Mediaboss Marketing

Eight months have passed since the election, but on the Left the shock has not abated. For them, each new week brings fresh revelations why Donald Trump shouldn't be president.

I've stopped trying to convince them that Trump isn't the monster they think he is. Instead, though I disagree,I go along with all their judgments and add, "But it's your liberalism that put him there." Huh?

The conversation continues.

Liberalism has fallen into a position in which it can make few moral arguments against the other side. Thats the real frustration liberals have with President Trump.

"Yes," I say, "you call him vulgar and crass, but youve praised vulgar and crass characters from George Carlin to Madonna nonstop. You celebrate them as groundbreakers and boundary-pushers. Well, now youve got someone taking it all the way to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

The guy is sullying the dignity of the office, they charge.

But you love edgy counter-cultural gestures, the CEO who shows up to meetings in a t-shirt, the lefty rock star who shouts at the Golden Globes This is f------ brilliant. Remember how you labeled Tipper Gore an uptight Puritan after she led the charge against indecent rock lyrics? Well, now youve got a president who is no Puritan."

"Yeah, he's nothing but a reality TV star," they grumble. "He's a braggart and a bully."

"Wait a minute," I reply. "You ate up the braggadocio of Muhammad Ali. And just listen to the liberal ESPN and note how often it showcases trash-talkers and the 'swagger.' Ill take Joe Frazier any day, but you put the strong, silent type away long ago with your Sixties anti-hero."

"Look at how he talked about women on that bus!" they charge.

"C'mon," I remind them, "President Obama toldRolling Stonethat he was hip to the rappers Nas ("see that p----y, they hand it to me") and Lil' Wayne ("I love a cute ho"). And dont forget Maureen DowdsNew York Timescolumn Dirty Words from Pretty Mouths (Feb 28, 2015), which praised female writers and actresses for their own version of male raunchiness. Thats the feminism that said women can be just as sexually aggressive as men.

The Left has forgotten the link between political and cultural liberalism. Political liberalism, broadly speaking, seeks state solutions to private problems. Cultural liberalism operates on one principle: Do your own thing. The error is to believe that the two can remain separate. Liberals thought that they could create a culture of individual freedom, but keep politics on the straight and true line of progressive change. But rampant individualism was bound to erode public manners and mores; we see the moral anarchy of our world every time we turn on the TV. It was inevitable that the deterioration would filter into American politics, too.

Why, then, should people who voted for Donald Trump pay any attention to liberal criticisms of his lifestyle and language, his divorces and reality-TV celebrity? Everything liberal opponents attack him for on cultural grounds could be turned right around on themselves. When Robert De Niro told Brown University graduates that in four years the United States has gone from an inspiring uplifting drama to a tragic dumbass comedy, Trump supporters remembered that Black Lives Matter, Jon Stewart, The View, and a hundred other left-wing voices have never treated America as uplifting and inspiring.

Liberalism has fallen into a position in which it can make few moral arguments against the other side. Thats the real frustration liberals have with President Trump. He is the ultimate realization of liberal cultureand yet he still (rightly) believes in God and country.

Mark Bauerlein is Professor of English at Emory University and Senior Editor at First Things magazine.

View original post here:
Liberalism created Donald Trump - Fox News

Editors Note: This piece was originally published by Acculturated. It is reprinted here with permission.

Everyone knows Donald Trumps approval numbers are in the toilet he has an approval rating of only 37 percent, according to an ABC poll taken a couple of weeks ago but many observers are baffled about why the president still seems to be doing well among evangelicals. Sixty-one percent of them approve of the job the president is doing.

During the election, observers marveled that this voting bloc was willing to rally around a man whose personal life was hardly a model of Christian virtue. But evangelical leaders said it was more important to them to ensure a Supreme Court pick they would like, for example, than to worry about how many times Trump was married or whether he spoke respectfully about other people.

A PRRI poll taken during the election found that more than six in ten (61%) Americans say immoral personal behavior does not preclude public officials from carrying out their public or professional duties with honesty and integrity. And researchers also noted that no group has shifted their position more dramatically than white evangelical Protestants. More than seven in ten (72%) white evangelical Protestants say an elected official can behave ethically even if they have committed transgressions in their personal life a 42-point jump from 2011.

Some might say this is simply political expediency. And I wrote a piece during the election comparing what I saw as the more principled reaction of Mormons to the Trump candidacy compared to evangelicals. But it is odd that Trumps liberal opponents would take evangelicals to task for the divide between their views on a persons personal behavior and public life.

After all, this is what liberals have been advocating for generations that evangelicals should be able to separate these things. From the moment it was decided that prayer no longer belonged in public classrooms, the liberal message to traditional Christians has been that they should keep their beliefs to themselves. That message extended to abortion, where Christians were told that choice was the name of the game. Sure, you have your beliefs, but you cant impose them on others. The same was true for gay marriage and just about every other culture-war issue of the past several decades. Most recently, evangelicals have been told to put aside any personal objections they have to transgender rights and accommodate people of either sex into their bathrooms and locker rooms.

One would think the Left would be celebrating the fact that evangelicals are finally acknowledging that politicians shouldnt be judged by their personal actions (as Democrats argued ad nauseam during President Bill Clintons years in the White House).

Its odd, then, that at the same time liberals have tried to wrest conservative Christians away from their notion that personal beliefs must determine views about public policy, liberals have come to enthusiastically embrace the idea that the personal is political. Its not simply that being a woman now means you have to advocate a feminist agenda that includes abortion on demand. Its that being a racial minority means you should be pushing for less police intervention in low-income neighborhoods and opposition to school choice, among other issues. Abandonment of these policy views is seen as a betrayal of ones personal commitments (not to mention ones race or sex).

Does this mean that liberals will leave evangelicals alone if they return to their roots fighting the culture wars both personally and politically? Not likely. Because if theres anything weve learned from the sanctimonious efforts at resistance coming from the left these days, its that the personal is political only so long as your politics conform to theirs.

Naomi Schaefer Riley is a weekly columnist for the New York Post.

Read the original post:
The Christian Right Is Finally Taking Liberals' Advice - National Review

President Donald Trump speaks during a "Made in America," product showcase featuring items created in each of the U.S. 50 states, at the White House on July 17, 2017, in Washington. Alex Brandon / AP

But with the 2020 election more than 39 months away, what's the hurry?

"The entire Democrat political machine is solely focused on blocking the President's agenda and defeating him and other conservatives in the next two election cycles," said Ed Rollins, lead strategist at Great America PAC. "Given this reality, it's essential for us at Great America PAC to work twice as hard to help ensure the president's short-term success and create a more favorable environment for his re-election campaign."

By early May, these super PACs had together

Another pro-Trump super PAC active in 2017 is Rebuilding America Now, which reported income of $1.15 million during the first half of 2017 almost all coming in the form of "media." The PAC has largely spent its cash on food, travel, legal fees, and $35,000 a month to one of the

Meanwhile, Ronald Weiser, founder of architecture firm McKinley Associates, gave

Florida-based America First Agenda, yet another new pro-Trump super PAC,

Make America Number 1, the pro-Trump PAC

Future45, another pro-Trump super PAC largely funded last year by casino magnate Sheldon Adelson and Linda McMahon, who Trump appointed to head the Small Business Administration, secured $105,000 from only two sources so far in 2017.

Nearly all the money this year, $102,500, came from super PAC Liberty 2.0,

More here:
Pro-Trump Super PACs Already Have Edge Over Liberals in 2018 ... - NBCNews.com

As the BC Liberals move into the unfamiliar confines of opposition, theyll have to choose who best will lead them

The final act in this years bizarre political drama played out last week with the resignation of former Premier Christy Clark.

Looking relaxed, and frankly relieved, she told reporters Monday, I am done with public life.

Her resignation comes at the end of a tumultuous few months: The election of a minority government; the assemblage of a partnership between the Greens and the NDP; a bizarre Liberal throne speech; and a final non-confidence vote that prompted Lt.-Gov. Judith Guichon to call on NDP leader John Horgan to form the next government.

Since then Clark has been noticeable by her absence.

So, while many expressed shock and surprise by her announcement Friday, it wasnt all that surprising.

It was unlikely that the BC Liberals were going to fight the next election with Clark at the helm. There was too much baggage, and too much bitterness for her to regain the confidence of the electorate.

As she said Monday, the party needs renewal and this is the best time for that to take place.

Both the NDP and the Green Party will want to consolidate their gains (and replenish their war chests) before heading into the next election. Horgan and the NDP will want to score some quick wins before presenting a throne speech this fall that can put into action the years of promises theyve made.

The Greens will want time to demonstrate they are a viable option not just an alternative.

The Liberals, meanwhile, need to rebuild. Not only must they replace key players lost in the last election, they must decide what kind of party they want to be. Their strength has always come from uniting divergent right-of-centre perspectives. Thats easier done when you are in power. However, that unity is harder to maintain from the opposition benches.

Perhaps thats why Clark was looking so relieved.

See more here:
Heavy lifting ahead for BC Liberals - Surrey Now-Leader

Former Surrey mayor Dianne Watts, the Conservative MP for South Surrey - White Rock, in the Commons. In the provincial Liberal party, the right-wing is arguing it is their turn to hold the leadership and hopes to recruit Watts. But others in the party say it is time for a leader from outside Metro Vancouver. Bernard Thibodeau House of Commons / Vancouver Sun

VICTORIA The race to succeed Christy Clark was just getting underway last week when I began hearing from Liberal party members why such and such a contender was a poor choice for the leadership.

Target: Todd Stone, the Kamloops MLA and recent minister of transportation and infrastructure.

Objection: Poor communicator. Ticked off Metro Vancouver with his clumsy handling of tolling policy and the transit referendum. And remember that brief flap in the 2013 campaign over him not displaying Christy Clark or the party name in large-enough type on his election signs?

Next up: Andrew Wilkinson, Vancouver MLA and former minister of advanced education.

Objection: Smartest guy in the room just ask him. Overbearing. Not ready for the world beyond Cambie Street, never mind upcountry.

Before the weekend was out, the dissing was in full swing among Liberals.

Jas Johal, rookie MLA from Richmond: Who does he think he is anyway? Just joined the flock and already wants to be shepherd.

Mike Bernier, Peace River. Lightweight, indecisive.

Mike de Jong, Abbotsford, ex-finance minister: Short-changed the party election platform, best-before date long gone.

Kevin Falcon, second place in last leadership: No time for Liberals to play back to the future.

Rich Coleman and George Abbott: ditto and ditto, though by the time the partys trash-talkers got around to them, theyd already taken themselves out of the running.

All in all, the first round of recriminations served to confirm an observation by B.C. journalism legend Bruce Hutchison: You can learn to dislike anyone in politics but for those feelings to develop into full-blown hatred, the person will usually be a rival for power and position within your own party.

Already, too, one can see a couple of fracture lines emerging, one factional, the other geographical.

The B.C. Liberals are one party, albeit including people with roots in the federal Conservative and Liberal parties, as well as the old B.C. Reform and Social Credit provincial parties.

Between elections, the parts work well comparatively together, particularly if the party is in power. But when the leadership is open, the components tend to come unstuck.

The leadership race in 2011 came down to a showdown between Christy Clark, whod come up through in the federal Liberal party and its old provincial counterpart,and Kevin Falcon, whose connections were all federal Conservative and provincial Socred.

Clark edged Falcon by about four percentage points in the popular vote and afterward had to work hard to staple the two halves of the coalition back together.

She did so with assistance from prominent Conservatives, including former federal cabinet ministers Stockwell Day and Jay Hill, longtime provincial Socred and federal Tory John Reynolds, and then prime minister Stephen Harper himself.

The effort helped put the party on a winning footing in the 2013 election. But with Clark now giving up the leadership after blowing the government majority in this years election, some of the Conservatives in B.C. Liberal ranks are saying it is time to put one of their own into the leadership.

Thats not the only factor with those who discount Todd Stone and Andrew Wilkinson, both of whose roots are on the Liberal side of the party equation.

But Tory proclivities do account for the push to recruit former Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts, now serving as a federal Conservative MP.

Another Tory name to conjure with is retired MP and former cabinet minister James Moore, now a business consultant, policy adviser and chancellor of the University of Northern B.C. The still-youthful Moore (hes 41) quit politics in 2015 in part because of the precarious health of his infant son and for personal reasons, so may not be in a position to return to the arena.

The other potential dividing line in the Liberal leadership is urban-rural or to be more precise, candidates from Metro Vancouver versus those from the North and Interior.

Since Kelownas Bill Bennett retired as premier 30 years ago, the office has been inhabited for all but a few months by leaders whose home base was Metro Vancouver, including two former mayors of the city itself.

Another group of Liberals making the its our turn argument are from the North and Interior, where the party added to its strength in the recent election even as it lost nine seats and four cabinet ministers in and around Vancouver.

Others argue that far from going with a leader like Stone or Bernier from regions where the party is already well entrenched, Liberals should pick a candidate like Watts or Johal from a region where the party lost ground this year.

Based on the formula set out in the party constitution, the Northern and Interior ridings will have about 28 per cent of the voting strength at the convention, the Island and Coast should get 17 per cent, and the rest, about 55 per cent in total, will be allocated to the Lower Mainland and Fraser Valley. In that regard at least, Metro would appear to have the edge.

But its too soon to say how all this will shake out. The two dozen or so members of the partys governing executive have yet to meet to set all the membership and voting rules and date for a convention that is expected to be held early in the new year.

Until then, speculation and recriminations will rule the day.

vpalmer@vancouversun.com

Go here to see the original:
Vaughn Palmer: Fault lines show as BC Liberals slag own potential leaders - Vancouver Sun