August 1-2, 2018

Aug 01 10:26 Erin Murphy's statement on the Thurman Blevins shooting
Aug 01 13:00 Pawlenty, Housley campaign ad watch
Aug 01 22:23 Barack Obama's endorsement list

Aug 02 12:00 Sen. Schumer's 'forgetfulness'
Aug 02 12:35 Duluth News Tribune endorses Tim Pawlenty
Aug 02 20:00 Acosta's outburst, Sanders' reply
Aug 02 20:30 Rattling Bob Casey's cage

Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul

Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Erin Murphy's statement on the Thurman Blevins shooting

It's apparent that Erin Murphy hasn't thought about crime from a police officer's perspective. That's totally apparent after reading this article . First, Jeff Johnson said "I watched the body camera footage from the Thurman Blevins shooting today. It shows clearly that Blevins was carrying a gun and that the Minneapolis officer involved did everything he could to convince Blevins to surrender before firing his weapon. Serving our communities as a police officer is one of the hardest jobs in America today and we shouldn't second-guess the very difficult decisions they make until we have all of the facts."

Gov. Pawlenty issued a statement, saying "The actions of the Minneapolis police officers involved in the shooting of Thurman Blevins were clearly appropriate. Police officers protect our communities at extreme risk to themselves every day. We support and appreciate them. Those who claimed Blevins did not have a weapon or that officers acted improperly owe the officers an apology."

Next, compare those statements with what Erin Murphy said:




As I watched the body camera footage of Thurman Blevins death, I was struck not only by the end of his life and the hard questions it raises, but by the beginning of the video. From the first moment officers are on scene they are loudly swearing, and threatening a man who appears to be sitting on a curb with a woman and child. From the first moment the police are shouting, scaring him, pushing him, and engaging in a way that led to the awful ending of his life.



He ran, yes. He was armed, yes. He reportedly was drunk and had fired shots, yes. All of those things might have led to his death, but none of them had to. I don't understand why calmly starting a conversation wasn't an option or wouldn't have been a better course.

I don't know much about Thurman Blevins. Had the officers approached the situation differently he might be in jail right now for firing his weapon into the sky and ground, or could be sitting on that curb with his family enjoying a morning off. I don't know.


When a man (or woman) wields a gun, that officer has a responsibility to protect himself/herself and their partner. That isn't a situation where the officers have a ton of options. It's literally a kill-or-be-killed situation.

Notice how Rep. Murphy blames the officers, not Mr. Blevins. Rep. Murphy, if you were faced with this life-or-death situation, would you take a pacifist's approach? Would you let a person who has a gun wave it around? If that's truly what you'd do, there's a high probability that you'd be shot. Further, by taking the pacifist's approach, you'd put your partner's life in jeopardy, too.

This story is troubling:




More protests are expected in Minneapolis over the decision not to charge officers involved in the June 23 deadly shooting of Thurman Blevins. The two Minneapolis officers involved say he pointed a gun at them during a short chase. CBS News' Dean Reynolds spoke to Blevins' sister and cousin who dispute the officers' version of events. Blevins' sister Darlynn and cousin Sydnee Brown admitted he had a gun on him but say he was scared for his life when he ran from police.



"It was the way that they approached him when they came out of the vehicle," Darlynn said. "I mean, who else is not going to run if somebody is behind me telling me 'I'm going to shoot you. I'm going to kill you.'"


First, here's the police body cam video:

[Video no longer available]

Then there's this interview of Blevins' family:

[Video no longer available]

Let's state something here emphatically. Gov. Dayton's reckless statements after the Philando Castile shooting contribute each day to the tension between minority communities and police officers. Gov. Dayton said that "Would this have happened if those passengers, the driver were white? I don't think it would have." Since that day, tensions have escalated. Rep. Murphy's statements just further escalate the tensions.

That's inexcusable.

Posted Wednesday, August 1, 2018 10:26 AM

Comment 1 by eric z at 01-Aug-18 11:19 AM
Thurman Bevins is not running for any office. This is Lee Atwater's and GWH Bush's Willie Horton stuff. It is so far off point leading to an election that it sucks. At least Atwater, in dying, apologized for his stuff.

The election will not be about Bevins. It will be about single payer and income inequality and getting money out of politics (the latter being proclaimed by many as a goal, but actions speak louder than words.)

And when it comes to money influencing politics wrongly, you have Pawlenty's recent beltway work as a banking lobbyist. That will hurt him as impeaching his credibility - he wants money to own politics.

Bevins is somebody's ineffective smokescreen offered in front of the Pawlenty lobbying record, with a hope to distract and disorient voters from the truth.

Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 01-Aug-18 01:20 PM
You mean Al Gore's Willie Horton ad, right? Further, since when is addressing crime & law enforcement irrelevant to elections? Is it that you don't care about the safety of your fellow citizens? Trust me when I tell you that law enforcement will be a significant portion of this election. (Think illegal immigration.)

As for Pawlenty's work, I don't think that'll make a bit of a difference in this election. People don't care about that as much as they care about whose policies will bring prosperity & safety to their lives.

Pawlenty, Housley campaign ad watch

Tim Pawlenty has started running an ad that takes a shot at Gov. Dayton's incompetence in administering government assistance programs. Before we watch the ad, though, it's important to note that Pawlenty has listed this issue as a high priority on his campaign's issues page .

He wrote "Whether it is a driver's license renewal system that doesn't work, broken healthcare websites, or childcare providers allegedly defrauding the state of a massive amount of money and sending some of that money to terrorists overseas, state government needs to be held more accountable. Too often, state government is not held accountable and taxpayers are left to pay the price. As just one example, a recent audit from the Office of the Legislative Auditor found the state is paying hundreds of millions in benefits to people not even eligible because state government fails to verify income eligibility. We will properly verify eligibility and use the hundreds of millions currently being wasted to lower health care costs and provide better care to Minnesotans in need. It's time to hold state government more accountable and put hardworking Minnesotans first."

Here's Pawlenty's ad:

[Video no longer available]

Rating this ad

I consider this ad to be effective. First, Pawlenty 'narrates' the ad, in essence telling people what he thinks is important while highlighting what's wrong with government. Next, he closes by saying that he'd use those savings to lower health care costs for Minnesotans who work hard and obey the law.

Next up is Karin Housley's first ad:

[Video no longer available]

Rating this ad

I rate this ad effective, too. First, Sen. Housley speaks for herself, which is always the most effective way of getting the message across. Next, she explains her governing philosophy. Simply put, she wants to 'drain the swamp' and get government out of the average citizen's way. She wants government "working for you, not against you." Finally, she tells voters that she understands "that the best place for your hard-earned money is in your pocket."

In both cases, the ads were short, concise and about things that Minnesotans care about.

UPDATE: I saw Jeff Johnson's first ad tonight:

[Video no longer available]

Rating this ad

Johnson's ad definitely goes after Tim Pawlenty, which is what I'd expect since Johnson first has to win the primary. I thought it was gratuitous for Johnson to say that Gov. Pawlenty "gave us higher spending." When Gov. Pawlenty started in office, Jim Knoblach chaired the House Ways and Means Committee. It's foolish to think that there was a massive spending increase at that time because Gov. Pawlenty inherited a $4.2 billion projected deficit from Jesse Ventura. Pawlenty and Knoblach eliminated that deficit without raising taxes. It's fair, however, to mention the fee increases.

The ad is a bit misleading in that Pawlenty had to battle DFL supermajorities in the 2007 and 2009 budget sessions. That's when Republicans relied on Gov. Pawlenty to be our goalie.

Overall, the ad is somewhat effective because it's somewhat misleading.

Posted Wednesday, August 1, 2018 10:13 PM

No comments.

Barack Obama's endorsement list

What's fascinating about President Obama's list of 8 candidates running for election across the United States isn't who's on the list. It's who's omitted from the list. What's fascinating is that the article starts by saying former "President Barack Obama weighed in on behalf of 81 candidates for federal and state offices on Wednesday, his first major batch of endorsements for the 2018 midterm elections." Then the article states "I'm proud to endorse such a wide and impressive array of Democratic candidates - leaders as diverse, patriotic, and big-hearted as the America they're running to represent. I'm confident that, together, they'll strengthen this country we love by restoring opportunity that's broadly shared, repairing our alliances and standing in the world, and upholding our fundamental commitment to justice, fairness, responsibility, and the rule of law. But first, they need our votes - and I'm eager to make the case for why Democratic candidates deserve our votes this fall."

What's noteworthy about President Obama's statement is that he didn't mention anything about creating jobs or strengthening the economy. That isn't surprising. It's just noteworthy. President Obama didn't put a priority on creating jobs while he was president. Why think that he cares about building a strong economy now? Here's the tweet with President Obama's endorsements:








Attached to the tweet are the candidates he's endorsing. It's rather fascinating that he didn't endorse any Democrats in Minnesota. It's fascinating that he didn't endorse Dianne Feinstein or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. This was a fun interview to watch:

[Video no longer available]

Here's something that I just thought of that's worth considering. President Obama didn't endorse a single DFL candidate in Minnesota. He didn't endorse Keith Ellison. He didn't endorse Tina Smith. Question: Is that because they're both Bernie followers? Also, as I said earlier, President Obama didn't endorse Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She's a Bernie candidate, too. Question: Is this the start of a fight between the establishment and the Bernie wings of the Democratic Party? Only time will tell but I can't rule it out.

RNC Chairman Ronna McDaniel made a great point in her interview with Harris Faulkner when she asked if Democrats would highlight the fact that President Obama had endorsed them. I'm betting they won't highlight it.

Posted Wednesday, August 1, 2018 10:23 PM

No comments.

Sen. Schumer's 'forgetfulness'

This LTE criticizes Sen. Schumer's 'forgetfulness'. That's noteworthy but it isn't the most distressing news for Democrats. The most distressing news is that it was written by a Democrat.

It opens by saying "Sen. Chuck Schumer's plea for financial support from Democratic New York State Assemblyman Dov Hikind may have answered a question recently proposed by both Schumer and the Watch commentator Allison Perry. Allison challenged any supporter of President Trump to provide information 'as to any way in which Donald Trump has improved your lives or this country.' And Schumer, in asking for contributions, got an earful."

A couple paragraphs later, the LTE said "You forgot to tell us about unemployment, which is lower than it has been in decades, while economic confidence is at a 17-year high. It's also at a record low for minorities. That's very good news, Senator. You forgot to tell us how the U.S. is beginning to emerge in energy dominance. The Department of Interior, which has led the way in cutting regulations, opened plans to lease 77 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico for oil and gas drilling, decreasing our reliance on foreign oil. That's very good news, Senator."

Read the entire LTE. Every GOP candidate should commit to memory each of these statistics. Lately, Democrats have started testing a talking point that goes something like this: 'yes, the economy is good but we don't know if it's helping everyone. We don't know that everyone is feeling the recovery.'

That's BS. If people weren't feeling the effects of the Trump/GOP economic policies, consumer confidence wouldn't be sky-high. Business investment wouldn't be happening at the high rate that it's happening. If the economy was in tough shape, people wouldn't be returning to the workforce in an attempt to find a job. Optimism is increasing. Pessimism is shrinking.

Those things didn't happen during the Obama administration. They're happening now, though.

The Democrats aren't happy with Sen. Schumer:

[Video no longer available]

For all the talk about a blue wave, the truth is that Democrats are a divided political party.

Posted Thursday, August 2, 2018 12:00 PM

No comments.

Duluth News Tribune endorses Tim Pawlenty

This Duluth News Tribune editorial endorses Tim Pawlenty as the Republicans' best shot at retaking the governorship. Normally, endorsements don't mean that much but I think this one matters. It isn't because I think the endorsement itself is that impactful. I think it's impactful because Tim Pawlenty was given the time and space to explain why he's running. In my estimation, he made the most of that opportunity.

In the editorial, Gov. Pawlenty said "People criticize me for, 'You held the line on this' or, 'You cut that.' You bet I did. When you're in a near depression and government's budgets have contracted, the answer isn't to go out to the taxpayers and say, 'We need to raise your taxes.' We had to tighten the government's belt, just like every family did, just like every house did."

In my estimation, that response was what you'd expect from the adult in the room. It didn't stop there, though. After that, Gov. Pawlenty stated "I'm 57 years old, I have no other political ambitions. I'm not running for any national office. I'm coming back to try to run for governor not because I need the title; I already have it. And I don't need to go to sit in the office; I've already done that for eight years," said Pawlenty, governor from 2003 to 2011 and a Republican presidential candidate in 2012. "I'm coming back for one reason, which is to get things done for my state and for the state that I love. And I think that at this point we need somebody who is strong enough and experienced enough and, frankly, willing to embrace enough risk to bridge the (political) divides. I am in the best position in this race to do that."

The difference between Gov. Pawlenty then and the conditions he'd walk into now are dramatic. When he first won the office, he inherited a $4.2 billion projected deficit from Jesse Ventura and a terrible economy. This time around, he'll walk in at a time when the US economy is hitting on all cylinders. Thanks to that robust economy, Gov. Pawlenty will have the chance to reform the tax system that Gov. Dayton created.




What does Pawlenty want to do if elected again? He wants to slow down health insurance premium increases and maybe even reduce them. He wants to provide tax relief to middle- and modest-income Minnesotans, including by getting rid of Minnesota's rare tax on Social Security benefits. And he wants to modernize and improve Minnesota schools and the state's educational system to finally close the achievement gap and to help meet growing workforce needs.


Tim Pawlenty is the best choice to lead the Republican Party of Minnesota. He's got universal name recognition. He's got the funding network that'll be needed to fight off the DFL candidate. Most importantly, he's got a reform-minded substantive agenda that conservatives can rally around.



Jeff Johnson is touting the issues he wants to run on. That's admirable. He'd be a fine governor if he got elected. The thing is, though, that he'd have a difficult time getting elected. You can't govern if you don't get elected.

Republicans have a fantastic opportunity to reform Minnesota's economy. To do that, though, we need unified Republican control of St. Paul. We can't get there with Jeff Johnson. He's already lost 2 statewide races. I'm not willing to bet that the third time is the charm. There's too much at stake to entrust to a 2-time loser.

Tim Pawlenty wants to focus on accomplishing sensible things. That's been out of style the past 8 years in St. Paul. Here's what I'm talking about:

[Video no longer available]

Posted Thursday, August 2, 2018 12:35 PM

Comment 1 by Rex Newman at 02-Aug-18 10:30 PM
First - the linked article doesn't display properly in all browsers, due to a too-clever-by-half quiz/script required to see the text.

Second - it's hardly a stirring endorsement, really just a series of quotes, mostly of Pawlenty. There is no criticism of Johnson nor any differences cited as the reason for the endorsement. Perhaps it was Pawlenty's "un-Republican" support of green energy, or other actions that "raised eyebrows among his own party." While that obviously would please the DFL, including their newspaper friends, if anything Republican primary voters should have the opposite reaction.

Third - I'm troubled that any newspaper would make primary election endorsements, even for their own party as the Duluth News Tribune also did for Tim Walz. This is "party business" and any endorsement must be partisan by definition.

My personal guess is that they fear that DFL-endorsed (a fact not mentioned) candidate Erin Murphy will lose in November. To justify endorsing Walz, they had to "balance" with a GOP preference. In their eyes, Pawlenty is the weaker opponent and/or the "cross the aisle" Pawlenty of old that will give the DFL most of what they want anyway.

Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 03-Aug-18 12:54 AM
Rex if you want to continually look at the past, that's your option. I won't waste my time on that. That bill is history. I've flushed it down the toilet. Further, if you think that TPaw hasn't learned his lesson, then that's just sad. He's actually run something & run it pretty well. Were there times that he disappointed us? Without question. Jeff Johnson has spent the last 10 years being a rebel who opposed, opposed, opposed.

He didn't have to make a decision that actually mattered. All he had to do was oppose things. That isn't difficult. When you're responsible for running something, sometimes you have to make difficult decisions. Jeff Johnson never had to worry about that. In that respect, he cast tons of free votes. TPaw actually had to make difficult decisions because he always had to deal with at least 1 DFL-controlled chamber of the legislature.

Comment 2 by Rex Newman at 03-Aug-18 09:27 AM
LFR readers know that I like pulling Gary's chain on TPaw, but my larger point still stands: beware of DFL outlets bearing GOP gifts. Is endorsing Pawlenty merely the price this paper paid to "objectively" support Walz? Or do they actually see Pawlenty as the weaker opponent, one with a target-rich record despite his money and name recognition?

I like my theory #1, that E-squared portends near certain defeat in November vs. Pawlenty or Johnson. Even if Murphy wins, the DFL could suffer a wave Legislative rout in 2020.

Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 03-Aug-18 10:28 AM
That's a fine theory, Rex, except that DNT has played it pretty much straight down the middle on endorsements throughout the years. They endorsed Chip Cravaack's re-election campaign, for instance. They aren't like the NY Times editorial board in that respect.

I think that Rex is right in that I'm fairly certain that E-Squared will benefit most from the CD-5 primary. As for TPaw, I think the DNT sees him as the class of this field. The number of quotes they included in their endorsing LTE let TPaw get his message out across a wide swath of the DNT's territory. If they thought he was just so-so, they wouldn't have given him that much free advertising.

Comment 3 by Rex newman at 03-Aug-18 08:18 PM
Aug 14, 2018 - the first time I'm rooting for a big DFL CD-5 turnout. Go E-squared!

Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 04-Aug-18 05:53 AM
Amen to that!

Acosta's outburst, Sanders' reply

Jackass Jim Acosta made another spectacle today, questioning White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee-Sanders about whether she thinks "the press is the enemy of the people." Rather than answering directly, Huckabee-Sander replied "It's ironic, Jim, that not only you and the media attack the president for his rhetoric when they frequently lower the level of conversation in this country. Repeatedly, repeatedly the media resorts to personal attacks without any content other than to incite anger." She then continued, saying "Including your own network said I should be harassed as a life sentence. That I should be choked. ICE officials are not welcomed in their place of worship" before finishing by saying "When I was hosted by the Correspondents' Association, which almost all of you are members of, you brought a comedian up to attack my appearance and call me a traitor to my own gender. As far as I know, I'm the first press secretary in the history of the United States that's required Secret Service protection."

Later, Acosta walked out of the briefing before tweeting this:








Here's the video of their fiery exchange:



The truth is that Jim Acosta is a spoiled brat with no manners. It's impossible to take him seriously. Further, his unprofessionalism is obvious to anyone with a functioning brain.



What's painfully obvious is that this was another attempt to get attention. This was the first time that Acosta talked about the White House Correspondents Dinner fiasco. He didn't bring it up, either. He spoke to it after Sarah Huckabee-Sanders brought it up along with a lengthy litany of other abuses she's suffered through. If the media wants to rebuild their credibility, they should stop acting like jackasses. Further, they should stop hiring insulting comediennes for the White House Correspondents Dinner. Nothing says 'Don't take me seriously' like an unfunny, unserious comedian.

The only thing that's worse is this:




Including your own network said I should be harassed as a life sentence. That I should be choked.


That qualifies as a legitimate reason to say that the press is the enemy of the people. That's what bitter, hateful people say. That isn't what a professional with self-respect says. Kicking a reporter out for asking a controversial statement is one thing.



Today's episode goes far beyond that. That was just mean-spirited unprofessional behavior. Acosta shouldn't have been allowed to walk out early. He should've been kicked out. Then the White House should've issued a statement highlighting acceptable and unacceptable behavior.

Posted Thursday, August 2, 2018 8:00 PM

No comments.

Rattling Bob Casey's cage

Let's be blunt about something. Bob Casey is a lightweight compared to his dad. Tonight, President Trump held a well-attended rally for Lou Barletta in Wilkes-Barre, PA. After the rally, Sen. Casey published this tweet, saying "Tonight my opponent asked for your support so that he can help President Trump. Not so he can help working families or seniors or students. Just so he can help the President advance his divisive corporate agenda. That's not the job of the Senator from Pennsylvania."

During the rally, President Trump rattled off some of the things that Sen. Casey fought against. For instance, Sen. Casey voted against a) the Trump/GOP tax cuts, b) confirming Justice Neil Gorsuch and c) repealing all of the anti-mining regulations that President Obama imposed on coal mines. Further, he's planning on voting against Judge Kavanaugh without bothering to meet with him. Finally, President Trump mentioned that Sen. Casey voted for the ACA and voted against repealing the ACA.

Call me crazy but I think Sen. Casey has cast tons of votes that aren't in the interest of Pennsylvanians. I'd also highlight the fact that he's been virtually invisible most, if not all, of his political life. He votes the way Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer and President Obama tell him to vote.

In other words, he's the furthest thing from a moderate this side of Bernie Sanders.

In an interview with Stuart Varney, Barletta talked about 'Trump Democrats':

[Video no longer available]

The truth is that this race could tighten significantly. If I was managing Sen. Casey's campaign, I'd be worried. President Trump spent a significant amount of time highlighting Sen. Casey's lackluster career, including his voting record on removing anti-mining regulations. That's a potential weakness for Sen. Casey.


Posted Thursday, August 2, 2018 8:30 PM

No comments.

Popular posts from this blog

January 19-20, 2012

Image
Jan 19 02:57 Minnesota Majority report an indictment against Minnesota's election integrity Jan 19 03:41 Ron Paul's Logic Jan 19 08:08 Newt thrives despite Mitt's hatchet job efforts Jan 19 09:19 Potential Game-Changer: Perry dropping out this am Jan 20 05:12 Newt takes Sen. Santorum to proverbial woodshed Jan 20 00:56 ABC, CNN, crawl into bed with National Enquirer Jan 20 04:00 Child Care small businesses file federal lawsuit Jan 20 04:41 Mitt's biggest policy blunder Jan 20 18:58 Gingrich, Reagan re-united Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Newt takes Sen. Santorum to proverbial woodshed Rick Santorum was really feeling it Thursday night. Then he said something that's certain to cause him pain this morning. Here's what he said that got him in trouble: SANTORUM: But you also have to admit that this freshman congressman who wasn't supposed to win a race came and did something you never did, which is blew the li...
Read more

March 21-24, 2016

Image
Mar 21 01:28 SCSU's budget cuts? Mar 21 02:29 When will the Range change? Mar 21 08:54 DFL's Marty in charge of environment Mar 21 11:45 OLA report, DFL & Meyer Associates Mar 23 12:48 Liberals' definition of moderate Mar 23 14:37 DFL activists: Government is racist Mar 24 08:59 IRRRB: Revamping vs. scrapping Prior Months: Jan Feb Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 SCSU's budget cuts? Cuts in Athletics at SCSU - Will it Really Save Money? by Silence Dogood With a $6,000,000 "structural deficit" and the need to "rebuild reserves by at least $3 million," SCSU has a $9,000,000 hole in its' FY17 budget. It doesn't take a Noble Prize in economics to figure out that reductions in expenditures (i.e., cuts) are going to be made at SCSU. On the Wednesday before Spring Break, SCSU President Dr. Earl H. Potter sent an email to the campus community announcing cuts to the athlet...
Read more

October 31, 2007

Oct 31 01:01 Media Matter's Alter Ego? Oct 31 03:32 Iraqi Civilian Casualties Dropping Oct 31 10:52 Hillary's Panderfest Blows Up in Her Face Oct 31 13:15 Brod, Emmer Call For Investigation of Mark Ritchie Oct 31 19:43 Ritchie's 'Episode' a Tempest in a Teapot? Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Prior Years: 2006 Media Matter's Alter Ego? One Media Matters-like organization is already too many. It appears as though there's another liberal apologist blog out there. Their name is News Hounds . The post that caught my attention dealt with last weekend's interview of Justin and Darryl Sharraltt on Hannity's America. To say that their post didn't attempt to refute Justin's story is understatement. In fact, they jump right into criticizing Mr. Hannity: Last night's (October 27th) Hannity's America was a strange magazine format which combined stories about mediums and haunted houses...
Read more