Connect with us

Everything

The one concern about the President’s climate agreement speech

Published

on

There was nothing beneficial about the Paris climate agreement. It wasn’t good for the world and it definitely wasn’t good for America. We’ve always maintained that this particular piece of foreign policy has a clear resolution: President Obama should never have signed it and President Trump should remove us from it immediately.

Today, he did just that, but with a caveat:

No. We shouldn’t begin negotiations to re-enter. It can’t be fixed. It’s built on a false premise that globalizing the climate change combat initiative through disproportionate restrictions brought about by political maneuvers can fix the problem. It’s also based upon unverified assumptions. In the future, we’ll discuss the party’s stance on the environment, one that is based on real science rather than the political science that focuses solely on carbon emissions, but for this piece let’s look at a trend revealed further by today’s announcement.

Since declaring that only he (Trump) can fix our problems at the Republican National Convention last July, we’ve seen the way that the President likes to address pretty much every situation. He wants to fix everything. He wants to make deals. This is fine for some things, but the best solution in most situations is to remove federal government intervention altogether. This doesn’t seem to be on option for the Republicans (and it’s definitely not even a consideration in the Democrats’ playbook).

Of all the issues for which the President should say, “We’re getting out, period,” the Paris Climate Agreement is one of the most obvious. There’s no need to try to leave the door open for some future “fix.” Get out. Move on. Don’t look back. That he is still signaling the possibility that we can renegotiate our way back in is troublesome.

NAFTA. Obamacare. Planned Parenthood. Immigration. Mexico building the wall. Moving the U.S. embassy to Israel. Now, Paris. One of the biggest reasons Trump was elected is because many assumed he would be unflinching when keeping his promises. To be fair, he has demonstrated resolve in some situations, but most of his promises have been negotiable at best. It’s a trait that seems to have carried over from the previous administration.

We’re not saying that we agree with the President’s stance on all of the issues listed above, but we’d prefer that he act definitively in one direction or the other rather than tiptoe through everything by placing a “renegotiation” caveat on it. As we’ve stated before, Obamacare is an easy example of something that should be chopped apart without the government trying to fix it. The AHCA is not a repeal and replace. It’s a tweak and rebrand.

The same holds true for his stance on Israel. While everyone focused on the Paris agreement announcement, the other big news of the day is that the President decided to not move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem “for now.” Some may say it’s just temporary, but these six-month waivers on the law have been going on for decades. It wouldn’t even cost us a thing; Israel would happily pay for the move if the President asked.

“We will move the American embassy to the eternal capital of the Jewish people, Jerusalem,” he said when campaigning. Why wait? Will things suddenly be better in the future? Will it be more acceptable to the Muslim world in six months? A year? Seven years?

We’re very pleased that the President pulled us out of the Paris agreement. We just wish he’d stop trying to renegotiate everything. Some things should be left to die in peace.

Opinions

Ivanka Trump is an idiot

Published

on

Ivanka Trump is an idiot

Apparently, she didn’t get the memo. That’s essentially the excuse the White House is using to try to sweep under the rug First Daughter Ivanka Trump’s use of a personal email account for government business.

Before 2016, perhaps that excuse could have worked. We could have dismissed it as an understandable mistake. But she was using her private email account for United States government business in 2017. That’s inexcusable.

Ivanka Trump used private email account to discuss official White House business

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/ivanka-trump-used-private-email-account-to-discuss-official-white-house-businessTrump and Kushner established personal emails in December 2016 with a domain of “ijkfamily.com” through a Microsoft system, which stores the emails. She used the account to share information on government policies and official business less than 100 times, usually in response to administration officials who contacted her first via the personal email address.

She also sent hundreds of emails concerning her official work schedule and travel details to herself and personal assistants, potentially violating federal records rules.

Did she not attend any of her father’s rallies? Was she oblivious to the news that started hitting in 2015 and ran pretty much nonstop even after the 2016 election? Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server is definitely different from Ivanka Trump’s use of a personal email account, but it’s in the same realm.

Either she knew she was doing something she shouldn’t be doing, in which case we should question her judgment and wonder what she’s doing in any official or unofficial role at the White House, or she’s an idiot. There’s no in-between.

Many Republicans will defend her actions by saying it was different from Hillary’s. They’re right. Hillary didn’t have the benefit of two years of news coverage ripping on the use of personal emails for government business. Ivanka did.

Continue Reading

Democrats

In threat to Pelosi, 16 Dems say they’ll back new leadership

Published

on

In threat to Pelosi 16 Dems say theyll back new leadership

WASHINGTON (AP) — Sixteen Democrats who’ve opposed Nancy Pelosi’s quest to become speaker released a letter Monday saying they will vote for “new leadership” when the House picks its leaders in January, underscoring a significant threat to her effort to lead her party’s House majority in the next Congress.

The letter’s release suggests that rather than spending the next six weeks focusing on a fresh agenda to present to Americans, House Democrats could be consumed with a bitter and attention-grabbing internal leadership fight.

The battle pits the party’s largely liberal and diverse membership backing Pelosi, D-Calif., against a small group of mostly moderate male lawmakers. Of the 16 Democrats who signed the letter — which stops short of explicitly saying they will vote for an opposing candidate for speaker — all but two are men: Reps. Kathleen Rice of New York and California’s Linda Sanchez.

“We promised to change the status quo, and we intend to deliver on that promise,” the authors wrote, referring to campaign pledges by a number of Democratic candidates. “Therefore, we are committed to voting for new leadership in both our Caucus meeting and on the House Floor.”

Pelosi has activated an aggressive campaign for the job involving House colleagues, prominent outside Democrats and party-aligned interest groups. Her office distributed endorsements Monday from nine House Democrats who are military veterans and UnidosUS, a Hispanic civil rights organization.

Known as a precise vote counter with a keen sense of her caucus’ leanings, Pelosi is aided by the lack of a declared opponent and many weeks during which she can dangle choice committee assignments, rules changes and other goodies to help attract support.

“Leader Pelosi remains confident in her support among Members and Members-elect,” spokesman Drew Hammill said in a written statement. He said 94 percent of House Democrats declined to sign the letter, though Pelosi opponents said they expect others who didn’t sign to vote against her.

Though the mavericks’ numbers represent a handful of the 232 House Democrats elected, plus five races still undecided, they could still garner enough opposition to thwart her.

Pelosi seems certain to have enough support to become her party’s nominee for speaker when House Democrats vote by secret ballot on Nov. 28. She will need only a majority of Democrats in that contest.

But when the full House elects its new leaders Jan. 3, the speaker will need a majority 218 votes, assuming that no one votes “present” or misses the vote and Republicans oppose her en masse, as seems likely. At 232 seats, Pelosi could afford to lose just 14 Democrats and still become speaker.

The rebels’ letter to their Democratic colleagues praises Pelosi, 78, as “a historic figure” who helped win major victories. Pelosi was speaker from 2007 through 2010 when Democrats held the majority and has been the party’s leader since 2003.

“We also recognize that in this recent election, Democrats ran and won on a message of change,” they wrote. “Our majority came on the backs of candidates who said that they would support new leadership because voters in hard-won districts, and across the country, want to see real change in Washington.”

Pelosi’s critics say the party’s long-serving top leaders must make room for younger members. They say years of Republican ads portraying her as an out-of-touch liberal have made it hard for moderate Democrats to win in swing districts.

Pelosi allies counter that the party just won House control with their biggest gain of seats since the 1974 post-Watergate election. Many bristle at dumping her at a time when President Donald Trump and the #MeToo movement have helped attract female candidates and voters to the party.

Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland has been No. 2 House Democrat since 2003 and South Carolina’s Jim Clyburn has been No. 3 since 2007. Both are in their late 70s and are running, unopposed so far, for those posts again.

Of the letter’s signees, five are incoming House freshmen or hope to be. Two of them — Anthony Brindisi of New York and Ben McAdams of Utah — are in races in which The Associated Press has yet to call a winner.

Pelosi critics assert there are more Democrats who’ve not signed the letter who are prepared to vote against Pelosi. That includes Rep. Marcia Fudge of Ohio, who’s said she’s considering running for speaker.

Trump has tweeted his respect for Pelosi and offered to round up GOP votes to help elect her speaker. Pelosi’s office has said she will win with Democratic votes, and it seems a stretch to expect Republicans to help elect her speaker — a vote that could open them up to primary challenges in 2020.

Others signing were incumbents Jim Cooper of Tennessee; Bill Foster of Illinois; Brian Higgins of New York; Stephen Lynch and Seth Moulton of Massachusetts; Ed Perlmutter of Colorado; Tim Ryan of Ohio; Kurt Schrader of Oregon and Filemon Vela of Texas. Incoming freshmen were Joe Cunningham of South Carolina, Max Rose from New York and Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey.

Continue Reading

Guns and Crime

Suspect dead, 4 critical after hospital shooting

Published

on

Suspect dead 4 critical after hospital shootinga

CHICAGO (AP) — The Latest on a shooting at a Chicago hospital (all times local):

5 p.m.

Police say the suspected gunman is dead and four people are in critical condition following a shooting at a Chicago hospital.

Chicago police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi says a police officer and at least one hospital employee are among those hospitalized in critical condition following the Monday afternoon shooting at Mercy Hospital.

Guglielmi says the gunman was killed, but it’s unclear if he took his own life or was killed by police.

The department issued a statement earlier on Twitter saying there were “reports of multiple victims” after shots were fired near the hospital on the city’s South Side. Police are asking people to avoid the area.

A spokesman for Mayor Rahm Emanuel says the mayor and Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson are monitoring the situation.

___

4:15 p.m.

Chicago police say an officer has been shot during an active-shooting incident at a hospital on the city’s South Side.

Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi says the officer is in critical condition. He says one “possible offender” has also been shot, and that officers are now searching the hospital.

The department issued a statement on Twitter saying there were “reports of multiple victims” after shots were fired Monday afternoon near Mercy Hospital. Police are asking people to avoid the area. No other details were immediately released.

A message left for hospital officials wasn’t immediately returned.

Television footage shows several people, including some wearing white coats, walking through a parking lot with their arms up.

___

4 p.m.

Chicago police say officers are searching a hospital after a reported shooting and that one “possible offender” has been shot.

The department issued a statement on Twitter saying there are “reports of multiple victims” after shots were fired Monday afternoon near Mercy Hospital on the city’s South Side.

Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi says officers are searching the hospital. He says at least one “possible offender is shot,” but no details were immediately released. Police are asking people to avoid the area.

A message left for hospital officials wasn’t immediately returned.

Television footage shows several people, including some wearing white coats, walking through a parking lot with their arms up.

___

3:50 p.m.

Chicago police say they are responding to a shooting near a Chicago hospital with “reports of multiple victims.”

A department spokesman issued a statement on Twitter saying officers are responding after shots were fired near Mercy Hospital on the city’s South Side. The department says there are “reports of multiple victims.”

The police department says it didn’t immediately have more details. A message left for hospital officials wasn’t immediately returned.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report