Wait, this award was supposed to be serious? Given the honorees I thought it was an ig nobel or Darwin award sort of thing, possibly run by the onion.
Julie Opperman according to Federal Election Commission filings, is a major Republican donor. In 2016, she donated $50,000 to Rebuilding America Now, a super PAC founded by Paul Manafort and Tom Barrack—two top Trump advisers—to support the Trump presidential campaign. That year, she also donated $2,700, the legal maximum, directly to the Trump campaign. In 2020 Opperman contributed $200,000 to Republican campaigns and PACs, including a $100,000 donation to the Take Back The House 2020 PAC and $92,000 to the National Republican Congressional Committee.
Ok. Makes sense now. She’s just trying to shit all over RBG’s name. So, she gave the awards to a racist, anti-LGBTQ+ billionaire, the piece of trash that has been driving GOP propaganda since Nixon, a Wall Street fraudster, and a scab who crossed the picket line during the SAG strike.
Don’t buy the claims of ignorance. This was intentional.
This needs to be the top comment. This is such an obvious ploy by a right wing extremist.
Those were serious nominees? AND they didn’t see the problem? How excruciatingly tone deaf.
It’s not just that they let a few questionable ones slip through, it’s as is they were were positively selecting for scumbags. That’s not tone deafness, that’s flat out having contrary values.
…Barbra Streisand?
She really has an effect.
She was last year’s honoree for the award.
Okay that’s a sensible connection at least
Ao much so they should name it after her.
I am also curious how she is at all relevant to this. I guess she may bring some awareness to the issue via her eponymous effect.
Wooo, wooo, wooo-ooo, wooo, wooo, wooo-ooo
So why is the Dwight D. Opperman Foundation handing out awards in the name of RBG?
Can just anyone do that?
She established the award with them, while she was still alive.
[Edit: they’ve since changed the criteria for the award.]
Another RBG L
Yeah, it’s nice that she did some good stuff decades ago, but her immediate legacy is dog shit.
I see - thanks for the info…
It was in the article. If you have a question like that, it’s a good idea to read the article.
I did but I suppose I lost that section amongst all the ads interspersed through the article.
Thanks for the suggestion, though.
Might I suggest Ublock Origin? Never browse without it.
I do have ABP installed. I leave the “Acceptable Ads” option on which usually accomplishes what I want. Not sure how Rolling Stone’s ads are getting qualified as “acceptable” though.
I enabled “Reader” mode for RS by default in Safari now so it won’t be a problem again
Someone should make an RBG award for refusing to retire long after it’s obvious you should have. First posthumous award to Diane Feinstein.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
An award named after Ruth Bader Ginsburg that was set to be given to Elon Musk and Rubert Murdoch has been cancelled.
And, while we believe each of the honorees is worthy of our respect for their leadership and their notable contributions, the Foundation has decided that the planned ceremony in April 2024 will be canceled.”
Along with Musk and Murdoch, this year’s awardees had included Sylvester Stallone, Michael Milken, and the only woman nominee: Martha Stewart.
“The justice’s family wish to make clear that they do not support using their mother’s name to celebrate this year’s slate of awardees, and that the justice’s family has no affiliation with and does not endorse these awards,” said RBG’s daughter Jane Ginsburg in a statement to the New York Times, describing the choice in this year’s awardees “an affront to the memory of our mother.”
Opperman previously told the publication that Ginsburg fought “for everyone” and they wanted to “honor both women and men who have changed the world by doing what they do best.”
Shana Knizhnik, the author of Notorious RBG, said that honoring Musk and his “anti-feminist and anti-LGBTQ sentiments” and Murdoch, who “has used his immense power to undermine democracy,” dishonors Ginsburg’s legacy.
The original article contains 495 words, the summary contains 204 words. Saved 59%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
