The Patriot Post Digest 6-2-2017

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 6-2-2017
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

Mid-Day Digest

Jun. 2, 2017

IN TODAY’S EDITION

Trump exits Paris climate deal, leftists go even more insane.
May jobs numbers don’t impress, but there are some important reasons for that.
When wondering about congressional corruption, follow the money.
Daily Features: Top Headlines, Cartoons, Columnists and Short Cuts.

THE FOUNDATION

“Foreign influence is truly the Grecian horse to a republic. We cannot be too careful to exclude its influence.” —Alexander Hamilton (1793)

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
Campaign Promise Kept as Trump Exits Paris Climate Deal1

By Allyne Caan

An American in Paris no more. President Donald Trump announced the U.S. exit from the Paris climate agreement Thursday afternoon in a welcome instance of a campaign promise kept. “In order to fulfill my solemn duty to protect America and its citizens, the United States will withdraw from the Paris climate accord,” Trump said, while leaving open the possibility of renegotiating a better deal. “We’re going to have the cleanest air. We’re going to have the cleanest water. We will be environmentally friendly. But we’re not going to put our businesses out of work. We’re not going to lose our jobs.” And in acknowledgment of who brung him to the dance, he said, “I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris.”

Given that the U.S. entered the agreement only thanks to Barack Obama’s strategically skirting the Senate, it’s worth revisiting why this treaty deal was a ridiculous farce from the start. Claiming the 195-nation deal was simply an executive agreement, Obama made the pact in the waning days of his administration. On the campaign trail, Trump vowed to un-make it.

As we explained last year2, the Paris agreement was a UN scheme to cut global greenhouse gas emissions to keep earth’s temperature increases “well below” two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial times, as opposed to the projected three-degree increase the world would otherwise see by 2100. Yep, a costly international agreement for an ineffective one degree.

And that’s just the stated goal. The real agenda3, of course, is statist control of the world’s economy — control that would just happen to benefit Europe and China at the expense of the United States.

The Daily Signal notes4, “If carried out, the energy regulations agreed to in Paris by the Obama administration would destroy hundreds of thousands of jobs, harm American manufacturing, and destroy $2.5 trillion in gross domestic product by the year 2035.”

Trump critics and the media (but we repeat ourselves) are in an uproar at the exit, with the press quick to point out the only other non-participating countries are Syria and Nicaragua. As if the U.S. under Trump’s leadership is now comparable to Syria under Bashar al-Assad. Clearly, these critics missed the childhood lesson, “If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you jump off, too?”

Hillary Clinton comically went further in her reasoning, stating, “Part of what keeps us going is that America’s word is good, and that you stand with your prior administration whether it was of your party or not.” Yep, just like Obama stood by everything George W. Bush did.

Speaking of Obama, he once again eschewed the humble example of his predecessor in blasting his successor. “It was steady, principled American leadership on the world stage that made [the Paris agreement] possible,” he boasted of himself. Then, using his familiar tripe, he accused Trump of joining “a small handful of nations that reject the future.” Finally, he turned to a cynical call for “hope”: “But even in the absence of American leadership; even as this Administration joins a small handful of nations that reject the future; I’m confident that our states, cities, and businesses will step up and do even more to lead the way, and help protect for future generations the one planet we’ve got.”

The Wall Street Journal rebutted succinctly5: “Leadership is not defined as the U.S. endorsing whatever other world leaders have already decided they want to do, and the U.S. is providing a better model in any case. Private economies that can innovate and provide cost-effective energy alternatives will always beat meaningless international agreements.”

Indeed, for all its costly restrictions, the Paris climate agreement is somewhat of a joke. As National Review’s Rich Lowry wrote6 prior to Trump’s decision, “The treaty’s advocates, hoping to forestall a Trump exit, are trying to save the accord by arguing that it is largely meaningless. In this spirit, a piece on the liberal website Vox explained, the Paris accord ‘asks participants only to state what they are willing to do and to account for what they’ve done. It is, in a word, voluntary.’”

The deal has little enforcement mechanism. As Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey notes7, the agreement “basically allows each nation to write its own rules, and then decide what enforcement and reporting will look like.” Thus, he explains, “The idea is that nations will compete to look super-greeny, and the laggards will get so ashamed of their foot-dragging that they’ll finally comply.”

But make no mistake: Current carrots would become sticks before long. The Left’s objective is always to tighten the screws, and this agreement would become more restrictive over time.

Of course, some companies see their own super-greeny photo-ops as good for their bottom lines, so they oppose bidding Paris adieu. As Rosebud Mining CEO Cliff Forrest writes for the Wall Street Journal8, “The commercial interests that strongly support the Paris Agreement typically have created programs to exploit, game or merely pass through the costs of the climate-change agenda. Many also maintain a green pose for marketing purposes.” Yet, Forrest adds, “It seems that Paris backers hope for a sudden public amnesia about the many businesses that use government to push out smaller competitors.”

And as Heritage Foundation policy analyst Katie Tubb notes9, “Big business and big government often go hand-in-hand. Big businesses generally can absorb and adapt to the costs of complying with burdensome regulation, of which Paris is a wellspring. Smaller companies have a much harder time complying, which means less competition for big business.”

Of course, now that Trump has made the U.S. exit from Paris official, climate-change alarmists and the media (but again, we repeat ourselves) are eviscerating him based on their tyrannical pseudo-science that permits no debate, only agreement. But it was high time to leave this absurd deal behind.

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

May Jobs Growth Numbers Steady but Slight10

The Labor Department released May’s job report this morning and the news is just so-so. Only 138,000 jobs were added last month, not nearly the 180,000-plus some economists were predicting. The U-3 headline unemployment rate dropped slightly from 4.4% to 4.3%, which is the lowest it has been since 2001. And in what may be even better news, the U-6 unemployment rate dropped from 8.6% to 8.4%, continuing its steady decline. After hovering at near 10% for over a year, that better measure of unemployment has dropped more than a percentage point since the election.

On Thursday, payroll agency ADP reported 253,000 new private-sector jobs from the previous month, with Mark Zandi, the chief economist of Moody’s Analytics, declaring, “Job growth is rip-roaring. The current pace of job growth is nearly three times the rate necessary to absorb growth in the labor force. Increasingly, businesses' number one challenge will be a shortage of labor.” Things didn’t pan out quite as well as the always-overoptimistic ADP showed, but that’s not the only story.

Economists are beginning to question whether the economy has reached “full employment” levels — the best indicator being a steady increase in wages as businesses compete over a shrinking number of available workers. That has yet to materialize, but several economists are predicting that this will be seen in the next few months. The good news is that much of the new job growth can be credited to Donald Trump’s active deregulations, as businesses respond to what they perceive as a much more growth-oriented policy and administration. However, it is quite evident that ObamaCare is still proving to be a tremendous drag on the economy. Republicans' slow movement on both repealing and replacing ObamaCare and on enacting tax reform legislation is likely keeping jobs numbers a little on the low side. Success in either or both will jolt the economy out of the Obama doldrums.

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 6-2-2017
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

When It Comes to Congressional Leadership, Follow the Money11

A dirty little congressional practice is exposed in a recent story12 from reporter Sharyl Attkisson and The Daily Signal. Attkisson notes a report entitled, “The Price of Power” by Nick Penniman of Issue One, which reveals that the establishment of leadership positions on various committees is not merit-based but money-based. The more money a member of Congress can raise for their respective political party’s coffers, the greater their opportunity for powerful committee positions. Penniman states, “It’s not only a powerful position, it’s a perverse system. In fact, it’s the inverse of what we all as citizens should want.” Not that it’s surprising.

The current system is designed as a means to generate money for the political parties. Each member of Congress is expected to pay “dues” every two years, and these dues are often raised by the members engaging in what is termed “dialing for dollars,” where members make fundraising calls in order to meet their financial quotas.

The amount of campaign funds raised and given to the party determines who moves to the front of the line. For example, every Republican member of Congress pays party “dues” that run in the six-figure range for an ordinary member. Penniman states, “It is borderline extortion. … Today, besides the $1.2 million required of ‘A’ committee chairman, Republicans who chair secondary ‘B’ committees are expected to raise $875,000 in dues. The top Republican in the House, as speaker, has to raise $20 million. The number two majority leader … $10 million.”

Former Rep. Connie Morella (R-MD) said, “I think we have reached crisis proportions when it comes to money. A member of Congress devotes almost one-third of every day to raising money.” But not only are members of Congress fundraising on taxpayers' time, they’re raising funds from the very groups they are on committees to oversee and regulate. Former Rep. Zach Wamp (R-TN) explains, “They [the party leadership] actually intentionally give you those lists of people that have something to do with your committees, because they know that they’re the ones most likely to say yes [to giving funds].”

With money rather than merit determining leadership roles in Washington, is it any wonder the government has become so complacent when faced with corruption?

Top Headlines13

Four reasons Trump was right to withdraw from “climate change” treaty. (The Daily Signal4)

The top 24 ½ reasons Hillary Clinton lost the election, as told by Hillary Clinton. (National Review14)

Government workers union spent $20 million more on politics than representing members. (The Washington Free Beacon15)

Despite the Left’s best efforts, the Dakota Access Pipeline is now delivering oil. (Hot Air16)

May 2017 sets gun sales record. (The Washington Free Beacon17)

U.S. ranked the 114th most peaceful nation on earth says annual global ranking. (The Washington Times18.)

Germany leads bid to block Turkey from hosting next NATO summit. (CNS News19)

Chick-fil-A donates thousands to military charity. (Washington Examiner20)

Oregon’s new “transgender equity” law should shield many criminals nicely. (Hot Air21)

Policy: America should never have backed Paris accord. (E2122)

Policy: USGS study reaffirms: No fracking contamination of groundwater in Gulf shale. (Inside Sources23)

Friday Humor: Pentagon officials scramble to change nuclear code from “covfefe.” (The Babylon Bee24)

For more, visit Patriot Headline Report25.

MORE ANALYSIS FROM THE PATRIOT POST

How Tense Are Things Between Merkel and Trump?26 — It’s fairly strained at the moment, but don’t count out a stronger NATO alliance when all is said and done.
Your Tax Dollars at Work: More Abortions, Fewer Women27 — Planned Parenthood’s annual report once again belies the abortion mill’s claims to be providing health care.
Trump, Jerusalem and the Status Quo28 — Despite campaign promises, the president won’t (yet) move the U.S. embassy in Israel. What’s the calculation?

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

Jeff Jacoby: How Do We Encourage Terrorism? Let Us Count the Ways29
David Limbaugh: Hillary Clinton — Endless Sore Loser30
Mona Charen: The Kids Are Not All Right31

For more, visit Right Opinion32.

OPINION IN BRIEF

David Limbaugh: “The main takeaway from Clinton’s pathetically endless election post-mortem is that while Trump critics dwell on his alleged instability and lack of class, Clinton has further proved herself to be worse in reality than Trump is perceived to be. I’m not talking about policy matters, albeit Clinton would have been an unspeakable disaster in that realm as president, too. I mean on a personal level, where this woman who has held herself out as a public servant all these years is a self-absorbed political animal and shows little grace and even less class. I have no doubt that the stories we’ve read about how she mistreats people are true. … Hillary Clinton was a disastrous candidate and would have been a worse president. How long must we endure these public post-election couch sessions?”

SHORT CUTS

Upright: “Our president is choosing to put American jobs and American consumers first. Our president is choosing to put American energy and American industry first. And by his action today, President Trump is choosing to put the forgotten men and women first.” —Vice President Mike Pence

For the record: “The American people did not vote for President Trump so that American taxpayers could send billions of dollars overseas to establish a global crony capitalist slush fund. Pulling out of the Paris Climate Agreement is absolutely the right decision for the United States economy.” —Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT)

Re: The Left: “If you’re blown up at an Ariana Grande concert, [European political leaders] say, ‘Get used to it. That’s just the way it is. We can’t do anything about it. But if you want us to lower the thermostat of the planet by a third of a degree in the year 2100, that we can do.’ … It’s bonkers.” —Mark Steyn

Al-pha Jackass: “Removing the United States from the Paris Agreement is a reckless and indefensible action. It undermines America’s standing in the world and threatens to damage humanity’s ability to solve the climate crisis in time.” —Al Gore

Braying Jackass: “Withdrawing from the Paris Accord devastates our economy, our planet, and our children. This isn’t leadership. It’s an insult to humanity.” —DNC Chief Tom Perez

Keen sense of the obvious: “It’s only 2017, so projecting the greenhouse-gas emissions of disparate countries over many decades, and how they will change the planet’s climate, is no exact science.” —The Washington Post

And last: “It is possible for a person to hold simultaneously that a) man is having some effect on the climate; b) that our discussion of this effect is prone toward alarmism; and c) that what to do about this problem is a matter of legitimate and necessary debate. Indeed, an awful lot of people hold exactly these positions. Do those hyperbolizing over the withdrawal from the Paris Accord understand that? It seems that they do not.” —Charles C.W. Cooke

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.