Via Alison Webster on Twitter:
Sublime @you_kiki on www. https://t.co/pC7b8gi7l5 today hmu @charlietoons pic.twitter.com/9VdS9XssEr
— Alison Webster (@alisonvwebster) April 8, 2016
Commentary and analysis on American politics, culture, and national identity, U.S. foreign policy and international relations, and the state of education - from a neoconservative perspective! - Keeping an eye on the communist-left so you don't have to!
Sublime @you_kiki on www. https://t.co/pC7b8gi7l5 today hmu @charlietoons pic.twitter.com/9VdS9XssEr
— Alison Webster (@alisonvwebster) April 8, 2016
The Left Seeks End of Sex-Segregation Everywhere: https://t.co/KsskfEGXKa #Leftism #LGBTyranny #Privacy #Modesty #tcot #MediaWatch
— IL Family Institute (@ProFamilyIFI) April 7, 2016
A funny thing happened on the way to the following article getting published. After two pieces appeared in the Chicago Tribune mocking and maligning those who believe sex differences matter, I submitted an op-ed in which I express an opposing view. The associate editor of the Chicago Tribune’s Commentary section, Marcia Lythcott sent me this response:More.
I would love you to offer up an opposing viewpoint but you have submitted a rant. There is no way that this piece would make those on the fence say “Hmmm, that a really interesting viewpoint to consider.” I feel like you are jabbing the opposition in the eyes nonstop. Is it possible for you to do a rewrite, one that is less doctrinaire and reader-friendly? The point is to have as many readers as possible read a piece to the bitter end. I fear that many will stop reading your submission by the third paragraph. No one wants to be screamed at.Readers can make their own judgments about the professionalism and accuracy of Lythcott’s eye-jabbing response, but before doing so, please take a few minutes to read the two pieces that prompted my op-ed, one by Rex Huppke and one by Mary Sanchez. See if their articles are less eye-jabbing, doctrinaire, ranting, and screaming than mine.
“The Left Seeks End of Sex-Segregation Everywhere”
Written by Laurie Higgins — First published on American Thinker
North Carolina’s attorney general recently announced that he would not fulfill his duty to defend a duly enacted law one of the purposes of which was to preserve the right of communities to require that restrooms correspond to biological sex rather than “gender identity.” Progressives are incensed by this type of legislation, which is proposed by conservatives in response to leftist actions in the service of their subversive beliefs about gender dysphoria. Progressives want any persons who wish they were the opposite sex to have unrestricted access to opposite-sex private areas, including restrooms, locker rooms, showers, dressing rooms and single-sex shelters. In the brave new progressive world, beliefs about the meaningfulness of objective, immutable physical embodiment as male or female must be subordinated to desires to be the opposite sex.
The left seeks to prohibit “discrimination” based on “gender identity” and “gender expression” in all contexts, including those areas that were created for the sole purpose of recognizing and accommodating objective, immutable sex differences. The prohibition of discrimination based on sex and the prohibition of discrimination based on “gender identity” and “gender expression” with regard to facilities in which private activities take place are wholly incompatible. The former permits society in some contexts to accommodate sex differences. The latter forbids society in any context from accommodating real, objective, immutable differences between men and women.
Some progressives dishonestly claim that conservatives are “obsessed” with so-called “bathroom bills,” when in reality it’s gender-dysphoric activists and their ideological allies who are obsessed with radically altering the cultural understanding of sex. They seek to mandate that sex-separated facilities, like restrooms, for private activities no longer correspond to the biological sex of humans but to the subjective feelings of humans about their sex.
Progressives ignore substantive conservative arguments. They recast arguments about the nature and meaning of sexual differentiation as bigotry; flippantly mock potential risks, particularly for girls and women; and wholly ignore the near universal understanding that separate facilities for men and women to engage in private activities exist because objective bodily differences exist and have meaning.
The concern of conservatives is not centrally about gender-dysphoric men assaulting women or girls — though that risk is not nil. The safety concern is, rather, that predators may exploit these policies, pretending to be gender-dysphoric in order to access women’s private facilities.
But even this is not the central concern. The central concern is with the meaning and value of physical embodiment from which feelings of modesty and desires for privacy derive.
In order to justify the injustice and irrationality of policies that force women and men to share private areas with persons of the opposite sex, the left resorts to unsound comparisons of gender dysphoria per se to race per se. Their error rests in the fact that while there are no intrinsic and meaningful differences between people of different races, there are intrinsic, substantive and meaningful differences between males and females, which both those who experience gender dysphoria and those who experience same-sex attraction implicitly acknowledge.
Here are some questions for progressives...
A former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State and currently a Distinguished Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, Kim R. Holmes surveys the state of liberalism in America today and finds that it is becoming its opposite—illiberalism—abandoning the precepts of open-mindedness and respect for individual rights, liberties, and the rule of law upon which the country was founded, and becoming instead an intolerant, rigidly dogmatic ideology that abhors dissent and stifles free speech. Tracing the new illiberalism historically to the radical Enlightenment, a movement that rejected the classic liberal ideas of the moderate Enlightenment that were prominent in the American Founding, Holmes argues that today’s liberalism has forsaken its American roots, incorporating instead the authoritarian, anti-clerical, and anti-capitalist prejudices of the radical and largely European Left. The result is a closing of the American liberal mind...More.
Keep reading.
A divided Board of Supervisors voted in 2014 to reinstate the cross on top of a depiction of the San Gabriel Mission, which appears on the seal among other symbols of county history. They were sued by the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California and a group of religious leaders and scholars, who said placement of the cross on the seal unconstitutionally favored Christianity over other religions.
A decade earlier, the county had removed a cross from the seal — this one shown floating above the Hollywood Bowl — after being threatened with a similar lawsuit. The proponents of reinstating the cross on the seal argued it was needed to make the image of the mission historically and architecturally accurate. When the seal was redesigned in 2004, there was no cross on top of the mission, as it had gone missing during earthquake retrofitting. The cross was later restored atop the building...
We have been documenting a clear shift in tactics by anti-Israel campus activists, led by Students for Justice in Palestine joined by other groups.Keep reading (additional video there as well).
The shift is towards disruption of Israeli and pro-Israeli speakers on campus in order to create a hostile campus environment. We have reported on several such recent disruptions, including at UC-Davis, University of Chicago, University of Minnesota Law School, UT-Austin, Kings College (London), U. Windsor, University of South Florida, and anLGBTQ Shabbat Event in Chicago. Even events that are not disrupted are protested, such as the appearance of actor Michael Douglas and human rights hero Natan Sharansky at Brown University.
It happened again yesterday at San Francisco State University, where anti-Israel activists have co-opted student protests over proposed budget cuts. International Business Times reports...
More than half of the likely Republican primary voters in New York favor Donald Trump, according to a new Monmouth University poll, potentially allowing the celebrity businessman to sweep the state’s 95 delegates on April 19.
Mr. Trump won 52% support in the poll, while Ohio Gov. John Kasich got 25% and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz got 17%.
“If this result holds in every single congressional district, Trump will walk away with nearly all of New York state’s delegates,” said Patrick Murray, director of the independent Monmouth University Polling Institute.
The poll concludes that about one-third of the state’s GOP vote will come from the 16 congressional districts encompassing New York City and Long Island, though this populated region will produce most of the state’s 95 delegates. Any candidate who wins more than 50% in any district wins all three delegates, forcing Mr. Trump’s challengers to micro-target areas where they might be able to hold his support below a majority.
Most New York Republicans said they were not influenced by Mr. Trump’s recent statements that he favored punishing women who have abortions and allowing Japan and South Korea to make nuclear weapons. But 29% said those controversial statements make them less likely to support him...
As China asserts itself in its nearby seas and Russia wages war in Syria and Ukraine, it is easy to assume that Eurasia’s two great land powers are showing signs of newfound strength. But the opposite is true: increasingly, China and Russia flex their muscles not because they are powerful but because they are weak. Unlike Nazi Germany, whose power at home in the 1930s fueled its military aggression abroad, today’s revisionist powers are experiencing the reverse phenomenon. In China and Russia, it is domestic insecurity that is breeding belligerence. This marks a historical turning point: for the first time since the Berlin Wall fell, the United States finds itself in a competition among great powers.Keep reading.
Economic conditions in both China and Russia are steadily worsening. Ever since energy prices collapsed in 2014, Russia has been caught in a serious recession. China, meanwhile, has entered the early stages of what promises to be a tumultuous transition away from double-digit annual GDP growth; the stock market crashes it experienced in the summer of 2015 and January 2016 will likely prove a mere foretaste of the financial disruptions to come.
Given the likelihood of increasing economic turmoil in both countries, their internal political stability can no longer be taken for granted. In the age of social media and incessant polling, even autocrats such as Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin feel the need for public approval. Already, these leaders no doubt suffer from a profound sense of insecurity, as their homelands have long been virtually surrounded by enemies, with flatlands open to invaders. And already, they are finding it harder to exert control over their countries’ immense territories, with potential rebellions brewing in their far-flung regions.
The world has seen the kind of anarchy that ethnic, political, and sectarian conflict can cause in small and medium-size states. But the prospect of quasi anarchy in two economically struggling giants is far more worrisome. As conditions worsen at home, China and Russia are likely to increasingly export their troubles in the hope that nationalism will distract their disgruntled citizens and mobilize their populations. This type of belligerence presents an especially difficult problem for Western countries. Whereas aggression driven by domestic strength often follows a methodical, well-developed strategy—one that can be interpreted by other states, which can then react appropriately—that fueled by domestic crisis can result in daring, reactive, and impulsive behavior, which is much harder to forecast and counter.
As U.S. policymakers contemplate their response to the growing hostility of Beijing and Moscow, their first task should be to avoid needlessly provoking these extremely sensitive and domestically declining powers. That said, they cannot afford to stand idly by as China and Russia redraw international borders and maritime boundaries. The answer? Washington needs to set clear redlines, quietly communicated—and be ready to back them up with military power if necessary...
It’s time to put the “home” back into our homeland. Part prescription and part memoir, this exceptional view of America’s security concerns by a leading government Homeland Security advisor, Pulitzer Prize–finalist columnist, CNN analyst and mother of three delivers a message and a plan: security begins at home.
“Soccer Moms” are so last decade. Juliette Kayyem is a “Security Mom.” A national security expert who worked at the highest levels of government, and also a mom of three, she’s lived it all—from the fears of being a target of an anthrax hoax, to the challenges of managing the BP Oil spill, to the more intimate challenges of defeating lice in her children’s hair—and now she tells it all. Weaving her personal story of marriage and motherhood into a fast-paced account of managing the nation’s most compelling disasters, Juliette recounts the milestones that mark the path of her unpredictable, daring, funny, and ultimately relatable life....
Security Mom is an utterly modern tale about the highs and lows of having-it-all parenthood and a candid, sometimes shocking, behind-the-scenes look inside the high-stakes world of national security. Unlike so many in her field who seem invested on terrifying citizens into paralysis, Juliette’s motto has always been “don’t scare, prepare!” In her signature refreshing style, Juliette reveals how she came to learn that homeland security is not simply about tragedy and terror; it is about what we can do every day to keep each other strong and safe.
'My God. We've done this': Meet the reporters who probed the Panama Papers: When Gerard Ryle saw a photograph ... https://t.co/YAtmo8PHRR
— Social N Chicago (@SocialInChicago) April 6, 2016
When Gerard Ryle saw a photograph of thousands of protesters gathered outside Iceland's Parliament this week, a thought flickered through his mind: "My God. We've done this."Keep reading.
It was true. Iceland's prime minister stepped down from office Tuesday — the most significant fallout so far of the work by journalists collaborating with Ryle's International Consortium of Investigative Journalists.
Over the weekend, hundreds of reporters in more than 70 countries unveiled a nearly yearlong global investigation and began publishing a series of articles on millions of leaked financial documents they dubbed the "Panama Papers," a trove of information bigger than anything WikiLeaks or Edward Snowden ever obtained.
The effect has been like shining a flashlight into a series of dark rooms packed with money and lies. The documents leaked from the Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca — and examined by journalists at outlets including the Guardian, the BBC and the Miami Herald — have forced global leaders and public figures to answer for the massive amounts of wealth they had hidden in offshore tax havens, outside the scrutiny of auditors and voters.
But the story started small, with an anonymous writer's message to the German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung in early 2015: "Hello. This is John Doe. Interested in data?"
The newspaper was interested, of course. But the source said there were conditions: "My life is in danger. We will only chat over encrypted files. No meeting, ever."
"Why are you doing this?" a journalist at the newspaper asked the source, according to an account published this weekend.
"I want to make these crimes public."
The documents sent to the newspaper stretched back decades and were unwieldy. They included bank records, emails, phone numbers and photocopies of passports held by Mossack Fonseca to track its clients. But there was no road map to show what they all meant.
It was like trying to read an MRI without a doctor.
Seeking help, the Sueddeutsche Zeitung reached out to Ryle's consortium, a global network of journalists that had handled document leaks from the HSBC bank and the tiny European nation of Luxembourg.
The network is overseen by the Washington-based Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit known for its muckraking journalism in the United States. The two share offices on different floors of the same building...
Depending on the final outcome, Trump will need to capture close to 60% of the remaining delegates to clinch the nomination without a convention fight, said David Wasserman, who is tracking the GOP race for the nonpartisan Cook Political Report. “Right now,” Wasserman said, “it looks like a 50-50 chance he gets there.”And see Politico, "Wisconsin meltdown puts Trump on track for convention fight."
Heading into the Wisconsin primary Trump suffered one of the rockiest stretches of his campaign, and that raised the hopes of opponents — including many rallying behind Cruz grudgingly as part of a stop-Trump effort — that the New York businessman's controversies may have finally caught up with him.
Exit polls found a strong aversion to the GOP front-runner, who heads to much friendlier territory Wednesday, starting with a rally on New York's Long Island.
Nearly 4 in 10 of the Republican voters interviewed Tuesday said they would be scared of what Trump would do if elected president, much higher than the levels of concern expressed about Cruz or Kasich.
About 6 in 10 said they were excited or optimistic about a Cruz presidency, and about half said that about Kasich, compared with just over 4 in 10 for Trump.
Additionally, the level of discontent with Washington and the percentage of voters favoring a political outsider for president, while considerable, was much lower than in states where Trump ran strongly.
Wisconsin at first seemed tailored to Trump's advantage. The state has a large population of working-class white voters and allows independents to cast ballots in the GOP primary; both groups have undergirded Trump's political success across the country.
Wisconsin is also more secular and less ideological than states where Cruz, running as a staunch social conservative, has performed well.
But almost immediately Trump ran into difficulties, owing to a series of tactical miscues.
He criticized the state's two most popular Republicans, Gov. Scott Walker, a onetime presidential rival, and House Speaker Paul D. Ryan, and turned off many by insulting the looks of Cruz's wife, Heidi, in a posting on social media.
“That stung him badly,” said Rep. Reid Ribble, who represents Appleton and Green Bay in Congress and endorsed Cruz days ahead of the primary. “There's a real strong sense of family. The idea that somebody would attack anybody's wife, based on just physical appearance, was just so insulting to the typical father, to the typical husband and to the typical woman.”
Trump also faced a relentless battering from Wisconsin's conservative talk radio hosts, a key ally in Walker's pitched battles against organized labor and the political left.
Walker endorsed Cruz and, in effect, turned the primary into a referendum on his performance, telling Republicans to support the senator over Trump “if you liked what we've done” in Wisconsin.
Trump's difficulties were compounded by a series of controversies, including the arrest of his campaign manager on allegations of manhandling a reporter in Florida, and a statement — which Trump quickly revised — that the candidate would support punishing women who have an abortion if the procedure were banned.
Some voters, like Pam Gruettner, said they had backed Trump at first, only to be turned off by his behavior and outlandish statements, especially in the raucous GOP debates.
“I wanted someone to kick butt and get stuff done in the White House,” said Gruettner, a retired saleswoman, pausing after she cast her ballot for Cruz in Waukesha, a conservative stronghold. “I think his ego got the best of him.”
For some, though, Trump's penchant for unpredictability and blithe disregard for most social and political niceties were precisely the reason to support him.
“Trump is the right person to put in here, because we need somebody who everyone thinks is nuts,” said Tom Podziemski, 67, who cast his ballot in Greenfield, a Milwaukee suburb. “Cruz is just saying what the establishment wants him to say. He's a puppet.”
Cruz ran harder in Wisconsin than any state since Iowa, where he won the first 2016 contest. He faced a two-front battle, against Trump as well as Kasich, who tried to pick off a handful of delegates in friendly pockets of the state, including the university town of Madison.
For Trump, the good news is the balloting now moves to less hostile political terrain, starting in two weeks with a primary in his home state of New York, where he is an overwhelming favorite to capture a substantial chunk of its 95 delegates.
A string of contests follows on April 26 in Pennsylvania and several Northeastern and mid-Atlantic states, where GOP voters tend to be less religious and conservative, which could also play to Trump's advantage...
Mike Scioscia sends you to the dictionary after the Angels 6-1 loss. https://t.co/vBQbjzKkFA
— Jeff Fletcher (@JeffFletcherOCR) April 6, 2016
ANAHEIM – The best thing you can say about the Angels’ season-opening two losses is that they are only two losses.More.
“It doesn’t count as three losses because you gave up a bunch of runs,” Manager Mike Scioscia said after his team dropped a 6-1 game to the Chicago Cubs on Tuesday night.
In their first two games, including a 9-0 loss on opening day Monday, the Angels have been outscored by 14 runs. That’s the worst two-game start in franchise history.
Again, though, just two games. Just a blink of an eye in a season.
“If you look up the definition of a small sample in the dictionary,” Scioscia said, “you’re going to find these two games are a small sample.”
To prove the point, the Angels’ previous worst two-game start came in 2014, when they were outscored by 12 runs in the first two games against the Seattle Mariners. They came back to win a major-league best 98 of their last 160 games that season.
That bit of meaningless trivia aside, the Angels certainly didn’t leave themselves much to feel good about heading into the season’s first off day...
In her Twitter Q&A, @TriciaLockwood made a reference to her essay that we decided to delete. https://t.co/TW1FolejCZ pic.twitter.com/j9DflPWLYZ
— New Republic (@NewRepublic) April 5, 2016
Imagine the enormous amount of trust it must require for an established journalistic institution to allow me to hijack their twitter account
— Patricia Lockwood (@TriciaLockwood) April 5, 2016
god forgive me on this day for using an unironic hashtag
— Patricia Lockwood (@TriciaLockwood) April 5, 2016
well that was fun while it lasted
— Patricia Lockwood (@TriciaLockwood) April 5, 2016
love means never having to say you're making a reference to your essay https://t.co/jk8PRNAgf9
— Patricia Lockwood (@TriciaLockwood) April 5, 2016
A 4-year-old Aurora girl was kicked out of a preschool last month when her parents raised questions about books read in her class, including ones that told the stories about same-sex couples and worms unsure about their gender.Sickening.
Her mother, R.B. Sinclair, sees it as sex education and wanted to opt her daughter out of those discussions.
Instead, school officials from Montview Community Preschool & Kindergarten in Aurora — run as a private, parent cooperative — explained the stories were part of the school's anti-bias curriculum, and because the discussions are embedded through the day, they told her that opting out was not possible.
She's known for playing a nerdy teen on ABC's Modern Family.More.
But Ariel Winter was far from her geeky TV persona as she frolicked on the beach in the Bahamas last week.
The 18-year-old put her incredible bikini body on display in a stringy white two-piece with gold chains clasping her bottoms together...
ICYMI: Jake Arrieta spoiled Angels opening night. https://t.co/FFwXCfhgte— Jeff Fletcher (@JeffFletcherOCR) April 5, 2016
ANAHEIM -- After suffering their worst opening day loss Monday, the Angels are set to "turn the page," to use one of Mike Scioscia's favorite phrases, with the second and final game of the series against the Chicago Cubs on Tuesday.The game's about to start as this post goes live.
It's a battle of lefties, with the Angels' Andrew Heaney facing the Cubs' Jon Lester.
Lester hasn't fared that well at Angel Stadium, posting a 4.76 ERA here in five starts. Heaney has never faced the Cubs.
The Angels are using their expected lineup against a lefty, with Craig Gentry starting in left in place of Daniel Nava. In spring training, it looked as if Mike Scioscia may have dropped Gentry in the lineup -- rather than just swapping him straight into Nava's No. 2 spot -- but Gentry is hitting second...
Fifty years after Betty Friedan unveiled The Feminine Mystique, relations between men and women in America have never been more dysfunctional. If women are more liberated than ever before, why aren't they happier? In this shocking, funny, and bluntly honest tour of today’s gender discontents, Andrea Tantaros, one of Fox News' most popular and outspoken stars, exposes how the rightful feminist pursuit of equality went too far, and how the unintended pitfalls of that power trade have made women (and men!) miserable.More.
In a covetous quest to attain the power that men had, women were advised to work like men, talk like men, party like men, and have sex like men. There’s just one problem: women aren’t men. Instead of feeling happy with their newfound freedoms, females today are tied up in knots, trying to strike a balance between their natural, feminine and traditional desires and what modern society dictates—and demands—through the commandments of feminism.
Revealing the mass confusion this has caused among both sexes, Tantaros argues that decades of social and economic progress haven’t brought women the peace and contentedness they were told they'd gain from their new opportunities. The pressure both to have it all and to put forth the perfectly post-worthy, filtered life for social media and society at large has left women feeling twisted. Meanwhile, in their rightful quest for equality, women have promoted themselves at the expense of their male counterparts, leaving both genders frayed and frustrated...
Iceland's prime minister became the first high-profile casualty over the leaked Panama Papers, stepping aside Tuesday following the disclosure of offshore assets that he and his wife held.More.
Prime Minister Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson, 41, suggested that his Progressive Party's vice chairman serve as prime minister for “an unspecified amount of time,” and Gunnlaugsson will continue to be party leader, a government statement said.
Earlier in the day, Agriculture Minister Sigurdur Ingi Johannsson told Icelandic broadcaster RUV that Gunnlaugsson was stepping down, the Associated Press reported. But the statement issued by government press secretary Sigurdur Mar Jonsson said Gunnlaugsson had not resigned. Iceland’s president has not yet confirmed any leadership changes.
Gunnlaugsson was expected to face a no-confidence vote in Parliament on Thursday, Icelandic news site VÃsir reported.
Gunnlaugsson on Monday denied any wrongdoing and told parliament he would not resign. Thousands protested outside the parliament building in Reykjavik over the disclosure that he owned an offshore company in the British Virgin Islands.
That posed a conflict of interest for him, because Gunnlaugsson had negotiated a deal for Iceland's bankrupt banks at a time when he was a claimant in those banks...
Crawford’s doing it again. Shitting on your ability to manage expectations. Undoing life’s hardest lesson: accepting mediocrity. Crawford is fifty years old. She recently posted a picture on Instagram, from some exotic Caribbean locale, of herself in a bikini. She looks fucking amazing. Not amazing for a fifty-year-old. She has abs and shit. Good luck fucking your old, dimpled wife after seeing that.More.
An hour before the Trump event starts, Milwaukee Theater is barely half full with no lines outside pic.twitter.com/lsSm6qW6rH— Betsy Woodruff (@woodruffbets) April 4, 2016
GREEN BAY, Wis.—Wisconsin Republicans could be Donald Trump’s worst nightmare: a sophisticated electorate guided by a conservative political network that has honed its tactics during 13 state Senate and two statewide recall elections held since Republican Scott Walker became the governor five years ago.Still more.
Mr. Trump has built a formidable delegate lead in the Republican presidential primary by appealing to people who are infrequent voters. But they are a rarity here—especially in the vote-rich counties that ring Milwaukee and form the core of the state GOP base.
During the 2012 general election, Waukesha, Ozaukee and Washington counties each saw turnout of 79% or more. Only one county in the state saw turnout less than 55%, according to the state’s Government Accountability Board.
“Wisconsin has been through a lot of challenging elections, so people are up on the issues,” said Alberta Darling, a Republican state senator from the Milwaukee suburb of River Hills who survived a 2011 recall after backing Mr. Walker’s repeal of collective bargaining rights for most of the state’s public employees. “We are seasoned voters and that’s made a big difference this year.”
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz barnstormed the state on Sunday, beginning with a Green Bay rally where he was introduced by Mr. Walker, who didn’t say Mr. Trump’s name but said the state’s Republican voters won’t be easily swayed.
“No matter what anybody says coming into the state, we are well-informed,” Mr. Walker said.
At stake in Tuesday’s Wisconsin primary are 42 delegates to the Republican National Convention. Mr. Trump retains a commanding delegate lead, with 736, compared with 463 for his closest rival, Mr. Cruz. A Republican needs to win 1,237 delegates to become the party’s nominee. Wisconsin polls show Mr. Cruz holding sizable leads over Mr. Trump and Ohio Gov. John Kasich.
Mr. Trump on Sunday called for Mr. Kasich, who is a distant third in the delegate hunt with 142, to end his campaign. “He’s not taking Cruz’s votes; he’s taking my votes,” Mr. Trump told reporters in Milwaukee.
Kasich spokesman Chris Schrimpf said no Republican candidate will win the 1,237 delegates required to clinch the nomination before the Republican National Convention in July. “We look forward to Trump dropping out before the convention,” Mr. Schrimpf said.
In addition to a GOP electorate educated on conservative issues, Mr. Cruz has another hidden advantage: Republican voters here show up. Of 10 presidential swing states tracked in a 2012 Bipartisan Policy Center report, only Wisconsin had more than 70% voter turnout in each of the last three presidential elections.
And Milwaukee’s conservative talk radio hosts have taken a victory lap in the national media after treating the Republican front-runner to a series of rough interviews, touting themselves as the bulwark of the anti-Trump forces.
But if Wisconsin hands Mr. Trump a defeat Tuesday, it will be because of voters such as Ed Perkins, a 75-year-old retiree in Grand Chute.
Always interested in politics, Mr. Perkins said he first became involved in conservative causes to defend Mr. Walker and Republican state senators during the recall elections of 2011 and 2012. He now leads a local tea-party group and on Friday hosted a Cruz campaign event featuring Mr. Cruz’s father, Rafael, at a restaurant in Appleton.
“People like myself have become more knowledgeable about what’s going on,” said Mr. Perkins. “The result of that, of all the candidates, we feel Ted Cruz is the constitutional candidate in front of us.”
Sen. Bernie Sanders continues to rake in contributions for his presidential run despite remaining a clear underdog in the race for the Democratic nomination, all but ensuring his battle with Hillary Clinton will continue for months.More.
Mr. Sanders’s latest fundraising haul—$44 million in March—was amassed as his path to the nomination narrowed substantially, leaving him with a daunting deficit in convention delegates. Such a feat amounts to defying political gravity, campaign-finance experts say: When candidates start losing primaries, as Mr. Sanders did during the first half of the month, the flow of donations typically slows significantly.
But Mr. Sanders’s fundraising has continued apace, fueled largely by small-dollar online donors. Now, after wins in a string of Western states in late March, the Vermont senator hits April with both money and fresh momentum. He holds a narrow lead over Mrs. Clinton for Tuesday’s Wisconsin primary, according to a RealClearPolitics average of polls, and the New York primary two weeks later looms as a pivotal showdown.
The importance of the New York contest for both campaigns is evident in the haggling this past weekend over where and when the candidates might debate ahead of the April 19 vote.
Mr. Sanders’s fundraising totals have grown each month this year, hitting $21.3 million in January and $43.5 million in February. Mrs. Clinton hasn’t yet released her take from last month, but Mr. Sanders raised more than she did in January and February.
Although Mr. Sanders has won five of the past six contests, Mrs. Clinton still holds a commanding lead in delegates that her campaign argues is nearly insurmountable. Mr. Sanders now needs decisive victories in delegate-rich states such as New York, California, Pennsylvania and New Jersey to make up ground, and he may also need to convince party officials known as “superdelegates” to abandon Mrs. Clinton and support him. Absent those outcomes, Mrs. Clinton appears likely to emerge as the Democratic nominee, but Mr. Sanders could make that an expensive proposition.
Mr. Sanders “is not suffering the fate that candidates usually suffer when they’re running behind,” said Lawrence Noble, general counsel at the Campaign Legal Center, a group that aims to reduce the influence of money in politics. “The narrative that it’s impossible to beat Hillary Clinton has not stopped [Sanders supporters] because I don’t think they believe it,” Mr. Noble said.
In interviews, many Sanders supporters said they were motivated by the senator’s pledges to address income inequality and overhaul the campaign-finance system, and they plan to continue lending financial support until the end. Only 3% of Mr. Sanders’s fundraising total has come from donors who have given the legal maximum of $2,700, and many backers have signed up to automatically contribute a modest sum each month.
Aislinn Melchior, a professor from Tacoma, Wash., who has made several small contributions, said of Mr. Sanders: “I am willing to do whatever I can to help out his candidacy, even if it’s doomed.”
Kenneth Pennington, digital director for the Sanders campaign, said the senator’s supporters understand that building a grass-roots movement doesn’t happen overnight.
“They’re in this fight for the long haul,” he said. “That means when we win, our supporters respond in large numbers. When we lose, our supporters step up to help us win in the long run.”
Downing Street has refused to deny that David Cameron’s family might have assets held offshore in Panama, reports Christopher Hope, chief political correspondent.
The Prime Minister was linked to the so-called “Panama Papers” by his late father Ian, who died in 2010.
Michael Wilkinson: Panama Papers raises serious questions for David Cameron https://t.co/3641kMNbZz pic.twitter.com/fzdzhxxFJ0— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) April 4, 2016
"thanks dad"— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) April 4, 2016
PM David Cameron in multi-miilion pound #PanamaPapers inhertence dodge
1 :https://t.co/fO0yaFdMDb
2: https://t.co/5Ofgqm3ATu
David Cameron must take "real action" to crack down on offshore tax havens, opposition figures have demanded after it emerged his father was among the names released in a massive data leak which exposed the scale of efforts by the rich and powerful to hide assets.More at the Guardian UK, "Fund run by David Cameron’s father avoided paying tax in Britain."
The Prime Minister's late father Ian Cameron was reported to be among names - including those of six peers, three ex-Tory MPs and political party donors - named in relation to investments set up by Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca.
Downing Street said it was a "private matter" whether the Cameron family still had funds in offshore investments and insisted the PM was in the vanguard of efforts to increase the transparency of tax arrangements.
More than 11 million documents were passed to German newspaper Suddeutsche Zeitung and shared by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) to 107 media organisations including the Guardian and BBC's Panorama.
HM Revenue and Customs has approached the ICIJ for access to the data and said it would "act on it swiftly and appropriately" if there was any wrongdoing.
While there is nothing illegal about using offshore companies, the disclosures have intensified calls for international reform of the way tax havens are able to operate and claims of large-scale money laundering.
Mr Cameron has been a vocal advocate of reform and legislation forcing British companies to disclose who owns and benefits from their activities which comes into force in June.
Despite several years of pressure however, few UK Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories - which are said to make up a large part of the tax havens referred to in the papers - have taken concrete action to open up the books.
He faces pressure to secure progress at an international summit on tackling corruption which he will chair in London in May and where the use of offshore tax havens to escape scrutiny will be high on the agenda.
Asked if Mr Cameron was prepared to legislate if there was continued inaction, the PM's official spokeswoman said: "He rules nothing out. The work with them continues."
Re “Are you going to vote for Donald Trump?” (Question of the Week, March 21):
After listening to the debates, I feel Donald Trump, although far from perfect, is the best person to lead our country. He has achieved the American dream by building up the million dollars given to him by his dad to billions by investing in real estate.
By using his own money and not being beholding to big donors, Trump is expressing his love for America and his desire to bring America back to greatness by:
• Improving our healthcare system by repealing Obamacare which is proving to be a job-killing healthcare-destroying monstrosity. Through the Affordable Care Act, my son’s deductible increased from $900 to $6,000. With this insurance, my son pays $150 for an office visit and is not compensated for anything X-rays etc. until the $6,000 is paid.
• Securing our border which is critical for both security and prosperity for America.
• Instituting a radical change to the tax system making it better for the average American and encouraging businesses to stay in America.
• Treating terrorists as military combatants not as criminals like the Obama administration treats them.
• Cutting spending without harming those on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.
• Reforming welfare and cracking down on entitlement fraud.
• Not intervening in other country’s problems without being compensated for doing so, and if we go to war, we go to win.
• Strengthening our military so we can have a strong national defense.
— Martha Morissy-Call, Downey
#MLB #OpeningDay! Spring is here! My #Angels don't play 2day but the #Royals are on. 😃 pic.twitter.com/INeEtW0n3u
— Elle Johnson (@_ElleJohnson) April 3, 2016
The massive, anonymous leak Sunday of more than 11 million documents belonging to a law firm in Panama — Mossack Fonseca — that detail how powerful people hid their wealth reveals suspected cases of money laundering, sanctions evasion and tax avoidance.More.
Here's what you need to know:
Denials from world leaders are rolling out.
Iceland's prime minister, Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson, faces a no-confidence vote later Monday for allegations in the documents that he deliberately hid holdings in Icelandic banks. Gunnlaugsson denies any wrongdoing and said on Icelandic television he would not resign.
News reports allege that Gunnlaughsson and his wife established a company in the British Virgin Islands with the help of Mossack Fonseca.
In Russia, the government said President Vladimir Putin has not committed a crime.
While Putin's name does not appear on any of the records published, the paper trail does show that many of his associates and close friends — including musician Sergei Roldugin, godfather to his daughter Maria and the man who introduced him to his wife, Lyudmilla — made millions from deals that would have been hard to make without Putin's knowledge.
Dmitry Peskov, Putin's spokesman, told Russian news agency Interfax that it was "obvious" the aim of the release of the documents was to undermine the president ahead of parliamentary elections expected in September...
The Panama Papers: world reacts to huge offshore tax files leak - live https://t.co/it4rZOdIiG
— The Guardian (@guardian) April 4, 2016
Here are the famous politicians in ‘the Wikileaks of the mega-rich’ #PanamaPapers https://t.co/Ll2wyPj9KC pic.twitter.com/ksNfrzYfrU— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) April 4, 2016
"Only a fool would go to Harvard, when he could go to Tuscaloosa instead." https://t.co/YyECsVvd2f #RollTide https://t.co/5TVEJad7XG
— FreeStacy (@Not_RSMcCain) April 4, 2016
Sunday’s jaw-dropping “Panama Papers” leak, which shows a global network of offshore companies helping the wealthy hide their assets, is already being called “the Wikileaks of the mega-rich."More.
The hashtag #panamapapers topped Twitter on Sunday afternoon. Among those reacting through tweets: Edward Snowden, the 2013 CIA leaker, who said the “Biggest leak in the history of data journalism just went live, and it's about corruption.”
In Russia, President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, told reporters that the Kremlin had already received “a series of questions in a rude manner” from an organization that he said was trying to smear Putin.
“Journalists and members of other organizations have been actively trying to discredit Putin and this country’s leadership,” Peskov said.
The Washington, D.C.-based International Consortium of Investigative Journalism (ICIJ) said the trove of 11.5 million records details the offshore holdings of a dozen current and former world leaders, as well as businessmen, criminals, celebrities and sports stars. The data span nearly 40 years, from 1977 through the end of 2015, ICIJ said, allowing “a never-before-seen view inside the offshore world — providing a day-to-day, decade-by-decade look at how dark money flows through the global financial system, breeding crime and stripping national treasuries of tax revenues.”
Jim Clarken, the CEO of Oxfam Ireland, tweeted: "As long as tax dodging continues to drain government coffers, there is a human cost."
In Australia, the country's tax office said it was investigating more than 800 wealthy clients of the Panama law firm Mossack Fonseca for possible tax evasion, Reuters reported.
The Australian Tax Office (ATO) said it had linked more than 120 of the clients "to an associate offshore service provider located in Hong Kong." ATO Deputy Commissioner Michael Cranston said his office was working with the Australian Federal Police, the Australian Crime Commission and anti-money laundering regulator AUSTRAC.
Iceland’s prime minister, one of several major politicians with alleged links to secret “shell” companies, was expected to face calls for a snap election, Britain’s Guardian reported...
"Oops" #PanamaPapers pic.twitter.com/ISwm6II4Hc
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) April 3, 2016
Iceland’s prime minister is this week expected to face calls in parliament for a snap election after the Panama Papers revealed he is among several leading politicians around the world with links to secretive companies in offshore tax havens.Keep reading (video at the link).
The financial affairs of Sigmundur DavÃð Gunnlaugsson and his wife have come under scrutiny because of details revealed in documents from a Panamanian law firm that helps clients protect their wealth in secretive offshore tax regimes. The files from Mossack Fonseca form the biggest ever data leak to journalists.
Opposition leaders have this weekend been discussing a motion calling for a general election – in effect a confidence vote in the prime minister.
On Monday, Gunnlaugsson is expected to face allegations from opponents that he has hidden a major financial conflict of interest from voters ever since he was elected an MP seven years ago.
The former prime minister Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir said Gunnlaugsson would have to resign if he could not regain public trust quickly, calling on him to “give a straightforward account of all the facts of the matter”...
The California electorate in the November general election will be far different than the makeup of voters who cast ballots in June. Obama won in 2012 with 59.3% of the vote.A great piece. Very informative.
If Trump becomes the Republican presidential nominee, political analysts expect a substantial anti-Trump movement in California during the general election, the first opportunity for non-Republicans to vote against him. Voter turnout among Latinos also would rise substantially, Madrid predicted.
“California has huge Spanish-language media markets … so you’re going to have much more reaction from the community,” Madrid said...
"Draggin' the Linel"
Flopping Aces, "Communist Defectors Warn About Four Stages Of Subversion — And America Is On The Last One ..."..."
View From the Beach, "‘Hail To Thee, My Alma Mater ..."