October 14-15, 2017
Oct 14 01:21 DFL mining rift still open Oct 14 07:07 Spineless NFL doesn't get it Oct 14 13:11 Another losing court fight Oct 14 14:10 Dayton's daily diatribe disappoints Oct 14 16:07 Rebecca Otto's health care pipe dream Oct 15 06:57 The new regulators in town Oct 15 08:12 Trump's ISIS strategy is working Oct 15 09:20 The Democrats' Constitution problem
Prior Months: Jan Feb ~ May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
DFL mining rift still open
The rift between miners and environmentalists has existed within the DFL for years. That tension isn't new. What's different this time is that the environmentalists are strident in their opinions. What's different this time is that the environmentalists aren't just strident about mining. It's that the environmentalists are strident in their opinions about an entire way of life. Brian Bakst's article highlights that difference.
The rift got pretty intense when Reid Carron said "Resentment is the primary driver of the pro-mining crowd here; they are resentful that other people have come here and been successful while they were sitting around waiting for a big mining company. They want somebody to just give them a job so they can all drink beer with their buddies and go four-wheeling and snowmobiling with their buddies, not have to think about anything except punching a clock."
It's worth noting that Carron's wife is Becky Rom. Ms. Rom "was quoted suggesting a mine worker also featured in the article didn't care about the area's natural beauty because he 'drives to the mine in his truck, comes home and watches TV, and he doesn't know this world exists.'"
Suffice it to say that Carron and Rom displayed tons of contempt for the people who built this nation. It isn't a stretch to think that Carron and Rom care more about their ideology than they care about doing what's right for the people who built this nation.
Meanwhile, Ken Martin is working feverishly to hold the DFL together rather than working feverishly to make Minnesota great again:
DFL Party Chairman Ken Martin was among the leaders in his party to say there was no room, in his words, "for the sharp-tongued attack on Minnesotans who work hard every day to provide for their families and support our state's economy."
Within Chairman Martin's DFL, though, there is room for the environmentalists to consistently criticize miners, pipefitters and other unionists. Within Chairman Martin's DFL, there's no criticism when Gov. Dayton stacks the PUC with environmentalists who stand ready to deny permitting to replace Enbridge's Line 3 pipeline.
Save the Boundary Waters issued this apology Friday:
People who go to work in mines are some of the hardest workers in Minnesota. They rise before the sun, work long hours, and take pride and accomplishment that comes from having produced something of value. That is a not a life to be mocked or derided. For any comments that did so, we are truly sorry.
We believe firmly - based on the science, the nature of the place, and dangerous risks associated with sulfide-ore copper mines, that the Boundary Waters is no place for that kind of mining. Our campaign will continue to work tirelessly to educate and organize others around those values toward the goal of protecting a unique and pristine place.
I don't trust a thing they said. After all, it isn't a secret that Becky Rom is a proven liar :
Then, late Thursday a Freedom of Information Act request by Twin Metals-Minnesota was granted. Upon request, they shared those documents with us. If anyone would like a copy, just send us an email. In the documents provided by the Bureau of Land Management was a letter asking for the PEIS. The agency requesting the PEIS? Northeastern Minnesotans for Wilderness. And who is the vice-chair of NEMW? Becky Rom.
We also have copies of emails sent by Rom outlining a meeting with the BLM where the agenda included: 'The BLM, together with the Forest Service, should undertake a programmatic environmental impact statement."
Rom told us the first she heard of the PEIS was when Tom Rukavina, an aide for Congressman Rick Nolan, was in Ely on March 5. We'd like to refresh her memory. A letter sent Jan. 23 from the attorney for NEMW specifically requests that the BLM and the USFS undertake a PEIS. The letter even references a meeting held on Dec. 10, 2013 with Bonnie and NEMW members. The letter to Bonnie is nine pages long and is a multi-pronged attack on copper-nickel mining in northeast Minnesota. It specifically targets Twin Metals Minnesota.
FYI- A programmatic environmental impact statement would essentially shut down mining for years. That Ms. Rom was trying to hide the fact that she'd requested on proves that she isn't interested in working with the people she now admits "rise before the sun, work long hours, and take pride and accomplishment that comes from having produced something of value." That's called lip service. This is, too:
Posted Saturday, October 14, 2017 1:21 AM
No comments.
Spineless NFL doesn't get it
It's clear that the NFL hasn't figured its customers out yet. That's because the "NFL said on Friday it has no plans to mandate players stand for the U.S. national anthem, but will rather present a possible solution on how to end the controversial protests when it meets with team owners next week."
During a conference call, NFL spokesman Joe Lockhart said "(Goodell) has a plan that he is going to present to owners about how to use our platform to both raise awareness and make progress on issues of social justice and equality in this country. What we don't have is a proposal that changes our policy, we don't have something that mandates anything. That's clear. If that was the case I doubt the head of the NFLPA would have put a joint statement out with us."
What's clear is that the NFL and NFLPA have morphed into activist organizations aligned with the DNC. They aren't seen as sports league as much as they're seen as political activists. That's why the NFL's TV ratings continue to stumble and NFL attendance is underperforming. Ed Morrissey got it right when he said "NFL fans expect Sunday football to be an escape from the politicization of all things." These protests got identified as partisan displays when this happened:
Quite frankly, the NFL's PR team stinks. They haven't even identified the things that their customers demand. That tin-eared approach is killing them. For all their insults of President Trump, they're rank amateurs compared with him in identifying with the NFL's fans. President Trump gets it. Commissioner Goodell doesn't. DeMaurice Smith hasn't figured it out either.
Since the NFL's anti-Trump protests, the NFL has deployed several too-clever-by-half strategies. The NFL also issued a statement that suggested that NFL players would stand during the National Anthem:
Goodell made it clear in the letter, obtained by ESPN's Adam Schefter, that he wants players to stand during the anthem. He did not provide specifics on how he intends to ensure it, but he wrote that it would "include such elements as an in-season platform to promote the work of our players on these core issues."
It's clear that Commissioner Goodell's memo was a PR stunt aimed at getting this issue off the front page.
It's doubtful that the NFL, especially this commissioner, will ever figure out their fans.
Posted Saturday, October 14, 2017 7:07 AM
No comments.
Another losing court fight
There's little doubt that Democrats think Obamacare is a winning issue. That's the message sent from their filing a lawsuit aimed at forcing President Trump into paying the Obama-era subsidies. The Democrat AGs have 2 major problems staring at them. The first deals with a legal issue. The other deals with a political issue.
First, let's deal with the legal issue. The AGs' problem is that they're attempting to compel President Trump to pay out money that hasn't been appropriated by Congress. That isn't opinion. It's a finding of fact by a federal district court judge. George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley was the lead counsel for the House of Representatives in their actions against President Obama. According to Prof. Turley, what happened was that the ACA provided for subsidies to insurance companies. The bad news for President Obama was that he needed Congress to appropriate the money for those subsidies. When Congress said no, President Obama ordered the Treasury Department to pay the subsidies.
As Professor Turley explains in this video, the court ruled in Congress's favor:
According to the article, "The states are asking the court to force the Trump administration to make the next payment to insurers, scheduled for Oct. 18. In a separate court case, the Justice Department notified a federal appeals in court in Washington Friday that payment 'would not occur.'"
In their filing, the AGs "claim that Trump's decision to halt the payments constitute an attempt by the president 'to gut the health and well-being of our country.'" The reality is that President Trump is sending the message that he'll follow the Constitution's instructions for appropriating money. The ACA allowed Congress to appropriate money. It didn't instruct Congress to appropriate money for these subsidies.
As for the political problem, Democrats are hoping that they can portray Republicans as heartless, which is pretty much the Democrats' entire playbook. Republicans' reply should immediately be that they're prepared to work out a long-term fix of the ACA but that it requires Democrats to engage in good-faith negotiations.
That's the last thing that Democrats want. They'd prefer demagoguing the issue. Unfortunately for them, this issue is too sensitive for that. That isn't to say that Republicans are in the clear on this. It's just that this turns into a wash, with both sides getting hit with negatives.
Professor Turley nailed it when he said "We don't have a lot of options in the democratic process. You can compromise and try to convince people in Congress or you can try to change Congress but you can't circumvent Congress." President Obama tried ignoring Congress. The courts shot him down. Now, these Democrat AGs are going to try re-litigating the case that President Obama just lost. Good luck with that.
Posted Saturday, October 14, 2017 1:11 PM
No comments.
Dayton's daily diatribe disappoints
The first thought I had after reading this article was "That's the best you've got? Seriously?" Speaking to the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits Annual Conference, Gov. Dayton said "The face of our country's federal government is grotesque. The damage they're doing to so many people, from destroying families through deportations, encouraging discrimination against transgender youth, to taking affordable health care away from the indigent and the elderly, is already severe and is becoming worse with every 3 a.m. tweet."
What's stunning is that Minnesota's chief law enforcement officer, Gov. Dayton, is advocating for people to break the law to move into this nation. Later, Gov. Dayton accuses President Trump of "taking affordable health care away from the indigent and the elderly" just a year after Gov. Dayton admitted "Ultimately, the reality is the Affordable Care Act is no longer affordable for an increasing number of people. We're going to need both state and federal governments to step in and do what they need to do to remedy these problems."
Gov. Dayton, it's impossible to take "affordable health care away from" people if "the Affordable Care Act is no longer affordable for an increasing number of people."
Asked about the president's decision to halt federal subsidy payments to health insurance companies, Dayton said it was a "destructive" and "cruel-hearted" action.
There's a common theme found throughout Gov. Dayton's statements. According to him, President Obama did the noble thing by unilaterally ordering bailouts of insurance companies without Congress appropriating the money. That's otherwise known as breaking the law. Further, rather than addressing the ACA's structural flaws, President Obama attempted to hide that major flaw by employing an unconstitutional action.
Much like Gov. Dayton's my-way-or-the-highway style of negotiating, President Obama tried insisting that Republicans do things his way. When they didn't, he started whining rather than negotiating.
Sounds familiar, doesn't it?
Posted Saturday, October 14, 2017 2:10 PM
No comments.
Rebecca Otto's health care pipe dream
In her attempt to attract Bernie Sanders voters, State Auditor Rebecca Otto is proposing universal health care , saying "I'm providing a path for us to change what we're doing as a state."
According to the article, "Under Otto's plan, every Minnesota resident would get basic health care coverage and would be able to choose his or her doctor. There would be no premiums or deductibles . Doctors would be paid to improve patients' overall health rather than just treat ailments." Later, Otto said "We should be able to reduce our cost of health care by 15 percent overall. That's a big deal."
That would be a big deal if it was possible. Unfortunately, it isn't. In fact, it isn't even close to possible. It's a pipe dream. I wrote this post about California's attempt to implement single-payer. It was scrapped when they found out how expensive it was. According to the article, "California's single-payer plan would cost their state $400,000,000,000. Per year." That's half a trillion dollars per year for California. If the cost per patient was the same in Minnesota, Minnesota's bill would be approximately $56,000,000,000 per year. That's roughly the size of Minnesota's biennial state budget plus an additional 33%.
Clearly, this isn't a serious policy proposal. It's meant to be a play for Bernie Sanders' voters. That's entirely predictable considering the fact that Tim Walz just picked Peggy Flanagan, a woman with impeccable 'Bernie credentials', as his running mate.
Otto did not put a price tag on her plan. She said the cost still needs to be worked out. Otto said the plan will rely on existing state and federal health care money, which would be redirected to a dedicated trust fund. She said a tax increase would also be part of the equation .
Then there's this fantasy:
Despite strong Republican opposition to tax increases and to an expanded government role in health care, Otto is convinced that she can get bipartisan support for her proposal. She said Republican small business owners have already approached about fixing health care.
I suspect that that's an outright lie. I suspect that that's a lie because there isn't a chance that Otto's tax increase would be directed at the middle class. Small business owner won't volunteer for a tax increase to pay for an expensive universal health care plan. Anyone that thinks that's possible is using expensive illegal narcotics.
Posted Saturday, October 14, 2017 4:07 PM
No comments.
The new regulators in town
Thank God for President Trump's regulators. After years of neglecting the riff-raff that serve as regulators, President Trump is installing a new breed of regulator. I'm certain it's a shock to the environmental activists who've ruled the roost the last generation. That's why it's essential to clean out the barn and install new regulators that believe in the rule of law and the Constitution.
One of the people who's likely to be a new regulator is a Wyoming woman named Karen Budd-Falen. It's likely that she'll be "the next leader of the Bureau of Land Management." According to the article, "Budd-Falen has worked extensively for private property owners, agricultural operations and local governments." Trent Loos, a Nebraska rancher and the host of a radio show Rural Route, said of Budd-Falen "There's no doubt why people who oppose multiple use and following the law as it's written would be opposed to Karen Budd-Falen. She believes in the Constitution the way it was written that guarantees multiple use. Not just rancher use but multiple use."
Later, Loos said "It's important to point out that she was railing on the BLM when (the Obama Administration was) against multiple use. That's why she was raising a stink. We've had administrations moving away from multiple use not maintaining it. That's why she went after the BLM so many times."
That's why we should expect lots of theatrics by the Democrats. Think of her as a tough-as-nails female version of Scott Pruitt. Needless to say, environmental activists are freaking out :
"This is probably one of the worst picks he could possibly come up with to head the BLM," explained Athan Manuel, director of the Sierra Club's Lands Protection Program. "She's very ideological, and does seem to be completely offended by the concept of federal lands," he added.
What's funny is that the Sierra Club is upset that Budd-Falen is using the same tools that environmental activists have used against power companies:
But Budd-Falen's approach was to destroy Ratner and Western Watersheds through this nuisance lawsuit accusing him of trespassing. She hardly even tried to hide her intentions, reportedly bragging in 2015 to a group of ranchers that "one of the funniest things I'm doing right now" is that she "figured out a way to sue Western Watersheds Project."
How is that different than MCEA suing the investors of the Big Stone II power plant? Back then, Paul Aasen bragged about his tactics :
Along with our allies at the Izaak Walton League of America, the Union of Concerned Scientists and Wind on the Wires, the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy and Fresh Energy argued, first in South Dakota, then before the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC), that the new plant was a bad idea. Our message was simple: The utilities had not proven the need for the energy, and what energy they did need could be acquired less expensively through energy efficiency and wind.
We kept losing, but a funny thing happened. With each passing year, it became clearer that we were right. In 2007, two of the Minnesota utilities dropped out, citing some of the same points we had been making. The remaining utilities had to go through the process again with a scaled-down 580-megawatt plant.
These environmental parasites don't care about the environment. They care exclusively about their extremist agenda.
They're just upset that someone's using their tactics against them.
Posted Sunday, October 15, 2017 6:57 AM
No comments.
Trump's ISIS strategy is working
After ISIS's rise, President Obama was forced to take action against his will. He really didn't want to send troops back into Iraq. Initially, the Obama administration announced airstrikes. Predictably, they didn't have much of an effect. Now that President Trump has increased pressure on ISIS, ISIS is getting exposed as being terrible fighters. This article highlights how ISIS has crumbled.
The article starts by saying "The Islamic State group once drew recruits from near and far with promises of paradise but now bodies of jihadists lie in mass graves or at the mercy of wild dogs as its "caliphate" collapses. Flies buzz around human remains poking through the dusty earth in the Iraqi town of Dhuluiyah, 90 kilometres (55 miles) north of Baghdad, at a hastily-dug pit containing the bodies of dozens of IS fighters killed in 2015. They should have ended up in the stomachs of stray dogs," local police officer Mohammed al-Juburi told AFP. 'We buried them here not out of love but because we wanted to avoid diseases.'"
Farmer Shalan al-Juburi is quoted as saying "We buried them with bulldozers. Even in the ground they are still mired in their own filth. They said that they would go to paradise to enjoy the gardens of delights, but this is how they ended up."
But as Iraqi forces in Anbar now look to oust the jihadists from their final footholds, operation commander Mahmoud al-Fellahi insisted any jihadists killed will end up in mass graves. A similar fate befell IS members in the city of Mosul, the group's largest urban stronghold in Iraq that it lost in July. There, a senior Iraqi commander told AFP, authorities used earthmoving equipment "to bury the jihadists after we collected information on their identities and nationalities".
During President Bush's surge, he benefitted from the Anbar Awakening. Once the people saw that they had a reliable military partner, the people started helping al-Qa'ida strongholds. It didn't take long to defeat al-Qa'ida.
Unfortunately, thanks to President Obama's politicization of US foreign policy, the US quickly lost the ground it had gained during the Bush administration. Now that we've got a legitimate commander-in-chief again, the tide quickly turned. This video offers a nice summarization:
Posted Sunday, October 15, 2017 8:12 AM
No comments.
The Democrats' Constitution problem
It seems like everything that Democrats criticize Republicans about is because the Republicans' actions are unconstitutional. At least, that's the Democrats' dishonest accusation. Janet Napolitano's op-ed is similarly dishonest. The op-ed starts innocently enough. The second paragraph states "Under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, the Obama Administration urged young undocumented immigrants brought to this country as children to voluntarily undergo rigorous background and security checks in exchange for the renewable option to legally live, work, and study in the country they know as home."
It doesn't take long, though, to turn ugly. The fourth paragraph says "Now the future of DACA is in jeopardy. The Trump administration's plan to end the program is illegal, unconstitutional, and anathema to our national ethos. It also defies common sense. I believed in the importance of DACA five years ago, and I will fight for it now."
First off, President Trump's plan is to have Congress pass legislation that protects recipients of DACA. Not only isn't that unconstitutional, it's the essence of following the Constitution. Democrats don't like that President Trump isn't the negotiating pushover they'd prefer. He's actually insisting that Democrats fund the building of the wall in exchange for making DACA protections permanent.
This is why the University of California Board of Regents and I have filed suit in federal court against the Department of Homeland Security. On behalf of the university and our DACA students, we have asked the court to overturn the rescission of this program I helped create.
There's little doubt that Napolitano will win when the 9th Circuit hears the case. There's less doubt that she'll lose when it gets to the Supreme Court. This paragraph is utterly laughable:
No court has found DACA to be invalid, and indeed, the Department of Justice reaffirmed its validity in 2014 .
Having Loretta Lynch or Eric Holder certify anything is laughable beyond belief. They both helped politicize pretty much everything the DOJ got their hands on. This paragraph is utterly laughable:
In the interim, and until Congress passes comprehensive immigration reform with a path to citizenship, we must fight this shortsighted and unlawful move. These young people are, in every sense but one, as American as those whose relatives arrived in this country on the Mayflower.
That's like saying that arsonists are law-abiding citizens except one. That difference is the major determining factor. That difference is that these illegal immigrants broke the laws of this nation. There isn't any dispute that Congress writes the immigration laws of this land :
Article 1 - The Legislative Branch Section 8 - Powers of Congress
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization
Posted Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:20 AM
No comments.
