Mediaboss Marketing

My hope of Dissolving Illinois to save middle-class taxpayers from being stuck in this toxic wasteland of a state hit a snag on Thursday.

It wasn't the hazmat crews crawling over the Capitol Building in Springfield after finding some mysterious white powder tossed around the governor's office.

It was what Democratic Boss Mike Madigan's legislature did with quisling Republican help in overriding Gov. Bruce Rauner's veto of their $5 billion, 32 percent tax increase without any real structural economic reforms.

For leverage, Democrats and pro-tax activists used warnings from Moody's Investors Service, stressing that without a tax hike Illinois bonds would likely revert to junk status.

Moody's later said that even with the tax increase, that state bonds might still be considered junk, because there were no real spending reforms.

And then 71 members of the state House, dominated by Democrats, wafted their toxic fumes all over the taxpayers of Illinois.

"It's been kind of brutal for me," whined State Rep. Steve Andersson, the Geneva Republican and Boss Madigan enabler who voted for the Madigan tax increase and the Madigan override.

"I've received hate mail, death threats, my personal cellphone has been given out," Andersson said, "but you know what I've thought about? The people, suffering ..."

I thought I could see his lower lip quivering a bit.

And David Harris, Republican Madigan enabler from Arlington Heights, speechified that he had precious little joy. He, too, voted for the Madigan tax increase and the override.

"There's no joy here," Harris moaned. "There's no joy. We are looking into an abyss, a financial abyss, and action is required."

Well, what about all those Illinois homeowners being squeezed out of their homes? Do they have joy?

And what about the small business owners who won't take it anymore, and will take the jobs with them across the state line?

And what about taxpayers who don't hold news conferences, who don't have public relations consultants to call network TV reporters to chronicle their pain? Where's their joy?

They just leave.

As Andersson and Harris whimpered about their bruised feelings and their courage, I was reminded of what my grandfather, Papou Pete, told me about politicians:

"When they speak, the donkeys break wind."

Papou was right. So please stop speaking, Andersson. Please, stop, Harris. It's not only obnoxious. It smells.

So now, after all the talk and all the stunts, who won and who lost?

Boss Madigan won. He's the Khan of Madiganistan for a reason. He works harder, he's more ruthless, he's smarter, and he's cautious, until he strikes.

He wins because he knows what he wants: the money and the power. That's all he's ever wanted.

And Rauner lost, big time.

Madigan pushed the tax increase through days ago, with mostly Democratic support, but also with the help of 15 Republican votes. He then overrode Rauner's veto on Thursday.

With all the political noise over the past few days, I don't want you to forget something else. And without that something else, none of this would have happened.

Those 15 Republicans who voted for the tax hike gave Madigan enough votes to pass the tax and to give ample political cover to eight House Democrats, some in suburban districts, to vote against it.

In effect, the 15 Republicans protected the Madigan Democrats, so Madigan didn't have to expose his pet minions. And now they can send out direct mail advertising approved by Boss Madigan to tell voters in their districts that they're Democrats independent of Madigan, that they care for middle-class suburban taxpayers, that they haven't lost touch.

Of course that's nonsense. If Boss Madigan told them to lick the white powder off the Capitol Building floor, they'd do it.

There were 10 Democrats who voted against the tax increase: Mike Halpin; Marty Moylan; Michelle Mussman; Jerry Costello II; Natalie Manley; Sue Scherer; Katie Stuart; Sam Yingling; John Connor; Rita Mayfield.

Eight of these, all but Connor and Mayfield, were expected to have been targeted by Republicans.

You need a scorecard in this game.

Madigan would never have allowed them to risk voter anger. Because without them, he'd risk losing his majority and then he wouldn't be Speaker of the Illinois House.

There will be much talk of Republicans and Democrats jumping from tax vote to veto override, and who flipped and who didn't. But please consider this:

That's all about confusing the voter.

Remember that without the 15 Republicans voting for the tax hike, the rest of it would have been moot. Some Republicans were in districts where universities eat tax dollars, and perhaps the universities will protect them. Yet each deserve a vigorous primary challenge.

And I'm mentioning the 15 Republican Madigan enablers here by name, so you can keep score on them as well:

There was the lead whiner, Andersson; and Terri Bryant; John Cavaletto; C.D. Davidsmeyer; Mike Fortner; Norine Hammond; and Harris, because after he spoke, all the donkeys were exhausted.

And Chad Hays, who is not seeking re-election; Sara Wojcicki Jimenez; Charlie Meier; Bill Mitchell; Reggie Phillips; Bob Pritchard; David Reis; Michael Unes.

Yes, Papou Pete is long gone, but he understood their kind.

They always have good reasons for reaching into your pocket and taking your money. They're always sad about it. And some almost cry.

See the article here:
Boss Madigan's Republican enablers give his minions cover - Chicago Tribune

Most mornings I spend my commute listening to the New York Times podcast The Daily. Managing editor Michael Barbarohosts an informative, well-produced look at the major news themes of the day, and it tends to feature some of the papers best reporters and analysts. This morning, Barbaroand domestic-affairs correspondent Sheryl Gay Stolberg examined an interesting alleged contradiction: Few states benefited more from Obamacares Medicaid expansion than Kentucky, yet its Republican senators are leading the charge for Obamacare repeal, including for Medicaid reform. How can that be?

The exchange had echoes of a long-voiced Democratic complaint. How can working-class Republican voters keep voting against their interests? After all, dont they know what Medicaid does for them? Moving beyond Medicaid, dont they know that higher taxes mean better social services? Dont they know that voting for GOP politicians means enriching the fat cats, at everyone elses expense?

Hidden within todays podcast was a clue a critical clue showing why GOP voters make the decisions they make. Stolberg said that coal-industry job losses had been abysmal, crushing at the same time that roughly 400,000 Kentuckians had taken advantage of the Medicaid expansion. And shes right. The Lexington Herald-Leader reported last year that coal jobs in the state had fallen to their lowest level in 118 years to a mere 6,900. Magnifying the crisis, a coal-mining job pays so well that its virtually impossible to replace that income without significant retraining and (often) relocation. You cant move from the mine to Walmart and maintain the same standard of living. People do, however, move from the mine to Medicaid and at least have health insurance.

And so were left with an odd definition of interests. For years the Left has unapologetically waged regulatory and rhetorical war on coal, implementing policies that were most assuredly not in the economic interests of Kentuckys mining families. But now those same families are going to let bygones be bygones and rally around a second-rate welfare program advanced by the same movement? Some will. But some will quite reasonably look at a bigger picture and distrust the party that helped bring them to penury.

Lets move beyond Kentucky and its coal. Family dissolution is perhaps Americas foremost driver of poverty and dependency. The rules are simple. Follow the success sequence graduate high school, get a job, get married, and then have kids and your poverty rate is extremely low. Deviate, and the problems magnify. Now, between the two parties, which one has centered its appeal around married parents with kids and which party has doubled down on single moms? Even worse, the Democrats far-left base has intentionally attacked the nuclear family as archaic and patriarchal. It has celebrated sexual autonomy as a cardinal virtue. Then, when faced with the fractured families that result, it says, Here, let the government help.

Thus we have the 2012 Obama campaigns celebrated Julia, the single woman who never needed a man. Like nuns marrying Christ, single moms were bound to big government, and to the many bountiful benefits it provides. Yet the fracturing of the family is not in the best economic interests of women. Sure, some of those women will let bygones be bygones and rally around the party that most celebrates the sexual revolution while expanding public assistance. Others, however, will reasonably look at a bigger picture, one that asks whether government dependency helps perpetuate the larger and worse crisis besetting Americas families.

Moreover, since when is a vote a mere economic decision? Should every family sit down at their supper table, open their calculator apps, and do simple math based on each partys government giveaways? Are you really telling a family that values religious liberty, abhors abortion, seeks a more decisive approach to jihadists, and believes good citizens should be armed citizens that theyre voting against their interests if their senators policy will increase their insurance premiums?

Its not that simple, and wealthy progressives the very people who are most likely to advance the argument that working-class Republicans vote against their interests understand this all too well. Why? Because they dont apply this kind of crude economic calculus to their own votes. Wealthy liberals routinely vote for higher taxes to fund public schools, state and federal welfare programs, and other government benefits that theyll never use. Why? Because they are trying not just to maximize personal benefit but to create a particular kind of society that they believe is most conducive to human flourishing. Theyre not simply thinking about themselves and thats to their credit.

Its time for progressives to understand that conservatives have the same mindset, just filtered through a fundamentally different ideology. David Brooks argued in a July 4 column on this same topic that most Americans vote on the basis of their vision of what makes a great nation. Hes absolutely correct, and our interests depend on the complex interplay between our faith, our families, and our communities. For example, is a person who enjoys more religious freedom but has less economic stability better off than a person whose liberty is diminished but has reliable health insurance? All too many progressives think theres an easy answer to that question. Theyre wrong.

Our interests are inextricably linked to our values, and millions of Republicans long ago decided that progressive political values no matter how well-intentioned ultimately harm the nation they love.

READ MORE: Conservatism in the Era of Trump The GOPs Ideological Earthquake and the Aftermath The Trump Tipping Point for Conservatives?

David French is a senior writer for National Review, a senior fellow at the National Review Institute, and an attorney.

More:
Stop Saying Republican Voters Are 'Voting against Their Interests' - National Review

I would like to ask Nancy Roberto, where was the outrage when images of President Obama being lynched, having his throat cut or burned alive were daily flooding the internet? When gun-toting, flag-draped patriots compared him to Hitler? Was she concerned then with what his little daughters felt seeing them? Where were the well-behaved Republicans then?

Her cry for Republican outrage illustrates perfectly the hypocritical double-standard that Republicans live by. Sure, scream, cry out, exhibit plenty of outrage as long as it benefits them. Her outrage against a progressive, liberal agenda reflects totally the business as usual attitude of the GOP tax cuts for the rich, no health care for the poor, discrimination against minorities of all kinds, a backwards, destructive agenda which threatens a socio-political and economic dark age for the nation, and its current poster boy is certainly not a leader in any sense of the word.

If Connecticuts Republicans are constantly amazed at why the state remains blue, its suggested quite well in her letter. The level of unfairness and seeming downright antagonism towards anything liberal would only open the door towards turning Connecticut into a more difficult place to live then it is now. It is not wanted here.

Wheres the outrage, Nancy Roberto? Well, whats good for the goose is good for the gander. You want it you got it.

Advertisement

Barry Hatrick

Milford

Original post:
Letter to the Editor: Republican outrage 'hypocritical' - New Haven Register

Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) has only been in Congress for six months, but hes already establishing himself as a provocateur.

His latest controversy: filming a video inside a former gas chamber in the Auschwitz Nazi concentration camp. The video first appeared online over the weekend.

The backlash grew enough that the freshman lawmaker, who is 55, issued a statement apologizing for the video by the end of the day on Wednesday.

I filmed the Auschwitz message with great humility. My intent was to offer a reverent homage to those who were murdered in Auschwitz and to remind the world that evil exists, that free nations must remember, and stand strong, Higgins said.

In the video posted over the weekend, Higgins explains how the gas chambers worked and says theyre an example of why the U.S. military "must be invincible."

However, my message has caused pain to some whom I love and respect," Higgins continued in the statement retracting the video. "For that, my own heart feels sorrow. Out of respect to any who may feel that my video posting was wrong or caused pain, I have retracted my video.

The Auschwitz-Birkenau Memorial and Museum and the Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect had condemned Higginss video on Wednesdayas disrespectful and insensitive toward Holocaust victims.

Congressman Higgins, Auschwitz is not a television studio," Steven Goldstein, executive director of the Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect, said in a statement.

The Auschwitz Memorial pointedly posted a photo on Twitter showing a sign at the entrance of the gas chambers that asks visitors to please maintain silence to remember [the victims] suffering and show respect for their memory.

Higgins concluded the video at Auschwitz by saying: Its hard to walk away from gas chambers and ovens without a very sober feeling of commitment, unwavering commitment, to make damn sure that the United States of America is protected from the evils of the world.

Higginss pin designating him as a member of Congress is visible on his lapel, along with a dual American-Polish flag pin.

Its unclear if Higgins toured the former concentration camp as part of official business. A spokesman did not respond to an inquiry asking precisely when and why Higgins was visiting Poland.

Higgins also drew national headlines a month ago for harsh comments on threats from radicalized Islamic terrorists.

He referred to radicalized Islamic suspects as heathen animals and concluded with a call to hunt them, identify them, and kill them. Kill them all. For the sake of all that is good and righteous. Kill them all.

The post came a day after terrorist attacks in London, for which the Islamic State claimed responsibility.

Three days later, Higginsposted again on Facebook asking his supporters to sign up for his campaign emails.

Higgins has long had a knack for going viral.

Before running for the House last year, Higgins served as captain for the St. Landry Parish Sheriffs Office.

Higgins created a series of Crime Stoppers videos in which he displayed a tough persona commenting on suspects and promising redemption if they admitted to their crimes.

Higginss videos drew millions of views on YouTube and even attracted the attention of late-night comedian Jimmy Fallon in 2015.

Im going to have a cheeseburger here with fries and a Coke, and leave a nice tip for the waitress, Higgins says outside of Stellys Supermarket. Meanwhile, your next meal will be served through a small hole in a cell door.

But last year, Higgins proved to be too controversial in one video that ultimately led to his resignation from the sheriffs office.

The video was not made on behalf of the Crime Stoppers series, but Higgins was shown describing members of a wanted street gang as animals, thugs and heathens while holding a gun.

"You will be hunted, you will be trapped, and if you raise your weapon to a man like me, we'll return fire with superior fire, Higgins said.

Higgins defeated former Louisiana Lieutenant Governor Scott Angelle for the deep-red, safe GOP seat last year.

Fallon joked while playing a clip from Higginss Crime Stoppers segment that the then-captain should consider a higher profile.

Can that guy run for president? Fallon joked.

Little did Fallon know Higgins would be serving in the House two years later. Higgins's attention-getting yet controversial actions have gained a national stage, where the consequences could be greater.

Olivia Beavers contributed.

Visit link:
Controversial House Republican gains national attention after filming Auschwitz video - The Hill

If all press is good press, June was a banner month for James Buchal.

The chairman of the Multnomah County Republican Party grabbed attention June 4 when he recruited new members at a far-right "free speech" rally in downtown Portland. Buchal soon began promoting the idea that his party could use militia groups like the Three Percenters and the Oath Keepers as security for future marches and events. And on June 28, the county GOP, under Buchal's leadership, formally authorized bringing in paramilitary organizations as armed guards.

The decision to turn to the Oath Keepers and Three Percenters for security immediately drew backlash on Twitter, Facebook and the county GOP's own website. Some called the decision a move toward martial law.

But Buchal sees it very differently: as a cheap way to keep an outnumbered and reviled party safe in enemy territory.

Only 13 percent of county voters are registered as Republicans. The party's volunteer ranks are even smaller: 179 members. And Portland, never a GOP stronghold, has embraced its fiercest Little Beirut reputation since the November election, with antifascist and anarchist groups marching in the streets to battle self-proclaimed neo-Nazis.

An antifascist protester in Portland on June 30. (William Gagan)

But Buchal claims Republicans are antifa's real target. Since he became chairman in 2015, the county GOP has made jarring changesembracing rhetoric that echoes the talking points of "alt-right" extremist groups emboldened by the election of President Donald Trump.

Buchal spoke with WW in his Sunnyside neighborhood office, discussing why he's leading his party to the political fringes.

WW: The Oath Keepers? What's wrong with regular security guards?

James Buchal: Because we are an all-volunteer organization with no money. So if we are going to get security services, we are going to get them from volunteers. And people who volunteer to provide security services to Republicans are generally going to be people who share the view that the government has developed an unconstitutional overreach of power, and that it is a reasonable political objective to attempt to rein government in.

Militia member assists the public at a June 4 right-wing rally. (William Gagan)

These are the same groups that helped seize the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. How are they on the side of the rule of law?

Some reporter told me with respect to the Malheur thing that the Oath Keepers down there were keeping the peace. I don't accept the premise of your question that the groups are inherently lawless. And we're talking about people who are locally based here in Portland. Not people who may have come from Arizona or Idaho or someplace because they like to go from place to place participating in situations of conflict. It's members of the local community.

What threat in Portland is so scary that you need to bring in a paramilitary organization?

It's been a sequence of events. The [volunteers] who were at the street fairs reported incidents that made them feel unsafe. And then we got people threatening to drag us out of the Avenue of Roses Parade, and then there were people threatening on Facebook that they were going to stab us to death if we dared to participate, and so on and so forth. So it's been sort of a continuous escalation. It was at that point that this idea began to take on greater sense, in my mind at least.

Right and left-wing protesters spar in Portland on June 30. (William Gagan)

Other than the one anonymous letter before a parade in April, what threats has the Multnomah County Republican Party received? Were you really kicked out of a restaurant?

I think when people call you up and they have this screaming demonic tone in their voice, it gives you some concern. Especially if it's more than one of them. We used to hold our quarterly larger meetings at Mekong Bistro. And when we went to get the one organized for June 26, we were told that we were no longer allowed to do that. Because it was political. I heard about it all secondhand. I inferred that they had come under pressure.

Do you acknowledge that hate speech and neo-Nazi activity has gone up in Portland?

It's a question of how you define your terms. [At the June 4 rally,] I saw two people carrying signs that said "Diversity equals white genocide," and then I saw them get kicked out. I haven't personally seen hate speech or neo-Nazi activity at all, unless these two people carrying the signs counted.

Antifascist protesters chase a counter-protester who stole a flag they were burning on June 30. (William Gagan)

Do you think the so-called alt-right groups are racist?

The left and the right may have a somewhat different definition of racism. I have the impression that many on the left would regard any defense of American exceptionalism as inherently racist. I think it is possible to defend Western culture without being a racist.

Do you see a difference between defending Western culture and defending whiteness?

I look at an idea entirely independent of the identity of the person who is advancing the idea. Meritocracy is color-blind. Equality of opportunity should be color-blind.

Right-wing protester in Portland on June 30. (William Gagan)

You've argued that the alt-right isn't racist. Let's say you're right. What ideology do they stand for other than antagonizing and provoking people?

I see them as standing for a restoration of constitutional government. And some of them, like Patriot Prayer, I think also have a Christian component to them, which would say that, in addition to getting the government under control, we need a rise in public morality.

How do you explain the accused MAX train killer who attended alt-right protests, then?

You don't know who is going to show up at your event. If someone shows up wearing swastikas, the answer to that is going to be, "You're not standing anywhere near us, asshole." What I know about Jeremy Christian is that he was registered as a Libertarian. There's a lot of crap out there on the internet. Who knows what influenced him? But I can guarantee you that it wasn't a Republican Party website. The conclusion I draw from the evidence I've seen is that he was mentally ill. And so I guess I sort of resent the notion that we're called upon to distance ourselves from some nut who as far as I know has never been to a Republican Party meeting.

You're giving speeches next to men dressed as Captain America. Why should Portlanders take you any more seriously than a teenager with a mask and a stink bomb?

I should prefer that they do not dress up in superhero costumes. I would say that this goes back to the ideal of judging an idea on its merits. If you're in the group of people who thinks there is such a thing as objective reality, then when someone says something, then you evaluate the objective merits of what he said. Is what he said true? Not "he's a member of a different identity group, so I'm going to discount or ignore what he says."

An alt-right protester in Portland on June 30. (William Gagan)

Decades ago, California's Republican Party started appealing to far-right groups and white nationalists, which partly led to the party's decline. Do you worry this will happen to you?

One is always concerned when working for a political party to not take steps to shoot oneself in the foot. But in Portland, we must look at the long game. We are unlikely to be electing a [Republican] mayor anytime soon. So I would give you the counter-analogy of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan. Barry Goldwater was successfully demonized as an extremist, a perception that he fueled by saying that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice, and he lost. But the defense of these ideals ultimately gained traction and led to the election of Ronald Reagan. So I think the pendulum will swing. As people begin to get a lower and lower opinion of the leftists and the results of their disastrously counterproductive policies, a good honest defense of fundamental principles like the rule of law and limited government will eventually gain adherence. Even if it is unfashionable at the moment.

Here is the original post:
Multnomah County Republican Party Chair Says His Plan to Use Paramilitary Groups for Security Isn't RadicalIt's a ... - Willamette Week