Breitbart Fail: Turning into Paul-bart?

The nominations for the 2016 Presidential election is already drawing in heated opinions and large funding streams.

The Marginalized Media is pushing for Hillary, and pulling apart Jeb Bush. The same Media has already trashed New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, even as they had cozied up to him for two years, following his stellar standing against teachers unions and standing up to Garden State denizens in town halls.

NJ Christie got built up
then torn down by media (Bob Jagendorf)

The chattering classes in New York and Washington DC build up moderates then demolish them, all in the end to promote then coronate a liberal. Christie was one of them. He went from gracing the cover of Time Magazine to featuring on a cover in silhouette: "The Elephant in the Room"

The feature was rude and trite, not even remotely accurate. Ultimately, Christie is not only not the elephant in the room (he has lost weight), but he does not look remotely like a contender for 2016.

On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton disgraced the New York Times Magazine with her face imposed on a planet, and constellations orbiting her.

Now the leftist elements in the media, particularly MSNBC, have gotten bored with Clinton (again) and want someone purely progressive. Clinton's server scandal over a private email account during her tenure as Secretary of State will not go away, the way that the media dumbed down the VA secret wait lists, Operation Fast and Furious, and the tragic massacre of four diplomats in Benghazi.

Now, with a new media rising, democratized, leaning right, and in some cases partisan to the point of inflammatory, the same faults of the Left toward promoting one candidate at the expense of others has emerged.

Breitbart has helped free up the media monopoly which benefited the Left, the Establishment, and Big interests taking advantage of political power and government favors. Sites like Truth Revolt and CNS News.

More right-leaning news sources hold Republicans accountable as well as Democrats, and they should. A free press cannot be essentially partisan, if the media wants to engage readers or maintain lasting influence. The downfall and resignation of Congressman Aaron Schock of Illinois, for example, follows from Breitbart and other news sources holding him accountable for his questionable spending habits.

Regarding the potential presidential contenders, however, it appears that Breitbart is embracing one candidate (or a set of candidates) at the expense of others.

Disclaimer: This author supports Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker for President in 2016.

Matthew Boyle

Matthew Boyle, one of the writers/journalists for the New Media newsite, demonstrates a strong affinity for US Senator Rand Paul. Just looking over the list of his recent articles, Boyle has extensively followed and promoted the junior senator from Kentucky. This Senator has done a number of noteworthy things, not just on the floor of the upper chamber (where he successfully filibustered the nomination of an Obama appointee to force an answer from Attorney General Eric Holder) to strong relationships with Democratic Senators to push moral reforms of the criminal justice system. He also supports defederalizing the War on Drugs, Right-To-Work legislation, and has voted his conscience in alliance with the same Tea Party principles which brought him to office.

He also voiced support for a pathway to citizenship, once calling illegal aliens "undocumented citizens." This rhetoric vividly offended supporters and constituents.  Paul has also denounced institutional segregation in the criminal justice system, yet ignored the cultural pathology in certain black communities. He even rejects Voter ID, while these political statements are viewed as mere posturing to secure the African-American vote.

Clearly, US Senator Rand Paul has his failings. Yet have Breitbart editors and writers exposed these issues? Why do they spend so much time slamming Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker? Conservatives get faulted much of the time for turning on their own. Does this criticism now apply to Breitbart?

Even Twitchy asked: why is "investigative journalist" attacking one of Governor Walker's staffers? No one can ignore "investigative journalist" in quotation marks. In 2014, Boyle relentlessly hammered US Senator Thad Cochran (R-MS), who still ended up winning his Senate seat against primary challenger state senator Chris McDaniel. Evidently, Boyle was deliberately interested in helping the state senator defeat the US Senator.

Now, is he trying to upend Governor Walker's chances? His means of doing so are starting to put his integrity and viability (along with Breitbart's) into question.

Breitbart turning into . . Paul-bart? (Truth Revolt)

The latest attack against Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker focused on one of his staff members. The attack was neither relevant nor informative, and almost tabloid in nature. The overextended of the piece, nearly two thousand words, discourages any in-depth appreciation for the column. Editing, conciseness, and direct reporting are key to engaging any audience.

If Breitbart turns into Paul-bart, one has to wonder if anyone is going to read it anymore, or at least no one should be surprised at its diminishing influence to detonate false narratives and reinvigorate free markets, free enterprise, and free people in our Constitutional Republic.

Breitbart Fail RE: Nanette Barragan Town Hall

I have a growing suspicion as to why Breitbart California is sinking fast.

Most of their articles get very few shares.

They spend more time aggregating from other conservative sites.

There is very little actual reporting, and most of it is inside baseball from other conservatives who just narrate the long list of failures at the state level.

One of the key contributors, Jon Fleishman, is a self-congratulatory throwback, Sure, Republicans in Sacramento were very worried about what Fleischman would think of them, or what he would report about them.  But after ten years of seeing Republicans in the state legislature decline, and a growing leftist cohort take over Sacramento, why bother worrying about Fleischman?

The man was anti-Trump to the very end. He ended up writing in Vin Scully, the sports announcer for the Los Angeles Dodgers. I have tried to speak with him, and he is very rude and arrogant. Other people have shared the same opinion of the man. He seems to think he is still an influential conservative legend, even if his FlashReport site has few visitors.

Breitbart California had a brief splash of glory. Their advertising launch contained such risue photos including a mash-up of Nancy Pelosi's head attached to the twerking profile of Miley Cyrus. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy had his editorial pulled from the site immediately after the advertising launch.

Other conservatives have stuck around, but the readership is still very low.

There is so much activism, advocacy, and local victories in California, yet Breitbart California doesn't report on it.

When they do report on something, however, they get the facts wrong, or they make mistakes. They have errors, too, which don't get attended to very uickly, either.

Check out what they just published about We the People Rising and LA for Trump's protest at the Nanette Barragan town hall last Thursday:

Rep. Nanette Barragán (D-CA), a first-year congresswoman from the 44th congressional district, abandoned a town hall meeting on Friday evening in the city of Carson in Los Angeles County after she was faced with an overwhelmingly pro-Trump audience.

First problem; it was Thursday. How about indicating the specific date? June 1, 2017. This is fundamentally sloppy.

I woudl submit that the audience was not overwhelming "Trump", but we overwhelmed her lies and hateful rhetoric against our President.

After the meeting began without the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance, the pro-Trump attendees recited it on their own. Rep. Barragán then began her remarks to the meeting by attacking Trump, and was immediately drowned out by jeers and chants: “We love Trump!” “Respect our president!”

This part was great! But where's the "and" between “We love Trump!” “Respect our president!” ?

Then the rest of the article goes to more general comentaroy, how this Demcoratic Congresswoman got a taste of what Republican Congressmen have been forced to tolerate for the past six months.

Final Reflection

Outburts like this and other protests from pro-Trump Californians have been happening all over Sounthern California. Not once did Breitbart California look into what We the People Rising contended with at UC Riverside against State Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de Leon.

Where was Breitbart for that?

To the credit of some of the writers, they are catching up with Joseph Turner's proposal to defund sanctuary cities by repealing the local utility users' tax, but even then they piggy-back off of other people's reporting.

I just wish that these reporters spent more time following up on these events, checking their facts, reaching out to activists like Joseph Turner, Robin Hvidston, and myself to make a stronger impact.

Oh, and the Barragan article ... why didn't they simply snippet a more lively photo from the YouTube videos outright? Frankly, our videos portrayed our fight much better than anything that Joel Pollak wrote for this post. It is any surprise that We the People Rising, LA County for Trump, Grindall61, and other citizen media are getting more traction than websites like Breitbart?

Breitbart Fail: Fung Opposes DLs for Illegals

Andrew Breitbart led fight
against corrupt media

Breitbart.com has become one of the leading voices in the New Media.

While the mainstream media wasted weeks covering the private prejudices of a basketball owner, and the overblown, soap-opera lawsuits which followed, the conservative website exposed the illegal immigrant youth crisis amassing along the Southern Border. While the mainstream media has given a pass to the Obama Administration’s floodgate of scandals, websites like Breitbart have attacked the corruption with an unwavering assiduousness.

Reporters have even written about the Republican surge in New England, where liberal Republican Charlie Baker has polled twice with a slim lead ahead of Democratic Attorney General Martha Coakley, Still smarting from her 2010 election loss to Scott Brown,

After reading his piece on Charlie Baker, I reached out to Matthew Boyle, and told him to report on Mayor Allan Fung’s gubernatorial run as well. He was enthusiastic and appreciative, because up to recently he was not paying attention to the Rhode Island race. Looking at the statistics and the demographics, there are enough reasons why conservative reports would ignore Rhode Island: small state, almost hidden in New England under Massachusetts and behind Connecticut, with a liberal Democratic legislature in power for over eight years.

Those dynamics may change this year, though, if the national unrest against Democrats hits the Ocean State. Other local activists in Rhode Island have signaled to me the importance of national attention on this race. In a deep blue state, when a Republican gubernatorial candidate is running neck-and-neck with a Rhodes Scholar pension reformer, party heads should turn.

Republican Mayor of Cranston Allan Fung -- Opposes DLs for Illegals

Boyle’s latest piece, however, contained one error:

In Rhode Island, Cranston's GOP mayor Allan Fung is running slightly less aggressively than Baker or Brown on the issue of immigration, saying that he supports driver’s licenses for illegal aliens. But he has made clear that he opposes the efforts of the administration to use Rhode Island as a spot to place illegal aliens as part of the border crisis, and according to some recent polling data is within striking distance of Democratic nominee state treasurer Gina Raimondo. Rasmussen's latest survey had him just seven points back—a pretty impressive feat for a Republican in a state as blue as Rhode Island.

The statement that Fung supports driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants is untrue. In fact, he and his former primary challenger Ken Block are on record opposing the policy:

Block and Fung said they would advocate for immigration reform on the federal level and indicated they oppose driver’s licenses for undocumented residents. They each pledged to restore the state’s use of eVerify background checks for state employees, a program that Chafee abolished on his first day in office in 2011.

Part of the reason politicians left and right should champion this stance against illegal immigration is as a nation of laws, every person living here legally should have access to these privileges, simple enough, but not those who have entered the country illegally.  Allowing law-breakers any legal privilege, like driving on American streets, only enables more illegal immigration.

Unfortunately, some Republicans are caving in on this issue, like California Republican gubernatorial candidate Neel Kashkari. While explaining that compassion and open borders would not solve the illegal immigrant youth crisis, he still supports drivers licenses for illegal immigrants.

CA GOP Kashkari supports DLs for Illegals

"They can’t stay here, but while they are here, they can still drive."

Confusing and contradictory polices like this one are turning off voters in California. How does this kind of pandering help the Republican Party win Hispanics votes, and elections in the long-run? Besides, DLs for illegals ends up trapping states into sanctuary status. Why should illegal immigrants leave when one can get away with driving legally and not worry about getting deported if pulled over?

Supporters for this controversial policy will contend that allowing them to drive legally will create safer roads and reduce crime. The exact opposite has occurred in San Diego, and other states enacting this policy. Fraud and human trafficking have become commonplace in many locales, too.

I contacted Mayor Fung and Matthew Boyle, who had written the story about Fung. The mayor affirmed his opposition to DLs for illegals, but Boyle has not yet gotten back to me.

In this Internet-driven media market, misrepresentation of a politician’s stance no longer goes unnoticed without immediate responses. While mistakes like the one mischaracterizing Mayor Fung may be more common because of the rapid increase of news production and consumption, readers and commentators can take direct action to correct those stories when errors arise.

Breitbart Fail: Rove Does NOT Favor Second Amendment Repeal

Bait-and-switch of gotcha journalism still occurs, in great numbers from the Marginalized Media, but also in conservative and New Media sources from time to time. A conservative, a Republican pundit will make a statement, and the blogosphere will jump on it as proof of liberal pandering. This blog-blasting occurred last year, when Mitt Romney discussed "taking care of those here illegally" as though he favored amnesty.

Romney did not say that at all.

This "Blog First, Ask Questions Later" also occurred at great length against Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and his nuanced stance on illegal immigration.

Now, the latest attack claims that Bush 43 advisor Karl Rove now favors repealing the Second Amendment, or that "Violence will continue until the Second Amendment is repealed".

Before launching into an extended criticism, I recognize the deep fault lines between Rove and Tea Party activists around the country. Many conservatives have slammed Rove for standing by Establishment Republicans, and consider his connections with George W. Bush a liability rather than an asset (They should also consider his recognition for Tea Party support to win the US Senate). This analysis does not serve as a boost for Karl Rove, nor seeks to diminishing the concerns that he is a Big Government conservative. All of that is inessential.

Furthermore, I have great respect for Awr Hawkin's reporting for Breitbart, as he reports the stories about the saving graces connected with concealed-carry (the lives saved, the crimes prevented), which the Marginalized Media loves to bury.

Now, from Hawkin's anti-Rove article on Breitbart:

During the Sunday airing of Fox New Sunday, host Chris Wallace asked Karl Rove how America can stop violent attacks like the one the country witnessed in Charleston, South Carolina.
Rove said “acts of violence” will continue, until someone can force America to “repeal the Second Amendment.”

He quickly added his belief that such a repeal is an impossibility, and therefore not a viable idea — yet.

That word "yet" is quite a teasing element, as though Rove is quietly plotting to strip away the right of gun ownership. If anyone has been following the gun-control fights in this country, they will see that the Second Amendment has won every fight. "Gun Grabbing" Michael Bloomberg lost many major elections he targeted in 2014 throughout the country. Even left-wing Democratic contenders like Bernie Sanders side with the Second Amendment. In Colorado, Democrats who attacked firearms found themselves getting shot down. Even in California, concealed-carry is on the rise.

Karl Rove

Now, the full transcript of Karl Rove's comments suggest a more nuanced response to dealing with gun violence. Here is Rove's answer to "Wallace's exact question":

KARL ROVE, FORMER BUSH WHITE HOUSE ADVISER: Well, I wish I had an easy answer for that. I don't think there's any easy answer. We saw an act of evil, racist, bigoted evil. And to me, the amazing thing about this is it was met with grief and love.

Rove was the first and only person to mention the issue of "evil". Conservative LA Radio Host Larry Elder also talked about the lack of fathers and Executive Director of Gun Owners in America Larry Pratt discussed "the evil in the human heart", which gun control legislation will never eradicate. This matter of human failings is essential to any serious policy debate, particularly gun control. James Madison recognized human frailty as the basis for a Constitution defined by checks and balances, with diffusion of government power and expansion of individual and local authority. Rove mentioned the matter of evil, and that matters a great deal. Rove's other statement deserves a second glance: "The amazing thing about this [the Charleston atrocity] is it was met with grief and love".

What amazing grace, that the victims' families could confront the assailant and say: "I forgive you." Let us also consider that President Barack Obama was surprised by the level of forgiveness from the families of the Charleston victims.

Rove continued:

And think about how far we've come. 1963, the whole weight of the government throughout the South was to impede finding and holding and bringing to justice the men who perpetrated the [Baptist Church] bombing and here we saw an entire state, an entire community, an entire nation come together grieving as one, united in the belief that this was an evil act.

Why won't Breitbart and other conservative sites highlight the strong, well-founded rhetoric demonstrating how far this county has come in fighting bigotry and violent racism?

So, we have come a long way. Now, maybe there's some magic law that will keep us from having more of these. I mean, basically, the only way to guarantee that we would dramatically reduce acts of violence involving guns is to basically remove guns from society, and until somebody gets enough oomph to repeal the Second Amendment, that's not going to happen.

Boom. Rove was speaking of a fantastic scenario, a line of argument which a number of pro-gun supporters advance. Left-wing, gun-control proponents want to diminish violence and gun deaths. The number one proposal, then, would be to eliminate all firearms. Not going to happen. The legislative apotheosis for this utopian ideal would certainly include repealing the Second Amendment. Of course that would never happen. The recognition of gun violence in our communities

 I don't think it's an answer.

Awr Hawkins did not quote this statement. Rove does not favor repealing the Second Amendment. Not now, not "yet", not ever.

I think there were so many warning since here. A friend who knew of what was in Dylann Roof's heart, parents who didn't pay attention, a community that had given up on him, and a loner who had fallen into the clutches of racist organizations and had come to believe in their ideology and put things up on the Internet that we didn't give any credence to whatsoever.
Conservatives who care about ending gun violence and firearms massacres usually point to the need for great community investment, and better interventionist methods against men and women who pose a threat to themselves and to others. US Senator Kelly Ayotte (R-New Hampshire) relied on similar arguments to (rightly) justify voting against the Toomey-Manchin compromise bill in 2013. These measures will not stop the dangerously insane individuals in our cities from committing these snap atrocities.

And so, there were a lot of warning signs here and I wish that some of those people had spoken up and said, here's somebody who is in trouble and a danger to himself and others.

Rove never suggested "Let's repeal the Second Amendment" and never suggested that getting rid of that Bill of Right would ensure an end to violence.

Granted, well-connected Republican politicos have made the expansion of the federal government a priority, or they have simply ignore the pleas and plights of Main Street. Rove may in fact belong to that Insider Beltway club. However, criticism must depend on proper quoting and reference within context.

In the case of Hawkins' piece against Rove, that did not happen. Once again, Rove does NOT support repealing the Second Amendment.

Paul-Bart Fail: Eblast Boosting Rand

US Senator Rand Paul

I received this latest eblast from Breitbart, further affirming my concerns about this news site. I do not receive eblasts from any other candidate. Why Rand Paul? Granted, at this time US Senator Paul is on my short list, for his accomplishments in the US Senate. He filibustered two bills, rallied major support for his efforts, and forced the Obama Administration to answer questions or let lapse a government spying program. Here are the contents, with the comments in the email all in italics. My comments are in bold.

Fellow Conservative: I'm ready to play hardball. On Fox News' On the Record, I announced I will introduce legislation to cut off ALL federal taxpayer funding for so-called "sanctuary cities" -- until they start abiding by federal law. I believe that at this is a worth goal. However, Ron Johnson and Jeff Sessions have already introduced the law. In fact, Breitbart just reported on the Johnson-Sessions bill. If you have my back in this critical fight, I need to know right away. Will you please fill out your "Enforce Immigration Law" petition IMMEDIATELY? Is Paul fighting for us or for his political chances? For taking this stand, I know I'm going to be attacked like never before. Actually, that is not true at all. Everyone who has learned about Katie Steinle's death in San Francisco, and more Americans of all stripes want an end to sanctuary city policies. But I think it's high time someone did something! Lots of people have been doing something about illegal immigration.  The only issue with Rand Paul is that he has been hesitant, then has stood on divergently opposed views on the matter. The US Senator from Kentucky is not the only one who is fighting against illegal immigration. The truth is, for years politicians in BOTH parties have promised you and me secure borders. But all we have to show for those promises is sheer lawlessness. This President has time and again sought to go around Congress with illegal and unconstitutional executive actions regarding immigration. Absolutely. President Obama has overturned and ignored the law time and again. He is the greatest obstacle to secured borders and real immigration reform. And now many American cities are following in lockstep in open defiance of federal law!   . . . . . My bill would end all federal taxpayer funding for these cities until they start ENFORCING federal immigration law. I know these cities will shriek and moan that there shouldn't be any strings attached to all of your tax dollars. They'll say they're entitled to pick and choose what laws they recognize. And you can bet our national media will be on their side, and come after me with everything they have. But Fellow Conservative, it's time politicians cared more about keeping their promises to the American people than what our national media says. If you agree, I need to hear from you right away. Please sign your "Enforce Immigration Law" petition and agree to your most generous contribution of $20.16 IMMEDIATELY. Chip in $10 immediately >> Chip in $25 immediately >> Chip in $50 immediately >> Chip in $100 immediately >> Or donate another amount >> In Liberty, Rand Paul ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am not sure what to think of any news site, whether liberal or conservative, promoting eblasts for candidates who in turn solicit donations for their campaigns. Once again, Breitbart has turned into Paul-bart, and its integrity is suffering in the process.

Breitbart Fail: Romney Did Not Advocate for Amnesty

This morning on Fox News Sunday, Governor Mitt Romney served as the surrogate on Republican chances for winning the US Senate this November 4th.

Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday

I differed with two other comments which he had made, but Breitbart focused on something else, which no one should find objectionable:

Republican-led Senate would pass new, stronger legislation on immigration reform.

Immigration reform is not a bad thing in itself. Romney explained what immigration reform means:

Romney said, “You’re going to see a provision, first of all, to secure the border.

Exactly. Secure the border. The United States does not need a fence. This country needs more than an adequate provision of military personnel along the border to secure our citizens and their property, to deter future illegal immigration, and to operate adequate screening facilities to ensure that those who come legally do not have to wait decades to become naturalized citizens.

Second of all, to deal with those who come here illegally.

Mitt Romney

That's all that Romney said. He did not say: Give them citizenship. Nor did he suggest granting citizenship or a pathway for law-breakers. Ann Coulter claims that he is the only major Republican leader with the best immigration policy: self-deport.

Perhaps not the most articulate message, but discouraging illegal behavior and encourage legal, streamlined immigration should be the goal of the New Republican majority in Washington.

Yet the article implies that Romney is "tone deaf."

 And third, to make sure our immigration policies are more open and transparent … That’s going to happen.

Yes, yes and yes. The current program is sclerotic and dysfunction. There are currently four million legal residents still waiting for their final naturalization papers. That is a crime. Individuals who have played by the rules, passed all the tests, and paid all the fees should not have to wait one more minute to get their full recognition of citizenship.

You’re going to see a bill actually reach the desk of the president if we finally have someone besides Harry Reid sitting in the Senate. So, we’re going to get it done.”

Now, I take exception to a different point. Why was Mitt Romney the point person for the GOP US Senate argument? Why not US Senator Rand Paul or Jerry Moran of Kansas? Moran is the Nationral Republican Senate Committee Chairman this year. Even John Cornyn could have stumped for his party, since he was the chairman in 2012.

Romney was not the best surrogate on Fox News. He lost the 2012 election because he did not inspire the base to vote. Furthermore, his tepid assurances were not convincing.  "I won't say that the GOP will take the US Senate, but we will gain seats in the House and the Senate."

Romney wouldn't say whether Republicans would take the U Senate or not? The lack of bold resolve from this candidate is still on full display. For this reason, every conservative and Main Street voter should take the former Massachusetts Governor at his word that he will not run again in 2016.

That would be his Act of Love for this country.
 

Dem Koch Brother Fail in New Hampshire

Liberal Democratic US Senator Jean Shaheen of New Hampshire is proud of her 99% voting record with President Obama.

How the voters of the Granite State feel about this candidate is another matter altogether.


Jean Shaheen v. Scott Brown

Four months ago, Shaheen was riding ten points ahead of Brown, who had best three other Republican contenders in the September primary. Fighting from his former record (and his prior constituency in Massachusetts), Brown has succeeded in gaining increased traction from New Hampshire voters.


With the border crisis of illegal immigrant youth, plus the intangible threat of Ebola arising, plus the devastation of Obamacare, Shaheen should be running from Obama.

Instead, she has doubled down on the same Democratic talking points.

In her latest debate with former Massachusetts state and US Senator Scott Brown, she interrupted his closing remarks, suggesting that his campaign has been funded by the Kansas oil magnates the Koch Brothers.

Brown commented:

She's voted against small businesses 100% of the time. She's got a zero rating from the National Federation of Independent Business. I received their endorsement, but not only them. The Chamber of Commerce endorsed me because. . .

Shaheen then butted in with:

Koch Brothers funded organization. . .

Shushes and boos erupted from the audience, including shouts of "Rude!"

This was a liberal audience, according to Breitbart's Matthew Boyle.

Brown permitted Shaheen to share her comments, then denounced her interruption by reminding her that he had let her make final comments without interrupting him. The crowd applauded Brown.

A double-fail for Shaheen, who is getting nervous as the race she thought she would easily win is slipping away from her.

Analyzing this scene with Neil Cavuto, Bryon York downplayed the weakness of the Koch Brothers' smear.

Still, Shaheen has even advertised on her campaign website the Koch Brothers' influence in her race:

Shaheen wants to recycle Koch
 

The Big Oil Koch Brothers and their special interest allies are pouring money into New Hampshire to pay for attack mail pieces that are propping up Scott Brown’s campaign.  This mail is littering New Hampshire and we want to do something about it.  Want to help?  Recycle Koch.  Simply bring any attack mail you receive to your local campaign office and recycle it for a Jeanne Shaheen bumper sticker!  

How much mail is coming in from the Koch Brothers, anyway?

I contacted Senator Shaheen's Concord field office, which turned out to be called "Granite State Forward." The gentleman I spoken to had not heard or read anything about Shaheen's initiative to "Recycle Koch". He did mention advertisements on TV, but nothing about mail.

Interesting. How does Senator Shaheen plan on recycling Koch mailers if there aren't any? Even a member of her field staff was not paying attention to these attacks.

Like the "War on Women" rhetoric which has fallen apart under Democratic overuse, the hasty, desperate tactic of tagging Republican candidates as puppets of two billionaires is falling on deaf ears, too.

Even in liberal-leaning New Hampshire.

Repost the Reproach: The Advocate's Hate Piece Against Me Fails ... Again!

The Advocate is on the warpath again.

They don't seem to understand that the more that they try to shame me for my strong views on life and family, the more that they fail.

Check out their latest attempt to hate below:

And the few commentaries we did find were over the moon, such as Arthur Schaper on BarbWire lauding both the so-called religious freedom guidance and the contraceptive exemption. “Instead of going along with these corrupt, perverse LGBT and Abortion lobbies, President Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions have taken a stand for life and liberty,” he wrote.

The Advocate even quoted me

And Tony Perkins, president of the anti-LGBT Family Research Council (which recently hosted Trump at its Values Voter Summit), gave an exclusive interview to Breitbart saying Trump had kept “the most important promise that he made” with those two actions. Oh, we can hardly wait to see what he does next.

Andrew Breitbart used to pride himself on the hate he would induce from the Left on Twitter, so he would "retweet the hate."

When people write bad things about me or try to smear me in print, I just 

"Report the Reproach!"

Media Forced to Cover Pedophile Weiner, But Still Soft-Pedals the Perversion

For the last thirty years, it was crystal clear to many that the media bias was so slanted toward protecting Democrats at all costs, that they could commit the most egregious personal crimes and pretty much get away with it.

This fallout was particularly clear in the case of Bill Clinton, who had soiled the Presidency with his personal affairs, then lied under oath to a grand jury about his infidelities. How could the Democratic Party continue to stand by their man?

The Republican Party leadership did not have clean hands or faithful vows, either. New Gingrich was having an adulterous affair, too, but he had resigned--and he did not lie under oath about his infidelities. His supposed replacement was Bob Livingston, but he had cheated on his wife, too.

Then there was Dennis Hastert--lo and behold, he had molested his high school students when he had served as a wrestling coach. He had left office by the time these disgusting crimes were revealed.

 So, what is the difference in the midst of all this despicable behavior?

Republicans went away. Their base would not tolerate such disgraceful behavior. The actions of these elected officials came to light, and they ran away as they should have. The Democratic Party continues to stand with these perverts, and even defends them.

Who can forget Gerry Studs of Massachusetts?! This guy was sleeping with one of his pages! Disgusting! Let's not forget Bwaney Fwank of the same Bay State! One of his lovers was running a brothel out of his own office! SICK!

The Mayor of Seattle, Washington, a hard-core progressive Democrat, had to step down following the fifth--that's right, FIFTH--accuser calling him out for child molestation. Where is the national outrage on this?

The Democratic Party has embraced the destructive LGBT Agenda at its fullest, and they are reaping the results of this destructive agenda. These behaviors result from all forms of child abuse. I cannot believe how many people have come forward from the gay lifestyle, announcing that they had been molested as children. This evil has to be confronted. We cannot normalize sin and then wonder why it proliferates.

So, back to Weiner-gate.

The media had to cover at great length that the former Congressman, well-known for lashing out at Republicans for killing a crony-filled funding package to help fund First Responders during 9-11. There is nothing wrong with proper compensation for first responders, There is plenty wrong with cronyism and graft.

There was even more wrong with Weiner, though, and he didn't want to come clean about it. This guy was sexting people pictures of his private parts. He was abusing his office to solicit sexual favors. This is such unbecoming behavior. What's worse, he not only denied the allegations for weeks, but the media tried to cover for him.

Breitbart took him down like a boss, refusing to let this corrupt, perverted politico to get away with it.

That was only the beginning. Speaker Nancy Pelosi had to pressure Anthony Weiner to resign, or he would lose all his committee assignments next. Imagine that! An outsider-reported named Andrew Breitbart got more done in two weeks than the Republican minority had managed to accomplish in six months.

Incredible, but true.

The media is still very much to blame for Weiner's disgusting behavior. Magazine features and articles tried to play up Anthony Weiner as a brand new man, a troubled former politician who needed to be restored, who needed to get back to the basics.

Nothing could have been further from the truth, and the voters of New York City let him have it when Weiner, in his brazen need for attention and power ran for Mayor following Bloomberg's decision to step down from office. He was still sexting other women online, hiding behind the name "Carlos Danger". He was even sexting people with his little baby right next to him! Those actions invited federal investigation in this online predatory behavior.

He lost the primary against Commie Bill de Blasio. The marriage looked like it was going to fail, but Huma Abedin stood by her man ... still. Why didn't she think about what was best for her child? What is it with these Democratic politicos? Don't they have any shame left?

I guess some of them do. What happened in 2016 and into 2017 brought down Weiner at last. He was connected with under-age girls, sending them lewd pictures of himself. He was caught, convicted, and finally sentenced.

Yet throughout the whole affair, as the media played it up for all to read, no one has slammed him harshly. He has pretty much gotten away with a soft-pedalled rebuke for his behavior. One article noted that he press spent more time feeling sorry for Crooked Hillary, since part of the reason she lost is the contents in wife Huma's computer, which in turn reopened the FBI investigation. Democrats will not accept that Crooked Hillary was a terrible candidate. She was dishonest, wicked, unpleasant, the fakest person one could hope to meet. She was a tired commodity who cheated to get the nomination. Nobody liked her, even the Democrats themselves, who noticed her icy, hateful disdain for American people. "Basket of Deplorables" said it all.

But back to Weiner. Does anyone not get it by now? This man is really sick, really wicked, has serious issues. Yet the media still gives a hint of tragedy rather than stern disdain for what he did. The media roasted Todd Akin for saying "legitimate rape," when the Missouri Congressman turned US Senate candidate was trying to explain his pro-life views. The media went nuts with those comments, going to every length they could to drag down every other Republican candidate with this "War on Women" nonsense.

But Weiner takes picture of his weiner, sexts these images to other women, and even tries to solicit naked pictures from young girls--and the media spends more time spinning out a soap opera. What about other victims of this behavior? What about the fact that the Democratic Party has a bizarre penchant for recruiting and standing by these perverts in the first place?!

And the media soft-pedals this disgusting behavior when Democrats engage in it.

2016: Who is Running for US Senate in CA?

US Senator Barbara Boxer

Breitbart reported that four-term incumbent US Senator Barbara Boxer has little campaign cash on hand: $200,000 now compared to the $3.5 million in her last run for office in 2010, her toughest campaign aside from her first election in 1992 for the open senate seat.

Lax and unrepresentative in Washington, Boxer has done little more than recite the Democratic "War on Women" talking points, followed by repeated efforts to stop climate change, as well as champion every minority and protect class of recently created victims.

When will California have a real mover and shaker who will get things done for this country, particularly the largest state per population in the entire union?

Dianne Feinstein's foreign policy stance, criticism of CIA spying, and support for Condoleeza Rice in 2005 for Secretary of State commands respect with some Republicans, but other than that, the two California senators have done nothing substantive, and in many cases their policy goals have undermined the Constitution or underestimated needs of California's constituents.

The ground is looking good for another open seat in 2016, and if Democrats are as unpopular as they are now, and Hillary is not at the top of the DNC ticket as the Presidential candidate, then there is a chance for another US Senator representing the Golden State in DC.

Which California Democrats may invest in a US Senate run in 2016?



Gavin Newsom

Likely contenders include Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom, the former mayor of San Francisco, an unabashed, unashamed partisan liberal who officiated gay marriages in The ,even though federal courts had enjoined those weddings. He has already won statewide office, but right now has nothing to do besides supervise a figure-head position.
Attorney General Kamala Harris would be another strong, progressive, activist contender of the seat, since she meets the key liberal criteria: identity politics. Beltway insiders are playing her up to replace the disgraceful Eric Holder as US Attorney General. Two years later, with a national presence and federal resources at her disposal, she could launch a US Senate bid and win.




Kamala Harris

And then there's Jerry. Governor Brown has a somewhat distinguished record already. Prepped for an easy reelection this year, would he give up Sacramento for a seat in Washington? He tried to many times before. If his ambition stirs up again, though, he will more likely announce a Presidential bid against Hillary Clinton, since he has more experience (and media success and spotlight) as an executive. Senator Brown? Only in Ohio.

Are there any other Democratic candidates who could consider a statewide US Senate run in 2016?



Senator Waters?
"The US Constitution can go straight to hell!"

Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-Torrance/Los Angeles) has developed a strong national following in African-American circles, and she has enjoyed more than a fair share of the national limelight as ranking member of the House Banking Committee. An infrequent yet noteworthy guest on Sunday morning talk shows, Waters has conducted town halls throughout her district, and in 2012 she spoke to the Islamic Society of Orange County about the comity of Sharia and the US Constitution.

What was she doing in Orange County, far outside the comforts of her South Los Angeles Constituency? Vetting support for a  possible Senate run? A long-shot possibility, but one which deserves attention, since Senator Boxer was a House Rep when she defeated Democratic House colleague Meldon Levine (Santa Monica/South Bay) in the  1992 primary.

Then there's former LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, but he has outlived his political fame, and despite rumblings for a gubernatorial bid (which disappeared as fast as insinuated), there is little momentum for a statewide run. Same with former LA City Controller Wendy Greuel, runner-up for LA mayor in 2013 and for Congress in 2014, the second time against a little-known state senator, to replace retiring liberal lion Henry Waxman.

What about California contenders for US Senate? Because of the open seat, and a possible drag on the Democratic ticket (especially if GOP chances prevail rather than fail in 2014), moderate to conservative candidates could throw their hat in the ring.

Congressman Darrell Issa

Breitbart suggested one name, which like Rep. Waters has appeared in the print and the social media at great length: Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa. He has the  money and the connections to mount a statewide run, even if self-funded. He could rally the Tea Party base yet draw on Establishment support to bolster his chances. Of course, because of his recent meeting with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, politicos can surmise that Issa is mulling a Presidential run in 2016, too.

Is there any other California Republican with a viable chance of running (let alone winning) in California?

Retired Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley was close to winning the Attorney General seat in 2010 against Kamala Harris, doing very well in districts where Democrats usually register five points ahead of the Republican contender. Despite his popularity and record, Cooley probably wouldn't bother.


Mike
Antonovich

Don Knabe and Mike Antonovich are the most prominent Republican lawmakers in Los Angeles County. Knabe has a bipartisan record of working with all types and accomplishing public projects. Would his influence expand outside of Los Angeles?

Mike Antonovich is the more conservative Republican, with a prior record of running (but losing) for statewide office, including Lieutenant Governor and Senator. His latest move to reject expanding public funding for health insurance in the county rested on his concern that the money would enable illegal immigration. He knows the issues and voters will know where he stands on those issues. Like Knabe, though, could he establish a statewide campaign again? Would he want to? Personally, I would like to see him run.

Would Carly run again?

Other Republican candidates include former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, with a substantial private fortune and her own resume of appearances on Sunday talk-shows and  national campaign stumping. Would Meg Whitman consider another campaign, too?



US Senator Ahh-nold?!
Terminate it!

One name that will likely not appear, nor be mentioned, despite prior discussions about a potential US Senate run: Arnold Schwarzenegger. This man ruined the brand worse than George W. Bush's fiscal imprudence. His legacy of girly men jeers, cap and trade, and liaisons with the housekeeper terminated his chances for higher office, and should put off any chance of him winning the GOP nomination for US Senate, let alone competing competently in a general election.

No matter what happens in 2016, the sources on the ground indicate that incumbent Boxer will sit out another round, a contracted Democratic Party primary will follow, and if the conditions are right, a decent Republican challenger will step up and fight for the open US Senate seat, too.

FAIL: John Cox at Craven, Cowardly CPAC, Too?

John Cox sent out a massive eblast broadside about his attendance at the latest CPAC Conference.

That's not good.

CPAC shut out MassResistance because of their "rhetoric". Give me a break.

Then they told Pamela Geller that she could not have Jim Hoft speak at her First Amendment panel.

Geller cancelled the panel and went home.

Cliff Kincaid's press credentials were revoked, too, because he exposed the anti-liberty LGBT Agenda infiltration CPAC.

But John Cox is celebrating his appearance there?!

Not good. Not good. "Next Governor"? I don't think so ...

Share Tweet Forward

The Insider Update March 2, 2018

The Next California Governor Does CPAC Arthur, I have been going to CPAC for decades, but attending this year as the leading GOP candidate for CA Governor, this had to be my favorite. It was inspiring to see President Trump and Vice President Mike Pence speak and light up the room with optimism and stories articulating their many successes so far. Just as the President is making America great again, it's time you and I make California great again. Let’s unite and do this! - John

Media from CPAC The Rebel: #CPAC2018: John Coxis "the governor California needs" John Cox is a Republican candidate for Governor of California. He's planning to use his skills as a successful business leader to fix the disaster being left by Jerry Brown. Click here to watch the interview. Breitbart: John Cox: Jerry Brown Has ‘Morphed Into George Wallace’ Gov. Jerry Brown and Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom have jointly “morphed into George Wallace,” said California gubernatorial candidate John Cox(R) on Thursday’s edition of SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Tonight in an interview with co-hosts Rebecca Mansour and Joel Pollak. Click here to read the article.

Facebook Live from CPAC Watch John talk to legendary tax fighter Grover Norquist. Watch John‘s conversation with two outstanding patriots: founder of the Lone Conservative Kassy Dillon and President of the Berkeley College Republicans Bradley Devlin. Contribute Volunteer

Share Tweet Forward

Copyright © 2018 John Cox for Governor, All rights reserved.  Thank you for your support of John Cox for Governor!  Our mailing address is:  John Cox for Governor 3525 Del Mar Heights Rd. #1077 San Diego, CA 92130 [//johncoxforgovernor.us16.list-manage.com/vcard?u=7a223cce8a218c61a8b2dfd58&id=37d017f6d4]Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.  Final Reflection I am not impressed with John Cox' appearance at CPAC. I will never go there, because they claim to be a conservative group, but they undermine the very values they claim to support. John Cox is part of this, too? No thanks. I am voting for Travis Allen for Governor!