December 17-19, 2017
Dec 17 01:53 Residents vs. special interests Dec 17 08:48 Hyperventillating liberals, tax edition Dec 18 00:24 DC's non-stop rumor mill Dec 18 03:01 Nattering Natalie's negativity Dec 18 11:41 The Democrats' 2018 campaign Dec 19 05:35 Restoring the Antiquities Act Dec 19 10:53 Karin Housley for Senate Dec 19 19:11 Even the protesters didn't show Dec 19 20:27 Democrats' talking point demolished
Prior Months: Jan Feb ~ May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Residents vs. special interests
Cindy Whitehair's LTE is a great example of how special interests have shown the difference in perspectives between how locals see the environment and how special interests see things.
This point is especially driven home when Ms. Whitehair said "There are indeed uses that are allowed in a national forest (for example) that are not allowed in a national monument. One such use is the local tribes' ability to practice their religion freely. Many of the lands that were swallowed up by President Obama's Bears Ears designation are sacred tribal lands that are used by local Navajo tribes for religious ceremonies and their access to those sacred lands was cut off when the lands went from a national forest designation to a national monument designation."
I'm confident that DC special interest organizations know this but haven't said anything about that the average person who isn't a local isn't aware of. It's a big difference. There's a policy difference that comes from this, too. Because locals know about these nuances, they're best equipped to influence how the land is used. There's no question that the Sierra Club and other national special interest groups were thrilled with President Obama's unilateral declaration. Ryan Zinke, President Trump's Interior Secretary, though, took time to travel to Utah to actually talk with residents.
The Trump administration's decision was made by the federal government but it was made based on the input of locals. The Obama administration's decision wasn't made with input of locals. The quality of the decisions is enormously different. Secretary Zinke's op-ed explains why they did what they did:
Bears Ears National Monument will be modified to create two units: the Indian Creek Unit and the Shash Jaa units. Between these two units, which will now span over 200,000 acres of federal land, the proclamation continues to protect important objects, from the Bears Ears buttes and headwaters, Moon House Ruin, and Doll House Ruin, to unique paleontological resources and areas sacred to Native Americans. The Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument will be modified to consist of three smaller units known as the Grand Staircase, Kaiparowits, and Escalante Canyons units.
Why wouldn't we want locals having input into the use of lands as beautiful as this?
Ms. Whitehair answers that question in this paragraph:
While that is not all bad, these special interest groups were not acting from a stewardship standpoint ( as the local Navajo actually are ). These special interest groups did not want to listen to the local tribes who were opposed to the designation or to the residents who were concerned about the impact to an already fragile local economy.(Utah's main economic generator is tourism and if you can't get into these wild areas, why go to those counties?)
Congress should modify the Antiquities Act by requiring greater local public input into these decisions and by requiring an individual act of Congress to create a national monument over a certain size. That way, individuals have a greater input and special interests from 1,000 miles away have little input.
Posted Sunday, December 17, 2017 1:53 AM
No comments.
Hyperventillating liberals, tax edition
Chuck Schumer isn't the only Democrat who should be criticized mercilessly for intentionally lying about the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. William Cohan's Vanity Fair hit piece is virtually devoid of truth.
Titled "The Republican Tax Plan Is a Recession Waiting to Happen", it goes downhill after that. Fast. Cohan opens the hit piece by saying "In the increasingly unlikely circumstance that nothing else should doom him politically first - a big if given the ensnarling Robert Mueller investigation, his increasingly lecherous Twitter decorum, and his vexatious game of chicken with Kim Jong Un - the now mostly reconciled tax plan that Donald Trump is aching to sign into law before the end of the year will surely seal his fate as one of the biggest political losers of all time."
Cohan's vitriol isn't hidden. Cohan's ideological disdain gushes out when he said "The Trumpian alchemy goes something like this: higher corporate profits will be re-invested in plants or equipment, or research and development facilities. Those investments will lead to higher productivity, which, Republicans assume, companies will decide to share with workers by increasing their wages. The whole trickle-down concept is a fantasy, of course."
Apparently, Cohan thinks that a 3% GDP growth rate is fantasy:
As a pathetic, single-page memo from Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin makes clear, the underlying premise of Trump's tax plan is that lower corporate tax rates - the current compromise is 21 percent - will somehow stimulate G.D.P. growth of around 3 percent a year, or higher.
Not only isn't it fantasy, it's currently reality. True experts expect GDP to grow at more than 3% for the third straight quarter in Q4-2017. These same experts expect it to grow at a similar, if not higher, rate in 2018.
One of those experts who's bullish on what she calls "the Trump Boom" is Maria Bartiromo . According to Ms. Bartiromo, "Corporate earnings have risen and corporate behavior has changed, measured in greater capital investment. Businesspeople tell me that a new approach to regulation is a big factor. During President Obama's final year in office the Federal Register, which contains new and proposed rules and regulations, ran to 95,894 pages, according to a Competitive Enterprise Institute report."
If I had to bet on who's right, I'd bet on Ms. Bartiromo, who is an expert. I wouldn't bet on Mr. Cohan because he's an ideologue and a blowhard.
[Video no longer available]
Posted Sunday, December 17, 2017 8:48 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 17-Dec-17 05:21 PM
Nothing has changed at this point other than a new president who ran on lowering taxes and look what has happened to the economy. During the tax and spend Obama era, no one knew what neck the heavy boot of taxation was going to be stomped on next so business sat on the sidelines saving their money or investing it offshore. With nothing but hope that a tax plan would pass the economy started to grow and now a tax plan is just days from becoming reality.
DC's non-stop rumor mill
The Democrats' non-stop rumor mill is getting pretty annoying. This time, Jackie Speier is the Democrat stoking the mill , insisting that President Trump is about to fire Robert Mueller.
This past Friday, Speier told California's KQED News "The rumor on the Hill when I left yesterday was that the president was going to make a significant speech at the end of next week. And on Dec. 22, when we are out of D.C., he was going to fire Robert Mueller." Speier continued, saying "We can read between the lines I think. I believe this president wants all of this shut down. He wants to shut down these investigations, and he wants to fire special counsel Mueller."
What BS. Ms. Speier doesn't explain why President Trump would need to fire Mueller. Thus far, Mueller's witch hunt (it isn't an investigation) hasn't uncovered anything remotely resembling criminal activity from the campaign. Watch this interview, then ask yourself whether it sounds like Trump is worried or whether Ms. Speier is just interested in stoking the DC Democrats' non-stop rumor mill:
[Video no longer available]
Here's the official response from President Trump's attorney:
"As the White House has repeatedly and emphatically said for months, there is no consideration at the White House of terminating the special counsel," Cobb said.
Thus far, there's no reason for President Trump to fire Mueller. Thus far, the biggest thing Mueller's witch hunt has going for it are tons of gossip from Ms. Speier and Adam Schiff. That's awfully thin gruel for a grand jury to consider.
Posted Monday, December 18, 2017 12:24 AM
No comments.
Nattering Natalie's negativity
Natalie Ringsmuth must be a physically fit woman because she's constantly jumping to conclusions. According to Ms. Ringsmuth , there's a new group in St. Cloud that's "trying to normalize the fact that refugees are not welcome here." The name of the organization is C-Cubed.
According to their statement from Dec. 11, 2017, C-Cubed first met November 17th with the mission of coordinating "activities focused on internal and external communication, data analysis, candidate recruitment while monitoring the activities of the St. Cloud City Council, the Stearns County Board and ISD 742 School Board related to the impact of resettlement of refugees on our community." Part of that "data analysis group has begun creation of a data warehouse containing data on the impact of refugee resettlement from a wide variety of sources. Analysis will be focused on the impact of resettlement on our community's economy, housing, health, education, and public safety systems."
Nattering Natalie's negativity is trained on citizens who are worried about local government decisions and the financial impact their policies have on taxpayers. It didn't take Ms. Ringsmuth long to jump from citizens wanting to know how refugees impact St. Cloud's "economy, housing, health, education, and public safety systems" to that being proof the members of C-Cubed want to send the message that "refugees aren't welcome here."
This is all you need to know about Ms. Ringsmuth's assumptions :
Often we allow misinformation and dehumanizing stereotypes to make untrue assumptions of our neighbors. By telling our stories, YOUR story, we can give a face to the disenfranchised and show others that there is more to each issue than meets the eye.
WHO IS YOUR NEIGHBOR?
LGBTQ+, Muslims, Christians, Immigrants, Disabled, Homeless, Poor, Women, Whites, Blacks, and on and on. We all have biases. They influence how we treat each other. You don't have to agree with your neighbor's lifestyle to promote a culture of respect. You don't have to agree on anything to be kind. Our commonality is based in our humanness. Take time to look your neighbor in the eye, learn their story, and see how much we all hold in common.
Our Vision
#unitecloud seeks to foster an empathetic community that chooses to stand up for one another regardless of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, abilities, or socio-economic background. We believe that our commitment to this vision will lead to a sense of greater safety and hope and a decrease in fear and suspicion of those who are different from us.
In other words, #UniteCloud automatically assumes that we're bigots that need to be taught how not to assume the worst about those not like us. Ms. Ringsmuth needs to stop jumping to conclusions based on misinformation.
Posted Monday, December 18, 2017 3:01 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 18-Dec-17 08:27 AM
"Nattering Natalie's negativity."
That headline has to have Spiro spiraling in his sepulchre.
Comment 2 by Dave Steckling at 18-Dec-17 08:29 AM
Negative Natalie works for an attorney who assists refugees. Let's see now - > more refugees = more business for attorney. Fewer refugees or zero refugees = less or no work
for Negative Natalie. Heck Sherlock, I see a conflict of interest.
Comment 3 by John Palmer at 18-Dec-17 11:27 AM
Thanks Gary for accurately report Cx3's focus. To paraphrase a Vietnam anti-war song: all we are saying is give the facts a chance. Fact based discussion with no spin will lead to knowledge. As Sam Spade that feline detective from children's literature says: Just the facts Mame, just the facts. Cx3 wants to follow the facts and become knowledgeable before jumping to conclusions. Since when do thoughtful people not want to follow facts and make unbiased decisions?
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 18-Dec-17 11:53 AM
What makes anyone think Natalie wants to have a truth-based discussion? She might but I haven't seen any proof of that yet.
The Democrats' 2018 campaign
Ed Rogers' article lays out the 2018 campaign perfectly, saying "The Democrats' last effort at having something positive to offer voters was a comical failure. Does anyone even remember when House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) launched her 'A Better Deal' campaign in July? Despite efforts to refresh the platform's website, it appears that Pelosi has essentially abandoned it altogether. The word 'fizzle' doesn't even begin to capture its non-performance." The Democrats don't have a policy agenda. At this point, they're the political party of identity politics. Period.
By comparison, Republicans have a positive message to run on. According to Ed Rogers' article, "President Trump and Republicans in Congress have made a positive impact on the economy. Forecasts for the months ahead look good, consumer confidence is up, the repeal of net neutrality will return capitalism to the Internet, stock market advances are contributing to the 'wealth effect,' businesses see that the war on regulation has only just begun and, with tax reform on the brink, chief executives and entrepreneurs throughout the country know that an all-around pro-business vibe has taken hold in Washington."
Other than getting the US economy heading in the right direction and repealing a ton of counterproductive regulations, Republicans haven't done much. It's clear that Democrats want to return to the failed policies of the past 8 years. If you ask the average person if they'd prefer more money in their checks or less, they'll take more. If you asked those people if they'd like having more opportunities at good paying jobs or less, I'm betting that they'll take more opportunities.
Lately, Democrats have started hinting that the tax cuts won't guarantee more good paying jobs. I'd turn that around on them and say that the only guarantee we had during the Obama administration was a guarantee of less economic growth and fewer opportunities for upward mobility. The facts speak for themselves. They aren't pretty.
Newt Gingrich lays things out perfectly in this op-ed :
Writing a good bill is only step one. Communicating the bill effectively, despite falsehoods and distortions in fake news, is the vital second step - and it requires serious commitment . If Republicans reach every person who is helped by this bill, they will win decisively in 2018.
The Democrats who do not vote for this bill will have to explain why they are against reduced taxes, lower unemployment, a simpler tax code and more American job creation. Winning the argument over the tax bill may be the most crucial step toward victory in 2018.
Rogers is right about this:
While the process associated with the tax bill's formation has not been particularly flattering or well communicated, none of that will matter if it produces a lift to the economy. Voters care about job growth, better wages and feeling economic momentum, not how tax law is formulated.
In the end, people want a strong economy and more money in their paychecks.
[Video no longer available]
Posted Monday, December 18, 2017 11:41 AM
No comments.
Restoring the Antiquities Act
At the recommendation of Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke , President Trump shrunk the size of Bears Ears National Monument and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah. President Trump followed Secretary Zinke's recommendation because he knew that Secretary Zinke's recommendation wasn't made until after he'd talked with the affected communities first. Only then did Secretary Zinke make his recommendations.
Cindy Whitehair wrote a LTE that the St. Cloud Times published this past Sunday , which I wrote about in this post . In her LTE, Ms. Whitehair wrote "There are indeed uses that are allowed in a national forest (for example) that are not allowed in a national monument. One such use is the local tribes' ability to practice their religion freely. Many of the lands that were swallowed up by President Obama's Bears Ears designation are sacred tribal lands that are used by local Navajo tribes for religious ceremonies and their access to those sacred lands was cut off when the lands went from a national forest designation to a national monument designation."
President Obama's designation of these lands did nothing to protect the land. President Obama's designation had everything to do with his legacy and pleasing the Democrats' special interest allies. Paul Driessen's article highlights what actually happened:
Utah residents and elected officials applauded the move as long overdue. The Patagonia and North Face outdoor apparel companies, environmentalist groups, and various liberal politicians and news outlets branded the action a desecration, claimed President Trump "stole" the lands from the American people, and launched coordinated and hyperventilated disinformation campaigns.
In reality, the actual thefts were masterminded and conducted by previous White House officials, in cahoots with radical environmentalists. Employing the immense power of the federal government, they took valuable state lands, multiple private lands and property rights, and a private company's most valuable asset (America's largest clean coal deposit) without any compensation whatsoever.
Later, Mr. Driessen explained the Antiquities Act:
The Antiquities Act was intended to protect areas of historic, prehistoric or scientific value, and lands designated as monuments were to be 'the smallest size compatible with the proper care and management' of objects or sites to be protected. Its goal is to safeguard fossils, unique plants and habitats, Native artifacts and sites, geologic structures and special scenic areas from damage, desecration and looting.
The Antiquities Act wasn't written to give presidents the ability to bypass Congress. It wasn't written to create presidential legacies or appease special interest allies, either.
It is these abuses that Messrs. Zinke and Trump sought to correct. In so doing, they followed decisions by Presidents Coolidge, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Taft and Wilson, who also reduced the size of previous monument designations. The Utah changes address arguably the greatest onshore Antiquities Act abuses.
Expect President Trump to reverse the actions taken by Presidents Obama, Bush and Clinton.
Posted Tuesday, December 19, 2017 5:35 AM
No comments.
Karin Housley for Senate
This morning, I received an email from Karin Housley announcing that she's running for the seat that Sen. Franken currently occupies. Ms. Housley's email says "Today I am writing to you to announce I am running for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Al Franken, and I am looking for your endorsement. Growing up in a working class neighborhood in South St. Paul, I met my husband Phil, and we got married after high school. We've been so lucky to have four fun kids, a son-in-law and two grandsons. It has been an honor to serve in the Minnesota State Senate since 2012. I've fought hard for our senior citizens, our kids' education and the unborn. I worked tirelessly writing, supporting and passing bills to help our small businesses. I fought to keep your hard-earned dollars in your own pocket. And, I've called on government to be transparent and accountable. Please visit my website housleyforsenate.com to learn more, join the team or contribute. I would love to represent you and be a New Voice for Minnesota in the United States Senate. I'll bring this same Minnesota work ethic to DC and I'll work hard, play fair, and do the right thing."
Mrs. Housley's opening campaign ad is impressive because it's positive:
[Video no longer available]
When elder care facilities whistleblowers reported that complaints of abuse were getting thrown in the trash, Karin Housley called attention to the problem :
Last week Sen. Karin Housley, chairwoman of the Senate Aging and Long-Term Care Policy Committee, and two other lawmakers called for an investigation into management practices at the Health Department after receiving reports of bullying at the agency.
Tina Smith was part of the administration that turned a blind eye towards the abuse happening at elder care facilities. Now she's pretending to care about this issue? Give me a break. Here's what Smith ignored:
In interviews with the Star Tribune, employees described an office so overwhelmed by backlogged cases that workers dumped dozens of maltreatment complaints into recycling bins without reading them. Others said unread complaint forms piled up into stacks 2 feet high and went unexamined for months.
At one point, employees said, they were ordered to stop making phone calls to elderly victims and other individuals who reported nursing home abuse because it was too time-consuming. But that only angered families, hindered investigations and subverted office morale, they said.
It's safe to say that Gov. Dayton wouldn't pay attention to this sort of thing. He's had a history of not knowing what's happening within his government. He didn't know the tax bill he and Tina negotiated had a sales tax on repairing farm equipment. Gov. Dayton and Tina didn't know that the Vikings Stadium bill had a provision in it for personal seat licenses.
Why would we now think that Tina Smith paid attention to utter dysfunction at elder care facilities? We don't need a career politician in DC. We've already got too many of those parasites there now. That's why DC is so dysfunctional. We need someone who has a history of accomplishment in the private sector. That's Karin Housley, not Tina Smith.
Posted Tuesday, December 19, 2017 10:53 AM
No comments.
Even the protesters didn't show
The once-anticipated Democrat wave appears to be off to a bumpy start. Sen. Schumer said that Republicans will "rue the day" they pass the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act . Earlier this afternoon, Nancy Pelosi said that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was the "worst bill in history." If drama queen antics translate into votes, Democrats will have a supermajority in the House and a filibuster-proof Senate.
The bad news for Democrats is that drama queen antics don't translate into votes. John Daniel Davidson's article for the Federalist highlights the Democrats' problem. In his article, Davidson wrote that "the main problem with the blue wave theory of 2018 is that it asks too much of the Democratic Party, which is riven by as much division and confusion as the GOP is, if not more. As Ed O'Keefe and Dave Weigel reported recently in The Washington Post, Democrats 'can't agree on what the party stands for. From immigration to banking reform to taxes to sexual harassment, many in the party say it does not have a unified message to spread around the country.' The left-wing base of the Democratic Party seems content to go out and run on a promise to impeach the president on some grounds or other, even as centrist Democratic candidates that don't toe the Bernie Sanders-Elizabeth Warren line on everything from health care to Wall Street regulations are left to fend for themselves. What's worse, they have no economic message."
In other words, the Democrats still have lots of problems. That's been verified by this:
[Video no longer available]
It's pretty pathetic when Democrat protesters don't show up for an anti-tax cut protest. It's beyond pathetic when the protesters and Ms. Pelosi don't show up for an anti-tax cut protest.
House Republicans, for all their difficulties this year, passed the bill 227-203 this afternoon. Tonight, Senate Republicans are expected to pass the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act 51-48, with all Republican senators still in DC voting for it. Sen. McCain is in Arizona getting treated at the Mayo Clinic for complications arising from his cancer treatment. In the first half of this video, Newt Gingrich lays out what's likely to happen in 2018:
[Video no longer available]
Once the tax tables get updated and people start seeing their paychecks get bigger and people who are currently unemployed get good-paying full-time jobs, reality will crush the Democrats because every Democrat in the House and Senate will have voted against tax cuts and more jobs.
Posted Tuesday, December 19, 2017 7:11 PM
Comment 1 by Lisa at 19-Dec-17 09:58 PM
Excellent
Democrats' talking point demolished
Glenn Kessler's fact check article utterly demolishes a mini-tweet storm from Kamala Harris, Bob Casey and Jeff Merkley. In his Oct. 24th tweet, Casey said "The average tax increase on families nationwide earning up to $86,100 would be $794.00." Meanwhile, in her Oct. 27th tweet, Harris said "On average, middle class families earning less than $86,000 would see a tax increase under the Republican 'tax reform' plan. Finally, in his Oct. 24the tweet, Sen. Merkley said "Under GOP plan, U.S. families making ~$86k see avg tax increase of $794."
Kessler did a little digging into the source of this talking point. That led Kessler "to a document put out by the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee, essentially the communications arm of Senate Democrats. That document laid out a series of statistics, tailored for each individual state, that purported to show how damaging the evolving Republican tax plan would be for middle-class Americans." That led him "to a report by Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee. So we tracked that down. That report had this line: "If enacted, the Republican tax reform proposal would saddle 8 million households that earn up to $86,100 with an average tax increase of $794 - a substantial expense for working families."
Here's why that's significant:
But notice the funny thing about this calculation: Only a small percentage (6.5 percent) of the nearly 122 million households in the bottom three quintiles will actually face a tax increase. Meanwhile, more than 97 million (80 percent) will receive a tax cut. Doing the math the same way the JEC staff did, we come up with an average tax cut of about $450 for those 97 million households.
As frightening as that is, this is more frightening to Democrats:
Let's be honest: the GOP tax plan is the Democrats' worst nightmare. After a year of 'resistance' against a duly elected president, stalling on Cabinet confirmations, slow-walking the exodus of Obama appointees, issuing purposefully damaging and often untruthful rumors about connections between the Trump campaign and Russia, attacking each and every initiative of the incoming administration, wailing about Congress moving forward on a partisan basis (as though ObamaCare didn't follow the same path), threatening impeachment and detailing gleefully every misstep and foolish tweet made by President Trump, Democrats are about to face an emboldened adversary.
Republicans are emboldened by a record of accomplishment, a year of stunning stock market gains and a reviving economy that may accelerate through 2018, powered in part by the tax plan. Democrats are banking on suburban women and other groups to take back the House next fall. How will that happen when Americans are feeling more upbeat and flush than they have in a decade? And when the Trump White House, with its GOP allies, has the tax bill to credit for at least some of the prosperity? Remember: it's all about the economy, stupid.
Throughout this past year, Democrats and elites have mocked President Trump for rookie mistakes, sneered at his exaggerations, and expressed horror when he followed through on campaign pledges, such as bowing out of the Paris Climate Agreement.
Since the start of the Trump administration, Powerline bloggers have criticized the AP's reporters for their dishonesty. Here's video proof of how the AP flirts with the truth:
Peek's point here is what should frighten Democrats the most:
But here's what should worry Democrats; that poll indicates that the public's dislike of the bill is because they don't really think their taxes will go down. What happens when they find out that Sen. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who called the bill a 'punch in the gut for the middle class,' or House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, R-Calif., who has called the bill a 'scam' and 'Armageddon,' are lying to them?
Next fall, when the economy is humming and the tax cuts will be felt by those 80,000,000 people, how do people think things will go when they're told that every Democrat in the House and Senate voted against the Republicans' middle class tax cuts? I don't care if the Democrats have every MSM outlet lined up and lying for them. When positive reality collides with spin, spin gets crushed .
That's what will happen next fall.
Posted Tuesday, December 19, 2017 8:27 PM
No comments.
