Liberal Academy Awards Cartoons

Weinstein scandal has Democrats in a bind – can they afford to cut their celebrity messengers loose?

Last year at the 89th Annual Academy Awards, then-Vice President Joe Biden walked on stage to a standing ovation to introduce Lady Gaga. He gave a passionate speech on the topic of campus sexual assault, about the need to speak up and “intervene in situations when consent has not or cannot be given.”

In 2013, Michelle Obama appeared at the Oscars via satellite from the White House decked in full evening gown and flanked by U.S. military service members to announce the winner of the best picture Oscar, which just so happened to go to director Ben Affleck’s “Argo.”

These are just two of the most prominent examples of how closely the Obama administration – and with it, the Democratic Party – has been tied to Hollywood, using them as messengers to push their agenda out to the mass public.

The late night hosts who only last week were happy to help Chuck Schumer push the Democrats’ gun control message are suddenly mute when it comes to Weinstein. And this is exactly where the Democrats find themselves in a bind. The party has depended on celebrity messaging for eight years.

It’s also the reason why Democrats can’t easily undo their connections to the sexual assault scandal involving super mogul Harvey Weinstein that is currently rocking the foundations of the industry.
Weinstein once stated that Hollywood “has the best moral compass, because it has compassion” – and for the past eight or so years, the Democratic Party has embraced Weinstein and his philosophy on Hollywood.
The flirtations between the party and Hollywood were not simply brief cameos at awards shows. President Obama used Hollywood to push almost every social action program his administration rolled out.
On ObamaCare, he enrolled the likes of Lebron James in a promotional video, Bill Murray in an Oval Office visit, and his famous “Between Two Ferns” appearance with Zach Galifianakis. Several celebrities, including Amy Pohler, Connie Britton, Olivia Wilde and Lady Gaga, Mark Ruffalo, Alyssa Milano and Mia Farrow participated in hashtag campaigns to “#GetCovered”. Liberal news outlet Mother Jones was kind enough to cull most of them into one piece.
When Obama wanted to give the impression he was tackling prison reform, he went to HBO and Vice. On Opioid abuse, he enlisted pop rapper Macklemore and MTV to film a video at the White House. Tom Hanks wrote about the virtues of free community college for the New York Times. Christina Hendricks was invited by the White House to speak at a family values summit. Alison Janney of West Wing fame cameoed to a twitterpated White House press corps.
On the Iran Deal, Obama enlisted Morgan Freeman as well as comedian and nuclear physicist Jack Black. Saturday Night Live, which refused to address the Weinstein scandal altogether last weekend, sang “To Sir With Love” to send Obama off into the sunset after eight years of Hollywood doting. By the end of his term, Obama had gone full Hollywood, appearing with Jerry Seinfeld simply for the fun of it.
This was why, despite very few actual legislative accomplishments, Obama’s presidency always felt more relevant in the moment than perhaps it actually was. It was so intertwined with the same faces in our culture that we see on magazine stands, album covers, movie screens and sitcoms. Obama always felt fresh and cool among the Hollywood elite, despite his party being decimated out from underneath him in consecutive congressional wave elections.
Obama and his administration wanted to be as much a part of Hollywood as Hollywood wanted to be a part of him. This was his chosen path to push his agenda -- through the people in culture with the loudest microphones whom he felt could influence the largest number of people to fall in line with his ideas.
Hillary Clinton tried to mimic this same strategy with her campaign, enlisting athletes, TV stars and pop stars to help drag her over the finish line. Clinton chose high-priced Hollywood fundraisers at the homes of stars like Gwenyth Paltrow over campaign stops in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Names such as George Clooney (also a personal friend of the Obamas), Ben Affleck and Matt Damon offered public support. Clooney alone raised $1.5 million for Clinton at a fundraiser in April of last year, with such names as Spielberg and Katzenberg in attendance.
Clinton regularly appeared on the campaign trail next to celebs such as Jay Z (a personal friend of Weinstein’s) and Beyoncé. Lena Dunham appeared with her in Ohio (a state she lost), as did the cast of the long defunct “West Wing.” Katy Perry was a Clinton campaign staple, even outfitting herself in dresses with Hillary’s slogan and logos. Actress Elizabeth Banks appeared at the Democratic Convention this past year, expertly mocking Donald Trump’s strobe light spaceship entrance onto the stage.
None of this, it seems, worked against Trump – who was able to tap into the forgotten voters of the rural rustbelt. These are the voters who don’t much care what Jimmy Kimmel or Sean Penn or Leonardo DiCaprio are preaching to them about the Earth’s climate or gun control – maybe because they’re more worried about the fact that they can’t afford their health care premium and have to use money to pay for their ObamaCare tax penalty that they could have used to fix their house, or car, or take their family on a vacation instead.
In fact, it seems the more Democrats have depended on Hollywood stars to sell their message, the more that most of the middle class in the middle of the country have tuned them out as their legislative and electoral majorities shrink.
Actress Alyssa Milano and other entertainment types campaigned actively for Democrat John Ossoff, who lost a money-soaked election in Georgia’s 6^th District in June. Hollywood was also vocal in Montana’s May congressional election, where Republican Greg Gianforte coasted to victory, even after being charged for assaulting a reporter only days before.
The question now, heading into 2018 and 2020, is where does the party go without its celebrity base – which they have almost no choice but to shun in the fallout surrounding Harvey Weinstein and Hollywood’s pathetically lame (and delayed) response to the “open secret” (according to many) of his decades-long sexual exploitation of women.
Weinstein’s connections run deeper than simple campaign donations. Weinstein sold influence. He was so “in” among the Democratic Power Base that President Obama felt comfortable enough allowing his teenage daughter to intern for his film company. For the Democrats and their party, hoping to catch the coattails of the Obama cool they’ve been severely lacking since his exit, severing their connections to an industry facing a crisis of character will be easier said than done.
The late night hosts who only last week were happy to help Chuck Schumer push the Democrats’ gun control message are suddenly mute when it comes to Weinstein. And this is exactly where the Democrats find themselves in a bind. The party has depended on celebrity messaging for the better part of eight years, and were clearly planning to depend on it heading into the 2018 and 2020 elections (remember Maxine Waters appearing to raucous applause as a voice of The Resistance™ at the MTV Movie Awards?).
But the days of happy backslapping with Ben Affleck and George Clooney are coming to an end for a party that now has to distance itself from celebrity-spokespeople who were content to lecture the rest of the country about their religion, their guns or their politics – but who couldn’t seem to bring themselves to clean up their own house by calling out one of their closest friends and business colleagues for preying upon vulnerable young women – for years.

If the Democrats were a smart party – and they’ve done nothing of late to suggest that they are – they would be huddling in offices around the parts of the country they lost, devising a plan of action on how to move on without Hollywood spokespeople who will do nothing but remind voters of their association with Weinstein.
Distancing themselves from Hollywood and Weinstein could, in fact, ultimately be a gift to a decimated party flailing for a message beyond symbolic resistance. It could force Democrats to get back to the dirty work of organizing at a grassroots level and focusing on a message that appeals to that big useless chunk of land between Los Angeles and New York.
But just as it was apparently evident with Harvey Weinstein, the rest of Hollywood isn’t particularly good at taking “no” for answer.

The GOP Congress needs to pass tax reform -- or face primaries. Voters have had enough

The American people are frustrated and rightly so. Tens of millions of Americans came together and elected the ultimate political outsider Donald Trump president of the United States in 2016.  This was a continuation of the message sent by voters in 2010 and again in 2014 that Washington, D.C., is broken.  

Now nine months into the reform-minded Trump administration, that feeling of frustration is palpable and growing with each day.   It’s growing because Republican leaders in Congress can’t seem to get their act together to keep their promises to the American people and pass the president’s conservative reform agenda.  The Republican majority is Congress is not enormous but it’s large enough to pass the big ticket items that virtually every member of the House and Senate caucuses has supported and campaigned on over the years.

Republicans across the board have been in agreement on the need to repeal and replace the disaster that is ObamaCare for seven years.  Now it appears that senators like John McCain would rather stab their constituents in the back than make good on a campaign promise.  John McCain doesn’t like President Trump and everyone knows it, but he let his spite get in the way of doing what is right for America.  Senator McCain’s decision to oppose Graham-Cassidy and kill Republican health care efforts smacks of a typical career Washington politician who has become a poster boy for congressional term limits. The American people are sick and tired of politicians who say one thing and do another.
I sincerely hope that history does not repeat itself with tax reform.  Republican Senator Bob Corker has long supported tax reform for his overtaxed constituents in Tennessee.  His constituents sent him to Washington to now deliver on the conservative agenda that eluded them during the Obama years.  Tennesseans delivered their electoral votes to Donald Trump with an overwhelming 61 percent of the vote.
Tennesseans want Senator Corker and the Republican majority in Congress to pass tax reform this year.  Presidents and Senators of the same party can have public spats, but at the end of the day, the agenda and promises made to the people must carry the day.  There is a direct correlation between how much of President Trump’s agenda Congress can pass with how many incumbents will face conservative primary challenges around the country in 2018.  The American people have had enough; get something done that you promised us or we’re going to find someone to take your place.  It’s common sense.
Incumbent Republicans in Congress need something to run on and I would recommend tax reform.  Your constituents demand it and will appreciate it.  This is America after all, where hard work and success are rewarded. 

John Kelly declares ‘I’m not quitting,’ in surprise briefing appearance

White House Chief of Staff John Kelly made a surprise appearance at Thursday's press briefing to assure reporters that he is "not quitting" and is "not frustrated" in the job -- in an apparent swipe at rampant media reports. 

Among them was a Vanity Fair report saying he's struggling in the position, and his relationship with President Trump is "irreparable." 

But Kelly told reporters he's staying put.
“I’m not quitting today. I don’t think I’m being fired today. I am not so frustrated in this job that I am thinking of leaving,” Kelly told reporters, adding he is “not frustrated.” “I will tell you this is the hardest job I’ve ever had.”
Kelly added that, “Unless things change, I’m not quitting. I’m not getting fired and I don’t think I’ll fire anyone tomorrow.”
The appearance was highly unusual -- as such special appearances at the White House briefings typically involve Cabinet secretaries or White House officials discussing a specific policy or emergency response effort.
Kelly told reporters that he decided not to do “too much press” until he got his “feet off the ground.”

White House Chief of Staff John Kelly takes questions from the media while addressing the daily briefing at the White House in Washington, U.S., October 12, 2017. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque - HP1EDAC1F1Q8V

He took questions from the press on a variety of issues, but repeatedly took issue with media reports on the internal tensions in the administration, even as he joked and sparred with the White House press corps.
The former Marine general and secretary of the Department of Homeland Security told reporters that his “only frustration” was reading news that is “just not true.”
“My only frustration, with all respect to people in the room, is to come to work and read about things I allegedly said or Mr. Trump allegedly said and it’s just not true,” Kelly said, echoing the president’s “fake news” mantra. “And I mean no disrespect to you all.”
Kelly went on to address reports that he is having trouble 'controlling' the president, saying he was "not brought to this job to control" Trump's tweets.
"I was not brought to this job to control anything but the flow of information to our president," Kelly said, noting that he thinks the president is a "decisive guy" and a "very thoughtful man."
"I restrict no one from going to see him," Kelly said. "I was not sent in or brought in to control him and you should not measure my effectiveness as chief of staff on what you think I should be doing."

Trump to halt ObamaCare subsidies, legal fight likely

President Donald Trump plans to halt ObamaCare subsidies, a report says. Trump is pictured after signing an unrelated executive order, May 4, 2017.  (Associated Press)

President Donald Trump plans to halt payments to insurers under the Affordable Care Act, the 2010 health care law also known as ObamaCare.

It’s the latest effort in the president’s bid to ultimately “repeal and replace” what’s considered the signature legislation of his White House predecessor.

Word of Trump’s latest plan came from two people familiar with the decision, who spoke to the Associated Press. They requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.
The White House said in a statement that the Department of Health and Human Services has determined there is no appropriation for cost-sharing reduction payments to insurers under the Obamacare law.
Trump's decision was expected to rattle already-unsteady insurance marketplaces. The president has previously threatened to end the payments, which help reduce health insurance copays and deductibles for people with modest incomes, but remain under a legal cloud.
Trump has privately told at least one lawmaker that the payments may continue if a bipartisan deal is reached on heath care, The Wall Street Journal reported.
Pushback expected
The president's action will likely to trigger a lawsuit from state attorneys general, who contend the subsidies to insurers are fully authorized by federal law, and the president's position is reckless. Xavier Becerra, California’s attorney general, called the decision “sabotage,” and promised a lawsuit.
After the president’s intentions were disclosed, leading Democrats in Congress were quick to criticize the plan.
In a statement, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., predicted that Trump’s expected action would increase Americans’ health premiums by 20 percent or more.
"If these reports are true,” the Democrats said in the joint statement, referring to the president’s plans, “the president is walking away from the good-faith, bipartisan Alexander-Murray negotiations and risking the health care of millions of Americans.”
The Democrats were referring to bipartisan talks being led by Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., and Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., to seek a bipartisan agreement for funding ObamaCare subsidies and stabilizing health insurance markets.
Order to lower premiums
Earlier Thursday, Trump predicted that “millions and millions of people” would benefit from an executive order he signed Thursday to make lower-premium health insurance plans more widely available.
But the changes Trump hopes to bring about could take months or even longer. That's according to administration officials who outlined the order for reporters. The proposals may not be finalized in time to affect coverage for 2019, let alone next year.
White House domestic policy director Andrew Bremberg said that Trump still believes Congress needs to repeal and replace the Obama-era Affordable Care Act. The White House described the order as first steps.
Trump signed the order in the White House's Roosevelt Room surrounded by Vice President Mike Pence, members of his Cabinet and Congress.
Trump employed the executive order because the Republican-controlled Congress has been unable to pass a plan to repeal and replace ObamaCare.
Trump says the health care system "will get better" with his action, and the action will cost the federal government nothing.
The president says he still wants Congress repeal and replace the Obama health care law. But he says his order will give people more competition, more choices and lower premiums.