Minnesota U.S. Senate Race

> Al can tell a joke, but he is for real; Al's working for Minnesota
> and a United States of America we can be proud of and not the tragic
> joke that Norm and his cronies have wrought from our once noble
> dreams and aspirations.

My biggest concern with Al Franken is that the sense I've gotten of
him I have is that he's the type to insult or belittle his political
opponents.  As I don't belong to a political party, I haven't been
engaged enough in the DFL primary contests to have much more of a
passing-third-hand sense of the candidate, so I'll admit to possibly
being mistaken in my perception - chances are, it has been formed
based on his opponent's propaganda.  The question is, is the
propaganda valid or not?

One of the traits I most respect about the Democrat's current
presumptive nominee for president is that he's shown a great deal of
willingness and ability to listen to his opposition and consider their
arguments with as open of a mind as one would want (one doesn't want a
politician's mind so open that it lacks any courage or conviction).

I have no wish to support anyone for political office who is more
interested in party politics, hurling insults or shouting slogans than
listening to arguments and employing rational and reasoned debate.  I
prefer someone who is more at home facing a reasoned opposition than
they are sitting in an echo chamber.

I'm interested in people's impressions of Franken in this regard -
preferably impressions with the support of some degree of evidence.

- phadrus (jason.goray), Minneapolis

I'm curious about what people think of Franken's new ad - cataloging projects
in Iraq in contrast to the neglect of our own country's needs.  Clearly, the
campaign has decided to hope the offensive humor issue will blow over.  The new
poll cited by MinnPost shows Coleman well ahead of Franken, but not alarmingly
so as a result of the Playboy/SNL news.

The ad cites Al's 7 trips to Iraq to entertain troops, and I'll bet most of his
material was unfit for family newspapers.  I wish more had been made of this in
order to address the humor problem.  Frankly, I don't think his ads have been
impressive.  He's obviously been advised to play it straight, demonstrating his
seriousness on the issues, but Wellstone was able to make his ads entertaining
while still solidly making his points.

As for his smart mouth, I'm wary, too.  The episode when he nailed the young
guy who asked an unwelcome question still troubles me. He should be able to
handle that kind of challenge with aplomb. Just how hair-trigger might his
sarcasm be?
Gail
St. Paul

> This effort of theirs can end only one way: November pies in
> Norm's face from the voters of Minnesota.


Likely the only choice voters will give the GOP is the flavor. Poor,
poor Mitch. Poor, poor conservatives. I'd say when it comes to
conservative in those Minnesota sends to the Senate and the White
House, Norm is about the max, and most would find he was a 2002
mistake given 20/20 hindsight; I'd say an incumbent like Dave
Durenburger would have a chance against Al Franken, but not if he had
done what Norm has: enable the darkest, most evil and corrupt
presidential administration in our history to virtually destroy what
we stand for in disastrously stupid domestic and foreign policies. I
could enumerate a long list of good senators who neither ran for nor
held office, maybe trot out Paul Wellstone, but this is a red
herring. The voters will make their choice, and it will not be Norm
in most cases. Tax problems, good jokes, bad jokes, and whatever you
throw out there this year the Republicans are fighting a losing
battle in denigrating a proud American who stepped up to counter the
madness that has reigned in Washington, D.C. under the Bush
Administration and their cronies; sending back Norm is not something
Minnesotans will do IMHO. Al Franken's my choice and I can live with
Pornorama and a tax oversight as easily as Mitch can live with
Bedtime for Bonzo and Iran-Contra; Franken will do a great job.

>

> voters will make their choice, and it will not be Norm
> in most cases. Tax problems, good jokes, bad jokes, and whatever you
> throw out there this year the Republicans are fighting a losing
> battle in denigrating a proud American who stepped up to counter the
> madness that has reigned in Washington, D.C. under the Bush
> Administration and their cronies; sending back Norm is not something
> Minnesotans will do IMHO. Al Franken's my choice and I can live with
> Pornorama and a tax oversight as easily as Mitch can live with
> Bedtime for Bonzo and Iran-Contra; Franken will do a great job.

Norm Coleman won't be getting my vote but that has nothing to do with
why Al Franken should or should not get it.

If I were a Democrat, this is a year I'd be most concerned about
getting the best possible candidates I had elected to congress.  Based
on recent history and public perception the Democrats have a very high
chance of controlling the White House and both houses of congress this
time around.   The question is, then what?

They're going to have Iraq on their hands, a national deficit and a
national debt of record proportions, an underpar infrastructure, an
education system that isn't doing so well in international standings,
a health care system that isn't doing so well in international
standings, increasing energy demands as cheap oil becomes rarer and
scarcer and more and more people begin to understand that you can't
consume a limited resource forever, and what sometimes feels like an
accelerating pace of natural disasters.

"This is because of the mess that the Republicans left us" will only
work so well for so long, especially in light of the fact that the
Democrats have already controlled congress for a while.  They'll
probably have a year or two of relative faith and trust before public
concern and then disillusionment threaten to set in.

Now, the problem is, most of these problems are going to take more
than a year or two to heal and in some cases, the medicine is likely
to be unpleasant.  In two to four years, they've absolutely got to be
able to make the case that their plans are working and need to be
stuck with or its going to slap right back over.  If things are bad
enough, we'll see things swinging back in two years or less.  The only
way that those in DC will be able to weather it is if they have
developed a reputation of being honest and straightforward enough that
when they say "yes, these seas are rough, but we're going to make it
through" and "we know this sucks and you're suffering but we truly
believe that this will be the best in the long run", people believe
them.

If Al Franken is not the right man for the job, if a fair number of
Minnesotans don't feel like they made a good choice of who to send to
DC, in six years when the seat is open again, there's a reasonable
chance it'll be a Republican again.  And, if he does enough to annoy
or anger the electorate, he'll enable the election of someone who
could make Democrats reflect fondly on Coleman's legacy.  Given that
Coleman does tend towards the moderate and doesn't seem to be the type
to stand in the way of a reasoned and respectful opposition that
happens to have the upper hand, he very well may be a better choice
than someone who claims to be a progressive but mainly spews hot air
and insults and undermines public faith in his political allies.

However, as I said, Coleman won't be getting my vote.  The thing I
want to know is, why should Franken get my vote or why shouldn't he?
Of significant importance to me is this question:

If Obama gets elected and his campaign promises have been honest in
his intent of moving towards a Washington that functions with premise
of respect for one's opponents and reasoned debate, will Al Franken
contribute to that wave of change or will he be an obstacle to be
overcome?

Additionally, I'd like to know:

Does the impression that has been made portraying Franken as the sort
of person who will attack, belittle and insult rather than listen,
reason and debate have any merit or is it pure propaganda?  Can you
offer support for either point of view?

The tax problems are a valid note regarding fiscal responsibility
however, not the sort of thing that is going to swing me on this.
After all, I've got my own little tax problems stemming from my
reluctance to give money to an administration I considered to be
committing war crimes. (As a note, the only way tax resistance will
work out for you is to stop making money.  Otherwise, they just end up
getting more in the long run).  After reading the "Porn-Gate" thing,
the primary impact it has on me is to reduce my opinion of those
flogging it.  But, neither of these things make me support him in any
way.

At this point, I really want to get a sense of the man's character.
Not the one he plays but the one he has.  When he goes into a
political conflict with the upper hand, how will he conduct himself?
When he goes into it with facing a greater number of opposition, how
will he conduct himself?

Will he be a Paul Wellstone, will he contribute to the change in the
nature of national politics that Barack Obama seems to be promising,
or will he serve to undermine it and doom us to more decades of
flipping back and forth between two parties who seem to spend more
time badmouthing each other than solving problems?  If McCain wins,
will he be a member of "the loyal opposition", or will he just be a
loud mouthed gadfly?  Will he be a Senator we can respect and be proud
of or will he be an embarrassment?

I don't know if I'm the typical swing voter or not.  As someone who
rides a bicycle, owns a motorcycle but no car, thinks vices should be
legalized and regulated, thinks people should marry whoever they want
and the state should recognize every marriage equally but realize that
the churches have a right to their discrimination when it comes to
their priests/ministers/rabbis/imams/shamans/druids/whatever
performing their rituals, opposed the smoking ban, supported
conceal/carry, eats organic, goes deer hunting, and thinks that the
question of whether or not Bush and Cheney should be impeached and/or
charged with war crimes or crimes against peace should be answered
rather than ignored, I somehow doubt it.

In general, I think my political and ethical spectrums run somewhat
orthogonally to the ones that the Democrats and Republicans tend to
think in terms of.

- phaedrus (jason.goray), minneapolis

Let me add to this discussion the fact that there will soon be a candidate for
U.S. Senate for Minnesota's third largest party, the Independence Party.
Current contenders for endorsement at this Saturday's convention include Steve
Williams (a farmer from Austin, Minn., and former Minneapolis resident), Kurt
Anderson (a Minneapolis attorney and former DFL congressional candidate), and
myself (a Minneapolis resident and subscriber to this forum).  In the wings is
yet another possible candidate, former Governor Jesse Ventura, a man with a
solid record of fairness and good government while serving as Governor of
Minnesota.  Additionally, he's the only person ever to have beaten Norm Coleman
in an election.

If I get the IP endorsement, you'll see a campaign focusing on the economic
future of Minnesota, the nation, and the world. What do we do about the $710
annual trade deficit?  How about $4 per gallon gas prices?  It's time for some
straight talk on these topics.  The economy is going down the tubes.

The trade deficit has two main causes:  (1) imported petroleum products, (2)
outsourcing of manufacturing production to low-wage countries.

To address those long-term problems, I advocate a crash program, aided by tax
credits and subsidies, to develop alternative sources of energy, especially
wind power.  We need to convert from gasoline-powered cars to hybrids, electric
cars, and cars powered by hydrogen.  We need to experiment with alternative
technologies in public transit, including PRT and smart jitneys.

With respect to outsourcing, I advocate that the trading system be revised in
its entirety.  The free-trade imperative is obsolete in an era where much trade
is intracorporate or between major retailers and closely related contractors.
I favor increased use of tariffs, both to create a certain cost buffer for our
own highly paid workers and a regulatory tool that governments can use to
encourage increased wages and reduced work hours in other countries.  This can
be done in an environment of cooperation among peoples in different parts of
the world.

We must also recognize how military expenditures are hurting our country
economically.  We cannot afford this any more.  It's important to get out of
Iraq as soon as it is humanely possible and also not bomb Iran and further
inflame world opinion against us.  In my opinion, we also need to close many of
our expensive military bases around the world.  The more hopeful future
involves moving the United Nations into the role of world policeman.  We have
little credibility in that role any more after the disastrous Bush years.

These are some of the things I want to talk about.  We're in a crisis.  Instead
of "rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic", we need to avoid the ice berg
looming ahead.

So, while the Norm Coleman vs. Al Franken match is interesting, a political
campaign should really be about options for our future.

You can find more information about my campaign at
http://www.newindependenceparty.org

> Well, I guess us Franken-philes must hope that ... authors of
> voluminous writings on e-democracy forums like Jason Goray
> will come around.

I do regret my apparent inability to write concisely.  I'm not
entirely certain, however, if the fault is fully mine or if it lies
partially in the hit-and-run nature of what discourse has become.
Believe it or not, however, I do edit and try and trim these things
down.

Perhaps its been lost in the volume but I'm trying to give the
Franken-philes an opportunity to refute the negative impression of
Franken that I've been given.  Of course, I'm giving his opponents the
opportunity to support the impression as well.

Here was the opener.  It might be seen as a slow pitch and its kind of
meaningless without the followup question but its part of the meat of
what I wish to know:

> If Obama gets elected and his campaign promises have been honest in
> his intent of moving towards a Washington that functions with premise
> of respect for one's opponents and reasoned debate, will Al Franken
> contribute to that wave of change or will he be an obstacle to be
> overcome?

Here's the more important supporting question:

> Does the impression that has been made portraying Franken as the sort
> of person who will attack, belittle and insult rather than listen,
> reason and debate have any merit or is it pure propaganda?  Can you
> offer support for either point of view?

And here's more about why I'm asking:

> At this point, I really want to get a sense of the man's character.
> Not the one he plays but the one he has.  When he goes into a
> political conflict with the upper hand, how will he conduct himself?
> When he goes into it with facing a greater number of opposition, how
> will he conduct himself?

And, to remind the Franken-philes that Franken very well may not get
my vote just because I don't want to vote for Coleman, we have this
post by William McGaughey.

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 10:33 AM, William McGaughey <email obscured>>
wrote:
> Let me add to this discussion the fact that there will soon be a candidate
for
> U.S. Senate for Minnesota's third largest party, the Independence Party.

I'm glad to hear it and unless I'm convinced that Franken is worth
voting for, my vote may well end up with the IP or Green candidate
although I try to give all of the registered candidates at least a
cursory look.

I saw a number of good points in your post especially regarding the
trade deficit, military spending, and alternative sources of energy.
I don't necessarily agree with every point, and I'm especially not
sold on PRT, but I'm glad to see the nature of the questions being
raised and the general direction of some of the solutions.

What's a smart jitney?

(I could google it, but others might be curious as well...)

- phaedrus, minneapolis, Hoping for a future with IRV for statewide elections.

I wonder how this convention went. Did they endorse anyone? Last night on
Almanac, Dean Barkley seemed to completely avoid the subject when questioned
about Jesse Ventura, who's been blustering about the possibility of running as
and Independent. I still have faith in Minnesotans to choose Al Franken over
two failures, however, since that is what both our former governor and future
former senator are. Time will tell if they will stand for another third party
spoiler and let their worst fear take office. Makes one year for statewide IRV.



On Thursday, June 19, 2008, at 10:33AM, "William McGaughey"
<email obscured>> wrote:
>Let me add to this discussion the fact that there will soon be a candidate for
U.S. Senate for Minnesota's third largest party, the Independence Party.
Current contenders for endorsement at this Saturday's convention include Steve
Williams (a farmer from Austin, Minn., and former Minneapolis resident), Kurt
Anderson

Bill McGaughey: "Politics has sunk to a low level."

I take issue with this statement. Politics has been a dirty business since
Adam's PR spinners blamed Eve for the fact that Adam ate the "fruit of the tree
of the knowledge of good and evil." Adam was the original spineless wonder.

Jesse Ventura's politics were no cleaner than any other politician. Jesse
Ventura was wont to use a menacing form of arm twisting on members of the
legislature (by report of legislators at that time). He, as governor, was a
bully boy. The difference between Jesse and some other bullying politician is
that Ventura's menace was much more physical, he having had the advantage of
years of TV wrestling.

Governor, as we configure it, is a matter of bullying legislatures into doing
what the governor wants them to do, even when the legislators know it will be
the stupidest move they can make.

When it comes to politicians, too often we are measuring one against the other
on a scale of who is the closest to civilized among a feral bunch. This is
particularly true in a presidential election year.

I agree with Wizard that Jesse brought his problems on himself while governor;
whining about the press and failing to work with the Legislature virtually
assured his failure, and it was a dismal failure that began the shift of our
tax burdens to property instead of something less regressive (he gave us
something only a Republican could love, and I hope it won't wash in November in
this Senate race --Jesse = Failure). Third parties, especially Independents,
could do well by shifting support to Democrats and reforming the electoral
system; they'll go on quixotically punishing us all in the the public
flagellation they like to call political campaigns and governing
(Ventura-style), until we have that reform. Blame the Democrats if you like,
but it will be third parties that sink any hope of a reasonable tax system and
the government we need. Waiting eagerly for the Independent endorsements,

>
>

According to IP's site some guy names Stephen Williams is seeking the IP
endorsement for US Senate. http://www.mnip.org/candidates.shtml. Stephen is in
the IP's "Candidates Seeking Endorsement" section and Bill isn't.
http://www.prairiefireusa.com
Stephen sounds like a Fair Taxer except instead of income tax he's using
payroll tax. He wants to move Medicare, Social Security, Workmans Comp employee
insurance to a Sales tax which ** won't be successful because it doesn't match
up to the same people **. The idea from which he is borrowing, moving an
individual US income tax to a national sales tax, aka Fair tax, makes more
sense.
Stephen is misguided on immigration. Not sure what nationalizing health
insurance means. Single payer?
He sounds light weight.

Did this guy debate you Saturday, Bill?

Jamie Delton
www.DeltonDigest.com
Summit U

OK, whoever you are. What have you done with Bill Kahn.

Bill Kahn wrote:

Williams is indeed the one the IP endorsed.

They also endorsed Tinklenburg in CD 6, and I can only say that I hope IP
voters are just as sensible when it comes to voting for the rest of those
running to serve Minnesota in Congress and the White House.

I should mention that I also attended as a delegate for the IP. It's been an
excellent way for me to get a tan. The one 4 years ago was at the Saints
stadium, and this year, the south Bloomington transit center provided me 50
minutes out in the fresh air between buses.

I voted for Bill, but don't tell, it's a secret ballot.

Well Tim, last time I looked in the mirror it still looked like me,
unfortunately.

I would, of course, have preferred that Tim's party endorse more DFLers like
Tinklenburg or not endorse anyone at all in the case of the other congressional
offices and the White House races, but aside from being a Democrat, I like to
think I'm a reasonable guy in that I don't tell or expect other party folks to
do what I'd like them to do. I do have a libertarian streak that may be unusual
for an otherwise liberal DFLer, and perhaps that leads to confusion for some
who like to portray folks with broad brush strokes; unlike other self-described
libertarians (e.g., those "more libertarian than thou"), any rights I ascribe
to citizens are inextricably bound to a duty to uphold those rights, i.e., my
rights do not exclude anyone else's if I can help it, an important distinction
lost to some in our discussions.

Of course, I want you all to all to vote for Al Franken, even though you have
the right to do something incredibly stupid like voting for any IP or
Republican incumbent. I hope that clears things up for Tim.

Back to my study of life on the Minneapolis campus of the U of MN now. For the
last few days and a few more to come, a conference on Evolution has been going
on, and I had the opportunity to attend; added to a broken computer, I am a
little disconnected from our forum, but certainly better connected with the
nature of life on earth. When the conference is over, I will let things MN-Pol
and e-democracy intrude a bit more along with the rest of my life, but for now,
I'm just another happy Darwinian listening to folks summarize their life's work
in 10-15 minutes with a question or more at the end when there's time.


On Sunday, June 22, 2008, at 09:00AM, "Tim Nelson" <email obscured>>
wrote:

>OK, whoever you are. What have you done with Bill Kahn.
>
>Bill Kahn wrote:
>
>Williams is indeed the one the IP endorsed.
>
>They also endorsed Tinklenburg in CD 6, and I can only say that I hope IP
>voters are just as sensible when it comes to voting for the rest of those
>running to serve Minnesota in Congress and the White House.
>

So, I noted that the Democratically controlled House has provided
retroactive immunity to the telcoms who broke the law on the request
of the president and helped the administration spy on Americans
without the necessary court orders.  The Democratically controlled
Senate is expected to support the bill as well.

I also noted that the Democratically controlled congress is voting to
expand the administrations capability to do this legally in the
future.

While the Democratically controlled congress is responsible for
passing this through to Bush, I certainly don't let the Republicans
off the hook.  All but one of them voted for this bill and Bush is
reputed to be quite pleased.

Does anyone know if Franken has commented on the bill and if he's
stated how he would vote on it if he were in the Senate?  Does anyone
know if Coleman plans to vote for it?  I'd be amazed but pleased if he
voted against it, but its worth asking.

I guess the Republicans didn't need to win congress last time around,
they're getting anything they want anyway.

My guess is that the Democrats are thinking about November and think
that being Republican-lite will win the independent voters and who
else are the progressives going to vote for anyway?

This is why we need some strong third/fourth/fifth parties in this
state.  If for no other reason than to keep politicians paying
attention to their alleged values in order to keep their base.

This independent voter is seriously considering using political party
as a litmus test**. If it says "Democrat" or "Republican" next to a
candidate's name, they don't get my vote.  If the Dems win the White
House and the Congress this time around, and don't do some real good
with the power they've been handed, I just can't see even being able
to hold my nose and vote for them again.

...

Retroactive Amnesty. Let your mind wander the implications of that a bit.

I wasn't going to say that the implication is that now we have no
rights and now  on the order of the president, anyone can be spied on,
arrested, tortured, or held without charges regardless of laws or due
process and anyone assisting in this action may well be held
unaccountable.  I wasn't going to say it because I thought it was
hyperbolic.

Then, I reflected a bit on recent history and recalled that we've been
seeing that for a while now.   This vote was just a step to legitimize
it a bit more.

- phaedrus, minneapolis

(** I won't ever REALLY use it as a litmus test as some good
candidates keep ending up in that party, but "Democrat" may well start
ending being a strike against a candidate where it used to be my
default vote.  In the last eight years, the party as a whole has shown
itself to either be spineless, soulless, or both.)

Hey, just for comparison's sake - since we're talking about the "profiles in
courage" on the left side of the aisle - how did candidate/itinerant messiah
Barack Obama vote on this bill?

http://tinyurl.com/6hfhlw

Oh.  My.  Didn't see *that* coming, did we?  Well, at least Nan Pelosi stood
for pure prin...er, wait, no she didn't.

Good Lord, people - in our litigious society, granting Telcos immunity *after
judicial review to make sure they meet the criteria for it* is a perfectly
legimate compromise - at least, outside the fever swamp...

...which is, unfortunately, where most discussions in this "forum" are mired.

I'll await the usual ad-hominem responses.

Mitch Berg
More Libertarian than thou, now and forever
The Midway

--- On Mon, 6/23/08, Mike Fratto <email obscured>> wrote:

> From: Mike Fratto <email obscured>>
> Subject: Re: [MN-Pol] Minnesota U.S. Senate Race
> To: <email obscured>, "phaedrus" <email obscured>>
> Date: Monday, June 23, 2008, 2:58 PM
> Lets be honest with this story. Yes the Democrats do control
> the houses of Congress. Yes the House passed and the Senate
> is about to pass this outrageous bill. But I think you will
> find that the majority of those voting in favor were
> Republican. Although, there were enough Dems that allowed
> it to pass in the House.
>
> The biggest blame should be directed toward the Democratic
> Leadership that once again seems to be in the pocket of
> George W. Bush that allowed the bill to come to a vote in
> the first place.
>
>
>
> Mike Fratto
> Payne Phalen
>
>
> Please help those who don't get enough to eat.
> http://oyh.org
> http://hungersolutions.org
>
> The future depends more on
> what we do between now and then
> Than what we did in the past.
>
> --- On Mon, 6/23/08, phaedrus <email obscured>>
> wrote:
> From: phaedrus <email obscured>>
> Subject: Re: [MN-Pol] Minnesota U.S. Senate Race
> To: <email obscured>
> Date: Monday, June 23, 2008, 12:49 PM
>
> So, I noted that the Democratically controlled House has
> provided
> retroactive immunity to the telcoms who broke the law on
> the request
> of the president and helped the administration spy on
> Americans
> without the necessary court orders.  The Democratically
> controlled
> Senate is expected to support the bill as well.
>
> I also noted that the Democratically controlled congress is
> voting to
> expand the administrations capability to do this legally in
> the
> future.
>
> While the Democratically controlled congress is responsible
> for
> passing this through to Bush, I certainly don't let the
> Republicans
> off the hook.  All but one of them voted for this bill and
> Bush is
> reputed to be quite pleased.
>
> Does anyone know if Franken has commented on the bill and
> if he's
> stated how he would vote on it if he were in the Senate?
> Does anyone
> know if Coleman plans to vote for it?  I'd be amazed
> but pleased if he
> voted against it, but its worth asking.
>
> I guess the Republicans didn't need to win congress
> last time around,
> they're getting anything they want anyway.
>
> My guess is that the Democrats are thinking about November
> and think
> that being Republican-lite will win the independent voters
> and who
> else are the progressives going to vote for anyway?
>
> This is why we need some strong third/fourth/fifth parties
> in this
> state.  If for no other reason than to keep politicians
> paying
> attention to their alleged values in order to keep their
> base.
>
> This independent voter is seriously considering using
> political party
> as a litmus test**. If it says "Democrat" or
> "Republican"
> next to a
> candidate's name, they don't get my vote.  If the
> Dems win the White
> House and the Congress this time around, and don't do
> some real good
> with the power they've been handed, I just can't
> see even being able
> to hold my nose and vote for them again.
>
> ...
>
> Retroactive Amnesty. Let your mind wander the implications
> of that a bit.
>
> I wasn't going to say that the implication is that now
> we have no
> rights and now  on the order of the president, anyone can
> be spied on,
> arrested, tortured, or held without charges regardless of
> laws or due
> process and anyone assisting in this action may well be
> held
> unaccountable.  I wasn't going to say it because I
> thought it was
> hyperbolic.
>
> Then, I reflected a bit on recent history and recalled that
> we've been
> seeing that for a while now.   This vote was just a step to
> legitimize
> it a bit more.
>
> - phaedrus, minneapolis
>
> (** I won't ever REALLY use it as a litmus test as some
> good
> candidates keep ending up in that party, but
> "Democrat" may well
> start
> ending being a strike against a candidate where it used to
> be my
> default vote.  In the last eight years, the party as a
> whole has shown
> itself to either be spineless, soulless, or both.)
>
> phaedrus
> Sheridan, Minneapolis
> Info about phaedrus:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/jasongoray
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/2Fh99H7NDclByjpuLemcEi
> -----------------------------------------
>   To post, send your message to:
> <email obscured>
>   To leave or for daily digest, type
> "unsubscribe" or "digest
> on,"
>   in subject line and send to:
> <email obscured>
>
>   More info about Minnesota Politics and Issues Forum:
>   http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mn-politics
>
>   E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at
> http://OnlineGroups.Net
>
>
>
> Michael Fratto
> Payne Phalen, St.. Paul
> Info about Mike Fratto:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/michaelfratto
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/6ER80P7i4XaRz3N8TUdNSu
> -----------------------------------------
>   To post, send your message to:
> <email obscured>
>   To leave or for daily digest, type
> "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
>   in subject line and send to:
> <email obscured>
>
>   More info about Minnesota Politics and Issues Forum:
>   http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mn-politics
>
>   E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at
> http://OnlineGroups.Net

Mitch Berg wrote:
> Good Lord, people - in our litigious society, granting Telcos immunity *after
judicial review to make sure they meet the criteria for it* is a perfectly
legimate compromise - at least, outside the fever swamp...
>
>
Sophistry at best, a Berg specialty, being a litigious society has
nothing to do with granting retroactive immunity for members of a
criminal conspiracy for their acts.

Some, not all telcos, violated the law.  Congress has somewhat
predictably buckled.  Obama's shift is a fact but then McCain has such a
long list of shifting from where he was to gain the nomination to where
he is with it your neck fairly aches from whiplash following him.

--
Marc Asch                                      <email obscured>
34 North Oaks Road                              651-484-9037
North Oaks, MN 55127

                   "Democracy is not a spectator sport."
                                           Craig S. Wilson

> Sophistry at best, a Berg specialty,

Ad-hominem as expected - an Asch near-exclusive franchise.

> being a litigious
> society has
> nothing to do with granting retroactive immunity for
> members of a
> criminal conspiracy for their acts.

You're correct (in  your obtuse and, by the back door, incorrect kind of way);
what it DOES have to do with is making sure that the fever swamp's definition
of "criminal" doesn't end up swallowing up companies who are following
government policy.

> Obama's shift is a fact but then
> McCain

In other words, "I know you are, but what am I?"

Excellent form there.  Excellent.

Simple facts;  McCain has shifted his positions to the right (an unequivocally
good thing) while Obama, on the other hand, is shifting *to the right*, which
is the sign of a gutless fop who's not ready for prime time.  Fact is, he's
stabbed the Tic base in the back; no matter how apparatchiks like Asch try to
say "doesn't his outfit look FABulous?", most of us - the right, of course, but
even plenty of the Kossack/Huffpo crowd that got Obama where he is today -
aren't amused.

Sorry, Marc.  Come back when you got a game.

Mitch Berg
Waiting on that Heller decision, baby,
The Midway

Mitch Berg: "> Sophistry at best, a Berg specialty,  Ad-hominem as expected"

Wrong again, Mr. Berg. Naming the behavior is not ad-hominem.

OED:  1. Specious but fallacious reasoning; employment of arguments which are
intentionally deceptive.
1340 Ayenb. 65 Ine huyche manyere et me zuere, oer openliche, oer stilleliche
be art, oer be sophistrie. 1377 LANGL. P. Pl. B. XIX. 343 Confessioun &
contricioun..Shal be coloured so queyntly and keuered vnder owre sophistrie.
1426 LYDG. De Guil. Pilgr. 5767 Tel on, as yt lyth in thy thouht, Wer yt deceyt
or sophystrye. 1531 TINDALE Exp. 1 John (1537) 8 Can ye..persuade us, thynke
ye, with your sophistry? 1582 BENTLEY Mon. Matrones 71 Stopping the mouthes of
the vnlearned with subtile..persuasions of..Sophistrie. 1639 HABINGTON Castara
II. (Arb.) 78 Who will with silent piety confute Atheisticke Sophistry, and by
the fruite Approve Religions tree? 1684 BUNYAN Pilgr. II. 108 This Maule did
use to spoyl young Pilgrims with Sophistry. c1710 POPE On Silence 40 The
parson's cant, the lawyer's sophistry, Lord's quibble, critic's jest; all end
in thee. 1777 PRIESTLEY Phil. Necess. 186, I do not profess myself to be master
of any uncommon art of detecting sophistry. 1825 LYTTON Falkland 65, I feel too
well the sophistry of his arguments. 1871 R. H. HUTTON Ess. II. 226 Nothing can
exceed the tortuous sophistry of this admirable special pleading.

There are 7 Democrat primary candidates:
“DICK” FRANSON
ROB FITZGERALD
PRISCILLA LORD FARIS
ALVE ERICKSON
BOB LARSON
OLE’ SAVIOR
Al Franken
http://candidates.sos.state.mn.us/CandidateFilingSearch.asp

Only one will get a shot at Norm Coleman. Who do you want it to be?
This is cross-posted in the comments of www.MinnesotaDemocratsExposed.com.

Fitzgerald’s website isn’t live until Jul 21.
Is this Rob the same Rob who ran as an independence party candidate in 2006?
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2006/10/05/midmorning1/

PRISCILLA LORD FARIS still believes we went into Iraq only for the oil.
http://www.tpt.org/aatc/videos/2008/07/18/almanac_july_18_2008/priscilla_lord_faris
You progressive and socialist guys and gals(Andy, Rick, Grace,Diane, Wizard)
should love her for that effort to cheapen the lost lives of our military by
reciting the line of foreign commercial interest, if not the line of our actual
military enemy. Our military enemy is nationless, media-savvy, global
terrorists and their host countries, which has been and will be ambitious
jihadi terrorists.
Please leave your thoughts on the recent negotiation concession to Iran.

Jamie Delton
www.DeltonDigest.com
Summit U

I believe it is the same Fitzgerald. I met him back in '06; I believed at the
time that switching to the DFL would at least have been honest.  Glad to see he
did it.

> He drove around the state in a red bus
> that ran on discarded cooking oil.

Then, someone had to drive behind him in a bus that ran on floor-degreaser to
get the mess he left behind.

Seriously, a question for DFLers - most of these hamsters are no real
challenge.  But Priscilla, Lord Faris?  She seems to be the real deal.  She
seems to be the genuine DFL article.  Heck, if she wins, you'll be getting two
DFL-overlord Senators (Lord Faris and her dad, Miles Lord).

How does Priscilla, Lord Faris' entry into the race affect y'all?  She'd seem
to be a natural to pick up some of that *avalanche* (snxx) of disenfranchised
Nelson-Pallmeyer (heh heh) voters that's just seething (heh heh heh) outside
the bounds of the DFL's tunnel vision, waiting to carry him to DC on their
shoulders (Bwahahaha).

Seriously - worth a look?

Mitch Berg
The Midway

The most important aspect of a senator is how they will represent Minnesota and
how they will vote in Congress!

Al Franken will represent Minnesota people

http://tinyurl.com/5bupw3

While Norm Coleman says one thing and does something different

http://tinyurl.com/5c8oyo

Grace Kelly nicknamed Kelly
Curmudgeon from St Paul

"I know, I know, he must be part of that 10% and is just disgruntled. Nothing
to worry about!"

Sounds to me like he is just getting a flash of what independents have gone
through just about every election for the past 20 years.

In Minnesota, we have a mini-version of the Presidential contest in our Senate
race. Al Franken is going up against Norm Coleman. The budget for the two
candidates is huge, and the heated ad content is similar to the big boys trying
for the White House.

There is nothing about these campaigns that you don't already know. Al Franken
found that in order to be nominated, and pass the primary, one must pander,
pander, and pander some more, to the progressive base of the party.

Norm Coleman, for his part, found that mirroring the Presidential candidate was
his ticket to the voting public. I will not fault him for his honesty, if he
says he will cross the aisle, early and often. I do not doubt he will do so in
a Democratically controlled Congress. It only stands to reason that McCain will
do likewise.

So where is this intrepid reporter in all of this, you ask?

In volunteer mode in the State Fair booth of Jack Uldrich, Independence party
candidate for that same Senate seat.

Jack is a futurist, and an author with a diverse set of interests, he is
similar to Patrick Moynihan in these respects. He would raise the Senate
debates to a level not to be seen in the Presidential debates. Issues have
answers. Jack sees the answers clearly. He will tell you what you need to know,
even if it is not what you want to hear.

Technological change may just be the biggest issue to be ignored by both
parties. It was not always this way, during the 50's and 60's, the popular
culture knew that the private sector would change how they live, work, eat, and
play. But change is coming faster, not in the public sector, in political
campaigns, or in party rhetoric, but how fast the private sector is leaving the
public sector, all of government, in the dust.

The former Soviet Union had this problem. To some extent all of the governments
on earth have this problem. How to keep up, when change becomes exponentially
faster. Congress, along with the President, and the Supreme Court, are the
gatekeepers. This is a scary notion, say if you are a lawyer in the same
generation as the majority of Congress, or even if you just have a "feeling"
that your Senator has no grasp of this new, impending, job description.

Who are you going to call? Call Jack, and others like him, to Congress post
haste. If another year goes by, it will be like two. Two years will change like
four, and without qualified gatekeepers, the whole of government may be
ill-suited to survive.

I just listened to Obama deliver his economic plan in a stump speech.

What a grand plan!  A tax cut for 95% of Americans at the time when we need it
the most!

Even the people making $250,000 or more "will pay either the same or lower tax
rates than they paid in the 1990s."  On his web site: "But no family will pay
higher tax rates than they would have paid in the 1990s. In fact, dividend
rates would be 39 percent lower than what President Bush proposed in his 2001
tax cut."

It IS the economy stupid and neither party gets it.  In fact, Americans don't
get it if they think this plan is more than a pipe dream at a time of the
greatest economic crisis since the depression.  I think Obama and McCain are
fortunate that the real pain has not started yet.

John and Barack - where do you think you are getting your revenue from?

I find it hard to believe that intelligent Democrats think that the Obama
economic plan is even remotely feasible.  And yet when McCain and Obama are
asked about how the economic crisis will affect their plans - the pat response
is "we will have to do things a little slower"

As I ponder the Presidential spectacle and the lesser spectacle at the level of
the Senate - the only question I have:

"Is there any intelligent life left in the United States?"

Apart from the cynics in both parties who are cranking this propaganda out.

George Dawson
St. Paul, MN


"The GOP just doesn't get it. I mean, "It's the economy, stupid" and
not their stupid economy; yet they keep running the ads that will
insure their losses by landslides. We're certainly not going to put
the rabid deregulators back in the executive and legislative branches
of government in the aftermath of the disasters resulting from their
worldview in action. The folks who want to cut taxes for the rich and
continue to make the middle class pull their weight as well as our
own, are still trying to sell the same old snake oil. No one is
buying it."

How about "tax the rich?"  The money hasn't disappeared, somebody is sitting
on a big pile of it. . .

-----Original Message-----
From: George Dawson <email obscured>]
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 3:12 PM
To: Minnesota Politics and Issues Forum
Subject: Re: [MN-Pol] Minnesota U.S. Senate Race

I just listened to Obama deliver his economic plan in a stump speech.

What a grand plan!  A tax cut for 95% of Americans at the time when we need
it the most!

Even the people making $250,000 or more "will pay either the same or lower
tax rates than they paid in the 1990s."  On his web site: "But no family
will pay higher tax rates than they would have paid in the 1990s. In fact,
dividend rates would be 39 percent lower than what President Bush proposed
in his 2001 tax cut."

It IS the economy stupid and neither party gets it.  In fact, Americans
don't get it if they think this plan is more than a pipe dream at a time of
the greatest economic crisis since the depression.  I think Obama and McCain
are fortunate that the real pain has not started yet.

John and Barack - where do you think you are getting your revenue from?

I find it hard to believe that intelligent Democrats think that the Obama
economic plan is even remotely feasible.  And yet when McCain and Obama are
asked about how the economic crisis will affect their plans - the pat
response is "we will have to do things a little slower"

As I ponder the Presidential spectacle and the lesser spectacle at the level
of the Senate - the only question I have:

"Is there any intelligent life left in the United States?"

Apart from the cynics in both parties who are cranking this propaganda out.

George Dawson
St. Paul, MN


"The GOP just doesn't get it. I mean, "It's the economy, stupid" and
not their stupid economy; yet they keep running the ads that will
insure their losses by landslides. We're certainly not going to put
the rabid deregulators back in the executive and legislative branches
of government in the aftermath of the disasters resulting from their
worldview in action. The folks who want to cut taxes for the rich and
continue to make the middle class pull their weight as well as our
own, are still trying to sell the same old snake oil. No one is
buying it."


George Dawson
St. Paul
Info about George Dawson: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/georgedawson

This topic's messages may be viewed at:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/7nfhDpcTGluJAg9HML7Jm1
-----------------------------------------
  To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
  To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
  in subject line and send to: <email obscured>

  More info about Minnesota Politics and Issues Forum:
  http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mn-politics

  E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
-----------------------------------------
Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net

Marc Asch: "Bush and the Congressional Republicans, including McCain, put us in
this fix.  Obama will get us out."

Unfortunately, unless we change the rules so that Obama can have four terms, I
don't think he can dig us out of this hole, it's too deep. But he can make a
good start on the problem.

"By the end of the first term stagflation and the
depression will be so severe the American people will
elect Sarah Palin as president and throw out the Democrat
congress."

Lee you crack me up.  You really have a crush on Palin don't ya (wink)

Well, while your stuffing money under your matress, I'm picking up some pretty
good stock at bargain basement prices.  So keep it up...  I can't afford
anymore this month and would like to resume next month.

After watching the first two Presidential debates, David Broder has the same
problem with McCain and Obama's economic pipe dream that I have.  Here is his
response to their inability to tell the American people that they might need to
sacrifice something to get out of the current economic crisis:

"It was a stunning rejection of reality. This nation is mired in two wars it
does not know how to end. It is struggling to escape the worst economic crisis
since the Great Depression. The federal government is staring at record
deficits, with no plausible plan for financing the retirement and health-care
needs of a giant generation of retirees. Our transportation and education
systems need help, and we are dependent on other countries for the energy we
use.

In the face of all this, Obama and McCain are stubbornly repeating promises
they made in happier times -- broad tax cuts, new health benefits, big
government-financed projects."

I don't know how a senior political correspondent would expect any reality
based thinking form American politicians - so this must seem particularly
extreme to him.

Why haven't the rest of the talking heads picked up on this?

Why haven't they picked up on the fact that McCain's and Obama's economic plans
are essentially worthless?


George Dawson
St. Paul, MN

David S. Broder.  Running From Reality.  Washington Post.  Thursday, October 9,
2008; Page A21:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/08/AR2008100802929.html