August 1-3, 2014
Aug 01 01:56 DFL: Felons should vote Aug 01 03:01 First bipartisan reform bill Aug 01 13:05 IRS contributes, Democrats say 'what IRS scandal'? Aug 01 14:00 Rauner leads in Illinois Aug 02 09:34 Greta blasts Harry Reid, Democrat Senate Aug 03 03:05 Keith Downey vs. Ken Martin Aug 03 03:00 Nolan vs. Mills, minimum wage edition Aug 03 13:32 Grimes' 8-minute temper tantrum
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
DFL: Felons should vote
TakeAction Minnesota, which is a major part of the DFL's fundraising network and a significant part of the DFL's GOTV operation, thinks that felons should vote :
All Minnesotans should be able to have their voice heard on Election Day. We call on the Minnesota legislature to restore voting rights to Minnesotans who are on probation for a felony conviction.
Why is this important?
50 years ago this summer was a breakthrough moment in the Civil Rights Movement. It was the 'Freedom Summer', 1964, and thousands of people put their lives on the line to register voters. As a result, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act into law.
Flash forward to this very summer right here in Minnesota, where more than 60,000 of our neighbors, colleagues, friends and family members still don't have an essential civil right. The right to cast a vote on Election Day.
These Minnesotans are living, working, and paying taxes in our communities but will have to sit and watch as their neighbors head to the polls this fall. And like in 1964, the voices being shut out are disproportionately African American.
Last year, a bill was introduced in the state legislature. Now, during the anniversary of the Freedom Summer, we're calling on legislators to restore this civil right.
Why should convicted felons be allowed to vote before they've paid their debt to society? The people who can't vote are felons who still haven't completed their probation. Until these convicted felons finish that part of their sentence, they haven't paid their debt to society. Further, it isn't guaranteed that these felons will complete their probation without committing another crime.
I know what it is to stand before a judge, wade through a confusing probation process, not knowing when or if I could participate in my democracy again. Being afraid to vote for fear of being charged with a felony is not what Minnesota is about.
It isn't that complicated. When a felon serves the last day of their probation, they're eligible to vote. The Department of Corrections is required by law to tell these criminals when they're eligible to vote again. That seems exceptionally straightforward.
In a state that has a proud voting tradition, the home of Hubert H. Humphrey the Chief Author of the Civil Rights Act, we can do better. Every Minnesotan should have the right to vote and have their voice counted.
That's just a sympathy play. It isn't an attempt to make a thoughtful appeal on the issue. It's just meant to tug on ill-informed voters' heart strings. This paragaph isn't much better:
But just like during the summer of 1964, change won't come if we don't demand it. Add your name to our petition, and together, we can keep building on the dream of the Civil Rights Act.
The difference between this attempt and 1964 is that the leaders behind the 1964 civil rights movement weren't convicted felons who'd committed violent crimes. They were simply men of conscience who made the case that people should be able to vote, regardless of the color of their skin.
The people pleading for the right to vote here are men who've had their rights stripped because they committed a serious crime against society. There isn't a state in the nation that lets felons vote until they've paid their debt to society in full.
This is the Democrats' latest attempt to increase voter turnout. It isn't accidental that they mentioned that "the voices being shut out are disproportionately African American." If I had to guess, I'm betting this is the DFL's attempt to increase voter turnout for the governor's race and the US Senate race, and, to a lesser extent, the other constitutional offices.
This isn't about the next civil rights battle. It's about doing anything to keep Democrats in power in St. Paul.
Posted Friday, August 1, 2014 1:56 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 01-Aug-14 02:21 AM
Gary:
A couple of things. One does this group make any qualifications for if the felon wasn't legally able to vote to begin with (aka illegal alien).
And two, I some how have gotten on Matt Entaza's mail list. He has sent out in the last week or so two campaign pieces attacking Rebecca Otto for wanting to side with the Republicans for weakening voter id laws. Has Matt heard of that election judge in Ohio who got caught voting at least five times for President Obama? Is he aware that there is fraud going on in a House Primary race on the DFL side?
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
First bipartisan reform bill
When Congress passed the bill reforming the VA hospital system , it became the first bipartisan reform bill passed during the Obama administration.
The Senate gave final approval Thursday to sweeping legislation aimed at fixing the troubled Department of Veterans Affairs, marking a rare moment of bipartisan accord triggered by the widespread treatment delays veterans faced at agency facilities.
The legislation passed 91-3 a day after the House overwhelmingly approved the package. It now goes to President Obama's desk.
The $17 billion measure is intended help veterans avoid long waits for health care, hire more doctors and nurses to treat them, and make it easier to fire senior executives at the Veterans Affairs Department.
As with any bipartisan bill, this isn't a great bill. It definitely is flawed. With that being said, Republicans got Democrats to include the Republicans' top priorities in the bill.
First, the bill includes a provision that lets vets opt out of the VA system. Those opting out will get a voucher giving them the right to go to a private clinic or hospital. This provision isn't available to all vets, though it's available to a significant number of vets.
It's also a great first step towards demolishing the corrupt VA hospital system.
The other major concession Republicans won was a provision that gives the VA secretary the right to fire employees who aren't doing their jobs. Again, this is a major concession from Democrats, mostly because this gives Republicans the impetus to pass legislation that gives all cabinet secretaries this right.
Democrats will find it difficult to argue that only the VA secretary should have that authority, especially considering how popular this provision is with taxpayers. They're tired of hearing about people like Lois Lerner committing crimes, then getting put on paid administrative leave while the department conducts their investigation. Taxpayers want heads to roll.
It's pretty pathetic that the first truly bipartisan reform bill didn't pass until the sixth year of this Democratic administration. It's quite the indictment against President Obama's administration and Harry Reid's my-way-or-the-highway leadership. It's the best proof that Washington, DC needs a Republican majority in the US Senate. Without a GOP majority, there won't be another bipartisan bill passed during this administration.
Posted Friday, August 1, 2014 3:01 AM
No comments.
IRS contributes, Democrats say 'what IRS scandal'?
Cleta Mitchell's tireless work on the IRS scandal has turned up some interesting information :
Cleta Mitchell, who testified Wednesday to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, pointed out to Fox News Channel's Bill Hemmer that IRS employees belong to the National Treasury Employees Union, which has directed 94 percent of its contributions to Democrats this election cycle .
The union, she said, has given to 11 of the 18 Democrats on the House Oversight Committee.
'And, every time there is a hearing on any aspect of this investigation about the IRS targeting,' Mitchell said, 'the Democrats come in one by one and say the same thing over and over again. 'Let's shut this down. Let's shut this down.'
This fits perfectly into the Democrats' culture of corruption method of operation. A special interest organization or a government employees union contributes to a powerful Democrat's campaign and, suddenly, that union's scandal disappears. It hits the proverbial black hole, never to be seen again for the rest of eternity.
This type of quid pro quo enables corrupt bureaucrats to continue their corrupt practices because they know they're protected if they're ever caught. Why wouldn't the IRS let their ideology get in the way of their professional responsibilities? If their corruption ever got caught, Elijah Cummings would just get in front of a camera and complain that this is a partisan witch hunt, that Republicans were selectively leaking information that lacked proper context, etc.
It isn't a stretch to think that the IRS's campaign contributions contributed to the Democrats' change in tone. When the investigation focused on "rogue agents in Cincinnati", Democrats were outraged at the IRS's activities. The minute that people figured out that it wasn't confined to Cincinnati, the Democrats' storyline changed. I don't know when the IRS started contributing to the Democrats' campaigns but it wouldn't surprise me if their contributions coincided with the Democrats' change in tone.
That isn't proof but it isn't implausible either.
The Democratic members of the committee pressed the theme that the IRS also targeted progressive groups, though little support for that argument was received from the witnesses.
If I were advising Chairman Issa, I'd authorize Rep. Cummings to put an official committee report that a) listed the specific progressive groups that the IRS targeted, b) highlights what additional scrutiny the IRS gave to these progressive organizations and c) reported how long it took for these progressive organizations to get their applications approved.
Further, I'd impose a deadline that the report is due by. Finally, I'd tell Chairman Issa to prepare a chart listing a) all of the TEA Party organizations that the IRS asked intrusive questions of and b) whether these organizations' applications were approved and how long it took to get their applications approved.
That way, there could be a detailed, side-by-side comparison between the IRS's targeting of TEA Party organizations and the alleged 'targeting' of progressive organizations.
Imagine the visual contrast if it's shown how intrusive the additional IRS questions were for TEA Party organizations, how many of the TEA Party organizations still hadn't gotten their applications approved after 2 years and how the allegedly 'targeted' progressive organizations got their applications approved in a short amount of time.
That's something the Democrats and the IRS couldn't explain away. That's because the IRS scrutiny of TEA Party organizations was stifling, improper and possibly a violation of their civil rights.
Posted Friday, August 1, 2014 1:05 PM
No comments.
Rauner leads in Illinois
This midterm election is different compared with 2010. That was a wave election. This isn't. Still, this polling shows it isn't shaping up as a good year for Democrats:
Republican challenger Bruce Rauner has edged further ahead in his battle with Democratic incumbent Pat Quinn for the governorship of Illinois. The latest Rasmussen Report telephone survey of Likely Illinois Voters finds Rauner with a five-point lead, 44% to 39%, over Quinn. Seven percent (7%) like some other candidate in the race, and 10% are undecided.
If this polling isn't an outlier, it's bad news for a governor who shouldn't be in difficulty. This is Illinois, not Utah or Wyoming. If this polling holds through to election day, that might help down-ticket Republicans in Illinois.
It isn't that Quinn isn't properly financed. What Democratic incumbent in Illinois isn't properly financed for a general election? They don't exist. What, then, explains why Bruce Rauner is leading Gov. Quinn?
Part of the explanation, in my opinion, is that Illinoiss is talking like they'll have to make some drastic cuts to their public pension plans. They're staring down the gun barrel on unfunded liabilities. The only state that's probably in worse shape is California.
Another contributing factor to this race is that Rahm Emanuel is embroiled in a big fight with powerful public employee unions. It isn't good news for Democrats when the Democratic governor is staring at big cuts to public employee union pension funds. It's terrible news for Democrats when the Democratic governor is staring at big cuts to public employee union pension funds and the Democratic mayor of Chicago is embroiled in a big fight with powerful public employee unions.
It's difficult to see a path to victory for Gov. Quinn. He's only getting 39% of likely voters. That means 60% of likely voters have rejected him. Gov. Quinn's only shot at victory is going harsh negative against Rauner in his attempt to drive down turnout.
That's the only path to victory for Gov. Quinn.
Posted Friday, August 1, 2014 2:00 PM
No comments.
Greta blasts Harry Reid, Democrat Senate
Friday night, Greta van Susteren expressed her frustration with Harry Reid and the Democrat-controlled Senate. Here's what she said:
You know, I don't know what's going to happen in this year's midterms but I hope that the American people think long and hard, because if you're gonna say that something is a humanitarian crisis and it's so important for the nation and then you leave town, I can't think of a greater way to not do your job.
Greta spoke while the House voted on the immigration bill. She spoke specifically about how the House was still in session while passing a bill to fix the border crisis. She highlighted the fact that she didn't know if the Republican bill was a great bill or a terrible bill but she respected the fact that they were at least sticking around in an attempt to fix the problem.
She then lit into the Senate, saying that the Senate called the situation a humanitarian crisis before leaving for a 5-week vacation. Greta noted that they didn't even stick around to try and work through the differences between the House bill and the Senate bill.
That isn't surprising. Sen. Reid has practiced my-way-or-the-highway tactics since becoming Majority Leader. Sen. Reid is the chief source of the disintegrating attitude in DC. Between President Obama's hostility and trash-talking and Sen. Reid's daily lies, they're a two-man wrecking crew with their sights set on demolishing bipartisanship.
The chief lesson to be learned from Sen. Reid's irresponsible behavior is that Democrats aren't nice people that we simply disagree with as Gov. Romney used to say. It's that too many Democrat senators and congresscritters are despicable low-lifes who care more about winning political battles than they care about doing what's right for the nation.
Their priorities show in their my-way-or-the-highway style of governing. Their priorities show in how they turn 3 paragraphs and 128 words about economic growth into a 22-word sentence telling the world that "the rich" think they need another tax break.
Simply put, Harry Reid is a tyrant. He's turned the Senate into a graveyard, a place with 358 bills have died without so much as a committee hearing or a debate. He's taken away the right of Republicans to represent their states. For that matter, the Democrats don't represent their states. They represent Sen. Reid, who represents President Obama.
What's interesting is that Democrat senators haven't complained that they represent President Obama instead of representing their states. Since that's the case, perhaps it's time those states noticed that they aren't being represented. Perhaps it's time they elected someone willing to represent them, rather than electing someone who represents a tyrant and a power hungry president.
Posted Saturday, August 2, 2014 9:34 AM
Comment 1 by Gretchen Leisen at 02-Aug-14 03:43 PM
Could not have said it better. Thanks Gary for laying it all on the line.
Keith Downey vs. Ken Martin
Friday night, Keith Downey, the chairman of the Republican Party of Minnesota, faced off against Ken Martin, the chairman of the DFL. For the most part, it was nondescript, with the first questions focusing on each party's strategy with absentee ballots. It turned feisty, though, when Cathy Wurzer talked about the Cook Report changing its rating of the Eighth District congressional race to toss-up:
WURZER: How worried are Democrats about that race?
MARTIN: I wouldn't say we're worried but we aren't taking anything for granted. In a midterm, crazy things can happen and we're working very hard in the Eighth Congressional District. We've got a great candidate in Congressman Nolan who has actually done the hard work of governing and getting things done on behalf of his constituents and I think that alone will help him win re-election.
WURZER: Are you surprised that experts -- so-called experts -- think that this is a toss-up in what we've long thought of as a pretty deep blue district?
MARTIN: No, I'm not surprised. Over time, the district has changed, no doubt about it. The addition of those southern counties has made it more competitive. There's been a change in some of the demographics in the district sso I'm not surprised that pundits are saying that. I am surprised that they think it's competitive because I think the candidate they have is really out of touch with the voters in that district. You have a guy in Stewart Mills who was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple. He's never had to fill out a job application in his life and I don't think that the blue collar workers of the Eighth District are going to take well to someone like Stewart Mills.
I'm not surprised that Ken Martin immediately attacked Stewart Mills as an out-of-touch rich guy. I also wasn't surprised by Keith Downey's response:
DOWNEY: Well, take away the personal insults and I think Stewart Mills is actually a fantastic candidate for the Eighth and you combine that with the fact that people are figuring out that people on the Iron Range are waking up to the reality that Democrats are committed to pretty much shutting down mining entirely up on the Iron Range. You look at the values that Stewart Mills holds and his lifelong residency in the district. I think he's a great fit in that district.
What's especially noteworthy is what wasn't said . What didn't get said is that Ken Martin didn't dispute Chairman Downey's statement that the DFL wants to shut down mining. The reason why that's so noteworthy is because an attack unchallenged becomes the truth with voters.
Chairman Martin didn't have any wiggle room because he's still working hard at keeping the environmental activist wing of his party from bolting from the DFL's coalition. Right now, the DFL's coalition is fragile. Chairman Martin can't afford it to start breaking apart.
That's why Stewart Mills is a great candidate. He's totally committed to making mining the Range's economic growth engine for another generation. Rick Nolan isn't.
Martin's snotty remark that Stewart Mills has never filled out a job application in his life should be exploited by the Mills campaign. I'd recommend they turn that around and ask Nolan the last time he managed a company's health insurange plan. I'd ask him the last time he opened another major retail store that's committed to paying its employees more than the minimum wage.
I'd ask those questions because they'd expose Nolan to be the career politician he's always been. I'd ask those questions to highlight the fact that Mills Fleet Farm is a popular store in the north country.
Friday night, Ken Martin and Keith Downey met on Almanac's set. Martin hurled insults while looking defensive. Downey debated while looking confident about the position Republicans are in.
Posted Sunday, August 3, 2014 3:05 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 04-Aug-14 07:54 AM
Gary:
While it sounds like Keith has done a good job here Ken should be reminded the district as constructed in the past has had to have those southern counties added in part because people needing jobs (you know those lack of mining jobs) moved to places like the Twins Cities or North Dakota with their families to get those jobs.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Nolan vs. Mills, minimum wage edition
Rick Nolan must think he's got a hot issue. From the start of this campaign, he's railed that Stewart Mills doesn't understand the voters in the Eighth District because he's a "one-percenter." This article says that Nolan is campaigning on the issue:
Increasing the federal minimum wage is front and center in Minnesota's Eighth Congressional District race. "Stewart Mills is against increasing the minimum wage," an AFSCME television ad says.
Actually, the ad was pulled because it's dishonest and defamatory. Further, it was paid for by Nancy Pelosi's PAC, which means that TV stations aren't protected from lawsuits if the content is found to be defamatory.
While Nolan, AFSCME and the Democratic Party focus on minimum wage jobs, Stewart Mills and other pro-growth Republicans have focused on creating high-paying jobs:
"Stewart does not support an increase in the federal minimum wage," said Mills campaign spokesperson Chloe Rockow. "But that's because he thinks that the best way to create jobs, the best way to help people in minimum wage jobs is to make sure that there are better paying jobs; more jobs that require higher skills and the way to get those jobs is to grow the economy." Mills says his company, Mills Fleet Farm, pays its employees a rate above the state minimum wage.
Voters in the Eighth District need to ask themselves if they'd rather vote for a candidate whose economic platform is raising the federal minimum wage or a candidate who has created hundreds of jobs that pay more than the minimum wage.
Further, do voters in the Eighth District want to be represented by a man who's more worried about raising the minimum wage of existing jobs or a represented by a man who's worried about creating lots of new jobs that pay well above the minimum wage? If they want the former, they should vote for Rick Nolan. If they want to be represented by someone whose life has centered on creating new jobs that pay significantly more than the minimum wage, then Stewart Mills is the clear choice.
Considering the fact that the median household income for the Iron Range is almost $25,000 a year less than the statewide average, why wouldn't you vote for the candidate who wants to create lots of new jobs that pay significantly higher wages than the minimum wage?
Then there's the fact that Nolan can't tell the truth if his life depended on it:
'Ironically, my opponent, Stewart Mills III, is paid $570,000 a year, nearly $300 an hour, by his family firm, even though $45 an hour is the going rate for a position like his," Nolan said. "And yet he has the audacity to oppose raising the minimum wage for everyday hardworking Americans to $10.10 an hour?"
That's proof Nolan is a liar. He knows there aren't any executive vice presidents of major retail chains getting paid $93,600 a year. This is further proof that Rick Nolan will say anything to get elected :
Northern Minnesota is known for its great fishing, so perhaps it's fitting that tracking 8th District Congressman Rick Nolan's position on a bill that deregulates the mining industry and fast tracks the permitting process for PolyMet is a bit like watching a fish flopping around on a dock: first he's against it, then he's for it and now he once again opposes it, this time promising to vote against the legislation if it 'comes anywhere near close to becoming law.'
The reaction of the those who gathered in Bohannon Hall on that Saturday afternoon is perhaps best summed up by 32-year-old Jesse Peterson, who characterized Nolan's responses and actions with respect to HR 761 as 'incredibly deceptive and reflecting a willingness to be phony.'
First, Nolan's solution for mining was a mining institute. Then he said he supported PolyMet "if it could be done" in an environmentally safe way. Now, he's fully supportive of PolyMet...sorta. He supports PolyMet even though, according to environmental activists, it might pollute an entire watershed. On the other hand, Nolan opposes the Enbridge pipeline :
Citing environmental and economic concerns, the Minnesota Democrat issued a statement in which he spoke of potential threats to environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands, porous sandy soil, drinking water sources and what he termed some of the cleanest lakes in the state.
In other words, Rick Nolan supports PolyMet until the day after the election, when he'll return to his environmental activist roots. Environmental activists haven't said anything since the DFL State Convention. Have they gotten a wink and nod from Nolan that he'll support them after the election? That's certainly possible, isn't it? It isn't like Nolan would be the first politician to break a campaign promise.
The simple solution is to vote for the candidate who's consistently advocated for PolyMet and who has created lots of new jobs that pay significantly more than the minimum wage. That's Stewart Mills.
Posted Sunday, August 3, 2014 3:00 AM
No comments.
Grimes' 8-minute temper tantrum
Alison Lundergan-Grimes' speech at the Fancy Farm Picnic wasn't a speech as much as it was an 8-minute long temper tantrum:
The highlight of Ms. Grimes' temper tantrum came 6:10 into her speech. Here's what she said:
Now I want you to put aside the partisan attacks and you'll see that one of us represents the Washington establishment and one of us represents Kentucky.
That's rich. Ms. Lundergan-Grimes speech is one negative attack after another, one temper tantrum after another. It makes sense that the candidate making the hyperpartisan attacks would then tell the people to "put aside the partisan attacks." The only other notable thing Ms. Lundergan-Grimes said was "Sen. McConnell, you seem to think that President Obama is on the ballot this year. He's not."
That's Ms. Lundergan-Grimes feeble attempt to distance herself from the Democrats' agenda. When Ms. Lundergan-Grimes wasn't throwing an on-stage hissy fit, she was talking up President Obama's and Sen. Reid's agenda item-by-item.
I haven't paid much attention to this race but after watching Ms. Lundergan-Grimes' temper tantrum, it's easy to understand why Sen. McConnell has criticized her. Her stump speech is high on energy, high on partisan whining and short on talking about a pro-coal agenda.
Ms. Lundergan-Grimes tried talking up her pro-coal credentials once. She even hired a British actor to wear a hard hat in her pro-coal ad. While defending herself, she said that she'd stand up to Harry Reid. When he held a fundraiser for her and other Democrat candidates, though, she was silent as a mouse.
Of course, she talked about labor's right to organize. Al Franken's doing the same thing here in Minnesota. Both stop short, though, of saying they're pro-mining. They're both trying to win the labor vote without being pro-labor on mining.
Here's a hint to Ms. Lundergan-Grimes: you can't be pro-labor and anti-mining. You can be one or the other. You can't be both.
The US Senate doesn't need another Elizabeth Warren. There's already one too many of them in there. Barbara Mikulski and Barbara Boxer don't need another companion pushing a hyperliberal agenda.
Kentucky needs a senator who will stand up to Harry Reid and President Obama. Kentucky needs a senator who's fought the EPA's anti-coal regulations.
Ms. Lundergan-Grimes didn't stand up to Harry Reid when she had the chance and she certainly didn't stand up for coal miners. That's why Ms. Lundergan-Grimes is wrong for Kentucky.
Posted Sunday, August 3, 2014 1:32 PM
No comments.
