The Prometheus League
Breaking News and Updates
- Abolition Of Work
- Ai
- Alt-right
- Alternative Medicine
- Antifa
- Artificial General Intelligence
- Artificial Intelligence
- Artificial Super Intelligence
- Ascension
- Astronomy
- Atheism
- Atheist
- Atlas Shrugged
- Automation
- Ayn Rand
- Bahamas
- Bankruptcy
- Basic Income Guarantee
- Big Tech
- Bitcoin
- Black Lives Matter
- Blackjack
- Boca Chica Texas
- Brexit
- Caribbean
- Casino
- Casino Affiliate
- Cbd Oil
- Censorship
- Cf
- Chess Engines
- Childfree
- Cloning
- Cloud Computing
- Conscious Evolution
- Corona Virus
- Cosmic Heaven
- Covid-19
- Cryonics
- Cryptocurrency
- Cyberpunk
- Darwinism
- Democrat
- Designer Babies
- DNA
- Donald Trump
- Eczema
- Elon Musk
- Entheogens
- Ethical Egoism
- Eugenic Concepts
- Eugenics
- Euthanasia
- Evolution
- Extropian
- Extropianism
- Extropy
- Fake News
- Federalism
- Federalist
- Fifth Amendment
- Fifth Amendment
- Financial Independence
- First Amendment
- Fiscal Freedom
- Food Supplements
- Fourth Amendment
- Fourth Amendment
- Free Speech
- Freedom
- Freedom of Speech
- Futurism
- Futurist
- Gambling
- Gene Medicine
- Genetic Engineering
- Genome
- Germ Warfare
- Golden Rule
- Government Oppression
- Hedonism
- High Seas
- History
- Hubble Telescope
- Human Genetic Engineering
- Human Genetics
- Human Immortality
- Human Longevity
- Illuminati
- Immortality
- Immortality Medicine
- Intentional Communities
- Jacinda Ardern
- Jitsi
- Jordan Peterson
- Las Vegas
- Liberal
- Libertarian
- Libertarianism
- Liberty
- Life Extension
- Macau
- Marie Byrd Land
- Mars
- Mars Colonization
- Mars Colony
- Memetics
- Micronations
- Mind Uploading
- Minerva Reefs
- Modern Satanism
- Moon Colonization
- Nanotech
- National Vanguard
- NATO
- Neo-eugenics
- Neurohacking
- Neurotechnology
- New Utopia
- New Zealand
- Nihilism
- Nootropics
- NSA
- Oceania
- Offshore
- Olympics
- Online Casino
- Online Gambling
- Pantheism
- Personal Empowerment
- Poker
- Political Correctness
- Politically Incorrect
- Polygamy
- Populism
- Post Human
- Post Humanism
- Posthuman
- Posthumanism
- Private Islands
- Progress
- Proud Boys
- Psoriasis
- Psychedelics
- Putin
- Quantum Computing
- Quantum Physics
- Rationalism
- Republican
- Resource Based Economy
- Robotics
- Rockall
- Ron Paul
- Roulette
- Russia
- Sealand
- Seasteading
- Second Amendment
- Second Amendment
- Seychelles
- Singularitarianism
- Singularity
- Socio-economic Collapse
- Space Exploration
- Space Station
- Space Travel
- Spacex
- Sports Betting
- Sportsbook
- Superintelligence
- Survivalism
- Talmud
- Technology
- Teilhard De Charden
- Terraforming Mars
- The Singularity
- Tms
- Tor Browser
- Trance
- Transhuman
- Transhuman News
- Transhumanism
- Transhumanist
- Transtopian
- Transtopianism
- Ukraine
- Uncategorized
- Vaping
- Victimless Crimes
- Virtual Reality
- Wage Slavery
- War On Drugs
- Waveland
- Ww3
- Yahoo
- Zeitgeist Movement
-
Prometheism
-
Forbidden Fruit
-
The Evolutionary Perspective
Daily Archives: May 20, 2021
Can Governor Kemp keep Republican voters on his team next year? – 11Alive.com WXIA
Posted: May 20, 2021 at 4:55 am
"In general, I think hes done a good job. But I dont think he did a good job handling the 2020 election," said one Republican voter.
WOODSTOCK, Ga. Governor Brian Kemp launched his re-election campaign this week and Georgia voters are already weighing in on his prospects following his nearly two and a half years in office.
The question many have, is whether Governor Kemp can keep Republicans voters on his team next year.
When Republican Kelly Sirois of Woodstock was asked what she thinks of Kemp, she responded with an exasperated sigh.
"Oh gosh, that is a loaded question," she said. "I voted for Governor Kemp. I voted for President Trump."
Siroys embodies the conflict some Republican voters have about Kemp.
"In general, I think hes done a good job. But I dont think he did a good job handling the 2020 election," said Republican Scott Barton.
Barton said he had been a Kemp supporter, but he later said he wouldn't be next year. "I hope he gets primaried, using the shorthand for opposition within the party primary."
So far, only former Democratic state Rep. Vernon Jones has announced he'll oppose Kemp in the GOP primary.
Barton and Siroys are among those exasperated by Kemp's willingness to steer clear of the unfounded attacks on the election leveled by then President Trump.
"State Republicans led by Kemp kind of caved, and thats not what I voted for him for in 2018, so I dont know what our alternatives are... but Im not happy with Gov. Kemp whatsoever," said Siroys.
In a December 11Alive poll, Georgia voters overall split 45%-45% over their approval of Kemp. The same poll showed 73% of Republican voters approved of him while 21% of Republicans said they did not.
But some Republican voters in Cherokee County said they liked how Kemp handled the pandemic and the economy.
"I think under the circumstances of the pandemic, I think he navigated that very well," said Cindy Radler, who also praised Kemp's handling of the Trump challenge to Georgia's election.
One Cobb County voter visiting Woodstock second that notion saying Kemps been in a very tough position.
"Kemp chose not to shut down our economy during COVID which actually worked pretty well for us. At first I wasnt for him, but now I really do like what hes done, and Im a Democrat," said Frances Gilliam Gilliam who mentioned she voted for Joe Biden in 2020.
11Alive's poll in December showed 21 percent of Democrats approved of Kemps performance.
Read this article:
Can Governor Kemp keep Republican voters on his team next year? - 11Alive.com WXIA
Posted in Republican
Comments Off on Can Governor Kemp keep Republican voters on his team next year? – 11Alive.com WXIA
Newcomer Erb wins Republican nomination for commissioner’s seat in Harrison’s 4th Ward – TribLIVE
Posted: at 4:55 am
The result of Democratic write-in votes yet to be announced will decide whether the winner of Tuesdays Republican primary for Harrisons 4th Ward commissioner will take the seat or whether a Democraic challenger will emerge.
Commissioners Chairman Bill Heasley served two four-year terms. But he said he chose not to run again because he supports term limits.
Republican Jim Erb bested Dylan Seelnacht for the Republican nomination.
There were no candidates on the Democratic ballot for the 4th Ward seat. However, there were 109 write-in votes, which could potentially set up a challenge to the Republican nominee in the Nov. 2 General Election.
Erb, 48, who is the director of Citizens Hose Ambulance Service, captured 82% of the Republican vote (131 votes).
Seelnacht, 28, co-owner of Seelnacht Iconic Interiors, brought in 28 votes (17.5%).
The race attracted 519 voters for a 76% turnout. The voter turnout for Allegheny County was only 28.7%.
Both Republicans vying for the 4th Ward seat pressed for changes and improvements in the township.
Im very happy with the results, Erb said. Im very grateful for the voters of the 4th Ward and I will do everything I can to work hard for them and not let them down.
Public safety is important to Erb, who has been a firefighter since joining Hilltop Hose in 1994. He would like to see more financial assistance for the EMS service from Harrison Township. He also wants PennDOT and Allegheny County to review speed limits on roads to tamp down the number of crashes.
Seelnacht wasnt sure what to expect from the election.
He liked meeting residents and learning about their struggles and issues.
I dont think I should throw in the towel after one attempt, he said. The future of our community means a lot to me.
Seelnacht is interested in revitalizing the Harrison, Brackenridge and Tarentum area. He started a Facebook group that led to in-person meetings of residents before the covid pandemic.
Mary Ann Thomas is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Mary at 724-226-4691, mthomas@triblive.com or via Twitter .
Read more:
Newcomer Erb wins Republican nomination for commissioner's seat in Harrison's 4th Ward - TribLIVE
Posted in Republican
Comments Off on Newcomer Erb wins Republican nomination for commissioner’s seat in Harrison’s 4th Ward – TribLIVE
Conservative Republicans propose $14T in cuts to balance budget | TheHill – The Hill
Posted: at 4:55 am
The Republican Study Committee (RSC), a conservative GOP House caucus, called Wednesday for cutting $14 trillion in spending over a decade to balance the budget and produce a surplus.
"Weve faced a year of unprecedented spending," the group's leaders wrote in a letter on their proposed budget. The letter was spearheadedby RSC Chairman Jim Banks (R-Ind.).
"As you can imagine, getting our spending under control and eliminating the deficit will prove to be a herculean task," it stated.
The group's alternative budget proposal would virtually eliminate the deficit by 2024 and go into surplus by 2026 by making aggressive cuts to discretionary spending and mandatory programs, relative to their current projected paths.
It would cut $2.5 trillion from current Medicare projections, $3.3 trillion from other health programs including Medicaid, and lop another $3.5 trillion from other mandatory programs that largely comprise the social safety net.
Discretionary spending, which funds the government, would drop by $3.5 trillion, reducing its size as a share of the economy by a third.
The RSC budget comes just more than a week before President BidenJoe BidenIsrael-Hamas ceasefire could come as soon as Friday: report US opposes UN resolution calling on Israel-Gaza ceasefire Parents of 54 migrant children found after separation under Trump administration MORE's full budget proposal is set for release on May 27.
In that budget, Biden is expected to lay out a fiscal plan for the country over a decade, incorporating his infrastructure and family support proposals alongside higher taxes for corporations and the wealthy.
He will also lay out his plans for mandatory spending programs such as Medicare and Social Security, some of which have limited runways in terms of funding from specialized trust funds.
Beyond the immediate fiscal year, long-term budget plans often have little to do with what policies are enacted. President TrumpDonald TrumpCuomo investigation includes priority virus testing for family, associates: report Anonymous Capitol Police letter to spur support for Jan. 6 probe causes stir Florida GOP passes bill that would clear way for Trump casino license MORE's budget proposals, for example, each proposed paths to eventually balance the government's budget, but the deficit ultimately increased in every year of his presidency.
Read more:
Conservative Republicans propose $14T in cuts to balance budget | TheHill - The Hill
Posted in Republican
Comments Off on Conservative Republicans propose $14T in cuts to balance budget | TheHill – The Hill
Just How Strict Will Texas Republicans Voting Bill Be? – The New York Times
Posted: at 4:55 am
AUSTIN, Texas Texas Republicans on Monday resumed their push to pass a major voting bill with an array of restrictions, moving the bill to a closed-door panel of lawmakers who will hash out the final version of the legislation.
But much of the suspense surrounding the panel, known as a conference committee, centers not on whether the legislation will pass the G.O.P.-controlled Legislature, but on what measures it will include when it does.
After a late-night scramble of last-minute negotiations among lawmakers last week, it looked as if recently introduced voting options, such as drive-through voting and 24-hour voting, would survive Republicans initial attempt to ban them. The version of the bill passed by the State Senate would have prohibited those types of voting, but the House version passed last week made no mention of either provision.
However, State Senator Bryan Hughes, the Republican sponsor of the initial bill and one of the committee members who will shape the final version behind closed doors, said in an interview last week that he would like to see the provisions banning drive-through voting and 24-hour voting added back to the final bill.
It makes sense, Mr. Hughes said, citing internal polling suggesting that Texas voters preferred standardized hours for early voting across the state. So theres some predictability and people are confident that the rules are being followed.
The conference committee will meet this week to start crafting a final version of the bill, which would then be sent for a final up-or-down vote in both chambers. The Senate announced its members made up of four Republicans and one Democrat on Monday, and the House will make its appointments when the chamber convenes on Tuesday.
The bill initially sought a host of new restrictions on voting that would have had an outsize impact on voters in cities, most notably in Harris County, the biggest county in the state and home to Houston.
During the coronavirus pandemic, Harris County introduced a drive-through voting option, which more than 127,000 voters used in the general election. It also had a single day of 24-hour voting, which more than 10,000 voters used to cast ballots. The original bill that passed the House would have banned both of those methods, as well as placed limitations on the allocation of voting machines in counties with a population of more than one million, which election officials had said could force the closure of some polling locations.
But as the bill made its way through the Legislature, most of those provisions were removed. The bill as it passed the House included provisions greatly expanding the autonomy and authority of partisan poll watchers, included new penalties for election officials and workers who violate the rules, and barred officials from sending out absentee ballots to voters who have not requested them.
Mr. Hughes said he wanted the provisions against drive-through and 24-hour voting to be added back to the bill so there would be uniformity among counties in how elections are run.
Amid months of false claims by former President Donald J. Trump that the 2020 election was stolen from him,Republican lawmakers in many states are marching aheadto pass laws making it harder to vote and changing how elections are run, frustrating Democrats and even some election officials in their own party.
One county cant just make up the rules, Mr. Hughes said. Houstons not the capital of Texas. Harris County doesnt need to do that. Whether I like the change or I dislike it, one county cant just make up the rules on the fly. That doesnt work.
Democrats in the Legislature have argued that this logic hampers the administration of elections, which are best run when local officials are empowered to address problems in their communities.
You really cant have uniformity when every county is different. Harris County is different than Loving County, said Jessica Gonzlez, a state representative and the Democratic vice chair of the House Elections Committee, referring to a county in West Texas with less than 200 residents. And so, in my experience in doing voter protection work, its important that these elections officials are able to administer their elections, because theyre the ones who are actually on the ground and able to address those issues.
If legislators in Texas were to add back provisions from the version of the voting bill that initially passed the State Senate, the state would stand as somewhat of an outlier nationally. Republicans in other states have tended to remove some of the strictest measures from voting bills as they make their way through legislatures. Both Georgia and Florida initially introduced bills that featured much more strident restrictions such as limiting voting on Sunday or banning drop boxes before settling on final versions that allowed for some weekend voting and limited drop box usage.
Texas is one of the last major battleground states working toward an overhaul of its voting rules and regulations. The Legislature is in session until the end of May, so any law will have to be on its way to the desk of Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, by midnight, June 1.
Read more here:
Just How Strict Will Texas Republicans Voting Bill Be? - The New York Times
Posted in Republican
Comments Off on Just How Strict Will Texas Republicans Voting Bill Be? – The New York Times
Republicans seize on conservative backlash against critical race theory | TheHill – The Hill
Posted: at 4:55 am
Republican candidates in states across the country are seizing on critical race theory as a talking point in their effort to appeal to cultural conservatives.
Virginia Republican gubernatorial nominee Glenn Youngkin vowed to expel the academic movement from schools, while Ohio GOP Senate candidate Jane Timken took it on as part of a statewide listening tour.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantisRon DeSantisFlorida GOP passes bill that would clear way for Trump casino license Florida lawmakers approve Seminole Tribe sports betting Palm Beach prosecutor says DeSantis could delay hypothetical Trump extradition MORE (R) and South Dakota Gov. Kristi NoemKristi Lynn NoemRepublicans seize on conservative backlash against critical race theory Government indoctrination, whether 'critical' or 'patriotic,' is wrong Montana governor approves restrictions on transgender athletes in schools MORE (R), both potential presidential candidates in 2024, have also knocked critical race theory. Noem recently started a petition on her campaign website to keepit out of classrooms.
It offers Republicans a great opportunity to educate people about what we actually believe about race, said Terry Schilling, the executive director of the conservative think tank the American Principles Project.
Schilling added that his organization was considering wading into the fight over the academic movement by running and testing the effectiveness of ads ahead of 2022.
The Republican effort comes after the party exceeded expectations in the 2020 elections, holding on to a number of crucial Senate seats and gaining seats in the House. Some Democrats argued the GOPs unexpectedly strong performance was due in part to conservatives tying Democrats to progressive policies like calls to defund the police.
Now, Republicans are looking to tie Democrats to critical race theory in an effort to paint them as radical.
Critical race theory was developed in the 1970s and 1980s by a number of American legal scholars who argued racism is rooted in the nations founding and that systemic racism continues to have a negative impact on the opportunities and treatment of people of color at all levels of society today.
But opponents of the theory say it teaches students to disparage the U.S. and works to sow racial divisions in classrooms.
White House press secretary Jen PsakiJen PsakiGOP senator seeks clarity from Biden on Trump-era peace deals Here's why 'Neanderthal' Texas governor is vindicated on early mask mandate call The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Facebook - Republicans seek to sink Jan. 6 commission MORE said that it was responsible to teach about systemic racism when asked about a proposal from Sen. Tom CottonTom Bryant CottonThe Memo: In Democratic divide, two visions of Israel Republicans seize on conservative backlash against critical race theory Tim Scott sparks buzz in crowded field of White House hopefuls MORE (R-Ark.), another potential presidential candidate, opposing critical race theory.
I dont think we would think that educating the youth and next and future leaders of the country on systemic racism is indoctrination. Thats actually responsible, Psaki said at a White House briefing on Thursday.
The debate over the issue has already swept across the U.S., with GOP-controlled legislatures in half a dozen states taking up measures that would limit or ban the theory in schools.
Idaho Gov. Brad Little (R) signed a bill that would keep funding from schools that taught viewpoints that are often found in critical race theory, while the Texas state Senate approved similar legislation. Tennessees state House advanced its legislation on the issue earlier this month, and lawmakers in Arizona, Arkansas and Oklahoma are drafting legislation that would combat the movement being taught in classrooms.
Republicans are also pushing the issue at the federal level, with roughly 30 GOP representatives signaling their support for Rep. Dan Bishops (R-N.C.) Stop CRT Act, which would ban federal employees from having to receive racial equity and diversity training.
Particularly over the last year in lockdown, education has really rocketed to the forefront of definitely suburban mothers minds, said Nicki Neily, president of the conservative group Parents Defending Education.
A lot of this new stuff was sprung on them with no heads up, no buy-in, no introducing it to the community, she continued. They feel like theres sort of no input into the process.
A poll released last month from Parents Defending Education found that 58.3 percent of respondents said they did not believe students should be taught that the country was founded on racism and remains structurally racist today.
The debate reached a boiling point during a tense school board meeting this week in the Washington, D.C., suburban enclave of Loudoun County, Va., after the interim superintendent announced he was launching an equity plan. The superintendent has insisted that critical race theory is not a part of the school districts curriculum.
Virginia Republican candidates have taken the issue head-on ahead of the commonwealths elections later this year.
Its going to be detrimental to our schools and its not what we want, Virginia GOP lieutenant governor nominee Winsome Sears told Fox News on Thursday. It supposedly is to help someone who looks like me and Im sick of it. Im sick of being used by the Democrats, and so are many people who look like me.
Youngkin has campaigned frequently on education issues, including the reopening of schools and school choice, as well as critical race theory. He vowed during the campaign leading up to the state GOP convention that he would take critical race theory out of Virginias public schools if elected.
While the issue has shown its potential to galvanize the conservative base, some strategists say leaning into critical race theory may not be the right messaging move in growing and diversifying suburban areas, which could play a determining factor in upcoming races.
Conservatives also say they are unsure of how the issue will play in suburban enclaves, pointing to Democratic successes in those areas in the 2020 cycle.
I dont know how its going to play with suburban America, Schilling, of theAmerican Principles Project, said. Suburban America has been becoming more and more woke over the last four years.
More:
Republicans seize on conservative backlash against critical race theory | TheHill - The Hill
Posted in Republican
Comments Off on Republicans seize on conservative backlash against critical race theory | TheHill – The Hill
John Micek: Republicans and the return of class warfare – pressherald.com
Posted: at 4:55 am
Having tired of the culture wars, Republicans have returned to the familiar and comforting battlefield of the class wars.
The GOP is seizing on disappointing jobs numbers as an excuse to call for the end of extended unemployment benefits, based on the slender and debunked premise that they have discouraged people from seeking work.
Neil Bradley, the executive vice president and chief policy officer of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said the jobs report begins to confirm that this is a barrier not the only barrier, but a barrier to filling open positions in the recovery, the New York Times reported. He added that, we absolutely have to begin to make the preparation to turn the supplement off. The sooner we do that, the sooner its going to become clear how this has been holding us back.
Republican Rep. Kevin Brady piled on, declaring that the White Houses strategies, which generally have improved the economy, was sabotaging our jobs recovery with promises of higher taxes and regulation on local businesses that discourage hiring and drive jobs overseas.
Last week, the White House stiffened its line, saying people who turned down employment risked losing their benefits. President Joe Biden has continued to defend the more generous benefits, however.
Meanwhile, red state governors are parroting the national line, and have announced that theyll turn down hundreds of millions of dollars in federal assistance to force their residents to return to poorly paying service-sector jobs with horrible benefits and potentially unsafe working conditions exacerbated by mask- and vaccine-denying patrons.
In a way, its kind of refreshing to see Republicans drop the obsession with Dr. Seuss and other shiny-object attractions of the culture war and get back to their fundamental business of defending corporate America. There is no small irony that its happening even as the GOP continues to try to shed its image as the party of the rich and rebrand itself as the defender of the working class.
The rhetorical jiu-jitsu, however, is a gross oversimplification of the tectonic forces that are reshaping the post-pandemic economy, as NBC News and other outlets have detailed.
First up, yes, its undeniably true that there are more jobs than there are people applying for open positions. Thats happening, in part, because people who got discouraged during January and February havent yet gotten the memo that the tide has turned.
But its also true that the pandemic-driven changes that reshaped the economy to begin with: home-schooling, childcare, and concerns about avoiding infection in the workplace until theyre fully vaccinated, also are causing people to hang back.
Its not just labor demand and supply, these are tough working conditions, Bhushan Sethi, the global people and organization co-leader at PwC Consulting Agency, told NBC News.
I cant underscore enough the real concern of individuals, he continued. Am I safe? Will I be forced to trade personal safety around the virus and variants for a job?
Finally, its also true that some people are using this time to consider their options and contemplate job changes.
But heres irony rearing its ugly head again: Republicans in the states and on Capitol Hill are opposing or refusing those things that would actually encourage people to return to work.
Namely, a livable wage, paid child care, and incentives in the American Rescue Plan for holdout states to finally expand Medicaid.
And heres where the GOP further tips its hand: A lot of what Biden wants to do is paid for by taxes on the wealthiest Americans and corporations. While Republicans may want Coca-Cola to keep its trap shut about odious efforts to restrict voting in Georgia, they still know on which side their fundraising bread is buttered.
Which is why you saw Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell sprain his tongue last month as he walked back his call for corporations to stay out of politics. Corporate donations, after all, slowed to a trickle after large companies cut off GOP lawmakers who opposed certifying the election results.
And as much as the exiled former Dear Leader held himself out as a champion of the forgotten man, he spent much of his four years disassembling the regulatory state to make the turf friendlier to big business. And lets not leave out the deficit-exploding tax cuts that benefited the wealthiest Americans to the detriment of working Americans.
So while the GOPs recent rhetoric about lazy and ambition-free workers (and which workers are they referring to, by the way? Surely not the base?) is disappointing, its not particularly surprising.
The grift has been in plain sight the whole time.
An award-winning political journalist, John L. Micek is Editor-in-Chief of The Pennsylvania Capital-Star in Harrisburg, Pa. Email him at [emailprotected] and follow him on Twitter @ByJohnLMicek.
Previous
Next
See more here:
John Micek: Republicans and the return of class warfare - pressherald.com
Posted in Republican
Comments Off on John Micek: Republicans and the return of class warfare – pressherald.com
Over 100 Republicans sign letter threatening to form third party – ABC News
Posted: at 4:55 am
The group takes issue with the party's embrace of former President Donald Trump.
May 13, 2021, 3:20 PM
5 min read
More than 100 Republicans, including some former elected officials, have signed a letter threatening to break from the GOP and form a third party, taking aim at the party's embrace of former President Donald Trump and his continued false claims that the 2020 election was "stolen."
"[W]hen in our democratic republic, forces of conspiracy, division, and despotism arise, it is the patriotic duty of citizens to act collectively in defense of liberty and justice," read the preamble to their letter released Thursday. "We, therefore, declare our intent to catalyze an American renewal, and to either reimagine a party dedicated to our founding ideals or else hasten the creation of such an alternative."
Naming the effort, "A Call for American Renewal," the group is calling for the Republican Party "to rededicate itself to founding idealsor else hasten the creation of an alternative."
President Donald Trump boards Air Force One before departing Harlingen, Texas, Jan. 21, 2021.
Miles Taylor, the former Trump Department of Homeland Security official who anonymously wrote a book and New York Times op-ed criticizing the Trump administration, co-organized the effort, which includes former members of Congress, governors, ambassadors, Cabinet secretaries, state legislators and Republican Party chairs among the 152 signatories.
The initiative's website indicates it's an extension of Stand Up Republic and The Republican Political Alliance for Integrity and Reform (REPAIR), another group organized by Taylor that calls for reforms to the Republican Party.
Though most are retired and haven't announced plans to run for office, notable names include former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge, New Jersey Gov. Christine Todd Whitman and former Transportation Secretary under George W. Bush, Mary Peters. Former congressional representatives include Barbara Comstock of Virginia, Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania, Reid Ribble of Wisconsin and Mickey Edwards of Oklahoma. Former Trump press secretary Anthony Scaramucci and official Olivia Troye also signed the statement.
Miles Taylor in Washington, DC, Nov. 16, 2020.
The effort comes on the heels of House Republican leaders voting to remove Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney from leadership because of her continued criticism of Trump and his baseless claims that the 2020 election was "stolen."
Cheney, in an interview with NBC's "Today Show" which aired Wednesday, warned that Republicans won't be able to convince voters to trust their agenda "if we are building our party on a foundation of lies."
The coalition teased more action to come including a town hall on "renewing America," saying it "cannot stay quiet in the face of rising political extremism."
ABC News' Katherine Faulders contributed to this report.
Read the rest here:
Over 100 Republicans sign letter threatening to form third party - ABC News
Posted in Republican
Comments Off on Over 100 Republicans sign letter threatening to form third party – ABC News
Opinion: I left the Republican Party because it left me – CT Post
Posted: at 4:55 am
I have spent my whole life in small business, starting by myself and now employing 16 people and providing them with health insurance and retirement benefits. I was a member of the Republican Party because it was the party of opportunity, the party that let you follow your personal pursuit of happiness.
I think this is no longer the core drive of the party.
I left when the Texas attorney general sued to stop four battleground states from casting their votes in the Electoral College. He had support from a majority of the Republican House members.
I then sat back in shock on Jan. 6. The occupation of the Capitol confirmed my decision. The Trump followers are not interested in the public or the greater good, only power. They turned their back on the rule of law and on our founders precedent of peaceful transition of power. They didnt seem to care about the issues of the public, including employers like me.
I like what Mark Branse, a Republican Town Committee member, once wrote: My Republican Party doesnt just whine and lie about the other side; it stands for policies that we think are good for America: fiscal responsibility and balanced budgets, a free-market economy with the minimum necessary regulation, professionalism in government service, conservation of our natural resources, education and other support for those who are willing and able to work, and a modest safety net for those who, through no fault of their own, need that help.
But I dont think the Republican Party stands for those anymore. Today I see a party of no, not of policy.
Republicans used to worry about burdening future generations with debt and making promises that could not be kept. But they passed a tax bill that drove high deficits much higher.
Americans fought two World Wars and a Cold War to establish liberal democracy as the preeminent governance mechanism, instead of autocratic dictatorship. I do not want a leader who demonizes and destroys respectful disagreement. I do not want to see Liz Cheney erased as she was Wednesday because she has a different point of view from party leaders and is not afraid to express it.
I am disturbed by the partys almost cult-like obedience to former President Donald Trump. The price for crossing the leader is ostracism and ridicule, followed by rioting. Trump and his followers lies about a stolen election, abetted by Republican congressmen and senators, demonstrates his lack of respect for American values and governance and for professionalism in government service. His lie led to the tragedy of Jan. 6. The aim is not to serve the public and honor its wishes, but to retain power and stifle all opposition for the benefit of core supporters.
As a Republican, I believe that none of us achieves happiness all by ourselves. We have a network of family and friends to help us in our troubles and to educate us on the world. I also know that government is essential to do things we cant do ourselves, such as building schools, roads and libraries and making laws that guide societys behavior.
But Republicans in Washington dont seem to agree. Obstructing relief last summer when unemployment money was running out. Voting to eliminate the Affordable Care act without a replacement plan. These and other votes show that Republicans are not interested in improving the average persons life, nor providing for those who need a hand.
I think both political parties have failed us. The public is sadly left out.
I joined the Independent Party in the hope that it will be a broader-based group interested in the welfare of all people, instead of special interests at the extremes.
The Republican Party formed 150 years ago from anti-slavery Whigs and disaffected Democrats. I am hoping a third party emerges from the ashes of todays Republican Party to represent those of us who are in the middle and unrepresented now.
Chip Beckett, a local veterinarian, is a member of the Glastonbury Town Council.
Follow this link:
Opinion: I left the Republican Party because it left me - CT Post
Posted in Republican
Comments Off on Opinion: I left the Republican Party because it left me – CT Post
What is the First Amendment? US right to free speech explained, after Prince Harry says its bonkers – iNews
Posted: at 4:55 am
The Duke of Sussex has called the First Amendment to the United States Constitution bonkers, drawing criticism on social media.
Prince Harry, who has moved to California with his wife Meghan Markle and their son Archie, was speaking on Dax Shepards Armchair Expert podcast.
The Duke discussed his new life in Los Angeles, moving away from royal duties and plans for his familys future.
The freshest exclusives and sharpest analysis, curated for your inbox
But his comments on the First Amendment led some Americans to say he is no longer welcome in their country, in angry social media posts.
The First Amendment was adopted on 15 December 1791, as one of the 10 amendments to the US Constitution that make up theBill of Rights.
It states that Congress cannot pass a law establishing a religion, nor can it prohibit the free practice of religion.
The amendment also protects freedom of speech, the press, assembly, and the right to petition the Government.
Free speech means the free and public expression of opinions without censorship, interference and restraint by the Government.
Free press means the right of individuals to express themselves through publication and dissemination of information, ideas and opinions without interference, constraint or prosecution by the Government.
Initially, the First Amendment applied only to laws enacted by Congress, but today it is invoked far more broadly.
The Duke brought up the First Amendment in reference to the press, telling Shepard he has experienced a media feeding frenzy while living in Beverly Hills.
Ive got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it, but it is bonkers, he said.
I dont want to start going down the First Amendment route because thats a huge subject and one which I dont understand because Ive only been here a short time.
But, you can find a loophole in anything.
You can capitalise or exploit whats not said rather than uphold what is said.
One Twitter user told Harry to get the hell out of America after hearing the interview, while another commented: If he has a problem with the constitution then he can go back to Britain.
Continue reading here:
What is the First Amendment? US right to free speech explained, after Prince Harry says its bonkers - iNews
Posted in Freedom of Speech
Comments Off on What is the First Amendment? US right to free speech explained, after Prince Harry says its bonkers – iNews
The New Campus Free Speech Bill What Universities Need To Know And Need To Do – Consumer Protection – UK – Mondaq News Alerts
Posted: at 4:55 am
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
The purpose of the Bill is to forceuniversities and students unions to comply with enhanced freespeech duties or face sanctions from the Office for Students and/orlegal claims from individuals.
Opposition to, and support for, the Bill have broken alongpredictable political lines. In this blog, I want to focus on thepracticalities of what the Bill would require universities to doand what action they need to take in order to be compliant with thenew law. Love the new Bill or loathe it, the law is going to changeand universities need to act.
I've highlighted in bold below the action steps universitiesmust take and the most key changes of which they need to beaware.
These are set out in sections A1 to A3 and are the mostimportant parts of the Bill. The OfS and the new Director of FreeSpeech and Academic Freedom will be empowered to ensure compliancewith these duties, and individuals will be able to bring civilclaims in relation to breaches of the A1 duty (though, note not A2or A3).
To summarise:
1) The A1 duty is very similar to the existings43 duty (see here this will stay on the statute books, but won'tapply to English higher education providers). It requires theinstitution's governing body to take steps that are"reasonably practicable" to ensure freedom of speechwithin the law for its staff, members, students and visitingspeakers. This includes ensuring that the use of premises isn'tdenied to anyone because of their ideas, beliefs or view. So far,so s43.
What's new is the additional requirement to have"particular regard to the importance of freedom ofspeech" when taking the "reasonably practicable"steps. It's not really clear what either of thosethings mean in practice or whether the additional wording actuallyadds or modifies the duty in any meaningful way. The main case onthe s43 duty involved a cancelled event where the security costsbecame too high perhaps the new emphasis will mean thatcosts have to take more of a back seat to free speech whenconsidering what step are appropriate? We'll need case law toflesh that out.
Also new is the addition of a specific objective tosecure academic freedom for academic staffalongside their general right to free speech. That includesensuring that they are not put at risk of losing their jobs,privileges or promotion prospects.
Combined with the new right to claim for losses in courtarising from breaches of this duty, universities will need to bemuch more careful when dismissing or disciplining academics. Theywill also need to be careful when recruiting for academic posts, asthere will be an addition new duty on universities to ensurethat their application was not adversely affected by any exerciseof their academic freedom.
Interestingly, the Government has chosen a rather narrowdefinition of academic freedom. It only covers question and testingreceived wisdom, and putting forward new ideas and controversial orunpopular opinions which are: (1) within the law; and (2) withinthe academic's field of expertise. It does not include othertraditional aspects of academic freedom, such as discussing how theinstitution is governed or how it affiliates itself (e.g.affiliation with Stonewall is controversial among some academics).Limb (2) is also new and seems to derive (imprecisely) frominternational case law. This seems to be the most controversialaspect of the definition and may be refined or removed during thelegislative process.
2) The A2 duty concerns the code of practicewhich a university must publish with a view to facilitating the A1duty. This will be familiar to universities as they are alreadyrequired to produce such a code as part of the s43 duty.However, there have been additions so universities willneed to review and update their policies immediately upon the newlaw coming into effect. In particular, the policies must now alsoset out the institution's values relating to freedom of speechand an explanation of how those values uphold freedom ofspeech.
Further, the university must also at least once ayear, bring the A1 duty and its code of practice to theattention of all students.
3) The A3 duty is entirely new. It is an active duty topromote the importance of freedom of speech and academicfreedom. At present, there are no further details as towhat is required here, but the Government have previously mentioneda statutory code of conduct which may set out details. This maycome later and/or be left to the OfS and the new Director toconsulate upon and draft.
Unfortunately, a lack of guidance here will leave universitiesin some doubt as to what they must do, particularly if acontroversy arises. For example, if one of their academics facesprotests or an open letter, will they face censure or sanctionsfrom the OfS if they do not release a statement in support ofacademic freedom? If they don't, it seems likely they will befacing a complaint under the new scheme (more on that below) and itwill be up to the OfS and Director to scrutinise their conduct orinaction.
The first two of the above duties also apply to student unionsin a similar form. Both may now be facing legal action forbreach of the A1 (or equivalent) duty. This is new. Underthe old regime, the only real remedy was a judicial review againsta university's decision in a s43 context. This is a complex andexpensive process for individuals who ultimately would have verylittle prospect of achieving any compensation whatsoever.That has now changed. Not only will universities be facingthe prospect of paying out compensation, they will potentially alsobe under threat of significant costs risks if theylose.
There are going to be some important and significant changes tothe underlying regulatory framework which govern universities. Hereis a breakdown of the three most important changes:
All sanctions generally available to the OfS, includingfines, will also apply here. The OfS can impose fines of up to500,000 or two per cent of 'qualifying income',whichever is higher.
As is clear from even that brief summary, the Bill will addfurther complexity to university governance and will introducesignificant new compliance requirements.
In particular, when disciplining and dismissing academics,universities will need to take much greater care and balance thenew legal protections alongside, and perhaps against, existing lawsuch as the Equality Act 2010. The interaction of these new ruleswith the specific situation of some academics (appointed underUniversity statutes and not always employees) will needparticularly careful consideration.
It also seems likely that organisations such as the Free SpeechUnion will use the new law to increase pressure on universities bysupporting their student and academic members in threatening andpursuing claims where academic freedom and free speech issues areconcerned.
Universities will need to consider carefully what the new lawrequires of them, and how best to mitigate the new regulatory andlitigation risks to which they will likely be exposed.
The content of this article is intended to provide a generalguide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be soughtabout your specific circumstances.
The rest is here:
The New Campus Free Speech Bill What Universities Need To Know And Need To Do - Consumer Protection - UK - Mondaq News Alerts
Posted in Freedom of Speech
Comments Off on The New Campus Free Speech Bill What Universities Need To Know And Need To Do – Consumer Protection – UK – Mondaq News Alerts