March 5-6, 2007
Mar 05 09:27 Monday's Must Reading Mar 05 11:46 Romney Gets It Mar 05 17:04 Bond Behind Gordon's Resignation? Mar 05 18:13 DFL's Bait & Switch Mar 05 19:35 The Dems' Counterpoint? UPDATE & Bump Mar 06 10:24 Trouble in Defeatocrat Paradise? Mar 06 11:33 The Face of Minnesota Conservatism Mar 06 11:44 Chili & Chat Mar 06 17:11 Freshman On Dems' Endangered Species List
Prior Years: 2006
Monday's Must Reading
AAA Andy Aplikowski has a great post up about the Somali airport taxi fiasco, another must read for thinking Minnesotans. Here's a key portion of Andy's post:
If we overlook them not giving rides to every passenger for religious reasons, what's next? They have a job regulated by government, and last time I remember, government can't discriminate based on religion.Andy's point about landlords who ignored government regulations would be prosecuted for not obeying the Fair Housing Laws is brilliant. The cabbies causing this trouble are essentially telling us they'll pick & choose which regulations apply to them & which ones don't. The sad part is that John Conyers is working on a bill that would give Muslims special civil rights protections. It's considered a given that Keith Ellison's vote is already counted on that legislation.
If they were landlords, they would be charged with violating Fair Housing laws. Why is it that only Muslims ignorance and intolerance is allowed? If a Christian cabbie refused fares to Muslims you can bet your ass that racism would be claimed.
Turns out among those attending their conference was Rep.-elect Keith Ellison, (D-MN), who will be the first Muslim sworn into Congress (with his hand on the Quran). Two days earlier, Ellison, an African-American convert who wants to criminalize Muslim profiling, spoke at a fundraiser for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Muslim-rights group that wasted no time condemning US Airways for "prejudice and ignorance." CAIR wants congressional hearings to investigate other incidents of "flying while Muslim." Incoming Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, (D-MI), has already drafted a resolution, borrowing from CAIR rhetoric, that gives Muslims special civil-rights protections.Here's the thing about Conyers' legislation: It's part of a scheme to push radical Islam's wishes onto society. Here's what the Strib's Katherine Kersten wrote about this tempest in a teapot:
At the Starbucks coffee shop in Minneapolis' Cedar-Riverside neighborhood, a favorite Somali gathering spot, holidaymakers celebrating Eid, the end of Ramadan, filled the tables on Monday. Several taxis were parked outside.This is all part of a campaign to put in place legislation that gives Muslims special privileges that no one else has. Why?
An animated circle of Somalis gathered when the question of the airport controversy was raised. "I was surprised and shocked when I heard it was an issue at the airport," said Faysal Omar. "Back in Somalia, there was never any problem with taking alcohol in a taxi." Jama Dirie said, "If a driver doesn't pick up everyone, he should get his license canceled and get kicked out of the airport."
Because:
-
John Conyers represents a district with a high percentage of voters who are Muslims.
- John Conyers has always been sympathetic to radical Islam's wishes.
- CAIR's leadership has given substantial campaign contributions to Democrats.
- They expect a return on their 'investment'.
Here's another interesting tidbit of information from Katherine Kersten's article:
How did the MAC connect with the society? "The Minnesota Department of Human Rights recommended them to us to help us figure out how to handle this problem," Hogan said.Here's what I wrote as a conclusion of what we know from this:
Omar Jamal, director of the Somali Justice Advocacy Center, thinks he knows why the society is promoting a "no-alcohol-carry" agenda with no basis in Somali culture. "MAS is an Arab group; we Somalis are African, not Arabs," he said. "MAS wants to polarize the world, create two camps. I think they are trying to hijack the Somali community for their Middle East agenda. They look for issues they can capitalize on, like religion, to rally the community around. The majority of Somalis oppose this, but they are vulnerable because of their social and economic situation."
- There was never "any problem with taking alcohol in a taxi" in Somalia.
- MAS, the U.S. branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, has issued a fatwa outlawing the carrying of alcohol.
- MAS is "an Arab Islamic group" seeking to intimidate the Somali Muslim groups by pitting group against group and individual against individual.
The truth is that one man's right lasts until it meets another man's rights. These Somali cabbies shouldn't be accorded special rights, at least in part because they didn't think it was a big deal to pick up these passengers when they lived in Somalia.
Posted Monday, March 5, 2007 9:28 AM
No comments.
Romney Gets It
In an interview with the Politico's Roger Simon and Mike Allen, presidential candidate Mitt Romney is quoted as saying that "blogs are able to really zero in on issues and find the truth." Expect bloggers to really appreciate Gov. Romney's remarks. This will only help his campaign. Here's more of what he said:
"I appreciate the blogs because the blogs are able to really zero in on issues and find the truth. Sometimes the mainstream media writes one article and it sits out there and it may be accurate, it may not be accurate. But the blogs are open...there's a discourse, there's back and forth and it allows us to get to the truth. And that's why the blogs are playing such an important role, particularly in grassroots organization of American politics."Gov. Romney makes some great points in that short paragraph, the most important is that "there's a discourse, a back and forth" on the blogosphere. I'm guessing that he's talking about the Right blogosphere because much of the Left Blogosphere are similar to the rantings of misbehaving children, often with the same logic you'd expect from little children. Here's another key quote from the article:
Romney went on to say, "I think what you're seeing is that blogs are able to get to bottom of things and to cut through the spin. The spin has a huge impact on the mainstream media. Candidates are able to go to the mainstream media, spin their story, they write it and sometimes it's accurate, sometimes it's not. The blogs actually are open for comment and debate and they ultimately get the truth out. And that's critical, in my opinion. Because there are going to be a lot of opposition research folks on other campaigns trying to put up things that aren't accurate."I've long thought that the growth in power of the blogosphere is that the Agenda Media paid too little attention to details and information verification. So many in the Agenda Media worry infinitely more about advancing their (Democratic) agenda than they care about the simple reporting of the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
If I had a dollar for every time that the NSA intercept program was characterized as "domestic wiretapping" or Valerie Plame was outed while she was a "covert CIA operative", I'd be fabulously wealthy, able to buy the tropical island of my choice. Conversely, if I had to live on the times that the Agenda Media wrote about the legal precedents supporting the President's claims about the TSP being constitutionally solid, I would've starved long ago.
In short, if you aren't getting your information from the blogosphere, you're likely not getting the whole story. It's great to see a presidential candidate who gets it.
Posted Monday, March 5, 2007 11:47 AM
No comments.
Bond Behind Gordon's Resignation?
If I were a betting man, I'd say that Julian Bond ran Bruce Gordon out of the NAACP. Here's why I think that:
Bond said, "Put simply, we fight racial discrimination and social service groups fight the effects of racial discrimination. Service is wonderful and praiseworthy and fabulous, but many, many organizations do it. Only a couple do justice work, and we're one of those few."It sounds like Bond is saying that the NAACP is in the business of suing people to keep the cycle of victimhood going. It also sounds like he's saying that that isn't the vision that Gordon had for the NAACP. It sounds like Gordon had a vision of moving the NAACP into the 21st century and that Bond objected to that, preferring the NAACP staying in the twentieth century:
Gordon repeatedly made clear that he wanted the NAACP to do more social service work, said Rupert Richardson, a board member from Louisiana, but board members balked. "I think he saw his job as remaking us to make us more effective, but his job was to do what the board and management wanted," she said. "He was not a good fit for us, but he could have been."God forbid that the NAACP was actually effective in answering the needs of its members. They can't have that. They can't have people start elevating themselves to a level of self-sufficiency. They depend on people thinking that they can't achieve anything without the NAACP's assistance.
This is why I'm certain that the NAACP will dramatically change well within a generation. They're outliving their usefulness.
Posted Monday, March 5, 2007 5:07 PM
No comments.
DFL's Bait & Switch
I finally have indisputable proof that raising taxes is genetic to liberals. Here's the list of DFL tax increase proposals, according to House Minority Leader Seifert's press release, issued earlier today:
The Democrat tax proposals before the Minnesota Legislature total more than $1 billion a year. Some of the tax increases include:Here's a key part of Seifert's statement:
- Income tax hike on the upper tier from 7.85% to 8.5%
- one-half cent metrowide sales tax
- 10 cents a gallon gas tax
- Statewide fuel taxes
- $20 per vehicle wheelage fee
- Increase in vehicle registration taxes and tab fees
- Sales tax on prefabricated homes
- New state tax on gifts
- Increase in the statewide home mortgage DEED tax by 50%
- Increase tax on car leases
- Extend the 6.5% sales tax to cosmetic surgery
- Increase tax on foreign operating corporations
- New state tax on gifts
- 5 cents a gallon paint tax
"It is easy to make promises and harder to keep them. It is unfortunate that the Democrats are learning that lesson at the taxpayer expense," Seifert said. "With the Democrats in control, Minnesotans will be literally nickel and dimed to death."Anybody who thinks that there isn't a dime's worth of difference between Republicans & Democrats isn't paying attention to the DFL's predisposition to raising taxes by more than dimes. I think that all GOP activists & bloggers should take heart at the approach that Seifert & Co. are taking to the budget process. This should make for some pretty interesting contrasts as we near the end of the regular session.
Seifert said House Republicans will unveil their budget, which will not raise taxes, by the end of the week.
"Taxing and spending won't solve the problem. Republicans will lead this state with conservative fiscal management, smart spending and a strong savings plan," Seifert said. "We want Minnesotans to keep more of their dollars, nickels and dimes."
Last year, GOP activists complained, rightly, that GOP legislators were acting too much like Democrats. After reading this, that complaint has been rendered as obsolete for this year.
Seifert's approach will also offer voters a clear choice of which governing philosophy they prefer. My bet is that they'll vote for the political party that isn't always looking to pilfer more money from their pockets, especially in a time of surplus. My bet is that the DFL has already given us enough ammunition to sink them in November, 2008. It's time to tell Minnesotans that there is a stark contrast between our vision & the DFL's vision. It's time that we told the voters that we're the party that believes in people, that the DFL is the party that believes in ever-expanding government.
That's a pretty clear choice.
Posted Monday, March 5, 2007 6:13 PM
No comments.
The Dems' Counterpoint? UPDATE & Bump
Mindy Greiling is spoiling for a fight over taxes. She's about to get that fight. Here's how Ms. Greiling frames the issue of increasing taxes:
"This bill will make the governor be smoked out, and he'll have to put his money where his mouth is or show that he is not as interested in world-class students as we are," said Greiling, who heads the House K-12 Education Finance Committee.Ms. Greiling is about to find out that voters think that education can be funded just fine without the need for increasing taxes. This proves me right again:
Hatch gave his task an initial shot in a rambling acceptance speech that punched some of the right buttons. He cast Pawlenty as too stingy with education, responsible for large class sizes and rising college tuition. He tagged him for an inadequate response to soaring health care costs and the emerging biosciences industry. He promised more state investment in those things. Significantly, he said, "we can do this without raising taxes."I hope that Republicans play Hatch's speech over & over & over again. What better way to refute Ms. Greiling's grandstanding than with the words of their last gubernatorial candidate? That's as delicious as it gets for the GOP faithful. As I said then, I agreed with Hatch that it could be done. I just didn't believe that Democrats would increase education spending without raising taxes. This is why I've nicknamed the DFL as Pinnochiocrats.
My question for Ms. Greiling is whether she's prepared to say that Mr. Hatch was lying then or if she's just framed an issue to her disadvantage. This isn't the way to gain a political advantage. It's the easiest way for the DFL to gift wrap a present for the GOP which they'll open in November, 2008.
Greiling outlined her plan at a Capitol news conference, where DFL lawmakers including four first-term representatives gave their support. They said they campaigned to raise more money for schools, and Greiling said neither Gov. Tim Pawlenty's budget proposal nor the state's projected $2.16 billion budget surplus will do the job.Is Ms. Greiling saying that $2.16 billion isn't a big enough spending increase on education? That's what it sounds like to me. If that's the DFL's position, then they're about to get clobbered with that issue.
UPDATE: Gov. Tim Pawlenty sent a letter to House Speaker Kelliher, House Minority Leader Seifert, Senate Majority Leader Larry Pogemiller & Senate Minority Leader David Senjem, stating that he wouldn't support tax increases of any sort. Here's the money quote from the letter:
"In order to keep Minnesota competitive and growing, we must hold the lines on taxes," Pawlenty wrote.It's good having Gov. Pawlenty state his opposition to tax increases in such a public way. This essentially means that Democrats will be skating out on the thin ice alone if they propose major new tax increases. Here's another interesting observation:
His letter comes a day after powerful DFL House members introduced a proposal to increase funding for education by raising taxes on the wealthiest Minnesotans. Kelliher gave the proposal a lukewarm reception.That's gotta tell Rep. Greiling that her tax increase won't pass anytime soon. It's gotta tell her that she should drop this proposal.
Originally posted Monday, March 5, 2007, revised 06-Mar 5:30 PM
No comments.
Trouble in Defeatocrat Paradise?
The Defeatocrat wing of the Democrat Party vehemently opposes John Murtha's 'Slow Bleed' plan, saying that it isn't defeatist enough. Here's what the Politico is reporting:
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is facing a full-blown revolt from liberal House Democrats over the $98 billion Iraq supplemental bill, according to Democratic insiders. Anywhere between 50 to 75 Democrats are now threatening to vote against the bill because it doesn't go far enough toward ending the war , including setting a date certain for withdrawal of U.S. combat forces from Iraq, said the sources. Pelosi and Democratic leaders are expected to postpone markup of the Iraq bill in the House Appropriations Committee by at least a week in order to buy time to resolve the matter.Putting a ton of restrictions into the supplemental is "going too far"? Murtha's softened proposal "doesn't go far enough toward ending the war"? People, that speaks volumes as to how defeatist these liberals are.
Liberals are unhappy with the current proposal being discussed by Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) and the Democratic leadership, which would prevent President Bush from sending more troops to Iraq unless they are certified as being properly equipped, trained and rested to take on combat missions. After weeks of political attacks from Republicans, Murtha softened his original proposal so that Bush can waive the requirements, although the White House would have to report to Congress why they are issuing such waivers. The Blue Dog Coalition, a group of moderate and conservative Democrats from swing districts, also wanted Murtha to soften his proposal.
But as happens so often in politics, if you move too far in appeasing one group, you then alienate another, which is what's happening here. Liberals Dems now don't want to vote for the Iraq supplemental, with many pointing out to Pelosi and party leaders that they never have voted for one before and aren't about to start doing so now just because Democrats are in the majority. These Democrats also want to offer their own alternative proposal to cut off Iraq funding immediately as an amendment to the supplemental on the House floor, said Democratic leadership aides.
This isn't a revolt by just a handful of the most liberal nutjobs, either. This is a revolt of a third of the House Democrats. I'd expect that representatives like Jim McDermott, Dennis Kucinich, Maurice Hinchey, Maxine Waters and Keith Ellison to say that this doesn't go far enough. To find out that 75 to 100 Democrats would vote against the bill would be a catastrophic defeat for Pelosi. This would tell the nation that a huge portion of Democrats salivate at the thought of engineering America's defeat in Iraq.
Liberals Democrats like Rep. Maxine Waters (Calif.), co-chairwoman of the Out of Iraq Caucus , want to end the war now, so they want a date certain for a withdrawal or pullout or "strategic redeployment," and they want it in the Iraq supplemental or they won't vote for it. "They figure that we won the election on a promise to end the war, and they want to live up to that promise," said a senior House Democratic lawmaker who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "It's a tough place the speaker is in right now, but we'll work all this out."This senior Democrat legislator is putting it mildly when he's quoted as saying that the Speaker is in a rough place right now. I'd say that Ms. Pelosi is in 'God's Little Half Acre'- east of the Rock, west of the Hard Place.
Pelosi has a bit of a problem here. If the Democratic leadership puts a date certain for withdrawal in the bill, there's a chance that enough Blue Dogs Democrats would defect and vote with Republicans, meaning the bill could [go] down for defeat outright. While that might suit anti-war lawmakers and groups, the political consequences could be disastrous for the party. It would end the Iraq war by default since there would be no more money for combat operations, and Republicans would punish the Democrats for years over it.
This was predictable, even from Election Night. I predicted then that the Defeatocrats would want the House and Senate to vote to end the war. It wasn't difficult to think that there would be plenty of Democrats who would say that that wouldn't be smart politics even though they'd love to see America defeated. This group of Democrats would say that they couldn't vote that way because it'd spell electoral defeat. They'd be right about that.
It'll be interesting to see how this all shakes out. I suspect that things will get worse for Democrats before it gets better.
Posted Tuesday, March 6, 2007 10:26 AM
No comments.
The Face of Minnesota Conservatism
Andy asks who is "the standard bearer of conservative values in Minnesota" in this post. While I don't think that there's an immediately recognizable face to the conservative movement, there are some people worthy of recognition.
Let's start with Marty Seifert. It's safe to say that Minority Leader Seifert has fought for some core conservative principles this session. The same should be said about Assistant Minority Leader Laura Brod. When Rep. Brod's fought for tax cuts the first week of this session, it gave activists like myself something to fight for. She took a principled stand on a major conservative principle, which we lacked in 2005 & 2006.
Another person who should be considered the standard bearer for Minnesota conservatives is my representative in Washington, Michele Bachmann. If there's anyone who is less apologetic about conservative values than Michele, I don't know who it'd be. Phil Krinkie would be the only other possibility.
I'd suggest that Andy himself is deserving of recognition in this, too. Lord knows that Andy's fought tirelessly for getting us back to our conservative roots. He's challenged people in positions of power. He's brought us back to talking about reforms & tax cuts & limited government.
In other words, we're at a point where we don't have a single standard bearer. We're at a point where many strong conservative voices are being heard, which is the first important step to rebuilding our movement. Rest assured that we'll be in great health if we continue on this path.
Posted Tuesday, March 6, 2007 11:33 AM
Comment 1 by The Lady Logician at 06-Mar-07 02:27 PM
I would add one more - from my district. Rep. Mark Buesguens has been very vocal in his opposition to a lot of the DDFL spending increases - especially the increase in the legislative per diem.
LL
Chili & Chat
Count this as my PSA about the 'Chili & Chat' that Freedom Dog's Derek Brigham is hosting tonight. I'd love to be there but I'm scheduled to make a presentation at the Benton County BPOU meeting tonight. Suffice it to say that I'll be with Derek, David Strom, Pat Anderson, Marty Seifert & the rest of the gang in spirit.
I strongly urge anyone with the time to attend. This figures to be a great event aimed at firing us up & giving us a direction forward towards 2008.
Posted Tuesday, March 6, 2007 11:44 AM
No comments.
Freshman On Dems' Endangered Species List
Buried deep within this Strib article is information that leads me to think that I've uncovered a vulnerable Democrat for 2008. Here's what I'm talking about:
But one of the freshman legislators supporting Greiling's measure said the message he got from voters in November was that they are willing to pay higher taxes to improve schools.Rep. Bly is kidding himself if he thinks he'll convince conservative southern Minnesota farmers that a tax increase is needed when we're running the second biggest surplus in state history. I'll expect to see pigs flying in V formation over my house before major tax increases will fly in times of surplus.
"I was told by several people, one being a school board member , that he would be willing to pay more taxes that would go to education," said Rep. David Bly, DFL-Northfield. "In the community of Northfield, I heard this frequently [going door-to-door campaigning]; the need for education is so great that they would be willing to do that."
I'd also suggest that Rep. Bly would be hard pressed to find a teacher or school board member that wouldn't embrace additional education spending, whether it meant increasing taxes or not.
I suspect that Rep. Bly didn't tell his constituents that we had a major surplus. I further suspect that he didn't tell his constituents any specifics of a tax increase. I'd bet that he didn't tell his constituents that he wouldn't look at any part of the state budget to eliminate wasteful spending. When the GOP candidate campaigns on those issues, I'll bet that Rep. Bly will be quickly dispatched to the ranks of being an unemployed former legislator.
The additional income tax revenue would be designated for a special K-12 funding account that could be used to pay for various education expenses. Those might include helping districts control their soaring special education expenses, and paying for "school innovation and reform" measures.Greiling is raising taxes but she hasn't decided which school programs need the extra funding. Doesn't that seem bass-ackwards? What that paragraph says is that Greiling will raise taxes, then decide where to spend the money. That's the type of 'logic' that starts with the outcome, then cherry-picks information to fit that outcome. In fact, I'd suggest that that isn't logic.
Except to a liberal.
Posted Tuesday, March 6, 2007 5:11 PM
Comment 1 by Drew Emmer at 07-Mar-07 10:35 AM
Good grab! This is the same Captain Bly who originally listed himself on his website post-election as Congressman Bly.
No one will support a blank check for education. That's what Mindy is pushing for here.
