BloggeRhythms

Spring has really not arrived in the Northeast as yet, average temperatures haven’t risen in over eighteen years and the polar vortex will keep the planet cooling for the next decade or so. Which may be the reasons that, according to FoxNews.com: “Seven unions have demanded that the AFL-CIO cut ties with Tom Steyer, the billionaire hedge fund manager and environmental activist, over his opposition to the Keystone Pipeline and other oil and gas projects.

“In a letter sent to AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka Monday, union officials accused the labor confederation of becoming "infiltrated by financial and political interests that work in direct conflict to many of our members’ — and yes, AFL-CIO dues paying members’ lives.

“In a rare clash between two of the Democratic Party's key constituencies, the union officials said they did not want their dues to go toward the For Our Future PAC. The PAC, backed by Steyer and the AFL-CIO, plans to raise $50 million for the Democratic candidate in this fall's presidential election.”  

Steyer himself spent more than $70 million during the 2014 midterm elections, and is one of the most prominent opponents of the Keystone Pipeline. 

The letter, signed by seven union heads, said that Steyer's opposition to such projects has disproportionately affected workers in the construction industry. “A growing trend within the Federation seems to consistently minimize the importance of Building Trades jobs and our members’ livelihoods in the pursuit of a coalition strategy with outside organizations that has produced mixed results at best and disastrous results at worst for our members and their employment prospects in many instances throughout the country.”

The seven union heads represent 1.5 million workers, while in all, the AFL-CIO represents approximately 12.7 million active and retired workers.  

“In a separate letter, first reported by The New York Times, Terry O’Sullivan, president of the Laborers’ International Union of North America, called the For Our Future PAC a "politically bankrupt betrayal" and called Steyer a "job-killing hedge fund manager with a bag of cash."

Regarding Steyer, Steve Contorno @politifact.com, wrote on Friday, September 19th, 2014: "For those unfamiliar with Steyer, he’s the billionaire behind NextGen Climate Change who has promised $100 million to Democrats in the midterm elections. Some have called him the Democrats’ Koch brothers of the election cycle.” 

In the article, Mr. Contorno asked: “How, exactly, would an environmentalist make money by blocking Keystone XL, a pipeline that would carry oil from the Alberta tar sands through Nebraska to refineries in the Gulf of Mexico?” 

Part of the answer came from American Crossroads who sent “quite a few news stories that showed Steyer wasn’t always the hardcore environmentalist he now portrays himself as. 

“Steyer made his fortune at Farallon Capital Management, an investment group he started in the 1980s. According to a Washington Post profile and other reports, Farallon Capital heavily invested in energy throughout Steyer’s time there, including fossil fuels. Steyer left the company in the fall of 2012. 

"Investments included BP and mining companies in the United States and around the world," the Post wrote. "Farallon's second-largest holding in September 2012, a month before Steyer announced his departure, was a $220 million investment in the oil-and-gas giant Nexen." 

And then came Steyer's probable concern, because “also included in Farallon’s investment portfolio was Kinder Morgan, a company that owned a pipeline connecting the Alberta tar sands to the Pacific coast. The pipeline is considered a rival to Keystone XL.” 

While Steyer now claims he’s completely divested his fossil fuel investments, his close relationship and the fortune he built over many years from those holdings, certainly leave room for speculation as to what his real game is. But, whatever the truth is, as long as the current administration's involved, nothing is ever what it appears to be on the surface.  

On another issue, now that Bill’s wife has announced that he’ll play a role in her administration, if she’s elected POTUS, more story’s are emerging showing that he and she have very different political preferences, and perhaps ideologies.

The one emerging today arises from an interview where Bill expressed his views on illegal immigrants to Chris Matthews back in 1996. And, at that time, Bill sounded almost exactly like Trump does today. Here are a few examples: 

At that time Bill said: “Honor every ‘legal” immigrant,“ but we are a nation of laws. This administration has taken a strong stand to stiffen the protection of our borders. We are increasing inspections to prevent the hiring of illegal immigrants. We are increasing border controls by 50%.  And finally, he was signing an executive order to “deny Federal contracts to businesses hiring illegal’s” 

So, aside from retaining Republicans to mange his economy, he agreed with their concerns about the perils presented by illegal immigrants to the extent that he wanted to remove any chance they had at finding gainful employment wherever he could. 

Which means that, perhaps, instead of bringing him on board to provide his advice, she’d be better off leaving him to his own devices and bimbettes.  

Here’s a link to the Clinton/Matthews interview: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/05/17/1996_flashback_bill_clinton_talks_like_trump_on_immigration_we_are_a_nation_of_laws.html

And here’s an appropriate item from a Facebook friend this morning:  

Which brings us to today’s update on Bill’s wife. 

Hannah Hartig, John Lapinski and Stephanie Psyllos @nbcnews.com/politics, headed their article today: “Hillary Clinton Holds Slim National Lead Over Donald Trump: Poll” 

“Attention is now rapidly moving to the hypothetical match-up between the leading candidates with an emphasis on a Clinton and Trump contest. In this week's poll, Americans are nearly split between their choice of Trump or Clinton; her margin over Trump narrows from 5 points last week to 3 points this week to 48 percent to 45 percent.” 

So, here we have evidence that in only two short weeks since Trump has become the presumed Republican presidential candidate, he’s gone from having no chance, according to the major media, to almost catching her. Which means that if that trend continues, very soon she’ll be trailing him, as she most certainly should.   

This latest data comes from the “NBC News|SurveyMonkey Weekly Election Tracking Poll conducted online from May 9 through May 15 among 14,100 adults, including 12,507 who say they are registered to vote.” 

At the same time, within her own party, according to Mark Z. Barabak @latimes.com, she presently leads Sanders, 1,716 to 1,433 in the actual vote totals to date, only 283 ahead. The substantial difference is found when “superdelegates” are counted, where her lead is 524 to 40. 

However, although the superdelegates are presently “committed” to Bill’s wife, Sanders maintains that if he keeps up his winning streak – including a big victory in California on June 7 – he’ll have so much momentum that superdelegates will shift to him “en masse,” giving him the nomination at a contested convention in Philadelphia.”

Thus, despite the pressures being brought by Bill’s wife’s handlers, it certainly makes sense for Sanders to stay in the race. Which is precisely the same decision made by Obama last time around, and we all surely know the results of that one. 

Bringing up the ongoing question once more: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?  

That’s it for today folks.     

Adios