Archive for May, 2021

Aldous Huxley Rules

Thursday, May 27th, 2021
I. Doug MalloukEXPOSED!

the black hammer show I guess we’ll find out if/when a bunch of adjacent leftist organizations start getting ratted out and hit with nunchucks in a weirdly-coordinated way. (Comparisons continue.) this is just LaRouche’s Operation Mop-Up for people who call themselves “influencers”

I’m a Lizard People/Lyndon LaRouche guy, over here.. Better than “communist land base”s.

Battle lines drawn. I was born with an inherent distrust for government/authority.. my dad had us reading LaRouche newsletters when we were kids.. But 2020 has solidified it for me.. I will NEVER lllllllltrust any “Experts” or “Mainstream Scientists” or Government “Doctors” or any Government official.. Who needs experts when you got larouche pamphlets, eh?

II.  Music Theory

What to make of the shout out to Louis Farrakhan?

Farrakhan is playing Beethoven’s violin concerto tomorrow night at 7PM. I think it’s really important that everyone watch. He’s a very good violinist. If you want to listen to music, instead of torturing yourself with some inhuman noise that the British Empire hypnotized you with, then you have to listen to this concert.

And with that diss of the Beatles out of the way, next comes a self promotion, tying the musical ventures of the Larouche Movement with the musical abilities of the Nation of Islam leader.

Then, you must listen to Schiller Institute NYC Chorus, of which I am a member

Sure. Next go to GWAR’s cover of Cindy Lauper’s “She Bop”.

Oh wait. This is, in fact, why pornography is so terrible. It dampens a person’s capacity for empathy. It is the destruction of something beautiful — the mind. The erotic trance prevents a person from concentrating on profound ideas. You become a slave to pleasure.

Quite an analysis for vandalism on historic structures. But LORG is moving over to recruitment field of picking up college drop outs who are disillusioned with cultural pap, and aching for higher culture aims. And thinking (possibly correctly, possibly not) that they jack off too much. BUT

If you’re not watching Farrakhan’s concert right now, you are an idiot. I am finally going to get off twitter.

Sorry, but everyone’s too busy solving the Israeli Palestinian war by building the World Land Bridge.

Daniel Burke has been pulling a crazy Twitter torrent, I guess viewable as a recruitment drive. (“We’re growing”.) Following the logic here… The United States is not the British Empire, although since they assassinated Kennedy, the presidents have gotten progressively more subservient to that system. … Progressively? So… Biden worse than Trump worse than Obama worse than Bush 2 worse than Clinton worse than Bush 1 worse than Reagan worse than Carter worse than Ford worse than Nixon worse than Johnson. Trump sucks now, eh?

Some decent points on mass sensory overload, if pointing to the least subtle production of Disneyland, and stuck in a generational trope — the milennials are old news now, it’s all about the zoomers now — we come up to this hypocritical smash where something — anything — on Oprah is finally brought into focus.

Presented is a 2013 article quoting Oprah on how “racist old people needing to die off” for racial progress. An updated version for today wllould be a picture of an American burdened by a racist elderly person in a wheelchair.

Recall Larouche on the greatness of the new generation circa 2002, or at least those who dropped in to get theater practice with Robert Beltran and practice doubling squares, as against the hopeless degeneracy of the Baby Boom generation.  I guess they are delving into this same cultural terrain of giving college drop outs a new set of teachers — not beholden to Disney )(a little bit of work to do as the suggestion that place is the ONLY entity not beholden to Disney suggests LORG is.). And with this the youth may be suscepible to that message that

Rules are Satanic.  And sell them on the biggest humiliation the larouchies suffered in these past few years, which we see that they view as a victory — when AOC was confronted by a universally viewed as lunatic LPACer with an “eat the babies” mantra. Yes Generation Zoomer — you too can have what she had!

PS LaRouchePAC is a group of evil people who took LaRouche’s name but only desecrate his legacy. Yeah, and it is a short countdown to tell that to this guy, who does not know that Planet Larouche has broken into two factions, and is liable to mistakenly just mock these tweeterers.

The Civil War commences again. Yeah, when will the bloodshed end?

III.  Part 2

Like an adolescent punk rock fan poohpoohing popular punk acts as not being real punk, whether accurately or not irrelevant to the concern of categorization and snobbishness. So you dig any classical, baroque, or romantic musician not named Mozart?. Prepare to get Mozart shoved loudly into your face, you fool! You will be Mozarted!!!

Prolific Twitterer Daniel Burke argues against the musical tastes of Larouche adjacent R Cam. Johnny Cash is crap, apparently. See too Bob Dylan. Everything fell apart when the British stepped in and created Jazz to ruin America. Or maybe it started with Euclidean geometry.

Then again, this tweet here may explain why the Larouchies reject any contemporary popular music… Because all I hear with this tweet is Bruce Springsteen with “Glory Days”, puzzlingly the song’s protagonist at least lived those glory days where here — not so much.

Hm. This is how Furtwangler fought fascism. I think you will approve.

Yeah, well… Here’s how Jello Biafro fought neo-liberalism.  Much of the lyrics should appeal to the Larouchies.  It beats the stupid “eat the babies” thingy.

Point: Mankind is a galactic species, regardless of your view. Counterpoint: No it isn’t.

PointYour idea of a “war on drugs” is totally different from LaRouche’s…  LaRouche’s number one anti-drug measure was and is the restoration fo FDR’s 1933 Glass-Steagall.  Counterpoint:  I don’t know if the 80s literature on the drug war involved Glass Steagall let alone prioritize it on page one and on the covers (Someone look up in the index to tell me — How many references does Dope Inc make to Glass Steagall?), but they sure were happy to collect credit card information from the populace supporting the accepted terms and support the politicos implementing the definition of the phrase “War on Drugs”.

Curious, this. It goes back to McGeorge Bundy, the Ford Foundation, and LaRouche. What do you think Operation Mop-up was?  Begs a few questions — in Larouchian lore, who beat up who?

An epic Twitter debate between Daniel Burke and a “bald head man”, whose Twitter address has a “2” after it suggesting bald head man 1 was already taken. Burke slides back to the cudgel of shouting “agape!”, which surely wins any debate to those with full agape.

IV. Woke Forces Go After Aldous Huxley at Western Washington University, picking up Larouche Attacks

All we have to do is open our eyes and look. The A.S. Review’s op-ed arguing for the denaming is pulled out of the creationist, anti-evolution, anti-science, white supremacist swamp of disinformation and conspiracy. The article is written by Paul Glumaz, a long-term activist for the Lynldon LaRouche organization. He published in Executive Intelligence Review, a notorious LaRouche newsmagazine known for hawking conspiracy theories over the past five decades, including that climate change is a hoax and the “Big Lie” conspiracy that claims the election was stolen from Trump. Glumaz himself is currently a leading promoter of the Big Lie.

Glumaz’s article is a tour de force synthesis of the creationist, Christian fundamentalist, anti-science attacks on Huxley. The attacks have spread and multiplied since Henry M. Morris published an article in 1973 accusing Huxley of racism and connecting evolutionary theory to genocide. Morris was the founder of scientific creationism, a fanatical anti-evolutionist and himself a racist who supported a biblical justification for slavery.

Glumaz’s absurd rhetoric escalates to a dramatic climax of mind-control conspiracy where Huxley single-handedly (well, with a little help from Darwin) purges God and scripture from society. In its place he builds an “empire of Malthusian genocide” (Malthusian often being code for birth control and reproductive rights) that is leading us into a secular “Dark Age collapse of civilization.”

Whew!

Glumaz’s arguments are used throughout the A.S. Review op-ed. We should take to heart the concluding words of Paul White, one of the distinguished historians the Task Force asked to comment on Huxley’s legacy. White is the editor and research associate for the Darwin Correspondence Project, at Cambridge University. White wrote the following about the A.S. Review articles:

“I have tried to understand something of the situation you are facing, and have read several articles in the AS Review (“Thomas Huxley: Once Respected, Now Rejected,” “Students Continue to Push for Huxley College Name Change”). These are not well informed and are stitched together from a handful of sources. From the Executive Intelligence Review (one of the sources cited), I learned that Huxley orchestrated the hideous conspiracy that man is an instinct driven ape-like creature. Huxley is described as an abolitionist, he was in fact much more than this. He called for the elimination of all political, legal, and economic prejudices, equal rights and opportunities for people of all races (and sexes). If the staff and students agree to remove Huxley’s name, they should at least do so with a better understanding of his views, and an appreciation for his place in the history of human emancipation and activism.”

The Glumaz citation was also included in the follow-up research document submitted to the Task Force, and the basic framework and arguments were maintained. Quote-mining is used extensively throughout the report, with most of the lifted passages quote-mined previously by creationists. Virtually all the arguments against Huxley can be traced back to creationist sources.

The “man is not an ape” line dragged out to prove a Malthusian pessimism by opponents, curiously for a man who spent a lifetime predicting quarterly apocalypses here called — ironically — an Optimist.

The brilliant, agapic statement of Xi Jinping … Yeah, 0.5¥ has been deposited to your account  (and the entre to Iranian Press extended to Bill Jones)– Now he’s just burning his bridges to lpac.   And ensure that if previously Larouche fan Alex Jones has someone on the show, it will be from the load faction — should they submerge Xi agapism enough — see the current poll on info wars:

What’s The Next Crisis China And The Globalists Will Unleash?
Food/water shortage Another energy attack Weather disaster World war

LORG still has grayzone, though.  They have work to do to move from eyes coming back on China regarding Wuhan labs.

On this discussion on Twitter regarding China’s government’s perfidy, somewhere short of the comments of Jacques Cheminade — LORG is laying it on thick, aren’t they?

V.  Memories

That one time… Yep. I nearly missed a flight out of Houston Hobby (i.e., cops offered me option to return my husband in the bar or be detained) in the early 80s for picking a fight with Lyndon LaRouche followers. […] I also ran into LaRouche folks at a table in front of City Hall in Monterey, CA about 4 yrs ago. They remain crazy as ever. (No police intervention was needed that time

Watching Congressional GQPr’s interact with actual voters reminds of Barney Frank, when he told a Larouche nut that arguing with her was “like arguing with a dining room table.”

2 girls from my HS turned down full rides to Stanford to work for the Lyndon LaRouche campaign

More professionally, Our Town. I remember Our Town’s going after crackpot Lyndon LaRouche, who posted his minions at NYCO airport terminals in the days when I often had to fly for work. So Our Town always gave me fodder for airport arguments with cultists. I recall Our Town’s coverage of our efforts on the UES to save the City and Suburban Houses, and it was an Our Town reporter who caught then Mayor Koch on City Hall’s steps shaking his finger and berating me for “perverting the letter and spirit of the Landmarks Law, saying, “Mr. Gold – it is a perversion!

Favorite “insult”: LaRouchite told me that I was being too objective by asking him what ideas LaRouche had other than his economic craziness.

Hm. I went on a date once with a girl who tried to recruit me. I went to one meeting with her then spent an evening trying to get her to leave the cult, while she kept insisting I give it another chance. It was a wild meeting. Poetry and reading classics and shit

Remembering Nataliya Vitrenko through her 2004 campaign poster,key data

heh There’s an old story about some LaRouchies showing up to a Foucault lecture in the 70s and accusing him of being a CIA plant. Today they could instead go to Langley and accuse the CIA directors of being Foucauldian plants.

Regretable youthful discretions. When I was just 17 I campaigned for Lyndon LaRouche so don’t be embarrassed about John Edwards! I was young and impressionable and was too immature to do any real research on who he was. My husband set me straight. I was always very careful after that!

Recent victim. If you feel bad about yourself just remember that at least you did not come under the influence of Lyndon LaRouche for about a month in late 2015.

Red Pill Diaries.

College bits: I went to Brandeis and my first big story at the college newspaper was when the radio station brought in some LaRouche lljugend to talk about the world affairs and the speaker dove right into the links between the Queen, the Triad gangs and, I think, Abba Eban, whom the speaker claimed helped the SS round up Jews. It was scheduled for right after a lecture by a professor on the Holocaust, and some kids who got out of that wandered into the LaRouche thing, and, well, it didn’t end well (fortunately, only one kid was injured enough to require a trip to the ER).

And…  Will never forget my at the time Larouchian friend in college insisting that ‘being woke’ means knowing that george soros’ open society foundation astroturfed blm into existence

Me too! Was kinda convincing for my impressionable 18y.o. brain until they started talking smack about rap music.

BURN!!! Someone once called me the Lyndon LaRouche of Catholic Twitter and this comment has never ceased to haunt me.

Tea Party memories.

Blame it on Dave Emory.

Laffs. Trying to write a joke about Lyndon Larouche warning against the dangers of Italian sandwiches- how Eggplant Parm is “the degenerate food of the hot blooded saracen let loose on a continent built on reason” but it isn’t funny and I dont think anyone (myself included) would get it

VI.  On the Frontlines!

The Battle: The Memo: The GOP’s war is already over — Trump won. The Enemy is completely freaked out over their inability to destroy Trump. If we succeed in getting Trump and his supporters to adopt LaRouche’s American System of Economics, … … we can win over the producer base of the Democratic Party and secure the nation for the rest of this century. Join the ongoing LaRouchePAC class series.  (Common Theme, not entirely accurate — the dems and the reps pretty well cemented as placing 1-2.)

just gave a thumbs up to a larouche guy handing out pamphlets

Dateline Chester, New York, by way of prolific Twitterer Daniel Burke: Campaigning with @LaRoucheOrg in Chester, NY to crush the Great Reset and prevent thermonuclear war. I do not fear thermonuclear war as much as I do

But what I want to know is … Why wasn’t either LORG or LPAC invited into this Planetary Front?

Recruitment prospect. May want to start targeting dentists?

VII.  Aussies

Australian Citizens Party and where is the money coming from?. And how does it prop into China’s propaganda so much?

VIII.  Historical Notices

NAWAPA. Dismissing 21st Century Science and Technology as source of anything.

satanic panic. Has everyone seen this? Larouche whining that not one word about Maury Terry’s Roy Radin “satanic murder plot” was spoken during the trial of his killers. “Cover-up! Buried!” Of course it wasn’t, that’s because it’s all a FANTASY concocted by Maury, a chapter in his epic BS saga

The 1988 campaign, and worth notingHow you know the LaRouchians were a cult: their “Executive Intelligence Review” corespondent looks exactly like LaRouche, down to the glasses. –his latest missives regarding Larouche some decades after leaving the cult.

And that time Larouche spoke before the Oklahoma state Senate as presidential candidate. Because?

John Warner dies — John Warner is the only Republican I ever voted for. Granted, his opponent was Lyndon LaRouche. He took principled stands against Robert Bork & Oliver North. RIPThe election in question.   On this:  John Warner was one of the few Republicans for whom I’ve voted. In ’02, no Democrat challenged him and the alternatives were a Libertarian and one of those LaRouche followers. I figured he was tolerable enough to be the best option.  That election in question.  Yep — John Warner beat Nancy Spannaus twice!

AgainAgain — there are at least two others beyond Debs 1920 and Larouche 1992.  There is Peltier 2004 and Keith Judd 2012.  The latter was in the Democratic Primaries and not the General, so maybe he is dropped depending on definitions.  (This guy at least knows Judd.)

Making the way into historical fiction, how to set a scene: Nava’s narrative will be particularly nostalgic for a certain demographic of readers who came of age in the 1980s, a time when politicians believed it better to lock away those with AIDS and sequester them from public view. This was most evidenced in the creation of a Draconian California state voting proposition, whose legal language opens the novel, and was a very real measure appearing on the November, 1986 ballot and authored by notorious homophobe Lyndon LaRouche.

A fierce discussion on various presidential primary seasons mocking Sanders by comparing him to Larouche.

The question — Who is the greatest president we never had? — not getting any responses of Larouche.

IX.  “‘Attempted murder’, now honestly, what is that!? Do they give a Nobel prize for ‘attempted’ chemistry?”

Here we see Helga direct us to the defense of Larouche against the Oligarch.  And an  interesting defense to say the least.

A federal grand jury indicted LaRouche and 12 associates on credit card fraud and obstruction of justice; the charges alleged that they had attempted to defraud people of millions of dollars, including several elderly people, by borrowing money they did not intend to repay.

Borrowing money with no initial intent to pay anything back is a mental crime. You do not have to actually commit it. This is a THOUGHT crime like going to a bank to borrow money and then claiming you do not intend to pay off the debt. But this is how the law works – it is a mental thought that they prove by innuendo, circumstantial evidence, and it becomes does the jury BELIEVE it is more likely or not that there was no intent. We could lock up most of Congress and the White House using these theories. They borrow every year with no intention to pay anything back.

The Adventures of Dan Newhouse

Wednesday, May 26th, 2021

Reading between the lines, but just barely, on the current electioneering tactics of the ten Republicans in the House who voted for Trump’s second Impeachment, and the cranky comment from the Trump Republican challenger appears about right. That they are shuffling about in a mutual aid compact, raising donations and handing it all amongst the other nine — so money is just going around a very small circle.

Sure… Newhouse claimed loud and clear that he was a conservative during his elections but has behaved more like the Democrat employee he was for eight years under Gov. Christine Gregoire. The”>Sure… Newhouse claimed loud and clear that he was a conservative during his elections but has behaved more like the Democrat employee he was for eight years under Gov. Christine Gregoire.

And this… For all of those who support Newhouse I feel sorry for you. For all of those who support and voted for biden I wonder what kind of drugs you were on. Look at the mess this county has become since the brain dead basement hiding moron stole the election.

The responses “wow Fox News bot” — are behind the times. We are in OANN and Newsmax land.

It is actually amusing and intellectually confounding to see foreign press coverage describing American politics – so, for instance Britain’s liberal Guardian paper describes Republican split with fealty to Trump presented as the “right wing” position against more “moderates”. And I suppose there is something here in the sense of ” right is what the right does”, but I also understand when I see comments in, for instance, the comments section of the American Conservative describe Trump’s policy menu as essentially moderate or otherwise not strictly to the right of whatever had before regardless of toxic tweeting games and partisan fights. Trump has for the moment accomplished what was last accomplished by Franklin Roosevelt around 1936 in declaring the definition of Liberalism him.

So… Contract with America Part Deux?

“School choice, teaching American history for real, abolishing the ‘1619 Project,’ eliminating critical race theory and what the Texas legislature is doing,” Gingrich said regarding what might be included. “We should say, ‘Bring it on.’”

Those stated goals don’t sound like a positive message at all, noted Washington Post journalist Dave Weigel.

“Gingrich says a MAGA contract should be ‘positive’ and then lists one thing it will be for and three things it will be against,” Weigel noted on Twitter.

Many on the right have made similar attacks on ideas about how to better teach history in a more inclusive way. The “1619 Project” has come under particular fire from the right wing and white supremacists for its attempt to introduce a more in-depth examination of the history of slavery and racism in the U.S. to classrooms across the country.

Loaded terms indeed — also under fire by some leftists and Academics, and defended with some acknowledgement in mistakes in scholarship, but a “But that’s nothing when you look at the laughable 1776 Project” — and on to some dishonest whitewashing of what the original premise was.

But left vacant is the fiscal issues that speckled the original “Contract with America”, which I think I see New house picking up (what a national debt, huh?) and picking and choosing from the line of ” contract” complaints — surely immigration will be there, rhetorically splintering though.

“Build on successes, Move on from failures”

Sunday, May 23rd, 2021

Plotting the minority of Republicans and levels of equivocation with Trump.

Pollsters are just beginning to examine the Cheney sympathizers. In last week’s CBS News survey of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, most of the 20 percent who opposed her ouster cited among their reasons “There’s room in the party for different views” or “Not everyone should support Donald Trump.” But many gave reasons that will be harder to reconcile with the party’s ongoing campaign to whitewash the insurrection and the lies party leaders told about the election. Thirty-nine percent of respondents who sided with Cheney said “she’s right about the election,” and 37 percent said “she’s right about rule of law.” This core pro-Cheney faction, roughly 35 to 40 percent of 20 percent, adds up to 7 or 8 percent of the Republican-leaning electorate.

House Republicans figure that by the time the 2022 election rolls around, these people will have forgotten a party leadership vote that took place in May 2021. But purging Cheney didn’t solve the GOP’s underlying problem: Trump. In an Echelon Insights poll taken in April, 15 percent of Republican voters said they preferred a GOP “free of Donald Trump’s influence.” In a Navigator survey, when Republicans and Republican leaners were asked whether the party “should continue on the path laid out by Donald Trump” or “make some changes and move in a new direction,” 22 percent chose a new direction. These numbers closely resemble the percentage who have opposed Cheney’s removal in more recent surveys.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. The Echelon Insights poll found that beyond the 15 percent of Republicans who wanted to cleanse the party of Trump, another 21 percent preferred a GOP that “supports Donald Trump’s America First agenda but is not led by him,” and a further 23 percent preferred a GOP that “builds on Donald Trump’s successes and moves on from his failures.” Polls continue to show that Trump is an abrasive factor within the party, particularly in his treatment of liberals and racial issues. He’s also an albatross among independents: The Echelon Insights survey found that 57 percent of them would prefer a GOP free of his influence.

Parse out some meanings here. Understand, walk into a business with one of those “In Our America” placards and say “I want my Republican Party to build in his successes and moves on from his failures” and await a response. (Go ahead and see if “America First Agenda” isn’t ptesumed to be a code word for, like, “We shoulda fought the Commies with the Nazis as our allies” as opposed to, like, “Get Out of Afghanistan”.). There are items in his four years that could be viewed as “his agenda” that came out in controversy or sudden strike racist charges — oh, executive orders pulling employee racial sensitivity training — which struck me as just too haphazardly dropped to be effective — do you count such things as successes? His biggest success appears to be McConnell’s — three Supreme Court Justices.

On Cheney, we wait to see the caliber of her opponents. I do suspect she can pull a Murkowski or Lieberman and run and win with the Independents (and all six Democrats in Wyoming) after the Republicans nominate their luminary. Currently Trump is leaning that the passe nature of blogs as opposed to Twittering is leaving his online presence moribund — but we see plans on Giant Real World Touring so maybe he will get online in that backhand way.

One more consideration as you reconfigure political parties.

Different states have different customs and what’s prudent in one place might be radical in another.

That is different because it doesn’t mean calling ideas crazy as much as situationally unwise. So trying to be a Hatfield or McCall in Oklahoma would be as unwise as trying to be James Inhofe in Oregon.

Some state Republican Parties do manage to pull this off. Maryland and Massachusetts are both solid blue states with Republican governors; both Larry Hogan and Charlie Baker are well-respected moderates. And Democrat Jon Bel Edwards seems to be a good fit in Louisiana.

Yeah, but good luck replacing the Democratic governors of Louisiana and Kansas and Kentucky and North Carolina with a Democrat. They came in — generally barely — because the Republicans before them screwed the pooch in a manner that couldn’t be shuffled off to the corner or placed into broad context of national politics. For that matter we await a Republican governor in Oregon.

Republicans who voted yah

Thursday, May 20th, 2021

The 35 Republican congress critters who voted for the 1-6 Commission.

  • French Hill, Arkansas
  • Steve Womack, Arkansas
  • David Valadao, California
  • Carlos Gimenez, Florida
  • Maria Salazar, Florida
  • Mike Simpson, Idaho
  • Rodney Davis, Illinois
  • Adam Kinzinger, Illinois
  • Trey Hollingsworth, Indiana
  • Mariannette Miller-Meeks, Iowa
  • Meijer Peter, Michigan
  • Fred Upton, Michigan
  • Michael Guest, Mississippi
  • Jeff Fortenberry, Nebraska
  • Don Bacon, Nebraska
  • Chris Smith, New Jersey
  • Andrew Garbarino, New York
  • Tom Reed, New York
  • John Katko, New York
  • Chris Jacobs, New York
  • David Joyce, Ohio
  • Anthony Gonzalez, Ohio
  • Stephanie Bice, Oklahoma
  • Cliff Bentz, Oregon
  • Brian Fitzpatrick, Pennsylvania
  • Tom Rice, South Carolina
  • Dusty Johnson, South Dakota
  • Van Taylor, Texas
  • Tony Gonzales, Texas
  • Blake Moore, Utah
  • John Curtis, Utah
  • Jaime Herrera Beutler, Washington
  • Dan Newhouse, Washington
  • David McKinley, West Virginia
  • Liz Cheney, Wyoming

Reasonably certain this includes all ten Republicans who voted for Trump’s Impeachment, and those ten have had their political motivations analyzed already. (Adam Kinzinger wants to be Illinois Governor.) Beyond that, it is interesting to see two Utahns — Mormons well represented in that “Never Trumper” contingency. Curious to note Oregon’s Republican is in there. Also New York, which may because where New Yoek Representative Katko was the Republican with whom the Democrats negotiated the details.

Historical notices

Sunday, May 16th, 2021

The second to final paragraph of this news story on a historical track getting dropped for lack of diversity, veering into the career of Frederick Douglass and striking this false note:

Douglass also campaigned on the issues of women’s rights. He later ran for Vice President, becoming the first African-American to do so.

I… guess? From wikipedia:

Woodhull’s campaign was also notable for the nomination of Frederick Douglass as vice-presidential candidate, although he did not take part in the convention, acknowledge his nomination or take an active role in the campaign.

Does such count as a run? Victoria Woodhull’s is sometimes slighted in favor of the more respectable and organized bid of Belva Ann Bennett Lockwood. Some more on the vice presidential bid of Douglass:

But while Woodhull was clear about her presidential intentions, she never informed her running mate, Douglass, who never even acknowledged he had been nominated. Many have speculated that Douglass didn’t want to recognize the nomination for fear of being associated with Woodhull, who was seen as “a loose cannon and controversial even among radical feminists and abolitionists,” said Harvard historian John Stauffer. […]

Douglass also likely didn’t recognize the vice presidential nomination in 1872 because he was already supporting a different presidential candidate, said Kenneth Mack, a historian and Lawrence D. Biele Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. A loyal Republican, Douglass had backed Grant’s run for a second term. During his first four years in the White House, Grant had proven himself a champion of the rights of freed African Americans, having supported several Civil Rights acts in 1870 and 1871, including one designed to the end Ku Klux Klan’s reign of terror against Black people in the former confederate states. “And President Grant had supported sending in the Union army to protect the lives and the votes of Black people in the south. So, for Douglass, there was no real choice other than to support Grant.”

I do not understand the point of dropping in this historical footnote, which falls asunder to virtually meaningless under the smallest lean-in.