All posts in the topic Minnesota U.S. Senate Race (Short link)
Summary
- There are 48 posts — by 16 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by Tim Nelson at Aug 24 18:47 UTC
With Norm Coleman making schmaltzy testimonials on television while
the dark forces of the Republican Party attempt to conjure up a false
vision of an uncaring and uncouth Al Franken in the minds of
Minnesotans, I can only hope Al chimes in with the good and telling
jokes he is capable of at some point as his bad ones are trotted out.
Republicans can't conjure up any new material, so this is going to
get old. This effort of theirs can end only one way: November pies in
Norm's face from the voters of Minnesota.
Republican politicos -- posturing and pontificating about what a
serious job being a U.S. Senator is as we listen to the worst enabler
of the darkest and worst U.S. Presidential Administration in our
history try to snow us about how the job should be done -- are living
and breathing, walking and talking punch lines. The only thing the
incumbent is really good at is saying one thing and doing another;
the only bigger joke than Norm's campaign would be a Jesse Ventura
bid. So here is the big Minnesota question: Do we get huffy and
offended on cue from Norm and his folks--or even the famously huffy
Jesse "The Guv" Ventura--or elect Al? We're not all jokes in
Minnesota, but we come to know the worst ones when we elect them to
office for four to six years at a time.
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.
> 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
Jason Gorey: "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."
We have had eight years of insult and belittling from the GOP. It seems to me
that the GOP has lost the ability to debate an issue on its merits from their
stated first premise, so their fall back position is a, "so's yer old man!"
reply. That leaves any opponents of the GOP in a position of having to wrench
debate back to the issues with an opponent who will not go there, but
consistently indulges in flummery instead.
The GOP, whose campaign gurus seem to be stuck in an eternal pre-adolescence,
will trot out every dumb skit or offhand remark Franken has ever made and, of
course, they won't give you the date or context for the remarks. Franken, age
26 when he joined SNL in 1977, on a TV late night show played to a very
youthful crowd (I was one of them and it seems, and was, eons ago). If I happen
to see an old SNL skit, I'm never sure I'm seeing through nostalgia or if it
was really funny. My one exception would be Steve Martin's "King Tut." The line
'born in Babylonia, moved to California' is so absurdist it just slays me.
I'm not a great Al-Franken-for-Senate fan, though he's a good satirist. I think
the man is very angry about the state of the union and whether he can harness
that to serve him or not is what we have to see. So saying, we do need someone
with more on the ball than Coleman or, god help us, Ventura! Every time I see
Coleman, I think of this line from the film My Fair Lady, "Oozing charm from
every pore, he oiled his way across the floor...." Ventura named himself after
a highway in California and I think that's very telling.
I would have preferred Nelson Pallmeyer (sp?) or Ceresi, but such is life.
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
> We have had eight years of insult and belittling from the > GOP. Ah. The old "I Know You Are, But What Am I?" argument. Yeah, Wiz? Not really much of an argument. > It seems to me that the GOP has lost the ability to > debate an issue on its merits from their stated first > premise, so their fall back position is a, "so's > yer old man!" reply. Are you (plural) projecting much? This forum is a handy barometer for that exact thing; question a Democrat on any issue, and four or five of you (plural) will chime in "Halliburton Cheney Wide Stance Bush Brought Down The Towers!". > That leaves any opponents of the > GOP in a position of having to wrench debate back to the > issues with an opponent who will not go there, but > consistently indulges in flummery instead. I'm just going to sit and let the conversation marinade in the glorious irony of that statement. > The GOP, whose campaign gurus seem to be stuck in an > eternal pre-adolescence, will trot out every dumb skit or > offhand remark Franken has ever made and, of course, they > won't give you the date or context for the remarks. Leave aside the fact that the dates are right there in every case, you both come close to making a good point, and make one in turn for me. On the one hand, I - as not only a Republican but this forum's most reasonable person by quite a stretch - don't much care about Franken's comedy exploits. It was his career, for crying out loud. If people have to spend their entire lives trying to remain publicly squeaky-clean from age 12 on up to run for office, we'll get some really crummy politicians. When you're a freelance writer, a Playboy gig is nice, big money. But Franken's career as a writer, comedian (or "satirist" - a comedian who's not funny), and puerile, inept Air America host are the only thing we have by which to gauge the guy. He's never been elected to anything - even Jesse Ventura had more experience as an elected officeholder. He has no record of votes by which to judge his politics. So while all of you lefties shriek like a bunch of spoiled toddlers about Coleman's record (which is, to the objective, thinking person, pretty good, albeit not conservative enough), the rest of us are supposed to... ...what? Take your word for it, and his, that he's going to be just hunky dory? Let Alec Baldwin browbeat us into it? (http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=2688) Sorry, all. That's a rhetorical check y'all can't cash. Of course, his record on taxes is a much more substantial problem - and the context of that story has been presented in excruciating detail. And his participation in the looting of the Gloria Wise Center's treasury is a shameful episode that every Minnesota voter should know about; that Franken knowingly participated in pilfering the treasury of an inner-city kids program to pay his hyperbloated Air America salary IS something the people of Minnesota should know about. I have a question for Franken's supporters; it's right over here: http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=2732 Come on over. Bask in the cool, invigorating air of reason. And leave your answer in the comment section. (I require a login to fight spam - but it's a very simple process) Mitch Berg The Midway
> 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.
Mitch Berg: "So while all of you lefties shriek like a bunch of spoiled
toddlers about Coleman's record (which is, to the objective, thinking person,
pretty good, albeit not conservative enough), the rest of us are supposed
to..."
Fancy Mitch making my point for me, as usual.
Mitch, you do not have permission to truncate my name.
> 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
Well, I guess us Franken-philes must hope that great thinkers and and
authors of voluminous writings on e-democracy forums like Jason Goray
will come around. Middle Eastern policy is one thing, but the
Republican approach to energy and economic issues (find and burn the
last drops of domestic reserves at any cost, economic and
environmental, and give our money away to the richest 10% of our
country) are really key, and it is pretty clear where Franken will go
on these issues. I don't want to be too dismissive of those with
doubts, but hope by November they've got things worked out for the best.
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
I'm sorry. It's not not a $710 annual trade deficit but a $710 billion trade
deficit - the better part of a trillion dollars a year. This money is going to
foreign central banks who have been investing much of their dollars in Treasury
bills and may increasingly be purchasing privately owned assets.
> 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.
Sorry, I ran into the time limit.
A smart jitney is a proposal advanced by Bob Behnke of Oregon and others to
create instant carpools by means of cell phones and computer technology. It is
designed to relieve the pressure on the bus system to deliver service at peak
hours. People enrolled in the system would call a dispatch number indicating
where he (she) is and wants to go and another driver with time and capacity
could provide the ride. This proposal needed funding to develop the computer
system and never got off the ground.
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
The convention is this afternoon. I take issue with the statement that Jesse
Ventura's term as Governor was a "failure". In fact, he had many
accomplishments. The Independence Party draws equally from Democrats and
Republicans. The "spoiler" argument is mere whining from DFLers who feel
entitled to all non-Republican votes. The DFL should win elections by
presenting better programs for government, not by besmirching the motives of
others on the ballot. Politics has sunk to a low level. That's why more and
more people call themselves politically independent.
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.
Jesse Ventura's reign as governor was more failure than success. Yes he did what was needed to be successful by appointing bipartisan qualified leaders of the Executive Branch. But that is where it ended. He had no clue how to deal with the Legislature. I can also safely say that much of Minnesota's fiscal problems stem from his reign as Governor. 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.
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,
Congress is full of comedians courtesy of both major parties.
Why send one more?
George Dawson
St. Paul, MN
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
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.
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.
Yes, Stephen Williams of Austin, Minn. was endorsed for U.S. Senate at the
Independence Party convention yesterday. His opponents for the endorsement
were Kurt Anderson and me. I don't know why Steve was the only candidate
mentioned on the IP website or why my message mentioning the three candidates
was truncated.
Yes, I did debate Williams and Anderson at an IP meetup on Monday at the
community house near Lake Nokomis. We did not have much chance to compare our
views at the convention.
From my point of view, the main event at the convention was an attempt by
several of the party leaders to push for "no endorsement". Endorsed candidates
were required to get 60% of the vote or more and "no endorsement" was one of
the options. I used part of my 10-minute candidate speech to oppose that
effort. When Steve Williams led after the first round of voting, I withdrew as
a candidate and Williams was endorsed in the next round.
Yes, the prospective candidacy of Jesse Ventura was much on the delegates'
mind. But none of us knew what Jesse will do so we had to proceed as if he
were not a candidate. There's no doubt that he would win the IP primary for
U.S. Senate if he chooses to become a candidate and most of us would welcome
that event.
I'm pleased to say that my name was put in nomination by "Red" Nelson, a
realtor who once owned and managed the Scholar coffee house in Dinkytown where
Bob Dylan got his start. Peter Tharaldson, able chair of the 5th District IP
and chair of the convention, also supported my candidacy. But in the end
Anderson and I came up short. Williams had been campaigning for this
endorsement since he lost the IP endorsement at the convention in 2006. He's a
likable man with a serious message.
Tinklenburg, former mayor of Blaine and MN DOT commissioner under Ventura,
spoke to the convention and was endorsed. He is an attractive candidate for
Congress in the 6th District who stands a good chance of getting elected.
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:
Two responses to previous postings:
No, to the best of my knowledge, the IP has not endorsed anyone for Congress in
the 5th District.
Thanks, Tim, for your "secret" vote at Saturday's IP endorsing convention.
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.)
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.
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 6/23/08, Mike Fratto <<email obscured>> wrote:
> Lets be honest with this story.
So when republicans don't help the demcrats pass tax increases and
onerous bonding bills at the state level, they won't get the finger
pointed at them anymore? Sounds like a fair deal.
John Harris
mpls
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.
> 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...
I guess I'm in the fever swamp then because unless the only way I feel
its a good compromise is if the review is to determine that they did
not break the law or violate people's rights to due process. I do
not have the information on what the judicial review entails, but the
impression I have is that its a matter of the company having received
a piece of paper from the administration telling them it was OK. That
is NOT a warrant and is NOT due process.
If someone breaks my rights without going through the procedures that
give the authority to set my rights aside, I want them held
accountable. Its not OK for the congress to say "well, the law was
supposed to protect you but we're going to let this one go."
At that point, what does the law mean anyway? If you can't count on
it, its worthless.
For instance, it isn't legal for a police officer to beat a confession
out of me. It would not be OK if a couple of cops did pummel me until
I confessed to whatever and then, when I later said that my rights
were violated, it was determined that "we'll just let this one go."
Even if the chief of police told them they were OK to go ahead and do
it because I'm a really uppity person, its still not acceptable, and I
would expect the right to fully exercise whatever criminal and civil
complaints against those involved.
Retroactively setting a law aside makes laws and rights meaningless.
It would be a much more "acceptable compromise" to let it have its day
in court and then, if desired, give a presidential pardon to any
criminal charges.
As far as the civil suits go, my basic feeling is "screw 'em". If
they lose some profitability for breaking the law, that's fine, and if
it gives the telecoms who actually followed the law a bit of a
competitive advantage, that's what you should get for playing by the
rules while others are breaking them. However, if you really want to
protect those who commit criminal actions, I suppose there's some way
of capping or forgiving civil claims without making the companies
legally immune.
Obama has stated that he intends to attempt to strip immunity from the
FISA bill. If he does, in fact, do it, good for him. If he doesn't
and he votes to pass the bill anyway, well, it doesn't speak much for
the strength of his convictions.
If Coleman, Franken, Williams or any other Minnesotan candidates for
Senate make any statements regarding this issue, please let me know,
on list or off.
- phaedrus (jason.goray), minneapolis
> 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 wrote:
> Ad-hominem as expected - an Asch near-exclusive franchise.
>
>
This is simply an accurate description of your style of argumentation.
It is not ad hominen.
> in your obtuse
This, on the other hand is ad hominem.
> 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.
>
>
Criminal is defined by breaking the law. Government policy is what the
statutes say. Bush's minions asked companies to break the law because
the George, Cheney and co, did not like the law but could not change it.
The only company harmed in all this was Qwest which refused to break the
law and then lost a major NSA contract it was expecting. Oh, and did I
mention the successful prosecution of the CEO by the Administration for
stock related transgressions.
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.
Same ol, same ol'. Never ceasing potshots from the same posters day in and
day out. For 20 years now, I think. Never passing up a chance to use the
favorite term of the century: ad hominem. Is this supposed to scare someone?
Does anyone even care whether attacks are ad hominem or ex hominem?
Doesn't seem to be so.
The insulter is so very insulted.
Andy Driscoll
St. Paul
SEE BELOW FOR TTT¹S NEXT SHOWS
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
Yes, I'm fairly sure this is the same Robert Fitzgerald who was the
Independence Party's endorsed candidate for U.S. Senate in 2006. He drove
around the state in a red bus that ran on discarded cooking oil.
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
Jamie Delton: "PRISCILLA LORD FARIS still believes we went into Iraq only for
the oil. 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."
J'acuse Mr. Delton of rampant fuzzy thinking. There is a goodly amount of
evidence that, indeed, we went to Iraq for the oil. When Saddam Hussein
nationalized the Iraq oil industry, he threw out the American oil companies
doing business in Iraq. Since the US has taken over Iraq, or at least the
government functions of Iraq, the same oil magnates who were kicked out now
have contracts to deal with Iraq's oil.
What cheapens the lives of our military personnel, living and dead, is that the
administration went to Iraq for the oil, lied to the population, and
manipulated the military. The federal administration has wrapped itself in the
flag since nine eleven and firmly wrenched our focus off the target and into
Iraq. There ain't no oil in Afghanistan.
I very much resent the administration for treating our soldiers as though they
are nothing more than cannon fodder for the new Republican imperialist
rapaciousness and their Democratic fellow travelers. It was Isaac Asimov who
pointed out that "violence is the last resort of the incompetent."
Ms. Lord Faris is playing the role of "good DFL alternative" to those DFLers
who do not wish to vote for Franken and would sooner die that vote for Coleman.
Nor can they agree as a group to vote for one of the small parties fielding a
candidate. She's operating as a spoiler. I'm always suspicious of the motives
of spoilers. Generally I put them in the category of those who have more ego
than sense, a common failing of many would be politicians and too large a
number of elected officials. So, while I agree with the evidence that points to
oil as the sole reason we are in Iraq (as opposed to Saudi Arabia which is a
serious threat), I wouldn't vote for her on that basis alone. I doubt that she
has the time to construct a viable platform and inform the electorate of it
before we go into the October Surprise phase of the campaign season. Whether
she is up to getting her face and name around the entire state in the time
remaining is another negative for her candidacy. I'm not enthusiastic about Mr.
Franken, Mr. Coleman is repulsive, the small parties have not put forward a
candidate that can garner enough votes. And, it appears that we have made it
clear that Jessie Ventura is not a good choice.
As an aside, "Priscilla Lord Faris" is a very tough name on the ear. It rings
like Thomas Cardinal Woolsey and similar appellations. The associations ring a
sour note in my skull.
So, Mr. Delton, you are wrong. Ms. Lord Faris is not a candidate on whom I
would waste my one and only vote.
Well, sure, Flash! Of course Priscilla, Lord Faris and Jack Shepard are the
same kinda thing!
Because John Kline and Michele Bachmann are pondering endorsing Shepard over
Coleman, which will be a terrible embarassment to the Coleman campaign, having
sitting congresscritters endorse the enendorsed competition...
...oh, wait. Kline and Bachmann - along with over 90% of registered Minnesota
Republicans - are on board with Coleman. Betty McCollum is flirting with Ms.
Lord Faris (or at least not endorsing Franken), and Minnesota DFLers are only
3/4 likely to have drunk the Franken koolaid at this point.
Other than that? Sure, Flash - Shepard and Priscilla, Lord Faris are the same
exact thing.
Mitch Berg
The Midway
Shot in the Dark - www.shotinthedark.info
Saint Paul's Only Worthwhile News Source
Northern Alliance Radio Network
Saturdays, 11-5, AM1280 The Patriot - Podcasts www.townhall.com
The Only Honest News in the Twin Cities