Letter to the editor: Liberals have not contributed to society – Huntington Herald Dispatch

I see the same old liberal contributors saying the same old things over and over again. They claim to be experts, but we all know they are self-centered liberals who may claim to be Christians and who may claim to be just real good neighbors to us all.

However, its the same old liberal stuff about how bad our president is and how bad the Republicans are because they dont personally agree with their politics and tactics. Yes, we all have our preferences, but let me ask them about killing babies and selling baby parts for exploitation. How about asking them if they will admit some of the illegal immigrants in to their homes and give them part of their paycheck and part of their homes? How about asking them about Joe Biden, who cant remember where he was yesterday? How about asking them about how they would have handled the coronavirus for the entire country?

To me it is a good thing that we had a president who has done a great job despite the constant flak from the liberals that has been going on for over four years.

They claim to be experts. They have done so many things and held so many jobs.They claim that President Trump spreads hate, but look back at some of your contributions and check out the vicious things that you have said about many people.

I personally think that you all are hypocrites, and I think that the people deserve contributors who are actually out to help the people of West Virginia.

Read the original post:

Letter to the editor: Liberals have not contributed to society - Huntington Herald Dispatch

Time for Liberal government to give up ‘fiction’ that China is our friend, ex-diplomat warns MPs – National Post

Mulroney was supposed to appear alongside former ambassadors John McCallum and Robert Wright, but those two declined the invitation to appear. The committee voted to formally summon them to testify.

In June, a group of high-profile Canadians wrote a letter calling for a prisoner exchange with Meng to get Spavor and Kovrig back, which Prime Minister Justin Trudeau promptly rejected. Mulroney said that letter was concerning.

It worries me when I see people who are thought leaders seem to lack the sense of energy to defend our national interests, he said.

He said he believes prominent people, former politicians and government officials, doing businesses with China should have to be upfront about any business ties.

If you choose to go to work for China or another country, you can do that, but you have to be transparent.

Mulroney argued for Canada to stand with allies to pressure China together. He said China can punish one country economically, but cant do that to a coalition of countries standing together.

The reality is that Canada has what China needs, he said. China needs the products that Canada, Australia and the United States produce.

MPs also heard warnings about Chinas motives in Hong Kong and Taiwan.

Hong Kong is becoming a second Tibet

The leader of Tibets unofficial government-in-exile warned Canadian MPs that China is attempting to subjugate Hong Kong and Taiwan just as it did to his country more than 70 years ago.

Lobsang Sangay, president of the Central Tibetan Administration, testified that Hong Kong is losing its freedoms just as his country once did.

Visit link:

Time for Liberal government to give up 'fiction' that China is our friend, ex-diplomat warns MPs - National Post

Federal Liberal MP swipes Andrews government over pandemic response – Sydney Morning Herald

Mr Andrews has fronted media briefings for weeks on end during the virus, which have become appointment viewing for some as other entertainments cease because of the lockdown.

Some have reacted with tribalism, showcased by the two questioners featured on the program. One accused parts of the media of an "attempted crucifixion" of Mr Andrews while another suggested "heads should and must roll" for the failures of the state's hotel quarantine program, which allowed the virus to spread.

Labor Senator Kimberley Kitching said Mr Andrews' decision to appear at so many press conferences day after day, which often ran for more than an hour, was all that could be asked of a leader.

"I think there is a high level of accountability," Senator Kitching said. "Daniel has said he will take full responsibility and I think he's been very up front."

She accused the Victorian Liberal opposition of "shooting from the hip" with partisan barbs.

Australian Council of Trade Unions president Michele O'Neil said it was in Australia's interests for the Andrews government to succeed so the rest of the country could learn the lessons.

Victoria recorded its highest number of deaths during the pandemic on Monday but the lowest number of new cases in 12 days, sparking hope the stage four lockdown was working to curb the transmission of the virus.

Loading

Questions have been raised by The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald, along with other media outlets, about how Victoria's hotel quarantine scheme may have been mismanaged, which have fuelled discussion of the Andrews government's performance.

Mr Baird, who is now a healthcare executive, this week called for the public to rally behind Mr Andrews, who he said was "working his absolute guts out to save lives" amid criticism from state opposition MP Tim Smith and federal assistant treasurer Michael Sukkar.

Nick Bonyhady is industrial relations reporter for The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age, based between Sydney and Parliament House in Canberra.

Read the original:

Federal Liberal MP swipes Andrews government over pandemic response - Sydney Morning Herald

Andrew Furey wins Liberal leadership race, will become 14th premier of N.L. – CBC.ca

Andrew Furey poses for a picture with his family wife Alison, and children Rachel, Maggie and Mark after winning the Newfoundland and Labrador Liberal leadership election. (Andrew Furey/Twitter)

Orthopedic surgeon Andrew Furey is premier-designate of Newfoundland and Labrador, after winning the provincial Liberal leadership race on Monday evening.

Furey was the frontrunner from the beginning, with the backing of outgoing Premier Dwight Ball's entire cabinet.

In voting results announced Monday evening in St. John's, Furey doubled the only other candidate, longtime civil servant John Abbott, with 26,443 points to 13,557 points.

In his victory speech, Furey promised to be "frank and transparent," and called on all MHAs to work together to address the dire problems staring down at the province.

"Together we can emerge from this crisis as a stronger, more caring, more passionate and more diverse Newfoundland and Labrador," he said.

Furey, who has never run in a political race before,said he hasn't given any thought to asking anyone to vacate their seat, but said he will run for the first seat that becomes available.

About 21,000 votes were cast in the leadership race, despite the fact that more than 34,000 people had registered. The final tally of votes cast is less than the 2013 Liberal leadership campaign, even though more people registered to vote in 2020.

Furey has never held office before, and doesn't have a seat in the provincial legislature.

Furey, though, is politically connected. He is the son of Senate Speaker George Furey, a longtime Liberal organizer, and the nephew of former provincial cabinet minister Chuck Furey.

As a doctor, Furey founded Team Broken Earth to respond to Haiti's devastating earthquake in 2010. The organization has grown to include other medical missions.

The leadership race started in February with Premier Dwight Ball dropping a bombshell announcement during the evening news of his intention to resign.

On Monday, Ball was emotional as he gave a farewell speech to a small audience in his home town of Deer Lake.

"I have missed a lot of moments, but I am ready for the next chapter, whatever that may be," Ball said, before turning his attention to the next leader.

"This job deserves your all. There will always be more work to do. You are never finished moving forward."

Ball's decision to resign cameamid growing scandals within his caucus such as former Municipal Affairs and Environment Minister Perry Trimper's inadvertent "very racist" voicemail to Innu Nation staffer Dominic Rich, the hiring of Carla Foote without competition to a top job at The Rooms and subsequent investigation into then-Tourism Minister Christopher Mitchelmore's involvement, the hiring of Gordon McIntosh to a $350,000 contract with Nalcor Energy also without competition and the saga of a harassment claim set forth by then cabinet minister Sherry Gambin-Walsh which saw the removal of then-Liberal MHA Eddie Joyce and cabinet minister Dale Kirby.

Ball became premier when he led the Liberals to government in the 2015 general election. In 2019, Ball won a second term, albeit with a reduced caucus.

Furey will also inherit other problems, such as the province's troubling financial situation, which has since worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the ongoing push to bring the overbudget Muskrat Falls hydroelectric project online.

Over the course of the race, Abbott remained on the attack, twice raising concerns about how Furey formed his contact list a list Abbottsaid was improperly obtained from Liberal party software before he was officially a candidate. Furey was cleared of those accusations.

The two men also went to battle over health care, with Furey accusing Abbott of not doing enough to fix the system while he held his senior position in government.

Before the final tally was announced, Abbott said he wanted an independent review of the voting process. He said many of the voters his team tried to contact had died before the leadership race began, or were wondering how they even ended up on the voting list at all.

Abbott said he isn't contesting the results, and doesn't think the problems he encountered would have changed the outcome.

Furey said there is still a place for Abbott in his government, and told reporters he reached out to Abbott earlier Monday to express his desire to work together in the coming months.

Abbott told reporters he intends to run for the Liberals in the next election, and said he is willing to meet with Furey about his future.

With the race now over, there will be a transition phase, during which Furey will be referred to as the premier-designate.

Once Furey is sworn in, Furey will become the 14th premier of Newfoundland and Labrador.

He said the first meeting he wants is with Department of Finance officialsto address the province's fiscal woes. He said he wants to get a better understanding of the province's $2.1 billion deficit the second worst in the province's history, only just behind the $2.2 billion deficit of 2015-16.

In his speech, Furey said it is time to overcome the "boom and bust" economic trends the province has been stuck in for decades. He said growing and diversifying the economy will be a top priority.

"We can do it. It just takes the political will," Furey said.

Calling on Ottawa will also be at the top of his list. Furey said he doesn't believe in the word "bailout," since Ottawa has a fiscal responsibility to Newfoundland and Labrador.

Read more aticles from CBC Newfoundland and Labrador

Here is the original post:

Andrew Furey wins Liberal leadership race, will become 14th premier of N.L. - CBC.ca

‘Walking away from the ideology of liberalism’: Hundreds march through Hollywood in support of Trump – Washington Examiner

Hundreds of President Trumps supporters marched through Hollywood, California, over the weekend in what was called the Rescue America rally.

About 400 people gathered for the demonstration on Saturday, which began in West Hollywood, and they marched toward Los Angeless Beverly Hills sign, according to local outlet Fox 11. Actors Lorenzo Lamas, Scott Baio, and singer Joy Villa were among those who spoke at the event.

"Were a movement of people who are walking away from the Democratic Party. Were walking away from the ideology of liberalism, the liberal media basically, we want to live in a country with peace and civility truthfulness, kindness, and again, were not getting that from the political left, so were walking away from the Democrats," said Brandon Starka, the founder of an organization called Walk Away.

"Were doing these rallies because we wanted to show the radical left whos been smashing windows, committing acts of violence, and committing acts of vandalism they do not own Americas streets. Were going to fight for the heart and soul of America, so this is our third one. Next week well be in Milwaukee, and well basically be doing Rescue America rallies around the country for now through the end of the year," he added.

The Walk Away organization said it planned the rally to speak out against the destruction of property and lives, the villainization of law enforcement and weaponization of tragedies.

Marchers, who were described as peaceful by law enforcement, carried Trump 2020 flags, American flags, and signs that read United We Stand.

Read the original:

'Walking away from the ideology of liberalism': Hundreds march through Hollywood in support of Trump - Washington Examiner

Letters to the Editor: Enough with the liberal whining over Black Lives Matter’s methods – Yahoo News

Protesters shout slogans at the Mark O. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse in Portland, Ore., on July 26. (Associated Press)

To the editor: Nicholas Goldberg's column on the protests in Portland and the approving letter in response leave out a major aspect of the Black Lives Matter demonstrations: Black activists and their allies have been trying peaceful protests for decades now and have been largely ignored by the establishment, including and damningly by Democrats.

As a white ally of Black lives, I think it's insulting to the larger movement against police brutality (especially as it affects marginalized people) to insinuate that the righteous anger being expressed on the streets of Portland, Chicago, Seattle and elsewhere "play into Trump's hands" or "detracts from the larger movement."

If you didn't want violence in the streets, you should've listened to the alarm bells that have been ringing since 1776.

To claim to support Black Lives Matter but insult its methods is nothing short of white, liberal, privileged whining. If you don't want to see violence, put pressure on your representatives and government leaders to actually do something to support Black lives beyond writing op-ed articles and painting words on the street.

These don't feed Black families. These don't stop their killings.

Carolyn Knight-Serrano, Fullerton

View post:

Letters to the Editor: Enough with the liberal whining over Black Lives Matter's methods - Yahoo News

The Problem With MSNBC Isn’t That It’s Too Liberal – The New Republic

Public departures have been one of the biggest media stories of the summer. The New York Times opinion editor Bari Weiss walked off the job in July, claiming the newspaper was now being edited by woke Twitter users. Andrew Sullivan used his last New York column to assert that he was being let go because his coworkers didnt like him. (Sullivans departure occurred amid larger layoffs at Vox Media, which owns New York.) Earlier this week, MSNBC producer Ariana Pekary said goodbye to the liberal cable news network because its single-minded pursuit of ratings (and the advertising dollars that follow) stokes national division and blocks diversity of thought.

Pekary ended her post by writing, More than ever, Im craving a full and civil discourse. This was catnip for conservative media and other opponents of cancel culture, which turned a short blog post by a hitherto unknown journalist into a multi-day smorgasbord of content. Here was proof that what liberals have been saying about Fox News for years was also true about MSNBC. It was proof that the left is more concerned with coddling its own than pursuing the truth. As one senior producer quoted by Pekary said, Our viewers dont really consider us the news. They come to us for comfort.

Pekary posted a follow-up a day later underlining that she felt economic pressure, not ideological commitments, was ruining cable news. But at that point, it was too late: Her resignation had already become chum.

Whats striking about Pekarys letter, however, isnt what it says about the news media in 2020. It doesnt say anything about MSNBC or cable news that wasnt also true two decades ago. Its like a Jon Stewart bit without the humor: Cable news is simply not incentivized to be informative. In the social media era, when people can switch their attention at any point, this situation has gotten even worse, encouraging networks to turn their viewers into partisan junkies who dont change the channel because they need a fix that tells them theyre right about everything (and that the other side is wrong).

No one could deny MSNBCs turn toward the conspiratorial in the Trump era. During the Mueller investigation, Rachel Maddow at times went full Glenn Beck, to the point that you almost expected her to start scribbling on a blackboard. The networks overheated analysis of every turn in that investigation, big and small, led its captive audience to believe that the special prosecutor was about to uncover something huge. As Jacob Bacharach wrote in The New Republic last year, MSNBC has the strange simultaneity common to prestige TV: It is at once vast and circumscribed. A wider world intrudes, but the same central heroes and villains show up, week after week.

More:

The Problem With MSNBC Isn't That It's Too Liberal - The New Republic

How the taboo on Hindu widow remarriage led to liberal abortion norms in colonial India – Scroll.in

The contours of gender-related reform campaigns also contributed to the lukewarm nature of anti-abortion efforts. From the early nineteenth century, a series of social movements about women emerged across colonial South Asia. One such movement was the campaign to permit and destigmatise the remarriage of Hindu widows. Traditionally, Hindu women in many upper-caste communities did not remarry after the death of their husbands. They lived under ritually and materially restricted conditions in the homes of their dead husbands families. The Hindu remarriage movement focused on the plight of young widows, including virgin widows whose husbands had died before adolescent cohabitation began. Unable to remarry, some widows of childbearing age had extramarital relationships and became pregnant. They turned to abortion to avoid social and economic ruin. Financial support from their dead husbands families was contingent upon the widows continuing celibacy, although occasionally the courts tried to soften this position.

As early as the 1830s, colonial administrators linked abortion to the prohibition on Hindu widow remarriage. Commenting on the draft text of IPC s. 312 (on abortion), one member of the Indian Law Commission expressed scepticism about trying to crack down on abortion while young widows were prohibited from remarrying: I much doubt the policy of providing heavy penalties for the repression of the offence of causing miscarriage by the woman herself whilst the barbarous institutions of the country create the offence.

The widow-remarriage movement portrayed widows as hapless victims of inhumane norms. One 1856 petition signed by 312 native subjects of India argued that the Shasters in fact did permit Hindu women to remarry in five situations: if their husbands died, were long absent, or became ascetic, impotent, or apostates. Because these texts had been ignored in favour of a blanket ban on widow remarriage, the petitioners argued that abortion had become a common practice among young Hindu widows.

The Hindu remarriage campaign culminated in the passage of the (Hindu) Widow Remarriage Act of 1856, which affirmed the validity of widows remarriage contracts under Indian law. A continuing campaign to change social attitudes followed, but the stigma remained. The Hindu widow remained the quintessential figure associated with criminal abortion from the1860ss until the end of British rule in 1947. An 1885 editorial in the Times of India insisted that infanticide and abortion were the inevitable result of a custom that condemns twenty-one million women to perpetual widowhood. According to one letter to the editor in the same year, widow remarriage was still deemed a more heinous crime worthy of exclusion from caste and society than abortion, child desertion, or a criminal conviction. Hehir and Gribble made the following observations in 1892:

In this country it is, no doubt, true that there are a very large number of criminal or violent abortions, and that an unfortunate widow who has yielded to temptation has every reason, through fear of exposure, loss of caste, etc., to resort to such means in order to save her reputation. At the same time, it must be remembered that everything and everybody are against her. There are probably suspicions of her immorality; and in a small village community, where nearly everything that goes on is known, people are on the look-out, and even if she should miscarry naturally, she is sure to be suspected of having used criminal means to produce abortion.

Three decades later, Waddell noted that the majority of known abortion cases in 1920s India still involved Hindu widows. As long as the taboo on remarriage continued, so would the association of widows and abortion.

Between the mid-nineteenth and mid-twentieth centuries, coroners in Bombay Presidency carried out inquests on young Hindu widows who had died following attempted abortions. The coroner led the process whereby a coroners jury decided whether an unusual death was a suicide, homicide, or accident or had occurred suddenly by means unknown. He delegated the post-mortem examination to the coroners surgeon. If the coroners jury found that the death was a murder, a criminal trial would follow the inquest (provided there was a suspect). This trial would establish whether a particular person had committed the murder. If the coroners jurors found that the death was a suicide, accident, or the result of means unknown, the case ended there.

In some inquests, Hindu widows died by poisoning themselves after attempting to abort by mouth. One young widow in Ahmedabad died after taking drugs given to her by her paramour in 1849. More, though, involved later-term abortion attempts by local means. An 1872 inquest considered the death of Abbai, a 30-year-old widow who lived with her sister and stonemason brother-in-law. The coroners surgeon, Sidney Smith, concluded from the post-mortem that she had died of peritonitis followed perforation of the intestines during an abortion. Five years later, a 25-year-old widow named Heerabai was also found to have died of peritonitis following an abortion. She had been a widow since the age of 11.

Inquest cases were by definition fatal ones. For women who survived, the colonial state would only have added to these womens suffering by prosecuting them for abortion. Such action would also undermine the portrayal of Hindu widows as victims a characterisation essential for the remarriage movement. In other words, a light touch on abortion when the women were still alive was the compromise needed to prioritise another social-reform campaign.

Excerpted with permission from Abortion in South Asia, 1860-1947: A medico-legal history, Modern Asian Studies (2020) by Mitra Sharafi.

Link:

How the taboo on Hindu widow remarriage led to liberal abortion norms in colonial India - Scroll.in

Liberals turn over thousands of pages on WE decision, lawyers now vetting docs – CTV News

OTTAWA -- The federal Liberal government has handed over thousands of pages of documents related to the WE controversy to a House of Commons committee, which lawyers are now vetting for personal information and cabinet secrets.

The finance committee demanded the documents last month as it probes whether Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's relationship with WE Charity influenced the government's ill-fated decision to have the organization run a federal student-volunteer program.

Committee members are hoping the documents will shed light on the discussions that led to the decision to have WE run the Canada Student Services Grant, before the deal was cancelled amid controversy in early July.

"People are asking a lot of questions," NDP finance critic Peter Julian said in an interview. "There's been a lot of contradictions in testimony. So the documents should be revealing a lot more of what the real answers are."

Yet while the Liberals turned more than 5,000 pages over to the committee ahead of Saturday's deadline, it wasn't clear when they would be released to members as committee lawyers go through them to prevent the release of protected information.

"We don't know," Conservative finance critic Pierre Poilievre said during a news conference on Sunday when asked when committee members would get the documents. "We have asked. They have not given us the timeline."

Committee chairman Wayne Easter, a Liberal MP, predicted the documents would be released in the coming days to members as additional lawyers from the public service have been brought in to help review them for cabinet secrets and other information.

Even after the documents are released, however, there will could be disagreements about why certain information was withheld.

While Poilievre and Julian suggested they were keeping the door open to challenging any redactions, Easter said the vetting was being conducted by the professional public service -- and noted the tradition of Parliament respecting cabinet confidence.

Usually prepared for ministers to aid government deliberations and decision-making, documents marked as cabinet confidences hold closely guarded political secrets and are legally protected from unauthorized release.

Trudeau has previously faced pressure to waive cabinet confidence when it came to allegations he tried to pressure then-justice minister Jody Wilson-Raybould on a deferred prosecution agreement with Quebec engineering firm SNC-Lavalin.

"We respect the integrity of the public service," Easter said when asked about the lawyers redacting cabinet confidences in the WE documents. "That's why there is no political involvement in the redacting of these documents. That's why the law clerk is involved."

The Liberals have been embroiled in controversy since it was revealed on June 25 that WE had been selected to run the Canada Student Services Grant, which promised up to $5,000 toward the education costs of students who volunteered during COVID-19.

The sole-sourced agreement with WE was to pay one of its foundations up to $43.5 million to administer a grant program designed to encourage students to sign up for volunteer work related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Trudeau and Finance Minister Bill Morneau have since apologized for not recusing themselves from cabinet's discussions about the agreement before it was awarded to WE given their respective families' ties to the Toronto-based charity.

Trudeau has spoken at six WE Day events since becoming prime minister, while his mother and brother have been paid almost $300,000 and reimbursed about $200,000 in expenses for appearing at WE events. Trudeau's wife has also had expenses covered.

Morneau, meanwhile, acknowledged last month that he repaid WE about $41,000 in sponsored travel for him and his family to view the charity's humanitarian projects in Ecuador and Kenya in 2017.

Yet the government has insisted that the decision was based on a recommendation from the non-partisan public service following its conclusion that WE was the only organization capable of running the grant program.

Opposition critics, meanwhile, are also training their sights on an agreement between a Crown corporation and a company employing the husband of Trudeau's chief of staff, Katie Telford.

The agreement between the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. and MCAP, where Telford's husband Rob Silver is an executive vice-president, involves the administering of a rent-assistance program for small businesses affected by COVID-19.

The Prime Minister's Office has said Telford established clear ethical walls between herself and MCAP in January, even before COVID-19 shook the country's economy and led to the creation of the Canada Emergency Commercial Rent Assistance program.

But Poilievre questioned why the government didn't simply ask the Canada Revenue Agency to run the rent-assistance program given it is already managing the federal wage subsidy for businesses struggling during the pandemic.

"CMHC, which is strangely running this program, exists for the sole purpose of providing affordable housing. Not commercial real estate," Poilievre said.

"Now, of course, the easy way to deliver this program would have been through CRA. CRA already had a program stood up to deliver a wage subsidy."

Audrey-Anne Coulombe, a spokeswoman for CMHC, said in a statement Sunday that the federal housing agency had decided to go with an outside sub-administrator because it "does not have the internal capacity to stand up the program in short order."

Coulombe said CMHC sought bids from two financial institutions and chose MCAP because its proposal was stronger and cost less. She said Silver was not involved in contract negotiations or the delivery of services.

Easter expressed concern about the committee getting distracted by opposition "fishing" efforts and not focusing on its main task of preparing for next year's federal budget and overseeing COVID-19 spending.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 9, 2020.

See more here:

Liberals turn over thousands of pages on WE decision, lawyers now vetting docs - CTV News

Column: Can we find common ground for conservatives and liberals? – Milford Daily News

What I propose is we use the findings of political psychology, not to accentuate differences between left and right, but to bridge gaps.

Columns share an author's personal perspective and are often based on facts in the newspaper's reporting.

If we can agree on anything politically, its how divided we are.

We see it on TV reporting, on social media, and in between family members. On the personal scale, its poisoning relationships, and on the national scale, it's destroying the cooperation and compromise that we need to function as a working democracy. If we cant reduce this divisiveness, we will fall. Yet the division, and the danger, is getting worse.

When a patient will not heal by themselves, the attending doctors need to diagnose and treat the patient accurately and effectively to save them. The most scientific diagnosis of our political self is through political psychology, but that itself is a divided profession.

Professor Thomas B. Edsall recently reported in the New York Times that Disputes over differences in judgement, character and moral values between liberals and conservatives are among the most fraught topics in political psychology. How can doctors save our body politic if they are arguing among themselves?

Lets begin with the findings of research programs that measured cognitive reflection and thinking habits in relation to liberal or conservative political stances. You can imagine them by considering the yes/no responses of subjects to statements like these: A person should always consider new possibilities; or One should disregard evidence that conflicts with established beliefs; or No one can talk me out of something I know is right.

When these kinds of responses are sorted by the subjects political affinities, conclusions are drawn that are very similar across many studies: the willingness to change ones mind with new evidence was robustly associated with liberalism, rejection of traditional moral values, acceptance of science, and skepticism regarding religious claims. Conversely, conservatives were averse to changing beliefs about extrasensory perception, respect for tradition, abortion, and God, even on the basis of evidence.

Some studies go further: misinformation is currently predominantly a pathology of the right and conservatives have more need for order, rigidity, and dogmatism. Statements like Liberals perform better on objective tests of cognitive ability and intelligence . . . while conservatives score higher on self-deception are more likely to further divide than to heal. And yet, many liberals (including, mea culpa, myself) take these findings as ammunition to attack conservatives.

Lets face it, insult isnt a great way to persuade opponents.

Remember Obamas charge that conservatives cling to their guns and religion or Hillary Clintons basket of deplorables? I imagine those charges work as well as when conservatives attack liberals as immoral or godless abortionists. And many of us liberals try to persuade with the use of statistics and science, which isnt very bright when you consider the findings that conservatives are likely to ignore evidence. So, how can we heal? Should we even try? After all, some liberal commentators express disgust when Joe Biden expresses his hopes for bipartisan cooperation, and his history with it. But we all have to realize how important it is, especially now.

If the probability is that liberals are more likely to adopt change, I suggest we stop what isnt working, and try to persuade conservative opponents by appealing to their strengths. The recent findings of political psychology give some hope to such methods, and more importantly, a warning of a dangerous change in political direction: the rise of authoritarianism. History suggests opponents can unite in the face of a common enemy, and authoritarians threaten the entire country, liberal and conservative alike.

Some might equate conservatives with authoritarians, but there are critical differences between the two: the first are opposed to change and novelty, while the second are averse to diversity and complexity. A number of observers are noting that what has taken place with the Trump administration and among his followers is an authoritarian revolution. The hallmarks of authoritarianism are opposition to diversity of people, beliefs, and behaviors, and the embrace of oneness and sameness; all obvious in the xenophobia of Trump followers. The actions of Trump and his enablers: state violence, demonization of protesters, voter suppression, co-option of the organs of prosecution and the courts, are all exactly that of an authoritarian coup.

What I propose is we use the findings of political psychology, not to accentuate differences between left and right, but to bridge gaps. We are seeing glimmers of understanding in, and creative messaging from, the conservatives of The Lincoln Project and Republican Voters Against Trump. Liberals can appeal to conservatives attraction to traditions of right vs. wrong, rule of law, the morality of honesty, and opposition to corruption.

The rise of authoritarianism should scare conservatives too: its certainly not a valued American tradition nor is it based on the rule of laws, not men. Radical change, from democracy to autocracy, is not a conservative goal. Together we must unite to prevent us from falling into authoritarianism.

Lee Mendenhall lives in Framngham.

Read more:

Column: Can we find common ground for conservatives and liberals? - Milford Daily News

Powerful Rajapaksa Brothers’ Landslide in Sri Lanka Election Should Get "Liberals" Thinking – IDN InDepthNews | Analysis That Matters

By Kalinga Seneviratne

SINGAPORE (IDN) The landslide victory of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP Sri Lanka Peoples Front) led by the Rajapaksa brothers throws a challenge to so-called liberals everywhere whose ideology may not be in sync when a huge portion of the electorate vote for a strong government rather than a coalition representing various segments of the community that may not provide political and economic stability at a time of a crisis.

As retired political science professor Jayadeva Uyangoda argues in a commentary published on August 9 in a number of media outlets in Sri Lanka, that the failure of the yahapalanaya (good governance) government installed by the 2015 landmark elections with a promise of democratic revival, promoting peace and reconciliation and establishing corruption-free governance, has now given rise to a radically new political alternative for Sri Lanka with a strong leader, a strong government, a strong administration with military participation, with just one strong centre of power with no checks and balances. The stress has been on the word strong, he notes, adding that this word strong has been couched in Sinhala-Buddhist patriotic symbolism and discourse.

In January 2015 President Mahinda Rajapaksa (brother of now President Gotabaya Rajapaksa) was voted out by Sri Lankan voters choosing his former ally Maitripala Sirisena as president under the slogan of yahapalanaya. At the time it seems the western liberals may have achieved their goal through the ballot box. Sirisena was propelled to power mainly by a Western-funded NGO campaign via social media that painted the Rajapaksa regime as corrupt and undemocratic.

But within months of coming to power, they were embroiled in the worse financial scandal in Sri Lankas history, when Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghes school days buddy Arjuna Mahendran installed as the new Central Bank governor was involved in a fraudulent bond scam.

The Sirisena-Wickremasinghe government was never able to recover from this, as infighting within the governing coalition intensified and Sri Lanka drifted into economic and political disarray. The opposition regrouped under the leadership of the Rajapaksa brothers under a new party SLPP that accused the government of selling national assets to foreigners and crawling to the West by surrendering its sovereignty by co-sponsoring a resolution at the Geneva-based UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) that committed the country to account for war crimes allegedly committed by its armed forces in the final phase of the war in 2009 to eliminate the terror group Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).

This resolution would involve setting up war crimes tribunals in Sri Lanka where foreign judges would sit in judgement. The surrender to UNHRC and the West was seen by the Sinhala Buddhist majority in particular, as an affront to their cultural identity, and SLPP was able to mobilise them.

"The resounding electoral victory on August 5 of the SLPP, and particularly of the Rajapaksa brothers, clearly reflects the emphatic re-emergence of Lankan nationalism. To be precise, Sinhala Buddhist nationalism, argues Dr Palitha Kohona, former Sri Lankan permanent representative to the United Nations. Disregarded for five years by the previous Government, the Sinhala people felt betrayed as the country lurched aimlessly, mainly in a hardly disguised effort to please Western countries and pro-Western liberal NGOs. The wishes and sensitivities of the majority of the people counted for very little.

In a statement issued to the Sri Lankan media on August 7, British Conservative peer, Lord Naseby, who is the President and founder of the All-Party British Sri Lanka Parliamentary Group in the UK has described the electoral outcome as a sea change never before witnessed. He has been critical of the U.S.-EU war crimes witch-hunt of Sri Lanka in Geneva and has been a lone voice in the British parliament supporting the Sinhalese against a well-organised Tamil diaspora pro-LTTE propagandists in the UK.

This is true democracy at work. This is a new dawn for Sri Lanka, a fresh era creating the opportunity for the country to come together and finally put to bed the idea of any Tamil Eelam independence movement, he said. Now is the time for the West to understand the new mood in Sri Lanka; the desire on all sides for reconciliation to become realistic without any interference from the West or the UN Human Rights Council, added Lord Naseby.

Social critic and nationalist Shenali Waduge told IDN that the 2020 election has laid to rest for the second time, the liberal idea that the minorities called the shots and could decide who would rule Sri Lanka. While the Tamil and Muslim minorities voted en masse at the 2019 presidential elections against the ultimate winner Gotabaya Rajapaksa, she noted that there is a welcome difference this time.

This time a sizeable number of minorities voted for the winning party (SLPP). The results of the North clearly indicate that the people want to move on and away from terrorist-separatist linked political parties and politicians she argues. This is indeed a healthy sign and one that can usher better relations.

The Tamil National Alliance (TNA) which is regarded by the Sinhalese as an LTTE proxy has lost ground in the Tamil dominated north and east of the island. In its northern strongholds including Jaffna, TNA lost four seats to new Tamil parties aligned with the SLPP which pushed the incoming governments numbers in parliament above the two-thirds required for constitutional changes.

The Rajapaksas can take pride in their achieving such a decisive victory in a wholly free and fair election, noted veteran journalist Lucien Rajakarunanayake, writing in the Island newspaper. Lets make no mistake, this is what the people wanted, the reality of electoral democracy. This is what a huge majority of the people of Sri Lanka showed they wanted in three elections the last Local Government poll (2018), the Presidential Election last November, and this General Election.

Rajakarunanayake argues that the huge majority Rajapaksas were able to garner is a result of the hugely farcical moves the previous government took to supposedly fighting corruption. He added: The voters have punished those who had crooked deals with a dodgy Governor of the Central Bank, who was wrongly under the Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe; and the benefits that the ever-forgetful Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake allegedly obtained (from the deal).

Countrys oldest political party, the pro-western United National Party (UNP) polled miserably and did not win any seats to parliament for the first time. Thus, both Wickremasinghe and Karunanayake lost their seats. The UNP polled only 2.15 per cent of the national vote and would get a seat from the National List under Sri Lankas proportional voting system.

A party of Buddhist monks opposed to SLPP which won just 0.58 per cent of the national vote, that is just over 67,000 from a voter base of over 10 million has got 1 seat in parliament which is expected to be occupied by firebrand Buddhist nationalist monk Aththe Gnanasara, who will be sitting in the opposition benches.

However, the western media and its human rights groups have already started to brand the SLPP election win as a nationalist vote for authoritarian government backed by the military as President Gotabaya as defence secretary was instrumental in conducting the successful war against the LTTE.

New York-based Human Rights Watch has already issued a statement on August 9 claiming that the Sri Lankan government of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa is waging a campaign of fear and intimidation against human rights activists, journalists, lawyers, and others challenging government policy.

Western-funded NGOs, nurtured with the views of the English-speaking and Westernised elite of the country, will definitely have to recognise the gap in their assessments of the thinking among the common people of the country, Dr Kohona told IDN. There is a reawakening of nationalist sentiment in the country, especially among the Sinhala Buddhists, and this will condition the country's politics for the foreseeable future."

The unwritten and written obligation upon all elected governments is to uphold, protect, preserve and foster the primordial Sinhala Buddhist identity of Sri Lanka, argues Waduge. The unfair and legally questionable resolutions (of the UNHRC) need to be revisited and diplomatically challenged. The LTTE lobby (overseas) need to be legally addressed as well. They have become an obstacle for Tamils and Sinhalese to build their lives in peace (in Sri Lanka). [IDN-InDepthNews 09 August 2020]

Photo: Mahinda Rajapaksa takes oath as the new Prime Minister of Sri Lanka. Source: Newsfirst Sri Lanka.

IDN is the Flagship Agency of the Non-profit International Press Syndicate.

Visit us on Facebook and Twitter.

This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence. You are free to share, remix, tweak and build upon it non-commercially.

Continued here:

Powerful Rajapaksa Brothers' Landslide in Sri Lanka Election Should Get "Liberals" Thinking - IDN InDepthNews | Analysis That Matters

WA voters may not forgive and forget the Liberals’ coronavirus border stance in time – ABC News

Liza Harvey has been unequivocal in stating WA's border should remain closed.

"The Liberal Party supports strong borders that protect the health of West Australians," the Opposition Leader wrote in a Facebook post this week.

The only problem is, Ms Harvey had previously and repeatedly been just as unequivocal that the border should open as a matter of urgency.

"There doesn't appear to be a valid reason to keep the interstate borders closed," the WA Liberal leader said on May 19.

Ms Harvey doubled down on that stance, repeatedly urging WA to open up at first calling for domestic travel restrictions to go entirely, before instead suggesting a travel bubble with South Australia and the Northern Territory.

"Our family businesses are going to the wall because of his hard border stance and theres clearly no evidence that it is actually medically required at this point," she said on June 16.

Ms Harvey faced ferocious public criticism for that stance, which also earned the deep frustration of many of her parliamentary Liberal colleagues perplexed at why their party had taken such an unpopular stance.

But she was far from the only Liberal to urge WA to open up.

"The Morrison Government's view on border closures is clear, that borders should be open," Federal Attorney-General Christian Porter said in June.

The Commonwealth went as far as to intervene in Clive Palmer's High Court challenge, supporting the mining billionaire's legal demand that WA welcome back visitors from around the country.

"There is no doubt that those sort of borders do harm the economy, they do harm jobs and it is important that we get those removed as soon as possible," Prime Minister Scott Morrison said in May.

The Federal Government finally backed down a week ago, withdrawing support for Mr Palmer's challenge after the dramatic escalation in Victoria's virus situation.

Few would dispute their stance on the court challenge had become unsustainable, given case numbers had reached such concerning levels in Melbourne and public support of the border closure was so strong in WA.

Almost certainly, the situation made the backdowns by both the State and Federal Liberals inevitable.

But now the key question is whether the change of course came too late for the Liberals to avoid a severe public backlash.

Ms Harvey insists it is the big shift in circumstances, rather than public sentiment, that prompted her change of heart on the border.

"The community expect leaders to respond when circumstances change," she said this week.

"If you have a look around the country and around the world, leaders in every jurisdiction have had to change their position as the environment around COVID-19 changes."

But, as State Parliament returns this week, Ms Harvey is likely to face awkward questions about what would have transpired in WA had she got her wish in May or June.

So far, only Victoria has experienced anything like the rapid growth in cases that has so alarmed health officials across Australia.

But other states which even partially opened their borders have had serious headaches.

South Australia had to re-impose some restrictions this week after cases popped up, Queensland health officials were left scrambling after three COVID-19 positive people snuck back in to the state, and New South Wales for so long an open border advocate had to slam the door on Victorians, after weeks of clusters popping up all over its territory.

WA would likely have had every possibility of suffering the same fate had its border rules been relaxed.

Instead, West Australians are continuing to live with freedoms currently unparalleled around the country.

For all its popularity, WA's hard border closure is neither foolproof nor perfect.

Freight movement, such as truck drivers, continues to present an outbreak risk, as does the hotel quarantine system just as Victoria showed.

While the virus has been eliminated from the WA community, there are no guarantees that is a permanent situation.

And COVID-19 has sent repeated signals around the world that it is going nowhere leaving it increasingly unfeasible for WA to spend the whole pandemic inside its cocoon.

Families are separated and West Australians stranded, while businesses that rely on interstate travel are suffering greatly.

But, by any measure, the border closure is staggeringly popular within WA at the moment.

So, too, is the man seen as its primary advocate and defender Premier Mark McGowan.

With all that writing on the wall, both state and federal Liberals have backed away from their efforts to bring down WA's wall.

But with an already-daunting state election just seven months away, Liberals have good reason to be nervous about whether voters will forgive or forget the stance they took about the hard border.

And Labor will have plenty of campaign fodder for the next federal election albeit one likely to be much further away which is likely to leave senior WA Liberals facing repeated questions about why they fought for so long to bring down the border.

See the rest here:

WA voters may not forgive and forget the Liberals' coronavirus border stance in time - ABC News

Small business ombudsman awards contracts to Liberal-linked firm without tender – The Guardian

A small Liberal-linked communications firm was given multiple contracts without tender by the office of the Australian small business ombudsman, Kate Carnell, a former Liberal leader in the ACT.

Agenda C, a Sydney-based consultancy, has won three small contracts with the ombudsmans office for social media-related work since it was established early last year.

The ombudsmans office said it did not use a procurement process to award Agenda C the contracts worth $79,840, $79,922, and $31,989 because they each fell below the procurement threshold of $80,000.

Agenda C is led by former Liberal party advisers and candidates. Its managing campaign director, Carrington Brigham, worked as part of the federal Liberal party digital strategy team on Tony Abbotts election campaign in 2013.

He is also a former campaign adviser with the Liberal-aligned firm Crosby Textor, where he helped develop the Strong Choices ad campaign for the former Queensland premier Campbell Newman before his defeat at the 2015 state election.

The firms campaign account manager, Jacqui Munro, stood as the Liberal candidate for Sydney at the last election, and has previously worked for then New South Wales treasurer Gladys Berejiklian and City of Sydney councillor Dr Kerryn Phelps.

Agenda Cs managing strategy director, Parnell Palme McGuinness, edited the Liberal partys Fair Go website.

The contracts for the ombudsmans office included work on a social media advertising package and services such as a social media audit, strategy, content plan, and marketing analysis.

There is no suggestion anyone at Agenda C did anything improper or that they were not qualified for the work. Requests for comment to Brigham and McGuinness went unanswered.

Carnell, the former ACT Liberal chief minister, was made the inaugural Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman in 2016, appointed by then small business minister Kelly ODwyer.

A spokeswoman for the ombudsman said the contracts were awarded to Agenda C because it was a small business and the ombudsman supported small businesses.

The office denied any conflict existed.

Both Agenda C contracts were below $80,000 and therefore there was no requirement to go to tender, she said.

The office of the Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman supports small businesses Agenda C is a small business. All ASBFEO content is created in-house for the purpose of raising awareness about ASBFEO and small business-related issues. There is no conflict of interest.

The federal governments procurement rules state that contracts do not need to be put to market if they are below $80,000.

Two of the contracts fell just below that threshold. The first, worth $79,840, was awarded in June last year and expired in May this year.

The second, worth $79,922, was awarded in May this year for a period of one year.

The spokeswoman for the ombudsman said the more recent of the two was entered into to ensure continuity of service until 30 May 2021 from the termination of the preceding contract.

In 2017, an audit report identified a relatively high number of contracts awarded just below the $80,000 threshold.

In a submission to a 2018 parliamentary inquiry into contract reporting, the Grattan Institute noted that splitting contracts to avoid the threshold was against the procurement rules and called for a broader investigation of the auditors findings.

The Department of Finance should use the ANAO report as a basis for more detailed investigation of whether there is systematic flouting of the CPRs, the institute said in its submission. The department should conduct such a review annually, using the types of screens for potential non-compliance set out by the ANAO.

Here is the original post:

Small business ombudsman awards contracts to Liberal-linked firm without tender - The Guardian

How San Francisco Democrats Took Over the Country – POLITICO

Longtime California political players say Harris ascendancy, from San Francisco district attorney to California attorney general to U.S. senator to presidential contender, reflects her political acumen and a sense of where the electorate is leaning. That combination of people skills and instincts allowed her to accumulate power in the Bay Area without being forced into the box of San Francisco liberal.

It is also a testament to how much Democratic politics has shifted, both in California and nationally. When Republican icon Ronald Reagan became the last Californian to occupy the White House, he launched his candidacy from the same power base that underlay his governorship: the then-conservative bastion of Orange County, which recoiled from student protests and chafed at the states high property taxes. Harris climb to national prominence, from Berkeley to San Francisco district attorney to California attorney general, was fueled by a different formula, and one thats becoming key to understanding American political power: A combination of social and environmental progressivism, leavened by a commitment to economic growth through innovation.

In part, the San Francisco ascendancy is due to a shift in the politics of the largest state, as California has changed from a mixed electorate to deep blue. Local candidates used to struggle to break out of Bay Area politics. No longer. The leap from Bay Area to statewide now is much different than it was 30 years ago, because California has changed, said Rose Kapolczynski, a Democratic strategist who ran the campaigns of former Sen. Barbara Boxer, who hailed from Marin County in the Bay Area. Its become so reliably Democratic in statewide races that your progressive credentials are a benefit, not a drawback.

The leap from Bay Area to statewide now is much different than it was 30 years ago, because California has changed.

Rose Kapolczynski

The dominance of San Francisco politicians in Californiawith its vast media and fundraising resourcesgive them a natural launching pad for national leadership. It helps that the very issues that once defined San Francisco as the lefty fringe of the Democratic Party are now close to the center of the partys national platformand, in some cases, go unchallenged by Republicans.

In 1984, when the Republicans nominated Reagan for a second term, the very words San Francisco Democrat, became a derisive refrain at their convention. In the rough parlance of the times, being a San Francisco Democrat was synonymous with concern for criminal defendants (in the city that was the setting for Reagans favorite film, Dirty Harry), pot use, gay rights, peace protests, cracking down on corporate polluters and a post-hippie culture shockingly, outrageously at odds with the rest of America.

Now, in President Donald Trumps America, gay marriage is so widely accepted that even the Republican president doesnt oppose it, his foreign policy is based around curbing endless wars, both parties agree on reducing mandatory minimum sentences for criminals and marijuana is legal across much of the country. Meanwhile, California has become the envy of many national Democrats for its aggressive fight against climate change, which is supported even by some Golden State Republicans.

The leaders of San Franciscos Democratic Party have adapted themselves to being at the forefront of the national agenda. Newsom, whose career arc has long been intertwined with Harris, was ahead of the national curve in presiding over gay marriages and enforcing emissions curbs as mayor of San Francisco. Newsom is seen in the Bay Area as a business-friendly centrist, and his easy 2018 gubernatorial victory helped prove that, as Kapolczynski put it, 30 years ago, being mayor of San Francisco was not helpful statewide. Now its not a liability.

In ways, Harris has had an easier time avoiding reductionist portrayals than fellow San Francisco politicians like Newsom. While she was reared in deep-blue Berkeleythe college town that is still remembered for being a hotbed of protest in the 1960s and 70sand first won elected office across the bay in San Francisco, it was as district attorney. She was not signing or voting on bills, which in some ways inoculated her from the policy battles that consume San Francisco politicians.

First and foremost is she started out as a prosecutor, and thats not a typical rsum for a Bay Area politician to take on to a bigger stage, said Douglas Herman, a California consultant who ran a pro-Harris PAC during her U.S. Senate run. Its antithetical to form.

Kamala Harris, as San Francisco District Attorney, in April 2010. | AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez

Thats not to say Harris floated above the fray. A longtime political hand, Brian Brokaw, argued that her background positioned her well for a long career by posing an early test of her toughness.

From a political standpoint, theres a reason so many successful statewide elected officials have come out of the Bay Area, and thats because Bay Area politics is a contact sport, Brokaw said. San Francisco is not California. Most of the population is Democratic and the fights are between the progressives and the moderates, and I say that in quotes. The battles are mostly civil wars, but you have to be able to navigate that sort of dynamic.

Navigating those tumultuous waters isnt just a matter of policy. It also requires forging interpersonal ties, and people who have known and worked with Harris said she had the ability to sustain relationships even in the rough-and-tumble of an insular political culture.

San Francisco is a tough town for a politician, and to make it through San Francisco, you have to have thick skin and the ability to move forward after disagreements, said Shawnda Westly, former executive director of the California Democratic Party, adding she lets bygones be bygones for sure.

At one time, San Franciscos insularity condemned its politicians to a parochial career. Now, however, its very competitiveness has made it a crucial proving ground for Democrats, and a launching pad for political talent, much the way Boston was in the heyday of the Kennedys, Tip O'Neill, Michael Dukakis and John Kerry, and the way it continues to be for leaders like Elizabeth Warren.

San Francisco is a tough town for a politician, and to make it through San Francisco, you have to have thick skin and the ability to move forward after disagreements.

Shawnda Westly

And much like Boston, San Francisco has grown vastly wealthier over the decades, adding to its clout.

The transformation of San Francisco politics over the past four decades has paralleled the emergence of neighboring Silicon Valley as the worlds technology hub. Suddenly, a corner of America that was once known for its quixotic causes and willingness to dissent from the mainstream was very much at the vanguard of the 21st century economy. The quaint city by the bay was also the global tech capital, and much of the power and accountability that goes along with global economic leadership took root in San Francisco.

For politicians like Feinstein, Pelosi, Newsom and Harris, the Bay Area served as a goldmine of campaign cash. That made it relatively easy to finance statewide campaigns in the largest and most expensive market in the country, but alsoin the case of Pelosi, especiallyto help spread the wealth among Democrats across the country, helping to attract a national following.

At the same time, longtime observers said, San Francisco Democrats became loath to offend the tech moguls who propelled the local economy, providing a business-friendly counterpoint to their social and environmental liberalism. In the Bay Area of the 21st century, economic growth and social progress could made ahead, arm in arm. Suddenly, San Francisco liberalism didnt seem so quirky anymoreor, for that matter, so liberal anymore.

Harris, in particular, has demonstrated an ability to appeal to liberal voting blocs, both in San Francisco and statewide, without alienating moderate allies or inviting critics to pigeonhole her. That manifested most starkly in her prosecutorial career, when she overcame the opposition of law enforcement groups to win office.

As San Francisco district attorney, she declined to seek the death penalty for a cop killer. In that post and as state attorney general, she enacted some progressive reforms while falling short of the desires of some liberal votersmollifying some of her base without excessively antagonizing the law-and-order forces that tend to be critical to the longevity of elected prosecutors.

Part of the reason she has been so effective is shes realized in order to get big things done you have to find partners. The police unions spent hundreds of thousands if not more than that opposing her when she was running for attorney general, Brokaw said. Then she won, and she recognized in order to get done a lot of the big policy changes she wanted to see through, she wanted to bring some of the people who opposed her in as partners.

That hasnt always worked to Harris benefit. During the presidential primary, she drew ample criticism from liberal voters who distrusted her law enforcement record and her advocacy for an anti-truancy bill that some believed scapegoated some minority parents. Criminal justice reform advocates fault her for not pushing for state legislation to have independent prosecutors investigate police shootingsa position she now supports. They notice that she opposed marijuana legalization before she supported it.

To her critics, that can look like political opportunism. But it has also earned her admiration from those who see has as a prescient political tactician. Republican consultant Tim Rosales recounted then-district attorney Harris opposing a 2008 ballot initiative to reduce criminal penalties. After having played it cool at first, Rosales said, Harris helped provide a lot of credibility in the Bay Area by joining the opposition as it gained momentum. It was the type of savvy move that Rosales said served Harris well in her career.

I think what has been really instructive about her is she has been able to cultivate this broad-based appeal in California thats much greater than just being identified with San Francisco. Thats something that I think was true in 2008, its true now and its been true throughout her political career, Rosales said. She doesnt fit neatly into any one box. ... She has had law enforcement support in the past, she is certainly someone who draws support from the progressive side as wellshes really able to negotiate some of those political silos better than most.

Observers argue Harris shed the Bay Area association long ago as she built out a statewide political network that powered multiple California runs. Shes long had a home in Los Angeles tony Brentwood area. Unlike Pelosi, Brokaw argued, the consummate San Francisco politician for whom the San Francisco liberal broadside has been hammered on her by Republicans for so long thats part of her brand, Harris is not very easily stereotyped into being just one brand of politician.

When she ran for U.S. Senate in 2016, Harris was viewed as the liberal option in a Democrat-on-Democrat general election matchup with Rep. Loretta Sanchez, a self-described moderate from Orange County. But even in a race that lacked a Republican alternative, Harris was able to win in more-conservative counties that otherwise went for Trump.

I think what a lot of people overlook about California is that we are a microcosm of the nation. We have rural areas, we have Trump areas, we have urban, tons of suburban areas, Westly said. Even though shes from San Francisco, she was able to put together a statewide campaign where she took 23 of 25 Trump counties. That says something as to who she is and what shes capable of.

Since winning election to the Senate, and especially since launching her failed presidential run, Harris has become identified with the left. She has become a fiery antagonist of the Trump administration while backing progressive causes like "Medicare for All" and health care for undocumented immigrants. She forcefully argues for prosecuting wayward police officers, including by fortifying the nations use-of-force standard.

See the original post here:

How San Francisco Democrats Took Over the Country - POLITICO

Liberal MPs grill charity watchdog that has been critical of WE during latest committee meeting – National Post

Later, Liberal MP Peter Fragiskatos questioned Bahen on how her small team of four people could possibly do all the analytical and research work on charities they claimed to do.

Its hard for me to understand how an organization of four people can judge 250 organizations on a range of criteria, delve in and offer an enormous set of judgments. For us to look at that as MPs is a challenge, Fragiskatos asked.

To Bahen, the workload is similar to that of a financial or credit analyst.

When I worked on financial research way back in the day when I was young, there was a team of 38 people in the research department, and our research influenced 25 per cent of the daily volume on the Toronto Stock Exchange, Bahen explained. So this type of small team research coverage is very common in other sectors.

But the most aggressive line of questioning came from Liberal MP Adam Vaughn, who immediately questioned the oppositions assessment that CI conducted excellent work.

There's a double-edged sword

Based on what the opposition is saying, Habitat for Humanity, YWCA both in Vancouver and Toronto, Oxfam, the Canadian Humane Society, all are more of a risk to donate to than WE Charity based on the research that the opposition has declared as valuable excellent and impressive, Vaughn told Bahen, referring to the ratings CI had given to all the above organizations on its website.

Bahen responded that the three-star rating afforded to WE Charity was based on their financial situation and didnt take CIs concerns about WEs corporate structure into consideration.

Excerpt from:

Liberal MPs grill charity watchdog that has been critical of WE during latest committee meeting - National Post

China conscious about becoming liberal towards Muslims in the country, says Mahathir Mohamad to WION – WION

Former Malaysian Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad speaking exclusively to WION's Executive Editor Palki Sharma as part of Global Leadership Series said that that going to war with China is not an option because it is a very powerful country.

"We tried to find other ways of solving our strained relations with China. It cannot be compared to India as they have a different system and viewpoints. While India is more liberal and willing to accept criticism, China is not," Mahathir said in an exclusive conversation with WION.

"There are ways of doing things. Its not always through confrontation," he added.

Also Read:Cannot go to war with China on South China Sea: Mahathir Mohamad to WION

When questioned about what he has done for the Muslims of China, Mahathir said: "We tried to talk to the Chinese. But their response was not good. But I think the Chinese are becoming more and more conscious of the need for them to be a little bit more liberal towards the Muslims in China."

"China has offered to work with any country in terms of developing a vaccine and medicine for this pandemic. They are very cooperative, even with Malaysia and I think, China's attitude is far better than some countries which even consider that if they do find a vaccine, it is only for them," Mahathir said regarding China coronavirus response.

Also read:Mahathir Mohamad forms new 'independent' party as Malaysias power struggle intensifies

Mahathir said he does not support an international investigation against Beijing regarding the origin of COVID-19.

"I don't think it is the time for finger-pointing. What we need to do is to try and resolve this as a problem for the whole world. Pointing fingers at China doesn't help at all. In fact, China has shown how they can handle this pandemic much better than the United States of America for example," he said.

On China's neo-colonialism comment made a few years ago, Mahathir said: "the Malay states, the small Malay states of Malaysia have had relations with China for nearly 2,000 years and that they survived at all is a miracle because if China would have been like the Europeans we would have been colonised by China by now. But China has maintained the relation to the point where even though they call themselves the Middle Kingdom, the biggest country in the world, we survived despite their obvious size and power.

"China is not as bad as the Europeans. The Europeans came here in 1509, two years later they colonised us. China has known us for longer than that and they have not colonised us," he said, adding,"today, we have a problem with China making claims in the South China Sea but we cannot go to war with China, we have to find other solutions to the problem."

Read the rest here:

China conscious about becoming liberal towards Muslims in the country, says Mahathir Mohamad to WION - WION

4 reasons why Richard Nixon would be too liberal for the GOP and Trump supporters of 2020 – Salon

It was 46 years ago, on August 8, 1974, that President Richard Nixon overwhelmed by the Watergate scandal announced his resignation. And the following day, Vice President Gerald Ford was sworn in as president of the United States. Nixon, in his day, was considered arch-conservative, promoting anti-communist hysteria, a "law and order message" and the War on the Drugs. And in 2020, President Donald Trump's reelection campaign is responding to the George Floyd protests by echoing the paranoia and divisiveness of Nixon's 1968 presidential campaign. Yet in many respects, Nixon was to the left of today's GOP.

Here are some reasons why Nixon, as right-wing as he was, would be way too liberal and nuanced for the Trumpistas and the Republican Party of 2020.

1. Nixon favored universal health care

When President Barack Obama was working on a health care reform package in 2009 and 2010, one of the people he consulted was Stuart Altman who was Nixon's consultant on health care reform in the early 1970s. Nixon was a proponent of universal health care, and the health care reform plan he had in mind almost half a century ago was quite comparable to what is now known as Obamacare and it some respects, it was more aggressive. Nixon opposed the type of government-operated single-payer program that Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez now describe as "Medicare for all," but he favored universal health care via the private sector.

2. Nixon championed the launch of the EPA

Trump has a terrible environmental record, undermining the Environmental Protection Agency at every turn and expressing his love of fossil fuels and disdain for green energy. But the EPA started under Nixon's watch, and by today's Republican standards, Nixon would be considered a "tree hugger." If Nixon were alive today and ran on the environmental platform that he favored in the early 1970s, Trumpistas would consider him hostile to energy companies.

3. Nixon supported Medicare

Trump, the Tea Party and many other far-right Republicans have favored harsh cuts to Medicare and Medicaid both of which came out of President Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society in the 1960s (Trump was lying when, in 2016, he insisted he would protect Medicare). But Nixon, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, made it clear that he supported Medicare. Nixon vehemently attacked Democrats on many occasions, slamming them as a party of lawlessness and moral decay. But when it came to safety net programs, there were times when he wasn't shy about agreeing with them.

4. Nixon favored elements of the New Deal and the Great Society

Newt Gingrich, a devoted Trump supporter, has stressed that one of his political goals is the total destruction of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal and LBJ's Great Society. But Nixon, like President Dwight D. Eisenhower in the 1950s, stressed that he wanted to protect parts of the New Deal and the Great Society. And arguably, it was Nixon's paranoid anti-communism that inspired him to support programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid: he believed, one could argue, that allowing a certain amount of socialism and having a strong social safety net would discourage the spread of communism in the United States. And unlike the Tea Party wingnuts of 2020, he had no desire to privatize Social Security.

Visit link:

4 reasons why Richard Nixon would be too liberal for the GOP and Trump supporters of 2020 - Salon

No students participated in WE-run program, Liberals say, to surprise of charity that hired nine students – National Post

Keenan repeated the assertion when asked specifically about Souls Harbour, saying only that when it comes to supporting students and charities, were looking at options on how best to proceed.

Obviously Im frustrated, Porter said in response to Keenans statement. Up to now Ive just been assuming theyll come up with something. Are they really just leaving charities out in the lurch?

While Porter said she intends to press the government to change its mind, the Souls Harbour board has agreed to pay the students if the program is cancelled, at an estimated cost of around $15,000 money that would normally go toward feeding local families.

Opposition critics blasted the Liberal government for mismanaging the rollout of the program and for leaving charities and students in the dark about what will happen to them.

The two things cannot be true: they cannot be saying theyre not proceeding to these groups, and the groups saying they were approved, said Conservative economic development critic Dan Albas.

Its almost been a month now since they stopped the program and they have yet to actually tell Canadians clearly what theyre going to do about the different groups that did apply and if this program will be delivered.

NDP ethics critic Charlie Angus said students took the prime minister at his word that they would be compensated for volunteering through the program.

It is unconscionable that Justin Trudeau is now telling students that signed up for the program that they arent getting paid, he said. The summer is ticking down and not a dime has flown to students who badly needed help.

Listen to our news podcast, 10/3, on Apple Podcasts

More here:

No students participated in WE-run program, Liberals say, to surprise of charity that hired nine students - National Post

Five of 15 faculty reinstated within College of Liberal Arts and Sciences – UI The Daily Iowan

Five faculty, including three instructors within the Department of Rhetoric, will be reinstated in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences following a cut that formerly dismissed 15 faculty within the college.

Five of the 15 faculty whose contracts were not renewed by the University of Iowa College of Liberal Arts and Sciences will be reinstated, including all three faculty within the Department of Rhetoric whose contracts were initially selected for non-renewal.

Following further review, the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences has renewed the contracts of five of the 15 instructional track faculty whose appointments had not been renewed due to budget constraints. These positions reflect student enrollment demands and will allow CLAS to offer a robust curriculum this fall, said UI Assistant Vice President for External Relations Jeneane Beck in an email to The Daily Iowan.

The reinstatements, issued by liberal-arts college Interim Dean Sara Sanders, follow the replacement of former dean Steve Goddard, who was responsible for identifying up to $25 million in cuts within the college due to financial losses the UI faces due to the coronavirus pandemic. The initial faculty cuts in June came as the first part of a three-tiered plan, which asked the liberal-arts college to make $15 million in cuts.

Goddard was removed from his position following an undisclosed investigation that found he had violated the Policy on Ethics and Responsibilities for UI Staff.

UI Rhetoric Chair Steve Duck said receiving the information from Sanders was wonderful news.

They shouldnt have been terminated in the first place, and its good to see a new dean recognizing the quality of the faculty, he said.

Duck said Sanders decision has allowed Rhetoric to open an additional 150 seats for students to enroll in for the fall 2020 semester.

The Rhetoric Department has a very long and strong record of prizes and recognition for teaching excellence, Duck said in an email to the DI. When the UI wants to maintain enrollments and the revenue stream that comes with it, it makes best sense for UI to retain, reward and advertise such excellence to parents and prospective students rather than to cut good instructors.

Elke Heckner, a lecturer in the German department, said she was ecstatic to hear that she had been reinstated, although she hopes the reinstatement of lecturers means regaining their regular contract length as well, rather than short-term appointments.

The reversal of the decision to dismiss the lecturers renews my confidence in the values the University of Iowa wants to be known for as a public university. That is, a recognition and appreciation of the long-term contributions that lecturers in the humanities continue to make to the educational mission of UI, Heckner wrote in an email to theDI. The decision reinforces UIs commitment to teaching and research in the humanities.

This is a developing story. Check back with The Daily Iowan for updates.

Follow this link:

Five of 15 faculty reinstated within College of Liberal Arts and Sciences - UI The Daily Iowan

Letter: Liberal representatives have lost their way – Opinion – Lincoln Courier

TuesdayAug4,2020at9:45AM

Our liberal members of the U.S. House of Representatives have lost their ethics. Attorney General Barr was recently invited to testify before the House Judiciary Committee for a so-called "hearing." Mr. Barr was confronted with incendiary questions from liberal committee members and each time he responded, these Congressmen rudely interrupted him by stating, "I am reclaiming my time". This charade was planned to embarrass him while providing committee members an opportunity to promote their own views. Thoughtful people can see through these shameful actions.

Do we want these people representing us in Congress? They are supposed to do the legislative work of our country but all they do is use their positions to promote their political bias. What a disgraceful scene watching the behavior of Chairman Nadler and others.

Mr.Nadler even had the audacity to suggest that the Portland demonstrators were peaceful. Did he miss seeing the demonstrators throwing rocks and bottles, and blinding three federal agents with lasers pointed at their eyes?

Liberal Congressmen are more concerned with the "rights" of the mob than they are in supporting police and federal agents. The federal government has every right to protect property. Since when are riotous mobs allowed to destroy anything they please?

Lady Justice has lost control. Yet, this is an election year and voters can support law and order candidates. Lets restore Lady Justice to her throne by defeating anti-law and order lawmakers. Support your vote with discerning analysis of the candidates and oppose liberal destroyers of democracy and freedom.

Imee Miedema, Springfield

See original here:

Letter: Liberal representatives have lost their way - Opinion - Lincoln Courier