Mediaboss Marketing

What wasnt to like?

A lot, as it turns out. The leaders of the Womens March, arguably the most prominent feminists in the country, have some chilling ideas and associations. Far from erecting the big tent so many had hoped for, the movement they lead has embraced decidedly illiberal causes and cultivated a radical tenor that seems determined to alienate all but the most woke.

***

Start with Ms. Sarsour, by far the most visible of the quartet of organizers. It turns out that this homegirl in a hijab, as one of many articles about her put it, has a history of disturbing views, as advertised by . . . Linda Sarsour.

There are comments on her Twitter feed of the anti-Zionist sort: Nothing is creepier than Zionism, she wrote in 2012. And, oddly, given her status as a major feminist organizer, there are more than a few that seem to make common cause with anti-feminists, like this from 2015: Youll know when youre living under Shariah law if suddenly all your loans and credit cards become interest-free. Sound nice, doesnt it? She has dismissed the anti-Islamist feminist Ayaan Hirsi Ali in the most crude and cruel terms, insisting she is not a real woman and confessing that she wishes she could take away Ms. Alis vagina this about a woman who suffered genital mutilation as a girl in Somalia.

Ms. Sarsour and her defenders have dismissed all of this as a smear campaign coordinated by the far right and motivated by Islamophobia. Plus, theyve argued, many of these tweets were written five years ago! Ancient history.

But just last month, Ms. Sarsour proved that her past is prologue. On July 16, the official Twitter feed of the Womens March offered warm wishes to Assata Shakur. Happy birthday to the revolutionary #AssataShakur! read the tweet, which featured a #SignOfResistance, in Assatas honor a pink and purple Pop Art-style portrait of Ms. Shakur, better known as Joanne Chesimard, a convicted killer who is on the F.B.I.s list of most wanted terrorists.

Like many others, CNNs Jake Tapper noticed the outrageous tweet. Shakur is a cop-killer fugitive in Cuba, he tweeted, going on to mention Ms. Sarsours troubling past statements. Any progressives out there condemning this? he asked.

In the face of this sober criticism, Ms. Sarsour cried bully: @jaketapper joins the ranks of the alt-right to target me online. Welcome to the party.

Theres no doubt that Ms. Sarsour is a regular target of far-right groups, but her experience of that onslaught is what makes her smear all the more troubling. Indeed, the idea that Jake Tapper is a member of the alt-right is the kind of delirious, fact-free madness that fuels Donald Trump and his supporters. Troublingly, it is exactly the sentiment echoed by the Womens March: Our power your power scares the far right. They continue to try to divide us. Todays attacks on #AssataShakur are the latest example.

Since when did criticizing a domestic terrorist become a signal issue of the far right? Last I checked, that position was a matter of basic decency and patriotism.

Whats more distressing is that Ms. Sarsour is not the only leader of the womens movement who harbors such alarming ideas. Largely overlooked have been the similarly outrageous statements of the marchs other organizers.

Ms. Mallory, in addition to applauding Assata Shakur as a feminist emblem, also admires Fidel Castro, who sheltered Ms. Shakur in Cuba. She put up a flurry of posts when Mr. Castro died last year. R.I.P. Comandante! Your legacy lives on! she wrote in one. She does not have similar respect for American police officers. When you throw a brick in a pile of hogs, the one that hollers is the one you hit, she posted on Nov. 20.

Ms. Perez also expressed her admiration for a Black Panther convicted of trying to kill six police officers: Love learning from and sharing space with Baba Sekou Odinga.

But the public figure both women regularly fawn over is Louis Farrakhan.

On May 11, Ms. Mallory posted a photo with her arm around Mr. Farrakhan, the 84-year-old Nation of Islam leader notorious for his anti-Semitic comments, on Twitter and Instagram. Thank God this man is still alive and doing well, she wrote. It is one of several videos and photos and quotes that Ms. Mallory has posted of Mr. Farrakhan.

Ms. Perez is also a big fan. In the fall, she posted a photo in which she holds hands with Mr. Farrakhan, writing, There are many times when I sit with elders or inspirational individuals where I think, I just wish I could package this and share this moment with others. Shes also promoted video of Mr. Farrakhan dropping knowledge and another in which he says he is speaking truth to power.

What is Mr. Farrakhans truth? Readers born after 1980 will probably have little idea, since he has largely remained out of the headlines since the Million Man March he organized in 1995. But his views, which this editorial page has called twisted, remain as appalling as ever.

And dont you forget, when its God who puts you in the ovens, its forever! he warned Jews in a speech at a Nation of Islam gathering in Madison Square Garden in 1985. Five years later, he remained unreformed: The Jews, a small handful, control the movement of this great nation, like a radar controls the movement of a great ship in the waters. Or this metaphor, directed at Jews: You have wrapped your tentacles around the U.S. government, and you are deceiving and sending this nation to hell. He called Hitler a very great man on national television. Judaism, he insists, is a gutter religion.

In one of the several widely available YouTube videos hes made about the Jews, he told black Americans that the control of the Synagogue of Satan over our people must be exposed. He adds: These satanic ones have not only controlled hip-hop but they control, according to their own words, the very messages that are brought to the public. He goes on to offer a truly remarkable analysis of the hip-hop industry in which intelligent rappers are rejected by the satanic minds who insist that they want filth and encourage vulgarity and savagery. This is the first 10 minutes of an hour.

Mr. Farrakhan is also an unapologetic racist. He insists that whites are a race of devils and that white people deserve to die.

Feminists will find little to cheer in his 1950s views of gender: Your professional lives cant satisfy your soul like a good, loving man. Recently he told Jay-Z that he should make Beyonc put on some clothes. He also opposes gay marriage.

If that wasnt enough of a rap sheet, Mr. Farrakhan also loves Scientology and believes 9/11 was a false flag operation.

***

I can already hear the pushback. Whats a few impolitic tweets and photos compared to the horror show of this administration? Save your outrage for the transgender ban in the military, for the lies that spew forth daily from the press briefing room, for the cuts to Planned Parenthood, the shady business with Russia, and, and, and.

But the nightmare of the Trump administration is the proof text for why all of this matters. We just saw what happens to legitimate political parties when they fall prey to movements that are, at base, anti-American. That is true of the populist, racist alt-right that helped deliver Mr. Trump the White House and are now hollowing out the Republican Party. And it can be true of the progressive resistance regardless of how chic, Instagrammable and celebrity-laden the movement may seem. Recall that only a few months ago, Keith Ellison, a man with a long history of defending and working with anti-Semites, was almost made leader of the Democratic National Committee.

Will progressives have more spine than conservatives in policing hate in their ranks? Or will they ignore it in their fury over the Trump administration?

I am sure that Linda Sarsour, and perhaps the other leaders of the Womens March, will block me for writing this. Maybe Ill be accused of siding with the alt-right or tarred as Islamophobic. But what I stand against is embracing terrorists, disdaining independent feminist voices, hating on democracies and celebrating dictatorships. If that puts me beyond the pale of the progressive feminist movement in America right now, so be it.

The rest is here:
When Progressives Embrace Hate - New York Times

Rep. Maxine Waters / Getty

BY: Paul Crookston August 1, 2017 4:34 pm

After progressives turned "nevertheless, she persisted" into a rallying cry in support of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.), they have now moved onto the refrain"reclaiming my time," taken from Rep. Maxine Waters (D., Calif.).

Waters repeated those words to Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin during a House Financial Services Committee hearing last week, when she thought he was stalling in his answer about responding to a letter she sent him in May. Committee chairman Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R., Texas) stepped in toexplain that the time did indeed belong to Waters as a ranking member of the committee, and progressives found it to be an empowering moment of defiance in the face of male verbosity.

"As a de facto leader of the anti-Trump resistance, Waters has become a bit of a rallying point for progressives in recent months and her words to Mnuchin quickly became an internet meme among women, minorities, and anyone else who's run out of time to waste and f**ks to give," Aja Romano wrote at Vox.

Progressives have praised "Auntie Maxine" (a name that millennials have given her), shared clips from the hearing, and used "reclaiming my time" as a catchphrase. Similar to the outpouring of affection for Warren when Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) said, "Nevertheless, she persisted" in reference to her, the attention on Waters has been supportive and enthusiastic.

Vocalist Mykal Kilgore even recorded asong in honor of Waters, titled "Reclaiming My TimeGospel Mix" and the Washington Posthailed Waters' phrase as an "anthem."

Waters took to Twitter to thank Kilgore for the song and praise his talent.

Read more:
Progressives Turn Waters' Repetition of 'Reclaiming My Time' Into a Catchphrase - Washington Free Beacon

Editors Note: This piece was originally published by Acculturated. It is reprinted here with permission.

Everyone knows Donald Trumps approval numbers are in the toilet he has an approval rating of only 37 percent, according to an ABC poll taken a couple of weeks ago but many observers are baffled about why the president still seems to be doing well among evangelicals. Sixty-one percent of them approve of the job the president is doing.

During the election, observers marveled that this voting bloc was willing to rally around a man whose personal life was hardly a model of Christian virtue. But evangelical leaders said it was more important to them to ensure a Supreme Court pick they would like, for example, than to worry about how many times Trump was married or whether he spoke respectfully about other people.

A PRRI poll taken during the election found that more than six in ten (61%) Americans say immoral personal behavior does not preclude public officials from carrying out their public or professional duties with honesty and integrity. And researchers also noted that no group has shifted their position more dramatically than white evangelical Protestants. More than seven in ten (72%) white evangelical Protestants say an elected official can behave ethically even if they have committed transgressions in their personal life a 42-point jump from 2011.

Some might say this is simply political expediency. And I wrote a piece during the election comparing what I saw as the more principled reaction of Mormons to the Trump candidacy compared to evangelicals. But it is odd that Trumps liberal opponents would take evangelicals to task for the divide between their views on a persons personal behavior and public life.

After all, this is what liberals have been advocating for generations that evangelicals should be able to separate these things. From the moment it was decided that prayer no longer belonged in public classrooms, the liberal message to traditional Christians has been that they should keep their beliefs to themselves. That message extended to abortion, where Christians were told that choice was the name of the game. Sure, you have your beliefs, but you cant impose them on others. The same was true for gay marriage and just about every other culture-war issue of the past several decades. Most recently, evangelicals have been told to put aside any personal objections they have to transgender rights and accommodate people of either sex into their bathrooms and locker rooms.

One would think the Left would be celebrating the fact that evangelicals are finally acknowledging that politicians shouldnt be judged by their personal actions (as Democrats argued ad nauseam during President Bill Clintons years in the White House).

Its odd, then, that at the same time liberals have tried to wrest conservative Christians away from their notion that personal beliefs must determine views about public policy, liberals have come to enthusiastically embrace the idea that the personal is political. Its not simply that being a woman now means you have to advocate a feminist agenda that includes abortion on demand. Its that being a racial minority means you should be pushing for less police intervention in low-income neighborhoods and opposition to school choice, among other issues. Abandonment of these policy views is seen as a betrayal of ones personal commitments (not to mention ones race or sex).

Does this mean that liberals will leave evangelicals alone if they return to their roots fighting the culture wars both personally and politically? Not likely. Because if theres anything weve learned from the sanctimonious efforts at resistance coming from the left these days, its that the personal is political only so long as your politics conform to theirs.

Naomi Schaefer Riley is a weekly columnist for the New York Post.

Read the original post:
The Christian Right Is Finally Taking Liberals' Advice - National Review

President Donald Trump speaks during a "Made in America," product showcase featuring items created in each of the U.S. 50 states, at the White House on July 17, 2017, in Washington. Alex Brandon / AP

But with the 2020 election more than 39 months away, what's the hurry?

"The entire Democrat political machine is solely focused on blocking the President's agenda and defeating him and other conservatives in the next two election cycles," said Ed Rollins, lead strategist at Great America PAC. "Given this reality, it's essential for us at Great America PAC to work twice as hard to help ensure the president's short-term success and create a more favorable environment for his re-election campaign."

By early May, these super PACs had together

Another pro-Trump super PAC active in 2017 is Rebuilding America Now, which reported income of $1.15 million during the first half of 2017 almost all coming in the form of "media." The PAC has largely spent its cash on food, travel, legal fees, and $35,000 a month to one of the

Meanwhile, Ronald Weiser, founder of architecture firm McKinley Associates, gave

Florida-based America First Agenda, yet another new pro-Trump super PAC,

Make America Number 1, the pro-Trump PAC

Future45, another pro-Trump super PAC largely funded last year by casino magnate Sheldon Adelson and Linda McMahon, who Trump appointed to head the Small Business Administration, secured $105,000 from only two sources so far in 2017.

Nearly all the money this year, $102,500, came from super PAC Liberty 2.0,

More here:
Pro-Trump Super PACs Already Have Edge Over Liberals in 2018 ... - NBCNews.com

As the BC Liberals move into the unfamiliar confines of opposition, theyll have to choose who best will lead them

The final act in this years bizarre political drama played out last week with the resignation of former Premier Christy Clark.

Looking relaxed, and frankly relieved, she told reporters Monday, I am done with public life.

Her resignation comes at the end of a tumultuous few months: The election of a minority government; the assemblage of a partnership between the Greens and the NDP; a bizarre Liberal throne speech; and a final non-confidence vote that prompted Lt.-Gov. Judith Guichon to call on NDP leader John Horgan to form the next government.

Since then Clark has been noticeable by her absence.

So, while many expressed shock and surprise by her announcement Friday, it wasnt all that surprising.

It was unlikely that the BC Liberals were going to fight the next election with Clark at the helm. There was too much baggage, and too much bitterness for her to regain the confidence of the electorate.

As she said Monday, the party needs renewal and this is the best time for that to take place.

Both the NDP and the Green Party will want to consolidate their gains (and replenish their war chests) before heading into the next election. Horgan and the NDP will want to score some quick wins before presenting a throne speech this fall that can put into action the years of promises theyve made.

The Greens will want time to demonstrate they are a viable option not just an alternative.

The Liberals, meanwhile, need to rebuild. Not only must they replace key players lost in the last election, they must decide what kind of party they want to be. Their strength has always come from uniting divergent right-of-centre perspectives. Thats easier done when you are in power. However, that unity is harder to maintain from the opposition benches.

Perhaps thats why Clark was looking so relieved.

See more here:
Heavy lifting ahead for BC Liberals - Surrey Now-Leader