Charity? Yes, but charity for whom?

Ain’t charity grand? Even if it ain’t charity?

Some of the news accounts that heralded the announcement by Telsa Motors that it was giving $1.5 million to Nevada K-12 education as the first installment in a $37.5 million donation did get around to mentioning toward the end that the handout was part of a “commitment” the company made when it accepted $1.3 billion in tax breaks for building its electric care battery factory near Sparks in 2014.

All of the handouts were specifically targeted to items such as robotics and battery programs that might benefit the company.

The Las Vegas newspaper wrote that Gov. Brian “Sandoval said in a statement he was grateful for Tesla’s commitment and the opportunities it would provide.”

Grateful?

As one of the paper’s columnists got around to pointing out, the handout was required in the original deal. “Tesla will make direct contributions to K-12 education of $37.5 million beginning August 2018; grant $1 million to fund advanced battery research at UNLV; prioritize the employment of Nevadans and Veterans,” the deal states.

For that paltry sum and few other “commitments” the company got:

Columnist Victor Joecks noted:

Normally a company giving away millions of dollars for educational programs would be worth celebrating. But this wasn’t an act of corporate generosity. In 2014, the state provided Tesla with $1.3 billion in tax credits and abatements. As part of its pitch, the company promised to give $37.5 million to fund education programs.

Let’s save our praise for those doing philanthropy, not for a company using charity as political cover for a massive handout.

According to projections made in 2014, the gigafactory was to have 6,500 employees by now, but as of the end of 2017 it had only 1,400 employees.

According to the Nevada Appeal, Tesla qualified for $36.85 million in transferable tax credits, plus $115 million in tax abatements during the 2017 fiscal year alone.

Ain’t charity grand?

By the bye, Tesla’s CEO Elon Musk is worth $20 billion.

Tesla gigafactory tour in 2016. (AP pix via R-J)

 

 

Advertisements

Get out while the getting’s good or they’ll come for you next

Jane Ann Morrison with a Strip performer’s ape. (R-J file pix)

Run, Jane, run. Get out while you can with your reputation intact.

On page 1B of the Sunday newspaper Jane Ann Morrison announced she was voluntarily shoving aside her columnist keyboard. On the back of the Viewpoint section columnist Daniella Greenbaum reported that she had been basically shunted aside for failing to be politically correct.

Greenbaum wrote that she resigned from her post as Business Insider columnist after she wrote that actress Scarlett Johansson taking a movie role in which she would portray a transgender man was just make-believe and actors should be allowed to take on any roles they wish. The piece was spiked and she bailed. Johansson also dropped the planned role when the politically correct pique hit the roof.

After reading that I looked back at Jane Ann’s reminiscence about her decades as an ink-stained wretch and wondered if some self-styled animal rights zealot might take issue with that photo of her with a Strip performer’s ape. There’s always something. Eventually anyone who espouses an opinion is bound to run into the politically correct buzzsaw.

Two of today’s letters to the editor, conveniently, took umbrage with recent screeds by columnists Victor Joecks and Wayne Allyn Root for being insensitive.

An alert reader took the opportunity this morning to email a bit of anonymous satire someone had posted to the web:

It had been snowing all night. So at ….
8:00: I made a snowman.

8:10: A feminist passed by and asked me why I didn’t make a snow woman.

8:15: So, I made a snow womanNow I have a snow couple.

8:17: My feminist neighbor complained about the snow woman’s voluptuous chest saying it objectified snow women everywhere

8:20: The gay couple living nearby threw a hissy fit and moaned it should have been two snowmen instead

8:25: The vegans at the end of the lane complained about the carrot nose, as veggies are food and not to decorate snow figures with.

8:28: I am being called a racist because the snow couple is white.

8:42: The feminist neighbor complained again that the broomstick of the snow woman needs to be removed because it depicted women in a domestic role.

8:45: TV news crew shows up. I am asked if I know the difference between snowmen and snow-women? I reply, “Snowballs” and am called a sexist by the TV reporter.

9:00: I’m on the News as a suspected racist, homophobic sensibility offender bent on stirring up trouble during difficult weather.

9:29: Far left protesters offended by everything are marching down the street

Moral: There is no moral to this story.  It’s just the world in which we live today and it’s going to get worse.
By the bye, Jane Ann says she plans to give a shot at that novel that everyone is supposed to have inside of them. I can’t help but wonder if it will be set in a small desert, mob-infested gambling town called Three Cacti. (Hint: Obscure “literary” reference to one of her, and my, favorite mystery writers.)

 

 

 

 

Editorial: BLM should fight wild horse suit this time

A recent BLM wild horse roundup. (BLM pix)

The usual suspects are at it again, filing a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia demanding the court halt a plan by the Bureau of Land Management to remove all the feral horses in a 40-mile radius around Caliente.

The American Wild Horse Campaign, Western Watershed Project, The Cloud Foundation and a Beatty outdoor enthusiast are suing the BLM, saying it failed to adequately document and support its roundup decision, though what would ever be adequate for them is difficult to say.

Some of the same plaintiffs brought a similar lawsuit in 2011 over a planned removal of wild horses from Jakes Wash west of Ely, but the suit was mooted when the BLM backed down rather fight the matter.

In 2009 there were only 270 wild horses in the 900,000-acre Caliente area, but a year ago there were more than 1,700, a number the BLM deems unsustainable.

Plaintiffs consider their desire to be able to see “iconic” feral horses as more important than the livelihoods of ranchers who graze 4,500 head of cattle and sheep in the area.

One of the plaintiffs explained in the lawsuit, “The members of The Cloud Foundation enjoy viewing, studying, photographing, and filming wild horses in their natural habitats, free from human interference. The Cloud Foundation’s members travel to various areas, including public lands in Nevada, specifically for the purpose of viewing wild horses.”

The suit says of the Beatty resident that she “enjoys camping, hiking, birdwatching, and observing the flora and fauna. She also engages in photography and field sketching as hobbies, and particularly enjoys viewing, photographing, and sketching the wild horses that roam in the basins and on the ranges of Nevada.”

Isn’t that special?

Suzanne Roy, executive director of the American Wild Horse Campaign, told the Las Vegas newspaper, “It’s time for the BLM to stop prioritizing ranching special interests and start honoring the wishes of Americans to ensure that our iconic mustangs are protected and humanely managed on our public lands.”

BLM officials say they can’t comment on pending litigation.

The BLM plan is to gather the horses for up to 10 years in the Caliente Herd Area Complex, which consists of nine Herd Areas — Applewhite, Blue Nose Peak, Clover Creek, Clover Mountains, Delamar Mountains, Little Mountain, Meadow Valley Mountains, Miller Flat and Mormon Mountains.

The public notice of the plan said the removal is “needed to improve watershed health and make significant progress towards achieving range health standards recommended by the BLM’s Mojave / Southern Great Basin Resource Advisory Council. The proposed gather plan would allow for an initial gather with follow-up gathers for up to 10 years from the date of the initial gather. The plan calls for transporting gathered horses to holding facilities where they would be offered for adoption.”

The agency said the Caliente Herd Area Complex is not designated for wild horses due to insufficient forage and water resources.

The BLM manages more than 245 million acres of public land in the West. Economic activity on that land generated $75 billion in 2016 and supported more than 372,000 jobs.

But the lawsuit ignores that aspect of land use and instead claims the BLM permits grazing on the same public lands by thousands of cattle and sheep that, unlike wild horses, are not an “integral part of the natural system of the public lands,” though feral horses are not native and have few natural predators to keep the herds from overbreeding and depleting limited water and grazing resources that leads to starvation of the very animals they claim to want to protect.

The BLM should not cave in this time and fight to preserve a balanced multiple use of the land and seek to have the court assess the plaintiffs for all costs involved.

A version of this editorial appeared this week in some of the Battle Born Media newspapers — The Ely Times, the Mesquite Local News, the Mineral County Independent-News, the Eureka Sentinel,  Sparks Tribune and the Lincoln County Record.

Happy birthday, Eric Blair — the dystopian world you conjured is still here year after year

I don’t know about you, but I’ve taken to placing a little sticky note over the camera atop by desktop computer. If former FBI Director James Comey and Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg do it, so will I. Big and Little Brothers may be watching.

Happy birthday, Eric Blair.

On this day in 1903, Eric Blair was born in India.

But the year for which he is most noted is 1984, even though he died in 1950.

Under the pen name George Orwell, Blair penned the novels “Nineteen Eighty-four” and “Animal Farm,” as well as several other semi-autobiographical books and numerous essays.

Eric Blair as six weeks old

When Orwell wrote “Nineteen Eighty-four” he wasn’t forecasting a particular date, he simply transposed the last two digits in 1948, when he wrote much of the book. Though a life-long socialist he despised the totalitarian and despotic nature of communism, fascism and Nazism.

He added to the lexicon: Big Brother, thoughtcrime, newspeak, doublethink, Room 101, as well as the painted slogans WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

In “Nineteen Eighty-four” the warring nations kept changing enemies, sort of like today.

If you don’t think freedom is slavery, consider the “Life of Julia” — the Obama campaign video that showed a woman relying on government handouts from cradle to retirement. Julia, by the way, was Winston Smith’s girlfriend.

Ignorance is definitely strength, not for us but for politicians who the ignorant keep electing.

As for newspeak and doublethink, consider the language of both Obama and Trump. Obama said we were not fighting a war against terrorists but trying to prevent man-caused disasters. His Defense Department (They don’t call it the War Department anymore.) sent out a memo saying: “this administration prefers to avoid using the term ‘Long War’ or ‘Global War on Terror’ [GWOT.] Please use ‘Overseas Contingency Operation.’” And a man standing on a table, firing a gun, shouting Allahu Akbar is merely workplace violence.

As for Trump, Reuters calculates that he has taken 32 new stances on 13 different issues since his election, which is nothing new since he ran and won a campaign in which he took 141 policy positions on 23 issues over the course of 510 days. He has changed stances on immigration, ObamaCare, entitlement programs, gay rights, the Middle East and so much more.

How can there be any thoughtcrime if we are not allowed to use certain words. People aren’t in the country illegally, they are merely undocumented. And this too changes over time. Once the word negro was the preferred and the politically correct term, but now it is a slur.

“Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?” Orwell wrote in “Nineteen Eighty-four.” “In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.”

Back in 1975, David Goodman wrote in The Futurist magazine that 100 of 137 Orwell predictions in “Nineteen Eighty-four” had come true. With the advance of computer surveillance and drones, how many more have come true?

In 1983, while working as the city editor of the Shreveport Journal, I penned a soft feature tied to the 35th anniversary of the original publication of Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty-Four.”

I observed in that piece that Orwell’s book was about a totalitarian dystopia in which BIG BROTHER WAS WATCHING YOU, suggesting this was like the infrared camera equipped drones or huge network of cybersnooping computers, long before the NSA revelations. 

“George Orwell respected language and railed against its abuse,” I wrote in 1983. “He was particularly offended by the propaganda — some of which he helped to write for the BBC in World War II. He saw firsthand the way the press was tricked and subverted for political purposes in the Spanish Civil War. Battles that never happened. Heroes who became traitors.”

In another piece posted here in 2013, I asked whether Orwell was a satirist or a prophet.

Walter Cronkite in a foreword to the 1983 paperback edition of “Nineteen Eighty-Four,” claimed the book has failed as prophecy only because it has served so well as a warning — a warning against manipulation and power grabbing and the loss of privacy in the name of state security.

And Cronkite couldn’t resist adding: “1984 may not arrive on time, but there’s always 1985.”

Orwell himself called his book a satire and took pains to correct those who saw it merely as a denunciation of socialism.

In a letter written shortly after the publication of the book, Orwell wrote, “My novel ‘Nineteen Eighty-four’ is not intended as an attack on socialism, or on the British Labour party, but as a show-up of the perversions to which a centralized economy is liable, and which have already been partly realized in Communism and fascism.

“I do not believe that the kind of society I describe will arrive, but I believe (allowing, of course, for the fact that the book is a satire) that something resembling it could arrive. I believe also that totalitarian ideas have taken root in the minds of intellectuals everywhere, and I have tried to draw these ideas out to their logical consequences. The scene of the book is laid in Britain in order to emphasize that the English speaking races are not innately better than anyone else and that totalitarianism, if not fought against, could triumph anywhere.”

A Newsweek article earlier this year asked the question: “Is Trump nudging America toward corrupt authoritarianism?” Isn’t corrupt authoritarianism redundant?

Back in 2008, when the Las Vegas Review-Journal launched its blogging section online, I engaged in a bit of self-indulgent navel gazing in a column trying to explain why. I leaned on Orwell like a crutch.

I explained that I and other newspaper scriveners were joining the lowing herds browsing the ether — otherwise known as bloggers, those free-range creatures who mostly chew up the intellectual property of others and spit out their cuds online.

In an effort to find a rationale for this otherwise irrational exercise I grabbed Orwell’s “Why I Write” essay from 1946, in which he lists various reasons for writing.

First is sheer egoism: “Desire to seem clever, to be talked about, to be remembered after death, to get your own back on the grown-ups who snubbed you in childhood, etc., etc.,” Orwell explains. “It is humbug to pretend this is not a motive, and a strong one. Writers share this characteristic with scientists, artists, politicians, lawyers, soldiers, successful businessmen — in short, with the whole top crust of humanity. … Serious writers, I should say, are on the whole more vain and self-centered than journalists, though less interested in money.”

I think that was both a salute and a sully to the profession of journalism.

The second rationale, according to Orwell, is aesthetic enthusiasm: “Perception of beauty in the external world, or, on the other hand, in words and their right arrangement. Pleasure in the impact of one sound on another, in the firmness of good prose or the rhythm of a good story. …” Orwell explains. “Above the level of a railway guide, no book is quite free from aesthetic considerations.”

Third is historical impulse: “Desire to see things as they are, to find out true facts and store them up for the use of posterity.”

Finally, and probably most importantly, political purpose: “Using the word ‘political’ in the widest possible sense. Desire to push the world in a certain direction, to alter other peoples’ idea of the kind of society that they should strive after. Once again, no book is genuinely free from political bias. The opinion that art should have nothing to do with politics is itself a political attitude.”

Orwell wrote this shortly after he penned “Animal Farm,” but two years before “1984.” He said “Animal Farm” was his first conscious effort “to fuse political purpose and artistic purpose into one whole.”

Orwell wrote against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism.

Ayn Rand wrote for free-market capitalism.

Robert A. Heinlein wrote for libertarianism.

Others espouse various “isms” and objective journalism attempts to eschew them, not always successfully.

So, what moves one to write?

As our master Orwell said, “All writers are vain, selfish, and lazy, and at the very bottom of their motives there lies a mystery.”

Everybody loves to unravel a good mystery, right?

Happy birthday, Eric Blair.

Video first posted in 2013.

Bias in the media? We’re shocked! Shocked we tell you!

Did a political columnist for the morning newspaper just accuse his own publication of political bias?

Columnist Victor Joecks noted that the media jumped all over an obscure Nye County commissioner disendorsing Republican gubernatorial candidate Adam Laxalt for failing to endorse the Republican primary winner in Assembly District 36, brothel owner Dennis Hof who has been accused of sexual harassment, but totally ignored a press release two weeks ago from Republican Sen. Dean Heller accusing Democratic primary senatorial nominee Jacky Rosen of resume enhancement.

In fact, the same day’s paper carried a lengthy story about the commissioner’s disendorsement of Laxalt along with quotes from Hof about how the move might hurt Laxalt in Nye County and a prepared statement by Laxalt stating, “Adam respects the will of the voters in District 36, however, as a husband and a father of two young daughters, he has stated that he will not be supporting Mr. Hof’s campaign.”

The story also quoted a Democratic Party spokeswoman accusing Laxalt of being two-faced on the topic by being silent about political supporters accused of sexual misdeeds — including a rural sheriff and former casino executive Steve Wynn.

The story did not quote any of the usual university professorial suspects as to whether Laxalt’s stance might help or hurt him or be of no consequence.

Heller’s press release noted that Rosen was quoted by the morning newspaper in 2016 as saying she couldn’t get a degree in computer science from the University of Minnesota because it didn’t exist when she graduated:

She fell in love with the emerging field of computer sciences. The field “just clicked” with her, Rosen said. But back in the 1970s, those degrees weren’t widely available, so she graduated with a degree in psychology while spending most of her free time in the school’s math lab honing her computer skills.

But the Heller press release noted that a story in The Atlantic in January said Rosen had a degree in computer science. The story was corrected online on the same day as Heller’s press release was issued.

Joecks also noted that Rosen told CSPAN3 a year ago she had a degree in computer science. He went on to note that several people’s political ambitions have been crushed when they were caught fudging their resumes.

Joecks concluded:

So why the disparity in coverage between Hof and Rosen? On the merits, it’s baffling. That’s what makes you start thinking about alternative explanations. In a 2013 national survey, just 7 percent of reporters self-identified as Republican. If Heller wins his election, Democrats have no chance of regaining control of the Senate.

Sometimes media bias is blatant. But often, it’s more subtle, like the media passing on telling you about Rosen’s résumé lie that could end her political career.

The owner of the morning newspaper may be a big Republican backer, but what about those in the trenches?

 

How to slake the thirst of future development?

R-J graphic showing proposed land use changes.

Sometimes a story is most noteworthy for what it doesn’t say.

The morning newspaper reported on how the Southern Nevada Water Authority plans to supply water to a 39,000-acre tract of private development mostly south of Henderson should the federal government agree to release the land. The plan is to use conservation and recycling of water from Lake Mead.

Not one word was mentioned about piping groundwater from Lincoln, Nye and White Pine counties. The current plan is to pump 84,000 acre-feet of groundwater a year to Las Vegas at a cost of $15 billion for the infrastructure alone.

A year ago a federal judge heard arguments from proponents and opponents of the proposed project, which was first broached in 1989.

The judge refused to halt the project but ruled that the Bureau of Land Management must conduct further environmental review of the effects of the project and identify what can be done to mitigate them. According to an AP account, the judge characterized the fixes he ordered as “narrow deficiencies” in environmental impact statements.

Both sides interpreted the ruling as favorable to their side.

But today’s news story on supplying water to the proposed private development makes no mention of the groundwater from the north, even though the valley has maxed out its 300,000 acre-foot annual allotment from Lake Mead.

“The one-page document calls on far-flung developments to discourage or outright ban things like man-made lakes, water-cooled power plants and decorative turf,” the story relates. “Those developments should return their treated wastewater to Lake Mead whenever feasible or reuse enough of it on-site to ‘displace the need for SNWA water resources,’ the policy states.”

Protesters oppose Clark County taking rural Nevada groundwater.

Democrat co-opts Republican opponent’s proposal

Heller and Rosen (R-J pix)

That was quick. The ink hasn’t dried on the morning newspaper report that Democrat Rep. Jacky Rosen will face Republican Dean Heller in November for this Senate seat, but she is already embracing a Heller proposal to get Congress off the dime on passing a federal budget.

Rosen today sent out a press release touting her proposals to reform Congress. Why she hasn’t done this during her past year and a half in office was not explained. The second item on her list is: No budget, no pay. Specifically: “This measure would tie Members’ pay with whether or not Congress fulfills its constitutional responsibility of passing a budget and funding the federal government.”

Heller has been pushing for this since last least 2011, when he put out a press release saying,

“It has been more than 800 days since the Senate passed a budget, ignoring one of the most fundamental responsibilities of governing. Avoiding budget votes for political reasons is not what people want to see from their public officials. If Congress doesn’t do its job, its Members shouldn’t get paid. My amendment is a straight forward measure, and should be brought to the floor for an up or down vote.”

The amendment would prevent members of Congress from being paid their salaries if they fail to pass a budget by the beginning of any fiscal year. Retroactive pay would be prohibited.

In December 2016 Heller put out another in a long string of press releases touting his proposal:

“The only way to achieve the long-term fiscal solution Americans deserve is through the U.S. House and Senate passing a budget and all appropriations bills on time.  As the Senate begins the consideration of a continuing resolution, I am filing the ‘No Budget, No Pay’ Act as an amendment. The amendment puts the needs of our nation’s citizens ahead of the next Washington-manufactured crisis.”

Now Rosen is glomming on to Heller’s idea. Welcome to the general election season.

It could be a tight race. According to the Secretary of State, 143,320 Democrats voted in the Senate primary and 110,530 voted for Rosen. In the Republican primary, 142,175 Republicans voted in the Senate primary and 99,472 voted for Heller.