Mediaboss Marketing

US-POLITICS-VOTE-1YEAR-YOUTH - Credit: AFP via Getty Images

The the Super Bowl halftime show was, by most accounts, a huge success. Well, that was awesome, wrote Rolling Stones Rob Sheffield of the Los Angeles-centric medley. The Super Bowl halftime show finally opened up to hip-hop this was the first time the rappers got to bumrush center stage, instead of serving as a sideshow.

Charlier Kirk, the trollish founder of the conservative group Turning Point USA known for railing against cancel culture, was not a fan. The NFL is now the league of sexual anarchy, he tweeted. This halftime show should not be allowed on television.

Video: Hip-hop, rap, take center stage at the 2022 Super Bowl

More from Rolling Stone

Its unclear what exactly triggered Kirk here. Mary J. Blige wore an outfit that exposed her bare thighs. There was some dancing, but it was pretty tame. Perhaps he got a little flustered at the sight of 50 Cents built upper body. Regardless, the show certainly didnt feature anything warranting calls of sexual anarchy, at least not any more so than previous halftime shows led by white performers. Kirk did make a similar complaint in 2020, when he tweeted that the performance from Jennifer Lopez and Shakira was a horrendous example to the millions of young women across the world because it featured pole dancing.

Kirks tweet on Sunday was so comically prude that prominent commentators of all ideologies came together, at least for this one fleeting moment, to mock him.

You tiny, tiny boy. How can we help you? tweeted Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.).

Time for bed, Grandpa, added Trump-loving conservative host Piers Morgan.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who once bashed Morgan for mocking her career as a bartender, called Kirk a weirdo. The jab was an apparent call back to her tweet from December describing Republicans as creepy weirdos for projecting their sexual frustrations onto my boyfriends feet because they cant date me.

Story continues

I was in High School in the 1980s, tweeted former Republican Rep. Denver Riggleman. Weird Science was sexual anarchy.

Dr. Dre, Snoop Dogg, Mary J. Blige, Eminem, and 50 Cent five of the six performers supposedly unleashing sexual anarchy into the homes of millions of Super Bowl viewers on Sunday were also in high school in the 1980s. So was Tom DeLonge, formerly of Blink-182. Sexual Anarchy is a great name of a Punk Band, he wrote.

Even Lev Parnas, the Ukrainian businessman and Rudy Giuliani ally convicted of illegally funneling money to former President Trumps 2020 campaign, got in on the action. Lets not forget Charlie Kirk bussed in insurrectionists on Jan 6th, he tweeted.

President Biden has long been looking for a way to bridge the widening divide between Democrats and Republican in Congress. He may have finally found it.

Best of Rolling Stone

Video courtesy of NBCUniversal. For more, check out NBC.com.

Link:
Liberals and Conservatives Unite to Dunk on Charlie Kirk for Calling Super Bowl Halftime Show Sexual Anarchy - Yahoo News

IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

Why Ukraine crisis isn't overhyped00:38

Multiple anti-vaccine mandate protesters arrested near Ambassador Bridge02:43

Biden: U.S. will respond 'swiftly, decisively' to further Russian aggression against Ukraine02:13

Biden, Zelenskyy discuss Ukraine crisis day after Putin call02:18

Information Warfare with Russia, in Real Time00:18

The potential problem with the Kyiv embassy pullout.00:34

Now Playing

Inside the Obama meeting.01:08

UP NEXT

What Russians think of Putin's latest move.00:44

Biden to Putin: Consequences of invasion into Ukraine would be 'swift and severe'03:00

Police removing protesters blocking Canada bridge after judge orders truckers to disperse02:28

Biden speaks with Putin as Ukraine invasion looms03:39

Celebrate Black History Month with Film05:03

Take a selfie, view your tax records02:12

Joe Rogan apologizes for repeatedly using n-word on his podcast04:40

Boston mayor on storm: It's a big one here.00:28

Fmr CIA Agent: Putin is working against himself00:58

Providence mayor urges residents to stay indoors, non-emergency travel ban in place02:51

Thousands without power as powerful nor'easter slams East Coast02:38

Dems react to Sinema censure01:03

Arizona Democratic Party censures Sen. Sinema01:28

Michigan Congresswoman Brenda Lawrence was among the democrats on a virtual call with the former president.Feb. 12, 2022

UP NEXT

Why Ukraine crisis isn't overhyped00:38

Multiple anti-vaccine mandate protesters arrested near Ambassador Bridge02:43

Biden: U.S. will respond 'swiftly, decisively' to further Russian aggression against Ukraine02:13

Biden, Zelenskyy discuss Ukraine crisis day after Putin call02:18

Information Warfare with Russia, in Real Time00:18

The potential problem with the Kyiv embassy pullout.00:34

More:
Inside the Obama meeting. - MSNBC

Approximately nine months before the all-important midterm elections and after one year of President Joe Bidens administration, Democrats face an uphill climb to maintain control of the House and Senate.

And many political experts have opined that, as things stand, its challenging to fathom Biden winning a second term.

With less than desirable approval ratings and the failure to push through vital legislative priorities, President Biden has faced tough questions fair or unfair about his competency.

And whether his reelection opponent will be former President Donald Trump or Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, many Democrats realize they have reasons for concern.

The Hill recently summed up that concern:

Topping the speculation spectrum is Trump vs. DeSantis a Drudge Report favorite topic that could be brutal. Vice President Kamala Harriss (alleged) lackluster performance is a close second.

If President Biden declines to seek a second term, she sucks up copious bandwidth as a weak frontrunner. Currently, theres much chatter about the unlikely chance that Biden nominates Harris to the Supreme Court, solving two presidential problems which Black woman to select for the Court and whether to remove Harris from the 2024 ticket.

Third, reflected in polling, is an early assumption that Biden is a failed one-termer channeling Jimmy Carter. That has raised the possibility of Hillary Clintons presidential comeback.

But Clintons appeal pales compared to whom the Hill identified as the Democrats emergency candidate: former first lady Michelle Obama.

One GOP activist told the newspaper, God help us. She could beat any of our candidates.

However, Obama has repeatedly stated her opposition to running for office.

Still, those romanticizing about a possible run by the famous former first lady point to her best-selling book, Becoming.

In the memoir, Obama wrote, evolving is an ongoing process, meaning as time goes by, its conceivable that she could change her mind and seek to make history as the first woman to win the presidency.

The U.S. needs a female president. Unfortunately, we are lagging behind the world in giving a chance to a female, and really, it would be hard to find a better candidate for the role than Mrs. Obama, said Chris Anderson, the District-based founder ofSootheYourFeet.com.

She has everything that any serious candidate needs. The experience of her husbands tenures means she knows exactly what is expected, she has none of the baggage that Mrs. Clinton carried around with her, she is an articulate and effective speaker and her rock star appeal would leave any Republican quaking in their boots, Anderson insisted.

That mass appeal spreads all over the divides, appealing to the Democrats, independents, the minorities, the female voters, he said. She would fill stadiums wherever she went and build up such a momentum that she would be unstoppable. All it takes is for someone to persuade her to go for it, and she is in.

Steve Spacek, a D.C. public service consultant and campaign strategist, agreed.

Michelle Obama would have a very good chance to win the presidency when pitted against Donald Trump, or even against the incumbent President Biden or (West Virginia Democratic Sen.) Joe Manchin, Spacek said. I expect Mrs. Obama to certainly fare better than Hillary Clinton ever did, in partisan primaries and any general election.

Significantly, Spacek added, Obama appears free of controversy and carries no discernable baggage.

At 58, she would be younger than the current and previous president and any current crop of candidates, he noted.

Dr. Michal Strahilevitz, interim directorof Elfenworks Center for Responsible Businessand a marketing professor at Saint Marys College of California, said many Americans want to see former President Barack Obama return to the political spotlight.

Dr. Strahilevitz said if Mrs. Obama ran, the support shed receive truly would rock the vote.

It would be great to have this impressive power couple back in the White House, Dr. Stahilevitz asserted. Michelle Obama is herself a powerful woman and a force of her own with a successful book and a smart and extremely loyal fan base.

She is also relatable. She is genuine, even when that means saying controversial things. While some may see this as a liability, it is part of her appeal.

We know what she is thinking and we appreciate that authenticity. These are some reasons I believe she would be particularly good for voter turnout. As a candidate, she would motivate and inspire in a way that few other candidates could, he said.

See original here:
Michelle Obama Identified as Democrats' 2024 'Emergency Candidate' - The Washington Informer

Wanda Roam

Jefferson City

Dear Editor:

I find it humorous to read the liberal LTEs citing liberal resources that are promoting the "Big Lie" Joe Biden actually got more votes than Barack Obama to become the duly elected president. It is a never-ending argument of the liberals and the Donald Trump supporters.

If there were no real questions or anomalies associated with the election, there would not be forensic audits still taking place in the swing states where vote counting was mysteriously stopped almost simultaneously when President Trump was ahead.

Days later, president-elect Biden miraculously was announced the winner of all of these states. Where were all those extra votes found after hours? Things that make you go hmmm!

Truth has a way of rising to the top. The truth about the plandemic and where it was created by gain of function and funded by pompous Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates and others will be found out. Eventually, this will be uncovered and crimes against humanity must be filed against them along with big pharma, enabling health care providers, politicians and the governors that forced COVID-19-positive elderly into the nursing homes to infect the healthy.

The goal was to create fear and a willingness to allow the government to take our rights and freedoms away from us to mandate lockdowns, masks and dangerous so-called vaccines. This allowed the liberals and some RINOS to unlawfully change the voting laws to allow the election mess that is still being disputed.

It's also humorous Hillary Clinton and Stacy Abrams never conceded their elections and the Democrats in DC blamed Hillary's loss on Russia, Russia, Russia, in a stolen election.

The truth will set us free, so let's get to the bottom of the COVID-19 virus, the 2020 election and the setup of a so-called "insurrection" with the infiltration of FBI agents and/or informants.

Isn't it convenient the Department of Justice doesn't know or won't say whether any agents were involved?

Bring Ray Epps and the other unindicted co-conspirators before congress for all the world to see and hear their testimony about their involvement. Show us all the videos Nancy Pelosi is hiding. Subpoena her devices to see why she refused to ask for additional security Jan. 6 after being requested to do so.

My how the worm has turned. Hypocrisy is on full display but how quickly the liberals forget their own words. Stop the lies!

Excerpt from:
Your Opinion: Citing liberal sources about the 'Big Lie' - Jefferson City News Tribune

I have witnessed what happens when you have zero multifamily units that are going to be built in a neighborhood that desperately needs it, she said.

The afternoon debate focused on how and whether Colorado cities should be able to limit their own growth and development. The hearing wrapped up without a vote, but Gonzales support means that the measure is poised to pass at a future meeting and potentially proceed to a full vote before the Senate.

The reality is, no matter how much money this body decides to pour into affordable housing efforts, if local governments continue to enact anti-growth initiatives and unreasonable zoning policies, we are not going to construct the additional housing units we need to make Colorado affordable again, said state Sen. Larry Liston, who co-sponsored the bill with Rep. Andres Picos. Both are Republicans from Colorado Springs.

Boulder, Golden and Lakewood are among the cities that have instituted limits on growth. Voters in those cities approved growth restrictions in 1976, 1995 and 2019, respectively. In each city, the law says that the residential housing stock can grow by only 1 percent per year.

The Republican proposal would not invalidate those existing laws. Instead, it would ban other cities from instituting any limitation on the number of zoning applications or building permits allowed each year.

The amended version of the bill garnered strong support from Republican leadership.

I agree with (Sen. Gonzales.) We have got to think outside the box. We have got to look at innovative ways to change the way we approach housing in this state, said Senate Minority Leader Chris Holbert of Douglas County, also a member of the committee.

As originally drafted, the bill would have severely limited cities ability to downzone properties. Downzoning is when a local government puts new limits on what a property owner can build. The proposal would have required cities to pay just compensation to property owners for lost value if their property is downzoned, similar to a law in Arizona.

In reaching their compromise with Gonzales, sponsors agreed to drop that section. It was also a major focus of the opposition at the hearing, who argued that the just compensation measure would have hobbled city governments and shifted power to private property owners, rather than city leaders. (Republicans like Holbert said they liked that part.)

We believe that municipalities and their elected officials need to be able to make those determinations, at that level, with public input, with developer input, with the input of all constituents, said Meghan Dollar, a lobbyist for the Colorado Municipal League.

After the meeting, Dollar said that CML would poll its members about their opinions on the amended version of the bill, which focuses only on growth limits.

I think its really important to get feedback from municipal officials on this one. I will say that generally, CML opposes anything that takes land-use regulation out of the local level, Dollar said.

More than a half-dozen liberal land-use reformers also known as YIMBYs, for Yes In My Backyard spoke on the proposal. They werent particularly interested in the state-vs-local debate over property rights. Instead, they, they echoed the Republican argument that the state needs to rev up its housing industry in order to meet demand.

Weve had decades to see exactly what these (slow-growth) policies have done to limit housing, said Dmitrii Zavorotny, treasurer of YIMBY Denver. The Boulder growth-limiting law directly blocked his parents chance to build a home there, he said. He argues the policy has led to sprawl and pollution as people are forced to move to outlying communities instead of Boulder.

Colorados modern growth debate began in large part in the 1960s and 1970s, and Boulder was at the forefront. In 1976, Boulder voters made it the first community in the Rocky Mountain West to put a limit on its growth, as the High Country News reported.

Then-councilman Paul Danish, who led the effort, argued that uncontrolled growth cant be tolerated in Boulder because it would break the urban infrastructure and destroy all the desirable qualities of the towns environment.

His opponents, including local real-estate brokers, argued that the move would turn Boulder into an exclusionary community open only to well-to-do residents.

Boulders single-family home prices today are the highest on the Front Range, with the median house going for about $785,000.

Since then, the slow- or anti-growth movement has resurfaced several times. In 1995, Boulder tightened its residential growth limit from 2 percent to 1 percent per year, and Golden passed a similar cap. In 2019, Lakewood voters approved their own slow-growth law. Advocates also tried but failed to create a growth limit across the Front Range in 2019 and 2020.

During the pandemic, housing prices in Colorado have hit new highs, and leaders of both parties have made the shortage of new developments a central message. The pro-growth bill is part of Republicans Commitment to Colorado a package of bills focused largely on the cost of living.

State lawmakers are set to spend $400 million of federal money on a groundbreaking affordable-housing package. And in recent years, Democrats led an effort to create incentives for cities that allow greater density and embrace affordable housing.

The current pro-growth measure also breaks new ground: Its text declares that housing has become a statewide concern. That kind of language could contribute to a greater argument for intervention by state lawmakers in policies that, until now, have been decided at the local level.

Among other changes, Gonzales suggested that the legislature could create a permanent committee to address housing issues another sign of their growing importance to policymakers from both parties.

Read the rest here:
Colorado could ban 'slow-growth' policies as GOP and liberals team up at the statehouse - Colorado Public Radio