Mediaboss Marketing

After the repeal and replace debacle there is, yet again, a very public crisis for the soul of the Republican Party. (As if we Republicans actually have souls.)

This existential crisis for Republicans boils down to this one question: Is it the primary goal of Republicans to limit the growth of government, or should Republicans let government grow, but at a slower speed than Democrats?

This seems like an oversimplified and flippant question, but to understand this question is to understand why Republicans fail to govern.

Democrats (who of course do have souls, as witnessed by how much they care for people, with other peoples money) have their issues of infighting, turf wars and conflicts over strategy and tactics. But they dont have a constant battle over the overriding principle of their party.

All Democrats want to increase the size and scope of government. Their internal battle is over the speed at which it should be done.

But almost all Republicans say they are going to constrain government and reel in taxes, spending and regulations. Yet when given the chance, many dont. And it doesnt take but a few defections to make their attempt to govern fail.

John McCain, Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins refused to vote to repeal even the tiniest parts of Obamacare, even though all three campaigned on repealing all of Obamacare.

The Colorado version of this was of course the recent Republican capitulation over the Hospital Provider Tax (Fee). Because Republican senate leadership crumbled like a Dixie cup, we will now be paying over half a billion dollars more a year in taxes, and taking on some $2 billion in new debt without even being asked first at the ballot box.

And some of those grow government but at a slower rate than Democrats state senators may have to answer for it in next years primaries. We will see how senators like Polly Lawrence, who is running for State Treasurer, and Owen Hill, who is challenging US Congressman Doug Lamborn, fare as pro-tax Republicans.

So, after failures on Obamacare nationally, and forsaking the Taxpayer Bill of Rights locally, the Republican partys dysfunction is laid bare for the world to see. Youd think that would force a cathartic process to fix the party. But it wont, because there are two Republican parties.

The Republican Party functions more like a parliamentary system. It cobbles together two fundamentally different groups to form a fragile coalition whose primary purpose is to keep the other team out of power.

Think of these two parties as the Taxpayer Party, who wish to shrink the Leviathan, and the Manager Party, who like a good legal custodian wishes to run the machinery more effectively.

The Taxpayer and Manager folks team up well in the minority. Both agree the Democrats are taxing, spending and regulating too much, too fast. But they have completely different operating systems which make them incompatible when they get in the majority.

You cant simultaneously shrink and grow government!

This rift isnt new. Over fifty year ago Barry Goldwater wrote Conscience of a Conservative in hopes of pulling Managers to the Taxpayer wing of the party. Current Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake is making the same call in his daring re-write of the same title.

But all this really causes is deception. Its not really about moderate versus conservative Republicans as the media labels it. They are Macs and PCs different operating systems.

In order to win, especially in primaries, members of the Manager Party must appeal to voters who prefer the Taxpayer Party, so they talk like them. And we foolishly believe them. But theyre still Managers. But what if they didnt have to campaign that way?

Will Republicans ever officially split into these two parties representing their two very different ideologies? Before Trump, I would have said no.

But imagine how refreshing and freeing it would be for folks like McCain, Collins and Murkowski (and here folks like Sonnenberg, Lawrence and Hill) to be able to campaign on their true beliefs and values to a group of primary voters who value their style of responsibly growing government.

Time to call the divorce attorneys?

Jon Caldara is president of the Independence Institute, a libertarian-conservative think tank in Denver, and host of Devils Advocate on Colorado Public Television.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

See the article here:
It's time for the Republican divorce - The Denver Post

Wall Street Journal (subscription)

A Republican Failure Wall Street Journal (subscription) The Senate left town for its August recess Thursday, a week after the House vamoosed, and let's hope the Members get an earful from constituents at home. The Republican Congress has so far been a monumental disappointment and on present trend is ...

Read more from the original source:
A Republican Failure - Wall Street Journal (subscription)

Venezuela has installed an all-powerful constituent assembly with the authority to rewrite the constitution, remove public officials and trump all branches of government, raising concerns about the health of democracy in the country.

Opponents of President Nicolas Maduro fear it will solidly entrench his socialist administration and create a one-party state, while supporters say it offers a the best chance for peace after months of deadly unrest.

Some analysts evaluate the state of democracy in Venezuela:

MICHAEL SHIFTER, president of the Washington-based Inter-American Dialogue: "It's not a dictatorship in the classic formulation. Maduro was elected. But I think he's lost any legitimacy. There has been a gradual erosion of democratic practice, and this is a significant line that has been crossed. To attach the term democracy to Venezuela with this new constituent assembly is on very weak ground. I think it can't be taken seriously."

JOSE MIGUEL VIVANCO, Washington-based director of the Americas Division of Human Rights Watch: "Two basic principles need to be present to characterize a government as a democratic one. The first is free, fair and competitive elections. The second is the obligation to govern democratically to exercise power in accordance to respecting the limits of the rule of law, separation of powers, independence of the judiciary, free press, respecting civil society. And you are not supposed to engage in persecution of dissidents and political leaders. At this stage, I don't think Venezuela passes the test as an electoral democracy. And the Maduro administration should be treated as such. In plain language, as a dictatorship."

MARK WEISBROT, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington: "The media has kind of assumed that the assembly was a dictatorship of some sort, but they haven't done anything yet. They haven't abolished the National Assembly. So far, nothing has happened. ... Venezuela is still a very polarized country and there's a standoff between the two sides. Mediation failed last year because neither side was willing to concede anything. There is going to have to be a negotiated solution, with elections. And for those elections to settle the conflict there is going to have to be constitutional guarantees that the losing side is not going to be politically persecuted. That's the only way I can see to avoid a descent into violence and civil war."

LUISA ORTEGA DIAZ, Venezuela's chief prosecutor, during an interview with CNN en Espanol: "I couldn't say that we've absolutely lost democracy. There are still some glimmers of it. But unfortunately if we continue down this road, we will lose all traces of democracy. The trial of a civilian in a military tribunal that is the act of a dictatorship. The detention of people with no formal proceeding, without a judicial order, mass raids, the lack of information on people detained ... especially those who are uncomfortable for the government. They (the Maduro administration) have used criminal law, the police, to disappear, to extinguish them."

FERNANDO BUEN ABAD, Mexican philosopher, in remarks to be the Venezuela-based network TeleSur: The election of the constituent assembly "solidifies the extraordinary strengths of a people who understand what a constitution is. Who understand what a powerful tool the constitution is in order to weave together a framework of collective relations. And who understand that this is a platform to advance and deepen, including to criticize, its own process. We saw a robust lesson in democracy, that in spite of everything, despite tensions from some circles and parts of the country, the gathering was incredibly rich and proposed, in quantity and quality, a reflection that in my mind is a moral lesson for the entire planet."

BENIGNO ALARCON, director of the Center for Political Studies at Andres Bello Catholic University in Caracas: "Democracy does not exist in Venezuela, but it has not existed for some time. What's being installed is an assembly that is not governed by the constitution and has no constitutional limits. It can do practically whatever it wants. But it does not have any political acceptance. People will not obey the decisions they make. The only way to implement its policies will be with repression."

DANIEL LANSBERG-RODRIGUEZ, Northwestern University law professor who is a dual U.S.-Venezuelan citizen: "By its very nature, the creation of a constituent assembly under Venezuelan law delegates most of the traditional functions of participatory democracy to the newly created body, which for the indefinite duration of its deliberations can override the conventional legislature, the presidency and even the pre-existing constitution. Such delegation, if always risky, need not be inherently undemocratic, provided that a majority of the people vote for this process to take place. In this case, however, there were no plebiscites and Maduro is at 20 percent approval rating, lacking any semblance of electoral viability let alone a powerful mandate for change. In a cynical ploy to stave off future elections he can't win, Maduro has hijacked what remained of Venezuela's democracy without popular permission."

The rest is here:
With all-powerful assembly, is Venezuela still a democracy? - ABC News

WASHINGTON A future trivia question and historical footnote, the spectacular 10-day flameout of Anthony Scaramucci qualifies as the most entertaining episode yet of the ongoing reality show that is the Trump presidency. (Working title: The Pompadours of 1600 Pennsylvania.) But even as the cocksure sycophants gobsmacking spectacle stole the show, something of real importance took place a bit lower on the radar.

1) The military says no to Trump on the transgender ban.

Well, not directly thats insubordination but with rather elegant circumspection. The president tweeted out a total ban on transgender people serving in the military. It came practically out of nowhere. The military brass, not consulted, was not amused. Defense Secretary James Mattis, in the middle of a six-month review of the issue, was reportedly appalled.

What was done? Nothing. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs simply declared that a tweet is not an order. Until he receives a formal command and develops new guidelines, the tweet will be ignored.

In other words, the military told the commander in chief to go jump in a lake. Generally speaking, this is not a healthy state of affairs in a nation of civilian control. It does carry a whiff of insubordination. But under a president so uniquely impulsive and chronically irrational, a certain vigilance, even prickliness, on the part of the military is to be welcomed.

The brass framed their inaction as a matter of procedure. But the refusal carried with it a reminder of institutional prerogatives. In this case, the military offered resistance to mere whimsy. Next time, it could be resistance to unlawfulness.

2) The Senate saves Sessions.

Trumps relentless public humiliation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions was clearly intended to get him to resign. He didnt, in part because of increasing support from Congress. Sessions former colleagues came out strongly in his defense and some openly criticized the presidents shabby treatment of his first and most fervent senatorial supporter.

Indeed, Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, warned Trump not to fire Sessions because he wouldnt get another attorney general the committees entire 2017 schedule was set and there would be no hearings to approve a new AG. That was a finger to the eye of the president. Every once in a while, the Senate seems to remember that it is a coequal branch.

3) Senate Republicans reject the Obamacare repeal.

The causes here are multiple, most having nothing to do with Trump. Republicans are deeply divided on the proper role of government in health care. This division is compounded by the sea change in public opinion as, over seven years, Obamacare has become part of the fabric of American medicine, and health care has come to be seen as a right rather than a commodity.

Nonetheless, the stunning Senate rejection of repeal was also a pointed rejection of Trumps health care hectoring. And a show of senatorial disdain for Trump craving a personal legislative win on an issue about whose policy choices he knew nothing and cared less.

4) The Boy Scouts protest.

In a rebuke not as earthshaking but still telling, the chief executive of the Boy Scouts found it necessary to apologize for the presidents speech last week to their quadrennial jamboree. It was a wildly inappropriate confection, at once whining, self-referential, partisan and political.

How do you blow a speech to Boy Scouts? No merit badge for the big guy.

5) The police chiefs chide.

In an address to law enforcement officials, Trump gave a wink and a nod to cops roughing up suspects. Several police chiefs subsequently reprimanded Trump for encouraging police brutality a mild form, perhaps, but brutality still.

Press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said it was all a joke. Nonsense. It was an ugly sentiment, expressed coyly enough to be waved away as humor but with the thuggish undertone of a man who, heckled at a campaign rally, once said approvingly that in the old days guys like that would be carried out on a stretcher.

Whatever your substantive position on the various issues involved above, we should all be grateful that from the generals to the Scouts, from the senators to the cops, the institutions of both political and civil society are holding up well.

Trump is a systemic stress test. The results are good, thus far.

Original post:
Krauthammer: American democracy withstands Trump recklessness - The Mercury News

The U.S. governments track record of distinguishing allies from enemies in the Middle East leaves much to be desired. Todays ally is often tomorrows enemy.

The mujahedeen of Afghanistan, the Free Syrian Army, Saudi Arabia, the Iranian-dominated Iraqi government in Baghdad time and again, America is short-sighted about its interests, blind to its enemies, and compromises its values for short-term gain. Americas natural allies in the region, those who share Americas interests and values, observe this with frustration. Few in the Middle East have felt Americas miscalculations more acutely than the minorities of Iraq, particularly Iraqs Christians.

Waheda believes that the KRG will respect the rights of indigenous peoples to determine their own future. President Barzani said he will support a referendum by the Christians of the Nineveh Plain, she says. He will honor whatever they decide. She notes that the central government hasnt given the same assurances. Even for Christians, the matter is complicated.

IDC is on the ground in Iraq, meeting with #Christians in Ainkhawa, the Nineveh Plain, and elsewhere. #MiddleEast #Safezones #BeyondGenocide pic.twitter.com/mC3kZOqATt

Iraqs Christian secular and religious leaders are divided. Some believe that the Christians should be aligned with the central government; others prefer closer ties to the KRG. The notion of a Nineveh Plain Province was first proposed by Iraqis in 2014 before the ISIS conquest of Nineveh. This idea was introduced in a resolution last year by Congressman Jeff FortenberryJeff FortenberryRep: Charlie Gard granted permanent residence status Security fears grow on both sides of aisle VA eyes building closures to boost care under Trump MORE (R-Neb.).

Were asking the Iraqi government to create a province, a governate, Waheda says. We only ask for the conditions to take care of ourselves. The KRG has said that they will honor the Christians of the Nineveh Plain in any vote on their own self-determination.

If there is a vote for independence, the process would be protracted, controversial, and perhaps even bloody. But Waheda insists that Kurdish independence is feasible. There is the capacity locally to oversee self-government, which we already have, but also utilities, elections, oil resources, allows us to be free of foreign domination, she adds, referring to Iran and its affiliated militias, which have a presence on the Nineveh Plain, recently freed from ISIS. There is also a sense that Iraqs government is a pawn. In Baghdad, one group (Shia) are making decisions for all of Iraqs people, including minorities.

Middle East Christians celebrate Christmas under yoke of genocide (Op-Ed) https://t.co/ul46xLykFS via @thehill

The sense of frustration with Baghdad isnt shared by all Iraqi Christians. Many Assyrian Christians (most now living in the West) claim that the Kurdish militia, the Peshmerga, didnt protect them as ISIS overran the Nineveh Plain in 2014, and didnt permit the Christians or other minorities to defend themselves. Many other Christians, including those returning to their homes, point out that it was predominantly Kurdish Peshmerga who fought to liberate the Nineveh Plain.

Our villages and our lands are among the Kurds, she says.This doesnt mean that we dont have challenges with the Kurdish region. There are always challenges, but the Kurdish people have accepted us (Christians), more readily than others. Even today we have many homes in Baghdad and Basra where property was stolen without compensation. Christians can also hold posts in the KRG in a way that they cannot with the central government.

Few people living in the areas overrun by Daesh have confidence in the central government, she says. The only area where Christians seem to agree is the creation of a province in the Nineveh Plain, though there isnt consensus on the means to bring it about.

The Nineveh Plain region has vast natural resources and could theoretically be self-sufficient. Christians should of course benefit from the natural resources on the Nineveh Plain. They can and should use these resources to rebuild. Waheda says the Christians dont currently benefit from Iraqs petrol wealth.

Kerry determines that ISIS is committing genocide against Christians: https://t.co/BuxX840Apf pic.twitter.com/vwaivzolUs

Corruption in Iraq, like the rest of the Middle East, is really beyond the comprehension of most Americans. Its both a symptom and cause of Iraqs sectarian troubles. Decentralized governance, which has generally worked for Iraqs Kurds, is a model many continue to believe is the only solution for Iraq. We believe that we can secure the Nineveh Plain with local defense forces, she says. We also ask for international observers during any transition period not soldiers but simply to create a haven, as the West did for Christians in the 1990s.

She notes that the KRGs ruling Barzani family has historically had strong ties with the Christian community. How many other Muslim political leaders meet with the Pope? she asks. His family attends mass with the people of Ainkhawa at Christmas. This is more than a political gesture. There is a genuine affinity.

The presence of women in public life in the Middle East is far less common than it is in the West, though there are of course exceptions. Those exceptions speak volumes both about the cultures that produce them and the women themselves. There is no blustering or outrage or grandstanding in Waheda. Like other Middle Eastern women in public life, she has a quiet strength and perseverance qualities that Christians and other minorities in the region share.

Christianity in Iraq has been devastated by war for a generation, culminating with the ISIS genocide. There is an urgent need to secure and revitalize the Nineveh Plain region. Much blood American and Iraqi, Christian and Muslim has been shed for freedom in Iraq. The Christians who remain, like Waheda, are committed to rebuilding.

It should come as no surprise that Americas natural allies in the Middle East those who share its values and interests have turned to the democratic process without outside prompting. The looming question is whether America, for all its talk of democracy in the region, will honor the democratic will of those in the region, even if it threatens existing borders.

Andrew Doran writes about U.S. foreign policy and human rights in the Middle East. He serves on the Board of Directors for In Defense of Christians (IDC), a nonprofit that advocates for minority communities in the Middle East.

The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the views of The Hill.

Originally posted here:
Kurds, Iraqi Christians want democracy for themselves - The Hill (blog)