Cartoon: Why I Have Hope


This seemed like a good one to close the year out with. Happy New Year, Alas readers!


I don’t have a cartoon syndicate and I’m not in newspapers. But I get to do this for a living because lots of readers support my Patreon with mostly small pledges! I also have prints and books for sale.


I’m actually pretty serious about this. History is full of events – both good and bad – that most people never saw coming.

I understand people feeling pessimistic- I do too. And without a doubt, bad things are going to happen in the US, especially to trans people and for immigrants. And the catastrophe in Gaza is certain to continue and may even get worse.

But I try to remember that not only do I not know what’s going to happen – past experience shows I’m actively terrible at knowing what will happen. This is the most recent of several times in my life when the far right has won the White House and congress. And each time, terrible things have happened – but it’s never been the end of progress. It’s never meant that civil rights never advanced again, and it’s never meant that nothing good will happen again.


This one was fun to draw. The two-people-talking-while-walking-through-the-park thing is something I’ve drawn a lot, but I’ve decided that’s all right. Charles Schulz did a lot of cartoons showing Peanuts characters talking while leaning their elbows on a brick wall. Walt Kelly did a ton of strips featuring Pogo characters talking while hanging out in a swamp, or rowing a boat.

My goal with the park walk scripts is to keep it fun, for me and (I hope) for readers. Every drawing is a new challenge, and a new chance to make what I draw look lively and interesting. Every new strip is a chance to get something right, and maybe to make people feel touched or angry or at least less alone. I’m awfully lucky that this is my job.


TRANSCRIPT OF CARTOON

This four-panel cartoon shows two women talking as they walk through a park. The first woman has red hair and glasses, the second woman has a red hoodie and black hair held in a bun.

PANEL 1

GLASSES: So what do you think – is democracy done for?

BUN: What do I know? I thought Trump was definitely going to lose. Twice.

PANEL 2

A close shot of Bun, who looks distressed.

BUN: When I was a kid lots of smart people said we were doomed to be destroyed by nuclear war, and I believed them.

PANEL 3

BUN: I was shocked when the Berlin Wall fell. And I thought we’d never get gay marriage or legal pot in my lifetime.

PANEL 4

Both characters smile, and Bun spreads her hands expansively.

GLASSES: So you predict things will be all right?

BUN: No, I predict catastrophe. But it gives me hope that my predictions are always complete garbage.

CHICKEN FAT WATCH

Chicken fat is a venerable cartoonists’ term for unimportant details put into the backgrounds.

PANEL 1: There’s a hole in the ground, and Marge Simpson is popping her head out of the hole.

An almost illegibly tiny newspaper lies on the ground. The newspaper is called “The New Fork Tines.” The top headline says “Democrats Choose Youth For Leadership Position,” with a sub-headline reading “Newly appointed leader only 71.”

A bottle lying on the ground has a label that says “Old Litter.”

A mouse is holding a skunk at gunpoint. The skunk has its hands raised and next to it is a sack with a “$” on it.

PANEL 3

A bird flying through the air is wearing sunglasses and smoking a cigarette.

A hole in a tree has a paper hanging from it, which says “Hole For Rent, utilities not included.”

PANEL 4

One of the buildings in the background has a gigantic teddy bear climbing it King Kong style.

The mouse from panel 1, holding a shovel, stands by a freshly dug grave. The money bag lies near the mouse’s feet.


Why I Have Hope | Patreon

This entry was posted in Cartooning & comics, Interviews, Mandolin, My publications, Patreon, Writing Advice. Bookmark the permalink.

45 Responses to Cartoon: Why I Have Hope

  1. Dianne says:

    I’m actually kind of disturbed at how accurate my predictions have been lately. I predicted that Brexit would pass, that Trump would win (both times), and that Roe was in trouble. I also predicted that Germany would be the next target for a fascist takeover and look what’s happening there. Admittedly, the “limited” nuclear war I was expecting hasn’t happened. Yet.

    Oh, and my 2019 NanoWriMo project was a story about a world spanning pandemic.

  2. Hibernus says:

    @Dianne: Germany is hardly unique in being the target for a far-right takeover – France, Spain and Sweden are all facing a similar dynamic, in many cases much more advanced. (the French far right is much closer to actual power, as opposed to just influence, than their German colleagues) And arguably the far-right takeover has already happened in Italy. To say nothing of various smaller European countries. So if you predicted that Germany would be the particular target of a far-right takeover, I am not sure you nailed that one.

  3. bcb says:

    Mice deserve Second Amendment Rights! The well-regulated militia shall be composed entirely of mice.

  4. Ampersand says:

    Well regulated micetia.

  5. Jacqueline Squid Onassis says:

    @Dianne,

    Did you predict that Biden would win?

    I think everyone knew Roe was going down as soon the combo of Moscow Mitch not allowing a vote on *spit* Garland and Dollar Store Mussolini winning the EC happened. I know I posted a lot about the coming loss of Roe for years before it was overturned by the fascists on SCOTUS.

    I kinda feel like Moldova, Romania, and Georgia have been the most recent targets of fascist takeovers. Moldova and Romania seem to have, maybe, put theirs down but Georgia is still in question.

  6. Charles S says:

    I think Austria may be the next successful fascist takeover, as the fascists won the last election (largest party, 29% of parliament) and attempts to form a three-party anti-fascist coalition government fell through. A 1-seat two-party anti-fascist government is still possible, but would be very vulnerable to collapse, and efforts to keep the fascists out of government have increased their popularity.

    Germany still has a chance of forming a new anti-fascist coalition after the next election.

  7. Avvaaa says:

    @Jacqueline: I think with the Georgian President being forced out, the takeover is now essentially a done deal, at least for the moment.

    @Charles: I think the Netherlands is in a worse place than Austria, there is a coalition that doesnt technically include the Party for Freedom but not only relies on them for support, it is effectively committed to carrying through their policy program, at least partially. I would say this is about as close as currently exists in Europe to having actual fascist control without it existing explicitly (as in Hungary, Italy, etc).

    Compared to all this, the German neo-fascists are relatively weak (although obviously much stronger than I would wish for). But any electoral gains by German neo-fascists always attract more media attention than equivalent or even greater gains their fascist colleagues in Poland, Belgium, Denmark etc because… well, it´s Germany. So I guess it is understandable that it would seem that Germany is the “next target” even though other countries are closer.

    It might be interesting to ask which European country seems least primed for a fascist takeover? Barring microstates, I´d say Ireland (for all Sinn Feinn´s problems, I don´t consider them fascists), Iceland and Norway all seem to have escaped the taint. I won´t speculate on why.

  8. Dianne says:

    No one’s going to comment on Hungary?

    @Hibernus: I agree that fascism is an active problem in multiple countries in Europe and that the AfD has been active for a while. However, Musk’s recent statement and the sudden (?) influx of cash suggest that Germany has become a specific “project” this year. I suspect that the AfD will be in the government soon. Maybe this election, maybe the next one. They’re running second in the polls right now and could from a coalition with the CDU if the CDU is pressured sufficiently.

    @Jacqueline: Yes? No? Sorta? I thought that Biden would win 2020 because Trump had done such a terrible job with COVID and all other factors involved in actually governing. However, I was afraid to believe it and kind of set the idea aside until the election, so I can’t say that I really did, but I would have if I had dared hope. I think. P0st-hoc is so easy. So the implication that I’m not accurate, just pessimistic and cherry picking is a fair criticism. (If I’m interpreting your comment correctly. Sorry if not.)

  9. Dianne says:

    Random guesses for the next four years:
    1. Trump and his cronies will be incompetent at actual governing. Yeah, and the earth will continue to orbit the sun.
    2. The civil service will be a major target of Trump and he’ll do considerable damage. It will get virtually no press because “bloated bureaucracy” is so embedded in the public mind that there will be little external opposition.
    3. (Related) At least one sketchy medication will get approved in oncology and neurology. It’ll take forever to get them off the market again or even get the labels corrected.
    4. (Related to 2 as well) There will be fewer recalls of foods but more food related illness.
    5. Gas prices may fall initially, but will rise again by 2026. Mysteriously, this will go undiscussed.
    6. Ditto food prices. In fact, depending on how successful Trump is with the removing immigrants and increasing tariffs, there may well be a famine as we have no one to pick the crops (or maybe even plant them) and imports are hella expensive. I find this outcome unlikely but not impossible.
    7. In fact, inflation in general will be up, employment down, and every measure of economic health worse except for the stock market, which will be labile as crap. (There may be a transient period of good economy due to Biden having gotten the economy into relatively good shape and a probable sugar rush economy initially.
    8. Ukraine’s screwed.
    9. Netanyahu will “finish the job” with Trump’s approval and aid. However, there will be less coverage of the massacres and so people in the US will think that the situation in Gaza is better.
    10. Major epidemics. Malaria might start being seen in the southern states, almost certainly there will be measles outbreaks, and more deaths in the “flu and pneumonia” category, with or without acknowledged covid, depending on Trump and/or his handlers’ wishes as far as pretending covid is gone. Oh, and gun violence, of course.

  10. Jacqueline Squid Onassis says:

    @Dianne,

    I didn’t mean to imply you were cherry-picking. I just wondered about your prediction(?) for the ’20 election since you didn’t mention it.

  11. Jacqueline Squid Onassis says:

    I’m going to disagree with #4 because almost all food recalls are initiated by the manufacturer and usually only after food poisoning has happened. It’s not like food inspectors discover contamination and force a recall – there simply aren’t enough of them thanks to St. Reagan.

  12. Dianne says:

    @Jacqueline: I may have been projecting. I sometimes think that I just pick the worst possible outcome and go with it, leading to my being right more often than not. OTOH, I remember being not terribly surprised at Obama’s election and re-election (not hard predictions either) or Bush the second’s. I was surprised that Clinton ousted Bush I after one term, but Clinton is a bouncy, sparkly person and Bush I wasn’t, so maybe he appealed viscerally to neurotypicals enough that the Republican propaganda machine couldn’t overwhelm that effect.

    I’m going to stand by #4 since the FDA recently reorganized to try to regulate food better and there were a series of recalls following that, suggesting some level of success. They were “voluntary” recalls, but that generally means “you can withdraw this voluntarily or we can initiate the paperwork to make it mandatory, which would take up both of our lives for an indefinite period of time and neither of us want’s that, do we?” (Of course, if it becomes more difficult to initiate a mandatory recall, that’s yet another variable.)

  13. Dianne says:

    If anyone’s shopping for nightmare scenarios, I have some.

    Scenario 1: Trump succeeds in deporting a significant percent of immigrants, documented and otherwise, and institutes high tariffs. Farming immediately fails, because quite a lot of farmers or farm hands in the US are immigrants or seasonal workers from outside the US. Tariffs and annoyed foreign counterparts lead to severe limitations of importation of food. Hyperinflation and famine follow. Then the administration has a brilliant idea: There are all these people who have been legally deported but not yet removed physically sitting in camps “doing nothing”. Why not put them to work on farms? No need to pay them, of course, they broke the law and forced labor as punishment for a crime is constitutional. Speaking of which, we’ve also got this huge prison population. They can’t all spend their time sewing shirts that can be labeled “Made in the USA”. Why not put them to work in the fields as well? I think this may be, to some degree, the long term plan: it’s not Germany 1933 that they’re looking for, but US 1840 or so.

    Scenario 2: RKF Jr manages to actually get something done. Unfortunately, that is weaken or abolish vaccination requirements. Measles, among other diseases, runs rampant. Eventually, a variant that breaks through the immunity provided by the current vaccine or past infection with the current form(s) of measles develops. Measles is about as infectious as you can get and it is frequently worse in adults than children. If you thought the covid pandemic was fun…

  14. Avvaaa says:

    “No one’s going to comment on Hungary?”

    I mean what is there to say? Hungary has been full-on fascist for 10 years now. It doesn´t belong in a conversation about countries -going- fascist. It´s long gone.

    I did mention Hungary as an aside in the “already fascist” category alongside Italy in my comment 7 hours before yours, though, for the record.

  15. Avvaaa says:

    “Clinton is a bouncy, sparkly person and Bush I wasn’t, so maybe he appealed viscerally to neurotypicals ”

    While this is true, I think the 1991 economic recession had a major role to play in Bush´s loss. “It´s the economy, stupid” isn´t universally true, but I think it was true this time.

  16. Dianne says:

    Hungary has been full-on fascist for 10 years now. It doesn´t belong in a conversation about countries -going- fascist. It´s long gone.

    Point.

    I did mention Hungary as an aside in the “already fascist” category alongside Italy in my comment 7 hours before yours, though, for the record.

    I missed it. My bad. I have slightly more hope for Italy than Hungary, based on the difficulty the fascists are having in keeping power. This may be overly optimistic of me.

  17. Jacqueline Squid Onassis says:

    Yeah, the ’91 recession hurt Bush very badly. We were also in the 3rd consecutive term -and 5th out of 6 terms – of Republican rule and the voters were ready for a change. It didn’t help Bush the Elder that he was an absolutely awful public speaker. There were some hilarious mashups made of his malapropisms in speeches that made the rounds in ’92.

  18. Dianne says:

    @Jacqueline: Bush the Younger was an awful public speaker too. We did not misunderestimate him. And yet he won. Trump danced for something like half an hour at one of his own rallies and was frankly incoherent in the debates yet he won. The economy also tanked under both of them and yet they were re-elected. Why? I can’t help but feel like the rules are changing.

  19. Jacqueline+Squid+Onassis says:

    Bush the Yunger had the advantage of opponents who weren’t good public speakers. Definitely not as good as Clinton was.

    DollarvStore Mussolini, otoh, benefited from a VERY different political and media landscape. I can’t imagine how to compare a campaign from 1992 to one this year. I agree with you there.

  20. Avvaaa says:

    @Dianne: I guess the silver lining with Italy is that it shows that even when fascists can capture the executive and the legislature in a previously functioning democracy, there are still institutional obstacles behind them pushing full on fascism, e.g. Mellonis attempt to imprison asylum seekers in Albania was pushed back by the courts, and she complied with the ruling (while griping about it, but she still complied). Of course Italy has its own particular constitutional and political cultural foibles which do not necessarily apply elsewhere, but it does show that the game is not completely over once the fascists take formal political power. Perhaps Poland shows that even better, where the fascists were voted out – although, to counter my own counterpoint, the Polish fascists are down but not out, and may well return via another election some day in the future.

    I guess big picture, this current wave of fascism behaves somewhat differently to the 1920s-1940s wave. Which shouldnt be surprising, a lot has changed, even if the core of fascist ideology and political practice hasnt.

    (Now that I think of it, Mussolini took a few years to fully transform Italy into a fascist state, as opposed to a state with a fascist government, so maybe I should not be quite so upbeat – we might just be witnessing birthing pains, rather than fundamental weaknesses).

  21. Gar Lipow says:

    Hey, what is the best way to share your work on social media? If I want anyone to read my post, a link does not work, because (Bluesky and Mastondon excepting) most major social media denigrate links. But if I past directly, that directs nobody to your web page. The usual compromise is to paste in the post and then link in the first comment or reply. But that really does not do you a great deal more good than just pasting, cause few will click on the link if 1st comment. Would you prefer I just link, and we both live with the fact that about six people will see that link.?

  22. nobody.really says:

    Mental Floss “Word Nerd” 2025 Calendar
    January 9: Ampersand

    “Yes, an ampersand is a punctuation mark, but in the 1900s, it was also slang for the butt–or, as Slang and its Analogues Past and Present put it, “the breech; or posteriors.” Why? Because way back when, the ampersand was often the twenty-seventh letter of the alphabet, coming behind all the other letters. Plus, it has nice curves.”

  23. Ampersand says:

    Gar, thanks!

    Any sharing is good sharing! My URL is on the image itself on the left border, so anyone who really wants to find me can do so pretty easily. And I like having my comics seen even if it doesn’t lead to delicious yummy clickthroughs.

    For what it’s worth, when I post on Facebook, I post the comic, then post the links in a reply. If you’d rather not do the reply, my preference would be to post the comic without a link, rather than to post it in a way that fewer will see.

  24. Ampersand says:

    Nobody, LOL! I honestly haven’t run into that factoid before.

  25. Nancy Lebovitz says:

    _Railsea_ by China Mieville has ampersands as part of the story– both text and symbolism. A genuinely weird surrealist novel.

  26. RonF says:

    I see the term “far-right” being used a lot, but I’ve never seen it defined. What kind of policies would you say represent “far-right”? Especially as compared to merely “conservative” or “right-of-center”? Do you consider that those latter distinctions even exist? I’ve asked this question on X a lot of people who have used the term but I have never gotten an answer of any sort.

    As far as the various predictions regarding expelling all the people here illegally resulting in crops rotting in the field and starvation resulting, it seems to me that one solution would be to start prioritizing the H-2A mechanism. I have no idea if anyone in the Trump administration is actually thinking about that (I certainly haven’t heard anyone talk about it), but it’s there.

    One thing I think we may see if RFK Jr. actually gets through the Senate is that some common food additives are going to lose certification. One of the beneficial (or sometimes horrific) aspects of a degree in biochem is that I understand what the chemical names mean in the lists of ingredients in prepared foods. A lot of that $h!t needs to go. He just might be the guy to do it.

  27. Kate says:

    I see the term “far-right” being used a lot, but I’ve never seen it defined. What kind of policies would you say represent “far-right”? Especially as compared to merely “conservative” or “right-of-center”? Do you consider that those latter distinctions even exist? I’ve asked this question on X a lot of people who have used the term but I have never gotten an answer of any sort.

    People might not get back to you because you’re not doing the basic work of educating yourself about common terminology. How about you Google it yourself (I had a quick look, and the Wikipedia entry looks like a good place to start) & get back to me if that doesn’t answer your questions.

    As far as the various predictions regarding expelling all the people here illegally resulting in crops rotting in the field and starvation resulting, it seems to me that one solution would be to start prioritizing the H-2A mechanism. I have no idea if anyone in the Trump administration is actually thinking about that (I certainly haven’t heard anyone talk about it), but it’s there.

    I think they don’t make more use of H-2A visa holders for the same reason that they don’t make more use of U.S. citizens – they more difficult to exploit and too expensive. The cost to the employer of hiring H-2A visa holders is quite substantial – requiring the employer to pay for housing, transportation and fees associated with the visas in addition to wages. In any case, I think it is more likely that the plan is to redeploy the undocumented migrants gathered up as prison labor, paid a fraction of what they were before. To be clear, I think that is a form of slave labor and should be illegal. But, it will not cause food prices to rise. It might even mitigate some of the increases caused by tariffs, if all of the savings aren’t sucked up by CEOs and shareholders.

    One thing I think we may see if RFK Jr. actually gets through the Senate is that some common food additives are going to lose certification. One of the beneficial (or sometimes horrific) aspects of a degree in biochem is that I understand what the chemical names mean in the lists of ingredients in prepared foods. A lot of that $h!t needs to go. He just might be the guy to do it.

    1.) I am all for a reevaluation of common food additives based on current scientific knowledge. I do not believe that RFK Jr. is the man to do anything rooted in actual scientific knowledge. If he does manage to get some harmful additives decertified it will just be dumb luck.
    2.) I don’t think the benefits of getting rid of some harmful food additives would outweigh the likely consequences of his proposals to reduce restrictions on the sale of raw milk, much less the horrific consequences of the vaccine policies he may implement.

  28. Dianne says:

    As far as the various predictions regarding expelling all the people here illegally

    Quite a number of people being expelled are in the US legally. Some, apparently, have been citizens.

    One thing I think we may see if RFK Jr. actually gets through the Senate is that some common food additives are going to lose certification

    Want to give some specifics? What currently approved food additives do you think ought to be removed from the market, why, and what is the evidence that RFK Jr will act to remove these additives?

    One of the beneficial (or sometimes horrific) aspects of a degree in biochem is that I understand what the chemical names mean in the lists of ingredients in prepared foods.

    Again, specifics. Not that I don’t agree that there are some squicky but legal ingredients out there. My personal favorite is L-cysteine. (It is, or was, derived from hair. Human hair. Please, people, there is a reason that cannibalism is taboo. In any case, I think it’s mostly lab synthesized these days.) However, just having a long name does not make a food additive dangerous. So it’s hard to tell whether your argument makes sense without details.

  29. Kate says:

    Quite a number of people being expelled are in the US legally. Some, apparently, have been citizens.

    This also raises a question for me. If the Supreme Court upholds the ending of birthright citizenship, how will people with no documentation about how their ancestors arrived in this country prove their citizenship?

  30. Jacqueline Squid Onassis says:

    This also raises a question for me. If the Supreme Court upholds the ending of birthright citizenship, how will people with no documentation about how their ancestors arrived in this country prove their citizenship?

    Oh! I know this one. The answer is, “By being white.”

  31. DIA says:

    New Zealand ended birthright citizenship in 2006. I think the way it played out for them has some lessons for the USA right now. (Obviously there are differences, but they did cope with quite a lot of the same issues)

  32. Jacqueline Squid Onassis says:

    Did they boot out people whose parents weren’t NZ citizens but were born in NZ before they changed the law?

  33. Dianne says:

    If the Supreme Court upholds the ending of birthright citizenship, how will people with no documentation about how their ancestors arrived in this country prove their citizenship?

    Or even if they do? After all, most people’s parents are citizens only through birthright and so on back. Even if they are ultimately descended from someone who obtained citizenship after migrating to the US, how often would these ancestors have been accepted as immigrants under current laws? If they don’t pass that test, can they really be said to have been legal immigrants or did they cheat their way into citizenship? Maybe the only actual citizens are those descended from freed slaves who have a documented constitutional statement that they have citizenship. Fourteenth amendment or so.

  34. Karen says:

    If the Supreme Court upholds the ending of birthright citizenship, how will people with no documentation about how their ancestors arrived in this country prove their citizenship?

    Certificate of live birth before the change ?

  35. Ampersand says:

    I’m pretty sure that in practice, at least at first, it’s going to be about deporting people whose parents provably weren’t born in the US, not about deporting those who can’t prove where their parents were born.

  36. Dianne says:

    At first, yeah, but where will it end? Trump is literally deliberately destroying the country. He’ll need lots of scapegoats if he doesn’t want to be blamed for that.

  37. Ampersand says:

    I don’t think Trump has unlimited power. Under current circumstances, it’s very unlikely (I think/hope) that he’ll actually be able to pull off repealing birthright citizenship at all, let alone applying it super broadly.

  38. Kate says:

    Of course Trump doesn’t have unlimited power. It is important that we don’t give up and do what we can to push back against his illegal orders. That being said, based on the lawlessness of their recent immunity ruling, I think the Supreme Court will uphold the ending of birthright citizenship.

  39. Jacqueline Squid Onassis says:

    I’ve been saying for a long time that the fascists don’t want legal immigration, either. RonF has claimed otherwise. RonF was wrong.

  40. Dianne says:

    Given what Trump is doing to the CDC, I’m going to up my prediction and say that Trump will preside over a second epidemic that kills on the order of 1 million plus in the US and add that he might well get a third as well. But how will we know without the MMWR numbers?

    Also, this is now a post-diction because it’s already happened, but…planes will start falling out of the skies similar to the 1980s as air traffic controllers are replaced with Trump cronies or just not replaced at all.

  41. Ampersand says:

    Jackie-O: I think, in their brains, if the law says that legal migrants (or actual citizens) that they hate are legal, then the law is wrong. Any immigrant they hate, regardless of legal status, they consider illegal. Thus, it’s actually not possible for them to hate legal immigrants.

    The extreme end of this is their attempt to repeal birthright citizenship. Just because they’re trying to take citizenship away from American children of noncitizen immigrants doesn’t mean they’re opposed to those people! After all, they don’t plan to deport them until after they’re legally declared illegal immigrants, at which point they’re only going after them because they’re here illegally.

  42. Avvaaa says:

    Immigrants who are legal according to the “I support LEGAL immigration” crowd:

    1) Hot asian women who date older divorced white men. They become illegal when they break up with them.
    2) Lebanese christians who hate Muslims as much or even a little more than white Americans hate Muslims
    3) That one guy who does the burritos from that food truck everybody loves, I thought he was Mexican but I heard he was Paraguayan, anyway whatever, that dude can stay
    4) Wealthy white people

    Everybody else is ILLEGAL regardless of what laws passed by corrupt Congress says

    /s, in case it needed to be said

  43. Ampersand says:

    More “supporting legal immigration” news: At least two Oregon nonprofits – and I suspect, many similar ones across the country – have had their federal grant funds abruptly frozen. Both grants supported providing assitance to immigrants who are here legally and going through the process legally.

  44. Jacqueline Squid Onassis says:

    I can’t wait for RonF to explain how this gibes with his pro-legal immigration stance.

  45. Kate says:

    More “supporting legal immigration” news: At least two Oregon nonprofits – and I suspect, many similar ones across the country – have had their federal grant funds abruptly frozen. Both grants supported providing assitance to immigrants who are here legally and going through the process legally.

    I saw that Luthern Charities were also potentially on the chopping block due to their work with legal refugee resettlement. They also run a lot of nursing homes.
    Even more devastating long-term consequences could arise from abrubtly ending drug trials funded through USAID, including ones targeting drug resistant diseases (eg. Tuburcolosis and H.I.V.).
    My understanding is that a judge has ordered and preliminary injunction for funding to be restored for the time being, but I it is not clear that it is being complied with.
    Gee, I wonder where Ron is to tell us why this is all o.k.?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *