Category Archives: Liberal

Tucker Spars With Liberal Strategist Behind #HuntRepublicanCongressmen NewsBusters (press release) (blog) Tucker Carlson, Fox News' heir to Bill O'Reilly's slot in their primetime cable lineup, often fills the hour with bewildered glances, engaging dialogue, and outright mockery of his typically-deserving opponents who he brings on to the program. Monday ... and more »

See more here:

Tucker Spars With Liberal Strategist Behind #HuntRepublicanCongressmen - NewsBusters (press release) (blog)

Dave Rubin, the gay, liberal host of The Rubin Report, has become the Lefts latest victim of smearing-by-association, his character having been contorted in Josh Harkinsons recent Mother Jones article Cashing in on the Rise of the Alt-Right. After describing the funding models of a number of alt-right and neo-Nazi websites and podcasts, Harkinsons piece notes that Rubin has interviewed such personalities as Milo Yiannopoulos and Mike Cernovich, the self-described new right blogger who has argued that date rape does not exist and regularly peddles conspiracy theories. Originally, it also characterized Rubin as farright.

While the term farright probably does not merit the legal label of libel, its use in this context was at best lacking in intellectual honesty, and at worst a shoddy, malicious attempt to slime Rubin. Rubin is married to a man and favors marijuana legalization, pro-choice policies, and single-payer health care. He has publicly challenged the regressive Lefts increasingly illiberal attitude toward speech it finds objectionable, but that doesnt mean he can be characterized as further to the right than Breitbart in good faith. And Harkinson seems to know as much. After Rubin called the piece libelous and demanded a retraction on Twitter, the author backpedaled, claiming that Rubin merely host[s] softball interviews with lots of people who are to the right of Breitbart. Meanwhile, Mother Jones changed the sentence in question to remove the term farright, added Rubins response in parentheses, and highlighted both changes in a vague editorial note at the bottom of the page.

In digital journalism, such errors and retractions are inevitable. But the conflation of Rubin with literal white supremacists and separatists and the subsequent half-hearted retraction were no accident. Evidently, Mother Jones intended to equate Rubin who interviews and challenges personalities ranging from Margaret Cho and Hilary Rosen to Yiannopoulos and Paul Joseph Watson with the Internets most prominent alt-right extremists.

This is obviously quite problematic. Reasonable people can, of course, disagree about the propriety of giving a platform to those with views that engender wide, bipartisan disgust. But Harkinson isnt interested in having such a good-faith debate; his aim is to silence and de-legitimize those who attempt to air and understand extremist views. Indeed, when confronted with criticism from the likes of Ben Shapiro and Joe Rogan, he doubled down on his attack, retweeting clips of Rubin (rightly) arguing that non-mainstream voices are worth engaging with in part due to the failures of the media but also because entities with audiences as wide and engaged as, say, InfowarsAlex Jones, should be unpacked and understood.

Although this example is particularly egregious, it is by no means unique. The mass uproar over Megyn Kellys recent interview with Jones has, to a lesser extent, been informed by the same hostility toward interviews with controversial guests. Lost in the hubbub was that,given Kellys professional and prosecutorial credentials, her interview with Jones who has a massive audience and the ear of the president carried the potential to be an act of journalistic service.

Jack Shafer of Politico smartly lambasted the censorious power of the hecklers veto that was wielded against Kelly and threatens edgy, truth-telling journalism of the uncomfortable variety that explores how someone such as Jones could attract millions of followers. Under the veil of a moral panic, Kelly and Rubin have been stigmatized for the crime of heterodoxy, made to serve as a public warning to anyone else who threatens to deviate from a leftist agenda.

One wonders where this game ends. Back when the term alt-right was exclusively reserved for white supremacists with no regard for conservatism as it has traditionally been understood, it maintained a sort of incriminating implication. But every time the Left attempts to tar non-leftists with the same brush, it dilutes the label, just as it has done with every other pejorative that came before. The difference now, thankfully, is that the Internet gives victims such as Rubin a chance to fight back.

READ MORE: You Gotta Lie: The Tangled Progressive Web The Sickening Attack on Otto WarmbierIs Symbolic of the Lefts Hate Problem To Both Sides in Americas Dialogue War: Disarm

Tiana Lowe is an editorial intern at National Review.

See the rest here:

Mother Jones Smears Liberal Talk-Show Host Dave Rubin for Daring to Interview 'Alt-Right' Figures - National Review

More than a dozen left-leaning organizing groups are joining forces to lead a national day of action next month against the Republican plan to repeal parts of the Affordable Care Act.

The events are set for July 29, what is scheduled to be the first day of the congressional summer recess, and organizers are hoping the Our Lives on the Line protests including a flagship rally in Washington will set the tone for several weeks of aggressive activism to persuade key lawmakers to back off their repeal efforts.

Health care is priority No. 1 right now, said Nicole Gill, executive director of Tax March, which organized more than 100 rallies across the country on April 15. She said the health-care push represents the first instance where the leaders of recent progressive-oriented marches have joined forces

Organizers of the Jan. 21 Womens March and the April 22 March for Science are involved, along with Indivisible, the group that has aimed to focus grass-roots progressives on influencing lawmakers; Organizing for Action, the activist group associated with former president Barack Obama; Our Revolution, born out of the presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.); as well as MoveOn.org, Planned Parenthood, the Center for American Progress Action Fund and others.

We all have represented different issues or causes, and I think it speaks to the importance of health care in our communities across the country of why this is the thing thats going to pull us together, Gill said.

There is one big catch for progressives: If President Trump and Republican congressional leaders have their way, the GOP health-care bill will be law by the time July 29 rolls around and some lawmakers are suggesting Republicans stay in Washington until a bill is passed.

[While House passes GOP health-care bill, Senate prepares to do its own thing]

The House passed the American Health Care Act in May, and the Senate is now debating revisions to the bill, which the Congressional Budget Office estimated could lead to coverage for 23 million fewer Americans. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has announced his intention to have the Senate vote on the legislation by months end, though major internal divisions in the GOP persist, and that timeline is in doubt.

[Senate hard-liners outline health-care demands with Medicaid in the crosshairs]

Gill acknowledged that congressional Republicans are hoping to pass a bill before the summer recess even starts and that the situations not looking great. But she said whether that happens, there will be reason for progressives to rally.

I really dont know that we can predict either way how this is going to turn out before recess, she said. Either way, what weve seen is since 2008, basically, theres been a Republican-led assault on the idea of health care in this country. And whatever happens with this bill, thats a problem.

The summer recess, set to run from July 29 through Sept. 5, will be an important opportunity for opponents of President Trump and GOP policies what has come to be known colloquially as the resistance to render their dissatisfaction in person to Republican lawmakers at town halls, office hours and other in-district events.

The 2009 summer recess was a turning point in the Democratic push to pass the Affordable Care Act. Lawmakers across the country were accosted by activists affiliated with the nascent tea party movement, and while Democrats were able to push the ACA through less than a year later, the protests firmed up GOP opposition to the bill and set the stage for massive Democratic losses in the 2010 midterm elections.

To some extent, the tea party did kind of write a playbook on how to engage in grass-roots activism, Gill said. What I think weve done is much different. It is much more diverse and diffuse and grass-roots driven than anything theyve ever done, and I think that represents our movement that we are not easily characterized into one category or one type of person. The Resistance, so to speak, is resisting on a number of fronts and in a number of different ways, and that to me is a pretty big difference from what the tea party did.

People got engaged right away, and especially starting with the Womens March, she added. That was definitely not a town hall. That was not protesting for media coverage. That was people who were frustrated and upset, and they took to the streets, and that has continued. I think the energy is real, and its not going anywhere.

View original post here:

Liberal groups are teaming up to pressure GOP lawmakers on health care over summer recess - Washington Post

Getting nowhere with her father, liberal advocacy groups have been looking for an ally in Ivanka Trump. They haven't had much luck.

In recent weeks, activists have been appealing to the younger Trump for help on climate change, international labor conditions and immigration. But the first daughter, an influential adviser to President Donald Trump in her own right, largely has sought to stay out of the fray. Still the efforts underscore the politically charged position she occupies as she seeks to advance a positive agenda while avoiding weighing in publicly on her father's more controversial policies.

The most high-profile campaign directed at the president's daughter has come from New York-based China Labor Watch, which has been investigating working conditions at factories in China that have made Ivanka Trump products. The group on Thursday renewed a call for her to speak out about the detention of activists involved in the investigation and on their findings about labor conditions. They said they have sent a second letter to her at the White House to raise concerns.

Ivanka Trump's brand has sought to distance itself from the manufacturer under scrutiny, saying the company last made its products three months ago.

Trump, who spent the past week promoting the administration's efforts on job training, did not respond to requests for comment.

With her focus on issues that typically draw liberal or bipartisan support, Ivanka Trump has left many with an impression that she does not share some of her father's policies. But she avoided weighing in publicly on her father's travel ban, border wall, proposed budget cuts or the Paris agreement, leading liberal critics to question her influence.

Now some groups are trying to spur her to act.

Before the president announced he would exit the Paris climate accord, the Natural Resources Defense Council started an online petition asking people to email and call Ivanka Trump to push her father to stay in the deal. The call for action implored people to "raise a massive outcry" and ask her to "do everything in her power to persuade the president to keep our promise."

"As we began hearing he was leaning in the direction of pulling out, we threw a Hail Mary," said Ben Smith, the group's digital advocacy director, adding that they sought to "appeal to what seems to be a well-reported story that she's sympathetic."

Smith said 50,000 people signed the petition, "which is on the higher end of the performance scale for us."

Last week, Amnesty International launched a campaign that seeks to educate Ivanka Trump on their efforts to shut down a residential center in Pennsylvania that houses detained immigrant parents and children. The advocates say the facility, which has a contract with the Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, is a detention center.

"She says she cares about women and kids and child care. She says she wants to use this power she now has. We're following up on that," said Naureen Shah, senior director of campaigns for the U.S. section of Amnesty International.

Shah added: "It's not a shaming campaign. She says she wants to do it."

"Democrats do not have many lines into the White House, they don't have a lot of different ways to influence the president," said Democratic strategist Lis Smith. "His daughter remains one of the few ways they are able to get to him."

In interviews, Ivanka Trump has stressed that this is her father's administration and has said she airs her views with her father privately. During a recent interview on "Fox and Friends," she expressed surprise about the "level of viciousness" that the administration had encountered in Washington, a statement that some found curious given her father's aggressive rhetoric.

Saying her father's administration wants to do "big things," she added: "I was not expecting the intensity of this experience, but this isn't supposed to be easy."

She moved her family to Washington before her father's inauguration. She serves as an unpaid aide to the president and stepped away from executive roles running her brand and at the Trump Organization, though she retains ownership of the brand. She has been more visible lately, working on a plan for paid family leave that is included in the president's budget, taking part in the president's first foreign trip and appearing with her father to talk about job training.

Republican consultant Alex Conant, who worked on Sen. Marco Rubio's presidential bid, said the advocacy campaigns were unlikely to make a great impact on the first daughter. "As long as she has a thick skin, those campaigns will be unsuccessful and she'll remain effective," he said.

See the article here:

Liberal groups focus on Ivanka Trump - ABC News

Without doubt, this was a tough election, and I wasnt even in a lead campaigning role, let alone running. (I thought about the latter, and was approved; but I then campaigned in my home constituency of Sheffield Hallam.)

Gutted about our loss of Nick Clegg, I took to the blogs and comments on Liberal Democrat Voice over the past week to see how our national results were perceived across the party. Despite some celebration, they also demonstrate that there is much discontent, with rallying cries for radical centrism to so long, liberals alike. Evidently, tough Liberal love is in order.

It would make sense for us to take stock of the core challenges as the leadership bids begin. The new leadership and conference will determine the direction of the party: are we to continue the strategy of placing the Lib Dems on an axis of value politics, or return to decisions about left, right or centre? But besides direction, there are two other key themes which I think need urgent debate, too.

There is anger among many at the way Tim was allegedly pressured to resign, from those unelected Lords, no less, who represent the very party thats in favour of Lords reform.

But more fundamentally, as Liberal Democrats we need to redefine what we mean by our commitment to democracy, both internally and externally. For example, we were against a second independence referendum in Scotland, which was absolutely the right call, and helped get us three additional MPs. But we were in favour of a second referendum on Brexit, without much evidence that the mood had changed, and it turned out to be not that appealing to the electorate.

Most political parties and ideologies are somehow contradictory: its what should make them attractive to the mainstream. But framing our Brexit approach as about democracy above all else opened us up to another easy line of attack, aside from incoherence. When Andrew Neil in an otherwise bizarrely angry interview called us populists who arent popular (or something to that effect), he had a point. The 2011 referendum on the Alternative Vote was a loss. So as a party, we need to debate what being a democrat means for us, for our internal governance, and for the country.

There is also frustration that Tims resignation (wrongly) suggests were precisely not the party for freedom of thought.

The issue here seems to be that parts of the party (and much of the way weve spoken of our recent electoral successes) promotes what Mark Lilla has called identity liberalism. Hes claimed controversially that it lost Hilary Clinton the American presidency, and that Democrats there should instead move towards a post-identity liberalism.

We are not only in an era of Trump; in Britain we have our second female Prime Minister who is, for the second time, Conservative. I think we need to ask whether we are presenting ourselves and our fight for personal freedoms and fairness often through personal representation of, or attachment to, minority and currently or historically marginalised identities in a way that is actually resonating with the British electorate at large.

I had my misgivings about Tims leadership, but as a gay man I would far rather a leader who stood up for rights and private conscience over one who claimed to know, embody or worse approve of! some generalised gay identity. Could we achieve more through an issues-based, over identity-focussed approach to our political position? Its another question that I feel needs to be put to conference this year.

* Sean Williams is a Lib Dem member in the Sheffield Hallam constituency

Continue reading here:

Tough Liberal love - Liberal Democrat Voice

Labour, Liberal Democrat and SNP MPs are joining forces to try to bring down Theresa May's Government by passing amendments in Wednesday'sQueens Speech.

The Opposition parties only need seven MPs to change sides to overturn the Government's 13-strong working majority which could trigger a no confidence motion in Parliament.

The parties are looking at defeating the Government on amendments covering legal rights for tenants to demand protection from the risk of fire, easier access to the single market, a Brexit commission, hundreds of millions of pounds more for the NHS and an open Irish border after Brexit.

The amendments will be published in the next 24 hours and come as leftwing activists prepare to march on Parliament in a Day of Rage protest against austerity tomorrow.

If any of the amendments are voted through it could signal the end of the Government. Historically if the Queens...

See the original post here:

Exclusive: Labour, Liberal Democrats and SNP MPs plot to bring down the Government over Queen's Speech - Telegraph.co.uk

OTTAWA -- Aerospace giant Boeing appears to have gotten the cold shoulder from the Trudeau government in Paris.

Three cabinet ministers are in the French capital this week to promote Canada's aerospace sector and meet with various companies at the prestigious Paris Air Show.

Those meetings include discussions with fighter jet makers such as Lockheed Martin, which is hoping its F-35 stealth fighter will replace Canada's aging CF-18s.

But Transport Minister Marc Garneau and Industry Minister Navdeep Bains say there are no plans to meet with Boeing, despite previous talks to buy 18 interim Super Hornet fighter jets from the company.

It's the latest Liberal government snub of Boeing following the U.S. firm's recent trade complaint against Canadian rival Bombardier.

Ministers say the plan to buy Super Hornets from Boeing has been put on hold, as the government considers all options for buying interim jets.

Original post:

Liberal ministers snub Boeing, meet Lockheed Martin at Paris Air Show - BNN

Experts on extremism are increasingly shifting their focus from right-wing extremism to what they see as a rise of violence on the left, according to a new report.

"The past few months have seen enough of a rise in politically motivated violence from the far left that monitors of right-wing extremism have begun shifting their focus, and sounding the alarm," a report on Vice.com said.

Liberal violence has seen an uptick since President Trump was elected.

New Poll Shows Trump Approval at 50 Percent

Warren: 'Donald, You Ain't Seen Nasty Yet'

Bill Cosby's Spox: Tell Gloria Allred to 'Go Back to Law School'

The subject of left-wing violence reared its head last week after a Bernie Sanders supporter opened fire on congressional Republicans playing baseball last Wednesday, injuring five including House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.).

At UC Berkeley earlier this year, protesters started fires, attacked crowds of people, and smashed property.

Left-wing extremism is nothing new, the Vice.com report admitted, citing the Black Panthers and Weather Underground.

What were seeing is the democratization of extremism and the tactics of radicalism," said Brian Levin, former New York City police officer anddirector of California State University's Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism. Levin added that his warnings about the rising tensions have been dismissed in the past.

'Encouraging Violence Against Republicans': New Yorkers Rip Caesar Play

'Crooked Hill' Street Sign Altered With 3 Additional Letters...

NFL's Kaepernick Compares Cops to Fugitive Slave Patrols

Here is the original post:

Even Liberals Are Worried About Liberal Extremism - Fox News Insider

OTTAWAThe federal government introduced legislation Monday to restrict the use of solitary confinement inside federal prisons and to better protect prisoners with mental illness or at risk of self-harm or suicide.

Once passed, the bill would for the first time impose a so-called legislative framework establishing a time limit for what prison officials call administrative segregation.

The bill part of the Liberal governments broader efforts at criminal justice reform, which include reducing the number of Indigenous Canadians behind bars was introduced with just a week left in the spring parliamentary calendar, meaning its unlikely to come up for debate before the fall.

It also comes after several high-profile solitary confinement cases, including the 2007 death of Ashley Smith of Moncton, N.B., an emotionally disturbed 19-year-old who died in custody after tying a strip of cloth around her neck.

Read more:

A coroners inquest into Smiths death ended in 2012 with 104 recommendations, including a call to end to indefinite solitary confinement and the use of segregation beyond 15 days for female inmates with mental-health issues.

Shortly after taking office in 2015, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau ordered Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould to take second look at the Smith inquests recommendations as part of her mandate to implement criminal justice reforms.

In her mandate letter, Trudeau asked Wilson-Raybould to work on implementation of recommendations from the inquest into the death of Ashley Smith regarding the restriction of the use of solitary confinement and the treatment of those with mental illness.

Administrative segregation is used when there is no reasonable alternative to maintain the safety and security of the institution, staff and inmates. It differs from disciplinary segregation, which is applied to inmates who are found guilty of a serious offence in custody.

It was an over-utilized tool, said Liberal MP Mark Holland, the parliamentary secretary to Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale.

All of us were deeply saddened and heartbroken by some of the cases we heard, be it Ashley Smith or others.

The Correctional Service of Canada is also amending its policy to outlaw the practice in cases involving serious mental disorders or prisoners who are certified, those who are engaged in self-injury and those at risk of suicide.

Canadians expect our government to be smart on crime, to protect society and create safer communities, said Holland. Human custody and evidence-based rehabilitation and re-integration are at the core of strong new measures in criminal justice reform.

Under the current law, the Correctional Service of Canada is required to release prisoners from administrative segregation at the earliest possible time. The new law would establish an initial time limit of 21 days, and then 15 days once the legislation has been the law of the land for 18 months.

The legislation also proposes amending the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and the Abolition of Early Parole Act to make them compliant with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

That includes reinstating an oral hearing after a suspension, termination or revocation of parole.

The legislation would also allow offenders convicted of an offence before March 28, 2011, and who meet the criteria for accelerated parole, to once again be eligible for an accelerated parole review.

In 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada struck down retroactive changes to parole eligibility that were enacted by the previous Conservative government.

The unanimous ruling found that the Abolition of Early Parole Act was in clear breach of the Charter because it imposed new punishment on people who had already been tried and sentenced.

Marco Mendicino, Rayboulds parliamentary secretary, said the new legislation would also reinstate the right for an offender to get an oral hearing after their parole or statutory release is revoked.

Mendicino said the previous Conservative government revoked that right in 2012, leaving the discretion of whether to hold a hearing to a parole board member.

Original post:

Liberal legislation set to limit how long inmates can be kept in solitary confinement - Toronto Star

The New York Times was criticized over the weekend after running a story where the paper seemingly tried to rewrite the motives of James Hodgkinson, the lone gunman who is responsible for the ambush shooting on congressional Republicans last week.

While the motive behind the attack will likely never be known, most believe hyper-partisan politics are to blame. After all, Hodgkinson only attacked Republicans and House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) continues to fight for his life in the hospital after being gravely injured from a bullet fired by Hodgkinson.

Indeed, when authorities confirmed last Wednesday that Hodgkinson was the shooter, the 66-year-olds social media postings began to be heavily scrutinized because they painted a clear picture: Hodgkinson was a stalwart supporter of socialist politics and had a deep hatred for President Donald Trump and Republicans.

Despite the wealth of evidence that supports the motive being partisan hatred, the Times on Saturday attempted to paint a much different picture: that Hodgkinson attacked the congressmen because he was an unstable man and it had nothing to do with politics.

The storys headline emphasizes that idea: Before the Gunfire in Virginia, a Volatile Home Life in Illinois.

The story said:

No one can truly know what motivates a man to drive halfway across the country, live out of his car as Mr. Hodgkinson apparently did and attempt a mass killing of members of Congress. In the days since the shooting, much has been made of Mr. Hodgkinsons strong political views he was an ardent supporter of Senator Bernie Sanderss bid for the 2016 presidential nomination, and he railed against President Trump and Republicans in Washington on his Facebook page and in letters to the editor of the local newspaper.

But another aspect of his personality may have also presaged the shooting: his troubled home life.

The story goes on to say that Hodgkinson likely suffered from some sort of mental illness and his political beliefs had little to do with his desire to target only congressional Republicans, even quoting a local Democratic staffer who categorically denied that Hodgkinson ever volunteered for them.

The paper then went on to describe in detail Hodgkinsons life as a foster parent and detailed the much darker moments of his life like one instance of domestic abuse and the decision of one foster child to commit suicide.

And while it is helpful for investigators to know Hodgkinsons background in order to develop a better understanding of who the shooter was, the Times story seemingly ignores what most others dont, including one of Hodgkinsons Illinois neighbors, who told the paper that while life moved on for other people following the 2016 election, the election never ended for Hodgkinson.

People voiced their criticisms of the paper on Twitter:

One person even tweeted to one of the storys authors that the Times is playing to its base with the story:

The author then said the story was just journalism, before being accused of trying to cover up the shooters actual motive:

But, of course, the Times doesnt always try to whitewash the ideological beliefs of people who commit atrocities.

Last month, when a racist man killed two people on a Portland commuter train, the Times emphasized the fact that the perpetrator was racist and had anti-Muslim views.

One story read: Three Men Stood Up to Anti-Muslim Attack. Two Paid With Their Lives.

Another was headlined: Oregon Man Accused of Deadly Anti-Muslim Tirade Continues Rant in Court.

And even another: Two Killed in Portland While Trying to Stop Anti-Muslim Rant, Police Say.

See original here:

NYTimes downplays role of liberal politics in baseball shooter's motive but emphasizes 'anti-Muslim' Portland stabber - TheBlaze.com