November 16-18, 2016
Nov 16 03:50 Weaponized government, DAP edition Nov 16 20:23 DFL stupidity personified Nov 16 20:52 LTE alert Nov 17 02:23 Tucker Carlson: FNC superstar Nov 17 17:24 DFL's environmentalist dilemma Nov 18 00:53 2018 campaign: talk vs. action Nov 18 06:04 CAIR mouthpiece vs. Carl Higbie Nov 18 07:07 Jeff Sessions: Trump's AG?
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Weaponized government, DAP edition
It's more than a little disheartening to find out that the US Army Corps of Engineers is getting politicized. This statement is proof that that's what's happening.
The opening paragraph reads "Today, the Army informed the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, Energy Transfer Partners, and Dakota Access, LLC, that it has completed the review that it launched on September 9, 2016. The Army has determined that additional discussion and analysis are warranted in light of the history of the Great Sioux Nation's dispossessions of lands, the importance of Lake Oahe to the Tribe, our government-to-government relationship, and the statute governing easements through government property."
Predictably, the Great Sioux Nation is delighted , saying "We are encouraged and know that the peaceful prayer and demonstration at Standing Rock have powerfully brought to light the unjust narrative suffered by tribal nations and Native Americans across the country. Millions of people have literally and spiritually stood with us at Standing Rock. And for this, you have our deepest thanks and gratitude."
This sham protest will come to a screeching halt the minute President Obama leaves office:
The companies behind the pipeline - Partners of Dakota Access Pipeline, Energy Transfer Partners and Sunoco Logistics - called the Army's announcement 'unjust,' saying it reinforced the idea that the Obama administration has been acting outside the law. "This action is motivated purely by politics at the expense of a company that has done nothing but play by the rules it was given," said Kelcy Warren, CEO of Energy Transfer Partners, in a statement to NewsHour. "To propose, as the Corps now does, to further delay this pipeline and to engage in what can only be described as a sham process sends a frightening message about the rule of law."
Legal action is being taken :
Energy Transfer and its subsidiary, Sunoco Logistics Partners, filed papers in U.S. district court in Washington, D.C., seeking to "end the Administration's political interference in the Dakota Access Pipeline review process." Energy Transfer asked the court to declare that the project had the legal right to proceed and needed no further government approvals.
They have the right because they've applied for and received all the required permits. The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe can protest all they want but they're standing on shaking ground politically. President Trump's first Monday in office (he's sworn in on Friday) is the day that the protests are shut down. The Trump administration is putting a high priority on building America's infrastructure. That includes pipelines. They're putting a high priority on energy independence, too. One of the first things that Trump's Secretary of State will do is approve the Keystone XL Pipeline project.
The only question left is how much Tom Steyer and George Soros are paying these protesters.
Posted Wednesday, November 16, 2016 3:50 AM
No comments.
DFL stupidity personified
If LFR gave out awards for DFL stupidity, Duluth Rep. Jennifer Schultz would definitely have a shot at winning this week's award. This article is proof of that accusation. First, a little background is required. Blue Cross-Blue Shield Minnesota dropped the Integrity Health Network from BCBS's network. This is puzzling because their clinics are some of the highest quality clinics and most reasonably priced clinics in Minnesota. But I digress. Let's look at what Rep. Schultz said that puts her in the running for this week's award.
According to the article, "state Rep. Jennifer Schultz, DFL-Duluth, who was aware of the situation, said there's little, if anything, that state government can do. State regulations require the insurer to have adequate coverage in the areas they serve, she said. But as long as Blue Cross Blue Shield meets those requirements, there's nothing the Legislature can do to prevent them from dropping providers."
What a dipstick. Of course, there's nothing government can do to tell a private company that they have to include specific companies in their health networks. That isn't the same as saying that Republicans are hypocrites, which is essentially what she said in this statement:
"A lot of these folks ... complain about too much government regulation," Schultz said. "And here they're asking: What can the government do? We can't. ... If you want the private markets to work, this is what happens in private markets."
What type of dipstick thinks that's what Republicans are talking about? House Taxes Chair Greg Davids wants to expand Minnesotans' networks by giving them the ability to afford purchasing health care outside of the insurance companies' networks. That isn't regulations. That's changing tax policies to help Minnesota families. Rewriting Minnesota tax policy to allow for HSAs might help. Other remedies might work, too.
If this is true, BCBS Minnesota isn't being honest:
"And when you call customer service, Blue Cross Blue Shield representatives are telling their patients that absolutely we're in network for 2017," Shelton said. "But what they're not telling us is that they may only be in network for one month. And at that point, they will not have the opportunity to change their insurance."
BCBS needs to update their customers if they're misleading them like this. At this point, it's just an allegation. If this becomes verified information, BCBS needs to be punished.
Posted Wednesday, November 16, 2016 8:23 PM
No comments.
LTE alert
The St. Cloud Times just published my LTE on Minnesota's MNsure crisis. Check it out and leave a comment if so inspired.
Posted Wednesday, November 16, 2016 8:53 PM
No comments.
Tucker Carlson: FNC superstar
I've always enjoyed watching conservatives debate progressives. I especially appreciate it when the progressive hasn't thought things through. Fortunately, that happens relatively frequently. A great case-in-point was when Tucker Carlson debated Alex Uematsu, a student protest organizer attending Rutgers University, about immigration policy. Thanks to this mismatch, the progressives' immigration policies were exposed as intellectually flimsy.
Another thing that was highlighted was the fact that Tucker Carlson's new show will be a major winner and that Carlson is destined to be FNC's newest star. The intellectual mismatch started when Carlson asked Uematsu "who has the right to come to the United States? You apparently assume that these people have the right to be on your campus, taking a state-subsidized education. Who has a right to come to the United States"?
Predictably, Uematsu replied "I believe that everyone should be able to come to the United States. We are and always have been a nation of immigrants and so I believe that there is no line we can't let in as many people as we choose in terms of policy and there are artificial limits set on who can come in and who can't..."
Rather than transcribe the entire interview, just watch this video:
The frightening part, though, was watching Mr. Uematsu sit virtually motionless when Carlson said that illegal immigrants are a net drain to taxpayers. It was apparent that Uematsu wasn't taking in Carlson's information because it was different than the propaganda he's been fed by his professors.
Thus far, Carlson hasn't suffered the liberals he's interviewed. His aggressive debating style, combined with his unwillingness to let the left's false premises stand without contesting them, have helped him shine. He's 3 shows into his primetime career but it isn't overstatement that he's a gifted host and interviewer.
Posted Thursday, November 17, 2016 2:23 AM
Comment 1 by Mike at 17-Nov-16 07:41 AM
Who can be surprised by this. This kid was undoubtedly influenced by Rutgers professors.
DFL's environmentalist dilemma
Briana Bierschbach's article exposes the DFL's electoral dilemma going forward. She quotes Ken Martin, the DFL State Party Chairman, as saying "Clearly there were a lot of white, non-college-educated, working-class voters who were frustrated and anxious about their future and they wanted change. We have to figure out how to speak to white, working-class voters in a better way."
Actually, the DFL's problem isn't messaging. The DFL's problems revolve around geography and policies. Specifically, the DFL is dominated by the Twin Cities environmental activists that can't relate to outstate Minnesota. What's worse for the DFL is that these environmental activists don't want to relate to blue collar workers.
This isn't just a problem for the DFL. The Democratic Party nationally got routed because they ignored these blue collar workers. Democrats nationally and the DFL locally both have sided with environmental activists on issue after issue. Whether it's on the Keystone XL Pipeline or the Dakota Access Pipeline nationally or the Sandpiper Pipeline here in Minnesota, the environmental activists always win the fight with the Democrats.
If that pattern doesn't change, the DFL will continue to get hurt electorally. They won't admit this in public but the truth is that Donald Trump has changed the political landscape. I'm not calling this a permanent realignment. It's a significant shift, though, because there's now a new option available to blue collar Democrats.
This past year, Rep. Thissen told us that the DFL would make up ground in outstate Minnesota with broadband and transit. I wrote that those things wouldn't help them in outstate Minnesota because they weren't important to outstate voters. The DFL didn't identify health care accessibility or health insurance premiums as battleground issues.
Think of it this way: outstate voters that normally vote DFL are drifting away from the DFL because of health care and environmental issues. Suburban voters are drifting, too, because health care prices are expensive. The DFL's messaging won't change those realities.
Posted Thursday, November 17, 2016 5:24 PM
No comments.
2018 campaign: talk vs. action
This article highlights the Democrats' initial strategy in defending a difficult Senate map in 2018. Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, (D-ND), is finishing her first term in the Senate. It wouldn't be surprising it's her only term in the Senate. Sen. Heitkamp said "Those Trump voters are the same people who elected me to the Senate. You can say they're different people, but they're not different people. I resist the characterizations that people make of good hardworking people. I don't give a lot of consideration to what the 'party' does." Sen. Claire McCaskill added "I'm proud of the fact that we're a party of diversity and inclusivity, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be talking to everyone. And I feel like we've neglected to do that."
Democrats picked their Senate leadership team this week. Their team includes Sen. Manchin, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. They're this year's political odd couple. When President Trump proposes reigning in the EPA, there will be a fight amongst Democrats because they're owned by environmental activist wing of the Democratic Party. That will put Manchin in the difficult position of explaining why he's still a Democrat when Democrats want to kill West Virginia's economy.
Republicans will argue that it's counterproductive having a voice at the table when Democrats won't listen to politicians who represent states rich in fossil fuels. Republicans won't find it difficult to make the argument that West Virginia should be represented by the party that appreciates (and works for) miners.
Democrats will talk like they appreciate miners but it's just that -- talk:
That means centrists can vote against more liberal party leaders, even while the rest of the party holds the line to block conservative policy. A preview of that dynamic was on display this week as liberals attacked Trump for appointing Steve Bannon to his inner circle, but moderate senators refrained.
That's a too-clever-by-half strategy that won't work. People in West Virginia want the mining industry fixed. Let's hope that West Virginia voters won't let Sen. Manchin off the hook if he didn't fix West Virginians' biggest problems. Remember this campaign ad?
It's a great ad politically speaking. In terms of helping West Virginians, Sen. Manchin's been fairly worthless. It's a few political lifetimes between now and the 2018 mid-term elections. Still, it isn't a stretch to think that people will still demand action from their senators.
Posted Friday, November 18, 2016 12:53 AM
No comments.
CAIR mouthpiece vs. Carl Higbie
It isn't a secret that CAIR isn't a legitimate civil rights organization. They've supported terrorist groups like Hamas. They were funded by Hamas. Thursday night, Hassan Shibly, the "chief executive director of CAIR-Florida's chapter, attempted to shame Carl Higbie, a former Navy Seal and the spokesman for the pro-Trump Great America PAC. Wednesday night, Higbie was on Megyn Kelly's show when Higbie talked about a registry of immigrants from Muslim countries. Higbie said "To be perfectly honest, it's legal. It'll hold constitutional muster. I know the ACLU will challenge it but I think it'll pass. We did it with Iran back a while ago. We did it during WW II with the Japanese."
Thursday night, Higbie was Megyn's guest again. This time, he expanded on his statement of Wednesday night, saying "It was strictly a reference to the scrutiny of immigrants and registration of immigrants coming from places like Japan, Germany and Italy and places like that."
When it was Shibly's turn to speak, he immediately said to Higbie "To Carl, I say 'have you no sense of decency? Sir, America is a country based on freedom of religion. Freedom of religion is a fundamental principle that I have taken an oath and I'm sure that you have taken an oath to protect. It is ineffective to target people based solely on religion. Let's target criminals. Let's target terrorists..."
Here's the video of Thursday night's interview:
It isn't that religious freedom isn't a fundamental right in the United States. It's that protecting its citizens from Islamic terrorists is one of the federal government's primary responsibilities, too. There's judicial precedent stating that forcing people coming from terrorist nations to sign into a register before entering our nation is a reasonable thing. It's interesting that CAIR is ok with registering guns in the name of preventing attacks but it's protesting against registering people who might be violent terrorists.
It's foolish to think that sovereign nations don't have the right to protect its citizens from potentially violent immigrants. In fact, as commander-in-chief and as the chief law enforcement officer of the United States, the president has an affirmative responsibility to protect his citizens from violence.
Posted Friday, November 18, 2016 6:04 AM
No comments.
Jeff Sessions: Trump's AG?
This article reports that Donald Trump has asked Sen. Jeff Sessions, (R-AL), to be his attorney general. The report's opening paragraph states "President-elect Trump has decided he wants Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions to be his attorney general in his new administration, according to multiple reports." The next paragraph reports that CBS News first reported it in this article .
CBS is reporting that the "choice of Sessions to be the nation's top prosecutor is sure to be controversial. Sessions has been one of Mr. Trump's closest and most consistent allies. But when Sessions faced Senate confirmation for a job 30 years ago, it didn't go well."
Democrats have to pick their fights wisely so it isn't a foregone conclusion that they'll give Sen. Sessions a difficult time. If they object too vehemently, Republicans could make the Democrats' life in the minority for the next 4 years (and probably longer) difficult. New incoming Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer might want to save his political capital for a fight he's got a chance of winning. Sen. Schumer has to know that Sen. Sessions is someone that President Trump would fight for. History isn't filled with incoming presidents not getting their national security picks confirmed.
Posted Friday, November 18, 2016 7:07 AM
No comments.
