Archive for the ‘Environmental Activism’ Category

President Trump’s DOJ has filed a federal lawsuit against California for entering into a cap-and-trade agreement with Quebec. Apparently, California thinks that it doesn’t need to comply with the Constitution. In the lawsuit, the DOJ states “”The state of California has veered outside of its proper constitutional lane to enter into an international emissions agreement. The power to enter into such agreements is reserved to the federal government, which must be able to speak with one voice in the area of US foreign policy. California’s unlawful cap-and-trade agreement with Quebec undermines the President’s ability to negotiate competitive agreements with other nations as the President sees fit.”

In Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution, it states that the president “shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.” The federal government was created, at least in part, so that the states could speak with one voice internationally. Of course, California thinks differently:

In a statement Wednesday, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, slammed the cap-and-trade suit as “political retribution” and another example of the Trump administration’s “abysmal record of denying climate change and propping up big polluters.”

“For years our state has proudly participated in a number of environmental partnerships that tackle the devastating effects of climate change to our health and economy. This latest attack shows that the White House has its head in the sand when it comes to climate change and serves no purpose other than continued political retribution,” Newsom said.

Regardless of what Gov. Newsom said, the truth is that the Constitution assigns authorities to specific parts of the government. States weren’t authorized to negotiate international treaties. That authority is given exclusively to the President.

This video highlights as fact that Gov. Newsom isn’t too bright:

Might the higher prices be because California imposes irrational regulations? That’s likely why prices are higher, though Xavier Becerra won’t admit that. Finally, expect California to lose this lawsuit.

Just minutes ago, Democrat Sen. Ed Markey posted a picture through his Twitter feed. The message he conveyed was simple and utterly dishonest. Sen. Markey tweeted “If Donald Trump and the fossil fuel industry get their way and devastate the Arctic Refuge with drilling, we will never get this pristine wilderness back. The Senate needs to build off this House vote and pass our new legislation that will permanently ban all drilling there.” Here’s Sen. Markey’s dishonest tweet in its entirety:


I replied to Sen. Markey’s tweet with my own statement. Here’s that tweet:


A friend of mine is a retired engineer who worked for a company formerly known as AGAS, aka Alaska Gas & Oil. We’ve frequently talked about Section 1002. My friend told me that the area where the actual drilling would happen is hardly picturesque. I found this picture of a small portion of where the drilling will happen:

My picture hardly looks like Sen. Markey’s picture. In fact, I’d say that my picture looks like an oversized swamp whereas Sen. Markey’s is intentionally misleading. Back in the day, I remember how the Sierra Club predicted that building the pipeline would destroy the migration route of the Barrows Caribou, adding “and for what? Another 4-5 years worth of oil?” That grim statement was made in the mid-1970s. The pipeline was opened in 1978. It’s still transporting oil to tankers in Valdez, AK.

The thing that everyone should remember is that the Democrats’/Environmental activists’ predictions is really more propaganda than prediction. I’ve never seen one of their predictions come true. Most have been off by virtually orders of magnitude. When AOC said we had 12 years left to live because of climate change, I totally dismissed that prediction. It’s a total joke.

This article asks an important question for the Democrat presidential nominee and the DFL Senator. It’s an article about the Line 3 Pipeline project.

It starts by saying “MINNEAPOLIS — A divisive fight over the future of a crude-oil pipeline across Minnesota is pinning presidential candidates between environmentalists and trade unions in a 2020 battleground state, testing their campaign promises to ease away from fossil fuels.” Then it states something controversial, saying “Progressive candidates Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have condemned a Canadian company’s plan to replace its old and deteriorating Line 3 pipeline, which carries Canadian crude across the forests and wetlands of northern Minnesota and into northern Wisconsin. They’ve sided with environmental and tribal groups that have been trying to stop the project for years, arguing that the oil should stay in the ground. Other candidates, including home-state Sen. Amy Klobuchar and front-runner Joe Biden, have remained largely silent, mindful that such projects are viewed as job creators for some of the working-class voters they may need to win the state next year.”

I must take issue with this statement:

Sen. Amy Klobuchar and front-runner Joe Biden, have remained largely silent, mindful that such projects are viewed as job creators for some of the working-class voters they may need to win the state next year.

Oh really, Joe? Then what did you mean at this campaign event?

Ending fossil fuels necessarily requires being opposed to the Line 3 Pipeline project because the Line 3 Pipeline project carries fossil fuels. Democrats don’t want to admit that because Democrats want to appease both construction workers and environmental activists simultaneously. That’s impossible because those organizations fit together like oil and water. (Pardon the metaphor but I couldn’t resist.)

I’d also reject the notion that Sen. Klobuchar has stayed neutral, as this suggests:

Klobuchar has also avoided taking a position. She has said she wants to ensure a thorough environmental and scientific review to determine if the Line 3 project should move forward. Minnesota regulators signed off on the main environmental review last year, although an appeals court has ordered additional study on the potential impacts to the Lake Superior watershed. But she recently returned $5,600 in donations from an Enbridge project manager after a liberal watchdog group, the Public Accountability Initiative, revealed them.

Sen. Klobuchar knows that that’s BS. The Line 3 has already gone through the entire permitting process, including getting the approval from the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. The only step left is for the lawsuits to get settled. Enbridge played by the rules laid out by the legislature and signed by the governor.

Jason Lewis put things beautifully when he announced his candidacy for the U.S. Senate:

When Republican Jason Lewis launched his U.S. Senate campaign at the Minnesota State Fair, the former congressman said he would focus on greater Minnesota — the mostly rural part outside the Minneapolis-St. Paul area — to make up for Democratic strength in the cities. He highlighted the 8th Congressional District, which covers northeastern Minnesota and has swung from blue to red. Lewis said Trump’s campaign is “dead serious about Minnesota,” and that he expects it to follow the same strategy.

“Greater Minnesota is turning red, deep red. I don’t know how a Democrat’s going to win the 8th District promising to give pink slips to every trade union member on the Iron Range, promising to stop Enbridge, to stop copper mining, to stop logging, to stop people from having jobs on the Iron Range,” Lewis said.

The DFL is almost ceding rural Minnesota legislative districts while becoming more and more metrocentric. If the DFL continues siding with environmental activists and against the construction unions, they won’t win many elections in rural Minnesota. The truth is that the DFL isn’t interested in farmers or laborers, aka the F-L in DFL.

If President Trump highlights the differences between the DFL’s broken promises to farmers and laborers vs. President Trump’s promises made and promises kept on the issue of slapping tariffs on China to prevent steel dumping, he’ll make Minnesota competitive again.

Of all the stupid things to say, Kamala Harris told a CNN townhall audience that she would ban fracking. In her effort to win the Democrat presidential nomination, Sen. Harris attempted to pander to the heart of the Democrats’ base, aka the hard-left environmental activist wing of the party.

“There is no question I am in favor of banning fracking,” Harris said during an all-night CNN town hall event focused on climate change.

Given her track record of flip-flopping on the biggest issues to Democrats, there’s little question that she’ll tell voters in Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania that she misspoke and that she loves blue collar workers. The truth is that Sen. Harris leaves herself plenty of wiggle room to extricate herself from tight positions. For example, the article notes that “Harris’ formal climate plan, published earlier Wednesday, does not explicitly call for Congress to ban fracking.” Gee. How handy that is. I’m sure that’s just a coincidence.

Unless Sen. Harris turns things around fast, she’s history. I’ve said for a month that this is essentially a 3-4 candidate race, with Biden leading, trailed by Bernie, Warren and finally by Harris. The thing that’s getting obvious to voters who pay attention is that Sen. Harris’s initial statements on each issue is quite strong, followed by less firm statements as she fields criticism for her most forceful statements. Look how forceful her initial statement is:

It’s difficult to picture Sen. Harris standing out from standing out from any of the other Democrats’ presidential candidates on this subject. Still, it’s difficult to see Sen. Harris not participating in this townhall. To skip such a townhall might be seen as having something to hide.

Finally, Sen. Harris’s statement will doom her in the general election if she’s the Democrats’ presidential nominee. Banning fracking is one of the best ways of losing in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Ohio.

You’d think that a Fordham-educated politician like Andrew Cuomo would be able to understand simple math. Apparently, that’s above his pay grade. According to this article, Gov. Cuomo either is too dishonest to tell New Yorkers that his policies have led to this looming crisis or he’s too beholden to the environmental activists to do the right thing for the average New Yorker.

New York, California and Minnesota especially need to stop with their outright disdain for fossil fuels and mining. It isn’t healthy but it is counterproductive. Here’s what’s happening in New York:

Gov. Andrew Cuomo doubled down last week on his blame-the-messenger approach to New York’s growing shortage of natural-gas supplies by ordering the Department of Public Service to “broaden its investigation” of National Grid and threatening to “find another franchisee.” Anything, rather than admit that his own policies are at fault.

The utility has stopped taking new gas customers in parts of Long Island, Brooklyn and Queens where it can’t handle the new demand — because Team Cuomo vetoed the proposed Williams pipeline to bring in supplies from New Jersey. (Jersey is also blocking the pipeline, since Gov. Phil Murphy is appeasing the same green extremists.)

National Grid gave months of warning that it would need to impose the moratorium if fresh supplies weren’t ensured. Con Ed did the same in advance of its recent new-biz moratorium in most of Westchester, which was also prompted in good part by the nixing of new pipelines.

Gov. Cuomo’s policies are mainstream Democrat policies. That’s the problem. In a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans by 2,000,000 voters, idiotic ideas can pass because they’re that month’s flavor-of-the-month trend. It doesn’t matter if the policy hurts 200,000-400,000 people. If it’s trending in popularity, that’s what matters in New York. Whether it fixes anything is irrelevant. This is what Gov. Cuomo gets excited about:

That photo says one thing to him — reelection. That’s all he cares about. He won’t care about the crisis until it hits. Even then, he’ll do as little to fix the problem as possible. Most likely, if he acts, it will be a short-term fix.

Democrats aren’t about doing what’s right for the long-term. They’re mostly about maintaining power.

Saying that the Democrats have a candidate crisis this presidential election cycle is understatement. It isn’t just about the Democrats’ candidates, though that’s part of their problem. Part of their problem is that they’ve alienated their traditional base. Specifically, Democrats alienated blue collar workers and industrial unions. It’s more than interesting that Democrats have pushed aside unions like the UAW, Teamsters and United Mine Workers.

In this LTE, Rob Braun wrote “Middle America feels as if no one on the coast is taking their views and opinions seriously. The coastal liberal elites don’t want to hear that they aren’t happy with the moral and social re-engineering they promote. Or, calling Middle America bigots because they adhere to traditional sexual standards. And more importantly, the elites haven’t done a very good job at convincing middle America that their experiment in social and moral re-engineering is the best way of structuring a healthy and functional society.”

That’s certainly a significant part of why Democrats are pushing aside people of faith and rural America. When President Obama demonized people living in “small towns in Pennsylvania”, he criticized these people, saying that it isn’t “surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

That’s an invitation for rural voters to abandon Democrats. That’s what those voters did in 2016. President Trump capitalized on the situation, promising these voters that his policies would revive rural America’s economy. President Trump has delivered on that promise. Remember President Obama mocking then-Candidate Trump about promising to improve the US economy? I remember it because of this:

Longtime Democrat operative Mark Jaede responded to Braun:

It seems that the author thinks the Democratic Party should throw LGBT people and people of color under the bus in order to win votes from socially conservative rural white people.

I disagree. We won’t win by pandering to anti-gay people. We won’t win by dismissing the struggle against racism as “identity politics.” We won’t win by concerning ourselves with how many counties have GOP majorities. We will win by fielding a candidate who can offer Democrats in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Virginia, and North Carolina a reason to turn out and vote.

As long as Joe Biden promises to eliminate the use of fossil fuels, as long as Bernie promises to spend $16,300,000,000,000 on his version of AOC’s Green New Deal, as long as the entire Democrat field promises to decriminalize illegal immigration and give illegal immigrants free health care, Democrats will continue losing those states cited by Prof. Jaede, with the possible exception of Pennsylvania and Virginia.

Democrats love saying that budgets are moral documents. Democrats then say that budgets reflect our priorities. If that’s true, which I think it kinda is, then Tina Smith’s budget priorities are disgusting. As Minnesota’s junior senator, she’s opposed all projects that would’ve helped the people of northern Minnesota. That isn’t opinion. It’s fact. She’s fought the Line 3 Pipeline. She’s opposed the PolyMet and Twin Metals mining projects.

Just those projects alone would’ve had the opportunity to transform the Iron Range from a region with sky-high poverty rates and a virtually nonexistent middle class into a prospering region of the state. The median household income in Virginia, MN is $36,327, compared with the statewide average of $65,699. The percentage of people living below the Federal Poverty Level in Minnesota is 10.5%, compared with 24% living below the FPL in Virginia, MN.

While visiting southern Minnesota, Sen. Smith said “I think at the end of the day, I’m just thinking about what Minnesotans are thinking about, which is prescription drug costs being too high, how can they get the kind of amazing workforce training that they need to get great jobs like they can get here at Red Wing Shoes, and that’s where I’m going to stay focused as long as I can.”

If Smith was honest, which she isn’t, she’d admit that she’s thinking about what Minnesotans are thinking about as long as they aren’t living in rural Minnesota. That isn’t just true now that she’s a US senator. It was true in her time as Minnesota’s Lieutenant Governor. It was true when she was Gov. Dayton’s chief of staff.

Writing off a huge geographical part of the state, including the part that feeds the rest of the state, is disgusting. Still, that’s what Tina Smith is doing. That’s been a staple of her political life for years.

If Smith won’t pay attention to rural Minnesota, she should get fired next November. Tina Smith isn’t about doing the right thing for the entire state. Tina Smith and the DFL is only interested in doing what’s best for the metro DFL. That’s why the DFL has lost the farm vote and the laborer vote. When the Metro DFL unanimously opposes the Line 3 Pipeline, which provides the vast majority of jet fuel for Minneapolis International Airport, they’re saying that serving their special interest masters is more important than doing right by the biggest airport in Minnesota.

How foolish is that? Does that like the decision that a person who is “just thinking about what Minnesotans are thinking?” I’m betting that a significant majority of Minnesotans would disagree with Tina Smith and the Democrats on that issue.

It’s time to fire the DFL, Tina Smith included. The DFL’s priorities, like Tina Smith’s priorities, increasingly aren’t Minnesota’s priorities.

One of the links in TakeAction Minnesota’s weekly newsletter was to this article on Bernie Sanders’ Green New Deal proposal. According to Kenza Hadj-Moussa, TakeAction Minnesota’s Communications Director, “Bernie Sanders rolled out a climate plan today that seems designed to terrify fossil fuel executives. And we love it.” Bernie’s plan is beyond utterly unrealistic. It’s frightening that a top Democrat presidential candidate could be this stupid. Unfortunately, Bernie’s that stupid and then some:

There are novel, meaty policy proposals that make Sanders’s proposal stand out from an already ambitious field: a cash-for-clunkers and financial assistance program to scale up electric vehicle usage, and plans to boost public transit ridership 65 percent by 2030; a requirement that the Congressional Budget Office work with the Environmental Protection Agency to give new legislation a “climate score,” like the budget scores it currently doles out; and abiding by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to ensure the free, prior, and informed consent by Indigenous peoples.

TakeAction Minnesota is part of the DFL’s labyrinth of activist outlets. TAM thinks that boosting transit ridership 65% within 10 years is achievable. No sane person thinks that. TAM, aka TakeAction Minnesota, thinks that giving Native American tribes veto power over fossil fuel projects is a fantastic thing. TAM thinks that ending “fossil fuels imports and exports” is a great idea. What type of idiot thinks that’s smart economically? These guys:

Sanders outlines an expansive system, building on the resolution introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey in April, that would generate publicly owned clean energy and 20 million new jobs.

First, it’s insulting that they think there’s that many net new jobs to be created through the Democrats’ Green New Deal. If TAM thinks that, then they’re using illegal drugs. Either that or they’re that stupid. Next, anyone that thinks that there isn’t tons of corruption within the environmental activist community is kidding themselves. (Think Solyndra, etc.)

It’s clear that the DFL is attached to the Democrat fringe. Today’s Democrat Party has virtually nothing to do with Bill Clinton’s Democrat Party. In Detroit, presidential candidate after Democrat presidential candidate criticized President Obama’s signature accomplishment, Obamacare. Now Tina Smith wants to pretend that she’s a moderate or a centrist? I don’t think so.

As I’ve said before, a moderate Democrat is one campaigning for office. Once they’re elected, Democrats suddenly start talking about their mandate, etc.

Tina Smith couldn’t be clearer about her position on taxes. If Tina Smith was queen for a day on taxes, Minnesota and the entire nation’s economy would screech to a standstill in a New York minute.

In an interview, Smith said “Jason Lewis supported the Republican tax bill that gave giant tax cuts to big corporations and the richest among us, and I wouldn’t have supported that.” Those “giant tax cuts to big corporations” have led to companies moving back from overseas. Had Democrats been in charge, they would’ve kept the corporate tax rates at 35%, which was making the United States uncompetitive with other countries.

This isn’t a fairness issue. It’s a competitiveness issue. President Obama’s policy focused on fairness. As a direct result of that, the Obama economy grew at a sluggish pace. If Tina Smith wants to defend anemic economic growth while the US economy is booming, that’s her option. It isn’t a particularly attractive option but it’s the Democrat’s option. Further, Minnesota Republicans defeated Gov. Walz on the tax issue because money was pouring at a stronger-than-expected clip.

Lewis didn’t waste time before going after Smith’s record on the environment, highlighting Smith’s opposition to the Line 3 Pipeline project. Lewis pointed out that over 80% of the jet fuel for Minneapolis International Airport airplanes. While Smith insists that she’s fighting against special interests, she’s in bed with Twin Cities-based special interests opposed to mining on the Range.

“Senator Smith has a record of working hard for the people of Minnesota, taking on powerful special interests and working across the aisle to get things done, whether it’s fighting to protect health coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, standing up to the big drug companies to lower prescription drug prices or making sure young people have the skills they need to fill high-demand jobs,” Furlong said.

Right now, there are more job openings than there are people to fill those jobs. That means 3 things. The Tax Cuts & Jobs Act that Jason Lewis voted for is working. The deregulation that happened through the use of the Congressional Review Act has revived entire communities, especially in the Rust Belt states of Ohio and Pennsylvania. Lewis voted for most, if not all, of the deregulation. Third, it means that Democrats were wrong to unanimously vote against the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act.

No Democrats in the House or Senate voted for the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act. That means that Democrats were terribly wrong on economic policy. The Tax Cuts & Jobs Act took a barely-growing economy and kicked it into a higher gear virtually immediately. When Smith says that she wouldn’t have voted for the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act, she’s telling Minnesotans that she would’ve voted against the policies that jump-started the economy.

Do we really want to vote for a senator that wouldn’t vote for prosperity-inducing policies? Do we really want to vote for a senator who is totally controlled by special interests that’ve stopped Iron Range prosperity, that have killed blue collar jobs and that would’ve stopped the US from becoming energy independent?

If killing jobs, undermining national security and preventing Iron Range prosperity are your highest priorities, then Tina Smith is your candidate. If you want prosperity, then voting for Jason Lewis is imperative.

I didn’t realize just how much Gov. Tim Walz had bought into the DFL’s anti-mining agenda until now. According to this article, Gov. Walz has gone the full Al Gore on environmental stupidity.

Awhile back, Gore was in town for “the Climate Reality Leadership Corps training at the Minneapolis Convention Center.” Gore said Walz is helping Minnesota change the energy landscape, saying “What’s happening here in Minnesota represents some of the best of what’s happening all across the country. If Washington is not going to lead, Minnesota will.”

The ‘leadership’ that Vice President Gore is talking about is anything but leadership. It’s Democrat stupidity running rampant. During his presentation, Gov. Walz was interrupted by protesters who oppose the Line 3 Pipeline. When they were shut down, Gov. Walz tried winning their trust. Check out the video in this tweet:


Check this out:

Walz said even a head of state has to work in concert with lawmakers — and Minnesota is the only state in the nation where control of the legislature is divided. “We want to move to a totally carbon-free Minnesota,” said Walz, noting that the Republican-controlled state Senate has refused to hear a DFL-led climate bill modeled after aggressive plans in California and Hawaii. “We don’t have the Senate.”

Gov. Walz’s betrayal of his southern Minnesota farming roots is complete. He’s wholly owned by the environmentalist wing of the DFL. Long ago, the DFL sold out totally to the environmentalists. Further, the DFL doesn’t deserve its name because the Democratic-Farmer-Laborer Party has become the party of socialists. The DFL has abandoned farmers and laborers.

It’s impossible to picture a farm in a carbon-free environment. The protesters that interrupted Gov. Walz’s speech are protesting the Line 3 Pipeline. The DFL has already tried stopping the PolyMet and Twin Metals projects. They stopped the Sandpiper Pipeline project. If they won’t support those types of projects, how can the DFL credibly call themselves pro-labor?

California’s once-great agricultural land is virtually worthless. They’re blaming it on climate change but it’s mostly attributable to foolish policies pushed by environmental activists. The last thing that Minnesota should want is to become a cold California. That isn’t anything that any state should aspire to. California is quickly becoming the capitol of homelessness, illegal immigration and rat infestation.

Tim Walz isn’t from southern Minnesota anymore. He isn’t pro-farmer. He isn’t pro-gun rights anymore. He’s quickly becoming the most progressive governor in Minnesota history.

The sellout is complete.