Displaying posts published in

October 2016

The Hidden Costs of Wind and Solar Energy By Tyler O’Neil

A new report from the Department of Energy (DOE) painted a rosy picture for renewable energy, but Americans must not forget that any breakthroughs have come with a cost. The United States may produce more wind and solar energy than in previous years, but that increase must be understood in the context of government subsidies for those industries.

“Alternative energy technologies have been heavily subsidized for decades and even with the generous support from taxpayers, they haven’t penetrated the market as promised,” Nick Loris, research fellow in energy and environmental policy at the Heritage Foundation, told PJ Media on Monday. “If these technologies are as promising and cost-competitive as proponents of their use say they are, they shouldn’t need preferential treatment from the government.”

The DOE report shows “6 Charts that Will Make You Optimistic About America’s Clean Energy Future.” The charts show increasing energy output at decreasing cost for wind power and solar power, and they also show decreasing cost and increasing purchases for electric cars and LED light bulbs.

“The Department of Energy’s information tells a bit of a different story when you look closely,” Dan Simmons, vice president for policy at the Institute for Energy Research (IER), told PJ Media on Monday. Simmons noted that while the cost of land-based wind energy fell overall since 1980, it actually increased more than 40 percent from 2002 to 2010.

In July, National Review’s Robert Bryce reported that the wind energy industry has received $176 billion in local, state, and national subsidies since 2000. Despite this, according to the DOE graph, wind was actually cheaper in 2002 than it was in 2015.

“It appears that tens of billions in subsidies for wind made wind more expensive,” Simmons quipped.

WHEN IT COMES TO TAXES AND CHARITY HILLARY LIVES IN A GLASS HOUSE

https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/08/12/almost-all-of-hillary-clintons-charitable-donations-went-to-this-one-organization/
Almost All of Hillary Clinton’s Charitable Donations Went to This One Organization By Rick Moram (August 12, 2016)

According to tax returns for 2015 released by the Clinton campaign, 96% of the candidate’s charitable donations went to the Clinton Foundation.

Daily Caller:

The documents show that the power couple earned $10,745,378 last year, mostly on income earned from giving public speeches.

Of that, they gave just over a million to charity. But the contributions can hardly be seen as altruistic, since the money flowed back to an entity they control.

The other $42,000 contribution was to Desert Classic Charities. That group hosts an annual PGA golf event. Doug Band, a Clinton Foundation adviser and Bill Clinton’s longtime assistant, was on the board of directors of that organization through 2014, according to its IRS filings.

Desert Classic Charities effectively returned that donation back into the Clinton orbit. Its 2015 tax filing shows that it contributed $700,000 to the Clinton Foundation for work on obesity programs. The group handed out $1.6 million in grants that whole year.

The Clinton Foundation dispenses contracts to Clinton cronies like Doug Band while also paying for the non-political travel of the Clintons and staffers. It’s all perfectly legal — and disgustingly unethical. The Foundation is used as a slush fund that enriches friends of the Clintons while allowing foreign businesses and governments to purchase influence.

I doubt this story will get much play beyond the conservative net. It might cast Hillary in a bad light, and we can’t have that when the press now sees that it has a holy quest to keep Donald Trump from winning.

But you would think after what they wrote about Mitt Romney’s charitable giving, they’d at least give the appearance of balance:

Romney paid $1.9 million in taxes and gave $4 million in charity on income of $14 million. But many liberal commentators criticized the Republican because a majority of those charitable contributions went to the Mormon church. Another chunk went to a foundation controlled by his family.

The Nation, a far-left magazine, published an article entitled “Romney’s Ungenerous Donations.”

Mother Jones, another liberal publication, published several articles skewering Romney for giving to his own church.

“Romney Tax Tips: 10 Ways to Stiff the IRS,” is one such article. “Vetting Romney’s $3 Million in Charity” is another.

We’re used to this sort of media malpractice. Double standards are a specialty of the leftist press. But they’re all too busy denying there’s a problem with the Foundation to notice that Hillary Clinton believes that the #1 charitable cause in the world is herself and her husband.

‘Aqui no’: Not here, say the voters of Colombia By Silvio Canto, Jr.

Another country and another group of voters who sent the experts to that place that we can’t say in a family blog.

Let’s go to Colombia first:

A Colombian peace deal that the president and the country’s largest rebel group had signed just days before was defeated in a referendum on Sunday, leaving the fate of a 52-year war suddenly uncertain.

A narrow margin divided the yes-or-no vote, with 50.2 percent of Colombians rejecting the peace deal and 49.8 percent voting in favor, the government said.

The result was a deep embarrassment for President Juan Manuel Santos. Just last week, Mr. Santos had joined arms with leaders of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or the FARC, who apologized on national television during a signing ceremony.

The surprise surge by the “no” vote — nearly all major polls had indicated resounding approval — left the country in a dazed uncertainty not seen since Britain voted in June to leave the European Union. And it left the future of rebels who had planned to rejoin Colombia as civilians — indeed, the future of the war itself, which both sides had declared over — unknown.

Both sides vowed they would not go back to fighting.

So what happened in Colombia?

Let me introduce you to my good friend Daniel Duquenal who lives next door in Venezuela. I agree with him that President Santos, who was President Uribe’s defense minister, made a huge mistake in bringing Cuba (not an honest broker) into the middle of these negotiations:

Then came the choice of Havana and Castro’s guidance to negotiate with its allies, the communist FARC.

Let’s play ‘who lost more money’: Trump or Hillary? By Jack Hellner

Hillary says she can’t understand how anyone in business could ever lose $1 billion in a single year, yet somehow, according to an inspector general’s report, the State Department misplaced $6 billion of taxpayer money because of inadequate internal controls. Most of the sum was lost during Hillary’s four years.

Hillary’s losses cost the taxpayers much more than Trump’s. She didn’t just lose $1 billion in one year; she lost an average of over $1 billion for four straight years.

Do we want someone to be president who has been so careless with public funds – who, according to the FBI, was extremely careless with classified information? The FBI director couldn’t be sure that she understood the nation’s security laws, and apparently that is the only reason she wasn’t charged.

Nevada’s School Choice Victory Unions lose their attempt to kill education savings accounts.

Children won a big victory in Nevada on Thursday as the state Supreme Court upheld the state’s revolutionary education savings accounts (ESAs), the nation’s first universal school choice program. Note to Donald Trump: This is worth celebrating.

ESAs allow parents who withdraw their kids from public schools to use state funds to pay for private school tuition, tutoring, curriculum and school supplies. Each account in Nevada is funded at 90% to 100% (more for low-income and disabled kids) of the average statewide per pupil expenditure. Parents can roll over funds from year to year, and there is no cap on the number of participants.

About 8,000 parents applied for accounts last year but were blocked from tapping the funds because of lawsuits by the American Civil Liberties Union and other friends of the teachers unions. Those groups argued that the ESAs violate the state constitution’s requirement that the legislature operate a “uniform system” of public schools and prohibition on using public funds for sectarian purposes.

A 4-2 majority rejected their arguments, ruling that ESAs do “not alter the existence or structure of the public school system” in part because the funds once placed in the accounts “belong to the parents and are not ‘public funds.’” The court added that “it is undisputed that the ESA program has a secular purpose,” and the state constitution “does not limit the Legislature’s discretion to encourage other methods of education.”

While the state won on the core issues, the court did hold that the legislature violated a constitutional mandate to appropriate funds for public schools “before any other appropriation is enacted.” That’s because the legislature diverted money from last year’s education appropriation bill to fund ESAs.

The Apology of Donald J. Trump To those who don’t get why Clinton isn’t ahead by 50 points—here’s the answer. Bret Stephens….see note please

I’m not sure what Stephens is trying to do here…but if he is continuing his fatwa against Trump he fails…..If Trump did deliver this speech I would applaud enthusiastically….and i be that was not Stephens’ intent…..Just as Dorothy Rabinowitz’s fulsome endorsement of Hillary brought more people to Trump’s defense so will this column….rsk

“What follows is a draft of a speech Donald Trump is scheduled to deliver Tuesday, Oct. 4 in Prescott Valley, Ariz. We haven’t confirmed its authenticity because, like the rest of the corrupt media, we’re totally dishonest.

Thank you, everybody, thank you. It’s good to be back in Arizona. And you know we’re going to win, right? The polls say we’re going to win in Arizona, and we will.

The polls also say we’d lose the general election if it were held today. But they’re wrong. So wrong. You know how pollsters work? They guess who will show up to vote on election day, and then they poll these “likely voters.”

But let me tell you something. The pollsters have no clue. None. They don’t have a clue who the electorate is, and they don’t have a clue of what’s going on in America. Believe me, folks, on election day they’re going to find out.

The other day, in Colombia—I’m talking about the country in South America—they held a vote. A referendum. President Santos staked his reputation on a, quote-unquote, peace deal with the terrorists of the FARC.

Now the FARC, they’re the worst people in the world. They’ve killed tens of thousands of people. They make their money through drug trafficking and kidnapping. They’ve been terrorizing Colombians for 50 years.

Along comes Santos, and he makes this terrible deal that says to the FARC: We’re not going to send you to jail. We’re going to sentence your leaders to community service. We’re even going to guarantee you seats in the Congress.

And all the polls said the deal was going to win in a landslide. Obama and Kerry lined up behind it. Santos told Colombians they had no choice, that it was the only road to peace.

Guess what? The polls were wrong. The Colombians knew a bad deal when they saw one. They weren’t going to let killers get away with their crimes. The only deal they want with the FARC is the same deal Reagan got from Russia: We win, they lose.

Folks, it was the same story with the Brexit vote in June. All the polls said the Brits wouldn’t vote to leave the European Union. They did. All the experts said the sky would fall if the Brits voted to go. It didn’t. These geniuses said that Britain was too small to be the master of its own destiny. The British people believe otherwise, and I’m with them!

What happened in Britain, in Colombia, it’s going to happen here. Because, like them, we’re sick of it.

We’re sick of hearing ObamaCare is working when even the New York Times admits it’s a total disaster. We’re sick of hearing how great the economy is when it’s floating on a big wave of cheap credit that benefits Wall Street at the expense of savers. We’re sick of hearing how great the Iran deal is, then watching our sailors being humiliated while we secretly fork over pallets of cash.

You know what we’re also sick of? Liberal hypocrites.

I’m not supposed to say the name I’m about to say. Well, two words: Alicia. Machado.

The Schneiderman Rules America’s worst Attorney General abuses his office to aid Clinton.

We wrote Monday that many liberals believe that defeating Donald Trump justifies anything, and right on time comes the egregious Eric Schneiderman. The New York Attorney General delivered his own personal October surprise for Hillary Clinton by announcing a supposed scandal over Mr. Trump’s charitable foundation.

Mr. Schneiderman’s office, in a letter sent Friday and released Monday, ordered the Donald J. Trump Foundation to cease raising money in New York. According to the letter, the Trump outfit is not correctly registered in the state to solicit funds.

The AG gave the foundation 15 days to turn over reams of paper, including audited financial statements and annual financial reports going back many years. Mr. Schneiderman warned in his letter that failure to comply will be deemed a “fraud upon the people of the state of New York.”

The announcement is Mr. Schneiderman’s latest misuse of his prosecutorial authority to attack his political enemies. The AG’s office first announced it was “investigating” Mr. Trump in mid-September—the better to begin a round of bad headlines—and has also been touting its inquiry into Trump University. While it’s possible the Trump Foundation has violated in some way “section 172 of Article 7-A New York’s Executive Law,” it’s notable that the best Mr. Schneiderman could drum up by way of “fraud” was a paperwork technicality.

The bigger point is timing. Mr. Schneiderman’s cease-and-desist order, coming a month before a general election, smells like partisan politics. The AG has endorsed Mrs. Clinton and sits on the Democratic nominee’s New York “leadership council,” which the Clinton campaign describes as the “in-state leadership” for her campaign, charged with “amplifying the campaign’s national voice to New York families” and “aiding the campaign with rapid response.”

Mr. Schneiderman’s prosecution of her opponent certainly qualifies as “rapid.” He could easily have waited until Nov. 9 to divulge his investigation and unveil his order. If the Trump Foundation has been deficient with its paperwork for as long as the AG’s office says, a few more weeks of delay would hardly hurt.

“To the public it will appear that Schneiderman acted not in the interest of his client, the State, but for whatever influence his announcement might have on the election outcome,” NYU School of Law Professor Stephen Gillers told LawNewz.com, and Mr. Gillers is no conservative. CONTINUE AT SITE

Court Blocks Indiana Gov. Mike Pence’s Plan to Limit Syrian Refugees Plan delayed pending outcome of a lawsuit filed by an Indiana resettlement agencyBy Joe Palazzolo see note

NO DOUBT TIM KAINE WILL POUNCE ON THIS ISSUE IN THE DEBATE….RSK
Gov. Mike Pence’s plan to restrict the settlement of Syrian refugees in Indiana remains on hold following the decision of a federal appeals court, which called it discriminatory and based on “nightmare speculation.”

The ruling by the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Monday delayed implementation of Mr. Pence’s directive pending the outcome of a lawsuit filed by an Indiana agency that helps resettle refugees in the state.

Mr. Pence, the Republican vice presidential nominee, is among a group of conservative governors who have tried to block or delay the arrival of refugees fleeing the war-torn Arab country, arguing that Islamic State terrorists could be hiding among them.

“No evidence of this belief has been presented, however,” wrote Judge Richard Posner for a unanimous three-judge panel. “It is nightmare speculation.”

Mr. Pence has sought to limit the number of Syrian refugees in Indiana through state contracts with private resettlement agencies. Indiana reimburses such agencies, using federal grants, for providing social services to resettled refugees. Last year, Donald Trump’s running mate forbade reimbursements for costs associated with Syrian refugees.

Exodus Refugee Immigration Inc., which expected to resettle 100 or more Syrian refugees in Indiana this year, sued Mr. Pence to block his plan. A federal district judge agreed in February to pause the plan for the duration of the lawsuit, ruling that Exodus was likely to win its case alleging discrimination.

Indiana officials appealed the ruling to the Chicago-based Seventh Circuit, which on Monday also predicted that Exodus would prevail.

Anyone seeking refugee status in the U.S. must undergo multiple layers of screening by the federal government, following screening by a United Nations office, a process that can take up to two years. Judge Posner acknowledged that Syrian refugees pose specific concerns, because many were born elsewhere and moved to the country before its civil war, making them difficult to screen.

As a condition of using federal money for resettlement, federal law requires states to service refugees regardless of race, religion, nationality or sex.

Andrew Browne :For China, ‘Clouds Are Fading Away’ in the Philippines Duterte’s abrupt diplomatic and military shift from Washington heartens Beijing, threatens U.S. alliance

With the exception of the Vietnam War, America’s alliance system in East Asia has helped keep the peace for more than half a century.

Now it is in trouble. Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte’s progression from abusive name-calling to a more broadly articulated anti-American hostility has been swift and stunning. It threatens one of Washington’s crucial Asian alliances and sets back U.S. President Barack Obama ’s signature “pivot” to the region.

China is jubilant over Mr. Duterte’s cooling relations with Washington after it clashed for years with the Philippine leader’s predecessor.

“The clouds are fading away,” China’s ambassador to Manila, Zhao Jianhua, said at a Chinese National Day reception. “The sun is rising over the horizon, and will shine beautifully on the new chapter of bilateral relations.”

At first it looked like a fit of pique: One month ago, Mr. Duterte called Mr. Obama a “son of a whore” over U.S. criticism of his war on drugs that has strewn the country with thousands of corpses. His rage quickly hardened.

A few days later Mr. Duterte proposed removing American military advisers from the troubled southern region of Mindanao. Then he declared he was shopping in China and Russia for military supplies readily available in the U.S. Mr. Duterte will lead a Philippine business delegation to Beijing this month.