Mediaboss Marketing

Arkansas' Republican gubernatorial nominee Sarah Huckabee Sanders raised about $321,000 in contributions in July as Democratic gubernatorial nominee Chris Jones collected about $245,000 in contributions, according to their latest campaign finance reports.

Jones and a spokesman for Sanders on Tuesday also exchanged jabs.

Along with Libertarian candidate Ricky Dale Harrington Jr. of Pine Bluff, Jones and Sanders are vying in the Nov. 8 general election to succeed term-limited Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson. Their campaign finance reports for July were posted on the secretary of state's website Monday night.

For the general election, Sanders reported raising $321,781.74 in contributions and spending $339,503.27 in July. That boosted the amount that she has reported raising to $7.06 million and spending to $752,485.40 for the general election, leaving a balance of $6.3 million on July 31.

For the May 24 primary election, Sanders reported raising $13.1 million and spending that much, including a $4.2 million transfer to her general election campaign. Sanders, of Little Rock, is a former White House press secretary for President Trump and the daughter of former Gov. Mike Huckabee.

For the general election, Jones reported raising $245,789.96 and spending $295,667.74 in July. That increased the amount that he has reported raising to $662,972.75 and spending to $544,141.69 for the general election, leaving a balance of $118,831.06 on July 31.

For the May 24 primary election, Jones reported raising $1.9 million and spending that much, including a transfer of $69,431 to his general election campaign. He is a former executive director of the Arkansas Regional Innovation Hub.

Sanders said Tuesday in a written statement that "I continue to be humbled by the incredible support from Arkansans in all 75 counties, as well as Americans from all 50 states.

"Through bold conservative reforms, including lower taxes, investing in our kids' education, and reducing violent crime, we will create opportunity for all and take this state to the top," she said.

Jones said Tuesday in a written statement that "our campaign for Governor is making an impact."

"We're showing up in every corner of this state, talking face to face, and walking a mile in the shoes of everyday Arkansans," he said in a written statement. "That's why we're seeing strong fundraising numbers. Meanwhile, we see some stagnation in Sarah Huckabee Sanders's report as her campaign limits its time in Arkansas. Voters here in Arkansas expect candidates for the state's top office to work hard to earn their vote."

In response, Sanders spokesman Judd Deere said in a written statement that "Sarah Huckabee Sanders has completely shattered the record for the most money ever raised by a candidate for governor in Arkansas history and has a 50:1 cash on hand advantage for the general election.

"Arkansans reject Biden and the Democrats' failed policies and are ready for Sarah to lead our state to greater freedom, opportunity, and prosperity," he said.

In July, Harrington reported raising $2,322 and spending $46.27 for the general election. That increased his total amount raised to $31,704.72, and total expenses to $17,124.05, leaving a balance of $14,580.67 on July 31.

LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR

For the general election, Republican nominee Leslie Rutledge of Maumelle reported raising $11,138.66 and spending $29,940.07 in July.

That increased her total amount raised to $533,393.06 and total expenses to $85,638.52 for the general election, leaving a balance of $447,754.54 on July 31. In June, she reported transferring $42,126 from her primary campaign to her general election campaign.

Rutledge has served as the state's attorney general since 2015.

For the general election, Democratic nominee Kelly Krout of Lowell reported receiving $26,163.10 in contributions and spending $14,074.11 in July. That increased her contributions raised to $184,329.86, total loans to $100, and total expenses to $151,028.28 for the primary and general election campaigns, leaving a balance of $33,401.58 on July 31, according to her report.

Libertarian candidate Frank Gilbert of Little Rock reported raising $272.17 and spending $22.17 in July. That increased the total that he reported raising to $2,973.17 and total expenses to $793.81, leaving a balance of $2,179.36 on July 31.

ATTORNEY GENERAL

For the general election, Republican nominee Tim Griffin of Little Rock raised $22,957 and spent $33,663.56 in July, according to his report.

His contributions received totaled $1.4 million and expenses totaled $98,371.82 for the general election, leaving a balance of $1.3 million as of July 31, according to his report. In June, he reported transferring $783,818 from his primary campaign to his general election campaign.

Griffin has served as the state's lieutenant governor since 2015, and served as the state's 2nd district congressman from 2011-2015.

For the general election, Democratic nominee Jess Gibson of Little Rock reported raising $34,216.95 in contributions, loaning his campaign $8,750 and spending $22,126.12 in July. That increased his total contributions raised to $316,074.63, total loans to $42,500 and total expenses to $306,024.54 for the primary and general election campaigns, leaving a balance of $52,675.09 on July 31.

SECRETARY OF STATE

For the general election, Republican incumbent and nominee John Thurston of East End raised $8,950 in contributions, loaned his campaign $94.99, and spent $4,501.54 in July, according to his report.

That increased his total contributions received to $21,746.50, total loans to $1,139.98, and total expenses to $8,076.54 for the general election, leaving a balance of $14,809.94, according to his report.

For the general election, Democratic nominee Anna Beth Gorman of North Little Rock reported raising $15,770.99 and spending $20,575.80 in July. That increased the total amount raised to $169,660.87 and total expenses to $146,853.43 for the primary and general election campaigns, leaving a balance of $22,712.95, according to her report.

TREASURER

Republican nominee state Rep. Mark Lowery of Maumelle reported raising $3,500 in contributions and spending $2,617.96 in July for the general election. That boosted his total contributions received to $92,989.32 and total expenses to $43,398.75 for the primary and general elections, leaving a balance of $49,590.57 on July 31, according to his report.

Democratic nominee Pam Whitaker of Little Rock raised $2,970 in contributions and spent nothing in July. That boosted her total fundraising to $7,229.49 and total expenses to $2,079.98 for the primary and general elections, leaving a balance of $5,149.51, she reported.

AUDITOR

Republican nominee Dennis Milligan of Benton reported raising no money and spending $5,266.21 for the general election in July. That increased his total contributions raised to $38,678.69 and total expenses to $5,533.01 for the general election, leaving a balance of $33,145.68 on July 31, according to his report.

In June, he reported a $34,378.69 transfer from his primary campaign to his general election campaign.

Milligan has served as state treasurer since 2015.

Democratic candidate Diamond Arnold-Johnson of Mabelvale and Libertarian candidate Simeon Snow of Rector haven't filed campaign finance reports yet, according to the secretary of state's website.

LAND COMMISSIONER

Republican nominee and incumbent Tommy Land of Heber Springs reported raising $3,950 in contributions and spending $220 in July.

That boosted his total contribution to $52,436.67, total loans to $3,000, interest earned to $351.89 and total expenses to $14,084.99 for the primary and general elections, leaving a balance of $41,703.57 as of July 31, according to his report.

Democratic nominee Darlene Goldi Gaines of Little Rock raised $2,749 and spent $763.81 in July. In total, she reported raising $9,553.92 and spending $6,357.28 for the primary and general elections, leaving a balance of $3,196.64 on July 31.

SUPREME COURT

District Judge Chris Carnahan of Conway raised $4,125 in contributions and spent $4,693.11 in July, according to his report. That increased his amount raised in contributions to $106,860, total loans to $26,798.07 and total expenses to $125,656.05, leaving a balance of $8,680.67 as of July 31, according to his report.

Supreme Court Justice Robin Wynne of Little Rock reported raising $500 in contributions and spending nothing in July. That increased the amount that he reported raising in contributions to $79,927.76, total loans to $10,000, and total expenses to $85,130, leaving a balance of $4,797.76 on July 31.

Read this article:
Sanders raises $321,000 in July for Arkansas governor's race; Jones adds $245,000 in contributions - Arkansas Online

If someone insults your mother, you clock him. As a man, at least, theres really nothing else you can do. It may not be strictly legal, but its perfectly honorable. Conversely, if you dont want to get clocked, dont insult anyones mother. Legally, he may be in the wrong. Morally, though, hes right.

Free speech has limitslegal, yes, but also moral. You cant shout fire in a crowded movie theater without legal consequences, and you cant rip on someones mom without having to square up.

Salman Rushdies novel The Satanic Verses didnt violate the legal limits of free speech. But, as even his staunchest defenders will admit, it was deliberately insulting to Islam. Though Rushdie now calls himself a hardline atheist, he was born to a Muslim family in Mumbai, a city with a large Muslim minority. He knew what he was doing. He knew that he was offending the deepest convictions of two billion Muslims around the world. He wasnt offering an intelligent critique of their faith. He was mocking it. Thats not incidental to the book. For Rushdies biggest fans (like Christopher Hitchens), its part of the appeal.

No, he didnt deserve to be stabbed last week. That should go without saying. But getting stabbed doesnt make him a hero, either. On the contrary. Rushdie is a first-rate wordsmith, but a very banal blasphemer. His treatment of Islam was shallow and flippant, and Muslims have every right to be angry with him. Were not obliged to lionize him because some have overreacted so terribly.

It feels a bit low making this argument just a few days after the attack. Id prefer not to make it at all. But as soon as the news broke, libertarian pundits began working to canonize Mr. Rushdie as a living martyr for free speech.

Over at National Review, Charles Cooke issued an ultimatum: You either support free speech or you dont. According to Cooke,

Certainly, the people who dont believe in free speech have different reasons for their opposition: They want to protect peoples feelings or to aid public virtue; they think that the religion they believe in is too important; they fear the consequences of bad people hearing bad words. But, really, who cares? The root question is whether or not we are to have a clerisy of people who, via direct violence (murder, acid) or indirect violence (government) are able to tell everyone else what they may or may not say.

If any fundamentalist Muslims happen to read Cookes blog, Im sure theyre duly chastened and wont do it again. But what about the rest of us? What are we supposed to take away from this argument? That anyone who doesnt uncritically support Rushdie is cut from the same cloth as Ayatollah Khomeini.

Later, Cooke mentions the Charlie Hebdo shooting of 2015. The comparison is apt, but not for the reason he thinks. The magazines offices were targeted by radical Muslims over their crude, satirical drawings of Mohammed. Twelve people died in the attack, while eleven more were injured.

And what was the point of it all? For what cause did those twelve give their lives? The answer is, insulting Muslims. Speaking to the press after the attack, Charlie Hebdos editor said they would go on mocking the faith until Islam is just as banal as Catholicism. Thats it. But dying for a cause doesnt make it right, and Charlie Hebdo doesnt even have a cause. They give offense for the sake of being offensive. How tragic.

Likewise, the fact that someone tried to kill an author doesnt make that author's books any good. To most people, I think, that is just common sense. But apparently, Douglas Murray disagrees. He thinks we should respond to the attempt on Rushdies life by reading The Satanic Verses. The illiterate cannot be allowed to dictate the rules of literature, he writes. The enemies of free expression cannot be allowed to quash it.

Yet the point of a novel isnt free expression. Anyone can express himself by putting words on a piece of paper. Thats why teenaged girls keep diaries. Literature has to aspire to something more. And the irony is that none of the tributes to Rushdie explain what exactly makes him a great novelist. Reading them, you have no clue whether theres anything good or true or beautiful in The Satanic Verses. All you can glean is that it pissed off a bunch of Muslims in the '80s.

As it happens, the majority of Muslimshowever pissed offhave responded to The Satanic Verses quite peacefully. Yet folks like Charles Cooke and Douglas Murray dont give them credit for practicing free expression. Why? Because theyre just so earnest. Making fun of peoples religion is cool; getting offended when someone mocks your religion is square.

This is what Rushdies champions are really getting at. Whatever Cooke may say, most critics of The Satanic Verses dont think the book should be banned or its author beheaded. They are saying that human beings should be more respectful of each others convictions. Religion shouldnt be treated as something banal. Art shouldnt be flippant.

These are moral judgements; they are also literary criticisms.

And theyre perfectly fair. If Evelyn Waughs Brideshead Revisited ended with Charles Ryder still mocking the Flyte familys Catholicism, it would fail as a novelnot because Catholicism is true (though it is), but because mocking other peoples religion is childish. And its boring. It doesnt make for good art.

Rushdies defenders obviously dont care about his literary merits, though. This has nothing to do with art and everything to do with politics. They only care about free speech. They reduce The Satanic Verses to a propaganda piece. This does a disservice to Rushdies craft. It misses the whole point of literature. It also undermines the cause of free speech.

Except for libertarian ideologues, no one really believes that all expressions should be treated as equals. Most folks arent willing to divide humanity between Rushdie fanboys and Khomeini acolytes. We can condemn violent extremism without endorsing a frivolous nihilism. We can support the right to free speech while urging our countrymen to exercise that right more responsibly.

We can, and we should. Because, if we dont, this may become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Cooke tells Rushdies critics they may as well join up with the Ayatollah; the trouble is, eventually they might believe him. Give people a choice between violent extremism and frivolous nihilism and most of them will choose the former. In fact, they already are.

This is the problem with libertarian conservatives. Their deepest loyalties are to legal abstractions. If someone insults your mom (or your God), they expect you to shake his hand and cry, I may not agree with what you say, but Ill defend to the death your right to say it!

Subscribe Today Get weekly emails in your inbox

That is why Russell Kirk referred to J.S. Mill, that most classic of classical liberals, as a defecated intellect. And it is why they are more dangerous than violent extremists, even violent Islamic extremists. Because when a man is willing to fight for his God (or his mom), it means he loves something more than himself. He might do terrible things in the name of that love. His heart may be in the wrong place. But at least hes got a heart. What do the classical liberals have? Theories. White papers. A brain in a vat.

I dont want the kind of freedom Rushdies supporters are offering, and neither should you. It erases any distinction between beauty and ugliness, between good and evil, between truth and lies. It is the enemy of poetry, art, music, romance, community, worshipof everything that makes us human. It is the freedom to scoff and sneer, never to love or hate. And while it may keep us safe from death, it gives us no reason to live.

Natural rights do exist. But only because so does human nature. If we ignore the latter, we are sure to lose the former. If we force men to choose between liberty and loyalty, most will choose loyalty. So, you can write endless blog posts insisting on your First Amendment right to insult other peoples mothers. But if you try to exercise that right, you are going to get clocked.

See the original post here:
Rethinking Salman Rushdie - The American Conservative

The 1998 movie Enemy of the State starring Gene Hackman and Will Smith seemed like fiction at the time. Why I didnt regard that movie which still holds up in nearly every detail as a warning I do not know. It pulls back the curtain on the close working relationship between national security agencies and the communications industry spying, censorship, blackmailing, and worse. Today, it seems not just a warning but a description of reality.

There is no longer any doubt at all about the symbiotic relationship between Big Tech the digital communications industry in particular and government. The only issue we need to debate is which of the two sectors are more decisive in driving the loss of privacy, free speech, and liberty in general.

Not only that: Ive been involved in many debates over the years, always taking the side of technology over those who warned of the coming dangers. I was a believer, a techno-utopian and could not see where this was headed.

The lockdowns were the great shock for me, not only for the unconscionably draconian policies imposed on the country so quickly. The shock was intensified by how all the top tech companies immediately enlisted in the war on freedom of association. Why? Some combination of industry ideology, which shifted over 30 years from a founding libertarian ethos to become a major force for techno-tyranny, plus industry self-interest (how better to promote digital media consumption than to force half the workforce to stay home?) were at work.

For me personally, it feels like betrayal of the most profound sort. Only 12 years ago, I was still celebrating the dawning of the Jetsons World and dripping with disdain for the Luddites among us who refused to get with it and buy and depend on all the latest gizmos. It seemed inconceivable to me at the time that such wonderful tools could ever be taken over by power and used as a means of social and economic control. The whole idea of the Internet was to overthrow the old order of imposition and control! The Internet was anarchy, to my mind, and therefore had some built-in resistance to all attempts to monopolize it.

And yet here we are. Just this weekend, The New York Times carries a terrifying story about a California tech professional who, on request, texted a doctors office a picture of his sons infection that required a state of undress, and then found himself without email, documents, and even a phone number. An algorithm made the decision. Google has yet to admit wrongdoing. Its one story but emblematic of a massive threat that affects all our lives.

Amazon servers are reserved only for the politically compliant, while Twitters censorship at explicit behest of the CDC/NIH is legion. Facebook and Instagram can and does bodybag anyone who steps out of line, and the same is true of YouTube. Those companies make up the bulk of all Internet traffic. As for escaping, any truly private email cannot be domiciled in the US, and our one-time friend the smartphone operates now as the most reliable citizen surveillance tool in history.

In retrospect, its rather obvious that this would happen because it has happened with every other technology in history, from weaponry to industrial manufacturing. What begins as a tool of mass liberation and citizen empowerment eventually comes to be nationalized by the state working with the largest and most politically connected firms. World War I was the best illustration of just such an outrage in the 20th century: the munitions manufacturers were the only real winners of that one, while the state acquired new powers of which it never really let go.

Its hard to appreciate just what a shock that Great War was to a whole generation of liberal intellectuals. My mentor Murray Rothbard wrote an extremely thoughtful reflection on the naive liberalism of Victorian-age techno enthusiasts, circa 1880-1910. This was a generation that saw progress emancipation on every front: the end of slavery, a burgeoning middle class, the crumbling of the old aristocracies of power, and new technologies. All these enabled the mass production of steel, cities rising to the heavens, electricity and lighting everywhere, flight, and countless consumer improvements from indoor plumbing and heating to mass availability of food that enabled enormous demographic shifts.

Reading the greats from that period, their optimism about the future was palpable. One of my favorite writers, Mark Twain, held such a view. His moral outrage toward the Spanish-American War, the remnants of family feuds in the South, and reactionary class-based biases were everywhere in his writings, always with a sense of profound disapproval that these signs of revanchist thinking and behaving were surely one generation away from full expiration. He shared in the naivete of the times. He simply could not have imagined the carnage of the coming total war that made the Spanish-American war look like a practice drill. The same outlook on the future was held by of Oscar Wilde, William Graham Sumner, William Gladstone, Auberon Herbert, Lord Acton, Hillaire Belloc, Herbert Spencer, and all the rest.

Rothbards view was that their excessive optimism, their intuitive sense of the inevitability of the victory of liberty and democracy, and their overarching naivete toward the uses of technology actually contributed to the decline and fall of what they considered civilization. Their confidence in the beautiful future and their underestimate of the malice of states and the docility of the public created a mindset that was less driven to work for truth than it otherwise would have been. They positioned themselves as observers of ever-increasing progress of peace and well-being. They were the Whigs who implicitly accepted a Hegelian-style view of their invincibility of their causes.

Of Herbert Spencer, for example, Rothbard wrote this scathing criticism:

Spencer began as a magnificently radical liberal, indeed virtually a pure libertarian. But, as the virus of sociology and Social Darwinism took over in his soul, Spencer abandoned libertarianism as a dynamic historical movement, although at first without abandoning it in pure theory. In short, while looking forward to an eventual ideal of pure liberty, Spencer began to see its victory as inevitable, but only after millenia of gradual evolution, and thus, in actual fact, Spencer abandoned Liberalism as a fighting, radical creed; and confined his Liberalism in practice to a weary, rear-guard action against the growing collectivism of the late nineteenth-century. Interestingly enough, Spencers tired shift rightward in strategy soon became a shift rightward in theory as well; so that Spencer abandoned pure liberty even in theory.

Rothbard was so sensitive to this problem due to the strange times in which his ideological outlook took shape. He experienced his own struggle in coming to terms with the way in which the brutality of real-time politics poisons the purity of ideological idealism.

The bulk of the Rothbardian paradigm had been complete by the time he finished his PhD in economics from Columbia University. By 1963-1964, he published his massive economic treatise, a reconstruction of the economics of the origins of the Great Depression, and put together the core of the binary that became his legacy: history is best understood as a competitive struggle between market and state. One of his best books on political economy Power and Market that appeared years later was actually written in this period but not published because the publisher found it too controversial.

Implicit in this outlook was a general presumption of the universal merit of free enterprise compared with the unrelenting depredations of the state. It has the ring of truth in most areas of life: the small business compared with the plotting and scamming of politics, the productivity and creativity of entrepreneurs vs the lies and manipulations of bureaucratic armies, the grimness of inflation, taxation, and war vs the peaceful trading relationships of commercial life. Based on this outlook, he became the 20th centurys foremost advocate of what became anarcho-capitalism.

Rothbard also distinguished himself in those years for never joining the Right in becoming a champion of the Cold War. Instead he saw war as the worst feature of statism, something to be avoided by any free society. Whereas he once published in the pages of National Review, he later found himself as the victim of a fatwa by Russia-hating and bomb-loving conservatives and thereby began to forge his own school of thought that took over the name libertarian, which had only recently been revived by people who preferred the name liberal but realized that this term had long been appropriated by its enemies.

What happened next challenged the Rothbardian binary. It was not lost on him that the major driving force beyond the building of the Cold War security state was private enterprise itself. And the conservative champions of free enterprise had utterly failed to distinguish between private-sector forces that thrive independently of the state and those who not only live off the state but exercise a decisive influence in further fastening the yoke of tyranny on the population through war, conscription, and general industrial monopolization. Seeing his own binary challenged in real life drove him to found an intellectual project embodied in his journal Left and Right, which opened in 1965 and ran until 1968. Here we find some of the most challenging writing and analysis of the second half of the twentieth century.

The first issue featured what might be his most mighty essay on political history: Left, Right, and the Prospects for Liberty. This essay came from a period in which Rothbard warmed up to the left simply because it was only on this side of the political spectrum where he found skepticism of the Cold War narrative, outrage at industrial monopolization, disgust at reactionary militarism and conscription, dogged opposition to violations of civil liberties. and generalized opposition to the despotism of the age. His new friends on the left in those days were very different from the woke/lockdown left of today, obviously. But in time, Rothbard too soured on them and their persistence in economic ignorance and un-nuanced hatred of capitalism in general and not just the crony variety.

So on it went through the decades as Rothbard was drawn ever more toward understanding class as a valuable desiderata of political dynamics, large corporate interests in a hand-in-glove relationship to the state, and the contrast between elites and common people as an essential heuristic to pile on top of his old state vs market binary. As he worked this out more fully, he came to adopt many of the political tropes we now associate with populism, but Rothbard was never fully comfortable in that position either. He rejected crude nationalism and populism, knew better than anyone of the dangers of the Right, and was well aware of the excesses of democracy.

While his theory remained intact, his strategic outlook for getting from here to there underwent many iterations, the last of which before his untimely death in 1995 landed him with an association with the burgeoning movement that eventually brought Trump to power, though there is every reason to believe that Rothbard would have regarded Trump as he did both Nixon and Reagan. He saw them both as opportunists who talked a good game though never consistently and ultimately betrayed their bases with anti-establishment talk without the principle reality.

One way to understand his seeming shifts over time is the simple point with which I began this reflection. Rothbard dreamed of a free society, but he was never content with theory alone. Like the major intellectual activists who influenced him (Frank Chodorov, Ludwig von Mises, and Ayn Rand) he believed in making a difference in his own time within the intellectual and political firmament he was given. This drove him toward ever more skepticism of corporate power and the privileges of the power elite in general. By the time of his death, he had traveled a distance very far from the simple binaries of his youth, which he had to do in order to make sense of them them in the face of grim realities of the 1960s through the 1990s.

Would he have been shocked as I have been about the apostasies of Big Tech? Somehow I doubt it. He saw the same thing with the industrial giants of his own time, and fought them with all his strength, a passion that led him to shifting alliances all in the interest of pushing his main cause, which was the emancipation of the human population from the forces of oppression and violence all around us. Rothbard was the Enemy of the State. Many people have even noted the similarities of Gene Hackmans character in the movie.

The astonishing policy trends of our time are truly calling on all of us to rethink our political and ideological opinions, as simple and settled as they might have been. For this reason, Brownstone publishes thinkers on all sides. We are all disaffected in our own ways. And we know now that nothing will be the same.

Do we give up? Never. During lockdowns and medical mandates, the power of the state and its corporate allies truly reached its apotheosis, and failed us miserably. Our times cry out for justice, for clarity, and for making a difference to save ourselves and our civilization. We should approach this great project with our eyes wide open and with ears to hear different points of view on how we get from here to there.

Jeffrey A. Tucker is Founder and President of the Brownstone Institute and the author of many thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press and ten books in 5 languages, most recently Liberty or Lockdown. He is also the editor of The Best of Mises. He writes a daily column on economics at The Epoch Times, and speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture.

READ MORE

See more here:
How Could We Have Been So Naive about Big Tech? - Brownstone Institute

Even the staunchest libertarians deserve love. So throw away the pot you only smoke out of principle and take a shower, you son of liberty! You're going to need to put a little effort into a girl if you ever find one.

Here are some pickup lines to add to your repertoire:

"I don't believe in big government, but it should be illegal to look that good." Classic.

"Are you made of gold? Cause you're the standard by which women should be measured." Awwwww yeah!

"Hello, I am wearing deodorant." This will set you apart from the rest of the Libertarian herd.

"When I saw you my heart experienced runaway inflation." Romantic!

"Are you the federal reserve? 'Cause I'd like to audit you." Groan.

"Girl, you almost make me want to sign a government document confirming my eternal love for you. Almost." The government doesn't have the right to define or license your love!

"I don't need a reckless monetary policy to increase my interest rate in you!" Get it? No? Ok...

"How about you and I go somewhere quieter and listen to my podcast?" It's getting serious.

"I must be an artificially inflated dollar, cause I'm falling for you." You can never compare your feelings to irresponsible economic policies enough.

"Taxation is theft. Wanna make out?" Works every single time.

"Please hang out with me. I'm extremely lonely." Maybe you should just be honest.

In a collaboration with The Babylon Bee, Professor Gorb McStevens lists all the countries where communism hasn't turned into a totalitarian hellscape where you have to eat your dog.

Continued here:
11 Pick Up Lines For Libertarians To Use If They Ever Meet A Girl - The Babylon Bee

Happy Thursday, Illinois. Sometimes the days just run together.

Gov. JB Pritzker is pulling out all the stops to get state Rep. Lisa Hernandez elected chair of the Illinois Democratic Party, but some Democrats say hes crossed the line by enlisting an abortion-rights advocacy organization to endorse her over the current chair, Congresswoman Robin Kelly.

Cook County Commissioner Donna Miller issued a statement Wednesday rejecting Personal PACs implication that [Kellys] leadership jeopardizes the pro-choice movement here in Illinois.

Racial politics. As a Black woman, I am mindful of the dog whistles used to raise legal questions about the first African American and first woman to lead the Democratic Party of Illinois, Miller said in her statement. The party has flourished under her leadership. Personal PAC did not raise the same questions about the previous chair when he was under federal investigation and ultimately indicted, she said, referring to former House Speaker Michael Madigan.

Miller also withdrew from co-hosting a fundraiser tonight for Personal PAC. A few hours later, the event was canceled outright with no plans to be rescheduled.

Terry Cosgrove, the head of Personal PAC, said the organization has been proud since Day One to support and stand with the first African-American speaker of the Illinois House, and we are continuing to do that now. He was referring to House Speaker Emanuel Chris Welch, whos also endorsing Hernandez.

Whos behind who: The drama comes after Congressman Bobby Rush and the Illinois AFL-CIO threw their support to Hernandez, and Congressman Danny Davis and the Congressional Black Caucus PAC endorsed Kelly.

Hernandez sits on Welchs House leadership team. She most recently carried the House and congressional redistricting bills. And for years she was a top ally of Madigan, who used to run the Democratic Party with an iron first.

Times have changed: Welchs caucus lost some incumbents in the primary, and he wants assurances that party fundraising and outreach are strong enough to keep Democrats supermajority in the House and hold on to two state Supreme Court seats that are up for grabs.

The party has raised more than $2 million since Kelly was elected chair last year and has $4.2 million in the bank. Because Kellys a federal office holder, her hands are tied from being involved in state fundraising. So a separate committee oversees those funds.

Its a complication that Pritzker and Welch see as a hindrance. But Kelly and her allies say the reorganization allows for transparency that was lacking under Madigan.

Theres another tension point. Some Democrats say Pritzker is using his wealth to dictate politics. You feel youll be in a bad spot if you say 'no' to the governor, a political adviser told Playbook on condition we not use their name for fear of being alienated by Pritzker. A lot of people feel they dont have an option.

AND, HES OUT: Libertarian Jesse White, who was hoping to upend the secretary of state race, withdrew his candidacy Wednesday just as his petition signatures were about to face scrutiny.

White shares the same name as long-serving Democratic Secretary of State Jesse White, whos not seeking re-election. There was concern among Democrats that voters (the ones who dont read Playbook) might vote for Libertarian White thinking they were voting for Democrat White.

That wont happen now with Libertarian Whites exit.

Were disappointed that Jesse is no longer going to be on the ballot, outgoing Libertarian State Chair Steve Suess told Playbook. Thats all I can say right now.

Democrat Alexi Giannoulias campaign had already filed challenges to Whites petition signatures, and the next step in the process, the records examination, was to have started Wednesday.

Have a news tip, suggestion, birthday, anniversary, new job, or any other nugget for Playbook? Id like to hear from you: [emailprotected]

No official public events.

At City Hall at 9:30 a.m. for an update on reproductive rights.

At the Cook County Building at 10 a.m. to preside over the Cook County Board of Commissioners meeting.

Google taking over Thompson Center from the state: The search engine giant, with 2,000 employees in Chicago, will occupy the entire building. The state, working out terms with developer Michael Reschke, will sell it to Google for $105 million. In turn, the state will pay $75 million for the 115 S. LaSalle St. building, formerly the BMO Harris Bank building, by Sun-Times David Roeder.

Google expansion will enhance Chicago's tech cred, by Crains John Pletz

More sheriffs join DHS lawsuit: The lawsuit seeks to clear a chronic logjam of mentally ill inmates sitting in county jails for months while awaiting psychiatric treatment from the state, by Illinois Times Dean Olsen.

Sangamon County health officials look into first reported monkeypox case in adult male, by State Journal Registers Steven Spearie

Construction of the Interstate 74 bridge over the Mississippi River in the Quad Cities won top honors Wednesday among Midwest states in the Americas Transportation Awards.

Lollapalooza 2022 kicks off today with emphasis on security, via ABC 7 ...

Its the best weekend of the year for downtown hotels, but business travel remains sidelined, reports Tribunes Brian J. Rogal

School board approves $10.2M contract for police officers for upcoming school year, by Chalkbeats Mauricio Pena and Eileen Pomeroy

Magnet school students cant count on a bus ride to class as driver shortage continues, by WBEZs Sarah Karp

2 CPS teachers jobs are spared after theyd been recommended for firing over protests, by Tribunes Tracy Swartz

Details on proposed ordinance to make Chicago a sanctuary for abortion and gender-affirming care, by Tribunes Alice Yin

MCAs inaugural 'Chicago Performs' debuts local performance art on Sept. 15, 16, via Cultured mag

Authorities say Pheasant Run fire was caused by teens who broke into the shuttered resort: Prosecutors said all four defendants had repeatedly gone to the property and broke into rooms. 'The most culpable' of the teens threw a bed and other items out an upper window of the tower. He also made videos that would be posted on TikTok and Snapchat, by Daily Heralds Susan Sarkauskas.

Smashing Pumpkins Billy Corgan hosts benefit concert for Highland Park. We will always come together, by Tribunes Stephanie Casanova and Gavin Good

117 felony charges for alleged Highland Park July 4 parade shooter, by Lake County News Suns By Clifford Ward and Robert McCoppin

Bears host Highland Park HS football team at training camp, via NFL.com

Bailey attacks Pritzker and Lightfoot over crime; refuses to discuss Trump: Republican governor candidate Darren Bailey "wants to reinstate the death penalty for cop killers and repeal of the SAFE-T Act, which includes an end to cash bail beginning in January, reports WGN 9s Tahman Bradley.

Cook County Commissioner Sean Morrison was re-elected chair of the Cook County GOP last night by enthusiastic acclamation, according to a source in the room at Moretti's in Chicagos Edison Park neighborhood. Republican State Central Committeepersons also were elected. Heres a list of Cook County GOP candidates slated and on the ballot. And heres a list of GOP state legislative candidates also slated and on the ballot.

The Democrats rural problem: The big story of Democrats country collapse is that its self-inflicted. There has been no infusion of cash, no new commitment from the DNC or the state parties to mobilize and organize in rural areas, and no sense of urgency, via Washington Monthly.

Amazon workers file complaint alleging racial discrimination at Joliet warehouse: Black employees say colleagues wore Confederate flag clothing and wrote racist and threatening messages, but Amazon took little action, by WBEZs Esther Yoon-Ji Kang.

We asked for your best story about rats:

Larry Bury, of the Northwest Municipal Conference: We were visiting my oldest daughter and walking back from dinner when my youngest daughter, who was maybe 6 at the time, sees a rat scurrying along the curb. She points and says Look at that poor squirrel. He must be sick since he has no hair on his tail. We laughed before we explained that's no squirrel.

Taryn Williams, of Advance Illinois: The feral cats in my neighborhood (Hermosa) frequently like to bring half-eaten rats to my doorstep as gifts of gratitude for me not chasing them out of the yard.

Ed Mazur, of the City Club: Years ago when I was an urban studies professor and doing a ride-along with the Chicago Police Department on the midnight shift in a West Side district we entered an alley and the officers turned to me and said "Dr., be on the lookout for the Willards". Within a few seconds our squad car lights watched as several groups of 4 legged rats crossed in front of our car. Willards was a movie film that featured Rats.

Thumbs up or down on a third national political party? Email [emailprotected]

SHOCKER: Manchin and Schumer strike agreement on a party-line bill, by POLITICOs Burgess Everett and Marianne LeVine

Former Republicans and Democrats form new third U.S. political party, via Reuters

Gas prices are falling. Is it too late to save the Dems? POLITICOs Ben Lefebvre

Biden launches plan to bring solar to low-income homes, and Illinois is helping shape the program, by POLITICOs Zack Colman

Barack Obama's annual summer reading list is here, via Town & Country ...

On Obamas playlist: Kendrick Lamar, Beyonc, Harry Styles, Rosala, and more, via Pitchfork

Luis Gutirrez, the former Illinois congressman, has been named a fall fellow with the University of Chicago Institute of Politics, which was founded by former political consultant David Axelrod. Also among the latest fellows are former U.S. Sen. Doug Jones (D-Ala.), former U.S. Senate Secretary of the Majority Laura Dove, NBC News political analyst and CEO and editor of The Dispatch Steve Hayes, Indian journalist Rana Ayyub and author and leading voice on criminal justice reform Shaka Senghor.

Ken Griffin, recently decamped for Miami, puts four Chicago condos on the market: Total asking price is $54.5 million, by Crains Dennis Rodkin

Amy Littleton has been named president of Reputation Partners. She starts Aug. 15. Concurrent with her appointment, Nick Kalm, the firms founder and president, will become CEO. Reputation Partners EVP and general manager Andrew Moyer will continue in his current role.

Today at 10 a.m.: The bipartisan Illinois House Public Safety and Violence Prevention Task Force, chaired by state Reps. La Shawn Ford and Fran Hurley, both D-Chicago, holds a virtual hearing on gun crimes, current efforts to curb violence and how the state can take action to help save lives. View the livestream here

Saturday at 1 p.m.: Congressman Sean Casten (IL-06) will join Fred Guttenberg, father of Parkland shooting victim Jamie, for a town hall focusing on gun violence prevention. Sign up to watch

WEDNESDAYs ANSWER: Congrats to Jeff Lande for correctly answering that Claes Oldenburg created the Batcolum, a 100 foot tall lattice steel baseball bat installed in 1977 in front of a federal office building on West Madison Street that is the midwest U.S. Social Security Regional Office.

TODAYs QUESTION: Which former Illinois member of Congress tried out for the As back when the team was the Philadelphia Athletics? Email [emailprotected]

State Treasurer Mike Frerichs, Urbana Mayor Diane Marlin, governors chief of staff Anne Caprara, former state Sen. Jeff Schoenberg, former state Rep. Darlene Senger, political and media consultant Delmarie Cobb, tech entrepreneur and former mayoral candidate Neal Sales-Griffin, education advocate and comms expert Peter Cunningham, and TV personality Walter Jacobson.

-30-

Read this article:
Accusations of racism and abortion politics- POLITICO - POLITICO