September 24-27, 2010
Sep 24 07:03 It's the Economy, Stupid Sep 24 16:32 Rybak's Dishonesty Exposed Sep 24 19:54 The Poor Dears Sep 25 01:38 Great Event, Better Message Sep 26 07:59 Almanac Debate: Severson vs. Ritchie Sep 27 03:40 Sunday Wrap Sep 27 09:09 Dorholt Endorses Ritchie Sep 27 11:01 Media Alert: KNSI @ 7:10
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009
It's the Economy, Stupid
If there's one thing that people are worried about this election cycle, it's whether the candidate that's asking for their votes can put in place the policies that will create the next great economy. Minnesotans are yearning for a plan that creates jobs without raising taxes.
The only candidate with such a plan is Tom Emmer. Sen. Dayton's jobs plan is built around borrowing huge amounts of money and picking winners and losers:
I will establish an "Energy Savings Fund" that will invest in energy saving and alternative energy retrofits of every public building in Minnesota over the next decade. The Fund would "first invest in state government, college, and university buildings; then with the repayments from their energy savings, invest in public school and local government buildings. Over the next decade, this Energy Savings Fund would create thousands of jobs for workers in the building trades, reduce our state's energy consumption, save millions of taxpayers' dollars in energy costs, and make Minnesota the national leader in alternative energy innovation.
I don't have a problem with Minnesota being a leader in green energy jobs. I just have a problem with government picking winners and losers. I have a problem with that because government is terrible at identifying the next Microsoft, the next Fedex or the next Walmart.
What I have a bigger problem is the state borrowing money to create jobs that won't create wealth:
Governor Pawlenty's recent veto of "shovel ready" projects in the 2010 Bonding Bill callously eliminated 400,000 work hours. Next January, I will give those projects top priority in my expanded 2011 Bonding Bill, to which I will add other needed construction projects that will put thousands of men and women in our building trades back to work throughout Minnesota.
The problem with Dayton's jobs plan is that it's driven by a 1970's vision:
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.
We're entering the 2nd decade of the 21st Century and Dayton is talking about things from the 1970's and 1980's? What's that about?
Tom Emmer has pledged to streamline government so Minnesota returns to being a business friendly state. He's talked with farmers who expanded their farm in North Dakota because Minnesota's regulatory regime is that stifling. Tom's talked about getting PolyMet's mining operation up and running.
Tom Emmer will be an advocate for Minnesota's wealth and job creators. Mark Dayton will be an advocate for bureaucrats and special interest groups.
Tom Emmer wants Minnesotans to keep more of the money they've earned. That means people who've earned lots of money and people who are firmly planted in the lower end of the middle class. That's because he knows they've both worked hard for the money. That's because he knows, most importantly, that IT'S THEIR MONEY.
The only people who'll make money if Dayton's tax-the-rich scheme is implemented will be estate planners and and U-Haul companies.
We can't afford funding a 1980's version of government like Mark Dayton wants. We need a governor who'll build a 21st century government.
Posted Friday, September 24, 2010 7:08 AM
No comments.
Rybak's Dishonesty Exposed
In his op-ed , Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak knowingly and dishonestly mischaracterizes conservatives' economic policies:
If all you knew about Minnesota was what you heard from this season's political ads, you'd think our state's business leaders are convinced that reviving our economy was easy. Those ads from business-led Minnesota Forward tell us that if we just hold the line on taxes, jobs magically will appear.
What a joke. Conservatives know that real health care reform is important to making companies profitable. Likewise, they know that regulatory reform is needed to make Minnesota more business friendly.
If Rybak was interested in honesty, he would've talked about how Rep. Emmer criticized Sen. Dayton for not pushing regulatory reform during the first post-primary debate on Almanac. Regulatory reform is a high priority with Rep. Emmer and with GOP legislative candidates.
Don't get me wrong: It's clear to me that Minnesota's tax climate is a major concern of the business community, and rightly so. Tax competitiveness plays a large role in where a business locates and where jobs are created. More political leaders need to acknowledge that and act on it.
If it's clear that "Minnesota's tax climate is a major concern of the business community", why is Sen. Dayton insisting on raising taxes on small businesses from 7.85 percent to 10.95 percent?
We need the strong voices of business leaders to give politicians and community leaders the guts to develop a less partisan progrowth philosophy, one that recognizes creating jobs isn't a simple slogan. It's about a competitive tax climate and a competitive talent climate, managing spending and investing where necessary.
It's almost impossible to find a pro-growth DFL legislator. Sen. Dayton certainly isn't a pro-growth gubernatorial candidate. His proposals would kill, not create, jobs. If his tax plans were adopted, the only people who'd make money in Minnesota would be moving companies and trust fund/estate planners.
The DFL activists that read this blog have repeatedly made it clear in their comments that they're quite hostile to businesses making profits. The DFL's major candidates want tax rates to punish businesses. A 3 point jump in the marginal tax rates on small business income is punishment, not sound economic policy.
Sen. Dayton still hasn't made an economic argument for raising taxes on small businesses. He's only made the argument that businesses aren't paying their fair share. That certainly isn't a persuasive, capitalist argument.
The other argument Dayton's made regarding taxes is that they're needed to fund his antiquated version of government. Sen. Dayton hasn't said a thing about reforming government. Rep. Emmer's agenda is filled with plans to reform government and eliminate excess spending.
This can't be overemphasized. When spending is kept low, businesses know that the likelihood of tax increases drops precipitously. Dayton's unwillingness/inability to balance Minnesota's budget injects too much uncertainty into businesses' calculations. They don't know what taxes will be. They don't know what regulatory costs will be.
That's why it's important to Minnesota's businesses that we elect someone who has proven they know how to put a balanced budget together and whose economic agenda includes reforms that make Minnesota competitive once again.
Mayor Rybak's op-ed is dishonest. People paying attention to Rep. Emmer's agenda know that his plan isn't oversimplistic. R.T. Rybak has paid attention and knows this. His op-ed is just an attempt to mischaracterize Rep. Emmer's comprehensive plan for government reform and economic revitalization.
Posted Friday, September 24, 2010 4:32 PM
No comments.
The Poor Dears
According to Paul Demko's article , Mark Haveman, currently the executive director of the Minnesota Taxpayers Association, thinks it would be tragic to adopt Zero-Based budgeting procedures for the state budget:
Mark Haveman, executive director of the nonpartisan Minnesota Taxpayers Association, says that Emmer's approach is akin to "zero-based budgeting," in which all prior fiscal assumptions are tossed out the window and the budget is constructed from scratch. Haveman's skeptical that such an approach can succeed. "It's a time-consuming, exhaustive process when you have control over your own destiny," noted Haveman. "But when you have politics and political interests and the federal government also thrown into the mix, this becomes a challenging thing to actually pull off."
The poor dears. Changing to ZBB will require extra work but it'll save Minnesota taxpayers tons of money. In turn, we'll know that money isn't being spent on cronies or special interest allies. If that's what's required to bring down the high cost of government, then that's what needs to be done.
This type of oversight can easily be done the first 2 months of session. Let's remember how little work the DFL legislature did the first 2 months of the 2007 session. That year, a number of House committees didn't meet through mid-February. Others met once or twice. Something tells me that legislators could've been doing oversight hearings while waiting for the February budget forecast.
I'd also argue that people shouldn't run for office if they're going to make excuses like "That's too much work" or something similar. Minnesotans expect their legislators to demand that agency chiefs justify every cent that they spend.
This paragraph is insulting too:
Further complicating matters is the fact that all of the projected spending for the next biennium is encoded in state law. Scrapping or significantly reducing state programs and services would require major legislative changes. "The bump from the 2010-11 general fund to the projected 2012-13 general fund spending, which is about $3 billion, is all current law and demographics at work," said Havemen. "The question is, what can you actually do in that area?"
Haveman makes this sound like the budget numbers are etched in stone. What he's refering to are the budget tails, which the DFL uses as a weapon to make it sound like the deficit is huge and they have to raise taxes.
This is the gimmick they've resorted to after Gov. Pawlenty vetoed their bill that would've required MMB to factor in inflation into the budget projections. When that got vetoed, they opted instead to have huge budget tails on their omnibus spending bills.
In 2007, Nora Slawik wrote a bill that proposed to spend $35,000,000 the first year and $105,000,000 the second year. That $140,000,000 expenditure would've been a huge expense to the state but nothing to the tail on the bill. The tail on Rep. Slawik's bill called for spending more than $1,000,000,000 during this biennium, an increase of 700 percent.
Havemen makes it sound like the tails to the 2009 omnibus bills are spending that can't be cut. The reality is that each legislature isn't bound by past legislatures in terms of spending, with the exception of paying the interest from previous bond issues.
Otherwise, they're free to change spending priorities to meet the budget's and/or people's needs.
Havemen is right in saying that it's "current law and demographics at work." What he didn't say is that current law might have a tail that's exhorbitant, which makes it look like that's what we need to spend.
Minnesota needs to take budgeting off autopilot ASAP. What Minnesota needs most is for thoughtful legislators and a conservative governor to conduct oversight hearings, questioning each line item's importance.
King Banaian, the GOP candidate for HD-15B makes this statement about budgeting:
If I'm spending someone else's money, I can't avoid accountability with "it's time consuming!" "I'm exhausted." No excuses. You either are a steward of the people's trust or you step aside for someone who will be.
That's someone that gets it. If a person isn't willing to put in the time to do their due diligence, then it's time for them to be replaced by people who will put in the time.
The sooner we have a legislature that's willing to question our spending habits, the sooner we'll restore fiscal sanity.
Posted Friday, September 24, 2010 7:54 PM
No comments.
Great Event, Better Message
I just returned home from a Tom Emmer rally at the St. Cloud Victory Office. Steve Gottwalt did a great job emceeing the event and legislative candidates King Banaian, Tom Ellenbecker, Dave Brown and John Pederson each delivered great presentations on the need for government to live within its means.
A crowd of 50-60 enthusiastic people attended the rally.
The thing that impressed me most was our candidates' ability to explain why limited government will improve Minnesota's economy.
Following the rally, I spoke with Tom about his message. It's clear he understands what he needs to do in terms of messaging. Tom's newest saying is "Starve a bureaucrat, feed a family." Obviously, that isn't to be taken literally but it's still the right message.
Whenever we put families first, whenever we question government's role in our lives, the economy improves.
When a school like St. Cloud State considers closing the Aviation Department at a time when we're trying to get a new carrier for the regional airport, there's a disconnect between the bureaucrats and the community.
When the University considers this without doing an economic impact study or without asking the Chamber of Commerce whether such a move would St. Cloud's economic infrastructure, it's the legislators' responsibility to question how government functions.
MnSCU is only one bureaucracy that will get questioned when Tom is governor. Each bureaucracy will be questioned about what value they add to Minnesota's economy. They'll be questioned about whether they can eliminate things without reducing value.
It's obvious that our local candidates understand those principles. They get it that government should do the things the individuals and corporations can't do but that government shouldn't do things that slow Minnesota's economy or that add nothing but cost to government.
Also attending the event were local candidates Pat Lynch and Jeff Johnson. Pat's running in a 3-way race to replace Tim O'Driscoll as Sartell's mayor. Jeff is running for the St. Cloud City Council.
Travelling with the Emmers was State Sen. Amy Koch and MNGOP Deputy Chairman Michael Brodkorb. I spoke briefly with Sen. Koch. Saying that she's feeling optimistic about November is a slight understatement. She definitely isn't making predictions but she's confident that Republicans will, at minimum, put a big dent in the DFL's majority in the Senate.
The thing that's encouraging for activists like me is seeing the quality candidates we've got running this year and the quality of our message. Today's event just reinforces my belief that the DFL will be on the defensive the rest of the way.
It's painfully obvious that they don't have a message, just a bag of tactics. That won't cut it with Minnesota's voters because they're looking for people with solutions. The DFL doesn't have solutions, just a laundry list of things to whine about.
That isn't leadership. That isn't what voters are looking for. That's why the DFL is toast.
Posted Saturday, September 25, 2010 1:38 AM
No comments.
Almanac Debate: Severson vs. Ritchie
I watched Dan Severson's debate against Mark Ritchie to see whether Mr. Ritchie would resort to his usual excuses for his corruption. As I expected, they were employed.
First, Ritchie said that secretaries of state from across the nation told him that the recount should be the model across the nation. That's a non sequitur. First, the recount wasn't flawless like Mr. Ritchie suggests. By law, recounts should only recount ballots that were counted on Election Night.
Second, Ritchie continued insisting that voter fraud didn't exist during the 2008 cycle. Jeff McGrath's op-ed suggests otherwise.
The truth is that the problem started long before the recount. The problem started when Mr. Ritchie failed to pay attention to the warning signs that Minnesota Majority found during their investigation:
Prior to the 2008 general election, Minnesota Majority conducted a review of Minnesota's voter records and discovered a number of apparent irregularities, including double voting, vacant and non-deliverable addresses used in voter registrations, deceased people remaining on voter registration lists, felons newly registered to vote , duplicate voter registration records, deficient voter registration records and other inconsistencies.
Minnesota Majority communicated a number of these concerns in a letter to letter to Secretary of State Mark Ritchie on October 16, 2008. On October 17, the Secretary of State responded by calling a press conference assuring Minnesotans that Minnesota had the best election system in the country.
During the debate, Mr. Ritchie insisted that Minnesota had a clean voting system. Considering all the Postal Verification Cards that were returned, Mr. Ritchie should've been an advocate for Photo ID. That step alone would've given Minnesota a fraud-proof system.
Let's remember the KSTP investigation into the issue of absentee ballots that should've been rejected. While it's true that Mr. Ritchie isn't directly in charge of the handling of absentee ballots, there's no question but that he's responsible for making sure that the people who handle absentee ballots are trained properly in identifying what criteria is used in accepting or rejecting absentee ballots.
That didn't happen :
In South Minneapolis, Margaret Dolan told Alvarez that they didn't reject any absentee ballots because they weren't told what the criteria was for accepting or rejecting absentee ballots .
It's impossible to say that Ritchie has lived up to his responsibilities as Minnesota's chief election officer. While it's true that Mr. Ritchie isn't responsible for training each election judge, it's equally true that his office has oversight responsibility to guarantee that election judges have been properly trained.
Clearly, Mr. Ritchie didn't live up to his oversight responsibilities.
One of the contentious parts of the debate was on the issue of felons voting. Rep. Severson said that Minnesota Majority's investigation had provided the SecState's office with information showing felons still being on the voter roles.
Mr. Ritchie's response was lame, blaming Rep. Severson for not voting for a bill in last year's legislature that would've given the SecState the ability to maintain the voter lists. According to the United States v. State of New Jersey and Stuart Rabner , Section 303(a) of the Help America Vote Act, aka HAVA, states:
Section 303(a) of HAVA, entitled "Computerized Statewide Voter Registration List Requirements," requires that " each State , acting through the chief State election official, shall implement , in a uniform and nondiscriminatory manner, a single, uniform, official, centralized, interactive computerized statewide voter registration list defined, maintained , and administered at the State level ."
Later in the filing, we learn additional information about HAVA's requirements:
The statewide computerized voter registration system must, among other things, satisfy the following requirements:
(a) The list shall serve as the single system for storing and managing the official list of registered voters throughout the state, 42 U.S.C. § 15483(a)(l)(A)(i);
(b) The list must contain the 'name and registration information of, and must assign a unique identifier to, each legally registered voter in the State, 42 U.S.C. $8
(c) The list must be coordinated with other agency databases within the State, 42 U.S.C. $ 15483(a)(l)(A)(iv); and
(d) The list must serve as the official voter registration list for the conduct of all elections for federal office in the State, 42 U.S.C. 15483(a)(l)(A)(viii).
That isn't all that HAVA provides for. Here's more:
Section 303(a) of HAVA also requires State election officials to ensure that the computerized list is accurate and current by: (i) ensuring that all registered voters are included in the list; (ii) removing only the names of voters who are not registered to vote or who are otherwise ineligible to vote ; (iii) removing duplicate names from the computerized list; and (iv) implementing safeguards to ensure that eligible voters are not removed from the list in error. 42 U.S.C. $5 15483(a)(2), 15483(a)(4).
Mr. Ritchie is wrong in stating that he needed additional authority to remove felons from the registered voters list . The Secretary of State got that authority, at the latest, in 2002 through HAVA. In fact, it's clear that HAVA assigned that responsibility to him.
It's shameful that Mr. Ritchie is hiding behind these excuses. It's shameful that a blogger like myself knows more about the SecState's responsibilities with regards to maintaining registered voter lists than Mr. Ritchie knows.
The recount didn't prove that Minnesota's recount process was perfect. What it proved is that it's impossible to undo the damage done when felons vote illegally and their ballots are mixed with votes cast by legal voters.
When election judges don't reject absentee ballots that are missing signatures, they get mixed in with properly cast ballots. Once the improperly cast ballots are mixed in with properly cast ballots, they can't be undone.
The only thing that the court cases proved was that it's impossible to undo the damage caused by Mr. Ritchie's negligence.
Another thing that Ritchie got wrong is that Photo ID wasn't constitutional because voting is a right, not a privilege. Prior to the 2008 election, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Photo ID is constitutional. They're the final word on what's constitutional, not Mr. Ritchie.
The reality is that Mr. Ritchie came across as either negligent in his duties or as a corrupt election official. Either way, he looked like a man who should be replaced this November.
Originally posted Sunday, September 26, 2010, revised 09-Apr 8:17 AM
No comments.
Sunday Wrap
This am, I watched Tom Emmer's interview with Esme Murphy, followed by watching @Issue With Tom Hauser.
The Emmer-Murphy interview was fairly brief and cordial. Esme mentioned a fundraiser held for Tom Horner was hosted by a retired Republican state senator. She then asked for Tom's reaction.
Tom said that Horner has lifetime relationships with a number of business people so that support should be surprising. Tom then said that "over 80 percent" of Minnesota's businesspeople support Tom's "agenda of smaller, more efficient government, lower taxes and a better business environment."
Tom highlighted the fact that his plan will actually create stable, private sector jobs. That's something that Tom Horner and Mark Dayton can't say.
The other thing that Tom did a great job with was delinking state spending to property tax increases. Property taxes were going up before LGA was cut, meaning that there's more of a connection between local spending decisions and property tax increases than with state spending decisions and property tax increases.
Cathie Hartnett made a fool of herself during the Face-Off portion of @Issue With Tom Hauser. In discussing the House Republicans' Pledge with America, Hartnett said that "People like government to build roads..."
That's true by itself but it's more than a bit simplistic. I haven't found any people who have a problem with government doing the basics well. The people who are upset this year are upset with the bailouts, the pork in the stimulus, Obamacare and the fact that President Obama, Speaker Pelosi and Harry Reid couldn't even put a budget together, much less get their appropriations bills passed.
I couldn't tell if Ms. Hartnett thinks the tax debate is going well for Democrats. If she does, she should check with small businesses who haven't expanded because they don't know what their tax liability will be. That the Democrats couldn't even produce legislation that could be debated is proof that the Democrats can't even address these important issues.
I'd just ask Ms. Hartnett why the Upper Midwest is considered the Democrats' killing fields :
From Ohio to Iowa, there's a yawning stretch of heartland states whose citizens voted for Obama and congressional Democrats in 2008, but who have lost patience waiting for an as-yet undelivered economic revival that was first promised in 2006, and then two years later. Now, they look set to stampede toward the out-of-power party.
"There's little doubt that the Midwest is the Democrats' toughest region this year," Democratic pollster Tom Jensen of Public Policy Polling wrote on the firm's website Friday, adding that the firm is also finding an enthusiasm gap of about 10 points down from what existed in 2008.
"If the election was today the party would almost certainly lose the Governorships it holds in Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. It's also more than likely at this point to lose the Senate seats it has in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Indiana, miss out on a once promising pick up opportunity in Ohio, and quite possibly lose their seat in Illinois as well. And there are too many House seats the party could lose in the region to count," Jensen noted.
If big government liberalism is playing so well, as Ms. Hartnett suggests, why are liberal states like Illinois, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan turning on Democrats?
Posted Monday, September 27, 2010 3:40 AM
No comments.
Dorholt Endorses Ritchie
After Larry Haws retired, Zach Dorholt filed to run against King Banaian to fill Larry Haws's seat in the Minnesota legislature. Now that he's been defeated by Carol Lewis, Dorholt has stayed active in St. Cloud DFL politics, this time by endorsing Mark Ritchie . Some of the things he said in his LTE in today's St. Cloud Times are laughable. Here's an example:
While other states have moved to paperless voting, Ritchie has stood strong on making sure there is a paper trail in our election process, which Minnesota found quite useful when margins of victory were less than 1 percent.
Mr. Ritchie didn't lift a finger in "making sure there is a paper trail in our election process." According to page 41 of this Justice Department pdf file , the Help America Vote Act of 2002, a paper trail was mandated for audit purposes:
AUDIT CAPACITY.-
(A) IN GENERAL.-The voting system shall produce a record with an audit capacity for such system.
(B) MANUAL AUDIT CAPACITY.-
(i) The voting system shall produce a permanent paper record with a manual audit capacity for such system .
That's found in Section 301, which is titled "VOTING SYSTEMS STANDARDS." This bill was signed into law before Mr. Ritchie's predecessor, Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer, won re-election as Minnesota's Secretary of State.
In July, 2004, Mr. Ritchie was hired to lead an organization called National Voice :
National Voice is the brainchild of longtime activists Harriet Barlow, Betsy Taylor and others who realized that in the hard-nosed world of politics, voter targeting and aggressive fund-raising, millions of potential voters are ignored. They also believe hundreds of nonprofit groups care about citizen participation but have been intimidated from registering voters, even though the law permits virtually unlimited nonpartisan voter registration.
The job of National Voice is to change the culture around voting and participation and to get nonprofit groups to understand the old message that "if you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem."
Only a year old, National Voice hired gifted organizer Mark Ritchie, a veteran of international organizing on issues of global trade and justice. "I see November 2 as an outreach tool to drive people to the Web site where we can get them involved as a volunteer. I see the effort as unifying a theme and message that can tie together disparate GOTV efforts. Thirty thousand T-shirts are out the door, and bumper stickers and iron-ons. In essence, we are working to make it cool to vote and cool to get involved beyond just voting." There has been a bus tour with a film crew that is gathering footage for public service announcements on television. "If you saw the Nike commercial during the NBA finals--that fabulous one with Lance Armstrong riding his bike and the fantastic views and warmth," said Ritchie, smiling, "well, the same guy who did that one is doing our commercials."
I've included the information about National Voice because of the closing paragraph in Mr. Dorholt's LTE:
As Mark Ritchie has demonstrated faith in the people of Minnesota during tough times, I find it easy to place confidence in his leadership, thus earning him another term as our secretary of state. His strong character, based in a lifetime of working for the common good, is rarely found in many elected officials. Because of his leadership, because I'm proud of Minnesota's system, I will wholeheartedly support Mark Ritchie in November.
Here's a little information about November 2 and National Voice:
A profoundly straightforward and potentially effective pro-voting campaign called November 2 has just been launched by National Voice, a coalition of nonprofit and community groups working to maximize public participation in the democratic process. The campaign, developed by the crack advertising firm of Wieden and Kennedy (famed for its work for Nike), is clever in its simplicity. It's all about branding November 2 on T-shirts, billboards, computer screens and bumper stickers and connecting it to the logos of numerous organizations people trust. November 2 on the front of the T-shirt and National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), Sierra Club, League of Women Voters or Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) on the back. As Billy Bragg sang satirically: "The revolution is just a T-shirt away."
There has been substantial media coverage about large groups working on the partisan side in the election, receiving millions of dollars from big donors such as George Soros and Peter Lewis. America Coming Together (ACT), as a Section 527 organization in the IRS tax code, is allowed to do partisan voter registration as long as it isn't coordinated or specifically supportive of a specific candidate. ACT, which has raised more than $50 million, is about identifying potential voters who have a good chance of getting to the polls. Steve Rosenthal, the former political director of the AFL-CIO, says ACT "will make in the range of 10 million voter contacts before the election, but they will only be registering perhaps 500,000 new voters," because the less dependable "nonvoter" is not their priority.
Let's see here. November 2 t-shirts had November 2 on the front of each t-shirt. The back of the t-shirts had the logo for the Sierra Club, ACT, ACORN or the League of Women Voters on the back of the t-shirts.
Anyone that thinks a person who's worked closely with with ACORN is a man of "strong character" isn't someone that I'd trust. I'd further argue that anyone that thinks that Mark Ritchie worked diligently to guarantee that "there is a paper trail in our election process" isn't someone that I'll trust.
Posted Monday, September 27, 2010 9:09 AM
No comments.
Media Alert: KNSI @ 7:10
Sorry for the late notice but I'll be Dan Ochsner's guest this morning at 7:10. We'll be talking about Mark Ritchie's radical past. If you're outside KNSI's signal, just follow this link to listen to KNSI's live audiostream.
Posted Monday, September 27, 2010 4:49 PM
No comments.
