September 21-22, 2008
Sep 21 07:57 Clueless About Conservatism Sep 21 15:45 Dorsher Supports Universal Health Care? Sep 21 18:07 The Difference a Week (And A QB Change) Makes Sep 21 20:04 The Leadership Gap Sep 22 10:44 MTA Candidate Forum Sep 22 15:21 Minnesota Transportation alliance Candidate Forum Liveblog (Sorta)
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Clueless About Conservatism
Ross Douthat's article for the Atlantic is proof that journalists don't have a clue about conservatives or conservatism. Mr. Douthat's column paints a grim picture of the conservative movement. Here's a portion of Mr. Douthat's column:
What does this history lesson mean for today's GOP? If 2008 finds the Republicans where their Democratic rivals stood four years ago, then their challenge is tactical: they need smarter strategists and more-effective messaging; better online fund-raising and fewer inside-the-Beltway scandals-and maybe improved recruitment as well, to put forward a slate of candidates who don't look as if they should be populating a segregated Elks Club circa 1957. And they need an infusion of nerve and principle, to remind the party's base why they vote Republican and to give swing voters a reason to throw their lot in again with the GOP.Anyone who thinks that there's even a slight possibility of this being the GOP's 1980 hasn't paid attention. If they had, they'd realize that a new generation of leaders was forged from this summer's House Oil Party. People like Mike Pence, Tom Price, Thad McCotter, Marsha Blackburn and Michele Bachmann stepped forward this year. Though there wasn't the same revival in the Senate, I'd be derelict if I didn't mention John Cornyn, Jim DeMint and Tom Coburn, who stand for integrity and fiscal restraint.
If, on the other hand, the Republicans are experiencing their own 1980-with Barack Obama playing the role of liberalism's Reagan-then the GOP will need something more to hack its way out of the wilderness where George W.Bush has left his party. The Democrats of '80 needed better ideas, not better messaging and candidates; they needed to redefine their party, not just rebrand it. It has been a long, hard road from Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale to the confident, cash-rich Democratic Party of today. If 2008 is the GOP's 1980, then a similar period of soul-searching and internecine struggle awaits Republicans-and the sooner they get started, the better.
It's important to notice the job that John Boehner did as Minority Leader and that Adam Putnam did as House Republican Conference Chairman. That's before we start talking about people like Jeb Hensarling, Eric Cantor, Rob Bishop and others.
It wouldn't be wrong to think that this group might be the GOP's idea factory for the next decade.
That's before we talk about the Palin factor.
The 'GOP brand' was tarnished in 2006. They weren't the party of ideas anymore. That doesn't mean it was destined to stay tarnished long. What made the GOP great in the early 80's on through the 1990's was that they were the party of ideas. Thanks to the young leadership in the House, they're back to being the party of ideas.
The Democrats will likely keep the Senate for this cycle but I don't see Harry Reid being the majority leader much longer. In fact, I can picture him being defeated in 2010. In 2010, Democrats will have the burden of defending more seats than Republicans. Expect that to mean them losing their majority in 2010.
Posted Sunday, September 21, 2008 7:59 AM
Comment 1 by Walter hanson at 21-Sep-08 10:25 AM
You know the problem the writer had was we went into the wilderness because we walked away from our ideas. The Democrats when they in 1993-1994 were trying to implement their ideas (very restrictive gun control, higher taxes, not doing welfare reform, trying to do national health care) allowed the Republicans to get control of congress. The worse part is the damage that an Obama President can do with a Democrat controll Congress. ANYBODY WHO SEE'S THIS WANTS TO VOTE STRAIGHT REPUBLICAN TO TRY TO AVOID THAT DISASTER!
What got Republicans in trouble on a small scale in 1998 when they created the impression they only cared about impeaching Bill Clinton and nothing else and in 2006 was because we had walked away from our ideas and weren't passing them.
In 2006 I was frustrated. Apparently we had a Republican President ready to sign drilling for oil in ANWR the Senate managed to pass a bill with it and the House stripped it out! That is a clear example why we got our butts kicked in 2006 and deserved it.
But one question for Ross why doesn't the mainstream media care about people like Dodd (large campaign donations fannie mae), Jefferson (has more than $100,000 cash in a refrigator), Rangel (the tax writer who doesn't pay taxes). If these were Republicans they will be run out of town.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
The House has been great. The fact that Nancy Pelosi doesn't even offer them the chance to do amendments right now shows just how bad her leadership is.
Dorsher Supports Universal Health Care?
Based on this LTE in this morning's St. Cloud Times, it certainly sounds that way:
As a longtime elected official and past chair of the St. Cloud school board, Joanne Dorsher has plenty of experience from the employer's side of the health care issue. She realizes that one goal of health care reform must ultimately be to divest employers of the exponentially growing burdens of health care costs. Employer-driven health care puts companies at a competitive disadvantage internationally and prevents too many entrepreneurs from setting up independent businesses. In addition, it fails to cover those whose serious medical conditions make it impossible for them to work.While it's true that HSA's have many virtues, I think it's apparent that that isn't what this editorialist is espousing. I'm betting that the editorialist is quietly espousing singlepayer insurance. If you think that's appealing, ask a friendly Canadian what they think of CanadaCare. Just one thing: The minute you ask, prepare to duck as that friend from the north gets irate.
Policies still matter. That's why Ms. Dorsher won't be getting sworn in this January. Steve Gottwalt has pushed intelligent policies since getting elected. I've talked with a number of legislators and staffers over the past 2 years. These legislators and staffers tell me that, as a freshman, Steve Gottwalt was the House GOP's go to guy on health care policies.
The contrast between Steve Gottwalt and Joanne Dorsher is stark. It isn't a contrast that flatters Ms. Dorsher.
Posted Sunday, September 21, 2008 3:45 PM
Comment 1 by Chuck Hardin at 21-Sep-08 11:06 PM
So, because you have read the mind of a letter-writer who never mentions single-payer health care, and because this letter writer endorses Joanne Dorsher, therefore Dorsher endorses something the letter-writer never mentioned. Is that about right?
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 22-Sep-08 09:21 AM
Chuckie, If you'll notice, the title ends with a question mark. That signifies I'm asking a question, which is different than stating a declarative fact.
I did speculate, though, that since her puppeteer, Tarryl Clark, has held health care forums where the only option talked about was CanadaCare, I'm willing to guess that Ms. Dorsher would agree with that policy.
Comment 3 by Chuck Hardin at 22-Sep-08 10:57 AM
The title ends with a question mark, but the post is full of statements that don't follow. You don't know that the letter writer advocates single-payer health care. You don't know that Joanne Dorsher endorses what you assume the letter-writer endorses. And you certainly don't know that she's going to lose the election based on your chop-logic.
One question mark doesn't save you from the charge of making badly-reasoned assertions.
As for Tarryl Clark being Joanne Dorsher's "puppeteer", that's your paranoid fantasy. It's even less well-supported than the rest of your ragbag of an argument.
Incidentally, the endearments are mildly amusing, Mr. Gross, but I don't think we know each other that well. Let's act like adults, shall we?
Comment 4 by Gary Gross at 22-Sep-08 04:51 PM
As for Tarryl Clark being Joanne Dorsher's "puppeteer", that's your paranoid fantasy.
Give it a rest Chuck. I watched Tarryl passing information to Ms. Dorsher through a third party at the Chamber of Commerce candidate forum a week ago Friday. It isn't a paranoid anything. It's reality.
Furthermore, Ms. Dorsher attended the health care forum. I think I was the only person in the room that didn't agree with the notion of singlepayer.
She's certainly bought into the notion that we need to reform health care in Minnesota & that that reform must be government-mandated.
That certainly sounds like someone that's, at minimum, amenable to singlepayer.
I've done the reporting. I've attended the meetings. I've seen the hand gestures. Don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about.
Comment 5 by Chuck Hardin at 22-Sep-08 05:17 PM
So you attended a forum with Joanne Dorsher? Good for you. What a shame that you didn't ask her for her opinion.
Not every advocate of health care reform is an advocate of single-payer health care. Why not ask Joanne Dorsher what she thinks?
Passing information to someone isn't the same as controlling them. I am passing you information right here, but you're not my puppet.
I appreciate one thing, though. You've abandoned your pretense of asking questions about Joanne Dorsher and gone straight into flat declarative statements. They're ill-supported and false, but at least they're your honest beliefs. You are not at your best when you play games with the truth or try to hide what you are doing. Be honest. It's the best thing you have going for you.
Comment 6 by Gary Gross at 22-Sep-08 07:26 PM
So you attended a forum with Joanne Dorsher? Good for you. What a shame that you didn't ask her for her opinion.
I would have if she hadn't left immediately without taking questions. Instead, she schmoozed with the lobbyists for a minute or two, then left.
As for passing information not meaning that she's Tarryl's puppet, you might've reached a different conclusion if you didn't see Ms. Dorsher's deer in the headlights look on her face right before have that information passed to her.
As for playing games with the truth & trying to hide what I'm doing, you're provably wrong. I'm not the only person who's noticed these things. I'm just the only person who's stepped forward. That's because some of the others that've noticed these things might have to work with her if she wins this November, which isn't likely.
Comment 7 by Chuck Hardin at 22-Sep-08 08:52 PM
I find it impossible to credit your personalistic accounts of events, given your past and present refusal to admit your errors. The better bloggers are honest and willing to admit their errors. If you won't acknowledge an error everyone can plainly see, why should anyone believe your interpretations of anything they weren't there to see?
If I'm "provably" wrong, then prove it. Oh, that's right -- you can't prove it, because all of your witnesses are remaining mysteriously silent. How convenient for you!
In any case, you can ask Joanne Dorsher for her opinion any time, and you know it. That you choose not to do so, preferring instead to make excuses and make allegations based on hidden implications that only you can see, says volumes.
The Difference a Week (And A QB Change) Makes
Last week, I was fuming mad that the Vikings gave a game away against the Indianapolis Colts that they should've won. Specifically, I was fuming at the ineptitude of Tarvaris Jackson. This week, Coach Brad Childress admitted that he'd made a mistake entrusting the Vikings' offense to Tarvaris Jackson.
To be sure, Gus Frerotte made some mistakes in the first quarter, including throwing an interception. Frerotte settled down after that. The Vikings' defense stopped the Carolina running game, limiting them to 47 yards for the game on 20 carrise. Defensively, Jared Allen, Kevin Williams and E.J. Henderson played like beasts. Antoine Winfield sacked Jake Delhomme right before the half, which caused a fumble.
Instead of being satisfied and quitting on the play, Winfield picked up the fumble he forced, then took it in from 19 yards out. That tied the game right before halftime. That was Carolina's last wimper.
Gus Frerotte won't make people forget Tom Brady by the wildest stretch of the imagination. What he will do, though, is make people forget about Tarvaris Jackson. He still throws a great deep ball, which is a huge thing with the Vikings. Making defenses pay for putting that eighth man in the box to stop AP will cause defenses to think twice about putting that eighth guy inside the box.
It's important for fans to keep in mind that this is just one game. Still, Frerotte's QB play gives us far more hope than TJax gave us during his brief career. That's a good place to start.
Posted Sunday, September 21, 2008 6:07 PM
Comment 1 by off_nominal at 21-Sep-08 10:44 PM
Gus's first quarter wasn't bad at all. I'd say that 3 dropped passes were his problem then. Berrian is an overpaid fool, just like he was in Chicago. What does he add to the team? The receiving corp is a joke!!
The Leadership Gap
As time unfolds, two important things are becoming increasingly obvious. The most important is that John McCain is a leader. He isn't afraid to make a decision. When Russia invaded Georgia, Sen. McCain didn't hesitate in calling Russia out for invading a sovereign nation. When last week's Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac meltdown happened, he eventually put a plan together that would stabilize the situation.
The other thing that's apparent to all who are looking is that The Obamessiah won't pull the trigger on any decisions. When Russia invaded Georgia, the Obamessiah called for restraint on both parties' behalf. Two days later, from a beach in Hawaii, Sen. Obama finally arrived at the place where John McCain was at since a couple hours after the invasion.
When the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac meltdown happened, Sen. Obama said that he'd put a plan together by Thursday. As Jeff Emanuel points out , that plan didn't show up until today:
On Thursday, freshman Senator Barack Obama promised that he would be unveiling "new proposals" for dealing with the mortgage crisis at a Friday campaign stop in Florida.Sen. Obama's after the Russian invasion of Georgia is to wait until after Sen. McCain has issued a statement on the various issues, then attack McCain's position. It's a gutless habit. I'm certain that this stunt plays well with the faithful. Nonetheless, it isn't leadership. It's the presidential equivalent of voting present.
On Friday, Obama reneged [Ed.- Somebody call CNN and check if that word is still OK to use ] on that promise, instead saying that this was "not the time to present specific details for how to fix the immediate problem", because, clearly, the height of a crisis, during the last two weeks that Congress will be in session for the rest of the year, is the wrong time to propose solutions.
That night, the administration sent its proposed legislation to Congress, for those still showing up to work to consider.
On Saturday, John McCain released a statement tentatively opposing the bailout and encouraging Congress and the administration to consider his own proposal for preventing similar crises in the future. At the same time, the L.A. Times accused Obama of "voting present" on the bailout, as the freshman Senator maintained his silence and watched his opponent for guidance.
Today, after taking a day to wet his finger and put it in the wind (and to watch his grown-up opponent for what to do), Obama came out guns a-blazin' (figuratively, of course; we all know Barack Obama doesn't own any guns, and doesn't want you to either ) and "assailed" the plan, to use the AFP 's word.
One thing the America people won't tolerate is a president who won't make decisions. If there's anything they hate worse than a presidential candidate who doesn't make decisions, it's a presidential candidate who doesn't make decisions, then criticizes his opponent's plan while he stays silent.
At this late point in the campaign, we still don't have enough information to judge whether Sen. Obama is a good decisionmaker because he hasn't made enough decisions. Of the things he's actually made a decision, his decisions have been disastrous.
He looked like a deer in the headlights when Russia invaded Georgia. He didn't know the major players. He didn't show that he knew anything about the stakes at play. He didn't even seem to know that Russia had committed an act of war.
Compare that with John McCain's handling of the Russian invasion of Georgia. Sen. McCain knew President Saakashvili. He knew Putin. He called the Russian invasion an invasion. Then Sen. McCain proposed putting Georgia and Ukraine on a fasttrack into NATO. Finally, he showed solidarity with a fledgling democracy that potentially could become an important U.S. ally.
Consider this: Sen. Obama first played the moral equivalence card, then moved onto criticizing the McCain campaign of having a former lobbyist for Georgia, Randy Scheuneman, on the staff. I said then that there isn't any shame in having a lobbyist who believes in fighting for fledgling democracies. I haven't changed my mind. Finally, three days later, Sen. Obama issued his third statement saying essentially what Sen. McCain said the first night the crisis broke.
Sen. Obama isn't qualified to be president. I've been voting since 1974. I've voted in eight presidential races. Sen. Obama is the least qualified of all the presidential nominees I've ever seen, though George McGovern and Jimmy Carter deserve mention in that context too.
Why would we elect someone this underqualified in a time of war and peril? I'm confident that We The People won't elect him. We aren't that derelict in our duties.
Tecnorati: Obama , Jimmy Carter , George McGovern , Foreign Policy , Fannie Mae , Freddie Mac , Vladimir Putin , Mikhail Saakashvili , Election 2008
Cross-posted at California Conservative
Posted Sunday, September 21, 2008 8:06 PM
No comments.
MTA Candidate Forum
I'll be liveblogging the Minnesota Transportation Alliance's candidate forum this morning from St. Cloud's Kelly Inn. Check back later for details.
Posted Monday, September 22, 2008 10:44 AM
No comments.
Minnesota Transportation alliance Candidate Forum Liveblog (Sorta)
11:35 -Attending are Steve Gottwalt, Dan Severson, Jim Stauber, Josh Behling, Larry Haws, Joanne Dorsher, Larry Hosch & Elwyn Tinklenberg. Rob Jacobs might be here but I haven't seen him. Dave Kleis & Tarryl Clark are here, too.
11:43 -We're getting a late start. Hopefully, we'll get started soon.
11:50 -Other than me, Cassie Hart is the only St. Cloud media covering the event. I spoke with Cassie earlier & called her the hardest working member of the local media.
11:52 -It looks like we're about to get started. Margaret Donohoe is at the podium. It looks like she's ready with a PowerPoint presentation.
11:55 -She's highlighting a pamphlet provided by MTA, calling it a primer on transportation issues.
11:57 -Why transportation is critical- economic development, national security, safety, quality of life. Most traffic fatalities are on 2-laned rural roads.
11:59 -Gary Botzek is talking about how the infrastructure is crumbling. He mentions gusset plates. How appropriate with Mr. Tinklenberg attendance. 2007 MnDOT's needs are $1 billion per year, not including county roads & bridges.
12:04 -says that there was bipartisan support across the state. No one's mentioned how this hurts people's wallets right now.
12:05 -HF2800 provides $6.4 "for highways & transit". $2 billion in trunk highway bonds over 10 years.
12:08 -Ms. Donohoe is back talking about "structurally deficient bridges", listing a series of bridges needing repair or replacement.
12:10 -More projects, more jobs. MnDOT has added projects. "Counties & cities able to move ahead with needed projects." "Without this funding, property taxes would continue to rise."
12:15 -Chapter 152 doesn't mean "boatload of tax increases" despite Steve Murphy's claim that "There's a lot of taxes in this bill." Impact on avg. family is $130 per year.
12:17 -Next year, Congress will work on the next Transportation Bill. Ms. Donohoe: "Thankfully, Jim Oberstar is working on this bill." Taxpayers should cringe at that statement.
12:20 -Additional funding options needed for highways, transit, airports, etc. Index gas tax, include transportation funding as part of sales tax reform, expand authorization for local wheelage tax, VMT or mileage fee, trunk highway bonding, GO bonding.
12:30 -Thus far, it's all been MTA presentation, nothing from candidates.
12:35 -Still talking about Metro Bus.
12:40 -Tarryl now speaking. She's thanking MTA. "You made a big difference this year." We need to keep working together for safety, economic opportunities. She's now talking about putting Minnesota at a competitive disadvantage. Adequate, reliable funding a key.
12:46 -Larry Hosch first up. It wasn't about politics. Putting policy ahead of politics. "Compromise was made", then lists minor compromises made. (Instead of robbing us blind, they just robbed us.)
12:50 -Larry Haws is next up. "Baby boomers will need multimodal transportation system." the Greater St. Cloud Area will have 200K people in 2020. Now he's talking about the need for "geographical equalization" of funding, a euphemism for "The Twin Cities got alot, we got screwed."
12:54 -- Dan Severson is next up. He's talking about being on the transportation committee since getting elected. It's more about rural vs. metro than it is a partisan issue. "I voted against Transportation Bill because we should've taken money out of general fund to fund part of the transportation needs." "We need an aggressive transportation policy."
12:58 -Steve Gottwalt is next. "I have a long career working on transportation issues", then lists all the different transportation issues he's worked on. It's a lengthy, impressive list. Then Rep. Gottwalt says that "we needed to pass a bill. This wasn't that bill." He then says "We need to get back to safety first." The airport is a big economic boom. Improving the airport will be a boom for the East Side. "Gas tax for local company will cost them $500K." Prioritization is vital. Districts 5 & 9 will get a lot of funding; District 3 won't get much funding.
1:05 -Josh Behling is talking now, saying that the St. Cloud Airport is "an important part" of the transportation equation. He then talks about how the company he works for moves granite from Minneapolis via truck. We must get back to basics, which in transportation means safety. "I didn't support the bill." Prioritization is a key.
1:10 -Jim Stauber is now talking, mentioning that he's a commuter, that we need good transportation. We need to take a look at prioritizing. "We also need to make funding stable."
1:13 -Joanne Dorsher is up now. Thanks people for the opportunity to address the issue. "I would've voted for the bill." "It would've been a logical" decision. Japan invested in infrastructure. (HUH? What's that got to do with anything?) "We shouldn't be living today on the backs of our children." TRANSLATION: Increase taxes. "I'm a person who can forge agreement between people who don't agree" with each other. We must plan for the future.
1:17 -Rob Jacobs is talking. He's talking about his career at St. Cloud Reformatory. I negotiated contracts from both sides of the equation. "I'm not an expert on transportation so I won't pretend to be an expert." That isn't a comfort to 14A voters. (I talked afterwards with several MTA members. They said that wasn't a bright thing to say in front of this crowd. One person said that the least he could've done is say that he's learning more about transporation each day. I totally agree. This was the worst unforced mistake of the day.)
1:21 -El Tinklenberg is speaking. "This is a collaboration. Transportation shouldn't be a partisan issue. It IS a political issue." We must demand accountability. (If accountability is important to Mr. Tinklenberg, why hasn't he taken partial responsibility for not replacing the gusset plates on the I-35 Bridge?) "If you aren't pushing transportation, then it falls by the wayside. He's saying that he'd "work with my friend Jim Oberstar" on transportation. That should scare people.
1:30 -Steve Gottwalt says that we should provide people a picture of what they're getting for their money.
1:35 -What kind of priority will transit be in terms of general funds? Josh Behling says that you shouldn't move the money from transportation. Larry Haws says he's helped balance lots of budget. He doesn't mention that he's helped unbalance budgets, too. We can't take money from usual DFL sacred cows of education and transportation.
1:43 -Mr. Tinklenberg is saying that not all earmarks are bad but that they need to be transparent and justified. Good luck getting that past John Murtha, Jim Oberstar and David Obey.
Overall, I thought Steve Gottwalt looked the most authoritative, followed by Dan Severson. Rob Jacobs looked awful. He didn't address transportation issues because he admitted that he isn't an expert. Talk about foolish.
Of the challengers, Josh Behling looked by far the most polished. Joanne Dorsher is the classic cookie cutter liberal. I wasn't the only person there that thought she'd rubberstamp anything the DFL leadership instructed her to vote for.
Other than his not taking accountability for the I-35 Bridge collapse and his saying that he'd work with Jim Oberstar, I thought Mr. Tinklenberg helped himself.
Originally posted Monday, September 22, 2008, revised 23-Sep 11:19 PM
Comment 1 by anokacountyred at 22-Sep-08 08:47 PM
How was the attendance?
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 22-Sep-08 11:53 PM
There were 60-75 people there, including candidates.
