Mediaboss Marketing

Retired army general Jim Molan, who is an architect of the governments border policies, said other Liberal party state divisions were doing better than NSW because their constitution allowed forms of plebiscites. Photograph: Dan Peled/AAP

Preselection candidate and retired major general Jim Molan has dared the New South Wales Liberal party to expel him by speaking publicly to broadcaster Alan Jones.

Ordinary Liberal party members are not entitled to speak in public on party matters but his comments come as the party prepares for a bruising fight at the weekend futures convention to discuss the partys constitution.

An architect of the governments border policies, Molan is one of a number of high-profile members who accuse the moderate or left faction, including the former NSW minister turned lobbyist Michael Photios, of wielding too much power in the party.

They are turning up the heat in a campaign to win support for the Warringah motion, hatched in Tony Abbotts seat by his federal electorate conference president, Walter Villatora. Abbott has spoken out in favour of reform since losing the leadership. A former member, John Ruddick, has predicted a split if the rule change does not happen.

John Howard originally proposed the rule change in a review of the party after he lost government and has since backed the change. Other high-profile supporters include the monarchist and legal academic David Flint and the assistant cities minister, Angus Taylor, who says people are regularly barred from joining the party in order for powerbrokers to maintain control.

If passed and accepted by the partys governing body, the state executive, the Warringah motion would give ordinary members a vote in local preselections for all MPs and office bearers.

Molan said while he respected the prime minister and the premier, the members had a right to seize back the party.

This party is not owned by the prime minister, its not owned by the premier or elected parliamentarians, much less its not owned by factions, its owned by us, the members, Molan said. There is a great old military philosophy of what you walk past you condone.

Tony Abbott urged Liberal members to vote for the Warringah motion because the NSW party had too many lobbyists and factional warlords.

That means one member one vote for all positions, particularly the preselection of candidates because at the moment weve got too many lobbyists, too many factional warlords who are pulling the strings, Abbott told 2GB.

We dont want our party to in any way resemble the faceless men of the Labor party and if we want the Liberal party to be a better party, I think weve got to get out there on Sunday in particular, and vote for one member one vote.

Molan urged Malcolm Turnbull and the NSW premier, Gladys Berejiklian, to use their authority to ensure there were no last-minute motions and that the conference was conducted fairly. Turnbull has previously supported more open preselections in NSW.

Fifteen-hundred members have registered for the event where the prime minister will speak on Saturday and the premier on Sunday.

It begins with a party state council meeting on Friday night, followed by a day of debate before the motions are discussed on Sunday.

After a video on what it means to be Liberal, debate topics include Future challenges and Does gender really matter? On Saturday afternoon, members will discuss how the party can remain relevant, winning back the youth from the left, social media in modern campaigning as well as preselection.

Opponents of the change in preselection rules suggest it will lead to branch stacking. The Liberal backbencher Julian Leeser and the assistant immigration minister, Alex Hawke, have suggested compromise motions that impose waiting periods before members can vote, activity tests and a grandfather clause to protect sitting members. Both MPs have been contacted for comment.

Molan described alternative motions as the plebiscite you are having when you are not having democracy.

Its not a play to replace the current lobbyist influence, leftwing faction with a rightwing faction, Molan said. All factions within this party over the last number of years have been as bad as each other.

Molan said other Liberal state divisions were doing better than NSW because their constitution allowed forms of plebiscites.

If it was a fair contest, one person one vote, we will get through this contest no problem at all because it is what the people want, Molan said. Brave elected members of parliament who have worked for their people over time should have nothing to fear by sitting in front of their people and saying vote for me.

The NSW Liberal party was contacted for comment.

See more here:
Jim Molan dares NSW Liberals to expel him by speaking to Alan Jones - The Guardian

All women are witches would be a truly provocative premise. But what is a witch in 2017? The author of Witches, Sluts, Feminists: Conjuring the Sex Positive, dishes up different definitions, framing a witch-as-everywoman thesis to suit the modern day feminista. The witch is less a sorceress driven by the Devil or a terrible crone from a Russian folktale, more a politically engaged Pagan with a tumblr account. Author Kristen Sollee of Slutist.com earlier reclaimed slut for the womens movement but she didnt stop there! Sollee settles on a vague and inoffensive meaning of witch, n.: embodiment of a powerful femininity rooted in the earth, which transcends patriarchal influence. And her storyahem, herstorystarts with the sacred whores of Mesopotamian temples and culminates with Hillary Clintons presidential campaign.

An unbroken chain of nasty women joins the modern slut, who shalt not be shamed, to the witch, whos been maligned for millennia. (The witchs broom? Not just a broom, Sollee winks.) Her titular sex-positivity is about as subtle as the Slut Walks her website sponsors, vaguely political displays in which scantily clad hipsters take to the streets, daring the people of Santa Cruz to objectify them. And then a tenuous transition from the chapter Hillary Clinton: Wicked Witch of the Left to a celebration of the slut as the witch of the twenty-first century sets the archetype at war with itself.

Clinton, while no friend to the loose woman, came to own her witchery through frequent comparisons to Hermione Granger, the studious tryhard of young adult fiction fame. Vermont senator Bernie Sanders, whom Clinton beat by one type of black magic, hosted a link on his official website to a donors Bern the Witch fundraiser until a Clinton supporter complained and the Sanders campaign removed it. Shes a witch with a capital B, to Rush Limbaugh. Compared to the ubiquitous b word, Witch adds an element of supernatural evil that has no male equivalent in common use, writes Sollee.

This is the archetypal witch that sowed deadly paranoia in Salem circa 1692 and helped propel Stevie Nicks dark desirability. The essence of witchinessnow relieved of dark age superstition and the incumbent death sentence when a witch was discoveredstill evokes a secret, something shrouded in taboo and therefore unspeakably cool. Stevie Nicks wrote Rhiannon about an old Welsh witch, dresses in billowy capes and black velvet, and called her first solo album Bella Donna (otherwise known as sorcerers berry,) the plant belladonna brews a sinister sleeping potion). She denies rumors that shes a practicing pagan, and she wasnt oppressed by the patriarchy in any well-known way (although Sollee suggests otherwise without explanation, thickly worrying that she and other 1960s and 70s rockers allied themselves with witchcraft in a time when doing so was dangerous, and could even threaten their creative careers); Nicks was and is a performer who gives the people what they want, without giving too much away.

Sollee gets closest to the central contradiction in a meditation on the witch-slut dichotomy as a matter of concealment by degrees. She quotes fashion historian Valerie Steele on the attraction of concealment, as Sigmund Freud and Casanova knew it, and the neo-Victorian aesthetic [of] having the body all covered, draped in a mercurial black. Both sluts and witches thrive in high fashion. What distinguishes a slut from a witch? While more fabric often means more witchy, leaving less to the imagination is the sluts job. The slut lays bares what the witch keeps hidden. Denuding the witch demystifies her, and stripping away the mystique that made witchery alluring in the first place debases her to slut statuswhich, for the slutwalking sisterhood, is one kind of victory. Bur undressing witchy women, what Sollee aims to do, wont dent an historical sexism already in steep decline.

A commitment to intersectionality is non-negotiable, Sollee clarifies early on. But in one not so intersectional instance, Sollee invites us to look for the heiresses to Salems survivors among our sisters, How many of us are the granddaughters of the witches they could not burn? No skin off my nose, but surely only the WASPiest witches can trace their matrilineage to Cotton Mathers Massachusetts. Insistence on a trans-inclusive intersectional redefinition of witch in the age of social justice contortionism further confuses the witch-as-everywoman ideal: This book specifically looks at the indivisible links between the witch, femininity, and womanhoodwhich includes trans women and anyone on the feminine spectrumand the persecution women have faced as a result of their perceived connection with witchcraft.

There are now more women out there than ever casting spells and doing spooky things with pentagrams, apparently. Technology is just another tool at my magickal disposal. If I can conjure spirits with an old root and a circle of salt, why not through a website? witch Melissa Madara told Sollee in a survey. Internet witches hexed President Trump earlier this year in a spellcasting campaign to bind his harmful agenda and drive him from office. Amid the mercurial topography of the arduous journey toward gender equality, stands the witch, a beacon in blackand a loutish president has revived the call, Sollee writes. Trump tweets, meanwhile, about investigations into his administration's ties to the Putin regime as a witch hunt. Appropriating witchery is another problem, the unpacking of which leads our author to the broader commercial appropriation of a mercantile feminism marked by mass-produced This Is What a Feminist Looks Like t-shirtsand the ethical imperative that witch-identifying women use their magic toward anti-capitalist ends. (Although if I were a witch, I think Id use my powers to turn a profit.)

Its also clear that the archetypal witchs dark mystery shares an etiology with what Betty Friedan in 1963s Feminine Mystique called the problem that has no name. Whenever women collude, however inconsequentially, we get to enjoy a semblance of covenish conspiracy. And wherever women are excluded from public life, their sisterly camaraderie gleans an aura of mystery from menssometimes fatalsuspicions. (Women are still persecuted for sorcery in nations where superstition trumps gender equality.) Imagining devilry at the root of whatever escapes his understanding, man conjured the witch.

Excepting the occultists, the Wiccans, the truly weird, witchiness for most women can be a fashion choice or an otherworldly quality observed in an otherwise normal acquaintancemy grade school art teacher, for example. (Witches were also called intuitives," Sollee notes the euphemism multiple times.) Women dont go around worrying if their witchiness is showing, but if the witch in all of us remains, its still something of a secret. A wisp of wildness, the thread of a confusing Virginia Woolf passage slipping ecstatically away from sense and order, a womans wandering mind straining to catch up with itself. Progressive gender discourse prefers to deny indivisible gender, but according to Witches, Sluts, Feminists: Conjuring the Sex Positive, womens untraceable transcendent powercall it what you willhas persisted through millennia of persecution. Heres betting itll outlast the Trump administration, and the gender fluidity fad too.

Follow this link:
Liberals Love Witches - The Weekly Standard

In approving a $5.3 billion transportation package, Oregons state legislature passed the first bike tax in the nation. And in a state thats known for its cycling culture, its not sitting well with riders or sellers.

If Democratic Gov. Kate Brown signs the legislation, as shes expected to, a $15 tax on the sale of adult-sized bikes valued over $200 will go into effect Jan. 1, 2018.

The tax will be collected at the time of sale and will go toward projects that expand and improve commuter routes for nonmotorized vehicles and pedestrians.

Even still, cyclists arent happy.

BikePortland publisher Jonathan Maus called it an unprecedented step in the wrong direction.

We are taxing the healthiest, most inexpensive, most environmentally friendly, most efficient and most economically sustainable form of transportation ever devised by the human species, Mr. Maus said.

Oregon Republican Party Chairman Bill Currier blasted what he described as Ms. Browns endless obsession with finding new and innovative ways to take money out of the pockets of Oregon taxpayers.

She just continues to view the people of her state as nothing more than a piggy bank to fund her efforts to impose job-killing policies, said Mr. Currier in a statement. Now add anti-healthy, environmentally-unfriendly policies to that list. (The Washington Times)

Supporters note that there is no sales tax in Oregon so its not as though riders will be hit twice at the register.

Other proponents of the tax argue bikers arent paying their fair share.

Democratic state Rep. Earl Blumenauer defended the tax on bikes, for example, telling BikePortland that its a modest fee in the overall infrastructure package.

One of the arguments we hear repeatedly is that cyclists dont have any skin in the game so theres been blowback, Blumenauer said.

I hope people will take a look at the big picture and see how it all evolves and realize that if were going to be players in the bike/ped space, its important to be part of the whole process, he added.

Even The New York Times Noticed the Dems' Obstructionism

Read the original post:
Liberals vs. Liberals: Oregon's Bike Tax Isn't Going Over Well Among Riders - Townhall

OTTAWA Conservative and New Democrat members of Parliament want a trio of federal ministers to appear before a Commons committee immediately to outline Canada's priorities for upcoming NAFTA renegotiation.

The MPs from both opposition parties are jointly sending a letter to the clerk of the international trade committee today, requesting that a meeting be held.

Their request follows the release Monday of the U.S. government's goals for the next iteration of the deal, an 18-page overview which, among other things, calls for better access for American products and services in both Canada and Mexico.

The MPs want to hear a similar statement of priorities from the Liberals, specifically from the ministers of International Trade, Foreign Affairs and Finance, as well as Canada's chief negotiator for the North American Free Trade Agreement talks.

But while U.S. law requires that administration to disclose negotiation objectives, the same obligation does not exist for the Canadian government.

The Liberal government is currently accepting input from the public on a renegotiated deal, asking what elements of NAFTA should be preserved, what should be improved and what new issues need to be addressed to modernize the 23-year-old agreement.

Read the original post:
Tories, NDP MPs Want Liberals To Outline Canada's NAFTA Priorities To Trade Committee - Huffington Post Canada

Last weeks bombshell report from the New York Times was unlike the majority of purported bombshells about the Russia scandal over the past six months wholly deserving of the round-the-clock coverage it received from the media. The report provided the most damning evidence yet that members of the Trump campaign were at the very least willing to coordinate with individuals ostensibly associated with the Russian government in order to defeat Hillary Clinton.

More than a year after the fact, the Times revealed lastTuesdaythat Donald Trump Jr. held a meeting last summer with someone who he was told was a Russian government attorney who possessed official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia. The meeting, which was attended by Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort along with a lobbyist and former Soviet counterintelligence officer,according to NBC News has the makings of a major scandal.

Even if the various accounts of the meeting are true i.e., that the lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, had no meaningful information and quickly changed the subject this doesnt change the fact that the presidents eldest son accepted a meeting with someone who was allegedly part of the Russian governments effort to meddle in the U.S. presidential election. As conservative writer David French writesin National Review:

Yes, it is a big deal when senior representatives of an American presidential campaign meet with a purported representative of a hostile foreign power for the purpose of cooperating in that foreign powers effort to influence an American presidential campaign.

Though the Trump-Russia collusion narrative still warrants skepticism, anyone who still maintains that Russiagate is fake news after this latest report is either deluding themselves or deliberately lying or perhaps both. The Russia scandal is very real, and it has been clear for some time now that Putins government meddled in the presidential election by hacking emails from the Democratic National Committee and John Podesta, chair of Hillary Clintons campaign.

What has long been unclear (and remains doubtful), however, is whether the Trump camp had any kind of involvement with this effort notwithstanding feverish speculation from Democrats. We still dont know whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government (Veselnitskaya was not, after all, a Russian government attorney), the latest revelation about Donald Trump Jr. leaves no doubt that the Trump camp was capable of such acontemptible act.

The implications of the New York Times expos are clear enough, but it wouldnt be a Russiagate story without being followed by some hyperbolic allegations of treason. Many liberals seized on the report not only as proof that the Trump campaign acted unethically and maybe unlawfully, but that Trump Jr. had actually betrayed his country. We are now beyond obstruction of justice,saidSen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, Hillary Clintons former running mate. This is moving into perjury, false statements and even potentially treason. Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass., meanwhile,tweeted: If this isnt treasonous, Im not sure what is.

Of course, as just about every law expert has pointed out, there isno proofthat Trump Jr. actually committed treason, and claiming that he did is going well beyond any available evidence. Although the presidents oldest sonpotentially violated campaign finance laws,there is still no evidence that he or his father or anyone else within the Trump camp are traitors who deliberately aided the Russians.

Indeed, if this incident has proven anything conclusively it is not that Trump and company are collaborators in a vast Russian conspiracy, but that Trump and company are some of the dumbest and most politically incompetent individuals ever to set foot in the White House. As Anthony Fisher observesin The Week:Far from being cunning uber-villains of Machiavellian genius straight out of a James Bond film, [Trump insiders] are in fact clumsy buffoons, prone to taking meetings under shady pretenses and failing miserably at keeping their stories straight afterward.

Former undercover KGB agent Jack Barsky had asimilar take,noting that watching the Trump presidency is like watching a Bugs Bunny cartoon with Daffy Duck in charge. Trumps advisers, he continued, are fundamentally unable to tie their own shoelaces.

On Wednesday, the top buffoonrespondedto the latest controversy surrounding his son by calling it a political witch hunt, andthen suggested that Russian President Vladimir Putin would actually have preferred Clinton over him as president.If Hillary had won, our military would be decimated, said Trump. Thats why I say, why would he want me? Because from day one I wanted a strong military, he doesnt want to see that.

The reason why Putin wanted Trump to win, of course, is because he recognized that the billionaire was an incompetent clown who could be easily manipulated andthat he would likely destroy the United States global reputationand turnthe country into a pariah state. So far, President Trump has not disappointed. According to a recent Pewsurveythat spanned 37 countries, Americas global image has plummeted over the past year, and a median of just 22 percent of respondents have confidence in Trump to do the right thing when it comes to international affairs, compared to 64 percent in the final years of Barack Obamas presidency. Trump received significantly lower ratings in every single country except for surprise Russia and Israel.

Last week the Australian journalistChrisUhlmanndescribedTrump at the G20 summit in Hamburg as isolated and friendless, notingthat he has managed to isolate his nation, to confuse and alienate his allies and to diminish America. Our president,Uhlmann continued, haspressed fast-forward on the decline of the United States as a global leader.

This is all doubtlesstrue: The Trump administrationhas done moreto diminishAmericas standingin the world over the past six monthsthan Putin could have ever hoped for.But all thisprovesis that Trumpis an ignorant and incompetent buffoon whosereactionary agendais disastrousfor America. Andthe latest revelations about Donald Trump Jr. only provethat he is as clueless, incompetent and ethically challenged as his father.

Go here to read the rest:
Sorry, liberals: Donald Trump Jr. didn't commit treason he's just incompetent - Salon