Archive for May, 2017

Susan Stamper Brown: It’s Time for Democrats to Get Real – Noozhawk

By Susan Stamper Brown | May 31, 2017 | 12:40 p.m.

Democrats just lost another election, this time in Montana. Unless they are willing to do some down-on-your-knees, cry-out-to-Jesus soul searching, the only way theyll win another election is if they collude with the Russians to steal one the way President Donald Trump didnt.

Its going to take much more than an Olivia Pope-style scandal fixer to fix whats wrong with the Democratic Party. Putting a cowboy suit on an anti-gun, big government liberal like Rob Quist, who regularly does gigs at a nudist resort in Idaho, was about as effective as putting lipstick on a pig.

It was also a naked attempt to blanket a semblance of normalcy over a Democrat Party that better represents the characters in the Star Wars cantina scene than those on Main Street or Your Street, U.S.A.

Thats why Greg Gianforte won Montana's special election for the House of Representatives, despite being charged with assaulting a journalist one day prior.

After reading reports and listening to the audio of the altercation, I thought Gianfortes response was kind of sexy. Before the snowflake generation evolved, thats how manly men resolved their differences.

And still do, in places like Montana and Alaska, where men arent ostracized for being men. They duke it out, brush it off, shake hands and go on their way.

Republicans should be on guard that the leftist-controlled media are not there to get facts; they are there to get at them.

Reporters who just happen to have a recorder turned on will do their darnedest to bait politicians into physical altercations. As tempting as it might be, theres no place in politics for body-slamming obnoxious metrosexual snowflake reporters, or any other kind for that matter.

Democrats and the left-leaning media had nothing to say when in 2004, now-Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., emerged from a crowd and body-slammed a guy who was trying to shout down then-Vermont Gov. Howard Dean. Democrats promoted that clown to senator but are outraged at Gianforte.

Lets not forget that the violent political climate propagated by todays progressive-left is to blame for fostering a culture of violence. Violence, not manly wrestling matches.

The Democrat Party is overrun by violent far-left extremists who regularly display their antipathy to things they dislike using violence. Setting fires, throwing Molotov cocktails, smashing windows, throwing rocks at police, destroying private property and physically attacking Republicans like what happened at Berkeley in February was the norm long before Trump arrived on the scene.

Normal Americans watching this appalling behavior have come to understand that, just like terrorists, these left-wing anarchists the Democrat Party harbors cannot be reasoned with, so defeating Democrats at the ballot box is Americas only hope.

Despite the barrage of Trump-Russia nothing-burgers the media cook up and dish out daily, regular Americans believe what the Democrat Party stands for is far worse.

Democrats are out of touch to believe that their globalist, gun-grabbing, anti-Christian, anti-free speech, anti-capitalism, Russian-boogiemen-around-every-corner, race-baiting platform of victimhood would win the hearts and minds of regular people.

Whats flabbergasting to Democrats is that Americas proverbial abused wife on the other side of the aisle has finally conjured up the courage to put her foot down and say, No more! Not in my house! No more to the lies ... no more to the abuse.

Shocking?

Only to those who refuse to take an honest look at themselves and the political party to which they associate.

Susan Stamper Brown writes about culture, politics and current events from her home in Alaska, and is syndicated by Cagle Cartoons. Contact her through Facebook or at [emailprotected]. Click here for previous columns. The opinions expressed are her own.

See the original post here:
Susan Stamper Brown: It's Time for Democrats to Get Real - Noozhawk

Charges dismissed for suspect in 2016 murder – Sedalia Democrat

Charges are being dismissed against one of two suspects in the June 2016 arson death of Matthew Eldenburg.

Cody A. Harvey, of Sedalia, was charged in September 2016 with first degree arson and first degree murder, but those charges are being dismissed, according to Pettis County Prosecuting Attorney Phillip Sawyer.

A second suspect, Aran T. Cantrell, also of Sedalia, is facing the same charges, which will remain. Both suspects have been in the Pettis County Jail since their arrest.

Both Harvey and Cantrell requested change of venue and judge after entering not guilty pleas, and all requests were granted. Harveys case was set for a jury trial next week in Jackson County.

This morning it became evident to the Prosecutors Office that the admissible evidence was going to be insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Cody A. Harvey committed the charged crimes, and accordingly, charges against Mr. Harvey are being dismissed, Sawyer said in a news release issued Wednesday evening. We are limited in what we can say about the evidence because a case is still pending against Aran Cantrell, but the problem does not stem from any failure on the part of the (Sedalia) Police Department or any inadequacy in its investigation.

The police department and other law enforcement agencies did everything they possibly could to bring the investigation to a successful conclusion. The problem involves an essential non-law enforcement witness who has given false or inaccurate statements as to what took place in the case.

Cantrells case is set for a jury trial in Clay County in July. Sawyer said the evidence issue involves only the Harvey case and that he expects Cantrells case to be tried in July.

Eldenburg, 30, died in a fire at his South Grand Avenue home June 23, 2016. Sedalia firefighters found him during a primary search of the residence and paramedics tried to resuscitate him, but he was pronounced dead at Bothwell Regional Health Center two hours after the fire began.

Cantrell and Harvey were arrested by SPD about a week after the fire, which was ruled an arson by the Missouri State Fire Marshals Office, and charged with first degree arson.

It wasnt until September that first degree murder charges were added, as Eldenburgs autopsy results were needed. Pettis County Coroner Robert Skip Smith told the Democrat in September the results showed Eldenburg was alive at the time of the fire, making the case a homicide.

According to court documents, several witnesses identified Cantrell as a suspect. Cantrell told SPD detectives Eldenburg was unconscious on the couch, admitting to getting gasoline from the garage and pouring it on Eldenburg. He said an accomplice, identified as Harvey, lit Eldenburg on fire. Cantrell said he poured gas throughout the house and that Harvey lit the fire with the stoves natural gas turned on, both leaving the house once the fire began.

Harvey was then questioned by detectives, but he maintained he was not involved in the fire. However, he was unable to give an explanation as to where he was from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. June 23, and admitted to being in an argument with Eldenburg the night before.

Aran Cantrell

http://sedaliademocrat.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/web1_Aran-Cantrell.jpgAran Cantrell

Cody Harvey

http://sedaliademocrat.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/web1_Cody-Harvey.jpgCody Harvey

Second suspects trial set for July

Nicole Cooke can be reached at 660-530-0138 or on Twitter @NicoleRCooke.

.

More here:
Charges dismissed for suspect in 2016 murder - Sedalia Democrat

In President Trump’s wake, divisions mark both Democratic and Republican parties – Los Angeles Times

Six months after President Trump breached long-standing political boundaries to win the White House, the nations major political parties still muddle in his wake.

On the sun-swept lawn of the Hotel del Coronado two weeks ago, national Republican leaders sipped cocktails and listened to San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer, one of the partys brightest lights in the most populous state, praise a brand of moderate Republicanism that looks nothing like the versions coming out of Washington either the populism of the president or the more orthodox conservatism of congressional leaders.

A week later, Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez talked in a Sacramento interview of the remarkably constructive debate under way in his party, characterizing its divisions as largely in the past. Within hours, he and other party leaders were booed as they welcomed delegates to a state convention that would be filled with persistent internal warfare on healthcare and other issues.

No political party is immune to disagreement; indeed the path to power often relies on combustible ideological diversity. But Democrats and Republicans alike seem particularly adrift and quarrelsome these days.

Part of the reason is the magnetic power of Trump, who has attracted Republicans and repelled Democrats with such force that the parties often seem to be defined solely in relation to him, for or against. That has left both parties images blurry rather than sharp.

Steve Schmidt, a Republican strategist who ran Arizona Sen. John McCains 2008 presidential campaign, sees both parties as having left their anchorages without new destinations in sight.

The political parties have become divorced from their ideological roots; we saw that in the last election, he said. The Republican Party has become unmoored from the intellectual foundation of conservatism. Democrats are divorced from the realities of working people in their party, badly out of step.

Both, he said are held in contempt, as they should be.

Indeed, a poll published in April by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center found Americans viewing both parties in a more negative light than three months earlier.

Only 40% of Americans had a favorable view of Republicans, down from 47% in January. Forty-five percent of Americans had a positive view of Democrats, down from 51% in January.

For Republicans, the path to full control of Washington led to the partys divisions.

Republicans seized the Senate and House by electing candidates driven by differing emphases: tea party ardor, pro-business tax-cutting fervor or culturally conservative social views. (What was once a Republican orthodoxy, rigorous opposition to deficit spending, has mostly been lost).

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) has pressed tax cuts that primarily benefit wealthy Americans and cuts to programs for the less well-off, including support for the poor or sick, and reforms to Social Security.

Trump came into office advocating the opposite: protecting Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and spending on infrastructure. That view was embraced by his target audiences, voters in the industrial Midwest and Northeast who had previously sided with Democrats.

Trump since has leaned in the direction of congressional Republicans on healthcare and the budget, to the point that his budget has been criticized by some centrist Republicans as too draconian.

Trumps supporters, of course, see his singular ideology as the way the party should go.

It would be hard to say that Donald Trump isnt the Republican Party, said Ron Ferrance, GOP county chairman in Luzerne County in northeast Pennsylvania, which voted for President Obama in 2012 and flipped to Trump last November.

Trumps version of Republicanism is so popular in that economically stressed county that voters still have Trump signs in their yards, Ferrance said. Some of the appeal centers on Trumps deviation from the partys traditional stances on issues such as trade and immigration.

The main thing that people want in our area is to put America first and to feel safe, he said. Hes going to deliver that. Thats going to give him the buoyancy in 2020.

Across the country in California, however, Mayor Faulconer argued for a Republican Party that sticks to jobs and sets aside hotter issues. He suggested although he was not indiscreet enough to say so outright that it was the only path forward in areas where Republicans are not already dominant.

In an interview, Faulconer touted his citys close business ties with nearby Tijuana hardly the build the wall message emanating from the president.

Asked about the discrepancy, Faulconer said that the areas Latino community helps define us.

Good quality jobs for both sides of the border, he said. That works for us.

Democrats have no clearly defined leader or universally accepted direction aside from opposition to Trump.

Democrats essentially remain in the box where Hillary Clinton spent the general election: able to unify Trump opponents, but unable to craft a message for those not motivated by distaste for him.

The Democrats are closer to where the electorate is headed, but have shown a tin ear and an inability to understand the groups that formed the backbone of the Democratic Party for decades, said veteran Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart.

The deepest Democratic schisms involve whether to focus on liberal social issues or the economic struggles of blue-collar and middle-class Americans. During the presidential campaign, many voters saw the party as more intent on social issues, an image disputed by Democrats but pushed by Republicans.

The Democratic Party, especially the presidential campaign, lost its core economic message last year; Trump sort of outmaneuvered us among Democrats and independents, said Ohio Democratic Party Chairman David Pepper, who has spent the last few months in what he calls kitchen conversations with voters.

Supporting the civil rights of Democratic voter groups is admirable, he said, but we cant let them bait us into getting away from our core message and I think that does happen.

Party leaders in interviews expressed concern that the lesson may not have been learned.

Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Ind., and an unsuccessful candidate this year to head the Democratic National Committee, pointed to the issue of trade. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) energized a wide swath of Democrats by blaming trade deals for gutting jobs in the Midwest. That does not reflect reality, the mayor said, even if the idea has been embraced by many Democrats.

Weve got a lot of wins on the board from globalization, he said of his city. Weve got auto workers making Mercedes cars that are sold to China. Globalization doesnt have to be a disaster for working people.

But what could be disasters, he said, are seemingly unimportant economic developments touted by the partys more elite factions, such as ride-sharing and driverless vehicles. The first threatens demand for cars, the second threatens demand for drivers, a significant employment option for blue-collar workers.

Nobody in the political space is wrestling with it, he said.

Perez, the national Democratic chairman, has spent months traveling the country to buck up Democrats with a relentless focus on what he sees as Trumps failings. Yet he sees his own partys failings as well.

Just fighting against Donald Trump isnt enough, and Ive heard that clearly from voters, he said. Ive heard from voters that they dont know what the Democratic Party stands for and thats why were out there.

What it stands for, he says, is economic opportunity, good jobs for everyone, ladders of opportunity for everyone healthcare a right for all, not a privilege for the few.

When we get out there and fight for those values, thats how we succeed.

But divisions persist over those very issues. In the weeks leading to special House elections this spring, party activists feuded over whether candidates were supportive enough of abortion rights or populist enough in their economic leanings. At town halls, veteran Democrats such as California Sen. Dianne Feinstein were excoriated by more liberal Democrats for not supporting universal healthcare. (She favors repairing Obamacare.)

At a Los Angeles town hall meeting featuring California Sen. Kamala Harris, Kristin Morley, a real estate agent from Valley Village, said she feared that clashes among Democrats would doom the party in coming elections by dissuading some from showing up to vote.

In some activist groups to which she belongs, even the popular Harris has been sharply criticized for warning against ideological litmus tests, she said, adding: I am terrified by the fact that there is such division in the Democratic Party.

cathleen.decker@latimes.com

Twitter: @cathleendecker

ALSO:

For Democrats in California, a generational shift pulls the party left, with danger and opportunity ahead

Rep. Adam Schiff calls for unity in speech that suggests ambitions for himself

The latest from Washington

Updates on California politics

View original post here:
In President Trump's wake, divisions mark both Democratic and Republican parties - Los Angeles Times

Republican bill to penalize disruptive speech on campus moves forward in Legislature – Madison.com

The Assemblys higher education committee passed an amended version of a Republican-backed campus speech bill Tuesday that requires University of Wisconsin System institutions to punish students who take part in disruptive protests.

Changes to the legislation spelled out more specifically the types of disruptions that could lead to discipline for UW students and employees. They also toughened penalties for those who run afoul of the new rules by requiring universities to expel any student who violates the policy three times.

First Amendment advocates had warned that the bills original language was unconstitutionally vague and raised concerns that its mandatory punishments would treat all disruptions with the same severity as the at-times violent demonstrations that have prompted Republican lawmakers across the country to introduce similar legislation.

The amendments and the bill itself passed the Assembly Committee on Colleges and Universities on party-line votes.

Much like a lengthy public hearing on the bill weeks earlier, the sometimes heated debate during Tuesdays meeting often touched on pitched partisan battles over higher education nationally.

Republican members argued that their ideas are under fire on college campuses from left-leaning students and faculty, saying the legislation was needed to preserve open debate at UW institutions and protect the free speech rights of controversial speakers.

Rep. Joan Ballweg, R-Markesan, said the bill would ensure there is no idea or issue that will be shouted down in a public forum.

Democrats painted the legislation as an unnecessary overreach by Republican lawmakers who want to shut down protests they disagree with.

There is no problem that youre trying to solve here, other than an agenda issue for your party, said Rep. Terese Berceau, D-Madison.

The amended bill directs the UW Board of Regents to create a disciplinary process that sanctions students who engage in violent or other disorderly conduct that materially and substantially disrupts the free expression of others. The legislation previously barred a wider range of disruptive speech that Kremer acknowledged was too vague.

It also states that System institutions must strive to remain neutral on public policy controversies.

Another amendment requires universities to launch an investigation and hold discipline hearings if they get two or more complaints alleging someone violated the policy.

Democrats cautioned that the requirement could open the door to students filing complaints against people they disagree with creating, according to Rep. Dana Wachs, D-Eau Claire, a constant kerfuffle on our campuses about what somebody said.

Lawmakers in several states often, but not always, Republicans have introduced similar legislation in an effort to crack down on protests that they say use a hecklers veto to shut down talks by controversial speakers.

They cite as examples the high-profile demonstrations that led college officials to cancel talks at the University of California-Berkeley; in Wisconsin, lawmakers have criticized a protest that disrupted a lecture by conservative commentator Ben Shapiro for several minutes at UW-Madison.

Language in the Wisconsin bill mirrors model legislation proposed by the Arizona-based Goldwater Institute.

A Senate version of the bill has been referred to that chambers Committee on Universities and Technical Colleges.

UW System administrators have not taken a position on the bill, though they asked lawmakers at the public hearing to dial back its mandatory punishments for students who violate the policy.

The UW-Madison faculty advocacy group PROFS has registered against it, saying in a statement Tuesday that UW institutions should be given the autonomy to address their own speech issues.

Rep. Jesse Kremer, R-Kewaskum, who co-authored the legislation along with Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, and the chairpersons of the Assembly and Senate higher education committees, said existing UW policies have not been sufficient in protecting free speech.

Its not working weve seen that, Kremer said.

Excerpt from:
Republican bill to penalize disruptive speech on campus moves forward in Legislature - Madison.com

A new reminder of the possible political disaster looming for Republicans on health care – Washington Post

Right now, congressional Republicans are in about the best possible position on health care: They showed that they can pass something (anything!) in the House, and now no one is paying any attention to it any more.

Its unlikely, though, that the Senate will end up doing nothing with the American Health Care Act, the Republican bill that passed the House earlier this month. Meaning that the party will again have to grapple with a complicated, deeply unpopular bill that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office figures will mean 23 million fewer people with health insurance in 10 years time.

New survey data from the Kaiser Family Foundation, though, serves as a reminder that pushing forward with the legislation could be politically problematic well past this year.

Only Republicans have a broadly favorable view of the legislation, with two-thirds of them holding that position. Democrats and independents, on net, view the AHCA more unfavorably than favorably. Only about 3-in-10 overall view it positively.

By contrast, nearly 50 percent of respondents held a positive view of the Affordable Care Act (better known as Obamacare) the legislation that the AHCA would replace. Three-in-10 hold strongly favorable views of Obamacare; 4-in-10 hold strongly negative views of the AHCA.

And thats why the AHCAs unpopularity is so problematic.

Obamacare is about as popular now as it has been at any point since its inception in 2010. Generally, opinions have been pretty consistently split, with about half the country viewing it negatively and half positively. The percent viewing it favorably now, though, is seven points higher than those viewing it unfavorably, one of the widest margins in the foundations polling.

Those views are not universally held, though. By party, theres a distinct split.

If that graph looks familiar to you, its because it strongly mirrors approval ratings for the man behind the name Obamacare, Barack Obama.

Theres a different scale there; Democrats like Obama more than Obamacare. But the pattern is the same: A broad partisan gulf, with favorable views rising among Democrats and independents over the last few years of Obamas time in office.

So far, were seeing a similar split in partisan views of Donald Trump. Republicans view him very positively and Democrats very negatively, without much movement up or down among either group.

So if the AHCA were passed and partisan views of it held in the way that views of Obamacare did? Congressional Republicans would be passing legislation that starts out less popular than Obamacare and which will likely be mired in the same partisan trenches over the length of its existence. Sure, theyll say, people will come to like the improved health-care plan that is much better than Obamacare. To which theres an easy response: As more people got coverage under Obamacare, views of the program didnt move much. It was only when the risk to Obamacare from Republican control of Washington emerged that the program became popular on net but even now, its only barely above water.

There is one key difference. A number of polls over the course of the last eight years determined that the Affordable Care Act was more popular than Obamacare indicating that views of the legislation were a function of partisan views of Obama himself. Perhaps views of the AHCA will be separated from views of Trump. After all, three-quarters of respondents in the foundations poll figured that none or only some of Trumps campaign pledges made it into the AHCA itself. His ownership of it is less obvious.

Oh, and theres another key difference: It has to pass. With poll numbers like these, that should certainly not be considered a certainty.

View post:
A new reminder of the possible political disaster looming for Republicans on health care - Washington Post