Mediaboss Marketing

Bear any burden.

We're past the point of shifting blame. We know who gave us the presidency of Donald Trump, and it wasn't Hillary Clinton or Jill Stein or James Comey.

The culprit was democracy.

Even if you defend democracy on the grounds that Trump lost the popular vote, it's still a lame argument. After all, what kind of sensible political system generates 63 million votes for a thuggish incompetent to become its supreme leader?

Democracy was rarely an exercise in smooth sailing. Now, this.

"The choice of Mr. Trump, a man so signally lacking in the virtues, abilities, knowledge and experience to be expected of a president, has further damaged the attractions of the democratic system," wrote an exceedingly glum Martin Wolf in the Financial Times this week. "The soft power of democracy is not what it was. It has produced Mr. Trump as leader of the worlds most important country. It is not an advertisement."

Wolf isn't wrong, of course. If General Electric Co. had gone bonkers and installed Trump as CEO, the smart money would've deserted the company, fearing for its future. Yet what's to stop Trump from doing far more damage as president?

In an interview with Vox, political scientist Larry Bartels said:

History clearly demonstrates that democracies need parties to organize and simplify the political world. But parties dont make the fundamental problems of democratic control disappear; they just submerge them more or less successfully. When professional politicians are reasonably enlightened and skillful and the rules and political culture let them do their job, democracy will usually work pretty well. When not, not.

Democracy is not working pretty well in the U.S. Still, while there may be no reason to grant Trump himself patience, the democratic system itself has earned some.

Shashi Tharoor, a longtime United Nations official who is now a member of the Indian parliament, emailed:

Every system of government produces uneven results: There have been wise monarchs and feckless ones, capable benign dictators and incompetent ruthless ones, brilliant statesmen in democracies and people who owed their leadership positions to luck (the weakness of the alternatives) or merely inoffensiveness (the least unacceptable candidate). . . .

The strength of democracies is that because their leadership emerges from the will of the public as a whole, the system has a way of accommodating to them and very often, blunting their worst mistakes. Undemocratic systems have nowhere else to turn, and no established way of making the turn. So however flawed individual leaders may be, the self-correcting mechanisms built into democracy limit how much damage they can do.

Clear thinking from leading voices in business, economics, politics, foreign affairs, culture, and more.

Share the View

The nation's intelligence bureaucracies and news media are already shaking the foundation of the Trump presidency, leak by damaging leak. Courts are constraining some of the White House's baser impulses. Democratic and civil society opposition is fierce, and has been joined by a small but intellectually potent cohort of principled conservatives. Inflection points, from the scheduled testimony next week of former FBI director James Comey to the midterm elections in 2018, present opportunities to educate the public and strengthen resistance. Whether anything can induce Trump's Republican enablers to abandon him is unknown.

"If democracy produces a renewed commitment to democracy," said Harvard historian Jill Lepore in an email, "democracy is working."

In his book "The Confidence Trap," political scientist David Runciman pointed to the 1970s as an era in which democracy seemed to be marching haplessly toward failure, yet turned out to be gaining strength. In an interview with me last year he said:

Apparently the Chinese leadership is enjoying watching Trumps rise, because it seems to confirm all their suspicions of democracy: Its hucksterism plus stupidity. But in 1974 the Soviet leadership thought Watergate showed that democracy was finished. How could it survive such a scandal?

It survived, of course, and even thrived, eventually grinding down the Soviet Union. A similar emergence from the Trumpian ashes is possible. But it is not assured. Wolf is correct to worry that democracy everywhere is undermined by Trump anywhere. Yet with profound exceptions, democracy has been very good both to Americans and the world. Both may yet rally to the cause.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

To contact the author of this story: Francis Wilkinson at fwilkinson1@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Katy Roberts at kroberts29@bloomberg.net

Original post:
Democracy Faces the Enemy Within - Bloomberg

A new study by the Media Research Centerfound that the three major networks ABC, NBC, and CBS have dedicated a minuscule amount of coverage to the growing economic and civil rights crises including catastrophic levels of unemployment, hunger, and inflation, and the brutal repression of peaceful protests by the controlling government in Venezuela.

Additionally, MRC found that when the networks actually havecovered the crisis, theyve rarely mentioned the governments socialist system as a factor in the nationstroubles.

MRCbased itstimeline fromMarch 2013 (after socialist Venezuelan President HugoChavez death)through May 29, 2017. Through that time, ABC, NBC, and CBS evening news shows aired a total of25 stories on the Venezuelan crisis, totaling 28 minutes, and 39 seconds of coverage on the socialist country. This amounts to almost 3o seconds a month.

The major networks dedicated no news stories to the advancement of Venezuelan President Nicholas Maduros powers within Venezuela, including in November 2013 when then-socialist controlled National Assembly giving Maduro emergency powers, which permitted him to bypass the National Assembly and rule by decree, orin May 2017 when thesocialist-dominated Supreme Court ruled to strip power from the opposition-lead Congress.

MRC noted that human rights groups Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch made condemnations of human rights violations in places such as Syria, and Venezuela. Of the 17 times the Human Rights Watch, and 14 times Amnesty International were mentioned by the networks over the four-year period,the condemnations of Venezuela by the human rights groups have gone completely untouched by the media, said the MRC.

Furthermore, of the 25 stories dedicated to Venezuela by the three networks, onlyseven of the stories mentioned socialisms involvement. ABC World News never mentioned socialismat all, CBS Evening News mentioned it once, and NBC Nightly News mentioned it six times.

ABC did mention socialism on Nightline whenMatt Gutman said inFebruary 2014 said, When the price of oil crashed, the economy went with it, exposing the failures of Hugo Chavezs socialist government.

The MRC gave examples of how socialism was addressed by the major networks, and neither seem to highlight socialisms effects on the country, mentioning it only in passing.

From the MRC:

One of the exceptions: On the April 20 NBC Nightly News, correspondent Jacob Rascon noted that The Venezuelan economy has been in freefall for yearsProtesters blamed President Nicolas Maduro and his socialist government.

On May 4, CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley finally used the term for the first time since Chavezs death, when reporting on the worsening situation. Running battles continue in Venezuelas capital. They broke out a month ago when the socialist president tried to grab more power. At least 37have been killed.

Maduros socialist government has controls, or has part ownership in over 500 companies, 70 percent of which are bleeding money. This in turn has caused many to lose their jobs, leading to 25 percent unemployment. To combat the growing problem, Maduro hiked minimum wage for the third time in a year to over 65,000 bolivars a month.

Inflation is expected to surge to over 750 percent, making the bolivar virtually worthless.

Venezuelas major economic, and food shortagecrises have put the socialist country on the brink of civil war as thousands of rioters burn property, loot stores, and engage in violence with Venezuelan authorities. Venezuelan security forces have in turn engaged in brutal violence against the protesters and rioters.

Continued here:
Major networks ignore socialism's impact on Venezuelan crisis ... - TheBlaze.com

John Stossel 10:02 a.m. ET June 2, 2017

20/20 - JOHN STOSSEL(Photo: STEVE FENN, ABC)

Venezuela descends into chaos. Its people, once the wealthiest in Latin America, starve. Even The New York Times runs headlines like Dying Infants and No Medicine.

My Venezuelan-born friend Kenny says his relatives are speaking differently. Cousins who once answered Fine or Good when asked, How are you? now say, Were eating.

Eating is a big deal in the country thats given birth to jokes about a Venezuelan diet. A survey by three universities found 75 percent of Venezuelans lost an average 19 pounds this year.

So are American celebrities who championed Venezuelas peoples revolution embarrassed? Will they admit they were wrong?

No, says linguist and political writer Noam Chomsky. I was right.

Sigh.

Actor Sean Penn met with Hugo Chavez several times and claimed Chavez did incredible things for the 80 percent of the people that are very poor.

Oliver Stone made a film that fawned over Chavez and Latin American socialism. Chavez joined Stone in Venice for the films premiere.

Michael Moore praised Chavez for eliminating 75 percent of extreme poverty.

Hello?! In Venezuela, Chavez and his successor, Nicolas Maduro, created extreme poverty.

Chomsky, whose anti-capitalist teachings have inspired millions of American college students, praised Chavezs sharp poverty reduction, probably the greatest in the Americas. Chavez returned the compliment by holding up Chomskys book during a speech at the U.N., making it a best-seller.

Is Chomsky embarrassed by that today? No, he wrote me. He praised Chavez in 2006. Heres the situation as of two years later. He linked to a 2008 article by a writer of Oliver Stones movie who said, Venezuela has seen a remarkable reduction in poverty.

I asked him, Should you now say to the students whove learned from you, Socialism, in practice, often wrecks peoples lives? Chomsky replied, I never described Chavezs state capitalist government as socialist or even hinted at such an absurdity. It was quite remote from socialism. Private capitalism remained Capitalists were free to undermine the economy in all sorts of ways, like massive export of capital.

What? Capitalists undermine the economy by fleeing?

I showed Chomskys email to Marian Tupy, editor of HumanProgress.org. I like his response: If lack of private capitalism I assume he means total abolition of private enterprise and most private property is his definition of socialism, then only North Korea and Kampuchea qualify.

Tupy also asks how Chomsky thinks capitalists sabotaged the economy by taking money out if capitalists are superfluous to a functioning economy.

Good questions. Chomskys arguments are absurd.

As Tupy wrote elsewhere about another socialist fool, As much as I would like to enjoy rubbing (his) nose in his own mind-bending stupidity, I cannot rejoice, for I know that Venezuelas descent into chaos hyperinflation, empty shops, out-of-control violence and the collapse of basic public services will not be the last time we hear of a collapsing socialist economy. More countries will refuse to learn from history and give socialism a go. Useful idiots, to use Lenins words will sing socialisms praises until the last light goes out.

I fear hes right. This love for state planning is especially outrageous today because anyone who pays attention knows what does work: market capitalism.

Socialism failed in Angola, Benin, Cambodia, China, Congo, Cuba, Ethiopia, Laos, Mongolia, Mozambique, North Korea, Poland, Somalia, the Soviet Union, Vietnam and now Venezuela. We are yet to experience the blessed event of seeing one socialist country succeed.

Yet during the same years, capitalism brought prosperity to Hong Kong, Singapore, New Zealand, most of Western Europe, and years ago, to a mostly poor and undeveloped country we now call America.

In 1973, when Chile abandoned its short-lived experiment with socialism and embraced capitalism, Chilean income was 36 percent that of Venezuela. Today, Chileans are 51 percent richer than Venezuelans. Chilean incomes rose by 228 percent. Venezuelans became 21 percent poorer.

Venezuela has greater oil reserves than Saudi Arabia. But because some people believe socialism is the answer to inequality, Venezuelans starve.

What should Venezuela do once the tyrant falls?

It should do what Dubai and Hong Kong did, and what America should do next with Guantanamo Bay and Puerto Rico: create prosperity zones. Ill explain in my next column.

You can contact John Stossel at info@creators.com.

Read or Share this story: http://press.sn/2ryOVeI

More here:
Socialism has starved Venezuela - Press & Sun-Bulletin

|

Posted: Jun 02, 2017 12:01 AM

I can guess why a raven is like a writing-desk, Alice said. Do you mean you think you can find out the answer? said the March Hare. Exactly so, said Alice. Then you should say what you mean, the March Hare went on. I do, Alice replied. At least I mean what I say. That's the same thing, you know.

Not the same thing a bit! said the Hatter. You might just as well say, I see what I eat is the same thing as I eat what I see! You might just as well say, added the Dormouse, I breathe when I sleep is the same thing as I sleep when I breathe! It IS the same thing with you, said the Hatter.

Can you imagine stumbling upon the Mad Hatters tea party, watching as the discussions become increasingly absurd and yet wanting a permanent seat at the table? Could Lewis Carroll have been having nightmares about the Paris climate treaty when he wrote Alices Adventures in Wonderland?

President Trump was 100% correct (not just 97%) when he showed real international leadership this week and walked America away from the madness laid out before him and us on the Paris climate table.

From suggestions that Earths climate was balmy and stable until the modern industrial era, to assertions that humans can prevent climate change and extreme weather events by controlling atmospheric carbon dioxide levels to claims that withdrawing from Paris would imperil our planets very survival the entire process has been driven by computer models and hysteria that have no basis in empirical science.

There is absolutely no real-world evidence that plant-fertilizing carbon dioxide has replaced the powerful natural forces that have driven Earths climate from time immemorial. Moreover, even if the United States totally eliminated its fossil fuels, atmospheric CO2 levels would continue to climb. China and India are building new coal-fired power plants at a feverish clip. So is Germany. And China is financing or building dozens of additional coal-burning electricity generators in Africa, Asia and elsewhere.

Plus, even if alarmists are right about CO2, and every nation met its commitments under Paris, average planetary temperatures in 2100 would be just 0.2 degrees Celsius (0.3 F) lower than if we did zilch.

But our closest allies wanted Trump to abide by Obamas commitment. Some did, because they want America to shackle its economy and drive energy prices into the stratosphere the same way they have. Others dearly want to follow a real leader, and walk away from the mad Paris tea party themselves.

But even poor countries signed the Paris treaty. Yes, they did because they are under no obligation to reduce their coal, oil or natural gas use or their CO2 emissions. And because they were promised $100 billion a year in cash, plus free state-of-the-art energy technologies, from developed nations that would have become FMCs (formerly rich countries) as they slashed their energy use and de-industrialized.

But the Paris climate treaty was voluntary; the United States wouldnt have to do all this. Right. Just like its voluntary for you to pay your taxes. China, India and poor developing countries dont have to do anything. But the USA would have been obligated to slash its oil, gas and coal use and carbon dioxide emissions. It could impose tougher restrictions, but it could not weaken them. And make no mistake: our laws, Constitution, legal system, the Treaty on Treaties and endless lawsuits by environmentalist pressure groups before friendly judges would have ensured compliance and ever more punishing restrictions.

But hundreds of companies say we should have remained in Paris. Of course they do. Follow the money.

If we are to avoid a climate cataclysm, leading experts say, the world must impose a $4-trillion-per-year global carbon tax, and spend $6.5 trillion a year until 2030 to switch every nation on Earth from fossil fuels to renewable energy. Thats a lot of loot for bankers, bureaucrats and crony corporatists.

But, they assure us, this transition and spending would bring unimaginable job creation and prosperity. If you believe that, youd feel right at home in Alices Wonderland and Looking Glass world.

Who do you suppose would pay those princely sums? Whose jobs would be secure, and whose would be expendable: sacrificed on the altar of climate alarmism? Heres the Planet Earth reality.

Right now, fossil fuels provide 80% of all the energy consumed in the USA reliably and affordably, from relatively small land areas. Wind and solar account for 2% of overall energy needs, expensively and intermittently, from facilities across millions of acres. Biofuels provide 3% mostly from corn grown on nearly 40 million acres. About 3% comes from hydroelectric, 3% from wood and trash, 8% from nuclear.

Kentucky, Ohio, West Virginia and other states that generate electricity with our abundant coal and natural gas pay 8 to 10 cents per kilowatt-hour. California, Connecticut, New York and other states that impose wind, solar and anti-fossil fuel mandates pay 15 to 18 cents. Families in closely allied ultra-green Euro countries pay an average of 26 US cents per kWh, but 36 cents in Germany, 37 cents in Denmark.

EU manufacturers are already warning that these prices could send companies, factories, jobs and CO2 emissions to China and other non-Euro countries. EU electricity prices have skyrocketed 55% since 2005; 40% of UK households are cutting back on food and other essentials, to pay for electricity; a tenth of all EU families now live in green energy poverty. Elderly people are dying because they cant afford heat!

The Paris treaty would have done the same to the United States, and worse.

The Heritage Foundation says Paris restrictions would cost average US families $30,000 in cumulative higher electricity prices over the next decade. How much of their rent, mortgage, medical, food, clothing, college and retirement budgets would they cut? Paris would eliminate 400,000 high-pay manufacturing, construction and other jobs and shrink the US economy by $2.5 trillion by 2027. Other analysts put the costs of remaining in Paris much higher than this again for no climate or environmental benefits.

Big hospitals like Wake Forest Baptist Medical Centers Comprehensive Cancer Centerin Winston-Salem, NCand Inova Fairfax Womens and Childrens Hospital in Northern Virginia pay about $1.5 million per year at 9 cents/kWh but $3 million annually at 18 cents $5 million at 30 cents and nearly $7 million at 40 cents. How many jobs and medical services would those rate hikes wipe out?

Malls, factories and entire energy-intensive industries would be eliminated. Like families and small businesses, they would also face the new reality of having pricey electricity when it happens to be available, off and on all day, all week, when the wind blows or sun shines, instead of when its needed. Drilling and fracking, gasoline and diesel prices, trucking and travel, would also have been hard hit.

Americans are largely prohibited from mining iron, gold, copper, rare earth and other metals in the USA. Paris treaty energy prices and disruptions would have ensured that American workers could not turn metals from anywhere into anything not even wind turbines, solar panels or ethanol distillation plants.

Most of the bountiful renewable energy utopia jobs would have been transporting, installing and maintaining wind turbines and solar panels made in China. Even growing corn and converting it to ethanol would have been made cost-prohibitive. But there would have been jobs for bureaucrats who write and enforce the anti-energy rules and process millions of new unemployment and welfare checks.

Simply put, the Paris climate treaty was a terrible deal for the United States: all pain, no gain, no jobs, no future for the vast majority of Americans with benefits flowing only to politicians, bureaucrats and crony capitalists. President Trump refused to ignore these realities, this economic suicide pact.

He therefore formally declared that the United States is withdrawing from the treaty. He could now submit it for advice, consent and rejection by the Senate. He could also withdraw the United States from the underlying UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, or negotiate a better accord that is fair to America and its families and workers. But that is now largely irrelevant. Whats important is this:

We are out of Paris! And President Trump is leading the world back from the climate insanity precipice!

See the rest here:
Exiting the Mad Climate Tea Party - Townhall

When U.S. Rep. Rob Woodall took questions at a forum in Lawrenceville Thursday evening, he called most of his questioners by their first names.

Thats because there are few regulars at the United Tea Party of Georgias monthly meeting the four-term Republican doesnt know. What was missing was angry commentary about the health care bill passed by House Republicans last month or uncomfortable questions about the latest in the Russia investigation.

Thats because Woodalls appearance was a closely guarded secret. An email from the group Monday touted a special guest speaker but withheld the name.

For reasons that will be made clear at the meeting we are not announcing our speaker, but he is very knowledgeable on on the politics of the day, the email said, especially at the federal level.

While there were communications to the group suggesting that Woodalls staff asked that the event not be pre-publicized to avoid protests, Woodall said that was not the case.

That would stun me. That is not our policy, he said.

But Woodall did not publicize the appearance at the meeting, held in a restaurant at the Gwinnett County Airport, on his social network feeds or his Congressional web page.

David Hancock, United Tea Party co-chairman, said there was back-and-forth communication between his group and Woodalls staff over keeping the event quiet. Nobody wanted to deal with protesters, he said.

I wanted to have a meeting just like we had last night, he said That was a dream meeting. If we had four or five people there whose job it was just to disrupt, we wouldnt have gotten that.

Woodall, one of the more conservative members at the Capitol, told the tea party group he had no intention of providing a forum for protests from the left.

It is true that we have been protested. Weve had more meetings people have tried to take over in the last six months than the last six years, he said. And where do you think they learned the techniques they are using? Its tea party doctrine right down the line.

Hes right about the tea partys claim on town hall activism. In 2009, tea party groupsharassed congressional town halls from coast to coast, billowing their ire over Obamacare to the point that, like today, members of Congress stopped holding them.

But Ilene Johnson, communications director for the Gwinnett County Democratic Party, said that doesnt give Woodall a free pass to hide from people who disagree with him. Virtually every post on his Facebook page includes a comment demanding a town hall.

He has an obligation to hear all points of view, Johnson said. He is obligated to represent everybody and not just the people who voted for him.

Gabe Okoye, chairman of the Gwinnett Democrats, said plans are in the works for a District 7 town hall for everyone, whether or not Woodall attends.

It wont be secret. Everybody can come, he said. Well leave a chair for Mr. Woodall in case he shows up.

Okoye said members of congress should be expected to hold in person meetings with a broad range of constituents, not just reporters.

He doesnt just represent the Republicans, he represents all of us, he said.

Town halls down sharply

Woodall, R-Ga., has avoided traditional town hall meetings since President Donald Trumps inauguration despite constant requests to do so. But he is hardly alone among his congressional colleagues.

In a story this week,Politico.com noted that Congressional town halls are down sharply during this months legislative break compared to the April recess not not just among Republicans. While GOP town halls are down drastically, such forums from Democratic members of Congress fell 14 percent when comparing the two breaks.

The drop off raises the question of whether members of Congress have an obligation to hold more public forums in their districts, even if it means facing hostile crowds.

Woodall has represented the 7th District since 2011. Before that he was chief of staff for former 7th District Rep. John Linder, who handed him the keys when he retired.

Georgias 7th District stretches from Snellville in the south up to Cumming and has been pretty safe for Woodall. He didnt have a primary opponent last year and clobbered a political unknown in the general election, taking 60 percent of the vote.

Since Trumps election, Woodall has done some town halls by telephone, a preferred alternative to those eschewing the face-to-face type. But in past years, hes also held regular, honest-to-goodness town halls.

Its not like he didnt get criticism then. One frequent online critic who attended a town hall last year in Cumming went on the congressmans Facebook page to tell him his comments on drug pricing were pretty dumb.

And the telephone town halls dont insulate him from criticism either. Angry callers were on hand for one such conference call in February as Woodall gamely defended the president against those worried about conflicts from Trumps business interests and ties to Russia.

What I love about the outsiders that have taken over the White House is that it gives us the ability to look at the world through new eyes, Woodall said,according to a story in the Gwinnett Daily Post. I think one of the ways President Trump looks at the world through different eyes is Why are we still fighting with Russia 40 years later?

The Post reported that his reply prompted shouts and name calling.

No responsibility to help protesters

Woodall took some tough question at Thursdays gathering too. Tea party members held his feet to the fire on enacting tougher immigration standards, fighting for tax reform and supporting the president.

To his credit, Woodall did not always tell them exactly what they wanted to hear, including his support for visas for the high-tech industry and agriculture and his insistence that Congress has a duty to counterbalance presidential power. But in the end, folks lined up to shake his hand rather than jab their fingers at him.

For the folks not in the United Tea Party who missed a chance to question their congressman, Woodall said hes happy to meet with them in his office.

Folks dont think your congressman will sit down with you, he said.

Johnson, the Democratic activist, allows that Woodall does take appointments to meet with constituents. But she said not everybody can take off from work to upbraid their elected official. Town halls, usually held in the evening, are more responsive, she said.

For that opportunity, its likely she will keep waiting.

I feel no responsibility to help protesters protest, Woodall said.

As AJC Watchdog, Ill be writing about public officials, good governance and the way your tax dollars are spent. Help me out. What needs exposing in your community? Contact me at cjoyner@ajc.com.

Visit link:
Watchdog: Woodall holds hush-hush forum in district, ducks town hall - MyAJC