in 2016 from joke to contender. He would not have been elected without them.But this group? They're tired of his nonsense. They're exhausted with his meandering incompetence. And they're being loud about it. Check out these tweets the group has put out recently:This really riled up Laura Loomer, the infamous pro-Trump agitator, who publicly accused the group of “black supremacy” (???). The group responded with far more grace than she deserved:Anyway, y'all, a lot of unprecedented and wonderfully strange things are happening in American politics at the moment, and Evangelicals for Harris might be the most underrated storyline in all of it.Let's make sure we have their backs. Go follow them on Twitter (click here), Facebook (click here), and Instagram (click here).Tomorrow night, they've scheduled a Zoom rally at 7pm ET (register here), and among the number of pastors and advocates will be Jerushah Duford, an energetic evangelical leader and the granddaughter of the late Rev. Billy Graham.Send the link and their social media to your family, friends, and other folks in your life who are evangelicals on the fence. It might just be the thing that gets them into this joyous movement for Vice President Harris.Wonderfully strange times, indeed.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]Love of mythology is central to the American experience. We'd be much less happier—or perhaps, less entertained—without it. Mythology permeates our country: George Washington axing the cherry tree, the sweet but apocryphal story of the first Thanksgiving, stacking back issues of The New Yorker near our desk with the false implication we've read any of them.Here's another one: the Pilgrims didn't first land at Plymouth Rock. In fact, the Rock itself—yes, there is a literal rock—had nothing to do with the Pilgrims. It marks a spot long claimed to be the landing area of the Mayflower, the Dutch cargo fluyt that carried the Pilgrims across the Atlantic, but the claim was originally and erroneously made by 94 year-old Thomas Flaunce more than 120 years after the landing. Flaunce, of course, was not an eyewitness to this.And the Pilgrims never mentioned the Rock. They would be very confused by the importance placed on it today and may consider us all a bit weird (actually, it's guaranteed they would consider us all weird).No, in reality, the Pilgrims first anchored in the harbor of what is now known as Provincetown, a gorgeous seaside community of less than 4,000 residents at the southern tip of Massachusetts.The other myth about the Pilgrims that was beaten into our heads from an early age is that they absconded from Europe in pursuit of true religious freedom, a core tenet of the American Experiment. But in truth, the Pilgrims were religious conservatives who wanted to be completely separate from the spiritual influence of outsiders — perhaps “aspirational purists” might be a more apt description. They weren't seeking true religious freedom for all.The area where they first anchored already had residents: the Nauset people, closely related neighbors of the better-known Wampanoag, who were almost certainly the opposite of the Pilgrims in terms of social attitudes. Although there isn't substantial scholarship on the topic, it's fairly likely that LGBTQ people were accepted on that land long before the Pilgrims arrived with their strict outlook on gender, sexuality, and family.And so, it's quite fitting that Provincetown is today considered one of the premier vacation destinations for LGBTQ families. The season reaches its celebratory apex every year with LGBTQ Family Week, organized by the organization Family Equality, this latest being its 30th year of celebration.For three decades, LGBTQ families have traveled from throughout the nation—some crossing an ocean from other countries—to enjoy what can only be described as one of the safest places in America (and the world) for the LGBTQ community.During a long, wonderful walk through town, I ran into a friend and caught up on life. She and her wife have been bringing their son ever since he was a baby. He's now 15. He's grown up surrounded by love and joy in Provincetown.Last month, Nissan (North America) reached out and asked if I would join them as a guest for the festivities. They offered to cover travel and lodging, only requesting that I write about my experience if the spirit so moved me. I was not paid, nor would I have accepted payment.My sole motivation was quite simple: while anti-LGBTQ laws are being passed in dozens of states and children are being attacked and books are being banned and fear campaigns are being waged against trans people by elected officials, I wanted to draw attention to companies who are walking the walk (or driving the drive, in this case).If you're pleasantly surprised that Nissan is so invested in LGBTQ equality, allow yourself to be further delighted. As a number of other large corporations, from Target to Tractor Supply, have quietly moved away from LGBTQ outreach in the midst of backlash from anti-LGBTQ extremists, Nissan has doubled down.For years, they've achieved high marks in the Corporate Equality Index, an annual report released by the Human Rights Campaign to assess the commitment of a wide range of companies to LGBTQ equality. And this year, they increased their sponsorship of LGBTQ Family Week, desiring to send a message that all families deserve and should expect kindness, respect, and dignity.Of course, I immediately agreed to join.There are two ways to get to Provincetown (“P-town") after landing: you can take a long drive from Boston or catch a much shorter ride on the Bay State Cruise Company ferry across Massachusetts Bay. I took the ferry, and it was lovely. It was about 90 minutes, but it felt like half an hour, I kid you not. I spent the week with the lovely group from Nissan going whale-watching, singing karaoke (enthusiastically and badly and hilariously), laughing at a drag show based on the Devil Wears Prada, eating at several of the many charming restaurants in town, and generally enjoying the festive and welcome atmosphere. And that was all great, to be sure. It was wonderful. But the parts of the trip that stick with me most were seeing hundreds of LGBTQ families gathered together in such safe and joyous celebrations. There was Family Night at Motta Field, in which many a parent could be observed cleaning sticky fingers with wet wipes and cheering on their kiddos dancing in front of the stage and toddlers walking around with watermelon wedges bigger than their heads. Everyone just seemed happy and at peace. Nissan's Don Hayes delivered brief and moving remarks during the gathering, which included this heartfelt offering that got huge applause:“You know, there was a time when I didn't feel comfortable to be myself at work, concerned for my ability to advance…but I'm happy to report, that is no longer the case.”Nissan also displayed their Ariya, an electric crossover, which I only mention here because it's truly a gorgeous piece of machinery. (Again: they are not paying me to say this. I just think it's pretty.)And, of course, there was the Parade. Oh, the Parade. If you haven't experienced the Provincetown Family Week Parade, you're missing out. I've been to countless Pride parades in my life, and there's something particularly special about this one. LGBTQ families, as far as the eye can see, who weren't so much marching as they were joyously promenading through downtown, proud parents and energetic kiddos, amused and cheering tourists on the sides, a collection of excited humanity slowly enveloping the streets. Love upon love upon love.At the Parade's end, I caught up with Alexis Cantor, who recently took the helm as President & CEO of Family Equality. I had seen Ms. Cantor around all week, always spreading good cheer and having a kind word and smile for everyone she came across.I asked her what Family Week means to her. She said:“Being surrounded by queer joy and a sense of belonging and families just feeling safe, protected, loved, and celebrated is all we can ask for… I would remind people that we need joy with our justice, and at the end of the day, families come here because they don't always feel safe. They do have worry in their hometowns, and here, they can find their community… everyone gets to show up authentically as they are… we're here to celebrate it all.”At the end of our conversation, she summed it up about as well as anyone could: “How can you not want to create a world where every single child, every single adult, every single human, gets to feel that unconditional love of family?”I couldn't agree more, and as I headed back to Boston on the ferry, I found myself immediately longing to return to P-town and feel unreservedly safe and accepted, walking its streets and simply existing as myself, beautifully and unapologetically and in communion with no shortage of kind souls.My everlasting gratitude to the folks at Nissan and Family Equality for offering a bit of heaven in a time when so many desperately need it.I only wish everyone could have that, too. Affirmation shouldn't be a mythical concept.(To donate to Family Equality and help support their amazing work, go here.)Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]A little over two weeks ago, a user on Twitter posted a joke claiming, with a knowing wink, that J.D. Vance, the junior senator from Ohio and Trump's running mate, had been quite intimate with an alluring chesterfield. They have since locked their account, but here's the original tweet:To be clear: there is absolutely no proof whatsoever that Mr. Vance engaged in copulation with a couch. You can confidently state to the folks in your life that this never happened.But the joke took on a life of its own. For two weeks, the internet has been awash in puns, memes, and coy references to Mr. Vance's (falsely alleged) furnish-curious orientation.It hit a fever pitch on Tuesday at a campaign rally in Philadelphia when Gov. Tim Walz, running mate of Vice President Harris, included this reference in his speech: “I can't wait to debate the guy—that is, if he's willing to get off the couch and show up.”As the crowd roared in response, Mr. Walz followed up with: “See what I did there?”I was in that audience. It was a hell of a line. Many of you were probably watching on television and laughing with approval, and I gotta say: it landed even better in-person.Of course, not everyone agrees, particularly more than a few journalists and pundits who decried it as unnecessary and tantamount to disinformation. Yesterday, CNN's Jake Tapper characterized it as a “gross smear” while Washington Post columnist Megan McArdle opined on Twitter: “But the more people argue this is all in good fun, the more I want to write in a name rather than voting for either of the nasty tickets.”The Intelligencer's Benjamin Hart weighed in, too: “It does not follow that Trump accusing Democrats of killing babies and Kamala Harris of being a communist monster means that Democrats are allowed to lower their standards. That's not how standards work.”Ah, yes, standards — the expected consistency of holding a moral line, regardless of whom crosses it. Of course, it's been difficult not to notice that Mr. Tapper, Ms. McArdle, Mr. Hart, and every other finger-wagging, scandalized pundit didn't have anything to say when, just last week, Mr. Vance decided to use his global platform as the Republican vice presidential nominee to falsely and cruelly claim that Olympic woman boxer Imane Khelif is actually a man.Mr. Vance posted on Twitter: “This is where Kamala Harris's ideas about gender lead: to a grown man pummeling a woman in a boxing match. This is disgusting, and all of our leaders should condemn it.”He was quote-tweeting far-right commentator Charlie Kirk, who had written: “The Olympics just allowed a biological man, Imane Khelif, to pummel Italian Olympian Angela Carini. Her life's work was stolen by a man who beats up women for sport. Will someone have to die before people wake up?! This entire ideology is pure evil.”I wrote last week about the vile disinformation spread about Ms. Khelif by the likes of Mr. Vance, Trump, J.K. Rowling, and many others who slandered her online, along with all the reasons why this horrid accusation is patently false.(Also: to be abundantly clear, there are no trans women competing in the Olympics.)But here's the most important thing to note here: Ms. Khelif is from Algeria, where being transgender is not only considered borderline criminal but trans people are particularly vulnerable to lethal violence, to say nothing of discrimination generally.Mr. Vance encouraged a global pile-on against Ms. Khelif, quite literally putting her life in danger, all for a cheap political hit directed at Vice President Harris.Mr. Tapper said nothing on the matter. Nor did Ms. McArdle. Nor did Mr. Hart. Nor, to the best of my knowledge, has any other reporter or pundit who pontificated on Democrats making light of Mr. Vance allegedly having a tryst with an ex-lover from Rent-A-Center. In the case of Mr. Vance, there is no victim of disinformation. The greatest cause for trauma and injury can only be claimed by a hypothetical, seductive settee. But with the dangerous slander directed at Ms. Khelif by Mr. Vance, there's a woman who has struggled all her life in pursuit of her Olympics dream, only to watch as people like the Republican vice presidential nominee put her and her family through an extraordinary hell for the past two weeks.I don't expect journalists and pundits to comment on every single issue, particularly every little comment from every bit player in the world of politics. That's completely unreasonable. But Mr. Vance is not a bit player. He's on the GOP's presidential ticket. He's asking voters to consider him for the position of the second most powerful person in the world, and every single reporter and pundit in this country would understandably leap at the opportunity to book an exclusive interview with him.The silence of people like Mr. Tapper and Ms. McArdle and Mr. Hart—knowing full well that what he was claiming is false and dangerous—speaks to an increasingly destabilizing double standard in American media. For some, journalistic integrity seems to be highly contingent on the degree to which their access is threatened.If they had criticized Mr. Vance and set the record straight regarding Ms. Khelif, most likely jeopardizing their access with Republican elected officials, it might mean one less big scoop, one less primetime interview, one less panel invite or speaking gig or book deal. And thus, it is much easier to publicly opine on the moral imperatives of Mr. Walz, the vice presidential candidate for the political party that is not going to restrict access or otherwise punish journalists and pundits who ask a tough question or make a critical observation. It's easy to “take a stand” when you know there will be no consequences for doing so.I don't care what Mr. Vance does or does not do with his couch or end table or swinging crystal chandelier. It's none of my business. Granted, I would like a heads up, so as to avoid sitting there, but otherwise, it really has nothing to do with the rest of us.I do care quite a lot about the vulnerable people that Mr. Vance and his ilk continue to put in danger through dehumanizing and horrific rhetoric, gleefully attacking women generally and LGBTQ people, in particular, with scant accountability from much of political media.I would like to believe that Mr. Tapper and Ms. McArdle and Mr. Hart also value consistency in this regard, but the last two weeks have demonstrated otherwise.This evening, Ms. Khelif won the final of the women's boxing welterweight division in Paris, finally realizing, against tall odds, her lifelong dream of being an Olympic Champion. Immediately following the victory, she was warmly embraced by her opponent, China's Yang Liu, the 2023 IBA World Champion. The two smiled and took selfies at the awards ceremony, a joyous moment after two weeks of other women boxers rallying around Ms. Khelif in support against the violent disinformation spread by Mr. Vance and others. I hope Mr. Tapper, Ms. McArdle, and Mr. Hart were watching.Pundits, take a seat. Just not there.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]It was 1999. The previous year, Matthew Shepard, just 21, had been beaten, tortured, and left to die on a fence post in Laramie, Wyoming because he was openly-gay.I had just turned 12 in Central Texas, and as a closeted trans girl—very much in the closet—I was terrified by what I saw in the news. I couldn't talk about it to the adults in my life. I just knew it wasn't safe to be me.And so did millions of closeted LGBTQ youth around the country.About a 14-hour drive from Laramie—in Mankato, Minnesota—a 35 year-old social studies teacher was starting his third year at the local high school. His name was Tim Walz.He had grown up in a tight, rural family and earned a degree in social studies education and went to grad school for educational leadership.He had been serving in the Army National Guard as a senior sergeant for nearly two decades by that point. He was a coach for the football team.He would help lead his team to a state championship that season, and it was only the second most impressive thing he would do that year.A gay student was being bullied and wanted to start a chapter of the gay-straight student alliance (GSA). Mr. Walz didn't hesitate to take on the role of faculty advisor.Why?“It really needed to be the football coach, who was the soldier and was straight and was married,” he said.This was only three years after same-sex marriage had been banned, over a decade before openly-gay-lesbian-and-bisexual troops were permitted to serve, a decade and a half before the Supreme Court would enshrine marriage equality.At the time, according to Gallup, most of the country thought being openly-LGBTQ was morally wrong, to say nothing of whether or not LGBTQ marriages should be legal.He wasn't running for any office (and wouldn't for another seven years). He had nothing to personally gain in a socially conservative part of a country that was already opposed to LGBTQ equality.But he did it, anyway. He didn't want LGBTQ students to feel alone and afraid.I have to admit to you all that I'm tearing up while I write this because I would have given anything to have an adult in my life tell me at that time: You are not alone, and I am in your corner.When he became Governor of Minnesota two decades later, Mr. Walz had no time or patience for those attacking LGBTQ people in his state.He signed bills banning conversion therapy, protecting access to gender-affirming care, and stood tall against bigotry.Under his leadership, Minnesota has codified abortion rights, legalized cannabis, required paid family leave, mandated universal background checks for firearms, banned noncompete agreements for workers, and introduced universal free meals for hungry schoolchildren. He has done all of this while offering a common sense approach to governing: meeting people where they are, having hard conversations, and fighting to ensure no one gets left behind.It is no surprise to me that Vice President Harris chose Mr. Walz as her running mate this morning. I want go back to 1999 and tell that 12 year-old closeted girl that someday she'll get to vote for yet another ticket with two leaders who don't back down when it comes to protecting all Americans from violence and discrimination, regardless of who they are or who they love.I can't wait to vote for Vice President Harris and Governor Walz. Y'all, we got a winning ticket. And I'm talking the possibility of a landslide, if we put our hearts into this. VP Harris and Gov. Walz are THAT ticket. Let's make it abundantly clear where we stand.Sign-up to volunteer here: https://web.kamalaharris.com/forms/take-action-for-kamala-harris/And donate here: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/charlotteforharrisLet's go win the future. We got this.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]You may or may not have a relative or friend or acquaintance in your life who has posted on social media in the past few days, quite sardonically, that there's a lot of money to be made in betting on Algerian boxer Imane Khelif, who just made it to the semifinals of women's boxing in the 66kg weight class at the Paris Olympics.The past several days have seen a deluge of disinformation across the internet regarding Ms. Khelif, whose sex has been called into question because she was simply too good in her Olympics match against Italy's Angela Carini, who gave up 46 seconds into their bout and then implied Ms. Khelif may not be a fair competitor.Donald Trump, J.D. Vance, J.K. Rowling, rightwing Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, and YouTube star Logan Paul, among others, have viciously spread vile propaganda that Ms. Khelif is actually a man, not only smearing her reputation with transphobic and misogynistic nonsense but also likely putting her in danger.To be clear, there are three trans athletes in the Paris Olympics, none of whom are trans women. You can read more about them right here. But hey, it's been interesting to watch the response of sports betting markets!That's probably why your “very concerned” relative insisted on plunking down a wad of cash on Ms. Khelif winning the Gold Medal in her weight class, despite simultaneously dehumanizing her.Let's review how betting odds work. 1. The better the odds for an athlete winning, the lower they yield for bettors. Ms. Khelif, for example, currently has -500 odds on Fanduel. This has jumped substantially in light of the anti-trans propaganda online this week.That means a bettor has to wager $5 on her in order to make $1. The question then becomes: would you put down $500 to make $100? Some folks would, but it's pretty risky. It's even riskier when you consider that the odds are very likely inflated due to the incomplete reporting on Ms. Khelif over the past several days. That brings me to my second point. 2. Ms. Khelif has a 42-9 record. She has lost previously to nine other women. Nine. That includes a loss to Amy Broadhurst of Ireland in the World Boxing Championships, who is among the women loudly defending Ms. Khelif against these horrid accusations. Nine times she's lost to other women in the ring. Think about that. That brings me to my third point.3. There has been no evidence presented that Ms. Khelif has XY chromosomes, but a woman having XY chromosomes does not mean she's a man. Contrary to what I think most of us were taught in 6th grade biology, there are non-trans women with XY chromosomes and non-trans men with XX chromosomes. This is long-established science. You can read more about it here. There is also no evidence that Ms. Khelif has differences in sexual development (DSD) or Swyer's Syndrome or any other condition that may present her chromosomal status as having substantially "male" sex characteristics. That brings me to my fourth point. 4. Ms. Khelif was disqualified by the IBA last year in incredibly murky circumstances. The International Boxing Association (IBA) refused to be transparent about their testing methodology, which, in itself, is bonkers. Her disqualification just so happened to come three days after she beat Russian boxer Azalia Amineva in the semfinals of the IBA Women's World Championship. The IBA has strong, documented ties to the Russian government. Its president, Umar Kremlev, is a Russian citizen. He also serves on the Executive Committee of Russia's boxing federation. After becoming its president in 2020, Mr. Kremlev moved the IBA's operations to Russia and made Gazprom, Russia's state-owned energy company, its sole sponsor. Mr. Kremlev is an associate of Putin, which feels pretty redundant to state after all the above. All of this, plus a number of other concerns over corruption, led to the International Olympic Committee, last year, stripping the IBA as an eligibility authority for the Paris Olympics. In response, Mr. Kremlev called IOC President Thomas Bach a "chief sodomite." Classy. That brings me to my fifth point. 5. Ms. Khelif's country, Algeria, is notoriously anti-LGBTQ. The rights of queer Algerians is abysmal. Are there non-LGBTQ Algerians who support equality? Of course, but the Algerian government does not. It is illegal to be transgender in Algeria. It is impossible for a trans woman to obtain an Algerian passport indicating her as female. Ms. Khelif would literally not be able to leave the country with a female passport if she were transgender, which she is not. Of course, this is further moot given that 1) Ms. Khelif's father has provided her birth certificate establishing she was assigned female at birth and 2) trans women are barred from competing in boxing at the Olympics. That brings me to my sixth point. 6. This isn't really about whether or not Ms. Khelif is a woman. It's about women athletes only being valid when they meet arbitrary standards of femininity as defined through the male gaze. Women athletes as varied as Serena Williams and Katie Ledecky—whom I think most of us would agree are gorgeous (not that it should matter, of course)—have been targeted in the past by vile rumors that they aren't really women. Because they're too damn good and aspects of their bodies may not align with the absurd and arbitrary expectations of the male gaze. Women can be successful in the male gaze if, and only if, they please the male gaze. And even then, not really. That brings me to my final point. 7. Male athletes don't deal with this nonsense. When a man is stronger and faster, preternaturally gifted, has extraordinary biological deviations from the norm, he is celebrated and mythologized. When a male boxer KOs their opponent in the first ten seconds of a bout, it is cause for adulation. When a woman does it, she is suspect. Sounds a lot like misogyny to me. Of course, Angela Carini, the Italian boxer whom Ms. Khelif defeated in that bout that launched this whole controversy, recognized this within a day of the match. She said: "All this controversy certainly made me sad, and I also felt sorry for my opponent, she had nothing to do with it and like me was only here to fight... It was not intentional, in fact I apologize to her and to everyone. I was angry, because my Games had already gone up in smoke. I have nothing against Khelif and on the contrary if I happened to meet her again I would give her a hug." She hasn't been the only one to back off. The Boston Globe released a rare statement apologizing for their sloppy reporting on the story, and Logan Paul released a statement backpedaling on his claims. I'm gonna leave it there. So, if your relative would like to risk $500 to win $100 on all this controversy and disinformation surrounding Ms. Khelif, they are welcome to do so. But it seems like a wobbly bet.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]Folks keep reaching out to me to ask whether or not their kids should read the "Harry Potter" series given J.K. Rowling's completely hateful views on trans people, most recently her enabling of the disgusting and horrific disinformation that targeted a non-trans woman in the Olympics. I am not a spokeswoman for the trans community, and I would never present my opinion as representative of all trans people.Because no community is a monolith.I would encourage folks to read perspectives from other trans folks on this topic to get the necessary nuance to come to an informed decision.I have previously written about J.K. Rowling's virulent transphobia for USA Today (here) and The Washington Post (here).Here's my overall take:I have no issues with kids (and adults) reading and enjoying "Harry Potter" and becoming immersed in that world.If you wanna read the books, have a great time.What I would like to see, however, are parents sit down with their kids and encourage them to treat others with respect.I'd like to see parents teach their children that trans people--including trans and gender-expansive kids--are worthy of respect and dignity and kindness.I'd like to see parents teach their kids that the world is a complicated place, and it's necessary to take the whole of a person and prioritize respect and dignity and kindness for others above all else.I'd like to see parents teach their kids to be empathetic and curious and seek to learn more about those who are different from them.I'd like to see parents teach their kids that unpacking and discussing gender identity is essential for everyone, including non-trans people, because gender identity, even for non-trans people, is not a binary thing.That's really all I want.I think it's notable that the three main stars of the film adaptations—Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint—have all resolutely stated that they unequivocally support the trans community. I'm grateful to them for their proactive allyship and leading by example. I also think it's rather amusing and wholesome that Tom Felton—who portrayed evil, pivotal antagonist Draco Malfoy—made it abundantly clear where he stood on this debate: in support of trans folks. I'm quite grateful to the legions of “Harry Potter” fans who have been insistently outspoken against transphobia and made it plain that anti-trans bigotry will not be tolerated in their midst. I think it's possible to both enjoy the world of "Harry Potter" and recognize that its creator is really not a nice person, despite the lovely world she's created.I think it's quite reasonable and urgently necessary to guide children through that complexity.That's my view. I hope this is helpful.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]Okay, time out. Listen up.Contrary to the vile disinformation being spread online, there are no trans women competing in boxing at the Olympics.In fact, there are no trans women competing at all in the Olympics. None. Zilch.The maelstrom of hatred you're seeing from many bigots on social media over the past two days pertains to the participation of Algerian boxer Imane Khelif in the women's competition. Ms. Khelif is NOT a trans woman. She faced off against Italy's Angela Carini in the second round of the 66kg weight class, defeating her after Ms. Carini's corner threw in the towel 46 seconds into their bout.What followed was outrage from anti-trans corners all over the internet and a lot of confused people who understandably couldn't make heads or tails of all this without proper context.The propaganda was mostly pushed by American rightwing clowns, including vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance and YouTube influencer Logan Paul, with assists from international public figures like J.K. Rowling and Chris Evert. But again: Ms. Khelif is not a trans woman.The International Olympic Committee released a strong statement rejecting the fearmongering and questioning of Ms. Khelif's sex, contextualizing how the propaganda was enabled, and confirming that she complies with the strict standards of qualification for the competition, which does not permit trans women.Perhaps the most glaring thing about the misogynistic and transphobic nonsense surrounding Imane Khelif is that Algeria is notoriously anti-LGBTQ in law, and she would never get a passport approved if she were trans. There is no trans equality in Algerian law. At all.Are there LGBTQ people in Algeria? Yeah, of course, and there are a lot of non-LGBTQ Algerians who stand on the side of equality, but the Algerian government does not.So, it would appear that Ms. Khelif is, I guess, guilty of not looking the “right way” as a woman in the eyes of so many dorkass losers who can't stand imagining women as anything other than what they envision in their high femme fever dreams. But are there trans athletes competing in Paris? Yes, and in fact, I'm quite proud to highlight them.There are two non-binary athletes competing who were assigned female at birth: track and field star Nikki Hiltz (U.S.) and soccer star Quinn (Canada).There is one trans man competing (that means he was assigned female at birth): Hergie Bacyadan (Philippines), who became the first trans man to ever compete at the Olympics. He was soundly defeated by unanimous decision in the first round of women's boxing by China's Li Quan.I take pride in all of these athletes who are breaking barriers, and it's completely disgusting to watch insecure and hateful men on this site spread lies and half-truths about trans athletes.My congratulations to Ms. Quan and Ms. Khelif on their resounding victories, to Mr. Bacyadan for his historic accomplishment in qualifying for the Games, to Hiltz and Quinn for their representation on the highest stage, and to every athlete living up to the highest standards of competition and character.We're not gonna let bigots ruin these Games for us. They don't get to have that power.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]A few days ago, I saw a tweet go viral from a progressive commentator that mocked the dental care of Trump supporters. I'm not gonna name who it was because I'm not trying to shame anyone here. That's not the point.But I'll tell y'all a quick story.Most of my childhood was spent at or below the poverty line. We were perpetually and painfully broke. There were a number of months spent in a shelter when I was younger. We'd move from trailer park to trailer park in Central Texas; I attended four or five different elementary schools. My mother, outside of her minimum-wage jobs, did a number of things to keep us afloat during those years. Selling blood plasma and pawning our television was a regular source of income. One morning, I woke up to find the few toys I had displayed on a rickety yard sale table on the street where we lived at the time because otherwise, we weren't gonna eat that week.There were months when simply having three meals a day was a challenge. During the Summer of 1996, bereft of the free breakfast and lunch program provided by the local public school, we subsisted on boxes of old MREs (Meals-Ready-to-Eat)—military rations—that were procured from the local Army base. Those were rough times, and when I look back on that stretch of childhood, perhaps the most unnerving thing was the lack of access to good hygiene. A big part of that is due to my mother just not being a great parent, to say the least. I'll spare y'all the details, but she was not someone who understood how to care for children.Things that kids learn around this time—how to wash themselves, brush their teeth, sanitize the home with basic cleaning—were not things my mother prioritized.This is not say that most impoverished families are like this. Most poor families have parents who take excellent care of their children, even amidst intense financial struggles. My family was not one of them.How did we live like this? We just did. The growing doubts I had about our living situation were pushed down by fear of what might happen if I asked too many questions. Would I be taken away if I mentioned these things to an adult outside our home? What would happen to my mother?So, I just developed a sense of forced, numbed obliviousness to it all. The other part, of course, is how expensive it is to be poor. Dental care was not something available to our family. The first time I got my teeth cleaned was at 15 after I moved-in with my father. I remember the utter shame I felt sitting in the hygienist's chair as she carefully worked to undo many years of neglect. She said nothing, but it was hard not to think about the judgment running through her mind.My mother got upper dentures when she was 36 or 37. I still don't know how she afforded them, but the oral pain she was experiencing was too much. I vaguely recall a personal loan may been involved. She went to a local dentist, who may or may not have been horrified by what they saw. They extracted the relevant teeth, which were beyond saving, and got her fitted. Dentures at 37. Think about that.I know we're facing the hatred and bigotry of people whose cruelty seemingly knows no bounds. Because they have no ideas and threadbare logic, fueled only by their anger and resentment toward those who are different, they focus on childish insults, mocking appearances and disabilities and general suffering.I realize there's a strong temptation among many of us to give them a taste of their own medicine, make them feel small and ugly and disgusting, weaponize shame to achieve clarity. Respectfully, not only do I think that doesn't make sense on its face, but it tends to alienate and push away people who want a better country and want to support Vice President Harris and want to reject the hatred that drives Trumpism. There are a lot of people in this country with great values who don't have access to affordable dental care or good hygiene practices generally, and they so often go unnoticed because their existing struggles are seen as inconvenient to those who would rather not be burdened by acknowledging that suffering.I worry that mocking the dental care and weight and general appearance of Trump voters for a cheap laugh on social media turns off people who want to be part of the solution but feel shamed and shunned by the cruelty they see on display from some on the left. I worry that doing things like fat-shaming and intentionally misgendering hateful conservatives only serve to undermine the progress we're all working together to achieve. Because that's the past. That's moving backwards. That's telling undecided folks that we're really no better than the average, awful MAGA bigot. I see Vice President Harris offering the vision of a country in which people aren't left behind, regardless of their socioeconomic status. I see her looking at folks in all their pain and struggle and asking them to trust her on the way forward.How can she effectively do that if some her supporters are shaming people who have never had access to good dental care?This election is about the past versus the future. Trump is offering more of the same reactionary, blistering, divisive, cruel politics that thrive on making people feel unworthy, and Vice President Harris is pointing us toward a horizon that offers hope and says your worth isn't based on how you look.I know which way I wanna go. I hope everyone starts walking that way, too. Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]Last night, I was honored and delighted to join a phenomenal group of brilliant leaders and hundreds of thousands of women across the country in support of the Vice President on the first Women for Harris National Organizing Call.You can watch the organizing call in its entirety right here, and I strongly recommend doing so. Speakers included Women for Harris Director Rhonda Foxx, Sen. Laphonza Butler, Chelsea Clinton, Min Jin Lee, Yvette Nicole Brown, Shannon Watts, Ai-Jen Poo, Glynda Carr, and so many more.I honestly did not expect to cry so much, but when Ms. Lee began telling her story and teared up, I completely lost it. By the time Ms. Clinton reminded us all of the history of women seeking the White House, I was a mess.It was a bad night for mascara and a great night for democracy.Below are my remarks:Good evening!My name is Charlotte Clymer, my pronouns are she/her, I'm a writer and activist, and I am so excited to be part of this historic gathering of women across the country.Now, look, I'm not gonna repeat to y'all what the brilliant and eloquent women who spoke before me stated, nor do I have the eloquence and brilliance of the women who will speak over the remainder of this evening.I'm just gonna tell y'all a quick story about why I proudly support Vice President Harris.I am a proud American, a proud Texan, a proud military veteran, a proud trans woman, and a proud Democrat.And I have found that there a lot of folks, including Donald Trump and J.D. Vance, who want to place me in a specific box.They say I'm too queer to be a proud military veteran.They say a trans woman like me can't be a Christian and a strong person of faith as I am.They say women like me don't belong in America.Well, here's what I have to say to that: thank goodness our leader, Vice President Harris, has common sense and believes no American, no human being, belongs in a box.A little over four years ago, a number of rightwing extremists took a picture of me from a public event and attempted to harass me online. They wanted me to be ashamed of how I look as a trans woman.Now, just like the women I admire—women like my grandmother, women like Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett from my home state of Texas, women like Vice President Harris—am I going to give these sad and insecure people that kinda power over me?No. I don't have time for that. I love how I look. I know I'm beautiful. So, I wrote a thread explaining that, and I offered an open hope that these sad and insecure people will someday have the kind of peace and comfort in their own skin as I have in mine.One of the first public figures to respond to that thread was then-Senator Kamala Harris.She gave me support. She gave me encouragement. She made me feel seen. And in that moment, she sent a clear message that supporting her means supporting the basic concept that all of us are worthy to be who we are authentically.I want to be clear: there were no incentives for her here. I hadn't endorsed her. I hadn't talked with her campaign. It wasn't like she was gonna fundraise off this moment.She did it because Vice President Harris is the kind of leader who fights for every American. She fights for the military veteran who comes back from war with horrific wounds. She fights for the woman turned away from life-saving abortion access. She fights for the public school teacher who's overworked and underpaid. She fights for every child, every senior, every single American. She fights for all of us.Donald Trump and J.D. Vance are gonna throw everything they got at her—every cruel remark, every disgusting sexist and racist trope, every bit of vile—and they're gonna find out the hard way that it just isn't enough.And why is that? Because we have a clear strategy here. All we have to do is follow the example of Vice President Harris. She is a leader who builds bridges, who invites tough conversations, who always embraces discomfort as a gift for growth.If we follow her example, if we make every phone call, if we knock on every door, if we invite tough conversations with our friends and family and neighbors who are on the fence in this election, I guarantee you, on everything I hold dear, that Kamala Harris will be the 47th President of the United States.Thank god this is our leader. Let's follow her example. Let's go win this thing.To find out how to volunteer and elect our first woman president and save democracy from Trump and Vance and Project 2025, text WOMEN to 30330.And donate to the historic and exciting campaign of Vice President Harris right here: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/charlotteforharrisCharlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]I'm 37, which means I'm in a period of my life in which many of my friends—if not most of them—either have kids or plan to have kids. And I love it. I love to see the joy my friends are experiencing. I love baby showers. I love the chance to peruse through a registry and pick the perfect gift. I love it when my friends tell me about the latest thing their kids have done: things that make them proud, things that make them laugh, things that give them hope.I am absolutely the friend who genuinely enjoys watching whatever videos and pics you captured of your kiddo doing something cute or hilarious, and you're just dying to share it with someone.I love occasionally babysitting my friends' kids. I love spoiling them. I think it's really wonderful when I get to play Aunt Charlotte.I love all this because I think kids are awesome: their curiosity about the world, their general goofiness, their perspectives, their insatiable desire to learn, it's all delightful.Every child is our collective future. It's why I gladly desire our taxes go to public schools in order for them to improve and thrive. It's why I want guaranteed paid family leave for every family. It's why I want accessible childcare and accessible housing options and universal health care.It's why I don't want to live in a country that would ever punish a child for not being able to afford a school lunch or afterschool activities or basic school supplies.Every investment in America's children is an investment in our nation's future, and by extension, it means I benefit directly from ensuring children have all they need to be happy, healthy, and productive citizens someday.But I don't want kids. There was a time when I did. At some point, I realized that I don't see having children in my future, not because it's not an option but solely due to my lack of desire to have children.Maybe that'll change someday. Maybe I'll wake up one morning in the future and suddenly have the desire to be a parent. I'm not saying it won't happen.But I doubt it.I don't really feel the need to outline the reasons why I don't want children. I think it's more than enough to simply understand that about myself because that decision is up to me and only me. And no one else gets a say in that decision, and thus, no one else is entitled to an explanation for why I don't want kids.It is good enough that I simply don't want kids. It is inherently sufficient that I don't want to be a parent, for any reason.In an interview with Tucker Carlson, Republican vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance stated his belief that our Democratic presidential nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris, is one of the “childless cat ladies” who “want to make the rest of the country miserable, too.” He continued: “If you look at Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, AOC, the entire future of the Democrats is run by people without children.”Of course, this isn't true on its face. Vice President Harris is definitely a parent, and Vance's comments so angered Kerstin Emhoff, the former wife of Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff, that she released a statement which included this: “For over 10 years, since Cole and Ella were teenagers, Kamala has been a co-parent with Doug and I. She is loving, nurturing, fiercely protective, and always present. I love our blended family and am grateful for it.”Likewise, Secretary Buttigieg and Chasten Buttigieg are the parents of two beautiful children. When the Secretary recently appeared on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, the beloved host asked him about Speaker Mike Johnson's atrocious record on LGBTQ rights. The Secretary's answer was absolutely perfect:“Look, I'll work with anybody who can help us get good transportation available to the American people, but—I don't know, maybe we'll just have him over. Our little house isn't that far from the Capitol, and if you could see what it's like when I come home from work and Chasten's bringing the kids home from daycare or vice-versa and one of us is getting the mac ‘n' cheese ready and one of us is microwaving those little freezer meatballs—that are a great cheat code if you got toddlers and you gotta feed them quickly—and they won't take their shoes off and one of them needs a diaper change… everything about that is chaos, but nothing about that is dark. The love of God is in that household.”(By the way, just as an aside, there are a wealth of great choices for the running mate of Vice President Harris, but can y'all see why I so badly want this man on the ticket?)Anyway, I have no idea if Rep. Ocasio-Cortez wants kids someday, and it's absolutely none of my business. Because that choice is hers, and hers alone. It's very strange to me that anyone else would believe that is their business.I love this country, and I'm proud to be an American — and I believe part of that means I have a responsibility to do my part in ensuring that every child in this country has whatever they need to grow up into well-rounded citizens. I take that seriously.But I will damned if someone is gonna tell me or anyone else that we don't matter because we don't have children. I will not tolerate someone telling step-parents and adoptive parents and foster parents and anyone personally caring for children that they don't and don't matter.Moreover, it's exceedingly weird and creepy and cruel when someone insists that a woman must bear children in order to meaningfully engage in public life.Mr. Vance claims to be a follower of Christ, and that's between him and God, but I gotta tell y'all: as a Christian myself, one who actually reads my Bible, his horrible and reductive views—on women, on childcare, on the worthiness of families that don't look like his—are entirely abhorrent and bereft of Christ's love.I'm giving thanks that Vice President Kamala Harris and her family are showing the country that not all families need to look alike to be loved and respected and that not all women have to be alike to be truly free.That's the country I want every child to grow up in — where their worth is inherent and honored.To me, that's a country worthy of the children we all love.If you agree, please consider donating to the Vice President's campaign.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]President Biden just announced in a letter that he will step aside as the Democratic nominee for reelection.He said in part: “It has been the greatest honor of my life to serve as your president. And while it has been my intention to seek reelection, I believe it is in the best interest of my party and the country for me to stand down and for me to focus solely on fulfilling my duties as President for the remainder of my term.”I am heartbroken in this moment. This has been the most progressive and productive president of my lifetime, and the loyalty and respect he has earned comes from a lifetime of public service and an administration with extraordinary accomplishments, particularly in a deeply divided era for our country.As I said several days ago in the essay I published on this crisis, I trust the President. I trust his wisdom to know that this is the best path forward. If Joe Biden knows this is how we proceed, I trust him.Here's the critical excerpt from that essay that I need everyone to understand:But here's one thing I know for certain: this current political media landscape of ours, with all its slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, will not end with President Biden stepping aside.There is an obvious double standard at play right now. It is painfully apparent that Donald Trump and the Republican Party are largely being given a pass by much of political media.That is not to say that all—or perhaps, most—political reporters and outlets are working through a prism of obvious bias in favor of Trump, but there is certainly a pervasive absolution of journalistic duty that will continue to exist, no matter which names are on the Democratic ticket.Vice President Harris, Gov. Newsom, Gov. Whitmer, Gov. Pritzker, Gov. Shapiro, Gov. Beshear, Sec. Buttigieg, it truly does not matter who forms the ticket that gets printed on ballots — all of them will be unfairly weighed by much of political media against a narcissistic sociopath leading a major party that has become a cult.It could be anything. The propaganda we can expect is only limited by imagination.As soon as the Republican Party settles on a narrative and pushes it, much of political media will pick up that ball and run with it, “just asking questions” and musing out loud and doing all they can to preserve access with the GOP and satisfy certain billionaire owners who are throwing their weight on the scales.I don't point this out to demoralize anyone. Quite the opposite. I point this out to prevent a predictable demoralization that will surely come for anyone, regardless of their take on this matter, who believes the cementing of their preferred ticket will ease the path forward.We have to be prepared for pervasive discomfort, every single one of us. The next 15 weeks or so will come with unexpected obstacles and a deeply unfair double standard in much of political media and the frustrating prioritization of entertainment over substance, intrigue over clarity, ratings over republic, drama over democracy.Whatever happens next, even if it may not be what we personally think is best, it is critical that we roll up our sleeves and stand shoulder-to-shoulder in the work against those who gleefully seek to undermine and destroy our democratic institutions.I strongly believe President Biden is our best choice and that he and VP Harris will win, but if the President does eventually decide to step aside, I will trust his well-earned wisdom and I'm gonna get right back to work and fight like hell to save our country.The math here is remarkably simple. If we stand together and put in the work, we will win. If we allow anger and angst to divide us, we will lose and democracy will lose and the consequences of that will reverberate far beyond our country.All of us have a choice, and I trust that there are more than enough us, regardless of how we personally feel the ticket should look, to come together and choose a future that sends Trump and Project 2025 right into the trash bin of history where they belong.The choice is between democracy and dictatorship.No matter what happens next, let's all make that choice.I meant every word of that, and I certainly mean every word of it now.We can win this, and we will win this. I have no doubt about that.I promise you that anything other than a unified purpose in this moment will not be helpful. Whatever we may feel, however heartbroken or angry or frustrated, the fate of our nation relies on us standing shoulder to shoulder to defeat a fascist vision. That must be our purpose.President Biden has endorsed Vice President Harris, and he's absolutely right to do so.Vice President Harris will be the Democratic nominee, she will defeat Trump and his fascist vision, and she will be a great president. I have every faith in her. I am not worried about whether or not she can win. I know she can win.Time to unite behind her with that common purpose and go win this election.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]Look, I don't know for certain what happens next. I don't think any pundit or reporter knows for certain what happens next. I don't think any big donors know for certain what happens next. I don't think any senior Democratic leaders know for certain what happens next, except for one.Only President Biden knows what happens next because only he can decide what happens next. There was a primary. He was the victor of that primary. The decision rests with him alone on whether or not he'll be the Democratic nominee.It's certainly no secret that I fully support Pres. Biden and Vice President Harris, and I still fully believe they should be reelected. I believe they can win. I believe they will win, should Pres. Biden decide to remain on the ticket.I also recognize that a lot of smart and reasonable people, who care about our country and our democracy as much as me or the next person, do not believe President Biden is our best candidate to defeat Trump and his fascist Project 2025 vision for America.I've had many insightful and respectful conversations with folks who do not see this race as I do, and I've had many insightful and respectful conversations with folks who see it very much as I do. There's a lot of room for respectful disagreement here. We need to recognize that.There are also a host of other factors that need to be recognized, regardless of the names on the ticket: ballot access deadlines, campaign staff and fundraising questions, general organizing, etc.These all need to be kept in mind, and we all need to acknowledge there are many factors motivating folks in various ways to have the perspectives they do and uncertainty is one thing we should all recognize that we have in common.But here's one thing I know for certain: this current political media landscape of ours, with all its slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, will not end with President Biden stepping aside.There is an obvious double standard at play right now. It is painfully apparent that Donald Trump and the Republican Party are largely being given a pass by much of political media. That is not to say that all—or perhaps, most—political reporters and outlets are working through a prism of obvious bias in favor of Trump, but there is certainly a pervasive absolution of journalistic duty that will continue to exist, no matter which names are on the Democratic ticket.Vice President Harris, Gov. Newsom, Gov. Whitmer, Gov. Pritzker, Gov. Shapiro, Gov. Beshear, Sec. Buttigieg, it truly does not matter who forms the ticket that gets printed on ballots — all of them will be unfairly weighed by much of political media against a narcissistic sociopath leading a major party that has become a cult.It could be anything. The propaganda we can expect is only limited by imagination.As soon as the Republican Party settles on a narrative and pushes it, much of political media will pick up that ball and run with it, “just asking questions” and musing out loud and doing all they can to preserve access with the GOP and satisfy certain billionaire owners who are throwing their weight on the scales.I don't point this out to demoralize anyone. Quite the opposite. I point this out to prevent a predictable demoralization that will surely come for anyone, regardless of their take on this matter, who believes the cementing of their preferred ticket will ease the path forward.We have to be prepared for pervasive discomfort, every single one of us. The next 15 weeks or so will come with unexpected obstacles and a deeply unfair double standard in much of political media and the frustrating prioritization of entertainment over substance, intrigue over clarity, ratings over republic, drama over democracy.Whatever happens next, even if it may not be what we personally think is best, it is critical that we roll up our sleeves and stand shoulder-to-shoulder in the work against those who gleefully seek to undermine and destroy our democratic institutions.I strongly believe President Biden is our best choice and that he and VP Harris will win, but if the President does eventually decide to step aside, I will trust his well-earned wisdom and I'm gonna get right back to work and fight like hell to save our country.The math here is remarkably simple. If we stand together and put in the work, we will win. If we allow anger and angst to divide us, we will lose and democracy will lose and the consequences of that will reverberate far beyond our country.All of us have a choice, and I trust that there are more than enough us, regardless of how we personally feel the ticket should look, to come together and choose a future that sends Trump and Project 2025 right into the trash bin of history where they belong.The choice is between democracy and dictatorship.No matter what happens next, let's all make that choice.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]It's been nearly 90 hours since the first assassination attempt on a president or former president in more than four decades, and we still don't have any released information from medical professionals who have examined Donald Trump.No press conferences, no interviews, no statements, no photos. Nothing beyond his wearing a comically oversized bandage in public.This is weird, right?He was definitely wounded. That much is clear. We all saw it. No doubt about that.But why no medical information from those who examined him?Remember: this is Donald Trump, who is nothing if not a pathological showman, utterly obsessed with visuals and narrative, his entire personality revolving around an unyielding craving for spectacle and drama and centering himself.This is the same guy who entered the floor of the Republican National Convention to the tune of Lee Greenwood's “God Bless the U.S.A” wearing a medical dressing with a surface area approximately equivalent to Rhode Island.And yet, he's declining to pull all the other levers of public performance that would come from medical expertise.Why hasn't there been a press conference of physicians in white lab coats lined up to offer statements on the wound he suffered and his bravery? Why hasn't there been a network interview with the medical team who always travels with him giving a breathless recounting of the minutes after he was whisked away by Secret Service and presumably examined during the ride to Butler Memorial Hospital?I'm sure we'll get the oral history of what happened this past weekend from his inner cycle at some point, but will it include anyone with, you know, medical qualifications?If this were anyone else, it wouldn't stand out to me. If, say, Ted Cruz or Nikki Haley or Mike Pence survived an assassination attempt, I don't think it'd be all that strange if we didn't get much information from doctors. It'd be unusual, sure, but not enough to dwell on.(Sorry, I meant if Mr. Pence were to survive a second assassination attempt.)But with Donald Trump, this odd silence from anyone with medical credentials goes against everything we know about his public persona.Remember when he contracted COVID in late September, 2020? That entire situation could have been handled with a few press statements and ongoing communications from the White House.But that's not what happened. Although Trump required all medical professionals who treated him to sign an NDA (unnecessary given HIPAA) and we're still told he was never in any grave danger, there was a press conference held in front of Walter Reed on Oct. 3rd in which an entire team of medical professionals took turns offering their expertise but basically said he was fine and had exhibited minor symptoms.Weirdly, when a reporter asked if Trump had been administered steroids—a perfectly valid question—the presser was abruptly ended.Later that day, photos were released of Trump “working” at Walter Reed in a conference room, signing what were later revealed to be blank pages. In other words, they were staged photographs.The following day, we got another presser with a team of white-coat-clad medical professionals in front of Walter Reed. This time, they said he was “doing really well” and their ongoing examination yielded nothing of “any major clinical concern.” When asked about other findings—again, perfectly valid questions that should have been easy to answer—transparency disappeared. Doctors refused to answer basic inquiries.Several hours later, Trump took a completely unnecessary and much-criticized drive out in front of Walter Reed to wave to supporters, so angering Secret Service officials that one anonymous agent told a reporter: “He's not even pretending to care now.”Former Secret Service Agent Joseph Petro then wrote a scathing op-ed blasting Trump for endangering agents with the publicity stunt: “Given the President's covid-19 infection, this was a gratuitous and dangerous political exercise that needlessly exposed his Secret Service agents — as well as their families — to the potentially deadly novel coronavirus.”And he's right. It was a ridiculous bid for further attention from the most narcissistic person to ever sit in the Oval Office.Everything Trump's ever done has been geared toward consolidating and manipulating and exploiting press coverage, no matter the consequences. If there's anything Trump has ever truly cared about, it's the relentless preening of his public image.Nothing else really matters.So, here we have this horrific tragedy, perfectly primed for Trump to grandstand to his heart's content (and he certainly does) but oddly enough, not when it comes to amplifying the medical professionals who treated him, the very aspect of all this with the greatest potential to cement his longing for a heroic narrative.Folks, I say again: is this not all very weird?Here's another question: if President Biden had been in the same exact scenario, does anyone believe political press would let it slide that we haven't heard from medical professionals?That's what I thought.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]Last week, at his NATO Summit press conference, President Biden, in the midst of consistently demonstrating a widely-praised command of foreign policy issues, went on a small diatribe about gun violence, which included this memorable phrase:"Control guns, not girls”It was immediately resonant, drawing acclaim from many quarters. It's the kind of simple yet powerful slogan that can propel a campaign into history. I was so taken with it that I launched a t-shirt campaign the following day; we've already sold more than 300. (Purchase yours here: https://www.bonfire.com/controlgunsnotgirls/)Full video of the President's remarks are below (the gun reform portion starts at 2:20):The President has a history of making prescient remarks; anyone remember the USA Today op-ed he wrote on the threat of COVID in early 2020, just six weeks before the shutdown?Two days after this presser, a 20 year-old gunman used an AR-15-style rifle purchased by his father to fire eight rounds at Donald Trump during a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. One round went through the upper part of Trump's right ear, while other shots critically wounded two audience members behind him and killed a third: 50 year-old Corey Comperatore, who was shielding his two daughters from the gunfire.I want to quickly point out that I can't imagine being the family of Mr. Comperatore and hearing elected officials like Sen. Marco Rubio claim that God saved Donald Trump, the implication being that those wounded and killed in senseless acts of gun violence were forgotten by God. That's not faith. That's warping and exploiting the love of God for cultish ends.This horrific tragedy should never have happened. No civilian should be able to purchase an AR-15-style rifle, a weapon of war, but moreover, if we treated firearms with respect in this country, there would be comprehensive safety, licensing, and registration regulations similar to those we have for cars.In the aftermath, every major Democratic leader in the country immediately condemned this act of cowardice. The President—in addition to delivering an immediate on-camera statement—called Trump to offer support, assembled federal resources to investigate the tragedy, and gave a moving national address from the Oval Office demanding a wholesale rejection of political violence.Meanwhile, a number of Republican elected officials and pundits chose to politicize the tragedy while the victims were still being helped. Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio—Trump's likely running mate—immediately blamed the assassination attempt on President Biden. Congressman Mike Collins (GA-10) histrionically claimed that Pres. Biden “sent the orders” for Trump to be assassinated. I find this fascinating given that the only incendiary rhetoric literally calling for political violence has been from the Republican Party, particularly in the past few months.Like Kevin D. Roberts, president of The Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank behind the unabashedly fascist Project 2025, who said, two weeks ago, that the country “is in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be.”“Bloodless.”That same week, North Carolina Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, the Republican candidate for governor who's been endorsed by Trump, told a church congregation that “some folks need killing” and that “Some liberal somewhere is gonna say that sounds awful. Too bad. Get mad at me if you want to. Some folks need killing. It's time for someday to say it. It's not a matter of vengeance. It's not a matter of being mean or spiteful. It's a matter of necessity.”Or how about last year when numerous Republican Members of Congress started wearing AR-15 pins on their suits while at the Capitol, handed out by Rep. Andrew Clyde of Georgia, who owns a stake in the company that sells them.The AR-15 and its variants are responsible for most of the mass shootings that have become some of the most tragic markers on the American psyche in recent memory: Sandy Hook, Uvalde, Route 91 Harvest Festival, among others, and, of course, this past weekend's assassination attempt on Trump and the murder of Mr. Comperatore.There is only one major political party using and condoning and enabling violent rhetoric. Just one. It's the Republican Party.Don't let any political journalist or outlet opine about politicization while they fail to hold accountable the GOP's horrific rhetoric. Don't let them shame you into ignoring this appalling double standard.Control guns, not girls.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

[This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I'm always thankful for a simple cup of coffee.]Fifteen years ago, on the banks of the Tidal Basin, with the Washington Monument in the background, I took an Oath of Reenlistment in the United States Army. I raised my right hand and said the following:I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.I was 22 years old, and I had just completed my initial term of enlistment. It had been a tough three years, full of challenges and growth and settling into the essential truth that being an engaged citizen, let alone a soldier, was never meant to be easy.The previous evening, I sat in my friend's car while he made the case that maybe this wasn't the best decision. He pointed out that I was making a commitment that would mean postponing other dreams in deference to a way of life that had been quite difficult at times. He wondered aloud if I shouldn't go in a different direction.That's what it means to be a good friend: offering tough nuance that needs to be heard and considered. I'm still grateful for his candor. At the time, I didn't have the right words to explain my decision beyond that it just felt like the right thing to do.There are substantial reasons to be cynical in this moment of our nation's history. We are on the precipice of an uncertain chapter, and when I look around, I see a great deal of pain and skepticism and fear from reasonable adults.I acknowledge all of that, and I would never pretend it isn't warranted. We live in a country built on a past that has often been horrific, exclusionary, and antithetical to our stated values. But respectfully, I love America so much. I love this country. In fact, I don't think I have ever loved this country more than I do now. Perhaps my affection has achieved greater clarity in recent years because I have been forced to reconcile all that we stand to lose after all that has been gained.I believe the United States is a great country not because of the flag or an oath or the endless pageantry. Our greatness isn't found in monuments and statues. It's not found in anthems and pledges. These are all rewards for the hard part: the active citizenry that refuses to yield to our lesser selves.I love America because our greatness it is easily found in the 18 year-olds who stormed Normandy, wading into almost certain death, knowing deep down they may never live to see another day on American soil, all to free the world from fascist tyranny.Our greatness is found in the women who marched down Pennsylvania Avenue more than a hundred years ago, spat upon, beaten with nightsticks, hospitalized, only to get up the next day and keep marching, all to achieve rights they knew they may never see in their lifetimes.Our greatness is found in the enslaved and their descendants, who overcame the most egregious atrocities, marched against the popular opinions of white supremacy, were murdered and scorned for a courage that should have been unnecessary, and demanded equality from a nation that so often has chosen the easier wrong over the harder right.Our greatness is found in those who risked everything just for the right to love who they love and live in their authenticity, and where would I, as a proud trans woman, be right now without their sacrifices?Our greatness is found in the innumerable undocumented people, our fellow citizens in spirit, who endured a lethal trek that took so many others, against the vicious racism of lazy hypocrites, just for the opportunity for a better life for their children, and have made our country better in return. Countless people have literally died and risked death just to live in this country. Think about that.Our greatness is found in the citizen who speaks truth to power, often alone, only to be greeted with hearts and ears that turn away at the slightest discomfort and bit of cognitive dissonance and yet, still that citizen says what needs to be said.Our greatness is found in public school teachers who are overworked and underpaid and under-resourced and still come to their schools, every day, to ensure every child gets a chance at opportunity. Our greatness is found in the women and men of the labor rights movement, who have relentlessly pushed our nation to recognize the essential contributions of working class families and demand greater equity for them.Our greatness is found in social workers and community organizers and engaged clergy and medical professionals and public servants of all stripes who have never given up on those around them, even at great personal cost. Our greatness is found in any given American who openly criticizes America and dares to ask if we can be better.I grew up in trailer parks in Central Texas. Neither of my parents attended college. I lived on food stamps and the free lunch program and the kindness of strangers, and I am here right now because of numerous people who held the essential belief that America means no one gets left behind.These are the reasons I love America. These are the reasons I stop what I'm doing when the National Anthem plays and stand silently in respect, and these are the reasons I recognize the patriotism of someone who does not. I love this country because it's given so much to me, but moreover, I love this country because of all I've received from so many who came before, knowing I would the enjoy the liberation they would never experience. This is an incredibly tough moment for our nation, and I would never dare to tell another American how to feel about that. It's not my place. People should have the space to feel what they feel right now, and all of us should respect that. But given all this, speaking only for myself, how could I not love America? How could I not love this country?I have pride in America because over the course of my life, it is has often been one of the few things that kept me going. Imperfect and struggling though it may be, I have to believe in America because I have already thrown my whole self into the idea of it.And I do believe in us. I still believe we can be something grand and hopeful and proud and inclusive, if only we'll keep it up long enough to finally make the choices required to that end.I hope all of you will enjoy time with your family and friends today, and more than that, I hope you'll take time to remind your kids of the country we could have someday.Happy Fourth to you and yours.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe