Title :
link :
WWW.MOEISSUESOFTHEDAY.
BLOGSPOT.COM
Monday, August 6, 2018
All Gave Some~Some Gave All
*****
Twitter is run by Democrat donors and activists --- chutzpah specialists
By Paul Sperry
Records show Twitter has sought to influence Congress on behalf of Democratic causes. Hmmm...
PAUL SPERRY
After Twitter was caught last month “shadow-banning” Republicans, while giving Democrats unrestricted voice, the social-media giant insisted it has no political agenda. But records of its political contributions show board members, top executives and major shareholders have all given overwhelmingly to Democrats, including Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, while snubbing Republicans and Donald Trump.
After Twitter was caught last month “shadow-banning” Republicans, while giving Democrats unrestricted voice, the social-media giant insisted it has no political agenda. But records of its political contributions show board members, top executives and major shareholders have all given overwhelmingly to Democrats, including Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, while snubbing Republicans and Donald Trump.
Federal records reveal 80 percent of Twitter’s corporate PAC contributions in the 2018 election cycle have gone to Democratic candidates, none of whom are moderates. Liberal Democrats also got top dollar in the 2016 race.
The lobbying records I reviewed, moreover, show Twitter has sought to influence Congress and federal agencies on behalf of Democratic causes and against President Trump’s policies.
Vice News last month broke the story that Twitter limited the visibility of Republican Party Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel and several Republicans leading Hill investigations into the Obama administration’s efforts to spy on the Trump campaign, including Reps. Devin Nunes (Calif.), Matt Gaetz (Fla.), Jim Jordan (Ohio), Mark Meadows (NC) and John Ratcliffe (Texas).
San Francisco-based Twitter blamed it on a search-engine filter deployed against “bad” actors, such as racists, trolls and users inciting violence, which it maintains accidentally ensnared Republicans, while curiously failing to affect any Democrats.
“We enforce our rules without political bias,” Twitter Chief Legal Officer Vijaya Gadde said in a statement.
But Republicans aren’t buying it. They blame the unequal treatment on political bias, and they argue the timing is suspicious. They say Republican voices are being suppressed on the 355 million-user platform just months before the highly contentious November congressional elections.
They certainly have a point about bias. Senior Twitter executives heavily favor Democrats over Republicans in their political giving.
Federal Election Commission records show that Gadde, for starters, has given exclusively to Democratic candidates, including the maximum donations allowed to both Clinton’s and Obama’s campaigns. In 2016, she gave $2,700 to Democratic candidate Kamala Harris of California, who won her US Senate bid.
Twitter CEO and co-founder Jack Dorsey also donates only to Democrats. And in 2017, he and executive chairman Omid Kordestani together donated $530,000 to the ACLU to fight Trump’s executive order imposing a temporary travel ban on immigrants from high-risk Muslim countries, which Dorsey called “upsetting” but which the Supreme Court recently ruled constitutional. All told, Twitter gave $1.6 million to the anti-Trump ban effort.
Kordestani is a big Democrat donor, contributing the maximums to Clinton and Obama, as well as to former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. In 2011, moreover, the Tehran-born exec gave $35,800 to the Obama Victory Fund and another $30,800 to the Democratic National Committee.
Also snubbing Republicans is Twitter Chief Financial Officer Ned Segal, who has given exclusively to Democrats, including several thousands of dollars to Obama and former presidential candidate John Kerry. Segal has also contributed to DNC coffers.
Then there’s former Twitter CEO, current board director and major stakeholder Evan Williams. He’s shelled out more than $600,000 for the Democratic Party and Democrats running for federal office, FEC records show. Meantime, he has stiffed Republicans and the GOP.
What’s more, Evans in the past two presidential races pumped an additional $750,000 into Priorities USA Action — the largest Democratic Party super PAC — which contributes to leftist groups to help them turn out the vote for Democrats. Priorities USA is heavily funded by billionaire Trump-hater George Soros.
As one of Twitter’s largest investors, Williams has a lot of clout on the board. SEC records show that among Twitter officers and directors, Williams holds the largest stake — almost 4 percent — in the publicly traded company.
After the 2016 race, Evans said he was “sorry” Twitter may have helped Trump get elected and regretted that the free speech platform Twitter facilitated rewarded such “extremes.” No doubt adding to his remorse was the $323,000 he spent on the Hillary Victory Fund.
Last month, Twitter purged more than 380,000 of Trump’s followers, claiming they were fake accounts, and it’s now assisting special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Trump for alleged obstruction of justice based in part on his tweets.
Twitter did not respond to questions about its one-sided pattern of political donations.
While the company says it’s not engaged in political censorship, it’s clearly run by Democratic donors and activists. And though it says its algorithms for policing “healthy conversations” aren’t politically motivated, it’s clear that their effect is the censorship of Republicans and conservatives. And the Silicon Valley giant’s software engineers earlier this year admitted on hidden camera to anti-Trump, anti-GOP bias involving Twitters’s shadow-banning policies, according to Project Veritas.
This worries Republicans who see Twitter’s growing political clout and ability to sway elections ahead of the high-stakes congressional midterms.
GOP incumbents up for reelection say Twitter’s giving unfair advantage to Democrats by suppressing their voices. Last week, Gaetz reportedly filed an FEC complaint against Twitter, alleging it’s illegally making an unreported “corporate donation” to his Democratic opponents by making him less visible to voters. He called on the FEC to fine the company.
Some see a wider conspiracy by liberal-controlled Silicon Valley to rig elections for Democrats.
“Remember what Google did to the Republicans in California a week before our primary. They said our philosophy was Nazism. Remember what Twitter continues to do to conservatives, a shadowban,” House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy said. “This has got to stop especially before we go into this campaign.”
Paul Sperry is a former Hoover Institution media fellow.
The lobbying records I reviewed, moreover, show Twitter has sought to influence Congress and federal agencies on behalf of Democratic causes and against President Trump’s policies.
Vice News last month broke the story that Twitter limited the visibility of Republican Party Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel and several Republicans leading Hill investigations into the Obama administration’s efforts to spy on the Trump campaign, including Reps. Devin Nunes (Calif.), Matt Gaetz (Fla.), Jim Jordan (Ohio), Mark Meadows (NC) and John Ratcliffe (Texas).
San Francisco-based Twitter blamed it on a search-engine filter deployed against “bad” actors, such as racists, trolls and users inciting violence, which it maintains accidentally ensnared Republicans, while curiously failing to affect any Democrats.
“We enforce our rules without political bias,” Twitter Chief Legal Officer Vijaya Gadde said in a statement.
But Republicans aren’t buying it. They blame the unequal treatment on political bias, and they argue the timing is suspicious. They say Republican voices are being suppressed on the 355 million-user platform just months before the highly contentious November congressional elections.
They certainly have a point about bias. Senior Twitter executives heavily favor Democrats over Republicans in their political giving.
Federal Election Commission records show that Gadde, for starters, has given exclusively to Democratic candidates, including the maximum donations allowed to both Clinton’s and Obama’s campaigns. In 2016, she gave $2,700 to Democratic candidate Kamala Harris of California, who won her US Senate bid.
Twitter CEO and co-founder Jack Dorsey also donates only to Democrats. And in 2017, he and executive chairman Omid Kordestani together donated $530,000 to the ACLU to fight Trump’s executive order imposing a temporary travel ban on immigrants from high-risk Muslim countries, which Dorsey called “upsetting” but which the Supreme Court recently ruled constitutional. All told, Twitter gave $1.6 million to the anti-Trump ban effort.
Kordestani is a big Democrat donor, contributing the maximums to Clinton and Obama, as well as to former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. In 2011, moreover, the Tehran-born exec gave $35,800 to the Obama Victory Fund and another $30,800 to the Democratic National Committee.
Also snubbing Republicans is Twitter Chief Financial Officer Ned Segal, who has given exclusively to Democrats, including several thousands of dollars to Obama and former presidential candidate John Kerry. Segal has also contributed to DNC coffers.
Then there’s former Twitter CEO, current board director and major stakeholder Evan Williams. He’s shelled out more than $600,000 for the Democratic Party and Democrats running for federal office, FEC records show. Meantime, he has stiffed Republicans and the GOP.
What’s more, Evans in the past two presidential races pumped an additional $750,000 into Priorities USA Action — the largest Democratic Party super PAC — which contributes to leftist groups to help them turn out the vote for Democrats. Priorities USA is heavily funded by billionaire Trump-hater George Soros.
As one of Twitter’s largest investors, Williams has a lot of clout on the board. SEC records show that among Twitter officers and directors, Williams holds the largest stake — almost 4 percent — in the publicly traded company.
After the 2016 race, Evans said he was “sorry” Twitter may have helped Trump get elected and regretted that the free speech platform Twitter facilitated rewarded such “extremes.” No doubt adding to his remorse was the $323,000 he spent on the Hillary Victory Fund.
Last month, Twitter purged more than 380,000 of Trump’s followers, claiming they were fake accounts, and it’s now assisting special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Trump for alleged obstruction of justice based in part on his tweets.
Twitter did not respond to questions about its one-sided pattern of political donations.
While the company says it’s not engaged in political censorship, it’s clearly run by Democratic donors and activists. And though it says its algorithms for policing “healthy conversations” aren’t politically motivated, it’s clear that their effect is the censorship of Republicans and conservatives. And the Silicon Valley giant’s software engineers earlier this year admitted on hidden camera to anti-Trump, anti-GOP bias involving Twitters’s shadow-banning policies, according to Project Veritas.
This worries Republicans who see Twitter’s growing political clout and ability to sway elections ahead of the high-stakes congressional midterms.
GOP incumbents up for reelection say Twitter’s giving unfair advantage to Democrats by suppressing their voices. Last week, Gaetz reportedly filed an FEC complaint against Twitter, alleging it’s illegally making an unreported “corporate donation” to his Democratic opponents by making him less visible to voters. He called on the FEC to fine the company.
Some see a wider conspiracy by liberal-controlled Silicon Valley to rig elections for Democrats.
“Remember what Google did to the Republicans in California a week before our primary. They said our philosophy was Nazism. Remember what Twitter continues to do to conservatives, a shadowban,” House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy said. “This has got to stop especially before we go into this campaign.”
Paul Sperry is a former Hoover Institution media fellow.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein responds to report about staffer being a Chinese spy — by attacking Trump
Chris Enloe WEEKEND EDITOR
Sen. Dianne Feinstein responds to news that her longtime personal driver was a Chinese spy. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) on Saturday responded to the bizarre report from last week about her former personal driver who turned out to be a Chinese spy.
As TheBlaze previously reported, the FBI informed Feinstein 5 years ago that her driver was being investigated for potential espionage. The development left the longtime California senator “mortified.”
Fortunately, Feinstein’s office said no staffers in her California offices hold security clearances, so despite Feinstein’s high-ranking position on the Senate Intelligence Committee, federal investigators do not believe the driver was able to relay sensitive information to his connections.
That staffer worked for Feinstein for 20 years, according to reports. It was unclear how long he had been providing information to the Chinese government. The staffer was never charged with a crime, but was immediately fired from his job with Feinstein’s office.
What did Feinstein say?
She publicly responded to the news after President Donald Trump mentioned the story in a tweet. Trump questioned whether Feinstein would investigate herself since she is partially leading the congressional investigation into Russia “collusion.”
In response, Feinstein instructed the president to stop “attacking” the FBI, ignoring advice from his national security team, and begin appreciating the work American law enforcement does.
Is that it?
Despite Feinstein’s response, Trump again mentioned the story during a campaign rally in Ohio on Saturday. According to USA Today, Trump’s comments came while discussing the trade war with China.
“Speaking of China, it just came out that the Democratic leader and the leader of the Russian investigation, Dianne Feinstein, had a Chinese spy as her driver for 20 years!” Trump said. “And she’s leading the Russian investigation if that’s what you call it. How about she’s leading the Russia witch hunt!”
THE LIBERTY DAILY
Conservative Candace Owens Suspended from Fascist Twitter for Tweeting SAME THING as Racist New York Times Editor Who Wasn’t
Report: Abortion Accounts for 61% of Black Deaths in America
Mario TMario TamaInduced abortion is the leading cause of death in the United States and accounts for a disturbing 61 percent of deaths of African Americans, according to researchers from the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
A report Thursday analyzed research using data from the latest year for which all the pertinent information is available (2009) and found that induced abortion was responsible for 1.152 million deaths, making it the number one cause of death in the U.S. at nearly twice the number of deaths from heart disease (599,413) and cancer (567,628).
While abortion accounted for nearly a third of all U.S. deaths in 2009 (32.1 percent), more troubling still, it made up 61.1 percent of African American deaths, according to the study published in the Open Journal of Preventive Medicine (June 2016).
The ongoing disparity of black deaths through abortion has led one leading black pastor to recently decry the “black genocide” taking place in the United States at the hands of the abortion industry.
In his July essay, the Rev. Clenard Childress, Jr. noted that 52 percent of all African American pregnancies end in abortion and that whereas abortion is the most common operation performed on women, it is also “the least regulated medical procedure” and is often “completely ignored by health regulation enforcement.”
Statistics reveal that nearly 1,800 unborn black babies are aborted every day, proportionately more than any other race, Rev. Childress observed.
According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), between 2007 and 2010, more than 35 percent of the deaths by abortion in the United States happened to black babies, despite the fact that blacks represent only 12.8 percent of the population. Conversely, non-Hispanic whites, who make up 63.7% of America’s population, account for only 37.7% of all U.S. abortions.
Whatever the intent of abortion practitioners, by functional standards, abortion is a racist institution in the United States, with black children aborted at nearly four times the rate of white children.
Among white women, there are 138 abortions for every 1000 live births; among blacks, there are 501 abortions for every 1000 births. This means that blacks are aborted at 3.6 times the rate of whites.
Carried over to a global context, the figures are equally worrisome, with abortion accounting for more deaths than any other cause.
As of August 4, 2018, there have been nearly 25 million abortions performed worldwide so far this year, while less than a million people have died from road accident fatalities, 4.8 million from cancer, and 990,000 from HIV/AIDS, according to the best available data.
In their study, the UNC-Charlotte researchers, James Studnicki, Sharon J. MacKinnon, and John W. Fisher, lamented the fact that despite the overwhelming weight of data and the universal acknowledgement that the act of abortion results in a human death, abortion is often not reported as a cause of death in the vital statistics system in the United States, an omission stemming from ideology rather than science.
“The exclusion of a major cause of death,” they noted, “especially one with large racial and ethnic disparities, should be a major concern to the scientific community and society as a whole.”
“As a cause of death, the major one for Hispanics and African Americans,” said Dr. Studnicki, the lead researcher, “abortion would be at the top of the scientific agenda in the U.S., and with a funding priority consistent with its importance.”
Lawyer fights ‘sexist’ no-single-men pool party at California hotel, sues 300 other ‘anti-male’ businesses (BS story of the week)
BPR Wire
-
A party company allegedly prohibited three single men from attending its event
-
Lawyer Al Rava is suing the party company and a hotel for discrimination
-
Rava has sued nearly 300 businesses for discriminating against men
(Getty)A lawyer slammed a “sexist” no-single-men pool party hosted by a California hotel, while speaking with The Daily Caller News Foundation on Friday.
San Diego lawyer Alfred G. Rava is representing three men, Mitchell Fairless, Chris Fairless and James Hamilton, in a lawsuit against DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel Golf Resort Palm Springs and Plush, a party company that hosted an event at the hotel. The men are suing the hotel and party company for violating California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act and Business and Professions Code 125.6.
Rava filed his lawsuit with the Superior Court of California County of Riverside on July 26 and received a copy of the complaint Wednesday. The complaint opens with a quote: “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”
Plush advertised its event at DoubleTree with a “discounted rate $175 per couple” and “single ladies are only $20.” At least one of the plaintiffs received the ad by email and Plush also advertised it at Plushlife.org. The plaintiffs assert the company banned single men from attending a pool party hosted by DoubleTree on July 20 and 21, citing a text message one of their male acquaintances received from Plush reading “single men are not allowed to the event.”
“All persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex,” states the Unruh Civil Rights Act.
Plush is now advertising a similar Aug. 2-5 event in Scottsdale, Arizona, where California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act holds no weight.
“I know the left would have a cow if there [were] a similar event at this hotel, or at any hotel, that allowed couples and single men to attend, charging couples $175 and single men only $20, but prohibiting single women from entering,” Rava told TheDCNF.
The lawyer said that multiple hotel employees told the three plaintiffs that single men could not attend the event, but Rava did not think they ever provided a reason.
“I speculate that because it appeared from the advertisement for the event … to be some type of ‘swingers’ event, that single women were more desirous than single men,” Rava told TheDCNF. “In fact, single [men] were not just less desirous, they were not at all desired and were outright banned from attending.”
Rava asked the Palm Springs Superior Court of California in his July 26 complaint to make the defendants pay statutory and attorneys’ fees, forbid the defendants from discriminating against single men, and compel the defendants to take “sensitivity, diversity, and sex and marital status discrimination training” pertaining specifically to single men.
The lawyer said that each of his three clients are entitled to $16,000 in statutory damages.
DoubleTree and Plush did not return multiple requests for comment.
The Palm Springs Superior Court of California will first address the case in a January 2019 Case Management Conference.
Rava previously forced San Diego’s fire and rescue foundation to cancel an empowerment camp scheduled for March 3 and 4 for girls only a day after receiving his Feb. 22 letter addressed to the foundation, the city attorney and the fire-rescue department.
Rava said the California legislature quadrupled the minimum statutory damages that must be paid by parties violating California Civil Code sections 51, 51.5 and 51.6 during the legislature’s 2001-2002 session, specifically to combat Ladies’ Day and similar events that charged men more than women.
The lawyer said he has prosecuted more than 300 Unruh Civil Rights Act cases, 298 of which have involved discrimination against men.
“Next week, I will likely be filing an Unruh Civil Rights Act sex discrimination lawsuit against a long-established San Diego restaurant and pool hall that recently hosted an event that charged men $40 to enter while charging women only $5 to enter the same July 7th event,” the lawyer said.
Rob Shimshock on Twitter
Ocasio-Cortez West Coast tour avoids Hollywood elites, but who’s shunning who?
New York Democratic congressional nominee Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s West Coast tour raises a lot of questions, beginning with who is shunning who?
The democrat socialist darling paid a visit to the homeless in Los Angeles’ Skid Row neighborhood, met with social justice activists and held low-dollar fundraisers, Fox News reported, but she hasn’t had any “glitzy events with high-profile Democratic donors and Hollywood celebrities.”
The democrat socialist darling paid a visit to the homeless in Los Angeles’ Skid Row neighborhood, met with social justice activists and held low-dollar fundraisers, Fox News reported, but she hasn’t had any “glitzy events with high-profile Democratic donors and Hollywood celebrities.”
(Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)You know, the “glitzy” fundraisers former President Barack Obama was famous for.
All of which compelled The Hollywood Reporter to ask, “Is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Too Far Left for Hollywood?”
The celebrity news source noted that Ocasio-Cortez “isn’t meeting with traditional Hollywood power brokers for now.”
But again, who’s shunning who?
More from THR:
In a break with tradition, Ocasio-Cortez, who labels herself a democratic socialist, has no plans to meet with any of the entertainment industry’s Democratic political power brokers while she is in town. She will not be having coffee with Carl Reiner. There will be no sit down with Jeffrey Katzenberg or David Geffen. No $5,000-a-plate dinner at Robert Iger’s mansion in Brentwood.
“None of our clients are meeting with her,” says Marie Lloyd of the political and philanthropic consultancy Gonring, Spahn & Associates, which counts Katzenberg and Steven Spielberg as clients. And none of the other political operatives or members of the industry’s donor class reached by phone were aware of any meetings scheduled with Ocasio-Cortez. Some weren’t even aware she was coming to town.
But it’s not just the donors. Even though Mayor Eric Garcetti is currently in Asia, a source within City Hall tells The Hollywood Reporter that Ocasio-Cortez’s team did not make any outreach to his office regarding her trip.
So, it could be the candidate eschewing politically elite Democrats, who were more eager to embrace Hillary Clinton than Bernie Sanders, who shares Ocasio-Cortez’s socialist views.
There’s certainly a divide within the party between the two camps, especially after the revelation the Democratic National Committee had its fat thumb on the scale in favor of Clinton in the 2016 primary.
Interestingly, when former President Barack Obama released names of candidates he was endorsing recently, Ocasio-Cortez was noticeably absent from the list.
“None of our clients are meeting with her,” says Marie Lloyd of the political and philanthropic consultancy Gonring, Spahn & Associates, which counts Katzenberg and Steven Spielberg as clients. And none of the other political operatives or members of the industry’s donor class reached by phone were aware of any meetings scheduled with Ocasio-Cortez. Some weren’t even aware she was coming to town.
But it’s not just the donors. Even though Mayor Eric Garcetti is currently in Asia, a source within City Hall tells The Hollywood Reporter that Ocasio-Cortez’s team did not make any outreach to his office regarding her trip.
So, it could be the candidate eschewing politically elite Democrats, who were more eager to embrace Hillary Clinton than Bernie Sanders, who shares Ocasio-Cortez’s socialist views.
There’s certainly a divide within the party between the two camps, especially after the revelation the Democratic National Committee had its fat thumb on the scale in favor of Clinton in the 2016 primary.
Interestingly, when former President Barack Obama released names of candidates he was endorsing recently, Ocasio-Cortez was noticeably absent from the list.
(Photo by J Pat Carter for the Washington Post)THR noted that some say the divide may be a result of Ocasio-Cortez’s inexperience and a lack of campaign infrastructure to engage in the appropriate outreach.
At the same time, it could be that elite Democrats, with so much at stake financially, are not quite bold enough yet to so publicly own their socialist views.
The more unhinged among the left, people like Susan Sarandon, Chelsea Handler and Ava DuVernay, took to social media to celebrate Ocasio-Cortez’s big primary win over incumbent Rep. Joe Crowley.
At the same time, it could be that elite Democrats, with so much at stake financially, are not quite bold enough yet to so publicly own their socialist views.
The more unhinged among the left, people like Susan Sarandon, Chelsea Handler and Ava DuVernay, took to social media to celebrate Ocasio-Cortez’s big primary win over incumbent Rep. Joe Crowley.
We know first-hand that censorship against conservative news is real. Please share stories and encourage your friends to sign up for our daily email blast so they are not getting shut out of seeing conservative news.
Kellyanne’s Nails It with Hilarious Response to Bill Kristol’s Potential Presidential Run
BY BENJAMIN ARIE
Kellyanne’s Nails It with Hilarious Response to Bill Kristol’s Potential Presidential Run
BY BENJAMIN ARIE
Kellyanne Conway has a reputation for staying cool under pressure, always seeming to have the right answer even when facing hostile interviewers.
The White House adviser was extra-relaxed on Friday, while chatting with fellow conservative commentator Eric Bolling. The quick-witted Conway used the interview with the former Fox News journalist to slip in a hilarious zinger — but it wasn’t about Donald Trump.
Instead, it was directed at a man who wants to challenge him for the Oval Office.
In a video released by Bolling’s new employer, CRTV, the reporter mentioned to Conway that “Never Trumper” Bill Kristol may run in 2020 in a desperate attempt to be elected president.
“Of this country?” Conway quipped, with comedic timing that would make Groucho Marx proud.
“Of this country,” Bolling confirmed, laughing.
Eric Bolling: 'Bill Kristol may run for president.'
Kellyanne Conway doesn't miss a beat: 'Of this country?'
Kristol, best known as the editor of The Weekly Standard and his frequent television appearances as a political analyst, has strongly opposed Donald Trump since Trump announced his candidacy for the presidency.
Despite her incredulous response, Conway then answered the question seriously.
“Well, it’s a free country. I guess if you’re 35 and meet the other criterion, then you can,” she stated.
“I will tell you that everybody thinks it’s so easy to do that — that they can somehow catch lightning in a bottle the way Donald Trump did,”
Conway continued.
“You would have to have this relationship with the people, and a message that resonates with them,” she said, strongly implying that Kristol would never be able to do this.
The closest the balding 65-year-old whiner — sorry, commentator — has ever got to public office was serving as chief of staff to Vice President Dan Quayle almost three decades ago. Those old enough to recall Quayle’s service in President George H.W. Bush’s White House probably remember that Quayle did not exactly light the political world on fire.
Besides that less-than-stellar claim to fame, Kristol has taken some very dubious political stances. He previously refused to differentiate between legal and illegal immigration, and bizarrely voiced disapproval for companies giving bonuses to workers as a result of the GOP tax cuts.
James Woods ✔@RealJamesWoodsOnly an elitist cupcake like you would think having a bonus is “creepy.” Try actually working for a living, you pompous blowhard. It would amaze you how important a salary and bonus can be.
Bill Kristol ✔@BillKristol
Isn’t there something creepy about corporations giving cash bonuses to employees explicitly because of the passage of certain legislation or because of specific regulatory actions? Doesn’t it have something of a Road to Corporatist Serfdom feel to it?
Isn’t there something creepy about corporations giving cash bonuses to employees explicitly because of the passage of certain legislation or because of specific regulatory actions? Doesn’t it have something of a Road to Corporatist Serfdom feel to it?
Last year, he claimed that a U.S. president putting America first was “depressing and vulgar.”
I'll be unembarrassedly old-fashioned here: It is profoundly depressing and vulgar to hear an American president proclaim "America First."
Exactly which country Kristol thinks the American president is supposed to put first remains a mystery.
If Bill Kristol, a man who evokes responses of “who?” from most of the American public, is really the establishment’s best chance at defeating an incumbent president, it’s safe to say Trump has four more years in the bag. Good luck with that, Billy.
Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers' newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.
Elizabeth Heng (Campaign ad image/YouTube)Elizabeth Heng nearly beat incumbent Democratic congressman Jim Costa in California’s open primaries in early June. The 53–47 outcome would have made her the darling of the national political media, had she been a Democrat. She will face Costa again in the general election in November. My colleague Alexandra DeSanctis wrote an excellent piece last month profiling the young, smart, 33-year-old Republican contender.
So this happened yesterday. Heng’s campaign had tried to place this video as an ad on Facebook. It begins with her family’s roots — amidst the horror of Cambodian genocide.
And Facebook responded with a big ixnay. Here’s a screenshot of the rejection provided by the candidate:
Is the Cambodian Genocide now a non-event? Or just too icky for the Silicon Valley Boys? Or maybe this ad-rejection is yet another powerful Republican political message that fails some subjective standard contrived in a liberal hotbed?
The Heng campaign released this statement yesterday:
This Friday, Facebook revoked approval to advertise Elizabeth Heng’s campaign video detailing why she is running for office in the 16th Congressional District of California. Her video, which includes the story of her American immigrant parents who lived through the atrocity of communism and genocide that ravaged Cambodia in the early 1980s, evidently contained content too “shocking, disrespectful or sensational” for the platform, to quote Facebook directly.
“It is unbelievable that Facebook could have such blatant disregard for the history that so many people, including my own parents, have lived through,” said Elizabeth. “I’m sure it is shocking for some people to hear about this kind of injustice, but this is reality. This is why I wake up every single day with the fight and determination to have a voice and make a difference in my community. Neither Facebook nor any other company in the tech industry get to silence our stories. We’ve seen it over and over again with Republican candidates and organizations. This kind of censorship is an attack on the freedoms that we have as Americans to express what we believe in, and we must hold Facebook accountable.”
RETURN TO THE CORNER
Helen and Moe Lauzier note: We sense more than a touch of effete snobbishness against people (especially women) who look and act differently than our liberal masters. I can only imagine what William F. Buckley would have said about this Facebook oomgalagala.
G’ day…Ciao…
Helen and Moe Lauzier
Helen and Moe Lauzier
Thus Article
That's an article
This time, hopefully can give benefits to all of you. well, see you in posting other articles.
You are now reading the article with the link address https://capitalstories.blogspot.com/2018/08/www_6.html
0 Response to " "
Post a Comment