January 10-12, 2018
Jan 10 04:05 Jerry Von Korff, partisan hack Jan 10 10:39 Traditional thinking pundit alert Jan 10 13:46 Tax cuts = cheaper electric bills? Jan 11 08:24 When Oprah kissed Harvey Jan 11 13:48 Tina Smith's empty words Jan 11 16:44 The Democrats' latest euphemism Jan 12 04:53 DFL sabotage exposed Jan 12 10:53 Refugee resettlement hard truths Jan 12 23:12 The DFL wave that wasn't?
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Jerry Von Korff, partisan hack
Yesterday, the St. Cloud Times published my LTE about how the Trump/GOP tax cuts were already benefitting the middle class. I thought that might 'earn' me a ton of criticism from local lefties. The first lefty to criticize me was Jerry von Korff, a member of the ISD 742 School Board. In my LTE, I included a paragraph that said "The Dow rose 25%, the S&P 500 rose 19% and the NASDAQ rose 28% in 2017. With the stock market hitting 75 new record highs, employee 401(k)s are getting fatter. I'd love hearing Democrats explain to the 70% of Americans with retirement plans, mutual funds or directly invested in the market how they aren't winning."
von Korff's reply was "Starting with Trump's inauguration, the Dow has risen from 19,827.3 to 25,075.1 -- an increase of 26 percent. (See Politifact) But it's not as impressive as its performance during the equivalent period under Obama. Under Obama, the Dow increased from 7,949.1 to 10,572 - a rise of 33 percent. In fact, the Dow's rise was even more impressive under Obama if you start measuring at the market's low point, on March 9, 2009, during the depths of the Great Recession. That day, the Dow closed at 6,547. Between then and Jan. 5 - a 10-month period - the Dow rose by a stunning 61 percent. That's more than three times faster than Trump's rise over the same period in his term."
von Korff isn't the first lefty to use this talking point. He won't be the last, either. What von Korff avoided talking about was that the stock market should've grown a ton coming out of the Great Recession. He also didn't talk about how President Obama's policies left wages stagnant for almost a decade or that economic growth was pathetic during President Obama's time in office. This graphic will illustrate the fact that the economy underperformed:
Most importantly, von Korff didn't talk about how companies are a) investing in their companies again and b) handing out bonuses to their non-executive employees. The point is that Democrats can't just be happy that people have a shot at improving their lives for the first time in a decade. Democrats understand that their chance at retaking a majority in the House is slipping away as the economy improves. Happy people don't usually create wave elections, which is what Democrats need.
Posted Wednesday, January 10, 2018 4:05 AM
No comments.
Traditional thinking pundit alert
First, I'll admit that Charlie Cook is one of my favorite political number-crunchers/analysts. That's why I'm disappointed with Charlie's article about the 2018 election campaign.
Charlie's theory apparently is that President Trump's ego will get in the way of the Republicans' message. It's summed up perfectly when Cook wrote "The idea that this president and this White House would not step on their own message and not cut short what should be a post-tax-bill victory lap is laughable. Look at the last two days alone - the president's braggadocio that his nuclear button is 'Much bigger & more powerful'; the suggestion of jail for former Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin and former FBI Director James Comey; Michael Wolff's tell-all book on the Trump White House palace intrigue and former Trump intimate Steve Bannon's accusation of 'treasonous' behavior on the part of Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort; and various threats of lawsuits."
What Cook didn't notice is that the people who will receive the bonus checks or who received pay raises or saw their employers increase their contribution to their 401(k)s don't care about political messaging. They care that their lives just improved during President Trump's watch. This fall, when people start tuning into politics in earnest, people will see ad after ad after ad reminding them that every Democrat voted against the tax cuts that led these corporations to hand out bonuses or raise their pay or increase the employers' contribution to these employees' 401(k)s.
Yet even 39 percent still amounts to the lowest of any first-year elected president and equals his Gallup approval rating for the whole year. And SurveyMonkey reports that "over the last two weeks of 2017, President Trump's approval rating rose from 39 to 44 percent in SurveyMonkey's tracking, largely as a result of better marks from Republicans and Republican-leaning independents." While up is up, anyone looking for a big boost for the president from the bill's passage is likely to be disappointed.
I won't say that polls are irrelevant. I will say their importance isn't what it used to be. Polls used to shape public opinion. These days, I'd argue that social media has a greater impact on shaping opinions than polls have.
The other flaw in Cook's thinking is that people are smart enough to notice their lives improving, whether it's through lower electric bills , higher wages or more take-home pay.
Posted Wednesday, January 10, 2018 10:39 AM
Comment 1 by Lisa at 10-Jan-18 10:54 AM
Hopefully Trump will get most of his campaign promises either done or set into motion long before the election.
He already has such an impressive track record for getting things done, how can voters ignore that? We will see.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 10-Jan-18 01:56 PM
Just his record on getting solid judges & justices confirmed is impressive. BTW, Republicans should thank Mitch McConnell for that, too. Bannon wants to run the guy out who helped get Gorsuch confirmed? Seriously? That'd be stupid.
Comment 2 by John Palmer at 10-Jan-18 02:00 PM
Actions speak louder than words and by any objective measure the first year of the Trump Presidency has a record of high achievement.
Number crunchers and pundits have got the Trump story wrong from the beginning and as the pundit crowd says they have doubled down on the false narrative on the Trump Presidency. The establishment continues to try and asses Trump by the old metrics when the new metrics are bottom lines in the black and number of promises kept.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 10-Jan-18 03:27 PM
John, this reminds me of something Mara Liasson, of all people, once said: "Patterns are patterns until they aren't anymore." I'd suggest that a paradigm shift is happening.
Tax cuts = cheaper electric bills?
Who would've thought that the Trump/GOP tax cuts would lead to cheaper electric bills? That's what's happening , though. While Democrats insist that these benefits helping the middle class are just PR stunts, the middle class's reply is that they're fine with PR stunts that save them money. BTW, the PR stunt line is the Democrats latest talking point to deflect criticism away from the fact that Democrats unanimously voted against the Trump/GOP tax cuts that are benefitting literally hundreds of thousands of people. They're benefitting either through pay raises, bonuses, bigger employer contributions to the employees' 401(k)s or, now, through cheaper utility bills.
The most dramatic news on the utilities front comes out of South Carolina, where a "$7.9 billion deal between utility companies Dominion Energy and Scana includes an unusual term loosely related to the tax bill that passed Congress at the end of 2017. All residential customers of Scana's South Carolina Electric & Gas utility will get an average cash payment of $1,000 within 90 days of the deal being completed , the companies said in a statement. : Scana and Dominion are one of the first companies to explicitly say they will give their customers a credit as a result of the tax bill."
In Illinois, "ComEd is filing a petition with the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) seeking approval to pass along approximately $200 million in tax savings to its customers in 2018. If approved by the ICC, the average ComEd residential customer can expect to see an estimated $2-$3 decrease on their monthly bill related to the tax reduction.' (ComEd, 1/5/2018) "
"Pepco today announced they will file with the Public Service Commission of the District of Columbia in early February, outlining plans to provide annual tax savings to more than 296,000 electric customers in the District of Columbia. If approved, Pepco would plan to begin providing a credit lowering customer bills starting in the first quarter of 2018. : 'The tax law will result in lower bills for our customers and lower taxes for Pepco,' said Dave Velazquez, President and CEO, Pepco Holdings, which includes Pepco. 'We are pleased to provide these savings to our customers, while at the same time ensuring we are making prudent investments in the local power grid to maintain the safe, reliable, and affordable service our customers have come to expect.'" (Pepco, Press Release, 1/5/2018)
The point is that the middle class is definitely benefitting from the Trump/GOP tax cuts. That's indisputable.
What's important is for the American people to notice that Democrats made a political decision when Democrats , in the House and Senate, voted unanimously against the Trump/GOP tax cuts. Democrats from swing districts in America's heartland didn't listen to their constituents. Instead, those Democrats listened to Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi. Speaking of Ms. Pelosi, watch this video, then determine whether she's just plain wrong or whether she's intentionally lying:
[Video no longer available]
Ms. Pelosi insisted that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was "a bill that rewards corporations shipping jobs overseas." Then Ms. Pelosi asked if there was justice in shipping jobs overseas. What the hell is she babbling about? Which corporations have announced that they're moving their companies overseas since the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was signed into law?
At some point, someone's got to tell her that she's either got a warped imagination or she's liar without a conscience. There's nothing resembling the truth about her speech. Nothing .
Posted Wednesday, January 10, 2018 1:46 PM
Comment 1 by Terry Stone at 10-Jan-18 02:01 PM
Will Minnesota Power and Light share the wealth or try to give the tax saving away to the taconite companies?
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 10-Jan-18 03:25 PM
I've already sent an email to several politicians having them ask the same question.
Comment 2 by Chad Q at 10-Jan-18 05:42 PM
Cheaper electric for those who live in states where the elected officials have sold their souls to the green energy devil that is. We will never see cheaper rates here in MN because the dopes at the capitol have such a high renewable mandate, we continue to build worthless and expensive solar farms. Just look around Chisago and Washington Counties where there's a new one going up each week.
When Oprah kissed Harvey
Let's start by saying that Oprah is the perfect Democrat. To use Peter Schweitzer's book title, Oprah is the perfect do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do liberal. I find it rich that a celebrity like Seal would call Oprah out for her hypocrisy. That's exactly what he did when he posted a pair of pictures, including one where Oprah was kissing disgraced TV mogul Harvey Weinstein. Then he added an all-caps caption that said "WHEN YOU HAVE BEEN PART OF THE PROBLEM FOR DECADES BUT SUDDELY THEY ALL THINK YOU'RE PART OF THE SOLUTION."
Seal didn't stop there. Then he added "Oh I forgot, that's right.....you'd heard the rumours but you had no idea he was actually serially assaulting young starry-eyed actresses who in turn had no idea what they were getting into. My bad."
Make no mistake. Oprah was attempting to associate herself with the #MeToo movement. She wasn't wearing a black dress just because that was this year's fashion statement attire. This is the picture that Seal posted:
Seal wasn't the only one to call Oprah out:
Juanita Broaddrick, the now-75-year-old retired nurse, has alleged former President Bill Clinton raped her during his 1978 campaign for Arkansas governor, and that his wife Hillary Clinton helped him cover it up. She brought that allegation to Oprah's attention. 'Hey @Oprah #GoldenGlobes,' tweeted Broaddrick Monday. 'Funny I've never heard you mention my name. CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? Guess not. My rapist was/is your friend, Bill Clinton.'
This year in Hollywood, selective outrage is all the rage. In other words, #MeToo was just a PR stunt. Why hasn't Hollywood fiercely criticized Bill Clinton? For that matter, why hasn't Hollywood criticized Hillary for attacking the women that her philandering husband assaulted?
Since her speech, Oprah has been the object of lavish praise. That hasn't changed the fact that she's still living a fantasy life. What President Trump has proven is that, though he's a multibillionaire, he's still in touch with blue collar workers. Oprah hasn't proven that by any stretch of the imagination.
Thus far, Oprah has proven that she's a phony who wants to show she empathizes with the little people. That's a rather elitist attitude. Couple that elitist attitude with the fact that she sat still while a predator stalked Hollywood and you've got a person without character.
Posted Thursday, January 11, 2018 8:24 AM
No comments.
Tina Smith's empty words
At her first official stop since getting sworn in as a U.S. senator, Tina Smith "promised to take a message about Minnesota's labor shortage back to Washington , D.C." The problem is that lots of Minnesotans are leaving the state. According to Minnesota's Department of Higher Ed, of "the % of MN students choosing to go to a public 4-year university/college", 57% of all graduating seniors from Minnesota who choose a 4-year college "choose to stay in" Minnesota. Compare that with 78.2% of South Dakota graduates attending a college/university in South Dakota, 81.5% of Iowa HS graduates attend an Iowa 4-year college or university, 83.4% of North Dakota HS graduates attend a college or university in North Dakota. 84.9% of Wisconsin graduating seniors who choose a 4-year college or university attend a 4-year college or university in Wisconsin.
What can Washington do about this? This is a state issue. The dirty little secret is that people are deciding to move out of Minnesota. No federal government program will fix that. Throwing a little money at the situation won't fix anything. It'll help Smith say she did something but it won't help her honestly tell people that she fixed anything.
In 2013-14, there was a DFL governor and DFL majorities in the House and Senate. Rather than make Minnesota a more attractive state for workers, the DFL raised taxes, making the state less attractive for workers and employers. That's part of why state "economists have warned of shortages as baby boomers retire, shrinking the state's workforce. Economic development partnership Greater MSP projected that by 2020 the state will have a shortage of 114,000 workers."
In her role as Dayton's No. 2, and as his chief of staff before that, Smith was regarded as a tough but kind facilitator. Many people said she has a knack for finding solutions while working with opposing groups. She was involved in DFL politics in Minnesota long before joining the Dayton administration.
"She has been in politics for a lot of years and she understands she needs to start her job running," said Chaffee, who has worked with Smith on other issues over the years, and is confident she will work hard to accomplish things over the next 10 months.
Comparatively speaking, Smith is a better negotiator than Gov. Dayton. Then again, Gov. Dayton's negotiating skills have led to 3 government shutdowns in 4 budget sessions. How difficult is it to be better than the worst negotiator in Minnesota's history?
Tina Smith is a cookie-cutter Twin Cities Metrocrat. There's nothing worthwhile about that. She's anti-mining and anti-blue collar worker. She's opposed the various pipeline projects, which means she's been at odds with the private sector unions most of her time in office.
Posted Thursday, January 11, 2018 1:48 PM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 11-Jan-18 09:19 PM
The only thing MN is gaining is low and unskilled immigrants because of our generous social engineering programs that pay people not to work. No reason for anyone born here to stay and have the crap taxed out of them.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 12-Jan-18 12:01 PM
Chad, you need to check this post out.
The Democrats' latest euphemism
These days, Democrats are using the term border security as their new euphemism for comprehensive immigration reform. To Democrats, border security means not building the wall or ending chain migration. Democrats insist that the wall is a poison pill, that linking DACA to building the wall is a deal-breaker.
I'm upset with Republicans for not fighting that by questioning Democrats why they think that building a border wall is a poison pill. For that matter, I'd love seeing Chairman Goodlatte invite someone from the Israeli Defense Forces, aka the IDF, or Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, to testify in front of the House Judiciary Committee on whether their wall has protected Israel from terrorist attacks.
The Israelis are the gold standard at keeping their people safe. They're surrounded by water and terrorists. The terrorists have a virtual unlimited supply of short- and medium-range rockets. They also have the determination to kill Israelis. During the "Second Intifada", which started in 2000, Israelis built the border wall . From 2000 to 2003, there were 73 terrorist attacks. After the wall was built, from 2003 through 2006, terrorist attacks dropped to 12.
Let's hear Democrats insist that a border wall doesn't work or that it's a poison pill after hearing that type of testimony. The Democrats insist that the wall is a poison pill because special interest organizations that fund their campaigns want to keep the stream of illegal aliens flowing. Period. That's why it's imperative Republicans hold onto the U.S. House. Everyone knows that there's enough Senate Republicans who will cave on the wall. We need to keep our majority in the House to shut down any bill that doesn't include funding for President Trump's wall.
Let's be exceptionally clear about this. Conservative hardliners should stop debate of any immigration bill that doesn't end chain migration, doesn't end the visa lottery and doesn't fund the building of President Trump's wall. That's our poison pill because, without all of those things, the border isn't secure.
No amount of happy talk will make it so. Finally, Republicans should insist that Democrats eliminate any euphemisms that make it sound like they're serious about securing the border when they aren't serious about securing the border. If Chuck Schumer wants to throw a hissy fit on the Senate floor after getting called out on this, that's fine. Let him look like a jackass. After Sen. Schumer finishes his diatribe, the Republicans should then reiterate how the border wall between Israel and the West Bank has kept Israel safe for a decade.
Posted Thursday, January 11, 2018 4:44 PM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 11-Jan-18 09:16 PM
The difference between the Israeli wall and any wall the US would build would be the seriousness of defending the wall. Liberals and big corporations want the unskilled immigrants for votes and cheap labor so the wall won't be defended like it should be.
If the US was serious about defending the boarders, they'd be shooting people as they come across. No need for a wall, just tall watch towers spaced every so often. May sound harsh but after a handful are shot on site, the flood of illegals will stop.
DFL sabotage exposed
This post , written and researched by Catrin Thorman of the Center for the American Experiment, exposes Democrats as dishonest people willing to misrepresent their political beliefs to deliver a shocking message.
Thorman wrote about a "billboard criticizing President Donald Trump located on Highway 52 near Hampton, Minnesota", saying that the "sign shows a photograph of Trump accompanied by the words 'Big Mistake' and the name of the group responsible for sponsoring the billboard: Republicans for Honesty in Government."
Thanks to Thorman's digging, we learn that, according "to Minnesota Secretary of State records, Republicans for Honesty in Government was registered as a non-profit corporation in 2006 by its president Robert P. Johnson, as reported by Snopes. In 2009, the non-profit disbanded and was then reinstated March 2017. The registered office address is home to AEI Capital Corporation - a St. Paul-based real estate investment firm - where Mr. Johnson is the founder and president."
Further, using "Federal Election Commission records, Snopes confirmed a 'Robert P. Johnson,' 'Robert Johnson,' or a 'Bob Johnson' from Hampton, MN donated $43,830.50 to DFL and Democratic candidates or political action committees since 2004. (I used the same names and location to look up his individual contributions listed on the Federal Election Commission website and found records totaling $46,180.50 since 2004."
It's pretty clear that Republicans for Honesty in Government are really dishonest Democrats. To quote Mike Dukakis, "If it walks like a duck and squawks like a duck, it must be a duck. Using that logic, if they contribute to Democrats, they must be Democrats.
Posted Friday, January 12, 2018 4:53 AM
No comments.
Refugee resettlement hard truths
The Democrats' battle cry on all things migration and immigration has been 'that's not who we are'. Democrats don't tell taxpayers whether we can afford to accept more refugees. They simply tell us that it's imperative that the U.S. accept tens of thousands of refugees each year.
When President Trump said halt!, Lutheran Social Services screamed. As I've written about before refugee resettlement is how they make the money that pays their executives' lucrative salaries. At the time, I wrote "LSS gets paid $1,000 for each refugee it finds a home for. This year, LSS will get $225,000 to resettle refugees. That doesn't sound like humanitarian work. That's what a lucrative racket sounds like."
Public servants like St. Cloud City Councilman Jeff Johnson has tried to find out how much refugee resettlement costs St. Cloud taxpayers. For being fiscally responsible, the special interests have criticized him constantly. Thankfully, Johnson is about to get some answers :
Did you know that welfare spending in Minnesota is going up about 20 percent or more a year? K-12 budgets are ballooning, as well. All we have is a promise that the Office of Legislative Auditor is going to tell lawmakers in 2018 what costs are currently tracked, so lawmakers can presumably order HHS and other state agencies to begin tracking the costs.
Think of that last statement. At present, lawmakers haven't told state agencies to track the costs of refugee resettlement. Here's why that's important:
Think about this a minute. From 2002-2014, there's been an outmigration of Minnesota-born people. While that's been happening, there's been a strong inmigration of people born in other countries, sometimes hitting 15,000 international-born refugees.
Further, let's remember that Minnesota's welfare spending is increasing by 20% per year . What math-minded person thinks that's sustainable? It's one thing if a minor department's budget increases by 10-15% per biennium for a couple biennia. That's something that we can probably absorb without running a major deficit. The HHS budget is the second biggest line item in the state budget, behind only K-12 Education. Astronomical increases to the second-biggest department in Minnesota's budget isn't sustainable.
Our reigning elite, including so-called feminists, have ignored the pleas and shouted down the concerns of Americans who dare to wonder out loud how to deal with incoming cultures that openly reject religious tolerance, profess an allegiance to Sharia law, practice polygamy and mutilate their daughters. These are not the loser racists who show up in ridiculous man-boy outfits to rant and rave at alt-right gatherings. These are good, decent Americans who wonder, "What about my culture? Does that get any respect?"
This isn't a partisan issue. It's a bipartisan issue. Businesspeople from both parties love cheap labor. If they have to drive the middle class out of Minnesota while importing low-skill international workers that they pay a pittance, then that's what they're willing to do.
That isn't to say that all businesspeople think that way. They don't. I'm just identifying the fact that there are some entrepreneurs who do think that way. Often, they're found in the hospitality and meat-packing industries.
The point is simple: importing thousands of international refugees isn't sustainable. Politicians that tell us otherwise are either lying or they're too stupid to serve us properly.
Posted Friday, January 12, 2018 10:56 AM
Comment 1 by John Palmer at 12-Jan-18 02:31 PM
The good news is that with the reduction of refugees entering LSS income drops. At the current rate of resettlement LSS's income will be cut by more than half.
The DFL wave that wasn't?
One of my favorite things to read each week is Harold Hamilton's Friday commentary. Suffice it to say that Hamilton isn't into repeating conventional wisdom mumbo jumbo. This week, Hamilton devoted a portion of this week's commentary to a section titled "The DFL crack up." The important point that Hamilton highlighted was a quote from Ann Manning, identified as "the director of Women's Congress for Future Generations and associate director of the Science & Environmental Health Network." Manning is quoted as saying "The workers have no connection to the community, get paid large sums of money and have little to do in their free time. Some will bring trouble, attracting the drug trade, sex trafficking or both. They will pollute the land by day, and women and children by night."
Right before that, Hamilton wrote "The second example comes from the pen of Ann Manning, who wrote a scathing hit piece on construction trade workers this week, warning that pipeline work inevitable invites violent crime, as she believes these workers to be violent criminals inclined to engage in drug use and sexual assault."
It isn't just Hillary Clinton that thinks blue collar workers are deplorables. It's painfully obvious that Ms. Manning thinks blue collar workers are deplorables, too. The DFL, like the Democratic Party nationally, is turning into an elitist party.
One of the things blue collar workers should learn from my previous post about refugee resettlement is that the Democrats' policies are making income inequality worse because the Democrats' policies are hurting the middle class. The DFL hasn't implemented pro-growth tax and regulatory policies that help the middle class thrive. Instead, the DFL has been the anti-mining, anti-pipeline political party. With policies that eliminate high-paying blue collar jobs or, at minimum, make them virtually impossible to find, Democrats have made life difficult for the middle class and the blue collar workers.
This year, when people see that their paychecks are bigger as a result of the Trump/GOP tax cuts and that the DFL is still the anti-mining political party, it won't take a genius to figure out that Republicans will fight for blue collar construction jobs, mining jobs and middle class tax cuts. It won't take a genius because Republicans have been fighting for those things the last 5+ years. Check out this video, then ask yourself if Ms. Manning sounds like a mainstream type of person:
[Video no longer available]
If that's your definition of mainstream, I suspect that you think Howard Dean is a little too moderate for your liking.
The DFL has sold out to the environmental activists. It's taken awhile but the DFL's anti-mining policies have turned miners off. The most underreported story in Minnesota politics is that the DFL split on mining/the environment isn't subsiding. It's getting bigger.
Posted Friday, January 12, 2018 11:12 PM
Comment 1 by Gretchen Leisen at 13-Jan-18 06:06 PM
Is there evidence that the voters up on the Iron Range are actually turning away from the DFL? - or are they eternally hopeful the DFL will revert to being for the 'working man'?
My question relates to how the voters in NE Minnesota are relating to the changing politics of the DFL party which, like the national party, is busy promoting the interests of immigrants and anti-Christianity over middle class Minnesotans.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 13-Jan-18 10:46 PM
Yes, there's evidence of the tide turning. In 2016, Trump defeated HRC 54%-38% in the 8th District. I'd call that proof.
