April 21-22, 2012
Apr 21 01:04 Gov. Walker confident of recall victory Apr 21 11:05 Quietly robbing Peter (and his parents) to pay Peter Apr 21 18:49 Alan Dershowitz excoriates prosecutor in Trayvon Martin trial Apr 21 23:57 Walker's GOTV operation Apr 22 02:22 Gov. Dayton sides with unions...again Apr 22 06:39 The Pied Piper no more? Apr 22 15:28 Radio station owners, spines and the Left's censorship
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Gov. Walker confident of recall victory
While it isn't a sure thing, it looks more and more like Gov. Walker won't be recalled. Gov. Walker is sounding more confident of that each day:
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker said Friday he believes he won't be recalled from office in June, and that result will send a message to all politicians that 'you can make the tough choices and there will be voters helping you along the way."
The Republican governor also said more than $70 million could be spent on the recall effort, fueled by unions who unsuccessfully fought his efforts to eliminate most collective bargaining with public employees.
The remarks came during a speech to about 150 people at a downtown luncheon put on by the Illinois Policy Institute, a conservative think tank.
Walker has been actively fundraising and last week traveled to Oklahoma to raise campaign cash at an event co-sponsored by Koch Industries, an oil company led by wealthy brothers who are supporting a variety of conservative causes.
The Koch brothers are certainly supporting Gov. Walker. That's mostly due to the fact that Gov. Walker isn't hiding his support for conservative principles. Gov. Walker is right in saying that 'you can make the tough choices and there will be voters helping you along the way."
That's a lesson DC Republicans should learn. ASAP. Walker's proposals have had a positive impact in Wisconsin. That's why he's getting support from so many different demographic groups.
If there's anything that politicians should learn from Gov. Walker, it's that people want politicians who say what they mean and mean what they say, that then keep their promises.
As for Koch Industries hosting a fundraiser for Gov. Walker, that's just a reminder that I should send them a thank you note for playing a vital role in keeping a great man in office.
I know that the left will howl at the sound of that last paragraph. That's fine. The last I looked, the Koch Brothers weren't use threats and intimidation to get their legislative priorities passed. They didn't take money without permission from their executives.
Meanwhile, the PEUs like AFSCME and SEIU don't hesitate in using threats and intimidation. I know because I've written repeatedly about their thug tactics and their intimidation.
Last year, the unions spent tens of millions of dollars supporting recall candidates. In the most expensive of those races, unions spent millions of dollars in support of Democrat Shelly Moore. Sheila Harsdorf won that election by a 58%-42% margin.
It isn't likely that Gov. Walker will win by that margin but he's got impressive leads in state Senate districts that President Obama won in 2008:
Those polls show a major gap, one which the Democrats won't overcome.
Tags: Recall Elections , Scott Walker , Sheila Harsdorf , Koch Brothers , Republicans , Shelly Moore , Tom Barrett , Unions
Posted Saturday, April 21, 2012 1:04 AM
No comments.
Quietly robbing Peter (and his parents) to pay Peter
Several things are abundantly clear about the federal student loan program. The first thing that's clear is that it's been a mix of blessings and curses to students. Another thing that's clear is that it's a way of hiding the fact that the cost of tuition is too high. The third thing that's clear is that it first robs Peter to borrow money to Peter.
Actually, it's more likely that the federal government is robbing from Peter's parents today to borrow money to Peter. In return for doing Peter this 'favor', Peter 'gets' to pay the money that the federal government took from Peter's parent with a tidy interest rate tacked on, thereby adding interest rates to the injury.
To court the vote of young people, President Obama is promising to steal more money from parents :
President Barack Obama will use a tour of election battleground states next week to push Congress to prevent interest rates on federal student loans from doubling, a move that could appeal to middle-class and younger voters crucial to his re-election chances.
Obama will make his pitch in speeches at universities in North Carolina, Colorado and Iowa, three states expected to play a major role in the November election. The youth vote is a key national constituency his campaign team hopes to re-energize.
The money loaned to students originates as income earned by people, often income earned by the students' parents or neighbors.
Artificially shrinking the cost of a college education isn't the solution. Rather than dealing with the heart of the problem, President Obama is insisting on creating more problems.
Rather than highlighting the fact that college costs are growing as a result of university presidents spending money foolishly, President Obama is content with papering over the problem.
When a university president pays a consulting firm half a million dollars to create a new image for his university, that's spending money foolishly.
At some point, parents, students and taxpayers will have to address the administrators' entitlement mentality. If the administrators' reckless spending isn't addressed, student loans will only paper over the problem.
Meanwhile, student loan debt now tops $1,000,000,000,000 . That's right. Student loan debt exceeds one trillion dollars. What's worse for students is that students can't get rid of this loan debt through bankruptcy. Too often, these loans aren't paid off until many years later.
What President Obama is proposing is giving another generation a helping hand into a lifetime of debt. That's causing, not solving, problems. That's what President Obama seems best at.
Tags: President Obama , Student Loans , Debt , Bankruptcy , Interest , Tuition , Spending , Democrats , Election 2012
Posted Saturday, April 21, 2012 11:05 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 21-Apr-12 11:33 AM
Tax the rich. Pay it down.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 21-Apr-12 01:47 PM
Signing off on elites pissing away the taxpayers' money on frivolous shit is stupid. Do you like getting ripped off?
Universities need a major overhaul. They're spending money with virtually no oversight.
Eric complains when CEOs of corporations get paid big salaries but he's ok with university presidents going on international junkets to South Africa, China & India, each of which costs $100,000 for the delegation.
What's worse is that the taxpayers don't get anything worthwhile out of those trips. I'm supposed to accept that? I don't think so.
SCSU President Potter makes $329,000 a year. I think that classifies him as a rich fatcat. Why isn't #OWS protesting in front of him home & demanding that he stop pissing away 100s of thousands of $$$?
Hypocrite.
Comment 3 by Patrick at 21-Apr-12 03:02 PM
Don't forget the $115,000 Potter paid 'Gino' Gasparini as a special adviser for Athletics starting March 1, 2011 - that was for 6 months work... yes it was Foundation money but it would've made some nice college kids happy in the way of scholarships. I wonder if Gasparini is still drawing a check.
Comment 4 by Jethro at 21-Apr-12 03:19 PM
How about the SCSU new science building? Is this necessary? Wouldn't it have been more responsible to spend a fraction of the money to overhaul the current science building? I guess when you don't have a business plan and you are spending other people's money, it doesn't matter.
Response 4.1 by Gary Gross at 21-Apr-12 05:33 PM
Jethro & Patrick, you should know better than to think the Left gives a damn about fiscal responsibility, especially on one of its sacred cows. Employing their budgeting rules, they think that money that's spent one year on anytime must be included in the following year's budget. It isn't needed? That's alright. They're sure they can find some way to rationalize the pissing away of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
If the DFL wanted to be fiscally responsible, they wouldn't offer degrees in programs that leave people overeducated & underemployed, not to mention tens of thousands of dollars in debt.
The DFL isn't the taxpayers' watchdog. They're the people who feed the out-of-control government beast while families struggle.
Comment 5 by Nick at 21-Apr-12 07:32 PM
I agree with the above statements. Jethro, you said "How about the SCSU new science building? Is this necessary? Wouldn't it have been more responsible to spend a fraction of the money to overhaul the current science building? I guess when you don't have a business plan and you are spending other people's money, it doesn't matter."
I totally agree with your statement, in fact it would have been a lot smarter if SCSU renovated the Wick Science building than put up a brand new science building. I hope that the building construction gets halted.
Here's a fact for all of you, I lived in the Coborn Apartments, it was too expensive, poorly designed, recycling was too far away, stupid SCSU put freshmen in that building because they couldn't fill the building, and thus it was constantly loud. Loud music on Thursdays, Fridays, and Saturdays was a common occurrence. I lived there the year it opened on the top floor of the North building. The RA's were indifferent for the most part. The first year that it was open, it was only 1/3 FULL.
To benefit who? The Coborn Family, since they were the ones who provided all of the furniture in the units of those buildings. Also, the internet hardly worked in the first two months and there were many problems with the heating system, it was never warm enough. Before it opened, many landlord were PISSED OFF and filed a LAWSUIT against SCSU, but nothing happened, since the building got built anyway.
Total cost of a room in a 4 room unit at the Coborn Plaza Apartments in the 2010-2011 school year WAS OVER 700/month with heating included. Now, I live in a room of a house 2 blocks off campus that's costing only 375/month with all of the utilities included. I only have to pay for laundry.
Patrick, I agree with you too, Gino shouldn't have been hired, what a FRICKING waste of money. It's time to hold these administrators accountable!
Comment 6 by Nick at 22-Apr-12 01:49 AM
heating, I actually meant parking
Alan Dershowitz excoriates prosecutor in Trayvon Martin trial
It's understatement to say that legendary law professor Alan Dershowitz is upset with the prosecutor in the Trayvon Martin case :
Professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School stated upon release of the arrest affidavit that it was 'so thin that it won't make it past a judge on a second degree murder charge : everything in the affidavit is completely consistent with a defense of self-defense.'
After the release of the photo, however, Dershowitz went much further, telling Breitbart News that if the prosecutors did have the photo and didn't mention it in the affidavit, that would constitute a 'grave ethical violation,' since affidavits are supposed to contain 'all relevant information.'
Dershowitz continued, 'An affidavit that willfully misstates undisputed evidence known to the prosecution is not only unethical but borders on perjury because an affiant swears to tell not only the truth, but the whole truth, and suppressing an important part of the whole truth is a lie."
The benchmark for a witness testifying is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. It looks like that's the standard for affidavits, too.
If the police were the first people on the scene, they certainly had to see the blood on George Zimmerman's head. Whoever filled out the affidavit was obligated to include that information.
Alot of attention was paid to marches by racebaiters like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. The fact that Mr. Zimmerman might've been acting in self defense wasn't important to the racebaiting reverands. Replenishing the racebaiting industry's coffers was infinitely more important to them than seeking justice or the truth.
When this case collapses, President Obama and the racebaiting reverands will have tons of egg on their faces. It couldn't happen to more deserving people.
UPDATE: A Florida judge has set George Zimmerman's bail at $150,000 .
Tags: Trayvon Martin , President Obama , Al Sharpton , Jesse Jackson , Racism , Affidavits , Angela Corey , Prosecutor , Alan Dershowitz , Defense Attorney , Law Professor , Harvard
Posted Saturday, April 21, 2012 7:07 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 22-Apr-12 10:40 AM
I was not there and cannot say what happened.
All I know is the unarmed guy got gunned down.
Being shot dead, he had no later chance to say what happened.
Dispatchers told the gunman to stop stalking the individual and to wait for professional intervention and resolution.
Stalking continued anyway, and the unarmed man ended up gunned down.
It seems curious to me that prosecution is being discouraged.
And that leaves race and hoodies out of the discussion.
Same circumstances, two descendants of the Mayflower trip, not black and Hispanic tensions in Florida, put it in Salem where the Mayflower Stone is, and it remains very curious and problematic.
Comment 2 by Adrianne at 22-Apr-12 02:57 PM
Neighborhood watch volunteers are not supposed to carry guns on their watch. They are supposed to be the eyes of the police, call in any suspected problems and then leave it to the police. GZ had a gun, after many times being told not to and then he pursued after calling in his suspicions regarding Trayvon Martin. If these two things had been different, TM would be alive today to tell his side of the story. Can anyone say Murder 1?
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 22-Apr-12 03:08 PM
Can anyone say self defense? I don't know all the things that happened that night but I know that Zimmerman had blood on his head. Assuming that he didn't give himself that wound, which is easy to determine through forensic tests, the next question is whether there was a fight. If there was a fight, was it reasonable for Mr. Zimmerman to defend himself?
I won't render a verdict because I haven't seen all the evidence. You shouldn't either.
Comment 3 by Adrianne at 22-Apr-12 03:52 PM
"If there was a fight, was it reasonable for Mr. Zimmerman to defend himself?"
the two NEVER should have come in contact with one another. Zimmerman stalked the minor and confronted him. GZ was in the wrong here and in many other places. His actions led to TM's death. stop the selective blindness.
Comment 4 by Gary Gross at 22-Apr-12 04:35 PM
You can't know that Zimmerman "stalked the minor" because you weren't there.
Comment 5 by FatfreeToothpaste at 23-Apr-12 08:50 AM
My father used to tell me not to put my hands on people. Not to get into confrontations. You never know, the idiot might have a gun.
This was a chance meeting of two idiots. One of the idiots had a gun.
One less idiot in the world now. Tough Shit.
Comment 6 by Clint at 23-Apr-12 11:25 AM
Adrienne says: "Neighborhood watch volunteers are not supposed to carry guns on their watch."
Not true, even if the media and online commenters say it a billion times. Florida law does not require neighborhood watch volunteers to disarm themselves to perform watch duties. Try looking for yourself before you believe what you see in the media or blogs.
Comment 7 by Bob J. at 23-Apr-12 01:58 PM
Well, at least we know this much: we know which LFR posters get their news from MSNBC.
Comment 8 by Kevin Balon at 15-Jul-13 10:29 PM
I am so happy I stumbled upon your site. I really found you by accident, while I was browsing on Google for something else. Anyways I am here now and would just like to say thank you for a useful post and an all round inspiring blog. (I also like the theme/design), I don't have time to read through it all at the minute, but I have added your website to my favorites, so when I have time I will be back to read more. Please do keep up the awesome job!
Walker's GOTV operation
Political veterans constantly preach that the scariest thing that can happen to a campaign is for a politician to start getting complacent. Based on this article , Gov. Walker shouldn't worry too much about getting complacent:
GREEN BAY, WI - The Republican Party of Wisconsin is drumming up support for Gov. Scott Walker with 'Super Saturday.' Volunteers are making phone calls from offices across the state, from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.
They're even having a competition between cities, to see who can rally the most support ahead of the recall election that's scheduled for June 5, just 45 days away. The Green Bay Victory Center has a goal of making 7,000 phone calls to voters in just 12 hours .
That's what a campaign that isn't complacent looks like. This is impressive, too:
"I think we should give him a chance. And I think at this point, some of his policies, and the things he's ensued are beginning to work, so give him a chance,' said Marian Krumberger, a volunteer.
Krumberger is one of the 30 volunteers expected at the Green Bay Victory Center . She talked about her support for the Governor.
If you've got 30 volunteers making phone calls on a spring day, you've got enthusiastic supporters. That doesn't bode well for the union-bought candidate. Neither does this:
The Victory Center in Green Bay made nearly 2,000 calls in their first two hours Saturday. Most volunteers work in three hour shifts.
Of course, Democrats tried painting a rosy face on things:
"At the end of the day, this is about Scott Walker promoting Scott Walker, and not about the people of Wisconsin,' said Democratic Party Spokesperson, Graeme Zielinski.
Zielinski added this Saturday isn't super at all.
"There's nothing super about job loss and criminal corruption, there's nothing super about the division he's brought to our state,' said Zielinski.
Zielinski didn't bother mentioning that cities and school boards have started running surpluses where they'd been running deficits when Gov. Doyle's administration was in office. Things stunk under Gov. Doyle.
This presidential election year is shaping up differently thanks to Scott Walker. His agenda and his appeal make Wisconsin a battleground state. Depending on how Gov. Walker's recall election turns out, I think there's a better than 50/50 shot at Wisconsin flipping into the red column.
There's alot riding on this recall election for both sides. If the unions dump tons of money into defeating Gov. Walker, which they will, but Gov. Walker still wins, it'll be another stinging defeat for the unions. If they're defeated, that puts President Obama's campaign fighting an uphill fight.
With the Wisconsin GOP GOTV operation off to a successful start, Democrats, especially the unions, have alot to worry about.
Tags: Recall Elections , Call Centers , Scott Walker , Wisconsin , Reforms , School Districts , Cities , Balanced Budgets , Surpluses , GOP , President Obama , Unions , Jim Doyle , Democrats , Election 2012
Posted Saturday, April 21, 2012 11:57 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 23-Apr-12 07:33 AM
I think the Republicans have over time been better than the Democrats at GOTV effort. I believe that is why an election like the Dayton-Emmer one was so close. The Dems in greater numbers stayed home.
You are quite correct that Walker will be making an intense GOTV effort. However, the Dems will not stay home on that one. It will be a good one to watch.
Comment 2 by eric z at 23-Apr-12 07:36 AM
It is exactly the GOTV success of the Republicans that makes the Dems so strongly opposed to the disenfranchisement effort of the ALEC-inspired Kiffmeyer et al. photo ID thing to try gutting same day registration and voting, which Republicans want knowing their GOTV apparatus has been effective. Your success is cause for your wanting to tilt the playing field unfairly to be meeting strong opposition. And the nationwide dimension of it - ALEC, who else?
Gov. Dayton sides with unions...again
It's almost like this isn't news. Gov. Dayton sided with his union thug allies rather than with parents:
St. Paul- Governor Mark Dayton announced Friday his rejection of efforts by the legislature to ensure child care assistance dollars are not diverted to unions.
Senate Assistant Majority Leader Ted Lillie (R-Lake Elmo), chief author of House File 1766 (SF 1630), gave the following statement after the Governor's veto.
'I am surprised and disappointed by the Governor's decision to leave dollars meant for the care of our children unprotected from union hands.
Our priority is to act as faithful stewards of taxpayer dollars and also to protect private businesses from government overreach. With his veto today, the Governor does nothing to prevent unions from capturing tax payer dollars intended for the care of our children,' said Senator Lillie.
This bill was developed in response to Governor Dayton's call for an election to unionize child care providers in Minnesota. The Minnesota Senate filed an amicus brief in support of child care providers' case.
On April 6th, 2012, Ramsey County Judge Dale Lindman ruled that Governor Dayton exceeded his authority in ordering a union election for certain in-home child care providers, halting the union election from proceeding and attorneys fees and reasonable costs were awarded to the plaintiffs.
Senate Majority Leader David Senjem (R-Rochester) continued, 'the Governor fails to understand the purpose of child care assistance dollars. His veto today takes dollars meant for our kids' care and potentially diverts them to union coffers. Like his call for an election to unionize child care providers, his actions today indicate that the Governor's loyalties lie with his union allies.
Our priority continues to be growing jobs, reducing taxes and ensuring our state is the best place to raise kids.'
Theoretically speaking, if unions can take dues from small business child care providers, then it's a given that these small businesses will raise prices. That means already-strapped parents will have to pay more out-of-pocket.
Gov. Dayton, like President Obama, is totally wedded to PEUs. If they say jump, Mssrs. Dayton and Obama ask how high. (It's different with President Obama and construction unions, though. See Pipeline, Keystone XL Project.)
Gov. Dayton and the DFL are wedded to the PEUs. They've clearly shown that their loyalties are with PEUs, not with non-union families. They clearly aren't with child care providers or small businesses, either.
The government assistance that's sent to parents should stay there. Unions shouldn't get a finger on that assistance. It's meant to pay for child care costs, not the DFL's political campaigns.
The GOP majorities in the legislature have shown where their allegiances lie. They've helped speed up permitting so businesses can expand at faster than glacial speed. They've passed tax reform that will created dynamic, private sector jobs.
After that, Rep. Thissen and the DFL whine that the GOP hasn't passed a jobs bill. That's total nonsense. What they haven't done is pass a union stimulus/debt bill, aka a bonding bill.
Minnesotans have to decide whether they prefer the party that sides with corrupt unions over families or the party that's motivated by creating longlasting prosperity.
If it's the former, vote DFL. If you prefer longlasting prosperity, vote MNGOP.
Tags: Child Care , Small Businesses , Ted Lillie , Dave Senjem , Reforms , Permitting , Taxes , MNGOP , Mark Dayton , Unions , DFL , Election 2012
Posted Sunday, April 22, 2012 2:22 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 22-Apr-12 10:36 AM
It amazes me every time I visit how one side is always right and the other side always wrong. And there is a paper thin real difference between the two.
The Pied Piper no more?
A politicians' most finely honed instinct is re-election. That's certainly proving true. With Election Day nearing, Democrats are jumping off President Obama's sinking ship :
North Carolina's Brad Miller, who voted for the law, now laments that "we would all have been better off" if Congress had dealt with more pressing issues "and then came back to health care."
Barney Frank complained that the Democrats "paid a terrible price for health care." And Virginia's outgoing Sen. Jim Webb said the law would be Obama's "biggest downside" in the election and had cost him "a lot of credibility as a leader."
Meanwhile, stalwart Massachusetts liberal Elizabeth Warren is now calling to repeal a piece of ObamaCare, the 2.3% tax on medical devices, because, she says, it "disproportionately impacts the small companies with the narrowest financial margins."
Warren, by the way, is running for the Senate seat occupied by Republican Scott Brown, whose victory in 2010 was a result of the public's intense opposition to ObamaCare.
Former Alabama Rep. Artur Davis went furthest. "I think the Affordable Care Act is the single least popular piece of major domestic legislation in the last 70 years," he said. "It was not popular when it passed; it's less popular now." Ouch.
President Obama's signature achievement is wildly unpopular. Rep. Davis is right in saying that it wasn't "popular when it passed" and that "it's less popular now."
When President Obama ran in 2008, his campaign did everything right. The tone to his message was solid. The crowds were large and energized. Most importantly, he was a blank slate. That meant whatever voters envisioned as their dream candidate, he became.
Then something terrible happened, at least from his perspective. President Obama gathered a record. He wasn't a blank slate anymore. People started noticing that they didn't have much in common with President Obama. His ratings dropped significantly.
Now, they're following their Pied Piper in smaller numbers and with less enthusiasm. This song says what's happened to the Obama magic:
Tags: President Obama , Enthusiasm Gap , Jim Webb , Elizabeth Warren , Barney Frank , Artur Davis , Pied Piper , Obamacare , Brad Miller , Democrats , Election 2012
Posted Sunday, April 22, 2012 6:39 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 22-Apr-12 10:34 AM
Not enough. Do it right, single payer, next time.
At some point Scalia, Thomas and Roberts will die and hopefully be replaced by humanitarians. Perhaps not in my lifetime, but ultimately.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 22-Apr-12 02:24 PM
Do it right. Get rid of the costly government interference with health care. Let families, working in concert with their physicians, decide what they need or don't need.
Hopefully, at sometime soon, Justices Ginsburg & Breyer will retire & we'll appoint justices that actually give a damn about the Constitution. Hopefully, that'll happen within the next decade.
Radio station owners, spines and the Left's censorship
Last week, Mitch Berg wrote a brilliant series of articles about U of M Professor WB Gleason's threat to file an FCC complaint against Late Debate's Jack Tomczak. Specifically, Gleason threatened to file the FCC complaint over some tweets made by Jack.
As Mitch highlighted in this post , the FCC doesn't have jurisdiction over tweets:
Of course, Channel Five doesn't phrase their requests for interviews with terms like 'asshole'. Which was Tomczak's sole mistake. But, I hasten to add, that took place on Twitter - a place where the FCC has no jurisdiction.
Despite conservatives' warning the station that they shouldn't cave to Gleason, that's precisely what 95.9 did. To say that this touched off a firestorm amongst conservatives is understatement. Jen DeJournett, co-founder of VOICES of Conservative Women, sent this letter to Andrew Lee at AM1130:
His April 22, 2012
Dear Mr. Lee:
VOICES of Conservative Women (VOICES) would like to encourage your radio station to pick up the highly regarded show called the 'The Late Debate'. I have participated numerous times as a guest of the show and been a frequent listener to the program. I have found their guests and the issues they discuss to be relevant to the political dialogue in Minnesota. In addition, 'The Late Debate' has had numerous conservative women as guests on their program. Just last week, they hosted a 'Mom's Table' where every guest was a mom and responded to the timely topic of Hilary Rosen. No other radio program has had the sheer number of women guests in their tenure. Allowing our perspective to be heard is critical and appreciated.
Founded just a few years ago here in Minnesota, VOICES of Conservative Women has grown to become one of the premier women focus organization in the upper Midwest. Our current supporter base is 25,000 women from all over the country. VOICES of Conservative Women is a 501(c)4 national non-profit, nonpartisan organization that works to encourage women to be more involved in public policy and run for elected office. We also work to educate on issues that relate to our core mission: fiscal responsibility, limited government and free market principles.
Our 527 political fund (VOICESPAC) works to elect strong, qualified women candidates who support our mission.
VOICES has worked very hard since our inception to encourage women to get involved in politics and has a strong, proven track record of electing qualified women to office.
We hope that you will seriously consider bringing 'The Late Debate' to your radio station. Their willingness to be unique and newsworthy has made them a delight to listen to and a much needed voice in the Twin Cities radio market.
If you need any additional information from our organization, please let us know and we will provide it to you.
Best Regards,
Jennifer DeJournett, President
VOICES of Conservative Women
This is the highest profile letter to Mr. Lee to pick up Jack's and Ben's show. It isn't the only letter or email that Mr. Lee has received from conservatives.
Rather than just focusing narrowly on the situation confronting Jack and Ben, it's important that conservatives recognize some important facts. First, the far left is waging war agains talk radio. That's what's driven the Left's attacks against Rush Limbaugh.
They didn't have a prayer in hell of taking him down. Ever. The Left's goal was to get station managers to volunarily put silencers on 'controversial' talk radio hosts like Jack and Ben. In this instance, controversial is defined as people brave enough to ignore the Left's false premises and baseless attacks.
Another definition of controversial might be effective in exposing the Left's agenda of intimidation and creating controversy from thin air.
Jack and Ben will soon return to the airwaves. They're too talented and too informed not to be part of talk radio's lineup in the Twin Cities.
Tags: W.B. Gleason , FCC , Thug Tactics , Censorship , DFL , Jack Tomczak , Benjamin Kruse , First Amendment , Talk Radio
Posted Sunday, April 22, 2012 3:28 PM
Comment 1 by Rex Newman at 22-Apr-12 06:53 PM
Looking at the many tweets and posts, I think we're overall being a bit hard on the 95.9 management. Let's not forget that 1. it's their station, 2. they gave Jack and Ben the chance to begin with and 3. they're not getting rich having done so.
I further submit that this ultimately may prove the right decision long term for The Late Debate.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 22-Apr-12 08:10 PM
Fair points Rex.
Comment 2 by eric z at 23-Apr-12 07:29 AM
Who are Jack and Ben? It sounds like ho-hum talk radio, a low denominator aimed at reinforcing the biases of anyone who'd take the time to listen to such stuff as talk radio. Gary, you're not a talk radio junkie, are you?
Comment 3 by eric z at 23-Apr-12 07:51 AM
I notice Andy at Residual Forces has a short post on this same thing, and he identifies it as a Clear Channel operation. Isn't Clear Channel biased from the get-go, so if they pull something in their program, doesn't the smoke-fire old saying have credibility?
What exactly is in dispute? Neither here, nor Andy's post gives a clear statement of that. Is it a have to go look at Mitch Berg thing?
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 23-Apr-12 08:30 AM
What's in question: Gleason's ability to have the FCC rule on Jack Tomczak's tweets. WBGleason had a heated exchange with Jack on Twitter. The last I looked, the FCC didn't have jurisdiction over Twitter. It's that whole First Amendment thing.
