Mediaboss Marketing

By Jon Ossoff By Jon Ossoff June 26 at 4:04 PM

Jon Ossoff is chief executive of Insight TWI and was the Democratic candidate for Congress in the special election for Georgias 6th Congressional District.

On Nov. 9, Americans awakened to a startling reality: In the absence of broad, enduring citizen engagement, the door is left open for darkness to creep in and gain a foothold in our democracy.

Amid that awakening, I launched my improbable campaign for Georgias 6th Congressional District.It grew into something bigger than I could have imagined.

Here in Georgia, in a district considered safe for Republicans for decades, we built a grass-roots organization powered by thousands of volunteers and hundreds of thousands of small-dollar donors.

The right wings national apparatus fully mobilized to defend the status quo in Washington at any cost. I was defeated. But we put up a hell of a fight.

Grass-roots politics, linking small-dollar fundraising to massive local volunteer organization, showed that it can rival the power of a right-wing machine comprising super PACs backed by entrenched interests and mega-donors. These outside groups were forced to spend nearly $20 million defending a seat gerrymandered never to be competitive.

From the beginning I believed that to compete in this district we had to run a different kind of campaign a campaign that put grass-roots organizing and personal contact with voters above all else. And our campaign tapped into and grew a grass-roots movement the likes of which Georgia had never seen before. This community stood up with undaunted fighting spirit, participating in the largest field program ever run in a U.S. House race and driving a get-out-the-vote effort that brought Democratic turnout in this special election up to general election levels.

The campaign reached out to tens of thousands of voters who had never heard directly from a campaign before. Some 10,000 more people voted for a Democrat in this off-year special election than did for Barack Obama in this district in 2012. Thousands of Democrats and new voters considered extremely unlikely to turn out made their voices heard.

The intraparty disputes that dominate national commentary on Democratic politics were nowhere to be found in the 6th District. On the ground, Democrats were committed to strike the first blow of this new era on behalf of decency and progress.

We ran an economy-first campaign centered on local prosperity and opportunity. I focused on the development of metro Atlanta into a world-class commercial capital, on affordable higher education and technical training, on research and development to drive innovation in Georgias tech sector, on renewal of our transportation infrastructure and a commitment to fiscal responsibility, on pointing out that taxpayers are rightfully upset that the federal government wastes hundreds of billions of dollars per year.

We paired this economic platform with an unwavering support for a womans right to choose, Americans with preexisting conditions, criminal-justice reform, Medicare and Medicaid, voting rights, immigration reform, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights, anti-corruption efforts and U.S. leadership to fight climate change. We built a coalition that generated massive Democratic turnout, engaged communities long ignored by local political leadership, and final vote tallies will likely show that we won a majority of independents. And in districts like Georgias 6th, we will not compete unless we build coalitions.

I remained committed to civility and optimism throughout the campaign, and I remain committed to civility and optimism now. Hope, decency and unity are not mere catchwords. Theyre essential to the defense of our republic at a time when hatred and deception have become the dominant forces in American politics.

Its difficult to convey the depth of my gratitude to the hundreds of thousands of people who made this effort possible, giving new voice and agency to thousands of Georgians. In particular, the extraordinary determination and hard work of female activists here in Georgia was the beating heart of the campaign. The grass-roots organization that we built neighborhood by neighborhood is intact, battle-hardened and ready for the future.

We lost, but I am proud of the campaign we ran, and I am proud of my community for standing up against the odds. I launched this campaign believing that America can become stronger, more prosperous and more secure only if we stay true to the values that unite us. I still believe that, and Im not done fighting.

Follow this link:
Jon Ossoff: Lessons for Democrats from the Georgia election - Washington Post

As the night progressed, Bookers vigil on the steps attracted more and more senators. | Getty

By Seung Min Kim

06/26/2017 04:05 PM EDT

Updated 06/26/2017 11:11 PM EDT

Its time again for Senate Democrats to burn the midnight oil.

Senate Democrats launched yet another night of floor speeches on Monday night castigating the GOPs plan to repeal and replace Obamacare a talk-a-thon led by Sens. Patty Murray of Washington and Mazie Hirono of Hawaii that ran several hours after the Senates 5:30 p.m. votes.

Story Continued Below

And while Democrats took turns taking the floor inside the chamber, a much more rambunctious rally was unfolding outside on the Capitol steps in the relatively cool June night. Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), along with Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), settled outside shortly after 7 p.m. and began streaming their talk blasting the GOPs efforts to dismantle the seven-year-old health care law.

As the night progressed, Bookers vigil on the steps attracted more and more senators, including Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York and Dick Durbin, the No. 2 Democrat, joined in. Several other Democratic senators including Sens. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Brian Schatz of Hawaii, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania and Jeff Merkley of Oregon joined in for large chunks of the impromptu demonstration that attracted hundreds.

Right now, the biggest enemy we face is not a handful of senators blocking health care for millions, but its the silence of the many who have the power to do something about this, Booker said around 11 p.m. as the assembly was winding down. Remember, the power of the people is greater than the people in power let your voice be heard.

Murphy told the crowd that the senators didnt give anybody a heads up that several hundred people would gather at the Capitol steps. Booker urged the masses to Snapchat with the various senators who were there, adding: Extra points if you tell Durbin what a Snapchat is. And the normally soft-toned Casey roared to the group: The issue of health care is a matter of basic justice.

Light up the switchboard! Durbin roared to the group. Get on the phones dont be afraid to tweet.

A daily play-by-play of congressional news in your inbox.

By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Earlier on the floor, kicking off the round of speeches Monday evening was Hirono, who recently underwent treatment for kidney cancer and has spoken about her diagnosis as shes made her case against Republican efforts to dismantle Obamacare. Hirono is having a second surgery on Tuesday for a lesion on her rib, a spokesman said.

Democrats are going to keep sharing our stories," Murray said, "and the stories of our constituents to make sure people understand how devastating and mean Trumpcare would be for the people we represent, and to do everything we can to keep up the pressure to stop it."

Ben Wikler, the Washington director for MoveOn.org, on Twitter urged other liberal activists to pack the galleries in the Senate chamber Monday night to show support for Democrats and their late-night speech marathon.

Democrats also led a round of floor speeches last Monday that ended shortly after midnight.

Missing out on the latest scoops? Sign up for POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning in your inbox.

Read more here:
Senate Democrats rally against GOP health-care bill - Politico

USA TODAY 6:16 p.m. ET June 26, 2017

Rally outside of the San Francisco office of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency on June 20, 2017.(Photo: Justin Sullivan, Getty Images)

Letter to the editor:

President Trump has brandished his deportation machine by attacking Dreamers who arrived here as children, raiding schools hunting for illegal middle-schoolers and kidnapping parents on their worksites an immigration policy that relies on creating a culture of fear, hate and distrust of anyone perceived to be an immigrant. If we value our neighbors, our young people and our coworkers, we will resist the administration's cruel and racially-biased deportation policies and create a better path toward public safety.

As federal immigration policy becomes more extreme, clarified by acting Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency Acting Director Thomas Homan saying, You should look over your shoulder and you need to be worried, it will be up to states and local jurisdictions to refuse to submit to Trumps mob rule policies that target, criminalize and scapegoat immigrants and other communities of color. Instead, our immigration policies should assert values of safety and family unity.

Thats why the California Values Act, which is on its way to becoming law, would make our public schools, hospitals, courthouses and libraries safe and available to all California residents, regardless of immigration status.

California could lead the way in showing how values-based immigration policy that allows immigrants to access basic protections and directs law enforcement to do its job not Trump's dirty work will enhance public safety, keep families together and strengthen the economy for all.

Matt Nelson, Presente.org;Oakland

California and Colorado want to thwart Trump on immigration. Bad idea.

Letter to the editor:

The demand for the work that undocumented immigrants provide is not going away and will not abate by punishing employers. We need immigration policy that accepts this reality, allowing immigrants to work legally in a way that jeopardizes neither them nor their employer.

We used to admit the workers who take these jobs as immigrants who could bring their families, work legally and stay in the communities they helped to build. Now the only legal way for these workers to enter the United States is on a temporary guest worker visa, such as an H-2 visa, that resembles indentured servitude.

H-2 visas are owned by employers, not the immigrants themselves, which means these workers cannot legally find work elsewhere in the U.S. once theyre here. The boss holds all the power and can have them deported at any time. Immigrants with H-2 visas typically arrive in debt after agreeing to pay recruiters in their home countries for the opportunity to work here.

Natalie Tsu, Deputy Legal Director of the Immigrant Justice Project, Southern Poverty Law Center; Atlanta

Comments are edited for clarity and grammar:

President Trump, please come down hard on these liberal Democrats ruining my once great state of California. Make California Great Again!Remove all liberals!

Joe Richards

States that try to adjust and enforce immigration laws as they see fit will end up regretting itin the long run. Some undocumented immigrantare coming from badplaces, I'm sure they made those placethat way and they will make whatever state they take over exactly the same.

Marlene Augst

The progressive consistency is in opposing what they consider to be inhumane and unconstitutional actions by local, state and federal government agencies. Thesenew well-meaningbut misguided local ordinances, designed to shield illegals from ICE,do not advance progress towards immigration reform.

Businesses and politicians have an economic incentive to keep immigration reform mired in stalemate. Businesses benefit from cheap, illegal labor, avoid payroll and workman'scompensation cost, as well as depress legal labor costs. Politicians benefit in their fundraising campaigns, by using the specter of undocumented criminals pouring over the border,or (on the flip side) sob stories of families being ripped apart by an unfeeling, uncaring political opponent.

The sad thing isboth of the respective political basesare duped by these simplistic characterizations of undocumented immigrantsand theimmigration policy problem. Then, politicians get reelected and nothing meaningful happens.

Citizens, local and state governments should be pressuring Congress to update our immigration laws and regulations. Demand real solutions, not just more empty rhetoric.

Businesses that routinely hire undocumented immigrants should be exposed and prosecuted. Simply paying the occasional fine should not be the "cost of doing business,"when hiring undocumented immigrants.

Building a wall or having sanctuary cities are not solutions to our broken, outdated immigration system. Here is where progressives and conservatives should be finding common ground.If the they could only stop vilifying each other and start talking to each other.

Todd Fedoruk

To join the conversations about topics in USA TODAY, emailletters@usatoday.com, comment onFacebookor use #tellusatoday onTwitter.

Want more conversation starters? Listen to the latest Punchlines:

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2tfMijM

Continued here:
Readers sound off: California makes its own immigration rules - USA TODAY

Throw a D.A.R.T for cattle health

Any parent knows when their child is sick, because they tell you. But parents can usually tell just by looking at them. Your cattle, however, cant tell you they dont feel well, so you can use the D.A.R.T system, an acronym that literally helps producers to keep in mind likely tell-tale signs of poor animal health, says Barry Whitworth, veterinarian and Oklahoma State University Cooperative Extension food animal quality and health specialist.

Those four indicators include the following symptoms to look for, according to the Oklahoma Farm Report:

D stands for Depression

A stands for Appetite (or lack of appetite)

R stands for Respiration.

T stands for Temperature.

Click here for more.

One of the frustrations in running a rural business is higher-cost, slow internet. President Trump hopes to fix that, saying that expanded access to broadband internet service in rural areas will be part of the infrastructure plan he will submit to Congress, reports Southwest Farm Press.

"I will be including a provision in our infrastructure proposal -- $1 trillion proposal, youll be seeing it very shortly -- to promote and foster, enhance broadband access for rural America also," Trump said in remarks last week at Kirkwood Community College in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, after touring agricultural facilities on campus. "We will rebuild rural America."

Click here to read more.

Chinas long-awaited return to the U.S. beef market is indeed the buzz of the beef business. And even though the U.S. has a robust export beef trade, it will take time for the U.S. to ramp up the programs and procedures necessary to fulfill the potential that China represents, according to the Oklahoma Farm Report.

On the other side of the world, products not suited for our domestic market may actually be in higher demand and have a higher value in foreign markets. The ability to export these cuts, allows U.S. beef producers to salvage the carcass value that might have been lost if it were sold domestically. This has been the case for the major markets we're already exporting to, like China and South Korea. But it didn't happen overnight, says Oklahoma State Livestock Marketing Economist Peel.

"There's a lot of potential in this market over time. But, I think it will take some time," Peel says. "That's a process that will grow over time as you try to build market share."

Click here to hear and read more. http://www.oklahomafarmreport.com/wire/beefbuzz/2017/06/00644_BeefBuzzDerrellPeelWorldUtilization06162017_121024

Former U.S. Representative Charlie Stenholm teaches a class on agriculture, energy, and food policy at Tarleton State University. This article in Southwest Farm Press includes views and recommendations from that class, which have been respectfully submitted to House and Senate Ag Committees.

Some 43 million foreign born immigrants currently live in the U.S. (9.5 to 11 million are estimated as undocumented). That must change. In our opinion, rounding them up, locking them up, and deporting all of them is not a feasible or desirable option. For most, their only crime was seeking a better place to live and earn a living.

Reform must include a workable plan to encourage most of the undocumented to come forward voluntarily (with their employer or sponsor) to receive legal documents that will allow them to become legal immigrants. They or their sponsor must pay the appropriate fine or other punishment applicable as determined by Congress.Those who have broken other laws or do not come forward should be deported. Changes proposed by the current Administration on H1B visas are an important step in the right direction. A workable immigration policy for the future must have the buy-in of employers and an absolute enforcement mechanism with buy-in of We the People. Only Congress can provide that.

Click here to read more.

Just about everything we do with our cattle comes down to driving them someplace, whether to summer pasture and back, into or out of the corral, up the alley, onto the scale, or through the crowd pen and up the chute. And a really important thing to understand is that if we dont drive our animals properly, were going to have problems (e.g., resistance, runbacks). But if we drive them properly, we should avoid creating unnecessary problems and old problems will often disappear.

From the low-stress livestock handling perspective developed by Bud Williams, all the hoopla of conventional driving is unnecessary and counter-productive. Effective driving is based on communicating with the animals through proper technique so they understand what we want and do it willingno fear or force necessary.

Click here to see two different ways to drive cattle with less stress on you and the cattle

See the original post:
5 Trending Headlines: Throw a DART for cattle health; PLUS: Immigration reform concerns - Beef Magazine

Washington D.C., Jun 26, 2017 / 11:32 am (CNA/EWTN News).- In one of the biggest religious cases of the term, the US Supreme Court on Monday ruled that a church-owned playground can be eligible for a public benefit program.

Chief Justice John Roberts, delivering the opinion of the Court, wrote June 26 that the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran, the church at the center of the case, from a public benefit for which it is otherwise qualified, solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution all the same, and cannot stand.

The decision in Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer was about religious people being treated just like everybody else, stated Mike Farris, president of Alliance Defending Freedom.

At issue was a playground owned by Trinity Lutheran Church in Columbia, Mo., and operated by the churchs preschool. To resurface the playground for safety reasons, the church had applied for a state reimbursement program that provides rubber surfacing material made from used tires. Trinity Lutheran had ranked the fifth most qualified out of 44 applicants for the program.

The states natural resources department ultimately ruled the church ineligible for the program because of its religious status. The Missouri state constitution forbids taxpayer funding of churches. The Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the state.

The Supreme Court reversed that ruling and sent it back to the lower courts.

Justices Anthony Kennedy, Samuel Alito, and Elena Kagan joined Chief Justice Roberts opinion of the Court that the denial of the churchs eligibility for the program violated the free exercise clause. Justice Stephen Breyer filed an opinion concurring in Chief Justice Roberts' judgement.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch joined the Courts opinion except for a footnote stating that the decision was about discrimination based on religious identity with respect to playground resurfacing, and does not address religious uses of funding or other forms of discrimination.

I worry that some might mistakenly read the footnote to apply only to playground resurfacing cases, or only those with some association with childrens safety or health, or perhaps some other social good we find sufficiently worthy, Gorsuch wrote.

He added that the general principles here do not permit discrimination against religious exercisewhether on the playground or anywhere else.

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented from the Courts opinion.

The Church had argued that the new surface would be a safety upgrade for the playground operated by its preschool and used by members of the community during non-school hours.

It was used by both church members and non-members, they insisted, and should not be ruled ineligible for a state benefit program available to other entities just because it is owned by a religious institution.

Opposing the church was the ACLU, which had argued that to make the church eligible for state benefits would be an unconstitutional violation of the establishment clause.

Missouris denial of the church, however, goes too far under precedents of Supreme Court decisions, Chief Justice Roberts wrote, and violates the Free Exercise Clause.

The Missouri law was passed during a time when many other states were passing laws barring public funding of sectarian schools, widely viewed at the time to mean Catholic schools and other religious schools that were not part of the public school system. The laws were modeled after the federal Blaine Amendment, proposed in the 1870s and named after Maine Congressman James Blaine. His amendment was proposed, but never passed by Congress.

In oral arguments in the case, justices also discussed the broader constitutionality of religious groups having access to other public benefits, including a Jewish synagogue requesting a security detail.

Catholic leaders applauded Mondays ruling.

The Supreme Court is signaling in this decision that the government must stop its growing hostility towards religion and religious institutions, and that antiquated and anti-Catholic Blaine Amendments should not be used as a weapon to discriminate against people of faith, Maureen Ferguson, senior policy advisor with The Catholic Association, stated.

For over a century, Blaine Amendments have enshrined into law discrimination against faith-based charities and schools that form an essential part of American society, Ashley McGuire, senior fellow with The Catholic Association, stated. In this case, a state Blaine Amendment was used to justify blacklisting a Christian elementary school from a playground safety program solely on religious grounds.

Blaine Amendments are anti-Catholic in their origin, and getting rid of them is more than a century overdue, she added. Todays decision demands a more fair and inclusive approach to government programs meant to serve all people."

The decision will have an effect in the future, David Cortman, senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom, who argued the case for the church before the Court in April, said. Whenever religious people, organizations, see themselves being discriminated against, this case will be the controlling precedent, he added.

Members of Congress also weighed in on the decision. House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) called it an important ruling for religious liberty with profound significance for Americas civil society.

Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), co-chair of the Congressional Prayer Caucus and who filed an amicus brief with colleagues on behalf of Trinity Lutheran in the case, stated that todays decision affirms the First Amendment right to the free exercise of religionto have more than just a belief but to live out your faith without discrimination from the government.

The case was ultimately between the church and the states natural resources department. Missouris attorney general recused himself in the case.

Missouris governor Eric Greitens (R) had already announced that in the future, religious institutions could be eligible for benefit programs of the natural resources department. However, the Court stated on Monday that that announcement does not moot this case.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in her dissent, stated that this case is about nothing less than the relationship between church and state.

The Court today profoundly changes that relationship by holding, for the first time, that the Constitution requires the government to provide public funds directly to a church, she added. Its decision slights both our precedents and our history, and its reasoning weakens this countrys longstanding commitment to a separation of church and state beneficial to both.

In the majority opinion, Chief Justice Roberts acknowledged that it is true the Department has not criminalized the way Trinity Lutheran worships or told the Church that it cannot subscribe to a certain view of the Gospel.

But, as the Department itself acknowledges, the Free Exercise Clause protects against indirect coercion or penalties on the free exercise of religion, not just outright prohibitions. And a church being denied participation in public benefits because of its religious character can be such an indirect coercion on the free exercise of religion, he continued.

In this case, there is no dispute that Trinity Lutheran is put to the choice between being a church and receiving a government benefit. The rule is simple: No churches need apply.

Read this article:
Supreme Court rules in favor of church in crucial First Amendment case - Catholic News Agency