April 10-12, 2015
Apr 10 02:36 Exposing Gov. Dayton's deceptions Apr 10 13:08 Megyn Kelly, Ann Coulter vs. Ed Schultz Apr 11 11:46 Truth vs. Gov. Dayton's statements Apr 12 02:24 One-party rule fails students Apr 12 08:31 Transportation: Dayton vs. Bakk? Apr 12 12:14 America's "dark chapters" Apr 12 22:27 Is Hillary "everyday Americans' champion?" Apr 12 23:20 Hillary's worst nightmare?
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Exposing Gov. Dayton's deceptions
Thursday night, Gov. Dayton delivered his annual State of the State Address . True to the DFL's creed, there's something in there for each of the DFL's special interest groups. True to the DFL's creed, there's a ton of spin in Gov. Dayton's speech. Here's a perfect example of that spin:
At the other end of the education continuum, higher education: the University of Minnesota, the MnSCU colleges, and universities, and state financial aid for students are equally deserving of increased support. In 2013, the legislature approved a $249 million increase in higher education funding for the current biennium. That increase, however, only replaced the $246 million reduction enacted in 2011.
In real, inflation-adjusted dollars, state support for higher education in FY 2012 dropped to its lowest level in over thirty years. No wonder tuitions have been forced higher and higher in both systems, causing Minnesota students to graduate with the fifth highest average debt loads in the country.
That's just dishonest. One of the reasons why tuitions "have been forced higher" is because MnSCU presidents and the MnSCU Central Office have spent outrageously on consultants and administrators. Couple that with the reckless fiscal mismanagement in years past, mostly in the name of pursuing lofty-sounding visions or outright legacy-building and it isn't surprising why tuitions have skyrocketed.
Pitting students and parents' budgets against university presidents' and MnSCU administrators' wish lists isn't the best way to build a better Minnesota, though it's the fastest way to pay off one of the DFL's strongest special interest allies.
To show how misguided Gov. Dayton's policies are and how blindly the DFL will follow Education Minnesota's instructions, check out how Gov. Dayton, the DFL and Education Minnesota are cheating Jazmyne McGill:
Despite meeting all of the requirements for a diploma, I had to take a class in college that covered material I had already passed in high school. Worse, this class wouldn't earn me any credit toward a degree, although I had to pay full tuition for it.
Coming from a low-income family, I did not have the extra money to take a class that wouldn't count toward my degree. Minnesota's college graduates already carry one of the nation's highest student debt loads and repay their loans at an above average rate. Yet remedial classes saddle students with additional debt, don't earn them degrees, and deter them from completed their degrees - at a time when an increasing number of Minnesota jobs require post-secondary education.
Jazmyne paid hundreds of additional dollars for a class Education Minnesota told her she'd satisfactorily passed. That's the definition of educational theft.
Rather than verifying whether the K-12 or higher ed money is producing excellent educational outcomes, the DFL just keeps returning for more money for a system that's failing Minnesota's youth. Cheating Minnesota's students isn't acceptable -- except if it's Education Minnesota cheating students while the DFL are running things. Then it's apparently fine.
Finally, check out the transcript. It's traditional Dayton in that it's filled with terrible punctuation and grammar. Thank God he hired the best speechwriters, then gave them big raises . Spending lots of money, then not paying attention to whether it's being spent wisely isn't proof that government is treating its taxpayers wisely. It's proof that the DFL cares more about their big government allies than they care about the taxpayers.
Posted Friday, April 10, 2015 2:36 AM
No comments.
Megyn Kelly, Ann Coulter vs. Ed Schultz
This part of Megyn Kelly's panel about Rand Paul's intemperate behavior during interviews is a great slap down of MSNBC's Ed Schultz:
Megyn teed things up, then Ann Coulter hit Schultz right between the eyes. Here's the transcript of that part of the panel:
MEGYN KELLY: It seems like some are trying to exploit maybe an interviewing weakness or a temperament issue for him into making it a gender issue. I give the audience exhibit A, which is Mr. [Ed] Schultz on a competing network. Watch this.
ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC: There is real evidence that Rand Paul has problems with women reporters.
KELLY: Okay, Ann, this is Ed Schultz trying to lecture us about somebody who has a problem with women. Ed Schultz.
ANN COULTER: He is very sensitive with women as I recall.
KELLY: Who called Laura Ingraham a right-wing slut . He's now lecturing us on how men need to behave toward women.
COULTER: Yes, he is definitely the one who should be taking up the battle on this one. Ed Schultz. When I am worried about how women are being treated, I go to Ed Schultz.
Ed Schultz is a blithering idiot. There's a reason why his show is teetering on the verge of being cancelled by MSNBC. (Do you realize how terrible you have to be to get cancelled by MSNBC? It's almost impossible.) Schultz wasn't the only object of Coulter's sharp wit:
COULTER: It does expose liberals and especially feminists for this I think very annoying double standard of, you know, we are rough, we are tough, we can do the same things men can do, but, oh, I'm a delicate flower. Please don't talk to me that way, which is fine and good and it's actually why I like how the entire Paul family is kind of cranky with the media.
Some women don't cave into that "delicate flower" image, with Greta van Susteren, Megyn Kelly, Kirsten Powers, S.E. Cupp and Ann Coulter not fitting that image. Hillary, BTW, loves deploying this tactic. It's tactical because she frequently uses that tactic when she's in trouble and she doesn't want to deal with substantive issues.
Posted Friday, April 10, 2015 1:08 PM
Comment 1 by Peter Castle at 10-Apr-15 03:00 PM
There's a reason Coulter is so controversial. She runs the gamut from brilliant to abominable.
See 'Fifty Shades of Coulter' at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-5E.
Truth vs. Gov. Dayton's statements
During Gov. Dayton's State of the State Address, he insisted that the state of the State was good :
For right now, we have a rare moment of great opportunity. The state of our state is good. Not everywhere. Not for everyone. But overall, Minnesota is doing better than it has for some time, and Minnesota is doing better than most other states.
That's spin. This is reality :
According to the Getting Prepared report by the Office of Higher Education, 28 percent of Minnesota's 2011 high school graduates were required to take remedial courses when entering college. Together these students spent $9 million in tuition just on remedial classes - covering K-12 material that taxpayers already funded. The problem affects students from across the state, from affluent suburbs to rural communities to the Twin Cities' largest districts, but students of color and low-income students are most deeply affected.
When 1-in-4 high school graduates take remedial classes upon entering community college, that says K-12 schools have failed these students. What's worst is that, according to the Office of Higher Education's report, these problems affect "students from across the state, from affluent suburbs to rural communities to the Twin Cities' largest districts."
That means this problem isn't confined to students languishing in impoverished inner city schools. It's happening across the state. Rep. Thissen said that the DFL had made " historic investments " in education. That's proof that the DFL's education motto is still intact. FYI- DFL's education motto is 'more money, bigger achievement gap, less accountability.'
When one-fourth of MnSCU's community college students need to take remedial courses, the state of Minnesota's K-12 program isn't good. It's bleak. It need to improve. That won't happen without a change in policies and leadership.
Posted Saturday, April 11, 2015 11:46 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 11-Apr-15 01:23 PM
We're doing better because the DFL has over taxed its citizens and they think they have a huge pot of "found" money they need to spend. That's why Gov. Goofy believes we are doing well. He, like all DFLer's couldn't care less about the poor and education except to throw more money at the problems and right now he has a lot of money to throw at them.
One-party rule fails students
This editorial highlights how Education and the DFL have consistently failed students:
In evaluating candidates, delegates should clearly understand where advocacy for grown-ups stops and willingness to put students first begins . As we have noted, the school district is unionized wall to wall; of 7,000 employees, only a couple of dozen are not represented by a union. Our system of checks and balances goes out of balance if the board and superintendent are essentially chosen by, and hence unduly beholden to, one constituency.
Minnesota's achievement gap hasn't narrowed, much less closed, recently. Most of the DFL-Education Minnesota's 'reforms' have focused mostly on funding, not innovation. Clearly, that's failed. Minnesota's achievement gap still exists. The DFL and Education Minnesota insist that the solution is better funding.
Apparently, Education Minnesota and the DFL either don't know or they don't care that this recipe is working. Einstein's definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results. I'd assumed that the DFL and Education Minnesota were crazy. It's possible, however, that they aren't insane. It's quite possible that they don't care as long as Education Minnesota gets their cut.
Until the money attaches to the student, not the school, Education Minnesota won't have an incentive for changing their methods. As long as Education Minnesota gets funding increases whether they do a terrible job or a fantastic job, they won't have an incentive for improving educational outcomes.
Giving students the option of learning at a better school is a step in the right direction. Similarly, giving parents the option of sending their kids to schools where the teachers' first priority is responding to the students' needs is also a step in the right direction.
Sitting silent while the status quo continues isn't acceptable. It's immoral.
Posted Sunday, April 12, 2015 2:24 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 12-Apr-15 09:39 AM
The story is always the same. Give us a little more money and things will get better. Um they haven't been getting better. Hopefully enough independent voters will wake up and see this finally!
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 12-Apr-15 11:11 AM
All it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing. If we don't start speaking out in the newspapers & on TV, then we've failed the people. Complaining about what should be on a blog isn't enough. Blogs are great for informing people but they aren't enough to change policies.
I write between 6-9 LTEs a year. If I had people willing to submit them under their names, that would jump to 20-25 a year. Anyone interested in putting your name to one, just leave a note in the comments. It's that simple.
Transportation: Dayton vs. Bakk?
In Gov. Dayton's State of the State Address , Gov. Dayton talked about the Civil War, then changing the topic to a thinly-veiled reference to transportation:
We are not being called upon to make such extreme sacrifices. Yet, during the remaining six weeks of this legislative session, we will face our own moments of truth: Will we do what is easy, safe, and popular; or will we risk our political lives to preserve this great state for future generations?
In mid-February, Survey USA conducted a poll on which party's transportation plan Minnesotans preferred. Here's what they said:
Governor Dayton proposes a sales tax on gasoline, higher driver's license registration fees. and a higher general sales tax in the 7-county Minneapolis metro area to raise $6 billion over 10 years for new highways, bridges and mass transit. Do you approve or disapprove? Asked of 525 registered voters. Margin of sampling error for this question = ~ 4.4%
43% Approve, 51% Disapprove, 6% Not Sure
House Republicans propose spending $750-million on highways and bridges over four years by using some of the state's budget surplus and other existing funds without raising taxes. Do you approve or disapprove? Asked of 525 registered voters. Margin of sampling error for this question = ~ 3.8%
75% Approve, 17% Disapprove, 8% Not Sure
Since that poll was taken, Republicans published their full 10-year proposal. The Republicans' plan invests $7,000,000,000 in fixing Minnesota's roads and bridges. Clearly, the Republicans' plan is more popular, which is why Gov. Dayton talked about doing "what is easy, safe and popular" vs. passing the mildly unpopular Dayton-DFL transportation plan. (It's mildly unpopular in that it's only slightly underwater in its approval.)
Don't be surprised if Tom Bakk pulls the plug on Gov. Dayton's plan. With the Senate being up for election in 2016, he won't want to force his senators to take too many controversial votes. Sen. Bakk knows how to read a poll. There's no way he reads the KSTP-SurveyUSA poll and thinks he can enthusiastically support Gov. Dayton's plan.
Predicting how Sen. Bakk reacts to Gov. Dayton's transportation bill is speculation. Still, it's difficult to picture Sen. Bakk walking Gov. Dayton's plank.
Posted Sunday, April 12, 2015 8:32 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 12-Apr-15 09:37 AM
Gary:
Is Minnesota's constitution like the federal constitution where all tax bills must start with a House tax bill? If the House doesn't give Bakk a tax bill which he can put the gas tax on let alone House Republicans support out of conference he won't be able to get it on to begin with.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 12-Apr-15 11:05 AM
Walter, the transportation tax increases in 2008 weren't in the Omnibus Tax Bill. They were in the Transportation Bill.
I don't know if the state constitution requires taxes originate in the House. I suspect it doesn't.
Comment 3 by Margaret at 12-Apr-15 12:27 PM
Walter is right, Tax bills originate in the MN House. Gary is also right, you can have tax provisions in a different bill. In the end it doesn't really matter because even if a bill originates in the House the key moment for the tax bill is always the conference committee. Conference committees can draft and write an entirely new bill if they want, they have that power. Usually they don't but in this case, if the House, Senate and Governor are all far apart that is what may happen here.
America's "dark chapters"
This weekend, after he met with Raul Castro, President Obama continued his hate America tour, declaring that he was "very aware of the fact that there are dark chapters in our own history ."
There's no doubt that this nation has seen dark chapters during its history. While the darkest of those dark chapters is either the Civil War or the bombing of Pearl Harbor, not all of this nation's darkest chapters involve war. The Obama administration is one of those dark chapters.
Betraying Israel is a sad chapter in US history. President Obama has frequently betrayed Israel, whether it's through revealing Israel's sensitive nuclear secrets or by sending his political operatives to Israel to defeat Israel's sitting prime minister. Frankly, betraying Israel is betraying the United States' Judeo-Christian heritage.
Frequently ignoring the Constitution is another instance where the Obama administration has led the United States into a dark chapter in our nation's history. No other administration has had the Supreme Court rule unanimously against their power grabs thirteen times. That's a record that's as likely to get broken as Cy Young's 511 victories as a pitcher.
Negotiating a nuclear proliferation treaty with Iran, which is what John Kerry's framework really is, is a betrayal of our allies in the region. That's before talking about how it establishes Iran as the regional superpower. That's before talking about how it endangers our national security by pumping new money into Iran's coffers to support regional and worldwide terrorist attacks.
That's before highlighting this foolish statement:
'The cold war has been over for a long time and I'm not interested in battles that have been over frankly, before I was born,' President Obama stated.
It's stupid for President Obama to insist that the Cold War is over. Putin's on the march, gobbling up huge parts of neighboring countries. Further, I'm interested in hearing him explain how the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, when he was 28 years old. Perhaps he didn't notice because he was too busy selling cocaine?
The only potential positive that might come out of the Obama administration is the stench that will remind us we've survived a national nightmare of incredible intensity.
Posted Sunday, April 12, 2015 12:14 PM
No comments.
Is Hillary "everyday Americans' champion?"
The woman who claimed she was dead broke after leaving the White House now is insisting that " everyday Americans need a champion ." To prove her commitment to "everyday Americans," she issued this statement:
Clinton's press office left an embarrassing typo in its press announcement, saying that she had 'fought children and families all her career'
Michael Kinsley defined a gaffe in Washington as accidentally telling the truth. While this isn't a perfect fit for Kinsley's definition, it's certainly proof that Hillary can't stop making unforced mistakes. A year ago, Hillary's book tour was supposed to be the pre-launch of her presidential campaign. It failed terribly. The book tour was cut short to limit the self-inflicted damage she did to herself.
After that, Hillary disappeared for an extended period of time. The next time we heard from her, it was at the United Nations:
The biggest question facing Hillary's campaign is whether Clinton Fatigue 3.0 will set in. Hillary's team understands that Hillary isn't popular :
The Clinton 2016 presidential campaign, launched on Sunday afternoon, has set a goal for itself: Showing that she's likable. Period. Her advisers lay out a theory of the case. At large rallies Mrs. Clinton has trouble charming the audience. She can seem distant and unapproachable.
Put her in a room with a small number of people and it is a different story, Team Clinton says. In more intimate settings she displays an ease and warmth that is crucial to earning the trust of voters - and not always evident when she is reading from the teleprompter.
So, her aides are planning a different sort of campaign this time around. She will be meeting with small clusters of voters in diners, coffee shops and private homes. She won't always have a prepared speech in front of her. That can be dicey. Candidates pay a high price these days when they blurt out an incautious thought. But her advisers predict voters will see a less scripted, more disarming candidate than was on display eight years ago.
In 2000, George W. Bush took advantage of Al Gore's lack of public charm. They peppered him with accusations of constantly changing to fit the political moment. After the election, pundits across the political spectrum attributed his defeat to Gore's lack of authenticity. (Sounds familiar, doesn't it?)
Hillary is a known commodity. She'll attempt to re-invent herself again but that's pretty much impossible. She's got 100% name recognition. She's been on the national stage since 1991. She's said some incredibly stupid things :
HILLARY CLINTON: I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas , but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession which I entered before my husband was in public life.
The woman who wants to be "everyday Americans' champion isn't in touch with them. Here's part of Hillary's exchange with Diane Sawyer :
HILLARY CLINTON: Well, if you -- you have no reason to remember, but we came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt. We had no money when we got there and we struggled to, you know, piece together the resources for mortgages for houses, for Chelsea's education, you know, it was not easy. Bill has worked really hard and it's been amazing to me. He's worked very hard, first of all, we had to pay off all our debts which was, you know, we had to make double the money because of obviously taxes, and pay you have at debts, and get us houses and take care of family members.
SAWYER: But do you think Americans will understand five times the median income in this country for one speech?
There's no doubt that Hillary will attempt to wrap herself in the role of Everywoman and Grandma. The question is whether she can pull off that con job. I'm betting she isn't that politically talented. I'm betting she fails badly.
Posted Sunday, April 12, 2015 10:27 PM
No comments.
Hillary's worst nightmare?
Earlier today, Hillary officially announced that she's running for the Democratic nomination for president . That's surprising like finding out Bill Gates made money is surprising. Hillary's gaffe-tastic announcement will soon be swept away. Marco Rubio's candidacy won't be swept aside:
Rubio was elected in 2010 as part of that year's tea party wave. Since then, he's delivered the official republican response to President Obama's state of the union address, played a key role in passing bipartisan immigration reform through the Senate and proven himself a powerful rising star in the Republican Party. His announcement Monday that he is running for President should scare Democrats, and here's why.
First off, Rubio is a confident and effective public speaker. He's likable without sounding weak, and he's powerful without being arrogant. He responded to an unfortunate gaffe during his response to the state of the union in which he awkwardly reached for a water bottle in the middle of his speech, with humor and political savvy. This leads to my next point. On likability, Rubio is a great foil to Clinton.
Clinton is a very seasoned political insider at 67 years old who has played crucial roles in two Presidential administrations, and has run in a previous campaign for the office. The 43-year-old Rubio, on the other hand, is a fresh face, who was elected over an establishment Republican (the now Democrat Charlie Crist) just five years ago.
Hillary isn't likable. Further, she's secretive and calculating. In making her announcement, Hillary said she wanted to be everyday Americans' champion. Marco Rubio is the personification of America's rags-to-riches dream-come-true. It's possible to disagree with him on policies but there's no denying he's an appealing candidate.
Most importantly, he's comfortable with himself in a way that Hillary isn't. Sen. Rubio is young, charismatic and knowledgeable. Hillary is secretive, distant and cold. That isn't the match-up Democrats are looking forward to. Clearly, they're worried:
It'd be naive for democrats to think that these demographic and geographic advantages won't boost the young, handsome and telegenic Senator into a pretty good position against their all-but-anointed nominee. Add this cross party appeal to the possibility that Rubio uses his unique background to unite establishment Republicans and grassroots conservatives in November 2016 and you've got a possible disaster for Democrats, who were pummeled in last year's mid-term elections.
Around a dozen Republicans will announce presidential bids for 2016. Only about five of them will have any chance at winning. I'm firm in my belief that the best shot for Republicans is to nominate a young charismatic senator with cross party appeal to go up against a well-known national figure. Democrats did just that in 1960 with a guy named John F. Kennedy. In case you didn't hear, he won.
Sen. Rubio has the potential to be a transcendent candidate. It isn't known how strong of a campaign he'll run but, to use sports phrase, Sen. Rubio's got a high upside. Hillary is a known quantity. She isn't an 'X-Factor candidate'. Neither is Jeb Bush. Sen. Rubio and Gov. Walker are X-Factor candidates.
Posted Sunday, April 12, 2015 11:20 PM
No comments.
