May 11-14, 2007
May 11 05:05 Enough With The Silence May 11 10:51 That's How We'll Pay for the Tax Cuts May 12 01:22 Republicans Declare War...On Spineless RINOs May 12 10:55 Shocker of the Day!!! May 12 21:40 Kaufman "Shaping Discourse" on U.S. Muslim Groups May 13 02:02 The Reagan Drinking Game May 13 02:27 Governor's Opener a Big Success May 14 03:50 Enough's Enough May 14 16:27 Grassroots For Thompson
Prior Years: 2006
Enough With The Silence
A number of conservative bloggers have rightly complained about the silence of the media in not reporting on Swansongate. That said, it's pretty obvious that we aren't doing a good job getting the word out. When I say we, I'm referring to MNGOP. Let me explain.
Earlier this week, I got a taped phone message from Gov. Pawlenty. The caller first said that this was a message from Gov. Pawlenty & that they weren't asking for contributions. Then Gov. Pawlenty's message played, telling people to go to timpawlenty.com to find out how to get involved in holding down taxes.
My question is simple: If we're whining about the press not giving this coverage, why aren't GOP activists being told about the scandal & why aren't we being told how to pressure Tony Sertich?
Earlier this week, I attended a SD-15 BPOU Executive Board meeting. An hour before the meeting, I noticed that Michael posted Tom Emmer's updated data practices request. I forwarded the link to our BPOU co-chair & told him he might want to print a copy of it for the meeting. Josh handed out a copy of Rep. Emmer's request at the meeting. Josh & I were the only ones at the table who had heard about the scandal prior to that meeting. The others said that that was the first they'd heard of the scandal.
The GOP that I grew up with was a party of problem-solvers. Yes, we complained about media bias but at the end of the day, we went about finding solutions to the world's problems. Today's conservative movement isn't about solving the problems, at least not with the same vigor as we did in the past.
With that in mind, let me offer a solution to the media's silence on Swansongate. Have Tom Emmer tape a brief message outlining what he's done to investigate this scandal. Include the fact that Tony Sertich refuses to investigate the matter even though the House has twice voted unanimously to have the House Rules Committee investigate the matter. Include in the message the fact that Attorney General Swanson is alleged to have broken the law. Tell GOP activists that she's used threats, intimidations & firings to keep her lawyers from organizing a union.
Most importantly, tell GOP activists to call their local newspapers & TV stations daily to tell them that we'll keep calling until they get serious about covering this scandal. Tell the activists to write one LTE after another about the scandal. Tell the activists to include in those LTE's the fact that the local media has ignored a major scandal.
In short, let the media know that we'll drag them kicking & screaming if we have to if that's what it takes to get this covered.
Finally, have the recording tell people that the best way to stay current with this scandal is by checking daily with Drew Emmer's Wright County Republican blog.
In short, don't just whine about the media's silence on the subject. Do whatever it takes to get the media to cover the story. That's what any proactive GOP activist would do. That's what I demand of my state party's leadership. Thus far, they've failed. It's time to change that failing grade into an A.
Posted Friday, May 11, 2007 5:05 AM
No comments.
That's How We'll Pay for the Tax Cuts
How many of you have gotten tired of hearing liberals ask how we'll "pay for tax cuts"? Well, it appears as though the answer is simple: by enacting tax cuts so revenues can increase. Here's evidence that that works:
Federal revenue collections hit an all-time high in April , contributing to a further improvement in the budget deficit for the year.There you have it. Cut taxes and they'll pay for themselves and then some. These statistics don't lie. Economists have credited the Bush tax cuts for making the 2001-2002 recession the shallowest in history. Now they're directly responsible for creating the single biggest monthly tax collection in history. Here's the good news about Bush's tax cuts:
Releasing its monthly budget report, the Treasury Department said Thursday that through the first seven months of this budget year, the deficit totals $80.8 billion, significantly below the $184.1 billion imbalance run up during the first seven months of the 2006 budget year.
So far this year, tax revenues total $1.505 trillion, an increase of 11.2 percent over the same period last year. That figure includes $383.6 billion collected in April, the largest monthly tax collection on record.
The Congressional Budget Office said that it now expects the deficit for all of 2007 to total between $150 billion and $200 billion. That would be a significant improvement from last year's deficit of $248.2 billion, which had been the lowest imbalance in four years.Knocking $100 billion off the deficit is better than significant, isn't it? Personally, I'd rather use the word remarkable or fantastic instead of significant but I've been known to embellish things from time to time. Either way, the Bush tax cuts have paid for themselves and then some. Lest you think that people an article can be written with nothing but good news, here's today's dose of negativity:
However, critics say the improvement in the deficits will be only temporary with deficits expected to balloon again with the higher Social Security and Medicare payments needed as 78 million baby boomers retire.These critics don't have any credibility on this issue. They sabotaged President Bush's Social Security reform plans & they opposed his Medicare reform with everything they had. In other words, they're the people who are ultimately responsible for the looming deficits.
These critics aren't interested in a solution. They're only interested in having the issue to campaign on. That isn't leadership. That's them reverting back to being typical spineless politicians. Idiots like that are a dime a dozen.
We have President Bush's vision and steadfastness to thank for this strong economy. Every time that tax cuts have been tried, they've worked.
Posted Friday, May 11, 2007 10:52 AM
Comment 1 by RepublicansHateHateHate at 12-May-07 11:59 PM
BS and lies. Lies and BS. I'm a Republican. I eat the poor. How can you have such a hateful attitude toward your fellow man. Do you even make enough money to be a Republican?
Republicans Declare War...On Spineless RINOs
Erick Erickson, the editor of Redstate.org, has declared war on the House GOP 'leadership'. Here's what happened:
"The House Republican Leadership just does not get it and they will not take us seriously until we flex our muscle against them," wrote Erick Erickson, editor of www.redstate.com. "We must fight the House GOP and we must fight today. Today, I declare war on the Republican Leadership of the United States House of Representatives. We must scalp one member. That member's name is Ken Calvert."When Tom DeLay was indicted, alot of conservatives, myself included, expressed our worries about John Boehner. I said then that I remember him as being a poor spokesman for the conservative movement because he had a habit of slipping questions. Often is the time that I remember him appearing on Crossfire. Rarely did he answer questions directly. I demand better than that from a conservative leader.
Nonetheless, the GOP leadership elected him as the Majority Leader. After we got our heads handed to us last November, we said that we needed new leadership. They ignored us again, keeping the same 'leadership' team intact. Earlier this week, Tom Cole, who chairs the NRCC, said this:
"Oh, I don't think the problem was spending," Cole said. "People who argue that we lost because we weren't true to our base, that's just wrong."Mr. Cole, we're the ones out in the trenches fighting for the GOP. Many is the person that I've talked with who said that they wouldn't support the NRCC, the NRSC or the RNC as long as Republicans kept acting like moderate Democrats. Don't tell me that the GOP trying to out-Democrat Democrats isn't hurting troop morale. Conservatives stayed home in droves last fall. They didn't help out as much in door-knocking. They didn't contribute money like they have in the past. They didn't vote in the numbers that they did in 2004.
Erickson told The Hill, "Leadership may be pleased with themselves, but I've heard from more than two dozen Republicans on the Hill thanking me for speaking out against Calvert's appointment,That tells me Leadership is not in line with those it represents."I knew that when they elected John Boehner and Mel Blunt Minority Leader and Minority Whip. Now we just have people speaking out about it. That said, it's time for conservatives to seize the initiative and to run Cole, Blunt and Boehner out of their leadership positions. It's time that we brought in leaders with genuine conservative credentials. It's time that reform-minded people led the party. We don't need a leadership team that believes in a top-down mentality of 'leading' us. In fact, that model will drive the GOP to destruction.
We won't regain the offensive until we elect idealistic, passionate men and women to leadership positions. We need people who can articulate the conservative message. We need people who understand why Reagan's conservatism had such massive appeal. Boehner, Blunt and Cole don't fit that criteria.
Newt Gingrich should be the model. Newt didn't just criticize liberals. He pointed out flaws in their policies by offering more appealing alternatives. Newt was as much a teacher as he was a leader. Most importantly, he was an idealist. Reagan was an idealist, too.
I'm proud to call myself a GOP activist. I've told our local politicians that they can send me into political battle anytime they need me to fight for conservative principles. I only ask that they provide me with the intellectual ammunition with which to fight and defeat liberals. That means them taking intelligent, explainable and appealing stands on the issues. When they differentiate themselves from liberals by espousing intelligent, appealing policies, they give activists the ammunition they need to fight the good fight.
I won't enter the political battlefield when politicians adopt a 'go along to get along' attitude. Boehner, Blunt and Cole are 'go along to get along' types. They don't fight for Reaganesque principles. I'd say that they don't fight for many principles period.
Erick, Thanks for taking this battle stand. I'll proudly join you as a warrior for conservative principles. It's time to start fighting for appealing, common sense policies.
Posted Saturday, May 12, 2007 1:23 AM
No comments.
Shocker of the Day!!!
The AP's Charles Babington is reporting that Pelosi's Democrats suddenly don't have the same vigor in passing lobbying reform. Why am I not shocked with that news?
House Democrats are suddenly balking at the tough lobbying reforms they touted to voters last fall as a reason for putting them in charge of Congress.This was utterly predictable. Last July, I attended a Michele Bachmann fundraiser. Then-Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert was the guest speaker. After the fundraiser, I told Speaker Hastert about Murtha Must Go. I said that the Democrats' message of change was laughable. Here's Speaker Hastert's immediate reply:
Now that they are running things, many Democrats want to keep the big campaign donations and lavish parties that lobbyists put together for them. They're also having second thoughts about having to wait an extra year before they can become high-paid lobbyists themselves should they retire or be defeated at the polls.
The growing resistance to several proposed reforms now threatens passage of a bill that once seemed on track to fulfill Democrats' campaign promise of cleaner fundraising and lobbying practices.
"Change to what? Charlie Rangel & John Conyers have been there 40+ years. John Dingell's been there 50+ years. John Murtha has been their 30+ years. That's change?"Those guys are predictably anti-reform. In fact, I'd describe John Murtha as being militantly hostile to accountable government. Murtha's built a mini-kingdom through corruption and buying votes with legislators by throwing them a few earmarks each year. The last thing he wants is lobbying reform.
Several high-profile issues remained in doubt Friday, five days before the House Judiciary Committee is to take up the legislation.Sending this legislation to the House Judiciary Committee, which John Conyers chairs, is like putting Charlie Rangel in charge of sweeping tax cut legislation. It's like putting Alan Mollohan and William Jefferson in charge of writing ethics rules. Forgive me if I don't see the wisdom in that.
They include proposals to:
- Require lobbyists to disclose details about large donations they arrange for politicians.
- Make former lawmakers wait two years, instead of one, before lobbying Congress.
- Bar lobbyists from throwing large parties for lawmakers at national political conventions.
Based on Conyers' history, I'll bet that the lobbying reform that comes out of his committee will be very watered down, if it comes out at all.
The issues are in danger of being dropped from the House version, a Democratic member close to the negotiations said Thursday, speaking on condition of anonymity because sensitive discussions were continuing.This Democrat is essentially saying that reform isn't what Pelosi's Democrats are about, something that isn't shocking to anyone with a functioning brain.
"Members of Congress ignore this issue at their peril," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., who chairs his party's 2008 House campaign committee. "The public wants a Congress that is open and accountable."I agree with Rep. Van Hollen in that the public wants "a Congress that is open and accountable." Instead, they got this ethically-challenged bunch.
The chief stumbling block in the House centers on whether to require disclosures of a fundraising practice called bundling. It involves lobbyists soliciting and collecting campaign donations from other people and then presenting them in one package to the targeted candidate.This is the most important facet of lobbying reform. Without this, you can't legitimately call it lobbying reform. You can call it lobbying legislation but you can't call it lobbying reform.
Under current law, each individual check-writer must report his or her donation. But the lobbyist-bundlers, who use the practice to ingratiate themselves to politicians, often go undetected.
Posted Saturday, May 12, 2007 10:56 AM
No comments.
Kaufman "Shaping Discourse" on U.S. Muslim Groups
My good friend Joe Kaufman is shaping "the discourse on US Muslims and their organizations, both in the halls of Congress and on the pages of mainstream newspapers." Congratulations, Joe. I'm honored to call you my friend and I'm thankful for your pioneering work in identifying terrorist sympathizers and the 'charities' that they're associated with. (At least until the Treasury Department freezes their assets for funding terrorist organizations like Hamas.) CAIR must be worried about Joe. Listen to their words about Joe in this article:
This loaded designation, leveled at CAIR by some in the GOP at the behest of no more than an amateur blogger from Florida, is designed to withstand quantification, or any form of objective assessment, and therefore be beyond contention.First of all, describing Joe as "an amateur blogger from Florida" doesn't do Joe justice. Joe is one of the foremost authorities on terrorist front groups. Joe was one of the first people to point out that CAIR opened its first office after the HLF donated $5,000 to CAIR:
CAIR was co-founded in 1994 by Ibrahim Hooper, Nihad Awad, and Omar Ahmad , all of whom had close ties to the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), which was established by senior Hamas operative Mousa Abu Marzook and functioned as Hamas' public relations and recruitment arm in the United States. Awad and Ahmad had previously served, respectively, as IAP's Public Relations Director and President. Ibrahim Hooper was also an employee of IAP. Thus it can be said that CAIR was an outgrowth of IAP.This isn't speculation. This information isn't "designed to withstand quantification" but it is "beyond contention." This is documented fact.
While there has been a lot of media buzz about the controversy, one obvious question has yet to be asked: what is an "apologist for terror"?I'd answer that question with this information:
One indication came in October 1998, when the group demanded the removal of a Los Angeles billboard describing Osama bin Laden as "the sworn enemy," finding this depiction "offensive to Muslims."An apologist for terror might also say this:
The conviction of Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind sheikh who planned to blow up New York City landmarks, it called a "hate crime."That isn't the end of Ahmed Rehab's diatribe. Here's what he also said:
In the resulting hostile climate, "suspicion" of Muslims, not evidence of wrong doing, is apparently cause enough to demand that we be stripped of our right to speak freely on our nation's beacon of democracy and pluralism, Capitol Hill.If you'd believed Mr. Rehab's insinuation, you'd believe that Joe Kaufman can't back up what he says. Having worked side-by-side with Joe on several articles, I'll confidently state that what Joe says is documented, verifiable fact.
As for Rehab's worrying about CAIR's ability to "speak freely on our nation's beacon of democracy and pluralism, Capitol Hill", I can only say that that's utterly laughable. Last fall, I wrote about John Conyers' activities right after the Flying Imam Fiasco got front page coverage. Here's what I posted:
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.That's just one instance of CAIR exerting its political influence. Here's another instance:
Working with Conyers, the Ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, Democrats have introduced legislation to end racial profiling, limit the reach of the Patriot Act , and make immigration safe and accessible. Leader Pelosi is a proud cosponsor of the End Racial Profiling Act, the Security and Freedom Ensured Act (SAFE), and the Safe, Orderly, and Legal Visas Enforcement Act (SOLVE).Let's not forget this instance, either:
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Congressman John D. Dingell (D-MI), Congressman John Conyers (D-MI), Congressman Charles Rangel (D-NY), and other Congressional Democrats were joined yesterday by national leaders of the Muslim American community in a roundtable discussion on issues of mutual concern to Democrats and Muslim Americans. The discussion centered on working together to defend civil rights and to restore civil liberties.This information was published on CAIR's website.
Since 9/11, anti-Muslim hysteria has evolved from a collective knee-jerk reaction to a premeditated and coordinated cottage industry patronized by an agenda-driven elite who seek political and sometimes financial gain.What a patronizing statement that is. If calling attention to imams sitting in 9/11 hijacker formation is CAIR's idea of a "collective knee-jerk reaction", then their definition isn't shared by many people. Saying that Joe Kaufman's, Steve Emerson's, Daniel Pipes' and Robert Spencer's reporting of CAIR's documented ties to Hamas and other terrorist groups constitutes "a premeditated and coordinated cottage industry patronized by an agenda-driven elite", is CAIR's spinning of these men's work.
CAIR would be wise to learn that men armed with verifiable facts and a thirst for the truth about CAIR don't need much more than a computer and an internet hookup to expose terrorist apologists.
That's the spin free truth.
Posted Saturday, May 12, 2007 9:42 PM
Comment 1 by Imam Abdulla at 17-Sep-07 09:17 PM
In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
Could all Muslims please join with me to Promote Peace and share Gods good will by sending your friends and family a "Blessing from God" certificate from the website http://www.godsblessingsforyou.com
Share the beauty of Islam with friends and family, who will gain great strength and comfort when they receive one of these tasteful Blessing from God complete with your personal best wishes.
Asslamu alikum
Imam Abdulla
The Reagan Drinking Game
That's the title of Salena Zito's latest column. Salena's column offers a great blueprint for 2008. Here's one of my favorite sections of the column:
Ultimately, Republicans will be well served to look for a candidate who can conduct himself in time of trial, who can look at the landscape and tell America that he will lead it to a place.Liberals nicknamed him the "amiable dunce." They were half right. Reagan was amiable. Everyone talks about Reagan's optimism, which he certainly had an overabundance of. That said, the most compelling characteristics about Reagan was his wisdom and his unquenchable thirst for liberty for all people. Reagan didn't accept as fact that the Soviet Union was a nation that we'd have to deal with forever. He saw their economy as inferior and unable to sustain their military spending.
Americans still want someone who will fight terrorists but do it in a way that is disciplined, focused and forthright. In many ways that is the failure of the Bush administration; Bush was never able to show Americans where he wanted to take them. That has been his disconnect.
Reagan connected. He wasn't afraid of conflict because, ultimately, he knew what America would look like at the other end of the battle. And that was his focus.
Reagan also knew that our technology would overwhelm the Soviets. That's why he frightened Mikhail Gorbachev into glasnost.
Another Reagan principle was that you didn't negotiate from a position of weakness, that you only negotiated when the country sitting opposite the US was intimidated. The next GOP president would do well to work from that perspective.
The GOP presidential nominee must also show he has "the vision thing." Part of Reagan's massive appeal was that he knew what would happen if people just believed in the right things. Economic freedom was a key part of Reagan's vision.
Another bit of advice that I'd give the GOP presidential nominee is that he must be an optimist who points out the superiority of conservative principles. When you think about it, the only thing that Democrats can sell is "I'm not George Bush." The rest of their agenda is pessimistic and unappealing.
The first thing I'd establish is the GOP superiority in fighting the jihadists. I believe that explaining why the NSA intercept program and the Patriot Act are essential in preventing terrorist attacks will give people a reason to trust Republicans more than Democrats.
The Democrats' strategy is essentially to wait for the next terrorist attack and have enough first responders. You can't convince me that that's more appealing than killing the jihadists first.
Finally, I'd tell the GOP presidential nominee to offer a lengthy common sense reform agenda in much the same way as Gingrich did with the Contract With America.
Former Reagan campaign staffer Charlie Gerow is still bullish for Republicans in 2008:I think that Mr. Gerow is exactly right. This election is eminently winnable because Hillary is so unlikeable. The reason why she isn't liked is because she's perceived, rightly, as being calculated and for not standing for anything longer than the polls tell her to.
"I think that they can win the White House, I even believe that they can take back the Congress, but I think that they have got to do a lot more than they have done thus far in order to accomplish that." His advice? "Go back to the real message of Ronald Reagan, not just talking about it, (but) living it, especially in the world of foreign policy. It is time to adopt the Reagan Cold War game plan: 'We win, they lose.'"
In essence, she's the anti-Reagan: unlikeable, a lousy communicator, a sham and lacking a compelling vision of America. Frankly, I'd highlight Hillary's negatives by being optimistic and by offering a positive outlook on life.
Posted Sunday, May 13, 2007 2:03 AM
No comments.
Governor's Opener a Big Success
According to this article, Gov. & Mrs. Pawlenty & Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau had a pretty fun day of fishing:
Governor Pawlenty had a good day of fishing at the Governor's Fishing Opener on Leech Lake.It sounds like Mr. Leer had his A game going yesterday. Eight walleyes, eleven perch & a couple northerns make for a great-tasting shore lunch. (Yes, writing about that is making me hungry. Very hungry in fact.)
Pawlenty caught his first fish, a four-pound northern pike, off of Stony Point in the lake near Walker this morning. The governor reeled in two northerns, two walleye and a perch before heading in for a shore lunch.
First Lady Mary Pawlenty caught three walleye and two perch. Lieutenant Governor Carol Molnau caught three walleye and nine perch.
Guide Chip Leer was the Pawlentys' fishing host.
Based on the Strib's fishing report, it sounds like most anglers had a good day on the water:
Alexandria: The nice weather had a big impact on traffic in the area as the number of anglers was up sharply over last year. Because of the recent warm weather, lakes in the Le Homme Dieu chain have been producing earlier than usual, according to Christopherson's Bait and Tackle.I'm betting that most of the fish being taken on North Long were in the west end bay on the north side. There's some great weedbeds that warm up faster than the rest of the lake. Unless I miss my guess, the warmer water is holding lots of baitfish, drawing walleyes into the shallows.
Chisago City Area: Frankie's Bait reported it was one of the best openers in the past 10 years. North Center and Chisago lakes were producing a lot of fish in 12 to 18 feet. Sunnies, crappies and bass were all biting.
Lake Minnetonka: According to Wayzata Bait, anglers were having a lot of success in shallow water (8 to 12 feet) on the outside edges of the main bays. Anglers were catching northerns, and the crappie bite was good.
Leech Lake: Gov. Tim Pawlenty wasn't the only angler who had a good day on Leech Lake. According to Reed's Sporting Goods, it was a very good opener on the lake with a lot of large walleyes and a good perch bite. With a water temperature in mid-60s, the lake also was producing a lot of big northerns.
Mille Lacs: The fishing improved as the morning went on and anglers were having success on the north end sand and the rocks on the east side and Wahkon Bay on the south side, according to Johnson's Portside. It's starting out to be a good year for smallmouth bass.
Nisswa/Brainerd: According to Koep's Pro Shop, Gull Lake was the most heavily fished lake in the area and was producing a lot of walleyes. Anglers were also having success on North Long Lake and Round Lake.
Traditionally speaking, the best opening day bite on Gull is near the Gull/Round channel & near Dutchman's Bluff near the sunken islands in 8-12 feet of water.
Hearing that the north end sand was producing on Mille Lacs isn't surprising considering the warm spring that we've had. In fact, it's predictable. I'm betting that the best bite was had on a slip bobber rig & leech in 12-15 feet of water. One of my favorite spots this time of year is a rock pile half way in between Mir Mar & the Wealthwood landing. The late night bite is probably the best in 4-6 feet of water on a lighted bobber & a leech.
All in all, it sounds like there's alot of happy anglers tonight.
Posted Sunday, May 13, 2007 2:27 AM
No comments.
Enough's Enough
My senator, Tarryl Clark has a Your Turn editorial in today's SC Times which I've got to shred. Enough is enough. I'm done being Mr. Nice Guy. Let's start with this:
When taxes were cut at the end of the 1990s, mostly for folks at the highest income levels , the question was what that action would do to Minnesota's quality of life.With all due respect, Sen. Clark's characterizing the 'Jesse Checks' as tax cuts "mostly for folks at the highest income levels", is just plain wrong. Those checks weren't income tax refunds. They were sales tax rebates. They went that route because increasing income tax refunds would have shrunk the real size of the refunds.
Here's some details on the 'Jesse Checks' tax cuts:
Sales Tax RebateAnyone who thinks that that sounds like a 'rich get richer & the poor go broke type of tax cut obviously doesn't have a solid grip on life. To be fair, there was more to the tax cuts. People earning $18,120 single, $22,300 head-of-household or $26,480 married filing jointly were taxed at a rate of 5.35% in 2000 & 5.05% in 2001. People earning $18,120 - $59,500 single, $22,300 - $89,610 head-of-household or $26,480 - $105,200 married filing jointly started at 7.05% in 2000. That rate dropped to 6.75% in 2001. People earning $59,500 single, $89,610 as the head-of-household or $105,200 married filing jointly paid their taxes at 7.85% in 2000 & at a 7.55% rate in 2001. To be blunt, that doesn't sound like much of a windfall for the rich as Sen. Clark suggests. That's just the first thing I've got to debunk. Here's the next thing:
The Governor proposes an $856 million Sales Tax Rebate, similar to the 2000 rebate. The average rebate is estimated at $420.Eligibility for the 2001 Sales Tax Rebate is similar to the 2000 rebate; the taxpayer must meet one of the following criteria:
- Filed a 1999 Minnesota income tax return
- Is a dependent age 18 or older with wage income (will receive 35% of the rebate amount for non-dependents of the same income level)
- Receives social security or railroad retirement benefits (will receive the minimum rebate amount for their filing status)
- Was a non-resident but paid at least $10 in Minnesota sales tax on non-business purchases (rebate is a percentage of the sales tax paid, but cannot exceed the amount a Minnesota resident of the same income level would receive.)
We need to correct the direction Minnesota took at the turn of the millennium and offer a long-range vision that looks beyond the next election. Property tax reform, and the state paying its fair share of local special education costs, reverses some past mistakes. Energy independence, improved education and building our transportation infrastructure looks to our future.I agree with Sen. Clark that we need to spend more on special education classes. I even agree that we need to spend more on "our transportation infrastructure." I've got a serious problem with them increasing the education budget dramatically if they don't identify the waste in the education budget first.
Let's get serious here for a moment. Education Minnesota demands that education funding increase each year, which means that the DFL asks how high to jump. That also explains why Tarryl didn't follow through on conducting serious oversight on our budgets like she told me in January.
But let's get to the bigger point in the budget battle. The DFL has a mindset that says that all the funding woes that they perceive must be fixed during this session. That's a recipe for disaster. The proof of that mindset is best seen in the HHS budget that Gov. Pawlenty just vetoed. That budget called for a 24.4% spending increase this biennium & another 18% increase next biennium.
Let's look at the DFL's spending proposals a different way. Tarryl insists that the 'problems' happened over a 7 year period. Frankly, that's still debatable but let's stipulate that for the sake of this discussion. The DFL is acting like all the spending 'problems' must be righted this year.
That isn't the path to fiscal stability. That's a pathway to disastrous deficits. Here's another Tarryl accusation:
They also engaged in some egregious budget sleight-of-hand by shifting accounts and by instituting a new rule where inflation would not be factored into future budget forecasts.The DFL isn't a stranger to "sleight-of-hand" tricks. That's the last thing that they should accuse the GOP of. Let's remember Nora Slawik's sleight-of-hand:
Late in the day, Early Childhood Learning Finance Division met, and heard a bill chief authored by the division's chair, Rep. Nora Slawik. The bill addresses child care needs to such a great extent that the cost to Minnesota taxpayers goes from $140.5 million in the first biennium, to a whopping $723 million in the fourth year. That would more than eat up ALL the surplus revenue!Nora Slawik's bill was a childcare bill. The first year would've cost $35 million. The second biennium would've cost in excess of $1 billion. Doesn't that seem like alot of money for babysitting? This is the type of stunt that we've dealt with this entire session.
Sen. Clark wants us to believe that the DFL is only advocating serious policies that can be sustained for the long term. That's utterly laughable. It's preposterous.
That's why I said "enough's enough."
Posted Monday, May 14, 2007 3:50 AM
No comments.
Grassroots For Thompson
Based on this Washington Times article, it appears as though grassroots support is building for Fred Thompson. That shouldn't be a surprise. Here's a telling portion of the article:
"It's not 'if' but 'when,' he will announce," one Protestant evangelical leader says of the behind-the-scenes maneuvering for position in the 2008 race. A prominent Roman Catholic social conservative says the three Republicans who have raised the most money and have led the polls, former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, Arizona Sen. John McCain and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, fall short of social conservatives' expectations, but Mr. Thompson doesn't. "He's right on the issues...He's better than all of the above."This isn't good news for the frontrunners' campaigns because Christian conservatives are a key in winning the nomination and in working on general election campaigns. Right now, I don't sense any intensity for the McCain or Romney campaigns. That's subject to change but their participating in these 10 candidate debates won't help anyone break from the rest of the pack.
Both the Protestant and Catholic activist, like other Christian conservatives, spoke to The Times on the condition of anonymity.
Frankly, I think that Fred Thompson will shine once the field gets trimmed in half and he's up there competing with just Rudy, Romney and McCain. He's a policy wonk, a skilled debater and he's got tons of stage presence. That's a nice combination if you're hoping to win a debate.
Posted Monday, May 14, 2007 4:28 PM
No comments.
