Connect with us

Opinions

Trump makes another bribery payment to corn country ahead of Iowa caucuses

Published

on

Trump makes another bribery payment to corn country ahead of Iowa caucuses

When Democrats passed the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, they succeeded in setting mandatory Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS) that required ever-increasing amounts of ethanol be blended into gasoline.

Despite documented evidence of ethanol’s damage to consumers and the environment, RFS grew into a taxpayer-subsidized, crony-capitalist, corporate welfare program where the government picked energy winners (Big Corn) and losers (everyone else).

Even though RFS was a key piece of the radical environmentalists’ puzzle, key Democrats involved in the push for biofuels admitted last year they had made a mistake with the ethanol mandate and introduced legislation to phase out corn-based ethanol.

“We’ve now had more than a decade of experience with it, and it had the best of intentions. But it has turned out to be a well-intended flop.

“It actually doesn’t cut down on greenhouse gas emissions, it expands them. It’s had a significant impact on overplanting in fragile areas of the corn belt. It has had significant impacts on small engines. And it’s also had a significant impact on feed prices … and there is a lot of evidence it has increased the cost of food.”

So, how did Trump respond to this admission of failure? Since it was the 2018 election season, he did what he always does when an election is at stake — use bribery to steal votes and support. Trump promised to take care of Republicans and producers of corn by protecting and expanding ethanol production.

Leveraging the ethanol issue for political gain isn’t new for the New York Liberal.

Leading up to the 2016 Iowa caucuses, Trump unsuccessfully tried to beat Ted Cruz — who opposed RFS — by promising to increase ethanol production. And in October 2017, Trump bribed King Corn by overruling former EPA head, Scott Pruitt’s effort to rein in RFS after Iowa Sens. Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst and a handful of other RINOs representing corn-producing states lobbied Trump to do so.

I predicted during the 2018 midterms that once they were over and Trump moved into 2020 campaign mode that he would most likely go all-in on corn-based ethanol in preparation for Iowa’s first-in-the-nation presidential nominating contest.

Yesterday, Trump confirmed my prediction when new EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler released a possibly illegal rule lifting the summer ban on higher-ethanol blends of gasoline (E15).

“Consistent with President Trump’s direction, EPA is working to propose and finalize these changes by the summer driving season. We will be holding a public hearing at the end of this month to gather important feedback.”

Summertime bans on E15 were imposed years ago over concerns that it made smog worse. And according to the American Petroleum Institute, this rule change could cause consumers to lose the warranty on their vehicle.

Renewable Fuel Standards cost a fortune, fail to reduce pollution, and destroy automobiles, but Trump will do what he thinks best … not for America, but for his 2020 campaign.

Originally posted on StridentConservative.com.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook.

Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Advertisement

0

Guns and Crime

As background check proposal circulates, it’s time to give our representatives direction

Published

on

As background check proposal circulates its time to give our representatives direction

Congressmen, Senators, and even the President of the United States work on behalf of the people. This is why their oath is not to defend the government, the people, or even the nation itself. Their oath is to protect the Constitution because our founders were aware that as long as the Constitution is defended, everything else falls into place for protection of the people and the nation.

Yesterday, reports started circulating that Attorney General William Barr is passing around a memo with a proposed universal background check recommendation for Republican Senators to mull over. Many are skeptical, but they’re all pointing at others to see whether or not they’ll support it. In other words, they don’t want to endorse a plan until they hear from the right people first.

We, the citizens of the United States who they represent, ARE the right people and they need to hear from us. The President hasn’t endorsed the proposal for a reason. He, too, is seeing how the conservative world reacts to it before attaching his name to it. We must make him and every Republican lawmaker in Washington DC aware that we do not support his proposal. Not one bit.

Here’s the memo:

William Barr Background Check Memo

Despite language that attempts to ease concerns that this is not a step towards a national gun registry, it’s a step towards a national gun registry. This isn’t the step that creates it, of course. But it’s a step that a future progressive government can (and will) easily use to produce their coveted national gun registry. This would be the last step before outright gun confiscations.

As gun rights activist Dana Loesch noted, the memo is flawed in its concepts.

First, the memo gets it wrong that legal private sales are fueling prohibited possessors arms supply. In fact, the majority are obtained from the black market.

Second, despite protestations otherwise, this unarguably establishes a de facto registry. It’s irrelevant if third parties store records, if the government can access said records then the government has a registry, period. This is confirmed by the National Institute of Justice which stated: “Effectiveness depends on the ability to reduce straw purchasing, requiring gun registration and an easy gun transfer process.”

The GOP is wisely testing the waters before pushing this forward. NOW is the time to let them know. Email, Tweet, Facebook, call – whatever it takes to communicate to GOP Senators that you do not support this, please do so.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Justin Trudeau’s blackface and the world the left is trying to create

Published

on

Justin Trudeaus blackface and the world the left is trying to create

There’s a reason we’re only hearing now about progressive superhero Justin Trudeau’s blackface incident. The Prime Minister of Canada has been in the public eye for some time, but when he first entered politics, the progressive charge he’s trying to lead hadn’t really picked up the steam it has today. The people weren’t “woke” enough to go after anything and everything from the past that are condemned today.

Now, we’re ready. Any monuments of people from the past who participated in slavery must be taken down and erased. Any mascots that could offend someone are removed and replaced by politically correct variations. And anyone who wore “blackface” in their past, even at times when people were more sane about the use of makeup to pretend to be someone else, must be racists.

They must be. Otherwise, every element of the left’s current worldview is brought into question.

But Trudeau us unlikely to face the same backlash that a conservative in the same situation would face. That’s the narrative that’s quietly being spread – progressives get a pass while conservatives must be prosecuted in the court of public opinion. This is why Virginia Governor Ralph Northam is still in power. It’s why nothing is going to happen to Trudeau the way it would happen if a conservative were caught doing the same thing 18 years ago.

Progressives aren’t trying to create a world that is more understanding of our differences, despite their proclamations otherwise. They’re trying to create a world in which their sensibilities are condemning when a conservative is in the hot seat but forgiving when it’s a progressive facing the same situations. They want to take away guns, as long as they’re given a pass to keep their own firearms. They say words are violence, then they use their own words to attack others while feeling justified in their heinous speech.

It’s a world in with a group proclaiming to be anti-fascist uses their own variation of personal fascism and intimidation to quash the voices of anyone on the right… or even the center.

The leftist’s dream society of socialism and open borders crumbles when the rules they want applied to others are applied to them. This is why Bernie Sanders and other progressive leaders scream about socialism while elevating their own wealthy status through capitalism.

We live in a world that is becoming increasingly opposed to the truth. Even churches are ignoring sound doctrine, replacing the teachings of the Bible with anecdotes to promote their self-help agenda.

When an organization that tries to prevent as many women as possible from becoming a parent can call itself Planned Parenthood, we see where society is heading. When its supporters call opposition to their cause hateful bigots while ignoring the organization’s founder was a self-proclaimed hateful bigot, we know we’re heading in the the wrong direction.

It permeates across all aspects of American society and the leftist’s approach to promoting their agenda. They change words to have different meanings. Today, they don’t want a differentiation between legal and illegal immigrants. They want all of us classified as immigrants so they can say President Trump’s policies are anti-immigrant instead of the reality that his policies work against illegal immigration.

All of this circles back around to the reality that Justin Trudeau will not face the same consequences for his “insensitive” portrayal 18 years ago that a conservative would. Our emerging post-truth society allows the left to see what they want to see.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

‘Lite’ versions of Medicare-for-All are no better – and possibly worse – than the real thing

Published

on

Lite versions of Medicare-for-All are no better - and possibly worse - than the real thing

How do Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, and other Democratic candidates plan on sinking Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders? By highlighting how their radical Medicare-for-All proposals are several steps too far to the left for America and by offering “lighter” versions of their semi-popular healthcare plans. But there’s a problem with their proposals. All of them will lead to the same conclusion – single-payer healthcare – and all of them may actually be more damaging to the economy along the way.

This is saying a lot since the $32 trillion Medicare-for-All is an absolute existential threat to the United States economy. How could these lighter versions be worse?

Before we answer that, let’s look at what would happen if Buttigieg’s Medicare-for-All-Who-Wants-It, Biden’s Obamacare 2.0, or Harris’s Medicare-for-All plus private supplements ever become law in America. They all come at it from different angles, but what they’re describing is a public option for health insurance that would be taxpayer-funded and remove the out-of-pocket expenses from those who choose to take it instead of a private healthcare plan. This sounds reasonable to many Americans who want health insurance available to everyone, even those who cannot afford it, but who do not want to lose their own health insurance.

But what nobody’s mentioning is that the holes in a public option create problems for everyone, including:

  • Dichotomous healthcare services. There will be “good” healthcare offered to those with private insurance and “bad” healthcare offered to those taking the public option. We see this in action with the VA, which was intended to offer superior services to veterans. But the opposite has been proven to be the case. When government injects itself as an option against the private market, invariably the solutions they present are unambiguously inferior to the private variations. Americans will not be told of this dichotomy. Instead, they will find out when it’s too late that the healthcare they’re receiving is horrible compared to what they would have received under the private market option.
  • Increased costs across the board. What does a public option mean for the private market? Fewer customers. Fewer businesses enticing employees with health insurance benefits. Fewer healthy people paying for healthcare while higher-cost participants make private insurance more expensive for everyone. As for those on the public option, their acceptance of taxpayer-funded health insurance will, of course, drive up taxes for nearly everyone, including the middle class that nobody seems to want to admit will get hit with these taxes.
  • An eventual shift towards single-payerAs private health insurance becomes less lucrative and eventually becomes a money-loser, companies will start pulling out. We already saw this without the public option in Obamacare. Throw in a public option and it eventually becomes cost-prohibitive to offer anything other than supplemental insurance for uncovered procedures such as cosmetic surgery. The public option will become single payer by default within 3-5 years after it’s launched.

Nobody outside of the health insurance industry likes the health insurance industry, but over a hundred million Americans rely on this industry to keep themselves and their families from paying the extremely high costs for medical care. The combination of health insurance driving medical expenses and a government driving the health insurance industry has resulted in diapers costing $20 each after birth. They know most American will not care about the details as long as they’re not paying for it out of pocket, so they can encourage hospitals and doctors to charge outrageous rates. This all changes for the worst once single-payer is in place.

Back to the original premise – these “lighter” options could actually be worse for America than full-blown and immediate Medicare-for-All. With the latter, everything is upfront. They will tax us at extremely high rates to pay for their pet project. It will be horrible. But it will be understood from the beginning. With the half-measures proposed by the “moderates” in the group, the way it all pans out will be in a constant state of radical evolution. Prices will fluctuate so rapidly that changes will need to be made on the fly. It’s like inserting a knife into our backs slowly instead of just plunging it right in. The constant tearing of tissues over time may make us bleed out faster than if they just stabbed us quickly.

The various public option proposals are all single-payer-in-training. They will invariably become Medicare-for-All because private insurance will die a slow death as a result. Meanwhile, our healthcare quality and economy will die much more rapidly.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending