Mediaboss Marketing

President Donald Trump has floated the idea of a 20 percent tax on all Mexican importsas a way to reduce America's trade deficit and fund the U.S.-Mexico border wall.

The problem? As Conservative Review Editor-in-Chief Mark Levin pointed out on his radio show Thursday night, if the government imposes a 20 percent tax on the southern imports, it's not Mexicans or their government that'd be paying the tax YOU ARE.

Listen:

Mexico doesnt get taxed on anything! Not a thing! Zero! Levin said. These are taxes on the American people on the American worker.

This [tax] isnt for the workers, Levin stressed. You want to do something for the workers? Unleash the economy. How do you do that? Cut taxes. Roll back cumbersome, paralyzing regulations. Rein in government spending.

Just dont pass a tax on the American people and claim youre making Mexico "pay for the wall."

Editors note: A previous version of this article was inadvertently published with the wrong headline.

Dont miss an episode of LevinTV. Sign up now!

Read more:
Mark Levin: I'd expect this from liberals, but NOT Republicans - Conservative Review

The Womens March was more a mass group therapy than the launch of a new resistance movement.

The Womens March on Washington, and in many other mostly liberal cities, is being portrayed as the launch of a new resistance to Donald Trump and Republicans.

The use of the term resistance is not by accident.

It conjures up the heroism and selflessness of the French Resistance and the Resistance movements in other Nazi-occupied countries. Since Trump is equated to Hitler in so much of liberal rhetoric, it is in their minds the appropriate analogy.

Resistance, not coincidentally, also is the English translation for the group Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiya (Islamic Resistance Movement), better known by its acronym, HAMAS.

This plays into the regressive lefts bizarre affinity for Islamist movements, something put on display at the Womens March through the high profile role of Linda Sarsour and the widely-distributed posters of women in Hijabs made from American flagscreated by the same artist who created the Obama Hope poster.

The word resistance thus plays into many important places in the liberal psyche.

But in reality, the Womens March was more a mass group therapy than the launch of a new resistance movement. It was a way to try to stave off a demoralization of a once hopeful liberal electorate.

We have seen such demoralization play itself out in the crying, group cry-ins, and generally hysterical reaction to Trumps victory.

Its likely to get worse before it gets better.

Trump is fast out of the gate, and throwing out so much change so fast, it has liberals demoralized.

First came cabinet nominations which, to liberals, are an abomination going to the heart of liberal control of the culture the education bureaucracy, environmental regulation, and the Justice Department as political tool.

Barring something startling, its unlikely liberals can stop any of Trumps nominees.

That sense of demoralization is witnessed in the reaction to Trumps decision to move forward on the Keystone and Dakota access pipelines. One environmental activist group tweeted out that Trump is pushing DAPL and Keystone because they were stopped by our movements. He wants us demoralized. It wont work.

But in reality, it likely will work. Liberals will become demoralized.

There have been reports that Trump will seek to cut funding for the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities. From reactions Ive seen on Facebook and elsewhere, that move if it takes place is seen as a mortal threat to an important part of the Democratic base which depends on federal largesse for their artistic and political livelihoods.

Trump also has signaled that he would act forcefully against a form of protest movement important to liberal self-identification, so-called sanctuary cities. Trumps press secretary made clear that the administration would look to cut off federal funding streams for cities that defy federal authority on immigration.

And next week Trump will nominate a Supreme Court justice who almost certainly will be a conservative unacceptable to the liberals. Despite Chuck Schumers taunts that he will block any such nominee, in reality there is little Democrats can to do stop it without provoking a Republican nuclear option.

In the age of Trump, liberals are anti-change. They liked the status quo, and seeing it slip away is demoralizing for them.

It is in this context that the Womens March needs to be understood. They put on a heroic face, but I dont think they believed it.

Read this article:
Liberals desperately fight demoralization - legal Insurrection (blog)

So, how will the Leftrespond to President Trump in a serious way? Well, they appear to be yearning for a grassroots army of their own, a left wing version of the Tea Party. Many are still licking their wounds from Hillary Clintons upset defeat, while others remain completely immobile that the billionaire real estate magnate occupies the Oval Office. And therein lies the problem. Theres a reason why Trump was elected and Clinton was not. Theres a reason why the Tea Party energized the Republican Party. So, I guess I can see why the Left wants something like this for their side. Yet, even The New York Times said this was a tall order since the party has been devastated under Obamas presidency (via NYT):

Party leaders, eyeing the huge protests last weekend and growing worries over the promised repeal of the Affordable Care Act, are hoping to recreate the mass movement that sprang up in 2009 and swept Republicans to power in the House and in governors races across the country a Tea Party equivalent from the left.

And they are turning to the same playbook that guided their conservative counterparts in the aftermath of Mr. Obamas election: creating or expanding a number of groups outside the formal architecture of the party, focusing on often-overlooked state legislative and redistricting campaigns, and bringing together frightened fund-raisers to underwrite it all.

Recreating the conditions for a second lightning strike will be difficult. The kind of soaring unemployment that followed the worst recession since the Depression is not likely anytime soon, and with many House districts gerrymandered by Republicans and few Republican-held Senate seats open in 2018, the political terrain is more forbidding for Democrats now. Only two Republican Senate seats in Nevada and Arizona are plausibly available to Democrats at the moment, while Democrats must defend 10 seats in states won by Mr. Trump. The most hard-fought campaigns may be the 38 governors races that will take place over the next two years.

The article also noted two things that should stand out. One is that success will depend on the Democratic Party getting serious about state and local elections, in which the GOP has eviscerated them since 2009. Second, top Clinton ally David Brock held a three-day conference in Palm Beach, Florida over the inauguration weekend with 150 top liberal donors and operatives to map a course to create their own Tea Partyand reportedly to defeat Trump by finding ways to impeach him.

The Democrats have no standing in rural America, which is where youll find the die-hard supporters and the credibility to say this is actually a movement. Having marches consisting of the same privilegedand overly educated progressive elites that engage in the typical self-righteous anticsthat blinded them from the rising neo-populist wave isnt necessarily the recipe for a movement with longevity. Also, the GOP owns the heartland. If you drove from D.C. to California, youd be hard pressed to drive through a county where Clinton won. California is also the only reason why Clinton receive three million more popular votes than Trump, which isn't really an indicator of much other than Democratsvoted for a Democratin a state that already goes Democrat. It does serveas another reason why the Electoral College is necessary to prevent the liberal coasts from suffocating us in their politically correct, hyper-progressive, and intolerant ethos, but I digress.

Given that Middle America is Republican, Democrats are left with the coasts and the cities to rebuild a movement that a) doesnt seem all that interested in reaching out to white working class Americans; and b) doesnt seem to be willing to move away from transgender bathroom advocacy and towards job creation, the former being a hallmark of how the progressive urban elites. President Trump is probably the most pro-gay rights Republican ever elected, so once the Left finds out that he isnt all that interested in curbing LGBT rightsthats one wing that has no reason to get energized. Given that the GOP is now dominant in rural America, the Democratic Party has mostly let their political organizations in these areas wither and die. They have to start from scratch since the party has been virtually destroyed in Appalachia. Out of 490 counties that dot this region of America, which was once a Democratic bastion, Clinton only won 21 of them. So, before liberals can even begin talking about things that continue to alienate normal Americans, they have to rebuild the party apparatus. Its not impossible, but hard with the PC-minded ethos of the Left.

The point is that the Tea Party was organic. It wasnt organized by professional operatives, like what appears to be happening in Florida, and the message of lower taxes, smaller government, less spending, and less regulation resonates. Trigger warnings, safe spaces, bathrooms, cultural appropriation, only reigns in the echo chambers of the cities. Its for people who can afford to dabble in this nonsensical drivel; its not meant for someone who is voting or supporting someone out of survival. The sparks of the Tea Party could be seen with President George W. Bushs Troubled Asses Relief Program, which grew into a brushfire with Obamas health care law and stimulus program. In its initial stages, the Tea Partys t strength and weakness was that it was decentralized. There was no leader. There were no qualms about challenging and cannibalizing moderate Republicans seen as too establishment and not conservative enough in primaries.

With their bastions of power restricted to the cities and the coasts, their extreme progressive disposition, and the condescension they have for people who are not like them, I doubt Democrats will be successful in this venture. In fact, it could devolve into a total disaster. There is no way this Democratic Tea Party would accept anyone who isnt adherent to the ravings of a college-aged liberal, which seems to be the norm within Democratic circles. And this has happened before. Occupy Wall Street was the Lefts counter to the Tea Party. It wasnt organic. Professional activists organized it, it wasnt authentic (or organic)and it fell apart. This idea of a Democratic Tea Party, like OWS, will begin and die in the cities.

Continue reading here:
Liberals: Hey, Let's Form Our Own Tea Party To Fight Trump - Townhall

By JOHN McCULLOUGH Opinions Editor

During the Republican primary season, the vast majority of media attention was intensely fixated on the eventual victor, President Donald Trump. Through the grueling months of pageantry and spectacle, Trump successfully spellbound the media with demagogic rhetoric and political theatrics. One of the most widely focused-on incidents came during a Fox News Republican Primary debate, in which tension arose when moderator Megyn Kelly questioned if Trump possessed the appropriate temperament to serve as President of the United States. This conflict was heightened as Trump responded to the criticism in media, attempting to undercut Kelly with a misogynistic reference to her menstruation. Kellys feud with Trump turned her into an overnight hero of journalistic integrity among liberals and centrists. To many, this was proof that she was the good kind of conservative, a member of an honorable opposition that could be trusted to foster reasoned debate.

However, in liberals haste to recruit an enemy partisan to their side, Kellys actual record as a mud-slinging right-winger was swiftly forgotten. Her new fair-weather friends forgot about numerous outrageous statements that had won her their contempt years before, such as her gravely serious insistence on air that Santa is white, or that community activists should stop complaining about the excesses of police brutality. The sands had shifted, and no matter how contemptible her stances on the issues were, she would be exalted as a hero of idealized decency. The problem with this is simple: as the political spectrum shifts further to the right, more and more reactionary figures will seem positively reasonable by comparison. In fact, this is already happening.

Politicians formerly decried as right-wing extremists and war-mongers have now been deemed principled figures of a bygone era. Comparisons have been made longing for the days of George W. Bush, whose administration used false information to kickstart a war that killed hundreds of thousands of people. Others who have been forgiven for past offenses when criticizing Trump are Paul Ryan, whose number one political goal is the privatization of social security and medicare, and Chris Christie, who has waged an all-out war on teachers unions in his tenure as Governor of New Jersey. Naturally, both capitulated to Trump as soon as it became politically expedient.

Liberals reveling in the spirit of the enemy of my enemy is my friend is nothing new. During the 2016 Democratic National Convention, former Reagan administration staffer Doug Elmets received lavish applause when he declared to the Republican nominee: Donald Trump, you are no Ronald Reagan. While this has quite a bit of rhetorical stopping power, it is a form of historical revisionism that seeks to exonerate a particularly shameful period of American history. It seems doubtful that Trump would be so offensive to a man who refused to sanction apartheid in South Africa, funded anti-communist terrorists, and ignored the AIDS epidemic while thousands of Americans languished and died. Attempts to paint Reagan as a man who would be appalled by the evolution of Republican Party are at best naive and at worst disingenuous. When the man decried in the 70s as the most extreme right-wing candidate the party had yet seen is appealed to as a moderate forefather, a grave historical error has been made.

Instead of real dissent or argument, many liberals remain satisfied with pining for a forgotten rational conservatism. Many seek to re-write history to suit the narrative that reactionaries of the present-day are historical anomalies that The Right of the past would want nothing to do with. This practice does nothing to help liberals; it only exonerates their past enemies. If the center-left does not cease with this reckless variety of political rehabilitation, they might someday be forced to laud Trump in the face of a president so reactionary he will seem reasonable in comparison.

Here is the original post:
Liberals: Megyn Kelly is Not Your Friend - Fordham Observer

Twelve hours after Virginias two Democratic senators, Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine, voted to confirm Michael Pompeo, President Trumps nominee to run the CIA, the protests began.

On Tuesday morning, more than 100 protesters gathered outside Warners constituent offices in the Virginia suburbs of Washington. Amanda Lynch, a mother and writer near Manassas, took two of her sons to Kaines office there, where they played with pocket Constitutions, and she pledged to return every week.

I was disappointed by Pompeo, and Im not going to pretend otherwise, said Lynch, 34. Hes defended the use of torture even though its been proven that it doesnt work. Im disappointed in the selection of [education secretary nominee] Betsy DeVos. Apart from Gen. [James] Mattis, its hard for me to feel anything but perturbed by these Cabinet choices.

Senators have confirmed four of Trumps Cabinet nominees and voted a few more out of committee. Republicans have criticized Democrats for slowing down Pompeos nomination, delaying several others and voting in a bloc against secretary of state nominee Rex Tillerson at the committee level on Monday.

But none of it has earned them many points with a fast-growing liberal protest movement that is asking Democratic senators to wage a blockade on nominees they have deemed unacceptable.

They need to do anything they can to defeat or delay the seating of Senator Sessions, Mr. Tillerson and Mr. Price, said Maggie Godbold, 62, a retiree and Democratic activist from Fairfax County, Va., who helped organize the protest at Warners office, one of 200 across the country Tuesday. Theyre unqualified.

The senators, however, appear unwilling to do what their base is asking. On Tuesday, the full Senate voted 96 to 4 to confirm Nikki Haley, Trumps nominee to be ambassador to the United Nations. Earlier in the day, they voted Haley and three other nominees out of committee Ben Carson to lead the Department of Housing and Urban Development; Wilbur Ross to serve as commerce secretary; and Elaine Chao to lead the Transportation Department. That followed full Senate votes for Pompeo on Monday and for Defense Secretary James Mattis and Homeland Security Secretary John F. Kelly on Friday.

There are clearly going to be some Trump nominees that give me pause, but there are some Im going to be supporting, Warner said in an interview on Capitol Hill Tuesday. I argued strenuously, both as a governor and under President Obama, that you give the president, or the governor, the chance to put his team in place.

[Nikki Haley confirmed as new U.S. envoy to the United Nations]

The reality, too, is that thwarting Trumps nominees is a goal that is largely out of reach for Democrats, thanks to their own partys 2013 reform of filibuster rules, continued by Republicans ever since; it now takes just 51 votes to confirm a nominee for office lower than the Supreme Court.

Democrats, with no leverage, are left fighting nominees without really hoping to stop them.

Were getting lots of calls on lots of the nominees, said Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), a liberal from a safe seat who voted to confirm Pompeo. They want us to fight, but elections have consequences. We dont have the votes in many instances, so in order to stop any nominee, we need three profiles in courage on the Republican side. Those are just the facts. And people understand that but I think theres nothing to be satisfied about, and theres lots to be concerned about.

Thats one reason Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) has continued to tout his caucuss decision to continue delaying votes on nominees even if blocking any of them is unlikely.

Schumer said the Senate would move with relative speed on nominees who are not controversial.

Raising his voice and gesticulating more than usual at a weekly briefing with reporters, Schumer insisted: Were going to vet these nominees thoroughly. Were not being dilatory, but were not going to just rush them through. These are all very important nominees. And to have a few days discussion on them? That makes sense. Theyre going to be in power for up to four years with tremendous say on what affects Americans.

Cue the Republican outrage.

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Tex.) said Tuesday that party-line votes on things like secretary of state were breaking the comity of the Senate. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, successfully guided Tillerson to a confirmation vote, then bemoaned how no Democrats joined him.

All of a sudden, because the election outcome is what it is, its like everything has changed, Corker said. I just want us to get back into the middle of the road and get back to realizing the importance of these positions.

The delays are noteworthy when compared with past administrations; George W. Bush and Barack Obama entered their first day in office with at least seven nominees confirmed. The relative sluggishness of the Trump teams confirmations, in contrast, has led to dozens of critical national security, financial, public health and other domestic policy positions sitting vacant, with most federal agencies temporarily under the management of career civil service managers or holdovers from the Obama administration who could sit in place for months to come.

The modest progress on Pompeo and Tillerson came as top congressional leaders met with Trump at the White House on Monday night for a social gathering that included talk of persuading Democrats to move along quickly with votes on some of the presidents top picks. On Tuesday, Senate leaders met with him again at the White House to discuss his Supreme Court nominee which Trump said will be announced next week.

But the Democratic Partys base expects senators to move nominees along as slowly as possible.

This is not the first time a restive left has demanded resistance and blamed Democrats when little arose. In 2005, the active and angry Democratic Netroots shamed senators who voted to confirm George W. Bushs nominees, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales. Barack Obama, then a freshman senator, wrote a diary on the liberal Daily Kos blog explaining why he and other self-identified progressives had not filibustered every nominee they could.

How can we ask Republican senators to resist pressure from their right wing and vote against flawed appointees like John Bolton if we engage in similar rhetoric against Democrats who dissent from our own party line? Obama wrote.

A final vote on Tillerson, the former CEO of ExxonMobil whom Democrats have labeled as part of Trumps Swamp Cabinet, wont occur until Tuesday at the earliest. Other nominees, including Carson and Chao the wife of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) remain in limbo. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee also scrapped plans on Tuesday to hold votes to recommend former Texas governor Rick Perry to lead the Energy Department and Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.) to lead the Interior Department. Aides said that a miscommunication between the parties forced the panel to reschedule to a later date further delaying the formation of Trumps government.

Well, in a more fulsome way, move into approving Cabinet appointments, both controversial and noncontroversial, beginning next week, McConnell told reporters.

Schumer cited Carson as a nominee who has split Democrats, saying Tuesday that he had fresh concerns about the former brain surgeons nomination to lead HUD because of Trumps decision last week to sign an executive order that overhauled federal housing policy.

Carson had been unanimously approved by the Senate Banking Committee on Tuesday including by liberal leaders such as Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). Under pressure from supporters on social media to explain her vote, Warrens office said in a statement that she was backing Carson despite his inexperience with federal housing policy because of commitments he made at his hearing to work with her to expand fair housing rights to all Americans and to combat unacceptable lead levels in public housing.

Other Trump nominees sat for confirmation hearings on Tuesday, including Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), tapped to lead the Department of Health and Human Services. Amid several questions about his personal finances and disclosures to the Senate Finance Committee, Price would not commit during his confirmation hearing that no Americans will be worse off under Trumps executive order to ease rules under the Affordable Care Act.

Price also declined to confirm whether Trump is indeed nearly finished with a plan to replace the health-care law.

Republicans defended Price, broadly criticizing Democrats for undermining the Senate by continuing to attack Prices views and ethics instead of embracing his qualifications for the job.

Meanwhile, Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), Trumps choice to lead the Office of Management and Budget, defended his support of cuts to popular entitlement programs that Trump has vowed to keep intact.

During his hearing with the Senate Budget Committee, Mulvaney also faced questions about the Trump administrations claims that turnout for the new presidents inauguration was larger than previous swearing-in ceremonies.

Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) brandished side-by-side images of the Mall from Obamas 2009 inauguration and Trumps on Friday.

Im not really sure how this ties to OMB, Mulvaney said before conceding that images from Obamas inauguration showed a bigger crowd.

Merkley explained that he raised the issue because budgets often contain buried deceptions. ... This is an example of where the presidents team, on something very simple and straightforward, wants to embrace a fantasy rather than a reality.

Mulvaney assured the committee that he is deadly serious about giving you hard numbers I intend to follow through on that.

In the coming days, progressive groups are planning to organize more rallies, building on Saturdays Womens March on Washington as well as the political unpopularity of Trump. Tuesdays protests in Virginia were part of a National Day of Action against the Swamp Cabinet, organized by the progressive group MoveOn. They supplemented the ongoing Trump Tuesdays that other progressive groups are organizing to keep protesters in the field and attention on the Trump administration.

The millions of people that took to the streets on Saturday are not going to give up because Ben Carson will be confirmed to run HUD, said Ben Wikler, the Washington director of MoveOn. People want to see evidence that Democrats will stand up and fight, but they increasingly get that they cant stop everything. Democrats are just going to have to get used to their constituents being angry if they dont use every tool at their disposal.

Paul Kane contributed to this report.

Read more at PowerPost

Go here to see the original:
Liberals press Democrats to thwart Trump nominations, but to little effect - Washington Post