September 22-23, 2010
Sep 22 11:07 The Main Thing Sep 22 21:53 Tarryl Clark Infomercial Virus Hits St. Cloud Times Sep 23 00:06 Anti-Emmer Hit Piece Omits Important Information Sep 23 07:41 Obama's Spin Sep 23 08:41 Dayton's Education Plan: All Bluster, No Money Sep 23 14:56 Gillibrand Feeling the Heat Sep 23 23:56 Joe Biden: The Gift Keeps Giving
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009
The Main Thing
Nationally and locally, this week has brought us a reminder of what this election is about and why conservatives are the only ones with the answers to today's problems.
Locally, we've seen Sen. Dayton submit Budget 2.0 even though it doesn't balance. At a time when people are worried about staying employed or finding a job, when they're worried about their mortgage being under water or worse, people need to know that their leaders are taking their job seriously.
When a Sen. Dayton submits, not one but two budgets that don't balance, when his spokesperson admits that they're still trying to " identifying additional sources of revenue ", it tells voters that Sen. Dayton doesn't have a solid plan in place, that he's scrambling. His plans don't inspire confidence.
Nationally, our economic worries were encapsulated by Velma the CFO. She's the Obama voter who stood up at President Obama's townhall meeting and giving President Obama a tongue-lashing:
Expressing the frustration of tens of millions of Americans on a day during which the economists called the recession over, Velma Hart, a self-described CFO, wife, mother and veteran, expressed her "deep disappointment" with Obama's economic record to his face.Let's understand that President Obama wasn't expecting this question, especially from a black woman who'd supported him. Velma spoke for all of us when she told President Obama that she hadn't seen the green shoots that he'd talked about. She hadn't bought into Vice President Biden's fairy tale that the economy would soon be creating 250,000-500,000 jobs a month.
"I've been told that I voted for a man who said he's going to change things in a meaningful way for the middle class. I'm one of those people, and I'm waiting, sir...I'm waiting, but I don't feel it yet."
Calling herself "exhausted" by the rigors of the task of defending Obama, she lamented that she and her husband had thought the "franks and beans" era of their lives had drawn to a close but said she hears it "knocking" at the door. She finished with a heart-rending question to Obama, asking if anxiety is to be her "new reality."
What she'd seen didn't inspire confidence. Instead, it triggered heartache.
Whether the Lapdog Media admits it or not, people know that this election is a referendum on the Democrats'/DFL's economic ineptitude.
President Obama told the nation that if Congress passed the stimulus, we'd avert a crisis. After it was passed, unemployment shot up to 10.2 percent before settling in at 9.5 percent.
Sen. Dayton said that his tax the rich scheme would generate an additional $4,000,000,000 in revenue. Minnesota's Department of Revenue had a different opinion, saying that his plan would generate $1,900,000,000 in revenue.
That caused Sen. Dayton to scramble before putting another budget together :
Democrat Mark Dayton's second stab at a plan to resolve Minnesota's projected budget deficit leaves him about $1 billion shy of a complete fix.It isn't a stretch to say that President Obama and Sen. Dayton don't inspire confidence when it comes to putting together a 21st Century economy.
Sen. Dayton's jobs plan is rooted in the 1970's and 1980's:
As Governor, expanding our state's economy and putting unemployed Minnesotans back to work will be my top priority. Unlike other candidates, I have not just talked about creating thousands of new jobs; I've done it.That's what Sen. Dayton did then. According to this article , Sen. Dayton wouldn't put a high priority on creating mining jobs in northern Minnesota:
As Minnesota's Commissioner of Economic Development in 1978, I implemented the
state's new tourism initiatives.
As Commissioner of the expanded Department of Energy and Economic Development
from 1983 through 1986, I led the new jobs programs that encouraged businesses to
locate or expand here and to create thousands of new jobs for Minnesotans.
"Waiting six years and longer for an answer is not acceptable," said Kelliher.In the second year of his admininstration? What's he thinking? People are hurting now. If, God forbid, Sen. Dayton became Gov. Dayton, I wouldn't want him waiting until the second year of his administration to straighten out this debacle. I'd want him straightening out this mess in the first month of his administration.
"The second year of my administration we would take a comprehensive look, from top to bottom, to streamline the review process to remove duplication and triplication. The permit process should not be able to make a project economically unfeasible," Dayton said.
Compare Dayton's reply with Rep. Emmer's:
"Absolutely believe we have standards in place. We have adequate standards now, we have a good system in place. The EIS, instead of protecting resources and being used as a tool for everyone, including business, to operate in a good framework...is now being used at times as a tool to prevent these projects from moving forward," Emmer said.Sen. Dayton is beholden to the environmental organizations that use the EIS system as a weapon against Minnesota's job creators. That's what's truly unacceptable. Sen. Dayton won't be an advocate for creating high paying Minnesota jobs. He'll see those environmental organizations' campaign contributions and forget about creating jobs.
By comparison, Rep. Emmer gets it. He knows that too many environmental groups don't have Minnesota's best economic interests at heart. He will. Rep. Emmer has been campaigning on reconfiguring state government so that government serves Minnesotans, not vice versa.
When the ABMs and other Nutroots complain, ignore them if they aren't talking about creating a broad-based, prosperous economy, not an economy where government attempts to pick winners and losers.
Finally, Dayton's credibility is shrinking seemingly daily, especially after this information came out:
But Dayton Plan B wasn't the only thing Sutton was firing at. For most of the campaign, Dayton has said that he wants to repay the massive school aid shift, which was used to help balance the current biennium's budget, sooner, rather than later.So much for Dayton's promise of increasing education funding "each year without exception, without excuses."
Of late, though, he's joined Republican Tom Emmer and Horner in saying that repayment of the shift might have to be delayed until 2014.
The important thing to take from this is that there isn't much about Dayton's plans that's trustworthy. That isn't the type of thing that inspires confidence.
Posted Wednesday, September 22, 2010 11:07 AM
No comments.
Tarryl Clark Infomercial Virus Hits St. Cloud Times
Mark Sommerhauser's article is just the latest in a series of Tarryl Clark infomercials in the earned media.
Clark, a DFL state senator from St. Cloud, said Bachmann's growing national stature has cost her constituents. Bachmann is seeking publicity in other states to divert attention from her lack of legislative accomplishments, Clark said.I wish Mark Sommerhauser would've asked Tarryl what objective criteria Tarryl was basing her bashing on. I wouldn't have expected her to give an answer but at least the question would've been asked and her dodge would've been part of Tarryl's record. Had Tarryl given a straight answer, that could've been checked against the public record.
"She's failed, and she's trying to cover it up by running around the country," Clark said. "Who's she working with to actually make things happen? The answer is: No one."
As a result of that question not getting asked, the public loses out on an opportunity to learn about Tarryl's integrity or lack thereof.
"Many things she says are just factually wrong. I think she knows it," Clark said. "But it does create headlines; it does give you a certain notoriety."Tarryl, you've accused Michele of telling falsehoods. Why shouldn't we note that, while you reduced your office's expenses, you voted against cutting $112,000 from the Senate budget by voting for Amy Koch's proposed reduction in the stamp allowance? Why did you vote for increasing the Senate's per diem from an already generous $66/day to an outrageous $96/day?
Now Tarryl's touting the fact that she voted for cutting spending. How quaint. Just a couple years ago, she told Tom Hauser that $500,000,000 of waste was the best we could hope to find. Of course, that's back when Tarryl was pushing for another round of increasing taxes. Funny how her attitude has changed.
Or has it?
Why did Tarryl vote to raise our energy bills by voting for the Next Generation Energy Act? Technically, it isn't Cap and Trade but it certainly limits the amount of fossil fuels that will be used, thereby raising the costs of generating electricity.
Tarryl, how is that helping people in Minnesota's Sixth District?
I'm pretty certain that CD-6 voters would opt to not accept that 'help' but that's just my opinion.
It's time for reporters to ask additional questions when candidates aren't telling the whole truth. Our way of life depends on a stead flow of accurate information from our elected politicians.
It also depends on politicians not distorting item after item for their political gain. That's part of why Tarryl is getting drubbed in her attempt to defeat Michele Bachmann. The reality is that Michele's supporters know what she stands for. In turn, that helps them ignore Tarryl's accusations.
My question for Mark Sommerhauser is when he'll give the same treatment to GOP candidates. He's under no legal obligation to interview Michele or other downticket Republicans but he should do it for the sake of informing his readers.
Posted Wednesday, September 22, 2010 9:53 PM
No comments.
Anti-Emmer Hit Piece Omits Important Information
The unions' latest anti-Emmer hit lit piece implies that he's to blame for the I-35 Bridge collapse. It's just the latest proof that they'll say anything to prevent Tom Emmer from being the next governor.
While it's true that the unions' lit piece has tidbits of truth sprinkled in it, it's definitely fact that their intent is to mislead Minnesota's voters. Here's part of what PoliGraph said about the mailer :
"Emmer voted three times against funds that would have repaired broken infrastructure across Minnesota, including the I-35 bridge. He even voted against the final attempt to rebuild infrastructure before the bridge collapsed."
Emmer voted against the 2007 transportation funding bill three times: the House version passed in March, a merged House and Senate version in May; and an unsuccessful effort to override Gov. Tim Pawlenty's veto of the legislation.According the NTSB investigation report, the I-35 bridge collapse was due to inadequate gusset plates on the bridge. There's nothing in the bill that would've prevented the I-35 collapse.
But there are a few important caveats to this claim. First, Emmer's opposition to the transportation bill wasn't the reason it failed. House leaders needed 90 members to override Pawlenty's veto, but only secured 83.
It's also crucial to note that there was no specific provision in the bill to update the I-35W bridge, as the AFL-CIO's claim implies. However, it would have expanded the trunk highway fund and bonds, which cover bridge repair, precisely the sources of money that might have allowed the Minnesota Department of Transportation to renovate or replace the bridge sooner.
However, it's worth noting that El Tinklenberg could've prevented the crash by accepting a Kansas City engineering firm's recommendation to replace the faulty gusset plates way back in 2000. Had the gusset plates been replaced back then, there never would've been a bridge collapse.
There's a bigger point that must be made in this: that Steve murphy's transportation bill didn't do enough to improve highway infrastructure because most of it funded transit projects.
If the union wants to get into this fight, let's have at it. If they want to imply that Tom's vote indirectly or directly led to the I-35 bridge collapse, then I'll ask why the DFL put a higher priority on funding transit projects than they put on fixing roads and bridges.
Here's something from the PoliGraph post that I find objectionable:
For the most part, the AFL-CIO mailer is correct. On three occasions, Emmer voted against legislation having to do with the bridge collapse or general bridge repair in the state, though it's important to note that the 2007 transportation funding bill did not specify repairs to the I-35W bridge.The DFL's Transportation Bill had nothing to do with the I-35 Bridge collapse. Had the bill passed in 2007, the I-35 Bridge still would've collapsed. What the AFL-CIO won't say is that the bridge collapse could've been prevented had El Tinklenberg paid more attention to gusset plates than he paid to LRT.
Just like other DFL special interest allies, the AFL-CIO won't tell the whole truth. Too often, they'll talk about everything except proposing real solutions if that's what's needed to trash a political opponent. Their mailings aren't there to help increase useful information that's helpful to families. Their mailings are there to advance their agenda.
If that requires omitting important information, then they'll omit important information without hesitation.
It's time that Minnesota rejected deceitful special interests that don't have our best interests at heart. That means rejecting the DFL this November.
Posted Thursday, September 23, 2010 12:06 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 23-Sep-10 04:22 AM
Gary:
Didn't the Republicans when the bill was proposed put up an accelerated road building schedule finianced in part from bonds using the gas tax as their payment.
The reason why this is important was that the Republicans got more money without doing gas tax and car registration tax increases than this transportation bill did. The Republicans did it in part because they didn't devote any money to mass transist projects.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Obama's Spin
Jared Bernstein's op-ed isn't a statement of economic fact. It's spin from top to bottom:
President Obama is fighting for permanent tax relief for the middle class. At the end of this year, if Congress fails to act, a family of four in the middle of the income scale will see their tax bill rise by $2,100. For families making $100,000, the tax increase would be about twice that much. That's why the president has proposed to give permanent tax cuts for every family making less than $250,000, while letting rates on the wealthiest 2 percent of families return to where they were during the late 1990s.What Mr. Bernstein is omitting is that Republicans aren't caving because they know that cutting taxes on the middle class isn't all that's needed. They know that the middle class shrinks when the job providers are punished, especially during a recession like we're currently in.
Mr. Bernstein says that it's important to ask politicians who they're fighting for. I agree. If you aren't fighting for the middle class and the people who employ them, you aren't fighting for the right people.
Republicans say they want to keep the middle-class tax cuts in place just as much as we do. We all agree on that. So if politics is the art of compromise, then now is the time to practice that art.That's chutzpah if ever I saw it. This administration wouldn't act in a bipartisan manner if their life depended on it. They've avoided compromises on the stimulus. They jammed Obamacare down the American people's throats against the will of the governed. Now they're asking for compromise that isn't a compromise. They're asking Republicans to vote to give Democrats everything that they're asking for.
That isn't compromise. That's manipulation, something that this administration employs on a daily basis.
I don't trust Mr. Bernstein because his definition of compromise is him getting everything he wants. Here's Dictionary.com's definition of compromise :
a settlement of differences by mutual concessions; an agreement reached by adjustment of conflicting or opposing claims, principles, etc., by reciprocal modification of demands.What, specifically, is the administration conceding? What "reciprocal modification of demands" has the administration agreed to? This is just more proof that this administration won't hesitate in playing word games.
This administration should try a novel concept: listening to what the people want. If they did that, they'd find out that people want all the tax cuts extended because people understand that the middle class doesn't exist if their employers aren't prospering, too.
Posted Thursday, September 23, 2010 7:41 AM
No comments.
Dayton's Education Plan: All Bluster, No Money
Mark Dayton's latest education plan sounds nice (sorta) until we get to that sticky little thing called money. According to this Pi-Press article , Sen. Dayton can't pay for Dayton's plan:
"As governor, I will increase our state's investment in public education so that we can achieve smaller class sizes, all-day kindergarten and other innovations that are proven to improve outcomes for our kids," Dayton said Wednesday during a news conference at Dayton's Bluff Elementary School in St. Paul.REALITY CHECK: Sen. Dayton can make all the policy declarations he wants but they don't mean a thing because he can't balance Minnesota's budget. Until he has a plan for that, everything else is moot.
But the former U.S. senator acknowledged he hasn't figured out how to pay for those expensive improvements. His latest budget-balancing plan falls nearly $1 billion short of erasing the state's projected $5.8 billion deficit, and the state needs to repay more than $1 billion it borrowed from school districts before it can spend on new programs.
Republican Party spokesman Michael Brodkorb criticized Dayton for promising to spend more money without saying how he'd pay for it.First, Sen. Dayton said that he'd raise taxes because it's the fair thing to do. Next, he said that he was raising taxes to balance the budget. Now, he's saying that he'll raise taxes to pay for increased education spending. (I can't wait to find out what his tax increases will pay for next week.)
Dayton hinted he would raise taxes even more than he already has recommended to finance his plan.
"It does involve committing additional resources, which is the reason that I am committed also to raising revenue progressively so that we can restore our commitment to our children," he said.
He also pledged to close Minnesota's achievement gap, one of the worst in the nation, between students of color and their white peers. That's been a goal of Democratic and Republican politicians for years, but the gap has remained wide.There's a proven remedy for that problem: charter schools. Sen. Dayton's budget would slash funding for charter schools. Not coincidentally, EdMinn opposes charter schools.
Dayton said he would require "more effective approaches" to closing the gap, including better diagnostic testing and more remedial help.
Endorsed by Education Minnesota, the state teachers' union, Dayton said he would increase educators' pay and ensure they get additional training. But he also pledged to remove ineffective teachers and principals.There isn't a snowball's prayer in hell that EdMinn will agree to the government removing ineffective teachers and principals. There's a better chance of me getting hit with lightning three times while holding 2 winning lottery tickets than EdMinn agreeing to letting schools terminating ineffective teachers and principals.
At minimum, EdMinn would water down the criteria to the point that it wouldn't have a meaningful effect on the quality of teachers. If the object of reform is to improve something, then we'll need something that actually changes performance.
Based on the Strib's article , it doesn't sound like meeting Dayton's goals is realistic:
Several educators said Dayton's goals are admirable, but are nearly impossible without significant funding.Again, the thing that's preventing the implementation of Sen. Dayton's education plan is money. He can't balance the existing budget. What makes him think that he can improve Minnesota's economy and increase education funding when his budget, before additional education funding is approved, is $1,000,000,000 short?
"All of these things would make quite a difference, but they'd all have a pretty sizable price tag," said Duane Benson, executive director of the Minnesota Early Learning Foundation and a former Republican Senate majority leader. "It's pretty pricey. Right now, they're having trouble getting enough money just to meet basic needs."
Brad Lundell, executive director of Schools for Equity in Education, a consortium of 58 school districts mostly outside the metro area, also questioned how Dayton would find money to fund his plans.
He noted that many of his small districts wouldn't have the classrooms or teachers to accommodate all-day kindergarten.
"It's a very ambitious package," Lundell said. "It's hard to argue against, but you just don't snap your fingers and have things happen."
That's if you accept as fact that Dayton's proposed tax increase wouldn't chase businesses from the state, something I'm not willing to accept as fact.
The further we get into the campaign, the more obvious it is that Sen. Dayton's inability to put together a budget that balances will prevent him from implementing any of the high profile initiatives that's he's been talking about.
It's best to say that Sen. Dayton's plans are more bluster than reality. Minnesota can't afford that, especially right now.
Posted Thursday, September 23, 2010 8:41 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 23-Sep-10 02:51 PM
"As governor, I will increase our state's investment in public education so that we can achieve smaller class sizes, all-day kindergarten and other innovations that are proven to improve outcomes for our kids,"
Here's a problem for you, Senator. What happens if those things that are "proven to improve outcomes" don't have any proven effects at all, and those that do don't require additional "investment"? You're spouting liberal nonsense, or lying, or just haven't got a clue, take your pick.
Gillibrand Feeling the Heat
If this report is right, then Sen. Gillibrand, formerly thought of as sitting in a safe seat, is in trouble:
In the Special Election to fill the final 2 years of Hillary Rodham Clinton's term, incumbent Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand and former Congressman Republican Joe DioGuardi today finish effectively even, with Gillibrand's nominal 1-point lead being within the survey's theoretical margin of sampling error.If DioGuardi is this close now, then Sen. Gillibrand is in trouble. People like Dick Morris have been predicting that Gillibrand was vulnerable even when Sen. Gillibrand held a double-digit lead for a month or more. Now the polling is catching up with the prediction.
Two years ago, people were talking about how Republicans couldn't compete in the Northeast. Now they're competing in the Northeast. If Democratic strategists weren't worrying prior to this poll's release, they'd better start now.
This isn't an isolated incident either. Ed posted this about Barney Frank being in trouble:
The ballot is very encouraging and shows Bielat at 38%, Frank at 48% and 13% undecided.There are more independents in Massachusetts than there are Democrats. Getting them to swing to Bielat's side by a 51-34% margin must be troubling to Frank's campaign. If Bielat continues to win more independents over, Barney Frank will be in real trouble.
This is very encouraging because Barney Frank is an incumbent congressman who has served in Congress since 1981, has a favorable opinion slightly above 50% in a strongly Democratic district, but is now below 50% on the ballot. Frank has fallen 5 points on the ballot since July and shows that the national wave of frustration amongst the voters is even reaching the Democrat stronghold of Massachusetts 4th Congressional District.
We find more erosion of Frank's support when we look at independent voters. In July, Frank led this critical demographic 44% to Bielat's 37%, now, in September Frank has plunged 10 points with independents and trails with just 34% to Bielat's 51%.
Sean Bielat has a promising chance of creating a major upset in this race. With proper funding and the ability to compete with Frank for the last four weeks of the election, Massachusetts 4 could provide the upset story of the 2010 midterm elections.
Whether we're talking about Kirsten Gillibrand or Barney Frank, New England progressives look like they're in trouble.
Posted Thursday, September 23, 2010 2:56 PM
No comments.
Joe Biden: The Gift Keeps Giving
If there's anything that's as sure as death or taxes, it's that Joe Biden will continue saying stupid things. This morning, at a fundraiser for Sen. Barb Mikulski, Biden guaranteed that Democrats would still be the majority party in the House in 2011 :
In a characteristic demonstration of confidence, Vice President Joe Biden today "guaranteed" Democrats that they will maintain their majorities in Congress through the midterm elections, according to the Washington Post.
"There's an awful lot of talk this year about the demise of the Democratic party," Biden said this morning at a fundraiser for Maryland Sen. Barbara Mikulski. "I guarantee you we're going to have a majority in the House and a majority in the Senate. I absolutely believe that."
Let's file this with Biden's prediction that the economy would start creating 250,000-500,000 jobs a month.
In all fairness, Biden may be an idiot but he's the best quote machine in politics.
Democrats don't stand a chance of keeping their majority in the House this cycle. They'll be lucky if they still have 200 Democrats in the House next January.
Here's another Bidenism that's sure to get people laughing:
Democrats "have a heck of a record, a heck of a positive record to run on," Biden said.
How true. I can't keep track of all the ads I've seen from Tarryl Clark and Jim Meffert and Tim Walz talking about what a great thing Obamacare is and how the stimulus worked beyond their wildest expectations.
That's actually the truth because you can't keep track of things that don't exist.
Thank God for Joe Biden. Even though there's lots of Obama-caused misery, at least we can laugh at Joe Biden. If not for his Bidenisms, people would be upset with Obama's policies.
Posted Thursday, September 23, 2010 11:56 PM
No comments.
