October 22-23, 2017
Oct 22 05:48 SEIU's latest legal humiliation Oct 22 06:28 The DNC's death knell? Oct 22 06:58 Hillary's forked tongue Oct 22 16:27 Sulfide mining, wild rice & PolyMet Oct 23 03:25 Friends of the Boundary Waters exposed Oct 23 08:24 Angie Craig vs. Jason Lewis Oct 23 16:20 Steve Bannon's litmus test stupidity
Prior Months: Jan Feb ~ May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
SEIU's latest legal humiliation
The defeats keep piling up against SEIU. SEIU's latest legal humiliation wasn't just a defeat but a humiliation. SEIU "Local 775 filed suit to block the Freedom Foundation, a Washington State-based free-market think tank, from reaching out to home health aides to inform them they could no longer be compelled to pay union dues and fees following a 2014 Supreme Court ruling. King County Superior Court Judge Steve Rosen granted a summary judgment on Friday tossing the union's claim that the group's outreach constituted 'tortious interference,' in which a party causes economic harm to another."
Make no mistake about SEIU's lawsuit. SEIU's losing streak is bad for business. Their stature and confidence are getting shattered. People understand that public employee unions can't force employees to pay union dues. That's resulting in a significant loss of revenue to PEUs. That's resulting in SEIU losing political relevance, which is the threat most feared by the unions.
"The Freedom Foundation has prevailed on the merits every time a judge has considered them in this lawsuit," foundation chief litigation counsel David Dewhirst said. "For the unions, this case isn't about the merits. It's about inflicting maximum damage against the Freedom Foundation through the discovery process. And it's also about stalling for time because with every day that goes by, more dues money comes out of the paychecks of people who may not even know they're in a union, let alone share its values."
This video summarizes the lawsuit beautifully:
SEIU Local 925 in Washington lost about half of its dues paying members after home daycare workers were no longer forced to keep paying dues, according a 2015 Freedom Foundation report .
If this doesn't sound like a death spiral, nothing will:
"Nearly half of Washington's approximately 7,000 family child care providers have exercised their newly acknowledged rights and left SEIU 925 since the Harris decision. The percentage of providers paying dues to the union fell from 100 percent in July 2014 to 53.2 percent (3,738) in May 2015," the report said.
That's what happens when people have a choice on whether to join a PEU.
Posted Sunday, October 22, 2017 5:48 AM
No comments.
The DNC's death knell?
To read Politico's article on the DNC , you'd think they're in a world of hurt. That's the only logical conclusion to be reached after reading "The Democratic National Committee is reeling, facing a turnaround that's proving a much bigger lift than anyone expected as it struggles to raise enough money to cover its basic promises. Many donors are refusing to write checks. And on-the-ground operatives worry they won't have the resources to build the infrastructure they need to compete effectively in next year's midterms and in the run-up to 2020."
It's tough to read quotes that attempt to paint over the DNC's difficulties. According to the article, "Donors, small and large, are so over the party,' said Nebraska party chair Jane Kleeb, summing up the problem facing DNC chairman Tom Perez and his counterparts in the states. Kleeb, who is working on grassroots fundraising efforts for the committee, said she believes the money will come eventually." That sounds like spin to me. What has Kleeb seen that makes her think that donor enthusiasm will increase? Or is that statement wishful thinking? It's most likely wishful thinking.
Much of the immediate anxiety centers on the State Party Innovation Fund, a planned $10.5 million competitive grant program that DNC leadership has made available to interested state parties over the next year. The money is meant to pay for organizing, ground operations and other mechanics seen as essential to countering Republican National Committee investments that helped elect Donald Trump and a slew of other Republican candidates in 2016, leapfrogging Democrats in the process.
Desperation is setting in. This video highlights the outlandish statements Perez is becoming famous for:
In Las Vegas, Minnesota party chairman Ken Martin, the president of the Association of State Democratic Chairs, went out of his way while speaking to a gathering of state party executive directors to assure them the grant program was on schedule, since the money will be doled out over the course of a year and so doesn't have to be raised yet, said one Democrat in the room.
All the wishful thinking in the world won't solve the DNC's problems. While it's a stretch to think the DNC is listening to its death knell, it isn't a stretch to think that they're in trouble.
Posted Sunday, October 22, 2017 6:28 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 22-Oct-17 08:06 AM
Problem is that the GOP isn't much better at raising money. I heard a report 2 weeks ago that large donors are telling the GOP to start getting legislation passed or the money train will stop. No sense spending money when you have all 3 branches and still can't get anything done. Oh, and Senator Worthless i.e. Amy Klobuchar just raised like $1 mil and has over $4 mil in the bank.
Hillary's forked tongue
Hillary Clinton's forked tongue is getting her in trouble again. The world's greatest feminist (in her mind) just said something so stupid that it sounds like something from the Onion , not from a former presidential candidate.
During "an interview with BBC's Andrew Marr," Hillary tried changing the focus by saying "This kind of behavior cannot be tolerated anywhere, whether it's in entertainment, politics. After all, we have someone admitting to being a sexual assaulter in the Oval Office." When confronted on the subject of Hillary's husband being a philanderer, she replied "That has all been litigated. That was subject of a huge investigation in the late '90s and there were conclusions drawn. That was clearly in the past."
As with most things uttered by a Clinton, there's a hint of truth to the statement, followed by tons of BS. It's true that Bill's indiscretions have been investigated. What hasn't happened, though, is holding the Clintons accountable. That likely won't happen, unfortunately.
Typical Hillary
"He's been a supporter -- he's been a funder for all of us, for Obama, for me, for people who have run for office in the United States," she said. "So it was just disgusting and the stories that have come out are heartbreaking. And I really commend the women who have been willing to step forward now and tell their stories."
It's one thing to read the quote. Watching the video adds a different dimension to the story:
It's just the latest example of the Clintons' sociopathic behavior. Whether they're genetically predisposed to spinning things or whether it's years of training, it's pretty clear the Clintons aren't honest people.
Posted Sunday, October 22, 2017 6:58 AM
No comments.
Sulfide mining, wild rice & PolyMet
This article highlights the fact that environmental activists aren't trustworthy. For years, we've heard activists from the Sierra Club, Conservation Minnesota and Friends of the Boundary Waters tell us that the sulfur embedded within the copper deposits will stunt the growth of wild rice while poisoning the water.
Pro-mining people questioned the environmental activists' claims throughout. We're finding out why the pro-mining people were skeptical. First, before getting into that, I wrote about a University of Minnesota study on wild rice growth a couple years ago. The study reported that rice growth was stunted except when there was a high concentration of iron in the water. The study found that iron mitigated the damage sulfur caused to the rice.
I said back then that there was a pretty high probability that water flowing through the Iron Range would have high concentrations of iron in it. Back then, I quoted from an LTE that said "In 2013 the state hired the University of Minnesota to do a scientific study of the effects of sulfates on wild rice and to determine what the standard should be. Also the Minnesota chamber hired an independent laboratory to do the same. Both studies agree that sulfate is not toxic to wild rice. The studies also found that if sulfates turn to sulfides it does slow the growth of wild rice. However if there is iron present in the water, iron combines with the sulfides and doesn't allow the sulfides to affect the wild rice."
This picture is worth thousands of words of anti-mining spin:
The caption reads "A Picture Worth a Thousand Words: Much has been written lately about how sulfate discharges from mines may stunt wild rice growth. Here is a photo of wild rice on Birch Lake (Dunka Bay) 'stunted' by sulfate discharges in the Dunka River from the Dunka and Northshore mines. Why are new studies needed when actual results already exist? Photo by Pete Pastika." Good question, Pete. Personally, I think the time for studies is over. The time for Minnesota to approve the final permits is now.
Originally posted Sunday, October 22, 2017, revised 02-May 5:20 AM
No comments.
Friends of the Boundary Waters exposed
This article highlights the thinking of the anti-mining special interests. It also highlights the attempts by the DFL to distance themselves from the dominant wing of the DFL.
First, the article quoted Becky Rom's and Reid Carron's disparaging quotes about the mining industry. Carron is quoted as saying "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." Meanwhile, Rom is quoted as saying that "Ely council member and mining advocate Dan Forsman 'drives to the mine in his truck, comes home and watches TV, and he doesn't know this world exists,' referring to the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness."
Thanks to social media (and websites like LFR), their comments went viral. One of the first to react was "Jason George, political and special projects director for the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 49, [who] said 'it disgusts me. There is no other way to put it. In my opinion, and in my experience sitting through public hearing after public hearing listening to environmental activists dismiss and belittle construction jobs, the sentiments expressed by Rom and Carron very accurately reflect the way most anti-mining, anti-pipeline, and anti-development groups really feel about the hardworking people of northern Minnesota. Minnesota's blue-collar workers, the men and women I am proud to fight for, deserve better.'"
Mike Kinsley once infamously said that a gaffe is when you accidentally tell the truth. That's what happened here. Carron and Rom made the mistake of saying what they truly felt to a magazine reporter from New York. They never thought Minnesotans would hear their statements. Here's the guilty (married) couple:
DFL Party Chairman Ken Martin, in his attempt to keep the DFL together, embarrassed himself:
Amid an intraparty battle between pro-mining union members and environmental interests that have stepped up opposition to copper-nickel projects, Martin said "These judgmental comments wrongfully disparage thousands of hard-working Minnesotans. There's no question that the issue of mining in northern Minnesota is a contentious one. But there's no room in the debate for sharp-tongued attacks on Minnesotans who work hard every day to provide for their families and support our state's economy. Here in Minnesota, we value civility. We treat each other with respect. We must keep this debate healthy, productive, and focused on the issue at hand. Because at the end of the day, we all want the same thing: a better life for our family and a brighter future for our state."
That's outright BS. Mining isn't a contentious issue. I'll stipulate that it's a complicated issue for the DFL but that's only because they're too spineless to stand up to the dominant anti-mining wing of the DFL. If Martin had a spine, he would've forcefully criticized Rom for saying that "anti-mining forces would gain an advantage 'one funeral at a time.'"
The Bible says that you "can't serve two masters." That's what Martin is attempting to do. Using a different metaphor, he's trying to mix oil with water. Good luck with that.
In an apology released to a Duluth television station and later sent to the Echo, Rom and Carron wrote that Carron's was "disrespectful and untrue." "First and most important, the statement is untrue with respect to the thousands of people across northeastern Minnesota who work hard every day and who believe that developing copper mines will provide worthwhile economic opportunities for them, for people they care about, and for our communities," they wrote. "We respect people who get up at 4:30 am to drive to work in Minnesota's taconite mines. Second, the statement is untrue because it does not reflect what we think. Living in the Ely community, we depend on people all the time who we know hold a different view than we do on whether copper mining would be a good thing. When we do business with them, they are helpful and generous, and we treat each other with mutual respect.
"For Reid to say that people like that are sitting around waiting for a big mining company to give them a job or Becky to question if Dan Forsman has been into the Boundary Waters is disrespectful. We apologize for these statements."
I don't trust this apology. Why trust someone that's lied to newspapers about how they tried to secretly sabotage an entire industry ?
Finally, check out this quote:
"Reid Carron's description of people who support copper-nickel mining is nothing short of disgusting," said Paul Austin, executive director of Conservation Minnesota. "This is an important conversation that requires each of us to work to understand each other's perspectives on the issue so we can reach a positive resolution. There is no place for demeaning fellow Minnesotans."
Posted Monday, October 23, 2017 3:25 AM
No comments.
Angie Craig vs. Jason Lewis
All you need to know about the rematch between Angie Craig vs. Jason Lewis is that Ms. Craig still isn't about fighting for all of our civil liberties. According to Ms. Craig's issues page , Ms. Craig still thinks that the First Amendment shouldn't apply to everyone. Specifically, Ms. Craig's issue page said "The Supreme Court in its 2010 decision in Citizens United completely changed elections in the United States, by allowing unlimited and dark money spending. Money in politics was always a problem but now it is worse than ever before. Now special interest groups can spend unlimited amounts of untraceable money to elect people who will tip the rules in their favor once in office. The voices of the people are lost in favor of the voices of the few and the powerful. It is a big part of what is wrong in Washington. I am committed to pass laws to end Citizens United and get big money out of politics. Corporations and special interests are not people and their oversized influence on the way our government works needs to end now."
The oath of office that members of congress take states "I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
How can Ms. Craig support and defend the Constitution of the United States when she doesn't understand the Constitution or its Bill of Rights? You can't right laws that negate parts of the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. The only thing you can do is amend the Constitution, which require two-thirds of the House of Representatives to vote in favor of the constitutional amendment, then have two-thirds of the Senate vote in favor of the constitutional amendment, then have three-fourths of the states' legislatures ratify the Amendment.
Last year, Craig had a major fundraising advantage. That isn't the case this year :
2nd District: GOP incumbent Jason Lewis raised $235,000 and had about $583,000 in available cash. Lewis's 2016 DFL challenger, business executive Angie Craig didn't report any fundraising after announcing a new run in July and has $200,000 remaining on a personal loan from her last run.
Last time, Rep. Lewis trailed Ms. Craig in fundraising. Now he's leading. That's a sign that Lewis' base has solidified and that he'll be running from a position of strength this time.
That doesn't mean the Twin Cities media won't attack Rep. Lewis like they did in this video:
That being said, the attacking Twin Cities media better be prepared because Rep. Lewis knows how to fight back.
Posted Monday, October 23, 2017 8:24 AM
No comments.
Steve Bannon's litmus test stupidity
Steve Bannon's litmus test is foolish. Bannon insists that he'll primary all GOP senators up for re-election except Ted Cruz. What's stupid about Bannon's litmus test isn't that he's targeting GOP establishment incumbents. It's that he's endorsing candidates that were establishment candidates . According to the article, "For months, the National Republican Senatorial Committee has been media training Rosendale, according to a person close to the campaign. In addition to any help he gets from Bannon, Rosendale is a client of the consulting firm On Message, one of the most 'establishment' consulting firms in Washington, which is running his media and digital operations."
I can't blame Rosendale for wanting Bannon's endorsement. Building the biggest possible coalition makes sense if you want to win. What's interesting is that Guy Harrison, a partner at On Message, said "In every primary, every candidate learns how to put together a winning coalition. That means various factions of the party. Those that create the largest coalitions tend to win."
It doesn't sound like he's much of a Bannonite. It sounds like he's an establishment candidate. Either way, Mitch McConnell isn't taking this lightly :
PERINO: So, Senator McConnell, is tax reform a must pass? And if you get that legislative success, is it the antidote to Steve Bannon's agitation against you?
MCCONNELL: Well, let me just say with regard to the element that you're referring to here, they've been out there for a number of years. They cost us five Senate seats in 2010 and 2012. We would have gotten the majority of senators but for the fact that they were able to nominate people who could not win in November. In '14, they were defeated everywhere. In '16, they were defeated everywhere. And the difference is, we've been in the majority, in 2014 and 2016, two congresses in a row.
Look, this is not about personalities. This is about achievement. And in order to make policy, you have to actually win the election. The kind of people that are supported by the element that you'd just been referring are specialists in defeating Republican candidates in November. And that's what these inner-party skirmishes about. Our goal is to nominate people in the primaries next year who can actually win and the people who win will be the ones who enact the president's agenda.
Here's the videotaped interview:
Posted Monday, October 23, 2017 4:20 PM
No comments.
