Mediaboss Marketing

Members of Congress returned to their districts this week for Congressional recess met by hordes of angry constituents. Of Oberlins three representatives, only Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown made it through the week relatively unscathed. Protesters accosted 4th District Representative Jim Jordan at a public event in Marion, Ohio, Monday, turning a routine appearance into an impromptu town hall. More Ohioans lined the streets outside a private Republican fundraiser featuring Senator Rob Portman as a keynote speaker Wednesday night in Fremont, Ohio. Yesterday, hundreds of constituents in Cleveland held a mock town hall in Portmans name, since he failed to schedule one for the week.

These actions are one prong of local activism that has been newly invigorated in the month since President Donald Trumps inauguration. Progressives who feel that they have no voice in Congress are doing all they can to shift their elected officials even slightly to the left, particularly on key issues like the Affordable Care Act and Trumps cabinet nominees. These local actions aimed at producing change at the federal level have proven effective, as evident in the slow and contentious confirmation process, during which several Republican senators broke party lines after getting hammered by constituents.

While local organizing to shift national politics has dominated the news this week, we cannot lose sight of the potentially more important form of activism: local actions to produce local effects. Human rights issues are determined at local levels just as much as they are in Washington. As Eleanor Roosevelt said, Where after all do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any map of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person.

It is in the districts themselves that true progressive action can occur during Trumps tenure, not in D.C., where Democrats lack agenda-setting power and are desperately clinging to existing legislation like the ACA. Trumps new executive order that transgender students must use the bathroom matching their assigned sex, for example, will be rendered largely irrelevant if school boards install single-use stalls instead. Similarly, Oberlin City Council is attempting to protect immigrants from deportation raids by reinforcing its resolution to make Oberlin a sanctuary city, vowing not to request residents immigration statuses. In op-eds this week, Jackie Brant explains different methods cities can use to protect immigrants and Johan Cavert suggests modes of grassroots environmental activism, since the Environmental Protection Agency may soon be gutted with Scott Pruitt at its helm. All of these are critical social justice issues and cannot be overlooked with all eyes on the Capitol and White House.

Those opposed to the Trump agenda also cannot afford to ignore local elections. Over the past 10 years, the Democratic Party and the left more broadly have failed to run candidates in many state legislative seats, giving Republicans free reign in state capitals across the country. While Republicans undermine voting rights and leverage gerrymandering in their favor, Democrats have been slow to the game. However, its encouraging that President Obama and Vice President Biden have both turned to organizing around local elections in recent weeks.

From protecting the right to choose to labor laws to energy policy, what happens in state government matters. Progressives must not become so distracted by the ghastly circus in the White House that they forget to focus on where they can make the most impact the places they live. This dismal state of affairs cannot stand.

Go here to see the original:
The Oberlin Review : Progressives Should Focus on Local Activism - The Oberlin Review

Common Dreams

In Final Pitches for Ellison, Progressives Say He's Exactly What Dems Need Now Common Dreams With just hours left before the 447 voting members of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) choose their next chair, leaders of progressive groups are making their final case for "the candidate who has most consistently been in the trenches with the ... Progressives Need A New Party, Not A New DNC ChairHuffington Post New Democrats Seek to Block Rise of Progressives to DNC LeadershipThe Real News Network Prepare for the Centrist Gambit at the DNC Race: "If You're Progressive, You're Supporting Trump"Paste Magazine New Republic -The Hill (blog) -The Hill all 729 news articles »

Excerpt from:
In Final Pitches for Ellison, Progressives Say He's Exactly What Dems Need Now - Common Dreams

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

Pussyhats are pink, knitted, cat-ear headgear, and their manufacture and distribution are being undertaken by thePussyhat Project, one of the partners listed on the website of the Womans March scheduled for January 21, 2017.

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

As the Pussyhat Projects flier helpfully points out:

We love the clever wordplay of pussyhat and pussycat, but yes, pussy is also a derogatory term for female genitalia. We choose this loaded word for our project because we want to reclaim the term as a means of empowerment.

The group goes on to point out their view that identifying people with female genitalia as females is considered a form of oppression, saying that in this day and age, if we have pussies we are assigned the gender of woman. Women, whether transgender or cisgender, are mistreated in society.

For those not keeping up with the latest leftist terminology, cisgender is defined as a term for people who have a gender identity that matches the sex that they were assigned at birth.

As Breitbart News reported,the Planned Parenthood promoted protest is an anti-Trump, pro-abortion-on-demand event that organizers say will defend the most marginalized among us. The event doesnt define unborn babies as among the most marginalized among us but it will include marchers wearing Pussyhats.

The stated purpose of the Pussyhat Project is to give marchers a means to make a unique collective visual statement and to provide people not attending the march a way to represent themselves and support womens right.

For the DIYers out there, thePussycat Project websiteprovides instructions on how to create and register hats as well as how to get hats to marchers.

A map on the website shows where industrious progressives are making their Pussyhats around the word. Most Pussyhat makers are in large American cities and coastal area.

The Womans March will include celebrity guests such as Cher, Katy Perry, and Michael Moore, but at press time it was not known if any of them planned to wear Pussyhats.

Follow BreitbartNewsinvestigative reporterandCitizenJournalismSchool founder Lee Stranahan on Twitter at@Stranahan.Subscribe to the free Stranahan Report here.

Read more from the original source:
Progressives Prepping for Anti-Trump Woman's March by ...

A Chair for Progressives?

The next few days could be an important turning point for U.S. progressives. During its winter meeting being held in Atlanta, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is scheduled to elect a new chair. The results could help many left-leaning activists decide whether it really is possible to reform the Democratic Party, or whether it is time to pursue alternatives.

A top contender rightly opposed by most progressives is Tom Perez, former Obama administration labor secretary and Democratic establishment loyalist. If he wins, it could hasten frustrated Berners exit from the Democratic Party. It could well be the last straw for many progressive Democrats in generalcoming after the party establishments suppression of Sanders in the 2016 primary, its strong backing of fatally flawed Hillary Clinton, and then the related victory of Trump and the Republicans.

By contrast, the other chief competitor for DNC chair is Minneapolis Congressman Keith Ellison, the candidate supported by leading progressives. Theyve depicted him as champion of social and economic justice, who will fight to open up the Democratic Party to its social movement base. However, there is another side to the Ellison story, and ordinary progressives should be aware of it.

Ellisons own statements raise serious doubts about how much of a change agent he really would be. For example, he has downplayed the partys mistreatment of its progressive base in 2016; he, along with the other DNC chair candidates, has denied that the Democratic primary was rigged. Yet it is clear that election skewing and manipulation did happen. It featured the use of super-delegates to negate the will of the voting majority, significant voter suppression and fraud, and outright DNC collusion with the Clinton campaign. If Ellison wont admit that this occurred, he probably wont strongly promote rule changes that will keep it from recurring.

In fact, Ellison has explicitly refrained from supporting the elimination of super-delegates. Similarly, he has said that if he were elected chair, he wouldnt mandate a ban on donations from lobbyists (made largely on behalf of corporations to establishment Democrats). Instead, he would put the matter to a vote by DNC memberseven though many of them are involved in lobbying! In light of this refusal to aggressively challenge Democratic business as usual, it should be no surprise that even a Wall Street Democrat like Chuck Schumer has endorsed Ellison.

Of course, Keith Ellison isnt the root cause of his own political timidity. It is the larger Democratic Party of which he is a part and to which he must appeal as a DNC chair candidate. Most party officials who will be voting for chair are part of an entrenched party machine. Their careers depend on serving the Democratic establishment and its allies, including wealthy donors. And that requires opposing anyone who would seriously push substantial party reforms.

Thus, regardless of who wins the race for DNC chair, the Democratic Partys deep interests will continue to clash with progressives basic goals. As a result, a strong case can be made that left-leaning people must break from the Democratic Party if they want to achieve their aims. Even those who still hope to sway the party could be better off doing it from the outside, where they may pose enough of a partisan threat to exert some real leverage.

Alternatives to the Democrats

For those progressives ready to make the leap to another party, there are various options to consider. To begin with, there are the left third parties that existed prior to 2016, including but not limited to the Vermont Progressive Party, the Green Party, Socialist Alternative, and the Justice Party. Most of these groups have demonstrated that they are capable of winning elections, under the right conditions and with strong enough candidates. All seem to have gotten some boost from the energy generated by the Sanders campaign.

There also are a couple of bold new attempts by Berners to found their own parties, which may appeal more directly to Bernies huge base. One is the Progressive Independent Party; it aims to create a coalition of third parties and likeminded groups on the left. The other is the Draft Bernie for a Peoples Party movement, which actually seeks to recruit Bernie Sanders to found a new progressive populist party.

Arguably, the most intriguing of the above alternatives right now is Draft Berniejust launched earlier this month. If a popular left figure like Sanders actually agreed to form a new party, it could shake the current party system to its core and finally give progressives a prominent voice in American politics. Many people could be attracted to such a project, as polls show most Americans want a viable third party option and support a wide array of progressive policies.

While recruiting Sanders for a peoples party may sound like a long-shot effort, his own statements indicate that he remains open to third party politics, and might well go that route if his work to reform the Democrats fails. However, if Bernie doesnt eventually do this, the movement for a new party may go forward without him.

In any case, the DNC election and subsequent events should challenge both influential and ordinary progressives to ask themselves how long they will continue sailing on the U.S.S. Democrat. That ship is not headed toward the desired destination, nor is it even designed to go there. Moreover, in the wake of the 2016 election, it is a boat that appears to be rotting, drifting, and gradually sinking. Why not jump aboard a different vessel, one that really has the potential to get us where we urgently need to go?

See original here:
Progressives Need A New Party, Not A New DNC Chair - Huffington Post

Dear Editor,

You have probably wondered where I have been. Well, I am back writing; speaking up and speaking out. There has certainly been a lot to take in since the November election, and the ensuing reaction to the outcome. Interestingly, nothing has changed all these months later. That stated, I have much to say. There are so many issues to discuss, and I will not attempt to do so in a single letter. Among those issues are Obamacare repeal, travel restrictions and the ensuing ruling by the court, immigration and deportation, the wall, tax reform, and on.

I will begin by calling out the militant, progressive left. They have long claimed to be accepting and tolerant, but have showed themselves time and again to lack those qualities. The evidence of their lack of these qualities has been highly evident in the massive, nationwide protests since the election of President Trump, the calls to undermine our election by calling on electors bound to Trump to vote for Hillary, the rioting and looting that has erupted out of the protests, the obstruction in the Senate of cabinet appointees, and the unfair, unsubstantiated claims about our president and his supporters being racist, misogynist, xenophobic, etc.

Today, my letter will focus on the Progressives. Progressives are more commonly called Democrats and liberals, but the left has continued to be moved left by the Progressive agenda. And let me explain the Progressive agenda, it is based in a Marxist philosophy, a failed ideology, time and again. Marxism is Socialism, and also serves as the foundation of Communism. There is no major difference between the Socialistic and Communistic ends, the only thing that really varies is approach and level of governmental control. Socialism has significant government control, but may allow for some free market, freedom, policies to exist, as determined by a democratic philosophy. Communism is complete government control without the existence of any free market, freedom policies. Simply put though, even in Socialism, there is no true freedom, because freedom is determined by the government.

That approach is not consistent with American or Constitutional values, as freedom in America, per the Constitution, is based on natural rights and freedom, as freely given by God. Therefore, Socialism and Communism are un-American, and unconstitutional. This is why the Progressive left continues to seek to undermine our nation, our Constitution, our laws, and our institutions of government and society.

To be clear, the Constitution certainly allows people to freely believe in Socialism or Communism, but gives zero authority to establish any such laws or government on the basis of those beliefs because they are contrary to the very establishment of our nation and government.

Allow me to establish my argument using the very text of Karl Marx, the Communist Manifesto (yes, I own a copy of it so that I may know my opponents and the basis of their beliefs). In the CM, Marx lays out 10 ways to implement his agenda, prefaced by these words: Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property

Here is the list of 10 ways to promote the communist way into society.

Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.

Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state

Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies

Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.

Free education for all children in public schools.

Let me now begin my analysis. Marxs opening statement is a direct reference to tyrannical inroads to push the 10 point agenda and implement Socialism. This, in and of itself, is contradictory to our Constitution and government. Now on to the 10 points.

The government has long worked to eliminate private property in land. This is generally accomplished via regulations, but also is witnessed by the large amount of land owned by the federal government west of the Mississippi River. It is also witnessed by the ownership or designation of land as a federal park or protected by the national government nationwide.

There is no question of our application of an income tax in the U.S. that it is a heavily graduated income tax. This is why a flat or fair tax gets zero consideration when suggested. This is yet another attack on the property rights of individuals. The income people earn is an extension of their person and knowledge, it is property.

It is well known that we tax inheritance heavily, and disproportionately the wealthy. This is Marxs way of stealing the wealth of the wealthy and redistributing that wealth to the detriment of society. To make all equally poor. Dont believe me? Take one dollar out of your left pocket and put it into your right. Your right pocket is now $1 richer, but your left is now $1 poorer. If you keep money in your left pocket because you only put the money you have to spend in your right, then now you are $1 poorer than you would have been. No wealth has been created, it was only transferred. This is simply a thought process for those that wish to try to attack me on this.

If you rebel against the government, or leave the U.S., then this point states the government should take everything you have, and that they have right to do so. This is another attack on private property/ownership rights. This is best illustrated by civil asset forfeiture laws in many states.

This simply explains the existence of the Federal Reserve, the IMF, and the World Bank. END THE FED! The FCC and U.S. DOT. These departments create federal agencies to control these aspects. Neither existed for over 100 years after our founding.

This isnt done on a direct basis in the U.S., but it happens through indirect means. Those means are called regulations. Yes, our government controls, quite directly, our means of production through the guise of regulation. None the less, the government has direct control and power.

On this point I want to focus on industrial armies, aka, unions. This allows further control, extortion of capital from business, control over labor by government and unions associated with government, and the foundation of class warfare in civilized society.

This establishes a foundation to begin to transfer power from individuals, localities, and states, to the central governmental body, the federal government, to allow centralization of power, and further establish the means of despotism and authoritarianism to control all aspects of installing Socialistic programs and policies on everyone.

And this should really be self-explanatory at this point. Our public education is controlled by government, and therefore allows for government indoctrination. No wonder Clinton and Sanders wanted to expand free education through college ranks. No less to further indoctrinate our children to the Marxist mentality that runs rampant through our education system.

This really illustrates why we have an unconstitutional expansion of the federal government. It explains the IRS, the Bureau of Land Management, the EPA, the Federal Communications Commission, HUD, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Labor, and the Department of Education. We can easily eliminate these departments and agencies.

It illustrates the Progressive left, Democrat, or so-called liberal philosophy and ideology. It explains it very well, and shows it is very anti-American. As I continue to write week after week, it is going to be important to understand the points that I have presented here, which is why I chose to begin this series of writings with this topic. This letter will provide a sound foundation for my future letters on the variety of other topics I will be writing about. I will not address the letters you are very likely to receive Editor, based on this letter and others. People can say what they wish. I may address an occasional letter, should it be worthy of addressing, but I doubt that is likely to happen. Most simply address an emotional or opinioned response, but do not usually present many facts to back their positions or opinions. I do, or at least try to.

I will end with a quote from Frederick Bastiat, A citizen cannot at the same time be free and not free.

Brian Johnson Clare, Michigan

See the article here:
Calling out the progressives - Clare County Review