The White House has released a report accusing Anthea Hartig, the head of the National Museum of American History, of engaging in 'extreme political activism.' The report cites exhibits that 'celebrate diversity' and 'acknowledge uncomfortable truths' as evidence of a left-wing agenda infiltrating the nation's attic. But wait—what if the museum's job is simply to display history as it happened? Could the White House be confusing documentation with advocacy? The report suggests that a single protest sign from the 1960s or a button reading 'I Voted' constitutes political agitation. If that's the standard, then every history textbook is a political pamphlet, and every presidential portrait is a campaign ad. If the report's logic holds, museums might be forced to sanitize their collections. Imagine the 'American History' exhibit replaced by a single room of toasters and baseball cards, with a sign reading 'Neutral History: No Offense Taken.' Tourists would be issued 'political purity passes' before entry, and the museum's gift shop would sell only gray t-shirts. Anthea Hartig might be replaced by an AI that only shows images of George Washington with a neutral expression. The annual fireworks display would be replaced by a PowerPoint on the dangers of pyrotechnics. As the line between history and activism blurs, one has to ask: Is a museum that tells the whole truth now considered a threat to the status quo? And if so, what happens when the toaster exhibit is deemed too 'hot'?