September 5, 2008
Sep 05 14:21 Mark Olson's Ethical Dilemmas Sep 05 15:50 Another Obama Fundraising Letter Sep 05 17:39 Norm Gets It Right Sep 05 18:14 Kirsten Powers Fights Back Sep 05 22:26 We Can't Afford the High Price of Earmarks
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Mark Olson's Ethical Dilemmas
Mark Olson's ethical dilemma won't go away anytime soon. Earlier this week, the delegates to the SD-16 endorsing convention met at the Capitol in St. Paul to decry the perceived elitism shown by the Senate GOP Caucus, led by GOP Leader David Senjem.
Immediately after the special SD-16 endorsing convention, Leader Senjem announced that they wouldn't financially support Mr. Olson. At the time, I was one of the bloggers that applauded Leader Senjem's decision. I still applaud his decision.
I wasn't able to attend the news conference but I was able to get a copy of Alison Krueger's speech outlining the injustices brought against her. Here's the text of Mrs. Krueger's speech:
"Today I want to thank Mr. Mark Olson for his 16 years of service as Representative and to all of those who have put tireless hours into being SD16 Board members. I understand the amount of work it takes to pull together and be an effective united force.The first thing that jumped out at me is Dave Wilson's recommendation that, should Mrs. Krueger win the Sept. 9 primary, that she should turn it down because "90+ delegates recommended him." Legally speaking, endorsing conventions aren't legally binding whereas primaries are legally binding. Mr. Wilson essentially told Alison Krueger to ignore the will of the people. Mr. Wilson apparently thinks Alison Krueger should obey the will of an endorsing convention.
My name is Alison Krueger and apparently, I am part of the reason a group will be meeting on the steps holding a press conference today.
Many have asked what occurred at the Special Elections Endorsing convention August 7th. Why was Mr. Olson endorsed? It is because people wanted to believe Mark was good to them. We knew that sometimes his temperament would not afford us the best of representation. Most were willing to put aside his anger management issues at the capitol and during his campaigns. Until Mrs. Olson brought the Sheriff and Media in on their domestic problems and Mark was convicted of causing fear to do bodily harm or death to Mrs. Olson. Nevertheless, one year since sentencing, complacency has reasserted itself.
Years earlier delegates did not feel as though anything could stop the Good 'Ole Boys until Brave Rep. Bruce Anderson said enough is enough. Because of Representative Anderson's hard work district 19 now has Representative Tom Emmer. Like Representative Bruce Anderson, I will not stand for this nonsense. Complacency and the Good 'Ole Boys are alive and well here. Why is it I was not considered an elitist in February when the Good "Ole Boys asked me to consider Mr. Olson's seat or at some time run against Senator Wergin, but now that Mr. Olson wants the Senate seat I am an elitist? To illustrate this matter: Mr. David Wilson Benton County BPOU Chair said, "if the Primary election goes your way you need to hand the victory to Mark because 90+ delegates recommended him ." [ed.- emphasis added]
I will leave it to you to decide if this is elitism or corruption.
While I pledged to not campaign against Mr. Olson, I did not agree to the intimidation, defamation or slander I have recieved. More importantly, I did not agree to voters being told incomplete facts. I.e. letters to the editor stating quote, "Mark Olson was not convicted of a crime." Court documents state he was convicted and is on probation for two years! I could continue but my point is this: To become and remain honorable one is honorable publicly, privately and collectively. Therefore I ask you to please stop promoting your Good 'Ole Boy network before you become the very thing you think you are fighting against.
After all, you state you are honest, humble Christians. Speaking of Christians, while forgiveness is needed in everyday life, Biblical ancestors were held accountable and punished, therefore we know God judges the heart and humanity judges the deed."
That smacks of arrogance to me, arrogance that I can't and won't subscribe to.
I also find it stunning that Olson's supporters claim that he wasn't convicted to a crime. That's belied by official court documents. On August 16, 2007, Mark Douglas Olson was aquitted of the first count of Domestic Assault-Misdemeanor-Intentionally Inflicts/Attempts to Inflict Bodily Harm but was convicted of the second count: Domestic Assault-Misdemeanor-Commits Act With Intent to Cause Fear of Immediate Bodily Harm or Death-- Convicted
In fact, here's the relevant portion of that document:
DISPOSITIONSThis document unequivocally states that Mark Douglas Olson was convicted of Domestic Assault-Misdemeanor-Commits Act With Intent to Cause Fear of Immediate Bodily Harm or Death. That's why Mark Olson is currently on probation.
12/12/2006: Plea (Judicial Officer: Pendleton, Alan)
1. Domestic Assault-Misdemeanor-Intentionally Inflicts/Attempts to Inflict Bodily
Harm Not guilty
2. Domestic Assault-Misdemeanor-Commits Act With Intent to Cause Fear of Immediate Bodily Harm or Death Not guilty
07/13/2007 Amended Plea (Judicial Officer: Pendleton, Alan) Reason: Court Order
2. Domestic Assault-Misdemeanor-Commits Act With Intent to Cause Fear of Immediate Bodily Harm or Death- Guilty
08/16/2007
Disposition (Judicial Officer: Pendleton, Alan)
1. Domestic Assault-Misdemeanor-Intentionally Inflicts/Attempts to Inflict Bodily Harm- Acquitted
2. Domestic Assault-Misdemeanor-Commits Act With Intent to Cause Fear of Immediate Bodily Harm or Death- Convicted
That isn't the end of Mark Olson's ethical troubles. Mark Olson filled out a questionnaire. Here's one of the questions on that questionnaire:
D. Adopting codes of conduct for all Minnesota elected officials that require resignation and loss of pension and benefits upon conviction of felony or any crime involving dishonesty or moral terpitude.Mark Olson's answer is that he agrees with everything with the exception of the elected official losing their pension and benefits. According to Dictionary.com , turpitude is defined this way:
vile, shameful, or base character; depravity.I'd say that getting convicted of Domestic Assault-Misdemeanor-Commits Act With Intent to Cause Fear of Immediate Bodily Harm or Death fits most people's definition of depravity or vile, shameful, or base character.
I'm disgusted with Mr. Olson. It's apparent that Mr. Olson picks and chooses which rules, laws and promises he'll obey which ones he'll ignore. What type of lawmaker picks which laws he'll abide by and which he'll ignore? Does Olson think that he's above the law? For that matter, does he think he should be exempted from keeping his promises?
If he says that Minnesota elected officials should be required to resign if they're of a felony or any crime involving dishonesty or moral terpitude, why shouldn't he have resigned immediately after his conviction?
There's one thought that I can't get past: Mark Olson's life is the picture of arrogance and elitism. How dare he criticize Leader Senjem for his elitism.
UPDATE: Welcome Polinaut readers. Follow these links for more on the Olson fiasco. Though I'm a solid conservative, I'm unapologetic in not supporting Mark Olson. Mark Olson's political career ended the minute Mark Olson was convicted of misdemeanor domestic assault-Commits Act With Intent to Cause Fear of Immediate Bodily Harm or Death, that tears it.
The only problem is that Mark Olson continues to think that he's still politically viable; he still doesn't realize that, politically speaking, he's a walking dead man.
Originally posted Friday, September 5, 2008, revised 09-Sep 1:49 AM
Comment 1 by Eva Young at 06-Sep-08 10:58 PM
Did Mark Olson appear on the sample ballot?
Comment 2 by Marianne at 09-Sep-08 06:27 PM
This and similar vitriol has prompted many to coalesce behind Mark. Others who have been mistreated by the party naturally want to help. It's making me curious to see what money has recently gone into the "Senate Victory Fund."
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 09-Sep-08 08:15 PM
Mark shouldn't be part of the equation. If he was a man of integrity, he would've resigned the minute the verdict was read. Men of integrity don't push their wife to the ground & put their hands on her throat.
This isn't about voting regords. It's about integrity. Mark Olson doesn't have any. If you want to support him, that's your constitutional right.
Supporting him just heaps shame on his supporters.
Another Obama Fundraising Letter
Sometime last night, I got another Obama fundraising letter. after reading it, it's safe to say that Obama's audacity is still intact. Here's what the fundraising letter said:
Friend --The organizers that Sen. Obama is talking about have a name. That name is ACORN, the voter fraud specialists. ACORN is more than a little shy in terms of getting in front of a camera. Sen. Obama doesn't want this connection publicized, either.
Why would the Republicans spend a whole night of their convention attacking ordinary people? With the nation watching, the Republicans mocked, dismissed, and actually laughed out loud at Americans who engage in community service and organizing.
Our convention was different. We gave the stage to everyday Americans who hunger for change and stepped up to make phone calls, knock on doors, and raise money in small amounts in their communities.
You may have missed it, but we also showed the country a video with the faces and voices of those organizers, volunteers, and donors from every corner of the country.
These aren't "everyday Americans"; they're radical activists. They're convicted criminals , too:
But the most interesting news came out of Seattle, where on Thursday local prosecutors indicted seven workers for ACORN, a union-backed activist group that last year registered more than 540,000 low-income and minority voters nationwide and deployed more than 4,000 get-out-the-vote workers. The ACORN defendants stand accused of submitting phony forms in what Secretary of State Sam Reed says is the "worst case of voter-registration fraud in the history" of the state.Here's more from John Fund's article:
The list of "voters" registered in Washington state included former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, New York Times columnists Frank Rich and Tom Friedman, actress Katie Holmes and nonexistent people with nonsensical names such as Stormi Bays and Fruto Boy. The addresses used for the fake names were local homeless shelters. Given that the state doesn't require the showing of any identification before voting, it is entirely possible people could have illegally voted using those names.
Local officials refused to accept the registrations because they had been delivered after last year's Oct. 7 registration deadline. Initially, ACORN officials demanded the registrations be accepted and threatened to sue King County (Seattle) officials if they were tossed out. But just after four ACORN registration workers were indicted in Kansas City, MO, on similar charges of fraud, the group reversed its position and said the registrations should be rejected. But by then, local election workers had had a reason to carefully scrutinize the forms and uncovered the fraud. Of the 1,805 names submitted by Acorn, only nine have been confirmed as valid, and another 34 are still being investigated. The rest; over 97%; were fake.While I agree that ACORN does alot of doorknocking, they're paid for doing that.
The bigger point to all this is that ACORN represents another sleazy 'character' that Sen. Obama has associated with. I'm wondering if Sen. Obama has relationships with normal people. I'd even settle for relationships with people that aren't uconvicted criminals like Tony Rerzko, racists like Jeremiah Wright, terrorists like William Ayers or fanatics like Father Pfleger.
Sen. Obama's supporters would say that it isn't fair to Sen. Obama to play the guilt by association game. I'd say that that's nonsense, that it highlights Sen. Obama's decisionmaking ability. Supporters who say Sen. Obama's decisionmaking ability is offlimits don't set the rules. We The People set them. What fair-minded person thinks that the potential leader of free world's decisionmaking ability is offlimits?
The bottom line is that the Obama campaign is worried. I don't think that they're in full panic mode yet but I don't think they're far from it. This fundraising letter also says that they're realizing that they aren't in as good of financial shape as when they originally refused public funding.
Posted Friday, September 5, 2008 3:52 PM
No comments.
Norm Gets It Right
Sen. Coleman issued a statement on Sen. McCain's acceptance speech. Here's the text of that statement:
"This evening the American people are reminded of the call to duty of an American president nearly fifty years ago, who asked us all to do first for our country above all else. John McCain is the embodiment of country first, above all else, and for that, I am proud to be an American, and proud to support John McCain for President. In a dangerous world, we need the courage and leadership of John McCain. His bipartisan approach to solving problems, recognizing that some problems and challenges are just too big for one party, is something we need in today's divisive political environment. John McCain will guide America through great challenges for the next four years with steady, proven hands and with the courage and convictions that we need from our national leaders in this 21st Century."Sen. Coleman's statement speaks for many Americans. Americans, by nature, believe in sacrifices if that sacrifice leads to increased prosperity or increased freedoms for the next generation. That's what Sen. McCain is calling for.
Sen. Coleman should be commended for recognizing that trait. His strength is that he understands people. That's why he's as popular with voters as he is.
It's the defining difference between himself and Al Franken. Al Franken can't be bothered by actually listening. Unlike John McCain and Norm Coleman, Al Franken has a history of putting himself first. Unlike John McCain and Norm Coleman, Al Franken isn't interested in being a public servant. He's only interested in being a senator.
There's a huge difference. It's a difference so big that Minnesotans will notice this November. That's why Norm Coleman will be elected and why Al Franken will be rejected.
Posted Friday, September 5, 2008 5:40 PM
No comments.
Kirsten Powers Fights Back
Based on her last two columns , it's safe to say that Kirsten Powers won't agree with the Agenda Media's mistreatment of Gov. Palin. Here's a dose of Ms. Powers' latest indignation and irritation with the Agenda Media and the Irrational Left:
On that stage last night, Sarah Palin represented everything the feminist movement claims to strive for: a successful working woman with a happy family life and a husband who helps raise the children. Yet, rather than hailing her accomplishment, the feminist establishment has sat by silently as she's savaged for being a working mother.It's apparent that Ms. Powers is pissed at the 'Good Ole Girls Network'. The initially stated goal of feminism was to liberate women. In fact, it was first titled the Women's Liberation Movement. Women burning their bras was meant as a symbol of liberation.
Turns out old feminism is really just a bunch of good 'ole girls telling you what to think .
Ladies, don't you worry your pretty little heads about deciding what you believe; the audaciously named National Organization for Women is here to speak on your behalf.
Today, NOW and NARAL Pro Choice USA aren't about liberation. They're about control. Like Ms. Powers says, they want to speak for women. It seems to me that that's pretty demeaning to women. I can't for the life of me figure out why that'd appeal to suburban women woters.
Ms. Powers was just getting started. Here's another shot at the Agenda Media:
Time for a little truth in advertising.Exactly right, Kirsten. That's extremely condescending. It's insulting to the brilliant women leaders that we see virtually everywhere we turn. It's worth noting that these organizations' condescension is based in fear. They know that they're finished if women follow Sarah Palin's lead, which they'll do if she's elected.
Liberal women have been furiously penning identical screeds against Sarah Palin, blasting McCain for not understanding women and then announcing, "Now, let me speak on behalf of all women and tell you what women want in a candidate."
Talk about condescending.
Here's one last shot:
Today, nobody could blame any woman for not understanding a movement that purports to support equality for women but sits by silently as liberal radio host Ed Schultz uses "bimbo alert" to refer to Palin, and calls her a bad mother on CNN.Why does Ed Shultz get away with such smears? He's peddling in the most vile smears imaginable. Whether organizations like NOW or NARAL Pro Choice USA agree with Gov. Palin politically or not, they shouldn't tolerate the mistreatment of women.
It speaks volumes that Kirsten Powers used her bully pulpit but NOW and NARAL Pro Choice USA kept their mouths shut when smear merchants attacked Gov. Palin. It's apparent to me that Ms. Powers got the integrity and character that NOW and NARAL Pro Choice USA are missing.
Posted Friday, September 5, 2008 6:15 PM
No comments.
We Can't Afford the High Price of Earmarks
I get studies from the Heritage Foundation on a fairly regular basis. Friday afternoon's email caught my attention more than most, though. This study is why:
Recent projections by the Office of Management and Budget and the Congressional Budget Office reveal that the highway trust fund will run out of money during FY 2009. Unless the fund is replenished soon, federal spending on highways could decline significantly as the fund reverts to a spend-as-you-earn basis until a permanent remedy is enacted. Until then, one solution is to re-concentrate the fund's focus on highway investment and safety by abandoning the many low priority and non-transportation diversions that now encumber the federal program.[ 1 ]The Democratic majority will instantly demand passage of Jim Oberstar's gas tax increase. I doubt it'll make it that far (Senate Republicans would likely filibuster it) but if it gets to President Bush's desk, he'll certainly veto the bill.
As with most things, it isn't that there isn't enough revennue. It's that there isn't any spending discipline. It's apparent, too, that Congress hasn't prioritized their spending. They've focused their spending on earmarks, aka corruption magnets, aka re-election slush funds, rather than focusing spending on high priority items. If, and hopefully when, a McCain-Palin administration starts, rest assured that they'll quickly restore order.
The pending deficit is a consequence of flaws in the most recent highway reauthorization bill (SAFETEA-LU) enacted into law in August 2005 covering all federal highway and transit spending until September 2009. In an effort to provide funding for the more than $24 billion worth of earmarks included in SAFETEA-LU, Congress authorized levels of spending well in excess of the fuel tax revenues expected to flow into the trust fund, thereby drawing down the fund's balance to support the excess spending. Although the leadership of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (T&I) hoped that the fund's balance would be sufficient to make it through the current reauthorization period, many independent transportation analysts doubted that would happen, and their dire projections have been proven correct.As I said earlier, the problem isn't on the revenue side. The problem is that too many politicians, from both sides of the aisle,view the transportation bill as their re-election trust fund. This CBS article tells us everything we need to know about the legislators' excesses:
Taxpayers for Common Sense, which lists 6,361 of these projects valued at $23 billion , and other watchdog groups say such projects are wasteful, handed out as political rewards .If ever We The People needed a reminder of the excessive government spending, this should suffice. It's uconscienable for these porkmeisters to belly up to the trough like this. We have serious problems with our nation's bridges. They should be our first priority. Our roads need repairing. They should be our next highest priorities.
Instead of those priorities, porkmeisters like Rep. Jim Oberstar and Don Young load these bills up with bike trails and bridges to nowhere. These gentlemen (I'm using the term exceptionally loosely) had better get used to having their
Posted Friday, September 5, 2008 10:29 PM
No comments.
