Archive for the ‘Unions’ Category

GETTING CLOSER TO ‘SHOVEL READY’

Thursday, January 16th, 2020

 

What better way to slow the growth of a dynamic country such as ours, than to impose restrictive and time consuming environmental regulations.  Was  that  possibly  the plan of the Green/Globalist/Marxist Movement?   Ya think???   Nancy

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Getting Closer to ‘Shovel Ready’

Environmental impact statements shouldn’t take 13 years and more than 16,000 pages.

The Editorial Board  January 13, 2020

Traffic backs up on Interstate 70 near Silverthorne, Colo., Jan. 7, 2018. PHOTO: THOMAS PEIPERT/ASSOCIATED PRESS

EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE:  On Thursday the Trump Administration released a proposed rule to streamline NEPA reviews. One highlight is that the process would have presumptive limits: two years and 300 pages for a full environmental impact statement; or a year and 75 pages for a smaller environmental assessment. Thorny cases could go longer with written approval by “a senior agency official of the lead agency.”

If you visit an aging American megaproject—say, the Hoover Dam—you’ll probably see a startling statistic about how quickly it was built. Congress authorized the damming of the Colorado River in 1928, construction started in 1931, and the 726-foot concrete wonder opened in 1936. That’s a “shovel ready” job.

Today even modest public works, including roads, bridges and airport runways, can spend years in limbo, no thanks to the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA. That 1970 law requires an environmental study of any major project that involves federal funding or permitting. NEPA hasn’t been overhauled in 40 years, which is why the Trump Administration deserves applause for moving last week to modernize it.

Everybody wants to protect the environment. But NEPA isn’t doing the job sensibly. No single agency has responsibility for its enforcement, unlike the Clean Water Act or the Clean Air Act. There’s no obligation for the feds to keep a specific timeline. Environmental assessments and impact statements are often monstrously detailed, since agencies and sponsors are trying to make them litigation proof.

The result is a regulatory morass. From 2013 to 2017, the average final impact statement took more than four years and ran 669 pages, the Council on Environmental Quality said last summer. The longest file was for a contentious 12-mile expansion of Interstate 70 in Denver. The final report ran 8,951 pages, plus another 7,307 pages of appendices. The whole rigmarole took 13 years.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO 10 REASONS WHY BLACKS SHOULD LEAVE THE DEMOCRAT PARTY

Tuesday, December 31st, 2019

 

Does the Democratic Party represent the interests of black Americans? Larry Elder gives 10 reasons why blacks might consider leaving the Democratic Party.
VIDEO

10 Reasons Why Blacks Should Leave the Democratic Party by Larry Elder

128,277 views
Share

VIDEO – PUBLIC PENSIONS – AN ECONOMIC TIME BOMB PRAGER U

Tuesday, October 29th, 2019

 

VIDEO  – PUBLIC PENSIONS – AN ECONOMIC TIME BOMB  PRAGER U 
Who cares about public pension liability? Well, you should – after all, it’s the reason entire cities and even states are facing bankruptcy. Joshua Rauh, professor of finance at Stanford and Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, paints a startling picture of just how broken the public pension system really is, and what will happen if we continue to ignore it
Share

OBAMA’S INCREDIBLE MOVIE MAKEOVER

Monday, September 16th, 2019

 

This is an extremely informative and interesting article about the subject of Obama’s first film that he and Michele  produced with Netflix.  As you will read, the author of this article is very critical of the part that Obama played in the original closing of this GM plant during the 2008/2009 financial crisis which Obama does not mention at all in his movie .  Talk about chutzpah !!!
I have included the official trailer of this movie and a link to view the entire movie at the bottom of this WSJ article.   Nancy
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Obama’s Incredible Movie Makeover

The former president has produced a film about a factory closing—without mentioning his own role in the drama

By Mike Turner,  Mr. Turner, a Republican, represents Ohio’s 10th Congressional District.  He served as mayor of Dayton , 1994 – 2002
September 14, 2019
EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE:  It’s a fascinating and at times moving film. What’s interesting about it, though, is that it never once alludes to the part Mr. Obama played in diminishing the ability of Moraine’s laid off workers to transfer to other GM plants. The president’s role wasn’t indirect and isn’t a matter of dispute: His administration’s bailout deal for GM included a backroom exclusive agreement with the United Auto Workers. The hypocrisy of this Obama-backed film is astounding. Mr. Obama fails to acknowledge his direct role in creating the hardships the Moraine workers weathered. He had nothing whatsoever to do with the plant’s reopening—that was all the work of state and local officials and community leaders.

To put the point bluntly: If the president had his way, there would have been no plant to make a documentary about. “American Factory” would have been “Abandoned Parking Lot.”

Higher Ground, the production company formed last year by Barack and Michelle Obama in conjunction with Netflix, recently released its first film. “American Factory” is a documentary about a General Motors plant in Moraine, Ohio, a suburb of Dayton. The plant closed in 2008 and was reopened by a Chinese auto glass manufacturer in 2015. The film follows the lives of both the laid-off American workers and the Chinese workers brought in to run the new plant.

It’s a fascinating and at times moving film. What’s interesting about it, though, is that it never once alludes to the part Mr. Obama played in diminishing the ability of Moraine’s laid off workers to transfer to other GM plants. The president’s role wasn’t indirect and isn’t a matter of dispute: His administration’s bailout deal for GM included a backroom exclusive agreement with the United Auto Workers.

How does a nearly two-hour film telling the story of these workers fail even to mention the direct role the co-owner of the film’s production company played in creating their hardships? Did the filmmakers think no one would remember?

A quick refresher. The Obama administration’s auto bailout highly favored the UAW and its members. The GM plant in Moraine was unionized by the IUE-CWA. So—despite being one of the top GM facilities for quality, efficiency and production in the country—it was shuttered, and its employees were put at the back of the line when requesting transfers to other GM plants. Any non-UAW employees looking to transfer were forced to start as new hires, wiping clean any wages, tenure, and benefits built up during careers at other GM plants.

American Factory” documents the UAW’s efforts to unionize the reopened auto glass factory without any mention of the same union’s direct role in the GM plant’s closure. The Dayton community was left out in the cold—thousands of jobs lost, families devastated, longtime GM workers out on the street looking for work.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO WHY AMERICA CAN’T FILL A POTHOLE PRAGER U

Tuesday, July 23rd, 2019

 

Another excellent Prager U video    Nancy
VIDEO   PRAGER U
Why can’t America build or repair infrastructure on a par with countries in Europe or Asia? Why are our bridges, roads, and airports not what they should be? Aren’t we the richest and most technologically savvy country in the world? Who or what is holding us back? Kyle Smith of National Review has the surprising (and frustrating) answer.
Share

BACK TO THE 60’S – RADICAL SOCIALISTS

Saturday, April 13th, 2019

 

THE WASHINGTON TIMES
BACK TO THE 60’S
Radical Socialists are once again on the scene, pushing against conservative principles
 
By Ellen Sauerbrey  • Ellen Sauerbrey is a former Republican nominee for governor of Maryland and U.S. assistant secretary of State.   – – Wednesday, March 13, 2019

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Many Americans are shocked that socialism, which has been anathema to the vast majority throughout our history, has suddenly emerged as the guiding principle for most Democratic presidential candidates. How has this happened?

The seeds of todays’ socialist and conservative movements grew out of the 1960s — a time of turmoil, war protests, civil rights riots, assassinations and a clash of fundamental ideas about the role of government in organizing society.

Communism had been making great strides in Europe and the United States was in the crosshairs. A former FBI agent, W. Cleon Skouse, wrote an alarming book, “The Naked Communist,” outlining the Communist strategy to take over America. In 1963, Florida Congressman Albert Herlong Jr. inserted a list of 45 Communist goals from Clauson’s book into the Congressional Record. Today it reads like a checklist of the left.

The goals included: Capture one of the political parties, get control of the labor unions, big business, schools, and student newspapers. Infiltrate the press and the churches and eliminate prayer or religious expression in schools. Discredit the U.S. Constitution, the Founding Fathers and the family.

One of the leading voices on the left in the Sixties was Bill Ayers, the most prominent member of the radical and violent Weather Underground, and a self-described Communist. Ayers, his wife, Bernadine Dohrn, and co-conspirator Kathryn Boutin were dedicated to the violent overthrow of the capitalist system.

Two other influential Sixties radicals, Columbia University sociology professors Richard Cloward and Francis Fox Piven, promoted a nonviolent approach in a 1966 article in The Nation. Their idea was to collapse the financial system by recruiting so many poor for welfare that it would create a political crisis. They founded the National Welfare Rights Organization, packed the welfare rolls and by 1975 forced New York City into bankruptcy. With their success, it was clear that this strategy could be used to overwhelm other government systems as well.

(more…)

Share

2 ARTICLES – EDUCATION – ROOT OF THE PROBLEM

Monday, March 11th, 2019

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
DEMOCRATS HAVE TAKEN OVER EDUCATION REFORM
by Jay P. Greene and Frederick M. Hess  Mr. Greene is Distinguished Professor of Education Policy at the University of Arkansas. Mr. Hess is Director of Education Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute. Their report examining the political preferences of people working in education reform organizations will be released Monday in Education Next.
March 8, 2019

The K-12 education-reform movement was once led primarily by conservatives and libertarians with centrist Democrats as junior partners. But over the past decade, education reform has taken a hard left turn. Republicans are now almost entirely invisible within the ranks of its activists. This progressive capture of education reform—like the capture of much of the media and academia—will undermine the quality and effectiveness of the movement’s work.

We’ve seen this trend firsthand over two decades of work in education reform, so we decided to quantify it. In a new study, the first of its kind, we examined the political preferences of people working in education-reform groups. To identify these groups we focused on those receiving support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Walton Family Foundation. These are the two leading backers of school reform. Almost all major education-reform groups receive funding from one or both foundations (as have we). We then searched OpenSecrets.org for all political campaign contributions made by the staff of these groups to gauge their political leanings.

We tracked staff contributions to political campaigns in a sample of 73 education-reform organizations funded by the Gates Foundation, including Achieve, Teach For America, the New Schools Venture Fund, Alliance for Excellent Education, Jobs for the Future, Turnaround for Children, and Bellwether Education Partners. In total, we found 2,625 political campaign contributions from the staff of Gates grantees. Of those contributions, more than 99% supported Democratic candidates or the Democratic Party. Only eight (that’s eight, not 8%) of the 2,625 campaign contributions went to Republicans.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO DON’T CRY FOR ME, ARGENTINA

Tuesday, January 15th, 2019

 

VIDEO 

Don’t cry for me Argentina, Cuba, Venezuela, America…….

 

 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=33i_BAhuiE0

Share

VIDEO AMERICA UNDER SIEGE – TREVOR LOUDON

Saturday, November 10th, 2018

 

  Trevor Loudon speaks of  the Far Left in our government and how they work with the Marxists and the Islamists.  He names influential members of congress and those running for congressional seats in last weeks election.  Absolutely frightening.  Please share with your email lists.  Nancy    

Trevor Loudon   America Under Siege

Share

THE DARK MONEY THAT FUNDED ‘DARK MONEY’

Saturday, October 20th, 2018

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

The Dark Money That Funded ‘Dark Money’

Liberal groups sponsor a documentary faulting conservative groups that sponsor political advocacy.

By Scott Walter    Mr. Walter is president of the Capital Research Center
October 17, 2018
Left-wing interests are raving about the documentary “Dark Money.” Airing this month on PBS, “Dark Money” purports to expose the effects of right-wing political spending in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The Los Angeles Times calls the film a “political thriller.” NPR lauds it for revealing the “assault on the American electoral and judicial process by corporations whose agenda is nothing less than the dismantling of government itself.”

There’s one problem: This attack on conservative-funded political advocacy is itself liberal-funded political advocacy. The proof? The end credits listing the film’s funders.

Top billing goes to the Ford Foundation, the third-largest private political-advocacy philanthropy in the U.S. Its sheer size—$12.4 billion in assets—isn’t unique on the left. Even before hedge-fund billionaire George Soros injected $18 billion into his Open Society Foundations, eight of America’s 10 largest private foundations (ranked by giving as of 2013) were aligned with the political left.

Nominally nonpartisan but actually liberal foundations and nonprofits spend three or four times as much as their conservative peers on “education” and advocacy, as the Capital Research Center documents.

(more…)

Share
Search All Posts
Categories