February 25-26, 2016
Feb 25 05:33 DFL still appeasing AFSCME Feb 25 13:09 Jason Lewis: provocative congressman? Feb 26 06:22 Trump's Texax-sized beatdown
Prior Months: Jan
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
DFL still appeasing AFSCME
The DFL used to represent 'the little guy'. Now it's utterly beholden to Big Labor. Because the DFL is that beholden to the unions, they passed a bill in 2013 that a majority of in-home child care providers opposed. That's why the DFL made sure to rig the election. That's why in-home child care providers are suing Gov. Dayton , "Josh Tilsen, commissioner of the Bureau of Mediation Services (BMS), and Emily Johnson Piper, commissioner of the Department of Human Services."
First, "According to the suit: Only child care providers who were actively registered with the Minnesota Child Care Assistance Programs in the past 12 months and who received subsidies from the program in December 2015 can vote to determine whether AFSCME should represent child care providers. That means only 2,348 providers can vote in an election that was announced by the BMS in January."
BMS should be sued for rigging an election. AFSCME's unionization push doesn't just affect in-home child care providers that care for children whose parents receive assistance. AFSCME wants to be the exclusive negotiator with government on a wide range of issues. Despite that fact, BMS is insisting that the unionization vote be limited to a tiny portion of the child care providers. NOTE: There are over 11,000 in-home child care providers.
AFSCME knows that they'll get defeated if all 11,000 providers get to vote. In fact, AFSCME knows they'll get trounced if all child care providers vote.
The legislation and unionization efforts will interfere with other child care providers' abilities to negotiate contracts directly with their clients, the suit said.
Since these are independent small businesses, they should have the right to pick the people they want representing them before oppressive governments. They should be able to change their mind on that decision a case-by-case basis.
Isn't it absurd that government is telling these entrepreneurs who can represent them in negotiating with that oppressive government? Distilled to its finest form, that's what this rigged election is about.
Posted Thursday, February 25, 2016 5:33 AM
No comments.
Jason Lewis: provocative congressman?
When the first rumor got out that Jason Lewis was thinking about running for John Kline's seat, the DFL's opposition research staffers must've smiled for a week. As a former radio talk show host, and a provocative, feisty one at that, Lewis certainly wasn't a stranger to controversy. It isn't a stretch to think that the DFL will deploy their war-on-women chanting points if Lewis is the GOP candidate in Minnesota's Second District.
Let's hope that they do.
In 2014, I wrote more than a few articles about Mark Udall's re-election campaign against Cory Gardner. This article , in particular, highlights the fruitlessness of deploying the war-on-women tactic. Sen. Udall used those chanting points too often, leading the Denver post to nickname him Mark Uterus in their article endorsing Sen. Gardner.
The candidate most likely to win the DFL's endorsement is Angie Craig. Based on her issues page , she sounds like a well-financed, cookie cutter progressive. After watching her debate on Almanac, I'm convinced that that's who she is. She's great at reciting her lines but thinking on her feet isn't a strength.
Make High Quality Public Education and Debt-Free College Our Highest Priorities
In other words, she's a Bernie Sanders socialist. Either that or a Hillary Clinton socialist. (It's difficult to distinguish between them.)
Build a Sustainable Economy and Create Meaningful, Good-Paying Jobs
Thank God for Ms. Craig for reminding us that government creates jobs:
Let's support and reward businesses that create jobs and invest in infrastructure and research and development in America.
I've got a better idea. How about getting government out of the way and let businesses do what they naturally do. Like most socialists, Ms. Craig apparently thinks that companies don't invest in their businesses or R & D. It's clear that Ms. Craig has never seen this video:
Dr. Friedman was right in saying that "the world runs on individuals pursuing their separate interests. The great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus. Einstein didn't construct his theory under order from a bureaucrat. Henry Ford didn't revolutionize the automobile industry that way."
While there's no question that Minnesota's Second District isn't as conservative as it was before redistricting, there's no question that it's suddenly a liberal district that will support a socialist. Without interfering in the race, the fact is that Jason Lewis would light this socialist-in-training like a Christmas tree.
Posted Thursday, February 25, 2016 1:09 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 28-Feb-16 08:42 AM
Friedman mentioned Einstein and Ford.
Jason Lewis is no Einstein.
He's a Rod Grams.
There are other GOP candidates, ones I'd say are a cut above Lewis. It's a stretch, but one could say even Gerson trumps Lewis (if that verb's allowed).
Yes, Craig's no Einstein either. But galt.io?? Your side simply has better people, ones running CD2, right now.
Comment 2 by eric z at 28-Feb-16 08:48 AM
And, Friedman did mention Einstein, who under capitalism and with his physics PhD could not get an academic job because he was a Jew; so he found a niche in the Swiss patent office while writing his early 20th Century original special relativity paper. Beyond that, google:
Why Socialism? by Albert Einstein - Monthly Review, 2009
Now, Ayn Rand, she's no Einstein either.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 29-Feb-16 09:53 AM
That's disgusting, Eric. It's projection on your part. Academia isn't overrun with conservatives. It's overrun with hardline progressives. Look at the supposed party of diversity. Their presidential candidates are a pair of geriatric white people. Meanwhile, the party that's supposedly racist, aka the GOP, have an African-American doctor & 2 Hispanic senators running. That's before talking about a woman CEO who's actually accomplished things rather than yap endlessly about a war on women. That's before talking about all of the men & women who are Indian-American, Hispanic women, etc. who will make everyone's short list for running mate.
Don't look now but the Democratic Party is the fossilized party.
Comment 3 by eric z at 29-Feb-16 12:05 PM
You talk about Clinton's age. Do you suppose she's dying her hair? Bernie lacks any such vanity.
In terms of age, you mention Carson, and then Trump is no spring chicken. Do you suppose he's dying his hair?
And it's two Cuban senators, where the path to citizenship is greased by federal statute; something many Mexicans and Central Americans in the country might see and resent.
Comment 4 by Gary Gross at 01-Mar-16 07:56 AM
I'm talking about diversity & you're talking about who's dyed their hair? Astonishing.
The fact is that the Democratic Party is the monolithic party. The GOP is the party of racial & intellectual diversity.
Trump's Texax-sized beatdown
I could write a lengthy article filled with multiple attacks that Sen. Rubio hit Mr. Trump with but I won't do that here. I did that in this article . I could write about Sen. Rubio hitting Trump with a health care haymaker. I won't do that because that's what this article is about. (I am tempted, though, because Sen. Rubio hit Trump so hard on Trump's answer so hard Trump's great grandkids will be born with a concussion.)
I could provide links to the various articles out there that talk about how Rubio and Cruz tag-teamed Trump, after which Trump whined that he got too many questions from the moderators . (Yes, that really happened.) Instead of doing those things, I'll just post this picture because it says it all:
That picture shoots Trump's criticism that Rubio was sweating all to hell:
"It looked like he just came out of a swimming pool. He was soaking wet," Trump told CNN's Chris Cuomo. "He's a meltdown guy. I mean I look at him, he's just pouring sweat. ... We need somebody that doesn't sweat."
Trump would be fun to play poker against. He's got tons of tells. One thing that's clear after tonight is that he gets rattled when people question his understanding of issues. The minute that Rubio and Cruz ripped on him, he became unhinged. He started making wild accusations. When the camera panned out, Trump's posture was terrible, what with his jaw jutting out, his nose in the air.
While Rubio and Cruz both had strong nights, Rubio's performance was the strongest. He taunted Trump and laughed while he watched Trump disintegrate. At one point, Trump looked like a patient who hadn't taken his medication for a few days.
The important thing for Cruz and Rubio to do is to keep taunting Trump. Questioning his policies clearly got under Mr. Trump's skin, too. It exposed him as an empty suit, something that hadn't been done to this extent prior to last night's debate.
One other thing that I'll talk about is Trump's insistence that he's pro-Israel . Here's what Trump said and Sen. Rubio's response:
TRUMP: I may not be successful in doing it. It's probably the toughest negotiation anywhere in the world of any kind. OK? But it doesn't help if I start saying, "I am very pro-Israel, very pro, more than anybody on this stage." But it doesn't do any good to start demeaning the neighbors, because I would love to do something with regard to negotiating peace, finally, for Israel and for their neighbors.
RUBIO: I don't know if Donald realizes this. I'm sure it's not his intent perhaps. But the position you've taken is an anti-Israel position. And here's why. Because you cannot be an honest broker in a dispute between two sides in which one of the sides is constantly acting in bad faith. The Palestinian Authority has walked away from multiple efforts to make peace, very generous offers from the Israels. Instead, here's what the Palestinians do. They teach their four- year-old children that killing Jews is a glorious thing. Here's what Hamas does. They launch rockets and terrorist attacks again Israel on an ongoing basis. The bottom line is, a deal between Israel and the Palestinians, given the current makeup of the Palestinians, is not possible.
And so the next president of the United States needs to be someone like me who will stand firmly on the side of Israel. I'm not -- I'm not going to sit here and say, "Oh, I'm not on either side." I will be on a side. I will be on Israel's side every single day because they are the only pro-American, free enterprise democracy in the entire Middle East.
Apparently, Trump hasn't figured it out that the Palestinians are terrorists yet. That's stunning. Not taking sides between Israel and the Palestinians is taking the terrorists' side.
Finally, Rubio made this great point:
A couple points, number one, I do think it's amazing that on this stage tonight there are two descendants of Cuban origin, and an African American. We are the party of diversity, not the Democratic party.
Posted Friday, February 26, 2016 6:22 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 26-Feb-16 08:02 AM
An interesting post.
Rubio can get nasty, but can he govern? Will he show up?
Beyond that, all sound and fury signifying nothing is a saying that has lasted. Wait until the Ides of March, see who is who, then, for each of the two party system top of the ticket candidacies.
Or not?
Big question, have the three, Cruz who you curiously do not mention Gary, Rubio, and Trump between them poisoned the well for the one of the three that predominates?
There, I'd guess no.
My impression: The GOP will close ranks, Cruz will continue to be who he is - government shutdown effort and all, Rubio will remain a Senator who will begin again to attempt to have a Senate leadership voice. Etc.
Comment 2 by eric z at 26-Feb-16 08:04 AM
Forgot to say thanks for the examiner.com links. It is good to be able to see your full range of thought, beyond the posting here. The links are appreciated.
Comment 3 by eric z at 26-Feb-16 08:22 AM
One last thing, Ben Jacobs has an item at Guardian from yesterday before the debate, titled, "Debate is last chance for Rubio and Cruz to dent Trump before Super Tuesday." It favored neither of the three, but seemed to me to be analytically sound. If you get a chance to read it Gary, your reaction would be of interest. Since today is after the debate and you believe Rubio did extremely well, that perspective on the Jacobs item would be worth reading. What impressed me there was the dissection of rule changes the national GOP instituted after 2012 re proportional candidate allocation in "early states" and then winner take all hinging around March 15; and the "majority of eight states" rule.
