Mediaboss Marketing

Happy to return home after after damage to an Oroville Dam spillway in California prompted a massive evacuation, residents remain alert in case they are ordered to leave their homes once again. (Feb. 15) AP

Signs on a fence in Oroville urge residents to support secession and the creation of a new state, the State of Jefferson. Due to northern California's low population, the area has only six state-level representatives, compared to 114 for the southern half of the state, which is home to populous cities like Los Angeles.(Photo: Trevor Hughes/USA TODAY)

OROVILLE, Calif. Eldon Hofeling raises his voice over the roar of backhoes, helicopters, tumbling rocks, dump trucks and 750,000 gallons of water rushing past every second.

Its driving me nuts,hesays.

Steps away from his house, hundreds of contractors are struggling to repair the Oroville Dam before the spring rains arrive in earnest. A stream of semi-trailers unloads chunks of rocks, which backhoes then load onto large dump trucks to deliver to weak spots on the other side of the dam. Helicopters chatter overhead every 90 seconds, lifting in even more rocks to shore up the dams top. Diesel engines rumble day and night, contractors bark orders and neighbors wander by to take a look.

Every bedroom window in Hofeling's house looks out over the dam, at what is now a staging area. Contractors told him this repair effort could last weeks.

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

The mere threat of a dam failurelast weekwas enough to temporarily evacuate about 200,000 people living downstream. And a collapse could cause death and devastation in both the short- and long-term: This reservoir stores water to irrigate downstream farms and provide drinking water for Los Angeles.

Residents here in Oroville, Marysville and Yuba City are now living with the fresh knowledge that maybe this dam isnt as safe as they thought. That fact thatthe water benefits people hundreds of miles away from this danger isreverberating around these conservative communities that see little commongroundwith the far more liberal Californians on the coastand in Silicon Valley.

This isnt just idle talk: One of the first signs heading into Oroville, population 16,000, urges residents to support seceding from California to create a new state of Jefferson. Here in inland California, Gov. Jerry Browns name evokes disgust, and President Donald Trump is seen as the one who really cares. Here, residents distrust a state government they think is all-too-eager to help undocumented immigrants and build a bullet train to serve the rich coastal elites, leaving them with little.

I bet that if they put this effort into building it right the first time, they wouldnt have to do all of this, Hofeling, 66, saysas a backhoe drops rocks into a dump truck, shaking the ground.

Its a refrain voiced time and again in Oroville and the surrounding towns: The liberal, more populated parts of California suck up all the political attention and public dollars, leaving little for the men and women who help grow the nations food, fruits and nuts. That dichotomy has bred a mistrust of state government and a healthy skepticism of federal officials, Trump excepted.

How is it, the people here ask, that state and federal officials didnt seem to have the money to properly fix the dams problems when they were first identified, but have seemingly untold millions available when the crisis finally arrived.

To understand the situation, you have to look more carefully at Californias voting tallies. Statewide, Hillary Clinton clobbered Trump, winning 61% of the popular vote and 4.2 million more votes than Trump. On one hand, this is a state that utterly rejected Trump. On the other hand, because California is so big, theres wide variation in political affiliations.

Eldon Hofeling watches contractors load rocks being used to repair the Oroville Dam. The work continues 24 hours a day, making it hard for Hoteling and his wife to sleep in their own home. "I bet that if they put this effort into building it right the first time, they wouldn't have to do this," he says.(Photo: Trevor Hughes/USA TODAY)

The farmers and ranchers of Butte County, surrounding Oroville, live vastly different lives than the millionaires strolling Santa Monicas beaches or riding the Google buses to Mountain View or the Facebook coaches to Menlo Park. Butte County favored Trump in the election 46% to 42%, despite the presence of the more urban and traditionally more liberal Chico within its boundaries. Downstream neighbor Yuba County, home of Yuba City and Marysville, is perhaps a more accurate barometer: It went for Trump at nearly 58%.

In this part of the state, Brown is the bad guy for picking fights with the president over immigration, climate change and national priorities. Trump, in turn, called California out of control and suggested he might try to withhold federal funding, particularly over whether the more liberal coastal cities were acting as sanctuaries for undocumented immigrants.

As you know, Im very much opposed to sanctuary cities. They breed crime. Theres a lot of problems, Trump told Fox News host Bill OReilly. If we have to, well defund. We give tremendous amounts of money to California. California in many ways is out of control, as you know.

Brown, for his part, has lauded Trump for promising to repair the nations roads, bridges and dams, but has also promised to use the states scientists, lawyers and resources to fight the presidents alternative facts.

The bad blood has flowed downstream, from the retired homebuilder who trusts Trump over the locally managed state Division of Water Resources, to the traffic flagger who laughs that liberal environmentalists arent worried about rare fish when their own homes are endangered, to the evacuee who refuses to return home or be quoted by name because she doesnt trust what the government will do with the information.

A rainbow arches above the Feather River where it crosses beneath power lines beneath the Oroville Dam. Workers severed the lines during the flooding fear, worried that a flood could rip out both lines and towers, causing even more damage.(Photo: Trevor Hughes/USA TODAY)

Everyonehere, it seems, has a reason to distrust some level of the government. Nowhere was that more evident than when a video showing a National Guard soldier giving out wrong information about the state of the dam and evacuation began ricocheting around social media hours after the evacuation order was lifted. What he said contradicted the official line from dam managers, and the public seemed ready to accept his version over theirs, especially as some Californians already believed dam managers had covered up the extent of repair work conducted in 2009.

Dam managers say theyre making good progress on repairing the damage caused when the reservoir overtopped its emergency spillway, scouring away trees, dirt and boulders. Managers had feared the emergency spillway could collapse, sending a wall of water downstream. That threat has eased, and workers are now shoring up the spillway and removing debris from below the dam.

Still, social media has been filled with rampant rumors and speculation that government officials were misstating the risk for some political gain, and theres skepticism bordering on paranoia that the real story isnt being told by the media or the government.

We have this longstanding history in our country, based on the idea that people control the government, not the other way around, said Butte County Sheriff Kory Honea, who ordered the evacuation and then spent days defending it against critics on both sides of the aisle.

Wading into that political tension are the state and federal emergency-management agencies trying to help.

Basically, theyre like dont mess with us. We dont need youuntil we need you, said Craig Fugate, the head of FEMA under President Obama. You have to understand that level of mistrust. Its not personal.

Fugate said the political dynamic in California mirrors that of many states, from his native Florida to the urban-rural divide of Washington state. The Oroville Dams potential failure could have been the first major test of the relationship between Trump and outspokencritic Brown, who after opposing the president asked him to declare a disaster in Oroville.

An engineer with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers monitors water spilling from the Oroville Dam. The dam is controlled by the California Division of Water Resources, but the Army Corps of Engineers was providing assistance in monitoring and developing repair plans.(Photo: Trevor Hughes/USA TODAY)

Without addressing the conflict, Trump quickly approved the request via FEMA, freeing up potentially hundreds of millions of dollars and resources to pay for the repairs that are now disturbing Hofelings days and nights. Ballpark costs for repairs are set at $200 million.

I learned early on that all disasters are local, as all politics are local, Fugate said. You drop your logos and your egos at the door this is not about you, this is not about your ego, your publicity. Its about the people we are serving in a time of need. Because that need is a non-political need.

In Oroville, few people see it that way. Everyone gets run through the lens of politics. Theyre mad about Browns election (Gov. Moonbeam, they remind visitors), his plans for a high-speed train along the coast, and about the meddling of government in the ways they heat their homes, get their electricity and the kinds of cars they drive.

They feel the dams managers only respond to crises and only when they impact Democratic voters on the coast. And theyre heartened that Trump has vowed to rebuild the nations infrastructure on Saturday night at arally in Florida, he called upon Congress to pass a $1 trillion infrastructure package.

For the people beneath the dam, the fact that no Trump-Brown feud materialized is an example of the new presidents munificence. But theyre also well aware that things could have gone very differently here.Its very frustrating, says 23-year police officer and Oroville resident Jeff Wiles, as he watched the emergency repair work with his son. It just irritates you.

Wiles worked several days straight during the evacuation as police officers, sheriffs deputies and the California Highway Patrol emptied the Butte County Jail and then flooded the town with officers to prevent burglaries and looting. Wiles says he looks forward to retirement in a few years, so he can move his family, maybe to Idaho, to be among fellow conservatives. Hes tired, he says, of living in a state so split between Democrats and Republicans.

You tell the president, we dont want anything to do with you, and then you ask for help? Wiles says. At least hes not holding a grudge. I wouldnt blame him if he did.

Silhouetted by the afternoon sun, a civilian version of a military Blackhawk helicopter flies back to a work yard next to the Oroville Dam.(Photo: Trevor Hughes/USA TODAY)

Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/2lk9J4w

Read the rest here:
Oroville Dam exposes rift between conservative town, coastal liberals - USA TODAY

[Warning: Post contains some strong language]

Okayso it wasnt an explosive interview. There wasnt much drama. Nothing was set on fire. And no lives were lost. It was a cordial discussion between two people with opposing views. HBO host Bill Maher invited Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos, where the discussion was mostly rooted in both mens support for free speech rights. Maher also said that he cared about the "environment and living" as well, taking a swipe at the conservative movements aversion to supporting policies to combat climate change.

The comedian brought up that both of themwere run out of the Berkley campus, albeit the reaction to Yiannopoulos led to violet protests, $100,000 in property, and an FBI investigation into the matter. Milo later noted that Bill literally is the only good liberal left that respects free speech rights and discusses Islamic extremism honestly.

Milo noted how the Democratic Party and the liberal movement has gone insane, Lena Dunham is the face of the partywhich he notes will only lead to that party getting less votes (one could hope) in future elections.

Lets not pick on fellow HBO stars, said Maher.

Yet, another area they found agreementwas comedy and humor, which has become avictim of the political correctness police. Milo noted that this form of progressivism is wholly authoritarian, hence they must more or less silencehumor because its unpredictable. They hate that.Maher agreed.

And also because when people laugh, they know its true, he said.

As we wrote previously,The Intercepts Jeremy Scahill was booked for Fridays episode of Real Time, but backed outwhen he found out Milo was a guest. Yiannopoulos aptly noted that when you dont show up, you lose the debatewhich drew applause from the audience. Maher had issued a statement defending his booking of Milo, notingthat these anti-free speech antics is one the reasons why liberals will keep losing elections.

And also stop taking the bait, liberals, said Maher. The fact that they all freaked out about this little impish British fag, you fucking schoolgirls. You schoolgirls. Of course, Milo relished this, agreeing with the HBOhostwith chuckles of laughter.Its so ridiculous, he replied.

Yet,Maher and Milo disagreed about theBlack Lives Matter movement, Twitter trolls, and other comedians, namely Sarah Silverman and Amy Schumer, but closed his interview by saying that Mio should get off the Trump train.

For a guy who loves free speech, you picked a weird boyfriend, my friend, said Maher. Milo tried to defend the president, but they were out of time.

During Overtime, which airs online after the show, comedian Larry Wilmore, who was a panel guest, took the bait, telling Milo to go fuck himself over his opinion about Leslie Jones, the star of the disastrous Ghostbusters remake, and for calling him, along with former intelligence operative Malcolm Nance, another guestawful and stupid. Former Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) was the conservative guest for the shows panel, but more or less opted to let Milo, Bill and Larry go at it.

The question that got caused the tension centered on the Breitbart editor going after a transgendered personat a college, who he says fought for the right to use the womens locker room after this person had left the school.

I dont have a problem with it [a biologically born male thinking hes female], but I think women and girls should be protected from having peoplemen who are confused about their sexual identities in their bathrooms, said Milo.

Thats not unreasonable, replied Maher.

So, at the beginning of the show, where Milo and Maher talked about liberals taking the bait, Larry Wilmore tookthe bait.

Go here to see the original:
Bill Maher And Breitbart Editor Agreed That Liberals Take The Bait, Which Was Confirmed When Liberal Guest...Took ... - Townhall

Saturday Night Live continued to skewer Kellyanne Conway this weekend, referencing reports that CNN had temporarily refused to have her on-air because of credibility issues. But the shows Fatal Attraction-inspired skit went too far for some, with several prominent pundits denouncingit as sexist or uncomfortable.

In the skit, Kellyanne Conway, played by Kate McKinnon, breaks into Jake Tappers home in a negligee and robe, menacing him with a knife and pleading to be booked on the show.

She licks his face and says she wants that hot, black mic pressed up against my skin. Chasing Beck Bennetts Tapper around the apartment, Conway also says, You need to reach inside me, and you need to pull out the truth.

Olivia Nuzzi, who covers Trump for New York Magazine, called the skit sexist, unfunny and a gift to the White House.

Prediction: the White House will use that sexist skit to dismiss all criticisms of Conway and lying more broadly, Nuzzi tweeted on Saturday night. Casting Kellyanne Conway as Glenn Close was a miscalculation on SNLs part. Will be interpreted as unfair and mean to a wife and mother.

Jonathan Capehart, who writes for the Washington Post, said on Twitter that he was not sure about that Kellyanne skit, and Andrea Mitchell responded, Agree. Not Right.

The next morning, real-life Tapper responded with a concise, Um.

Conway, too, referenced the skit in a Tweet, saying she and Tapper spoke this morning just before brunch time. No boiling bunnies on the menu.

Even before theFatal Attractionskit, SNLs portrayal of Conway raised some eyebrows from conservatives. Writing forNational Review,Carrie Lucas (full disclosure: shes a colleague of mine atthe Independent Womens Forum) criticized the show for repeatedly skewering her.

SNL depicts Conwaythe president of a successful polling company she launched at age 29as an airhead, publicity-hound and gold digger, Lucas wrote.

Jillian Kay Melchior writes for Heat Street and is a fellow for the Steamboat Institute and the Independent Womens Forum.

Read the original here:
Even Liberals Were Irked by SNL's 'Sexist' Kellyanne Conway Skit - Heat Street

Warning: this article contains dance moveswhich may offend.

The WA Liberals held their campaign launch on Sunday, and with recent polling suggesting the party is back in the election race, it seemedthe candidates decided it was time to let their hair down... well, sort of.

Play Video Don't Play

Play Video Don't Play

Previous slide Next slide

It's been called the highlight of the WA state election, the WA Liberals dancing to Daft Punk's One More Time. Vision: Nine News Perth.

Play Video Don't Play

Parents have begun pulling their children out of a Perth primary school after discovering an 11-year-old male student raped an eight-year-old boy at knife-point at a local park. Audio: 6PR.

Play Video Don't Play

Anne Aly takes a swipe at WA Premier Colin Barnett by reading a childlike story to her facebook followers.

Play Video Don't Play

A Perth man's been targeted in a violent robbery at Beckenham train station after a thief reportedly attacked him with tools.

Play Video Don't Play

A 45-year-old male driver was filmed driving dangerously, before he deliberately swerved into oncoming traffic on the Bussell Highway on Sunday. Vision: Seven News/Sunrise

Play Video Don't Play

A Perth man has released CCTV footage he says shows a vandal defacing his car in a case of mistaken identity.

Play Video Don't Play

Boxer Danny Green talks with 6PR Afternoons about making it through his fight with Anthony Mundine.

It's been called the highlight of the WA state election, the WA Liberals dancing to Daft Punk's One More Time. Vision: Nine News Perth.

Aiming for a rare third term in government, the Liberals blasted none other than Daft Punk's One More Time through the speakers as its candidates stood together on stage.

What unfolded next has been described as the "worst and whitest moment in Australian political history".

Politicians began robotically clapping and awkwardly bobbing to the electro-classic.

Credit to some, there was the odd fist pump, and Deputy Premier Liza Harvey did her best to make the cringeworthy scene seem less rigid with a classic mum hip shimmy.

Transport minister Bill Marmion topped it off with an enthusiastic high-five to Simon O'Brien MLCbut that unfortunately was about as lively as it got.

Meanwhile Treasurer Mike Nahan fled from the front row of the party quicker than you could say "debt crisis", leaving Ms Harvey to lead the boogie solo.

Footage of the dancing caught the attention of many on social media.

"The WA Liberals clapping robotically to Daft Punk will give me nightmares for years," wrote one Twitter user.

"WA Libs dancing and clapping to Daft Punk is top shelf footage, especially when it goes into the breakdown and they confusedly keep clapping," wrote another.

"If all Perth nightclubs where like the WA LIBS dancing awkwardly to Daft Punk I would be totally picking up every single weekend#WAvotes," wrote another.

One can only imagine how wild the party will be if they actually win the election.

Elaine Benes, you've got some competition.

via GIPHY

Daft Punk wasn't the only music played during the campaign launches, with the Liberals and WA Labor both choosing to play AC/DC as their entrance songs.

Mark McGowan walked out to 1975 hit T.N.T, while Premier Colin Barnett strutted into the Liberal launch to Thunderstruck.

See the article here:
Music's got me feeling so free? Liberals butcher Daft Punk classic with awkward dance moves - WAtoday

Earlier this month, conservative elder statesmen issued a "Let's Make a Deal" on climate: Nix Obama-era regulations in return for a carbon tax and dividend.

So far, the idea has gained little traction from unretired Republicans who could actually make a deal. But if that changes, should Democrats and pro-environment independents accept it?

The proposal was issued with great fanfare by the newly formed Climate Leadership Council. Conservative economists Martin Feldstein and Gregory Mankiw and former secretaries of State George Shultz and James Baker III touted the plan in op-eds for the The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal. The council launched its effort at the National Press Club the same day.

A carbon tax appeals to free-market conservatives by empowering markets to find the cheapest ways to cut emissions. By returning the money through a dividend, the tax would not grow the size of government. The council estimates the dividend would start at $2,000 for a family of four, and rise with the carbon tax.

Obama pledged under the Paris climate agreement that the United States would aim for 28 percent emission reductions by 2025 from 2005 levels. As I wrote last year, the U.S. had already cut emissions 9 percent by 2014. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) just announcedthat emissions fell another 2.2 percent in 2015.

The council estimates that continuation of Obama-era policies would leave the U.S. about 12 percentage points shy of its Paris pledge. That's why 2016 Democratic nominee Hillary ClintonHillary Rodham ClintonChelsea Clinton attends Muslim solidarity rally in NYC Congressional Black Caucus expected to meet with Trump soon Why liberals should accept a conservative carbon tax plan MORE had proposed an ambitious agenda for further progress.

With President Trump and congressional Republicans calling to reverse Obamas policies without replacement, we'd likely fall further behind.

To meet our Paris pledge, the council proposes a carbon tax starting at $40/ton and rising with time. Unlike weaker taxes discussed before, the new proposal would likely be more than sufficient for that goal. A recent Treasury Department analysis estimates that a $49/ton tax would far surpass the emission cuts needed for Paris.

Meanwhile, Resources for the Future modeled various sets of carbon taxes that could achieve the Paris pledge. As co-author Marc Hafstead explained via email, their modeling shows a tax rising to $38/ton (in year 2013 dollars) by 2025 would meet the target. The council's proposal would exceed that level with its annual increases, and yield further benefits for decades to come.

Interestingly, Hafstead noted that their calculation of a $38/ton threshold for Paris compliance assumes the U.S. abandons efforts to control more potent greenhouse gases like methane. That may be the case, as the House voted this month to overturn rules on methane emissions from oil and gas drilling.

But if we don't abandon progress on other pollutants, Hafstead estimates a tax of just $22/ton would be sufficient.

Ditching methane controls is a bad deal for many reasons. Methane is the leading source of ozone smog worldwide. That's why researchers such as Jason West of the University of North Carolina and Arlene Fiore of Columbia University have shown that methane reductions can save tens of thousands of lives.

Leaking methane also means wasting a valuable fuel. Since methane is short-lived, it actually causes more warming near-term than traditional 100-year outlooks would suggest. Controlling methane while keeping the council's $40-plus/ton tax proposal would accelerate U.S. progress toward its ultimate goal of 80 percent emission reductions by 2050.

Environmentalists have little to lose trading the Clean Power Plan for a carbon tax. As I wrote with Leah Parks last year, the U.S. is well ahead of schedule to meet the plan's targets. That's because cheaper natural gas and renewables are already displacing coal, even as the Clean Power Plan remains tied up in court.

The main importance of the Clean Power Plan is preventing a swing back to coal if natural gas prices rise. But a carbon tax averts that scenario. A $40/ton tax would add 4.2 cents per kilowatt hour to the cost of coal electricity, but just 1.6 cents for natural gas combined cycle plants. Solar and wind would pay nothing.

With many coal plants already losing money, coal would quickly give way to cheaper and cleaner forms of electricity. Meanwhile, the tax on natural gas is comparable in size to existing tax credits for wind and solar. Even without those tax credits, wind and solar are already as cheap as new natural gas plants. Taxing natural gas would help renewables extend their recent dominance of new generation capacity without the need for subsidies.

For transportation, the effects of a carbon tax would be far milder. A $40/ton tax would add just 36 cents to the cost of a gallon of gasoline. That's not going to convince many people to drive less or buy an electric car, especially since electricity prices would rise a bit too. However, with fuel economy standards set to tighten, electric car sales would continue to rise.

Looking beyond the 2025 Paris target, swapping regulations for a carbon tax becomes an even more attractive deal. The Clean Power Plan ends in 2030. However, a steadily rising carbon tax would continue to drive down emissions for decades to come.

Carbon taxes have traditionally been criticized as regressive, since the poor spend a greater share of their income on energy. However, by rebating the tax through a per-person dividend, the Climate Leadership Council's proposal would leave many low-income families better off.

So should Democrats and independents welcome this deal?

In a word, yes. Writers in The Nation, the The New York Timesand Mother Jones have reached similar conclusions. I'd bargain for tougher methane regulations, but could accept waiting to restore those later.

Trouble is, conservative economists and retired Republican statesmen are in no position to seal this deal. RepublicEn, Citizens Climate Lobbyand the Climate Solutions Caucus are trying to rally Republican and bipartisan support for a carbon tax in Congress.

For now, such efforts have fallen on deaf ears from politicians who hear no evil on climate. If that changes, liberals and moderates shouldn't shy away from nixing Obama-era policies to accept a market-based solution to climate change.

Dan Cohan is an associate professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Rice University.

The views of contributors are their own and not the views of The Hill.

The rest is here:
Why liberals should accept a conservative carbon tax plan | TheHill - The Hill (blog)