Mediaboss Marketing

In a rare post-presidency speech, delivered before the Montreal Chamber of Commerce, Obama called on people, in the face of uncertainty, to stand by some of the very post-World War II economic and political institutions Trump has repeatedly called into question.

"In periods like this, people looking for control and certainty -- it's inevitable," Obama told the Canadian audience. "But it is important to remember that the world has gone through similar moments. ... Our history also shows there is a better way."

He said people should overcome fear and not listen to those who "call for isolation or nationalism" and those who "suggest rolling back the rights of others."

Obama's comments set a different tone than Trump, who campaigned on an "America First" message and has called Americanism his "credo."

"We're also bound by the institutions that we built to keep the peace," Obama said, referring to the UN, NATO and NAFTA.

Obama said that everyday people who felt left behind by government and a changing world could find authoritarians alluring. He said people who felt at a loss with the democratic process could "try anything," but that liberal values would win out over time.

"I am convinced that the future does not belong to strongmen," Obama said.

Without mentioning Trump, Obama spoke about the importance of wealthy nations investing in development abroad.

"We're going to have to summon the same capacity to adapt to new circumstances that we saw after World War II," Obama said. "We're going to have to replace fear with hope. That's the spirit that we need right now."

Obama repeatedly touched on the threat of climate change and Trump's decision last week to initiate the US' withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement.

"Obviously, I'm disappointed," Obama said.

Still, he tried to make the case that the agreement could be effective, regardless of Trump's decision, calling the accords "an agreement that even with the temporary absence of American leadership, will still give our children a fighting chance."

He commended state and local leaders who have pledged to push for clean energy and combat climate change.

"They will keep pushing forward for the sake of future generations," Obama said.

Since leaving office, Obama and his wife Michelle spent a significant amount of time off-radar and out of country.

At the Montreal event, just as he made a case for the post-World War II international order and his own legacy, Obama argued for increased civic engagement and the spread of democratic values. He said low-civic engagement and a lack of belief in the average person's ability to affect change in government weaken democratic institutions and are responsible for the advance of "reactionary" politicians.

Obama pledged to work on increasing democratic participation for the rest of his post-presidential life.

"The focus for the rest of my time on this Earth -- in addition to enjoying my children and, in a distant future, grandchildren -- will be active citizenship in the United States and around the world," Obama said.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tweeted Tuesday evening that he met with Obama in Montreal.

Go here to see the original:
In Montreal speech, Obama warns about appeal of authoritarianism - CNN

By Pete Marovich/Bloomberg/Getty Images.

A major part of Michelle Obamas legacy as First Lady will be her style. Whether she was at a state dinner, on the campaign trail, or out in the White House garden, the world tracked what she was wearing, and more often than not, fawned over it. Her husbands fashion choices, however, will most likely be forgotten (unless were talking about that tan suit. According to her, Barack Obama got away with a lot when it came to how he dressed, namely, wearing the same tuxedo for years during his presidency.

This is the unfair thing. You talk about Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers . . . no matter what we do, he puts on that same tux, she told the crowd at Apples developers conference in San Jose. People take photos of the shoes I wear, the bracelets, the necklacethey didnt comment [on] that for eight years. He wore that same tux . . . same shoes. And he was proud of it, too. He was like, Im ready! Im ready in 10 minutes. How long did it take you?

While no one commented on Obamas tendency to repeat outfits, Michelle Obama made headlines when she did. Many praised her style whether she was re-wearing clothing or wearing custom gowns, but the pressure was always on her to wear the right thing at the right time. She faced criticism when she didnt wear a designer from the home country of a visiting world leader and when she wore J.Crew to meet Queen Elizabeth in 2009, to which Oscar de la Renta commented, You dont go to Buckingham Palace in a sweater.

Double standards aside, Michelle Obama used her wardrobe to make political statements and encourage diplomacy and left the White House as a fashion icon. Barack Obama is just now transitioning out of dad jeans.

At the 2009 state dinner for India wearing Naeem Khan.

At the 2010 state dinner for Mexico wearing Peter Soronen.

At the 2011 state dinner for China wearing Alexander McQueen.

At the 2011 state dinner for Germany wearing Naeem Khan.

At the 2016 state dinner for Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden wearing Naeem Khan.

At the 2016 state dinner for Singapore wearing Brandon Maxwell.

At the 2016 last state dinner for Italy wearing Versace.

PreviousNext

At the 2009 state dinner for India wearing Naeem Khan.

By Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images.

At the 2010 state dinner for Mexico wearing Peter Soronen.

By Paul J. Richards/AFP/Getty Images.

At the 2011 state dinner for China wearing Alexander McQueen.

From Corbis/Getty Images.

At the 2011 state dinner for Germany wearing Naeem Khan.

Left, from Corbis, right, by Saul Loeb/AFP, both from Getty Images.

At the 2011 state dinner for South Korea wearing Doo.Ri.

By Jonathan Ernst/Reuters.

At the 2012 state dinner for the U.K. wearing Marchesa.

From Bloomberg/Getty Images.

At the 2014 state dinner for France wearing Carolina Herrera.

By Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images.

At the 2015 state dinner for Japan wearing Tadashi Shoji.

By Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images.

At the 2015 state dinner for China wearing Vera Wang.

By Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images.

At the 2016 state dinner for Canada wearing Jason Wu.

By Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images.

At the 2016 state dinner for Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden wearing Naeem Khan.

By Pablo Martinez/A.P. Images.

At the 2016 state dinner for Singapore wearing Brandon Maxwell.

Left, from Nurphoto, right, from Bloomberg, both from Getty Images.

At the 2016 last state dinner for Italy wearing Versace.

From A.P. Images.

Here is the original post:
Michelle Obama Calls out Barack's Outfit-Repeating - Vanity Fair

Neither former President Barack Obama nor any member of his cabinet warned state election officials of any Russian effort to hack or interfere with the countrys electoral systems, according to the president of the National Association of Secretaries of State.

We did ask, Denise Merrill, Connecticut secretary of state and the associations top official, told The Daily Caller News Foundations Investigative Group Wednesday.

And over-and-over again, they did say there was no credible threat that they had found. And they said that right through the election, and the next administration reiterated that. Over and over again when we asked, we were told there was no actual threat that they knew of, Merrill said.

Asked if there were any private briefings for state election officials on possible Russian interference prior to the November 2016 voting, Merrill said, No. We were not briefed on any of that. We were not told in advance.

Merrill also claimed the administration failed to take state officials aside about a potential or real Russian threat to election machinery.

Thats right, because I dont really think there was one, she said.

Merrill is a Democrat who previously served as majority leader in the Connecticut House of Representatives. In addition to serving as president of the association representing all of her fellow secretaries of state, she also is co-chairman of the groups Election Cybersecurity Task Force.

Obamas former Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson seemed to confirm Merrills comments. He was quoted Sunday on NBCs Meet the Press in an NBCtweetsaying Fmr DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson says there was no altering of voter counts in 2016 election. I know of no such evidence.'

Merrills comments contradict an unsigned top-secret National Security Agencydocumentthat was pilfered by Reality Winner, a 25-year old private-sector contract employee.

Winner gave the classified document to The Intercept, a three-year-old news site created by Pierre Omidyar, a close friend of President Bill Clinton. Omidyars wife Pamela donated $1 million to the Clinton Foundation.

Federal agents arrested Winner June 3 in her home in Georgia and chargedher under the Espionage Act for leaking classified information to a news outlet. She is currently in federal detention and is scheduled to have a federal court hearing Thursday.

Winner had worked for three months for the Alexandria, Va.-based Pluribus International Corporation. The company is under contract to the Army Intelligence and Security Command, which operates within the Army and NSA.

Winner was a harsh critic of President Donald Trump and publicly said she would stand with Iran in a hypothetical war with the U.S., according to a news report by Business Insider.

I think its unfortunate these reports are being leaked, Merrill told TheDCNF.

Col. Jim Waurishuk (Ret.), a former senior intelligence official who spent 30 years in the field, told TheDCNF the NSA document Winner released was an extremely high-level classified Top Secret Special Intelligence document, which is originator controlled, meaning the NSA has total control of this document. They determine who it gets disseminated to and it cannot be further disseminated unless its approved by the NSA.

Waurishuk, who is vice president of OPSEC, a nonprofit association of former Special Forces and intelligence officials, was asked by TheDCNF to review the document.

This document has nothing to do with affecting the election or with ballots, he said. It has nothing to do with the outcome of the election. This is merely a foreign signals intercept by U.S. intelligence officials.

The Russians were basically going to the office computers of a private company that served election organizations. Their malware went there, not to election balloting machinery. They were hoping office workers might be lured into a phishing effort, Waurishuk said.

The NSA document stated the limited incursion to penetrate the office computers failed. Three of the malicious emails were rejected by the email server which targeted a Tallahassee company called VR systems, according to the NSA document.

It is unknown whether the aforementioned spear-phishing deployment successfully compromised the intended victims, the NSA document concluded.

There is no evidence that this (hacking) has happened, Merrill told TheDCNF. This is the most important point, I think. Yes, there is strong speculation here, but nothing has actually happened.

Merrill believes stories like that in The Intercept weaken public trust in the integrity of our state and local election systems.

These kind of stories make the public think there should be a lack of trust in their elections. And that shouldnt be the case. This is the most destructive thing about this, she told TheDCNF.

Election tallying and tabulation systems in all 50 states work offline and are not connected to the Internet. They are managed by people, not machines, Merrill said.

Everything has paper backup, she told TheDCNF. Most states have paper ballots that you vote on. There is always a paper backup of the voter registration lists.

The NSA intelligence document suggested the Russians sought to hack VR Systems in Florida and could have had an impact on Florida election systems.

But the state doesnt rely on any machines. Its election system is paper based.

All voting in Florida is done on paper ballots so we can always refer to the original record, explained Sarah Revell, a spokeswoman for the Florida Department of State in a statement to TheDCNF. Additionally, voting machines are not connected to the internet, she stated.

Revell said Florida Secretary of State Ken Detzner participated in a September 2016 informational call with the FBI on the need to maintain security.

But there was no indication of a Florida-specific issue, she stated. Reveal added the FBI did not provide any information specific to VR Systems.

Florida had a smooth and secure election in 2016, Revell said.

Follow Richard on Twitter

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [emailprotected].

Read the original:
EXCLUSIVE: Obama Never Warned State Election Officials Of Russian Election 'Hacking' - The Daily Caller

Jacob Story, Treasurer, Mohave County Libertarian Party

A few weeks back, the Mohave County Libertarian Party was meeting on a Thursday night at the Black Bridge Brewery, and we were talking about the array of misconceptions about the Libertarian Party.

We decided that theres a lot of misinformation out there, so I took it upon myself as the Treasurer of the Mohave County Libertarian Party to write this for the Kingman Daily Miner to get a few things straight.

I am reminded of a time when I was having a conversation with a friend who is a member of the GOP. I love this friend like a brother, and in jest he called me a libtard, which is a term I have heard before to describe a liberal or Democrat (it should also be noted that this word is offensive to people who are developmentally disabled).

This exchange, once again, made me believe that theres a lot of misinformation. It has also been suggested that we Libertarians are in the same realm as the resistance, also known as the indivisible group. Two groups that, from my understanding, decided the Democratic National Committee was too conservative, and theyre a fringe sect to the left of conventional DNC thinking.

Often people see the word libertarian and think liberal the word libertarian actually derives from the word liberty; not so coincidentally, one of the symbols often used by the Libertarian Party is the Statue of Liberty.

Generally the Libertarian party has a platform of the following: Small or almost nonexistent government; limited, if no taxes whatsoever; unfettered individual rights; people taking individual responsibility; noninterference with foreign nations issues; and open and free markets. This is to name a few of the basic principles of the Libertarian Party. It can be boiled down even further to the following notion: We leave you alone, you leave us alone. The Libertarian Party has also been described as socially liberal, fiscally conservative, which I suppose is fair.

Our party is relatively new, formed in 1971, but were growing. The 2016 election saw many new registered Libertarians and although we didnt have any federal wins our win was the fact that we received 4.5 million votes, or in other terms, 3.2 million more votes than our last go during the 2012 general election. That speaks volumes 3.2 million fed-up voters.

We are not naive, we KNOW this is an uphill battle. It is going to be a long hard fight. But were willing to fight for what we believe in.

We are not all crazy, aluminum-foil-hat wearing conspiracy theorists (some are). You will find were the people demanding government accountability, trying to stop the corruption and entitlements.

We simply want this great Republic to once again be for the PEOPLE not the select few elected to office.

If you want to hear more about what were all about, please come join us for a beer at 6 p.m. on the second Thursday of every month at Black Bridge Brewery.

Continued here:
Letter: Libertarian Party misconceptions get cleared up - Kdminer

Why Statists State: Facts dont matter to the left or the right.

Ah yes, the ultimate question of libertarians to our statist friends: why do you argue for the state? Do you not believe in freedom and liberty?

The fact is, that the far left and the far right do not believe in freedom and liberty. They claim to, but they (unfortunately) dont grasp the actual concepts of the words freedom and liberty. Both of them pervert these terms into what their own ideologies are. That is the core of our problems in this country.

I hated numerous things about Barack Obama and some of the decision he made while in office. To me, he seemed to be a far left, government hand out to everyone, raise the national debt as high as humanly possible in two terms, freedom sucking douche bag.

So what did I do when it came down to Trump or Clinton? I voted for Trump, the one person who wasnt a career politician, who I hoped would bring balance to the force so to speak, and get us back on the right track.

Im slowly but surely proving to be wrong in my initial assumptions about him and his presidency. And yes, Im having some buyers remorse.

The thing is, at least Im recognizing it. Im having the personal judgement to look at things from a critical thinking standpoint despite what my initial personal beliefs were.

The far right seems to have some carnal infatuation with their dearly beloved emperor that no matter what he does, or how completely he reverts on his campaign promises, they will support him blindly. I swear to God, even if he drove us into 40 trillion dollars in debt, raised our taxes to 50%, and trashed the 4th amendment completely to make the job of cops easier to search and seize each of us, the far right would make excuse after excuse for him simply because they voted for him.

Cognitive dissonance people! Look it up! We are Americans, not peasants to worship one man. One man does not equal America. I dont care whos President.

The same can also be said for some of Trumps pics.

Look at Jeff Sessions, for example, as the Attorney General. This guy wants to push the war on drugs to full force, despite how any and all evidence points to how the contrary would benefit us as a nation; the war would only continue to make things worse.

Hes just like every far right wing friend I have. Show them the proof all day long, and just because they dont like it, and it isnt in line with their political ideology, and their political picks (through Trump), they file it faster than you can blink.

The hypocrisy of this is that conservatives (me being one of them), during the Obama administration, used to love facts.

We would throw them in far left Liberals faces all the time over their nonsense arguments.

But now, facts dont mean a thing to so called conservatives when they dont like it. They are now acting just like the left when it comes to facts! Its the same thing, just a different side of the political spectrum.

Of course, the far left are no different. Try to teach them economics, and how theres no such thing as free college, or no benefit to raising the minimum wage to 15 bucks an hour, and youll be scorned to hell and back for pointing out mathematical facts. There is no escape from math since is a completely non biased universal language that you cant argue your way around.

As Libertarians, this is the nonsense we see from both sides: What about muh roads? No problem right wingers, if its that important, private individuals and corporations will offer to pay for it.

What about muh birth control? Get a job and pay for it yourself leftists! What about muh government protection? You right wingers have argued for years that you need the rights to carry a gun anywhere you want because cops cant get there on time, so whats your problem now?

But, muh abortions, what about em leftists? Im not paying for that with my tax dollars, no one should have to. But, the gay marriages what about em rightist?? Get over it.

It has nothing to do with you personally, or your religion, and getting government involved to force your personal ideologies on those who dont align with your personal and religious beliefs is none of your business. I dont see you arguing that Satanists should not be allowed to get married; I could go on and on.

We have got to break through this barrier of right and left and just get back to what is in the best interest of the American people as a whole. Whats in the best interests of the individual, and what the Constitution actually says (and no, that document is not fluid).

The only way to do that, is get government out of the decision making process for our everyday activities. No one, whether you are on the left or the right, knows how to run your personal life better than you and you alone; without the government being involved.

Like Loading...

View original post here:
Why Statists State - Being Libertarian