Media Search:



Watch the Only NYC Public Advocate Debate Before the Nov. 2 Election – THE CITY

They want to advocate for the people of New York City. But first, they have to debate each other.

Two contenders for the job of city public advocate will face off on Tuesday in the only televised debate for the office before the general election on Nov. 2.

The city Campaign Finance Board will host the debate between incumbent Democrat Jumaane Williams and Republican Dr. Devi Nampiaparampil at 7 p.m. It will be broadcast by Spectrum News NY1 and NYC TV, and live-streamed by THE CITY:

The public advocate acts as a kind of watchdog or ombudsman for the city, and is first in line for mayor if the mayor cannot do his or her job. For more information about the candidates, read our guide to the Nov. 2 election here.

By law, the CFB must hold official candidate debates as described by the criteria in the Campaign Finance Act, which includes certain fundraising and spending minimums. The Oct. 19 debate, however, is not required under that law because two or more candidates did not meet the Acts thresholds.

The two candidates taking part in Tuesdays debate, Williams and Nampiaparampil, met part of the legal threshold for fundraising and volunteered to join the debate.

Two other public advocate candidates who will appear on the Nov. 2 ballot Libertarian Devin Balkind and Conservative and Independent candidate Anthony Herbert will not appear.

Tuesdays debate is co-hosted by the CFB along with, NY1, THE CITY, Citizens Union, the John Jay College of Criminal Justice and Social Work Votes (Columbia School of Social Work & Latino Leadership Institute).

To find out who exactly is on your ballot for all offices on Nov. 2, use this Board of Elections search tool. Type in your address, click Look Up, then click View Sample Ballot.

The CFB will also host two debates among the two qualifying mayoral candidates, Democrat Eric Adams and Republican Curtis Sliwa. The faceoffs will take place on Wednesday, Oct. 20, at 7 p.m. on WNBC and Tuesday, Oct. 26, at 7 p.m. on WABC.

Sign up and get the latest stories from THE CITY delivered to you each morning

Here is the original post:
Watch the Only NYC Public Advocate Debate Before the Nov. 2 Election - THE CITY

Opinion/Letter: Proposal for NH to secede from the USA – Seacoastonline.com

To the Editor:

Nine New Hampshire legislators have submitted a resolution (CACR 2022-2243) for our state "to peaceably declare independence from the United States and proceed as a sovereign nation" -- i.e., secede from the union. (They don't seem to have given much thought to what the consequences of such action would be, were it ever to happen.)

This secession proposal comes from members of the Free State Project, a group of anti-government zealots from around the nation who have been moving to New Hampshire for the past two decades with the stated goal of taking over state government and creating a libertarian "utopia. They selected New Hampshire as their target because of our small population and our narrow political balance, making it possible for them to have a significant effect on legislative actions. According to the Free State Project Watch (freestateprojectwatch.org), there are more than 40 Free Staters in the New Hampshire legislature today, elected as Republicans. Some suggest the number, including sympathizers, may be as high as 100.

The primary goal of Free Staters is to reduce the role of the federal government, as espoused by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). ALEC says the framers intended for states to cede only a "miniscule" amount of power to a national government, and that over time the amassing of federal power "has led to overregulation and redundant bureaucracy." Even international relations should be in the hands of state legislators, ALEC says, as they are "stakeholders in many of the most important national and international issues of the day."

While it is true that in crafting our federal system, the founders stressed that power derives from the people and governmental functions should be carried out at the lowest level practicable, over time developments in commerce and technology have made it increasingly necessary to regulate matters at national or even international level. To reflect nostalgically on simpler days of the eighteenth century, before automobiles, airplanes and computers, is not a sound basis for running our country today.

Secessionists are by definition not patriots, and with their growing representation in our state and local government, Free Staters pose a palpable risk. They have been introducing proposals to slash local and state budgets, undermine public education, neglect roads, bridges and other infrastructure, and overturn community priorities. For more, see the websitegranitestateprogress.org.

What we can do about this, since Free Staters run as Republicans (and since other Republicans support many of their priorities), is to show up at the polls and elect Democrats. Regardless of impediments Republicans place in the way of voting, we need to fight our way through, and vote.

Don Nolte

Exeter

View post:
Opinion/Letter: Proposal for NH to secede from the USA - Seacoastonline.com

Lockdowns And Freedom: At Odds Or Different Sides Of The Same Coin? – Scoop.co.nz

Monday, 18 October 2021, 4:06 pmOpinion: Lynley Tulloch

These are trying times. Like many other New Zealanders, I am impacted by lockdown. Yet I am aware that the effects of Covid-19 infection and lockdowns are spread unevenly across the population.

The human rights of all people during a Covid-19 outbreak and lockdowns need to be considered.This is where things get complicated. This rights - based focus is often at odds with the libertarian view of freedom from government intervention.

Those people who are anti-lockdown often feel that their rights to freedom are being breached. What many people seem to be forgetting is that with rights comes responsibilities. Many people are breaking the rules by gathering in groups indoors and spreading the virus even further.

While we have individual rights, we also need to remember that there is a responsibility to society to protect other people's rights.

Those people who are unable to be vaccinated against Covid-19 are at risk from other people. These include children and people with compromised immune systems.

The issues are complex and entangled. And yet too many people are looking at them from a one-dimensional perspective.

Anti-lockdown protestors are a case in point. They claim that lockdowns are a breach of our individual freedom and a form of tyranny. They refuse to look at the other important dimensions of the Covid-19 pandemic and the impact it has on people who are especially vulnerable.

In my opinion the anti-lockdown protestors hold a nave and limited view of freedom, one that puts people at further risk of Covid-19 which is highly infectious and variable. While some people are not affected much by Covid-19, others may be harmed for a long time (long Covid).

Lockdowns can protect people who are vulnerable to the Covid-19 virus such as older adults, unvaccinated children, and those with pre-existing health conditions.

Covid-19 affects people throughout the community unevenly even outside of the aforementioned vulnerabilities. For example, poor living arrangements and financial instability, disability, and homelessness can also worsen the risk of Covid-19 infection for people. Refugees and immigrants are another group of people who are at greater risk of social disadvantage from Covid-19.

These same people are also disproportionately affected by Covid-19 lockdowns. These lockdowns can increase financial instability and people may lose their jobs as businesses shut down. Access to social goods such as health services and education might also be impacted.

This then has further consequences for mental health.

So it seems that we may be stuck between the proverbial rock and a hard place.

However, rather than resist lockdowns I think we should be focusing on lobbying the government for greater rights for these groups during the pandemic.

It is not surprising that in times such as these with heightened tensions there may be a lack of social cohesion.

In the United States, England, Australia, and New Zealand anti-lockdown protests have threatened social stability. Some of these protests have been violent.

In Melbourne for example, thousands of angry protestors marched through the CBD shouting freedom and f*** the jab. Protestors threw glass bottles and flares at police. The riot police fought back with rubber bullets and tear gas.

The protest was organised by Harrison McLean, a Melbourne Monash University graduate who is a self-identified libertarian activist and proponent of individual and economic freedom. He is also a Covid-19 denier.

The knee-jerk reaction of protestors who want to protect their elite lifestyles in the West is problematic.

There appears to be some degree of naivety over the concept of freedom by the protestors. The idea of freedom that these protestors are raising is based on a libertarian notion of freedom as the enjoyment of ones own life and goods.

The libertarian definition of freedom is dominant in Europe and American countries. Scholars Zhou Zhifa and Tan Xiaohan from Zhejiang Normal University recently published a research paper claiming that this understanding of freedom has led to problems in Covid-19 governance in Western countries.

Zhia and Xiaohan said that protestors end up endangering public security and health through traveling, gathering, and demonstrating without masks during a pandemic.

A recent anti-lockdown protest in New Zealand during lockdown is a case in point. It had the potential to become a super spreader event and potentially plunge New Zealand into an even longer lockdown.

The anti-lockdown protest in New Zealand was a peaceful protest. However, I dont believe that anti - lockdown protests are in the same realm of a peaceful protest. Peaceful protests are a cornerstone of democracy. Peaceful assembly and freedom of expression are perfectly legitimate and healthy ways to try and achieve social change.

Just not in the middle of a pandemic. This is when their legitimacy needs to be questioned.

Mahatma Gandhi is considered the father of peaceful protest. He fought for civil rights in India and he resisted British colonization. For his troubles he was arrested thirteen times during his lifetime.

Gandhi showed the world that social change can be achieved without violence. He was an inspirational leader in human rights. He triggered other civil rights movements led by activists such as Martin Luther King jr, Cesar Chavez, Malala Yousafzai, and Nelson Mandela.

But anti- lockdown protests are not in the same ballpark. Instead of protecting people and fighting for the human rights of people from oppressed groups, they put these same people at risk.

The fallout of a Covid-19 outbreak on hospitals in New Zealand and elsewhere is extreme.

The concept of freedom held by civil rights revolutionaries such as Gandhi and Mandela and that held by anti-lockdown protestors are irreconcilable in the context of a Covid-19 pandemic.

Civil rights freedoms protect people from discrimination by gender, race of disability. A libertarian view of freedom on the other hand champions the freedom to make choices about your own life, your body, and your property. This is why many anti-lockdowners are also against the jab.

Some clarity around the concept of freedom will be helpful during these troubled times.

Lockdowns are not based on the repression of freedoms in service to a tyrannical need for power and control. Rather they are an attempt to protect our way of life in New Zealand, which actually has considerable freedoms compared to many parts of the world.

Scoop Media

Become a member Find out more

See more here:
Lockdowns And Freedom: At Odds Or Different Sides Of The Same Coin? - Scoop.co.nz

Election 21: When, Where & How To Vote In Long Branch-Eatontown – Patch.com

LONG BRANCH-EATONTOWN, NJ This year's general election will take place on Nov. 2, and voters in Long Branch and Eatontown have the option of casting their ballot either by mail using a secure dropbox, hand-delivering it to your local board of elections, or voting at your local polling location.

This year, voters can also vote early at in-person voting at select locations starting Saturday, Oct. 23 through Sunday, Oct. 31 from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Sunday.

Must-Know Election Info

Election date: Nov. 2

Check if you are registered to vote.

Where can I vote in person?

Mail-in ballot postmarked by deadline: Nov. 2

Mail-in ballot received by deadline: Nov. 8

What Will You See On Your Ballot?On the state side of things, there is a gubernatorial race this year, with current governor Phil Murphy being challenged by Republican Jack Ciattarelli, Libertarian Gregg Mele, Joanne Kuniansky of the Socialist Workers Party, and Madelyn Hoffman, who is representing the Green Party.

For Lt. Governor, incumbent Shelia Oliver is facing opposition from Diane Allen of the Republican Party, Eveline Brownstein of the Libertarian Party, Vivian Sahner of the Socialist Workers Party, and Heather Warburton of the Green Party.

There will also be both a State Senate and State Assembly race on this year's ballot. In Asbury Park, which is in legislative district 11, incumbent Democrat state senator Vin Gopal and assemblymen, Eric Houghtaling and Joann Downey are running against Republican senate nominee Lori Annetta and Marilyn Piperno, and Kimberley Eulner for the assembly. Asbury Park resident Dominque Faison is running for a set on the assembly as a Green Party candidate.

Long Branch does not have any municipal elections this November but does have a school board election where two current board members are running, Caroline Bennett and Violeta Peters are running on a ticket with former superintendent Joseph Ferraina against Maria Teresa Benosky for three seats of the Board of Education.

As for Eatontown, six candidates are running for two seats on the borough council: Republicans David Gindi and Everett D. Lucas, Mariel Hufnagel, and Coleen Burnett, who are the Democratic nominees, while current Councilwoman Jasmine Story and Dee Slattery, are running on an independent ticket.

For the Eatontown Board of Education, there are three openings with four candidates running. The only incumbent running is Maysee Y. Jacobs, with the other candidates being Jacquline Maguire, Deidre Seaman, and Jennifer Kopach.

There are also two statewide ballot questions: one is for the permitting of betting on all college teams at casinos and sportsbooks in the state. Currently, you are not allowed to bet on a New Jersey college sports team.

The other question is for the permitting of all groups to used the net proceeds from bingos or raffles to benefit their group. At the moment, only veterans and senior citizen groups can profit off of bingos and raffles.

Election Day is Nov. 2 and keep reading Patch for all of your Election 2021 updates.

Continued here:
Election 21: When, Where & How To Vote In Long Branch-Eatontown - Patch.com

Swimming Upstream in the Culture Wars – National Review

Transgernder flag at a protest against Trump administration policies in New York City, 2018(Brendan McDermid/Reuters)

National Review is never afraid to resist the Lefts demands for conformity.

Adead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it, said G. K. Chesterton. National Reviewhas demonstrated its liveliness by going against the tide of a culture that threatens to drag us down into the slough of despond.

You can help us continue the long journey upstream by contributing to our webathon.

The phrase culture war was born in Germany, then used in a Republican convention speech nearly 30 years ago, and has since become the description of the times we live in. But cultures are vast things, much larger and more mysterious than mere politics or even the state itself. A culture includes the religion of the people, their assumptions about human nature and about the purpose of their civic associations; it is our assumptions about what is good to know, and why. And of course, it includes the resplendent gamut of the arts, high culture, and mass entertainment. National Reviewhas been fighting for a healthy, free, excellent, and truly diverse culture from the start and carries on that fight today.

The Left talks about diversity, by which it means all types of people brought into conformity. They believe that every social and cultural institution is meant to embody and enact one set of progressive egalitarian values. But we have supported the republican institutions and a conservative judiciary that would allow truly diverse organizations to flourish in American society.

We have stood with the little platoons that make life in our society worth living in. And dying in! Over the years, we stood with the Little Sisters of the Poor and their right to spiritually and materially assist the dying while remaining Catholic. Weve stood with all religious organizations that seek freedom to honor God and serve His people according to their conscience.

We have been at the forefront of opposing the emerging threat of gender ideology that would rob women of their spaces, their sports, and even their exclusive claim to motherhood. The phenomenon would impose on young children a life of sterility and surgeriesand aims to put into doubt some of the oldest and most basic facts about biology. NR stands athwart this social contagion of lies.

National Review does not allow partisanship to cloud our judgment on these matters. When even Republican governors are willing to give in to the chemical castration and abuse of children, National Review rises up to oppose them. When a Republican-appointed and usually sound Supreme Court justice decides that transgenderism and gender identity are part of Johnson-era legislation on civil rights, we call out his false textualism, his tautologies, and his arrogant invitation to sue people to find out the true meaning of his ruling.

Before it became commonplace, we pointed out that our new identity politics was a displaced and discombobulated form of religion. Weve also pointed out that it is kind of a miserable way to go through life.

And National Reviews arts coverage reflects that deep commitment to human excellence and beauty, free of cant and the strictures of ideology. In particular, I think it is important to call out the essential, provocative coverage of cinema offered by Armond White, who not only argues for the greatness of cinema but is himself an American original. Alongside him, we have Kyle Smith and Ross Douthat covering the movies and what they mean for American life.

Weve stood up for a healthy, full life together and an American culture that protects life and enables the pursuit of happiness. So stand with us today.

See the original post:
Swimming Upstream in the Culture Wars - National Review