Mediaboss Marketing

Mr. Regnery attended the University of Pennsylvania, where he studied political science and joined the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, a conservative student organization co-founded by Mr. Buckley. He left before graduating to work on Senator Barry Goldwaters 1964 presidential campaign.

In the 2017 interview with Buzzfeed, one of the few times he spoke to the news media, he claimed that his efforts on behalf of Mr. Goldwater included what he called Operation Dewdrop, in which he attempted to deter Democratic voters in Philadelphia by hiring a plane to seed the skies with dry ice, in the hopes of making it rain. He failed though, he recalled, he burned his fingers on the ultracold dry ice containers.

Mr. Regnery later returned to Chicago, where he worked for Joanna-Western Mills. He became the companys president in 1980 but was ousted a year later, after several quarters of poor financial performance. According to his own account, he spent the rest of his career in a variety of businesses, while also dabbling in Illinois politics.

In his memoir, he recounted how he first began to turn against the Republican Party after listening to a speech in 1993 in which the economist Milton Friedman declared that the end of the Cold War meant that the free-market economic doctrines of the Reagan era had won. In an early sign of that break, according to a 2017 profile in Mother Jones, Mr. Regnery ran unsuccessfully for Illinois secretary of state in 1994 on the Term Limits and Tax Limits Party ticket.

Five years later, he convened a Whos Who of white supremacists for a conference in Florida, where he delivered a speech, For Our Childrens Children, in which he said the only way to save Americas white identity was for it to break up into several smaller countries, one each for the countrys various ethnic groups.

His racism grew more explicit. He announced plans in 2004 to start a whites-only dating site. It never happened, but he continued to worry that white people were in danger of extinction: In 2006 he delivered a speech in Chicago in which he said, The white race may go from master of the universe to an anthropological curiosity.

By then he had severed most of his ties with mainstream Republicans, and they with him. That same year the leadership of the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, which he had joined in college, removed him from its board.

Read the rest here:
William H. Regnery II, 80, Dies; Bankrolled the Rise of the Alt-Right - The New York Times

The bill signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis this week calling for intellectual diversity on college campuses has attracted national attention, drawing criticism and support.

And with an election year drawing near, the debate surrounding the new law appears to have staying power.

The reality is were very focused on diversity as policy matter and thats a good thing, House Speaker Chris Sprowls, a Palm Harbor Republican, told the state Board of Governors this week.

We should have diverse universities and diverse faculty, he said. But one of the most important things about diversity is not the diversity of how we look but the diversity of how we think.

Here are five things to know about the law, which takes effect July 1:

In recent years, the public debate over academic freedom and free speech on campus has been growing louder.

In 2015, The Coddling of the American Mind, an opinion piece in The Atlantic that was later turned into a book, sparked debate across higher education circles with the idea that students were being treated as emotionally vulnerable.

Sprowls referenced it this week while addressing the Board of Governors as they met in St. Petersburg. He warned them against pandering to the woke mob and people on social media. The day before, Senate President Wilton Simpson called Florida universities socialism factories.

Also in 2015, the University of Chicago drafted a statement upholding the values of free speech. The following year, the university sent out a letter supporting academic freedom and rejecting the notion of safe spaces and trigger warnings.

A staff analysis of the Florida bill cited a 2017 National Survey of Student Engagement, which found that 64 percent of students surveyed believed their coursework respected the expression of diverse ideas and that 71 percent believed their schools demonstrated a commitment to diversity. But far fewer than that 50 percent believed their schools were supportive of different political ideas.

The same year, Richard Spencer, an alt-right leader who organized the white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Va., planned a speech at the University of Florida. The university initially rejected his request, fearing his appearance would incite violence, but later backtracked and allowed him on the grounds of free speech. The school spent more than $500,000 on security.

Following the event, a series of free speech-on-campus bills were introduced in the Legislature. And in 2018, the Campus Free Expression Act became Florida law, essentially stipulating that an entire public campus should allow free speech and not limit it to outdoor areas.

The bill analysis also cites other surveys supporting the idea that too many people on college campuses feel like they need to self-censor, and that the burden is falling harder on those with conservative beliefs.

State Rep. Spencer Roach, the North Fort Myers Republican who sponsored the measure in the House, said in an interview he had heard that this was happening in Florida and introduced the bill as a means of collecting empirical evidence.

The law defines intellectual freedom and viewpoint diversity as the exposure of students, faculty, and staff to, and the encouragement of their exploration of, a variety of ideological and political perspectives.

It says schools may not shield students, faculty or staff from free speech. And it directs the State Board of Education and the State University Systems Board of Governors to conduct an annual assessment of intellectual freedom and viewpoint diversity for each school.

The practice of shielding students is defined this way: to limit students, faculty members, staff members access to, or observation of, ideas and opinions that they may find uncomfortable, unwelcome, disagreeable, or offensive.

The required surveys must be objective, nonpartisan and statistically valid and consider the extent to which competing ideas and perspectives are presented. It also must address whether people at a school feel free to express their beliefs and viewpoints on campus and in the classroom.

The first results are expected to be released Sept. 1, 2022 about two months before the Nov. 8 election.

Roach said the Legislature will not be involved in the surveys and each university will have a great degree of latitude in developing them. No one will be required to declare their political beliefs, he said.

Best case scenario, these surveys come back great and say its a marketplace of ideas, Roach said. It could say we really dont have that problem in Florida or it could say heres what the scope of it is and the extent of it is.

The results, he said, will be a tool for universities, the Board of Governors and future legislative bodies to take corrective action if needed.

The portion of the bill that generated most opposition among faculty members calls for the allowance of one-party recording in classes. Florida is one of 11 states that require all-party consent to record outside of public events.

While supporters of this provision argue that recording is being done anyway in classrooms, faculty worry it will have a chilling effect on peoples willingness to speak up.

The new law stipulates recording can be done only for personal use, filing a complaint to the university or as evidence in a criminal or civil case, and that action can be taken against violators. But faculty expressed concerns about intellectual property issues and not being able to control where things are posted.

When the bill was on the Senate floor, Sen. Jason Pizzo, a Miami Democrat, questioned whether this provision could be setting up a young adult to unwittingly commit a felony. The provision was included under the bills right to free speech activities.

The law expands protections for student government members and student organizations. These provisions are the result of politically charged issues that bubbled up on Florida campuses during the last election cycle.

At the University of Florida, some student leaders pushed to oust a student body president with Republican ties after he invited Donald Trump Jr. to speak on campus. Also at UF, three conservative student organizations were suspended for violating COVID-19 guidelines.

At the University of South Florida, a left-leaning student organization was suspended for the same reason, and members of the group were arrested during an on-campus protest.

The student body president at Florida State University was reinstated last October after being removed for criticizing the Black Lives Matter movement, Reclaim the Block and the American Civil Liberties Union during remarks to members of a Catholic Student Union.

Roach, the state representative, argued that the case shows the need for policies that prevent students records from being marred. We dont want our students to be subjected to some sort of kangaroo court, he said.

The newly signed bill modifies and codifies the State University Systems existing conduct regulations into state law.

It states that all schools will adopt a code of conduct that will protect the rights of all students and provide due process protections, including the right to a timely written notice within seven business days extending the existing five-day period.

The notice must outline the allegations and specify what portions of the code of conduct have been violated. It also allows for students to be represented by an advocate or legal representative.

The law requires universities to provide the accused with a full list of witnesses and all known information they have regarding the allegation five business days in advance of a hearing up from three days.

It states that students and organizations have the right to a presumption that no violation occurred and that schools have the burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that a violation has taken place.

Read this article:
Five things to know about Floridas new intellectual diversity law - Tampa Bay Times

The show of support for Mayor Byron Brown at the downtown ballpark Thursday wasn't exactly a grassroots effort. Numerous members of Brown's senior staff participated and spoke.

Wondering whether Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown is giving serious consideration to mounting a write-in campaign to keep his job in November?

The answer might have been in plain sight Thursday night at Sahlen Field, where Brown threw out the first pitch before the Toronto Blue Jays went on to drop the Baltimore Orioles, 9-0.

Outside the park, a crowd of Byron Brown supporters gathered in front of the main entrance to make a pitch of their own. They wore T-shirts bearing Browns name and carried signs reading Keep Byron Brown.

This was no extemporaneous, grassroots expression of support for the four-term incumbent, who lost the Democratic primary election Tuesday to upstart India Walton, sending shockwaves through the regions political and business establishments.

A lot of the people there, including many who spoke to the TV cameras capturing the event, are members of Browns inner circle. Others occupy important, high-paying bureaucratic jobs.

These included:

Petrucci is also an elected member of the Buffalo Board of Education. Also present was South District Council Member Chris Scanlon.

Browns spokesman, Mike DeGeorge who made $110,054 last year was spotted among the demonstrators, too, but he was at the ballpark to make sure the mayors ceremonial game-opening pitch went smoothly.

(For the record, it did: The mayors delivery was slow, but he got it right over home plate.)

Also there was Tom Smith, who earned $110,805 in 2019 as chief of staff for the Buffalo Sewer Authority. Smith was previously head of the Mayors Impact Team and has been an aide to Brown since he was a state senator. Smith is married to Jessica Maglietto Smith, a top aide to the mayor she made $96,477 in 2020 and his campaign treasurer.

The man who the demonstrators offered to TV cameras as a community spokesperson was R.J. Ball. Hes the brother of Betsey Ball and Tim Ball, the citys top attorney. R.J. Ball works for Empire State Development as director of industry development, a patronage gig that paid him $104,000 in 2019. Unlike his siblings, Ball serves at the pleasure of Gov. Andrew Cuomo, not the mayor.

As deputy mayor, Betsey Ball runs operations for the mayor inside City Hall the role once occupied by Steve Casey, who previously ran the mayors election campaigns. As such, Ball was responsible, at least in part, for the campaigns disastrous rose garden strategy: Until the week before election day, Brown acted as if there were no primary election, no opponent, no need to engage in the usual politicking at which Browns previous campaigns have been so adept.

In the final week, money poured into Browns campaign but it was too late.

The result of Browns blunder: Walton beat the four-term incumbent by 7 percent of Tuesdays low turnout. It is too late for Brown to get his name on another ballot line in November, leaving a write-in campaign his only option other than conceding his loss, which he has not done. Brown indicated on election night that hed wait until every vote had been counted and the results certified by the Board of Elections.

At the same time these riders of the patronage merry-go-round were agitating for their boss to keep the job he lost Tuesday night, developer Carl Paladino had called an emergency conclave of wealthy businessmen to discuss how to prevent Walton from taking office in January.

Paladino told those he invited his goal was to raise $1 million to fund a write-in campaign to keep Brown in office in Novembers general election. The meeting was postponed after Buffalo News political reporter Bob McCarthy wrote a piece calling attention to the planned meeting.

Paladino has a long history of clashing with Black elected officials, and until recently that included Brown. In 2009, he helped bankroll the mayoral campaign of South District Common Council Member Mickey Kearns, who lost in a landslide to Brown in the Democratic primary.

Paladino ran for governor in 2010, but his campaign was derailed by the publication of racist and pornographic emails hed shared with an email list of friends and business associates.

He later was elected to a seat on the Buffalo Board of Education, but was removed from office in 2017 after he made racist remarks about Barack and Michelle Obama to a weekly newspaper. He was an early supporter of Donald Trump and remains a hero of the regions conservative and alt-right movements.

Walton, meanwhile, has been receiving national attention for her victory. Shes been congratulated by prominent progressive figures including Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

That raises a fascinating prospect: Will Byron Brown, Buffalos first Black mayor, accept the backing of a guy like Paladino in an effort to defeat Walton, who is also Black and poised to become the citys first woman mayor?

If he does, what national figures and organizations will rush with money and volunteers to aid Waltons cause?

It could be a long, hot summer. And fall.

Paladino affirmed Friday to WGRZ-TV and other reporters that he had spoken to Brown and pledged his financial support, should Brown agree to a write-in campaign.

The mayor has not said whether he will do that, or whether hed accept Paladinos support if he does. But he told WGRZ-TV in a statement he was weighing the outpouring of support as he considers his next steps.

Follow this link:
Rallying to save their patronage jobs - Investigative Post

I am writing in response to the letter from Lee Santa. The Second Amendment to the Constitution was ratified on Dec. 15, 1791. It was written as a constitutional check on congressional power. Our forefathers didn't want a repeat of the totalitarian monarchy which ruled them before independence from Britain. They learned from an armed government, and didn't want citizens without a means of defense against that government, and tyrannical rule.

At that time there almost 700,000 slaves in the United States, and the population, according to the 1790 census, was 3,292,214. So it seems a little unlikely that the Second Amendment was written to suppress slave uprisings, which had not yet occurred.

But when have race baiters ever had a problem lying about the facts. Carol Anderson has a book to sell and facts are so inconvenient. In fact, over 300,000 white slaves were shipped from Britain to the Colonies, and in 1830 there were 3,775 free black people who owned 12,740 black slaves. Yes, those pesky facts again.

How dare you characterize citizens who uphold the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as, how did you put it, oh yes, "those, (with their Tarzan yells) who beat their chests, most likely alt-right/white supremacist scaredy-cats who are terrified of people of color, esp. blacks."

You are the racist here, you hate and seem terrified of white people. You are Carol Anderson's water carrier. I am embarrassed for you, you are the racist you purport to hate. And yes, Lee Santa, ignorance is a choice.

CATHERINE FAHRIG

Sandpoint

See original here:
The real facts about the Second Amendment - Bonner County Daily Bee

A soldier has been on the run from police in Belgium since mid-May after being implicated in the theft of weapons from a military base in Flanders.

The federal prosecutor charged Jrgen Conings with attempted murder and the illegal possession of weapons in a terrorist context after he was connected with threats to kill Belgiums top pandemic virologist, Marc Van Ranst.

The case highlights the countrys much overlooked problem with extremism on the right and how these politics have become entangled with the pandemic.

It is not just fringe far-right conspiracy groups, such as QAnon and Viruswaanzin, that have been exploiting the COVID-19 crisis. Several Belgian right-wing parties and movements are using the pandemic to spread misinformation and fuel resentment.

These mostly conservative, pro-Flemish-independence parties include the right-wing New Flemish Alliance (N-VA) and the extreme far-right Vlaams Belang. Both have been vocal about the way the caretaker governments led by former temporary prime minister Sophie Wilms have handled the pandemic. The criticism grew even louder when a seven-party coalition took over in October 2020. Even though N-VA and Vlaams Belang were the largest elected parties in Flanders in 2019, they have been reduced to an opposition role in the current federal government.

This has been a bitter pill to swallow, especially for Vlaams Belang, which had hoped to form a coalition with the N-VA in order to bypass a 1989 ruling aimed at keeping it out of government because of its extreme politics.

The tense political climate has been further exploited by the Flemish alt-right movement Schild & Vrienden to sow even more division.

It is in this complex context that pro-Conings groups have been popping up online ever since his news of disappearance was broadcast in May.

Conings had been on a terror watch list since February as a potentially violent extremist and was known to be connected to another former soldier, convicted neo-Nazi Tomas Boutens. Yet neither the Belgian army nor the Belgian minister of defence appear to have been informed about this.

A Facebook group supporting Conings soon attracted more than 50,000 members before being banned and relocating to encrypted messaging app Telegram, which is harder to regulate. Posts praised his actions with fascist memes which are popular among the Flemish alt-right and extreme far-right.

At least three support marches have taken place since his search warrant was issued one of them coinciding with protests against COVID-19 measures in Brussels.

A number of scientific experts have become targets during the pandemic. As well as Van Ranst, infectious diseases specialist Erika Vlieghe and vaccinologist Pierre Van Damme have had to endure online attacks.

Belgiums record-breaking federal government formation talks did not help either. Politicians from the caretaker government quickly passed on all responsibility to a team of scientific experts at the start of the crisis. Trying to save political face, most of the pandemic communication was left to the experts. This is how Van Ranst, head of Belgiums pandemic planning team and an opinionated Twitter user, became the personification of the pandemic.

Mainstream politicians from the traditional right and extreme far-right have played a part in fuelling personal attacks against experts. Calling Van Ranst doctor Hatred in a previous Twitter dispute, N-VA politician Theo Francken, infamous for his anti-immigration stance, set the tone again at the start of the crisis. Quoting a satirical article, he sent out and subsequently deleted a tweet targeted at Van Ranst. The tweet combined the Dutch word for pandemic with the gay slur sissy, suggesting the virologist was being overly dramatic about the pandemic.

Van Grieken and his party have taken advantage of their social media know-how during the pandemic, often publicising content from Vlaams Belang-linked alternative news sites, such as the Flemish nationalist t Scheldt. Recurrent themes are xenophobic conspiracy theories and the constant suggestion that Van Ranst is the leftist hand puppet to Belgiums illegitimate federal government, associating him with Chinas alleged communist dictatorship.

Dries Van Langenhove, Schild & Vriendens leader and now independent Vlaams Belang politician, has participated in the bashing of Van Ranst as well. In a recent meme-packed video, he even compared Van Ranst to Stalin for advising against reopening hospitality businesses too soon.

This excessive trolling, often accompanied by death threats, has had a concrete impact on all experts involved: before the Conings case, Van Ranst already spoke about being prank-called by groups of drunk youngsters, often ending their calls by singing the Flemish national anthem and calling him leftist vermin.

The pandemic climate has proven to be an excellent breeding ground for extremists. It has provided them with an excuse to go after what they see as the freedom-destroying establishment.

In this climate, Conings is portrayed as a Flemish resistance fighter by many sharing his feelings of exclusion despite being wanted for extremely serious crimes. The way people have responded to his case shows there is an urgent need to more closely inspect Belgiums homegrown far-right extremism problem.

In my research, I have been looking at how continental urban terrorist violence materialises both online and offline in the aftermath of the Paris 2015 and Brussels 2016 attacks. This pandemic-driven case teaches us that present-day terrorist threats do not only stem from Jihadist milieus, as is often assumed. The actions of people such as Conings who appear, on the surface, to be outliers or lone wolves need to be analysed as part of a wider sociopolitical environment, particularly when political parties appear to feel so comfortable spreading misinformation.

View original post here:
Jrgen Conings: the case of a Belgian soldier on the run shows how the pandemic collides with far-right extremism - The Conversation UK