Thursday, October 17, 2019

China asked league to

The Hill

NBA commissioner says 
China asked league to fire Rocket's GM




The Chinese government reportedly asked NBA Commissioner Adam Silver to fire Houston Rockets general manager Daryl Morey after he tweeted in support of the pro-democracy unrest in Hong Kong, The New York Times reported.

Silver told press Thursday "we said there’s no chance that’s happening."

“There’s no chance we’ll even discipline him,” Silver said.

Morey's tweet, in which he used a phrase coined by Hong Kong protestors, sparked a media firestorm and fallout with China, one of the league's biggest sources of revenue.

The tweet also came days before the NBA was set to play two preseason games in China.

The games were still played, but several Chinese-based companies canceled deals with the Rockets and the league.

Silver said that the financial consequences of Morey's tweets have "already been substantial."

“Our games are not back on the air in China as we speak, and we’ll see what happens next,” he added.

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) also weighed in on the situation through a press release Thursday evening.

“It’s good that Morey still has his job and the NBA deserves credit there," Sasse said.

He continued: "Let’s put this in perspective though: When an American citizen stands for basic human rights, the Chinese Communist Party tries to get him fired. But when a Chinese citizen stands for basic human rights, the Chinese Communist Party has a way of making them disappear.”

Ben Shapiro: Now's the time for Hillary Clinton to jump in and steal the nomination






Ben Shapiro: Now's the time for Hillary Clinton to jump in and steal the nomination

Now is the time for Hillary Clinton to jump into the 2020 race for the White House and take advantage of the weak and fractured field, said Ben Shapiro on Thursday.
Shapiro claimed cracks are beginning to show with the current front-runners for the Democratic nomination and said voters aren't responding to their initial policy proposals.
"It appears there is some roiling tension inside that Democratic field. People are not satisfied with the field they have," he said on "The Ben Shapiro Show."
"Honestly, if Hillary Clinton were to make her grand reentrance, now would be about the time she should do it. Because the fact is, a lot of people are dissatisfied with [Joe] Biden. A lot of people are dissatisfied with [Elizabeth] Warren and Hillary is an enormous name."
Shapiro predicted that if Clinton got into the race she would easily clinch the nomination, but said she is unlikely to do so, paving the way for a Trump victory next November.
"If she were to jump in right now, I think there's a pretty good shot she wins the nomination," he said. "Now, is she actually going to do that? Probably not. And that means the Democratic field is pretty, extraordinarily weak."
The Daily Wire editor-in-chief also targeted Warren directly and mocked her front-runner status, by calling her a dishonest liar.
"The budding impression of Elizabeth Warren is that she's dishonest," he said. "She lies about everything... she lies about her 'Medicare-for-all' plan... and she has now gone back and deleted her tweet about Native American DNA... she's a damn liar."
Last Wednesday Clinton mentioned a hypothetical 2020 run during a PBS News Hour interview and said she could defeat Trump "again" if she decided to jump back in.
"So maybe there does need to be a rematch," Clinton said. "Obviously, I can beat him again. But, just seriously, I don't understand, I don't think anybody understands what motivates him, other than personal grievance, other than seeking adulation."

Ivanka Trump Is Right..


Ivanka Trump Is Right about 
Empowering Women


White House adviser Ivanka Trump with women entrepreneurs during an event at the Lopez Palace in Asuncion, Paraguay, September 6, 2019. (Jorge Adorno/Reuters)

Empowering half the world’s population to flourish in the market economy is the best way to boost growth.

A  recent article in the Los Angeles Times criticizes Advisor to the President Ivanka Trump for working to empower women in the global economy. Trump, a 37-year old businesswoman and entrepreneur (with a degree from the Wharton School of Business), leads the Women’s Global Development and Prosperity Initiative (W-GDP), the first comprehensive “all of government” initiative to help women and girls in developing countries overcome barriers to economic participation and maximize their potential.

Filled with uninformed condescension and sexist statements, the article questions Trump’s role as an advisor and a leader of U.S. development assistance. In actuality, the biased article fails to acknowledge that Ivanka Trump is the first leader within a U.S. administration to effectively focus on what she calls the “most underutilized resource” in the developing world — the power and genius of women. For those of us who have worked in the world of women’s economic empowerment and have seen the dynamic and lasting change it can bring to families and communities, her efforts in this arena are greatly appreciated.

In light of pervasive global poverty and income inequality, Trump’s desire to cultivate women’s full economic potential hits on two excellent points: First, that sustainable development uses a holistic approach to increase the capability and participation of all people in the community — instead of just focusing on the “end goal” of economic growth; and second, that development aid has historically included what Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen called the “extensive neglect of the interests and agency of women.”

Just a few weeks ago, Ivanka Trump and USAID administrator Mark Green traveled through South America to Colombia, Argentina, and Paraguay, creating partnerships and launching programs in conjunction with W-GDP. This was the second trip since the launch of W-GDP in February 2019 to increase women’s global workforce participation, support their entrepreneurship, and reduce legal and cultural practices that hinder economic agency. One of the many accomplishments of this trip included the launch of the Academy of Women Entrepreneurs (AWE) in Colombia, a program run by the U.S. government and local Colombian partners that helps women gain the skills and expertise they need to create, own, and operate small businesses.

It is a well-documented fact that when women, who make up half the population, are encouraged to participate in the economy, the outcome is sustained social and economic growth for the wider society. A simple but clear example is the female-owned organic-strawberry farm that Trump and Green visited outside of Bogota called El Salero. The farm is supported by a Fundacion ANDI–USAID partnership, and with this help, strawberry productivity increased 82 percent and farm incomes increased 65 percent over a period of 18 months.

But when you consider that most of the world’s approximately 200 million unemployed are women and young adults living in developing countries (where the private sector provides 90 percent of the jobs), the importance of promoting women in the workforce becomes even clearer. Moreover, the EY Global Job Creation Survey 2016 suggests that businesses started by women create more jobs and exceed hiring expectations, as compared to businesses owned by men. But women still face higher barriers than men in starting a business or getting a job, and women do not have the legal rights or supporting environment that would enable entrepreneurship.

One approach to development argues that capabilities “should be pursued for each and every person, treating each as an end and none as a mere tool of the ends of others.” (Nussbaum) Too often throughout history, women have been used to support “the ends of others” and not as an autonomous “end in their own right.” Empowering women in the economy also increases their personal agency, meaning that women in developing countries can become “active agents of change” for themselves and for their communities, and not just recipients of foreign financial assistance.

Ivanka Trump’s W-GDP initiative, which plans to economically empower 50 million women by 2025, is working to lead women to self-reliance with the win-win outcome of boosting productivity, creating jobs, and increasing economic growth in their wider communities. As Mark Green said in Colombia at El Sasero, “You cannot have economic growth, you cannot have a brighter future, unless you reach out and empower women.”

What Barr Got Right - and..


What Barr Got Right — 
and What He Might Add


Attorney General William Barr (File photo: Erin Scott/Reuters)

He singled out for criticism those who believe that, in effect, government social programs could replace the virtues instilled by religion.

Attorney General William Barr finds himself the target of criticism for remarks he made at the University of Notre Dame in which he made the case that a decline in religiosity — and, indeed, attacks on the beliefs of the religious — might have something to do with personal and social dysfunction in the United States.

For this — and his expressed view that “militant secularists” might actually prefer to replace the “traditional moral order” — Barr stands accused of endorsing some sort of Christian theocracy.

Barr, of course, hardly endorsed the idea the church–state divide should be erased in the United States. Nor did he insist that only the religious could live a healthy and productive life. Rather, he singled out for criticism those who believe that, in effect, government social programs could replace the virtues instilled by religion. It’s an important distinction. Since the New Deal, and increasingly since the Great Society, we have done exactly what Barr asserted: We have “called on the state to mitigate the social costs of personal misconduct and irresponsibility . . .”

One tends to think in this regard of financial social-safety-net programs — the social-welfare state. But much more is involved in what might be termed the social-service state — the huge constellation of social-service “providers” who claim they can use counseling techniques to improve the lives of the addicted, the promiscuous, the domestic abusers. The distribution of federal funds to these not-for-profit organizations has, as Barr suggested, reflected a dramatic shift in values.

In the early 1960s the so-called independent sector was truly independent of government, but today, social-service providers have become creatures of government. Indeed, the Urban Institute has foundthat government agencies enter into some 350,000 contracts and grants annually with about 56,000 nonprofit organizations — much of which is social services meant to pick up the pieces of unfortunate life choices. Indeed, the Administration for Children and Families, a major part of the Department of Health and Human Services, distributes some $53 billion annually for a variety of treatment programs, as well as advocacy efforts aimed at increasing the amount of such spending.

This is exactly what Barr highlighted in his powerful story of his recent visit to church, during which a member of the parish social-action committee deplored the extent and state of the homeless in Washington, D.C. and the importance of soup kitchens to help them. “I expected him to call for volunteers to go out and provide this need,” Barr said. “Instead, he recounted all the visits that the committee had made to the D.C. government to lobby for higher taxes and more spending to fund mobile soup kitchens.”

What Barr describes is a long-term shift from an understanding that a robust civil society, including religious institutions, could promote healthy norms such as sobriety and self-discipline to a belief that government could be relied upon for rehabilitation, the term emphasized by the Kennedy administration when it first authorized federal grants for social services. This has not simply been a change in who pays for the same types of services. Rather, we have moved away from an emphasis on the formative — values that guide a productive, purpose-based life — to the reformative, based on the idea that social workers, paid by government, can cure our ills.

Religion, to be sure, has always played a key role in imparting formative values. But prior to the growth of the social-service state, major non-government-funded civil-society organizations did so as well.

In 19th-century New York, Charles Loring Brace, concerned about homeless street children, founded the Children’s Aid Society — with a board comprising Protestants, Catholics, and Jews — not only to provide shelter for newsboys and bootblacks but to counsel them on their life choices. “If you are selling papers,” Brace advised, “do honestly by everyone who deals with you, work early and late and you will soon begin to save money. This is the way men acquire wealth — by constant saving and hard work. (And) whether you are rich or not, you make an honest living and have no reason to be ashamed of your work.”

This civil-society “formative” tradition — often inspired by faith (Brace was a Methodist minister) but not itself about proselytizing — has had many subsequent institutional incarnations. Settlement houses taught English and the basics of American citizenship to immigrants; early social workers believed that “friendly visiting” to promote what we would now call bourgeois norms was the crucial means to impart to the poor the tools of self-improvement. Such institutions include the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, 4-H, and YM/YWCA. Because all these rely on philanthropy and volunteers, the growth of the social-service state — by diverting wealth and promoting the idea that government can cure our ills — undermines them.

William Barr has performed a great service by pointing out not only the way that government has diverted resources, both human and financial, from our civil society but the way it has distorted the way we think about how to assist those in need and, indeed, prevent need from arising.

What Elijah Cummings' death means for impeachment










What Elijah Cummings' death means for impeachment



The passing of House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings leaves a vacancy in the leadership of the congressional impeachment inquiry, as the powerful Democrat was spearheading the efforts alongside Adam Schiff and Eliot Engel.
Cummings, of Maryland, passed away early Thursday “due to complications concerning longstanding health challenges,” his office said in a statement. The late congressman had been in poor health over the past few years, navigating the Capitol in a motorized cart and with a walker.
Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y.,  the next in seniority to take over the gavel of the committee, is now filling Cummings' post and will serve the "acting" Oversight Committee chair.
Cummings was tasked with the House impeachment inquiry into President Trump last month, when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., announced the formal process following revelations surrounding the president’s phone call with the Ukrainian president over the summer.

Cummings, along with House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., was leading the inquiry—sending subpoenas, document requests, and conducting interviews with Trump administration officials who could hold information pertinent to the effort.
Each official House impeachment inquiry statement or update was issued on behalf of all three committee chairs, despite the fact that Cummings had not been seen on Capitol Hill in the last several weeks during some of those prominent closed-door interviews with officials.
"Elijah Cummings was the heart and soul of our caucus, a dignified leader with a voice that could move mountains. He was our moral and ethical North Star," Schiff tweeted Thursday. "Now we will be guided by his powerful memory and incomparable legacy. Rest In Peace, my friend."
Meanwhile, as news spread of Cummings’ passing on Thursday, the Oversight Committee postponed a planned hearing, and House Republicans canceled a press conference where they planned to lambast Democrats over the impeachment inquiry and said it would be rescheduled.
“We are deeply saddened by the passing of Elijah Cummings, a man of great consequence and significance on the Oversight Committee for the last twenty years,” Committee Ranking Member Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said in a statement Thursday. "He injected an unyielding passion and purpose into his work on the Committee.”
Jordan added that his prayers were with the Cummings family and his staff.
“Their loyalty and affinity for him speaks volumes about his character,” Jordan said.
During a press conference Thursday, Pelosi, when asked about the timeline going forward on the impeachment inquiry, said: "The timeline will depend on the truth line."
She also was asked if the Democrats would consider what American voters wanted in terms of the president's removal.
"The voters are not going to decide whether we honor our oath of office," she said.
Meanwhile, President Trump, who was the subject of not only the impeachment inquiry but other investigations led by Cummings and his committee, sent his condolences to the Cummings family and friends.
“I got to see first hand the strength, passion, and wisdom of this highly respected political leader,” Trump tweeted Thursday morning. “His work and voice on so many fronts will be very hard, if not impossible, to replace!”
He clashed with Trump after the president criticized his district as a "rodent-infested mess" where "no human being would want to live."
Cummings replied that government officials must stop making "hateful, incendiary comments" that only serve to divide and distract the nation from its real problems, including mass shootings and white supremacy.
"Those in the highest levels of the government must stop invoking fear, using racist language and encouraging reprehensible behavior," Cummings said in a speech in August at the National Press Club.
Fox News'  Chad Pergram, Alex Pappas and The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

A Democrat, and Social Conservative Challenges..

National Review


A Democrat, and Social Conservative, Challenges Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez listens as David Marcus, CEO of Facebookís Calibra, testifies to the House Financial Services Committee, July 17, 2019 (Joshua Roberts/Reuters)

Fernando Cabrera is running to unseat her in next year’s primary in New York.

D emocratic city councilman Fernando Cabrera sounds like a New Yorker. He’s speaking fast when I reach him by phone Monday, rattling off the myriad differences between himself and the woman he’s challenging for the Democratic primary nomination for New York’s 14th district: Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.


As a well-known New York Democrat who is unconcerned about jeopardizing a future career in national politics, Cabrera is the most serious primary challenger to enter the race, and the media have taken notice. His announcement was covered in the New York Post last week, and he was headed to an interview with Fox News as we discussed his plans to upset a political phenom.

While the cosmetic differences between Cabrera — a 55-year-old Pentecostal pastor —and his 29-year-old former bartender opponent abound, he’s convinced that the primary distinction between himself and Ocasio-Cortez is his willingness to do the work of government. He rapidly details his record as a three-term city councilman: falling crime and unemployment rates in his district, coupled with increased graduation rates and high-school STEM achievement. He juxtaposes this record with the way that Ocasio-Cortez has spent her first year in office.

“The ‘o’ in Ocasio stands for ‘zero,’” he says impatiently. “She has brought home zero money, she’s advanced zero bills.” His frustration is obvious. Cabrera explains that he had no intention of running for the congressional seat. “I would’ve retired,” he says, but then he saw how Ocasio-Cortez derailed Amazon’s plan to bring its headquarters, and 25,000 jobs, to Queens.

Citing her concern for the city’s working class, Ocasio-Cortez joined fellow progressives in Albany to lobby against the tax breaks that the city used to woo the corporate giant. And, having successfully blocked the move, she bizarrely touted the money she helped the city “save” by blocking tax breaks on taxes that will no longer be paid at all. This infuriated Cabrera, who was in talks with city educators to develop special technical high schools that would train students for jobs exactly like those Amazon would have offered.

The problem with Ocasio-Cortez is twofold, in Cabrera’s estimation. She prioritizes broad, attention-grabbing national issues over constituent service, and when she tries to solve problems that are, arguably, far outside her remit as a freshman congresswoman, her commitment is purely rhetorical. Or, as Cabrera puts it, “she doesn’t show up.”

To illustrate their differences, Cabrera cites their respective approaches to addressing climate change. When hurricanes rocked Puerto Rico last year, Cabrera dropped his life in New York and joined a cleanup crew on the island for three weeks. Ocasio-Cortez, by contrast, has responded to the threat of climate change by using her considerable political capital to introduce the Green New Deal, a resolution that ostensibly is aimed at combating environmental disaster but actually would restructure much of the American economy, bringing it under government control within a decade.

“She was voted down by her own [Democratic] colleagues, 57 to zero,” when the resolution was put up for a vote in the Senate, Cabrera notes before launching into a diatribe about her refusal to work with more experienced politicians to navigate the machinery of government.

While he stresses that he would be focused on local matters if elected, when it comes to addressing massive issues like climate change, he’d get involved to the extent that he could help directly, he explains. He believes that government works best when narrow policy solutions, arrived at through compromise, are applied to specific problems. He’s therefore allergic to Ocasio-Cortez’s particular brand of revolutionary politics, which seeks to combine a host of discrete policy issues with a broader socialist framework by which they can all be resolved in one fell swoop. Also, unlike Ocasio-Cortez, he has skin in the game when it comes to creating a better future: “Socialism is not what I want for my kids and my grandkids.” Ocasio-Cortez recently suggested she may not have kids since the threat of climate change has made the thought of doing so “bittersweet.”

Those three weeks spent in Puerto Rico, cleaning up and helping repair a world his kids and grandkids will inherit, versus Ocasio-Cortez’s endless media appearances touting the toothless Green New Deal, provide a neat juxtaposition. The day after I speak with Cabrera, Ocasio-Cortez, as if eager to make his point, tweets jubilantly about the socialist virtues of Denmark.

“Thank you everyone for the birthday wishes,” she writes. “Spending the day in Denmark after C40, enjoying this social democracy that treats healthcare & education as rights, zero-carbon as priority, & infrastructure as a key public good.”

Asked how, as a congressman, he would spend the free time he’d gain by forgoing projects like the Green New Deal and, presumably, trips to Denmark, Cabrera suggests he would continue the work he’s done throughout his career, but on a larger scale, with considerably more resources.

That means he would continue working to curb gun violence. Once again, the dichotomy between himself and his opponent rears its head. In 2012, Cabrera founded the Gun Violence Task Force with fellow councilman Jumaane Williams, now the city’s public advocate. As co-chairs of the task force, Williams and Cabrera helped implement the Cure Violence program, which trains and sends out former gang members from Brooklyn and the South Bronx to interrupt insidious cycles of violence in the neighborhoods they grew up in. The program has been effective: “In the South Bronx Cure Violence site, the analysis revealed significant declines in shooting victimizations,” according to a 2017 report from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice. Cabrera wants federal funding to expand this program, which currently encompasses just ten square blocks in his district.

He sees Ocasio-Cortez’s histrionic calls for overarching federal gun-control legislation, usually issued in the wake of a mass shooting or an outbreak of violence thousands of miles from her own district, as yet another empty gesture. “She’s nowhere to be found here,” he says. “She’ll point the finger at Chicago, but in her own backyard we have seen the rates of crime climb through the roof.” Indeed, both police precincts that are entirely encompassed by the 14th congressional district have experienced more than twice as many gun deaths in 2019 than in the year prior, according to weekly NYPD crime reports.

In addition to the apparent gap between their governing philosophies, he and Ocasio-Cortez have diametrically opposed social values. “I’m about family, faith, and community,” says Cabrera, who was born to a Puerto Rican and a Dominican immigrant and raised in the Bronx. Like much of his congregation and, he argues, much of the congressional district he hopes to represent, he is socially conservative.

He was pilloried by fellow Democrats on the city council in 2014 after a video surfaced of him praising Uganda’s adherence to Christian doctrine and its prohibition against gay marriage. The video emerged soon after Uganda passed a law making homosexuality punishable by life in prison, though Cabrera does not mention that legislation specifically in the video. While he holds traditional views on marriage and opposes abortion, he is sure to tell me that he’s worked with every stripe of New Yorker during his years as a pastor and in his nine years on the city council.

Ocasio-Cortez, by contrast, helped fundraise for the British transgender-rights group Mermaid Coalition, as one of her first acts in office. As our own Madeleine Kearns reported in January, “the 29-year-old congresswoman appeared in a livestream to support Harry Brews, a British gamer, who played the entire game of Donkey Kong in one sitting in order to raise $340,000 for Mermaids UK, a British charity that promotes sex changes for gender-confused children.”

Cabrera is convinced his traditional values better reflect the district and will win out over AOC’s particular brand of social-media-friendly progressivism. “It’s a moderate to conservative district,” Cabrera says. “I’m a match, I’m a perfect fit, I’m a reflection the people.”

Cabrera is under no illusions about the uphill battle he’s facing. He recognizes that the country’s young progressives, spurred on by sympathetic and monolithic national media, have rallied around Ocasio-Cortez as the epitome of authenticity. After all, she livestreams herself making mac and cheese. Cabrera’s campaign rests on his belief that New Yorkers have a finely tuned nose for the real thing and they’ve realized Ocasio-Cortez doesn’t qualify.

“In this district we’re not impressed with any type of celebrity status,” he says. “We want elected officials who are able to produce results and she has utterly failed.” We’ll find out, on June 23, 2020, whether his faith in New Yorkers is justified.