January 2-15, 2013
Jan 02 01:31 The DFL: No longer the party of the people, Part I Jan 04 06:27 The DFL: No longer the party of the people, Part II Jan 08 02:04 Obama's sycophants shocked he raised their taxes Jan 08 11:31 A lengthy battle, a 2 minute fight? Jan 10 06:44 Downey announces candidacy for GOP State Party Chair Jan 11 05:43 DFL's war against taxpayers, U of M edition Jan 14 04:18 Theis vs. Dorsher in HD-14A special election Jan 14 15:51 Is SCSU promoting unaccountability? Jan 15 16:04 Let's shut government down
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
The DFL: No longer the party of the people, Part I
One thing that's clear is that the DFL will pursue a counterproductive, anti-growth environmental policy either this year or next. It's understood that Alida Messinger, the lady writing the biggest checks to the DFL and the DFL's smear campaign machine, aka ABM, is pushing this agenda. History has shown that Alida Messinger won't let the truth prevent her from getting her way.
In 2010, ABM was repeatedly criticized for outright lying. In 2012, ABM accused the GOP of shutting down state government even though Gov. Dayton could've prevented it from happening by signing a lights on bill that would've funded state government through July 11, 2011.
Alida Messinger currently sits on the Board of Directors for Conservation Minnesota, an organization whose mission is to prevent precious metal mining in Minnesota. CM created MiningTruth.org because Mrs. Messinger wants to prevent precious metal mining. Here's a lie that CM didn't hesitate in telling to prevent those mining projects:
Sulfide mining produces toxic waste that could irreversibly damage Minnesota's fragile lakes, rivers and natural resources.
This picture is of the mine while it was in production:
This picture shows the restored mine site:
The point behind this is to prove that precious metal mining doesn't produce "toxic waste that could irreversibly damage Minnesota's" environment. If environmental damage isn't being prevented, the next logical question is to ask what CM's motivation is for this smear campaign.
That can't be known without a whistleblower spilling the beans on CM's agenda, which isn't likely to happen. Still, this Census report shows what effect CM's agenda is having on families in St. Louis County. From 2007-2011, 16% of the people living in St. Louis County lived below the poverty line. That's significantly higher than the statewide average of 11%. Median household income in St. Louis County was $45,399 compared with the statewide average of $58,476, a gap of $13,077.
Retiring Rep. Rukavina, a liberal's liberal by anyone's standards, said this in a recent email :
I'm perplexed. I sent an email to the three who voted no, I'm awaiting a reply. Frankly, if Gov Dayton is pissed off at the DNR (hell, Ranger's have been pissed off at them forever), he should fire some top dogs over there. But don't take it out on the good people of the Range who have been mining for 130 years and playing by the rules that some folks now want to change.
Perplexed and pissed off would better describe my reaction. But hey, I'm a has been but I have been wondering why I'm the only member of the Range delegation who seems concerned about this. Perhaps it's because I'm the only member of the Range delegation who represents the real Iron Range and has never represented any other constituents in my 26 year tenure.
It's apparent that the Twin Cities DFL isn't interested in fighting for miners like Rep. Rukavina is. According to Rep. Rukavina, miners "have been mining for 130 years and playing by the rules" all along.
The Twin Cities DFL is representing public employee unions and trust fund babies. That isn't the same as fighting for the average Joe on Main Street.
Tags: Alida Messinger , Conservation Minnesota , ABM , DFL , Elitists , Deficits , Poverty Rates , Declining Incomes , Mining , PolyMet , Twin Metals , Kennecott Mining
Posted Wednesday, January 2, 2013 1:34 AM
Comment 1 by Jethro at 02-Jan-13 08:52 AM
Now that the DFL is in control, Minnesotans can enjoy higher taxes and more businesses leaving the state. Hold on to your wallet.
Comment 2 by eric z at 02-Jan-13 01:10 PM
Big surprise. There is no party of the people. Only Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum. I am shocked, SHOCKED!
Comment 3 by eric z at 02-Jan-13 01:13 PM
Cravaack lost, Nolan won; and if it was not people voting for Nolan in greater numbers I await a better explanation. Divisive posturing does not fit how folks voted. Nolan defeated Clark in the primary, then CC in the general. Clark is who I'd have preferred, but I don't vote in CD 8, nor do I presume I know more than them about what's good for them. Rukavina is a blowhard.
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 03-Jan-13 12:56 AM
It's time DFL activists admitted that their party's elites want to prevent working people from achieving the American dream. Republicans aren't perfect but they'll always fight for people achieving the American dream. Alida Messinger is steadfastly opposed to miners living the good life.
Comment 4 by eric z at 03-Jan-13 08:20 AM
Gary, there are American dreams.
One of mine is single payer.
Another is tax the rich.
You write as if there is one, which Ayn Rand did, but she did accept Social Security payments, so go figure.
Comment 5 by Gary Gross at 04-Jan-13 06:30 AM
Eric, your type of single payer health care isn't an American dream. It's a nightmare.
Taxing the successful to pay for public sector lobbyists isn't the American dream, either.
Comment 6 by Bob J. at 04-Jan-13 10:27 AM
Of course, the rest of Eric's dreams include:
* economic stagnation
* death of job creation
* increased dependence on government
* economic collapse
* worldwide depression
Duckies and bunnies for all.
The DFL: No longer the party of the people, Part II
When Conservation Minnesota painted a bullseye on the mining industry in northeastern Minnesota, they proved that the DFL wasn't interested in helping hardworking mining families. These mining families are the most blue collar families in Minnesota.
Twin Cities DFL elites essentially said that their agenda was more important than those families' livelihood. There's nothing worse than the DFL's disinterest in these miners' livelihoods. The DFL's anti-mining agenda says that the miners are second class citizens in the DFL.
In St. Louis County, the median household income from 2007-2011 was $45,399. The statewide average during the same time period was $58,476. More importantly, during that same time period, 1 in 6 people in St. Louis County lived below the poverty line compared with 1 in 9 people statewide.
The other thing that's worth noting is that the DFL's agenda has focused mostly on 3 things: increasing spending on K-12 and higher education, raising taxes and submitting to everything on the public employee unions' wish list.
That agenda won't build a strong private sector economy because it takes money from people who increase Minnesota's GDP, then transfers that money to the public sector, where too much money is spent on parasites who subtract from Minnesota's GDP.
Some of the parasites that can be identified are PR staffers in every office, agency, panel, commission and council, 'government affairs directors' and the omni-present legislative liaisons. Government affair directors and legislative liaisons is just a different alias for public sector lobbyists.
These parasites get paid with taxpayers' money to lobby the legislature to steal money from the productive private sector so it can be spent in the unproductive public sector.
The DFL's agenda doesn't strengthen manufacturing, agriculture or mining, blue collar industries that strengthen economies. The DFL's agenda doesn't diversify Minnesota's economy, either.
Think how much healthier Minnesota's economy would be if the Twin Metals and PolyMet mining projects took off. They'd create an estimated 1,000 mining jobs. That's before determining how many mining support jobs they'd create. That's before thinking about the jobs that would get created in the Iron Range as a result of a strengthened economy. Think, too, of the population boom that'd surely follow.
The Twin Cities DFL is saying with their policies that they aren't interested in creating those blue collar jobs.
That's why the DFL isn't the party of the people anymore.
Posted Friday, January 4, 2013 6:27 AM
Comment 1 by Organica Black at 04-Jan-13 01:58 PM
I have been reading your blog for some time. I tend to be center-left in my viewpoint but like reading your stuff. I disagree with most of what you write but agree with most of what you write here.
I also think political parties are what is wrong with this state and this country. Neither party has the people's best interest at hand and neither party cares about the state or federal Constitution. All political parties do is create distrust of citizens.
Our forefathers hated political parties.
"The common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it. It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection."
- George Washington
"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party ........ where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all."
- Thomas Jefferson
Political parties IMHO are the evil of this country.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 04-Jan-13 07:23 PM
OB, Thanks for the comment about political parties being the culprit. I suspect that a pretty significant portion of the thinking public agrees with you.
Comment 2 by John Weinhandl at 04-Jan-13 10:45 PM
Mining isn't the only industry facing extinction here in MN. Affordable reliable energy is on it's way out. Primarily coal. Instead of forming common sense laws with proper time lines for implementation, we have shut the door on coal and nuclear power. Solar and wind now are the wants of the metro green Dflers. Sadly though both are heavily subsidized by tax payers dollars and very costly to build. Both of which are unreliable Solar can't be stored and the lead given off isn't so clean. I would like to add they both need to be backed up by either coal or gas fired boilers.
Let's take a moment and think about the thousands of living wage jobs we are turning away and the great impact these jobs would have on the local economy's of the state. Instead let's do away with energy jobs and implement radical laws such as regional haze, and the EPA's heat number that no coal fired boiler will ever reach. We need to wake up and realize that pollution and the consumption of fossil fuels is a global issue. Until we get the great polluters to get on board we only lose.
Comment 3 by eric z. at 06-Jan-13 08:49 AM
Neither party has acquitted itself well, recently, in DC in particular. Obama allying with the wealth-GOP as usual, liberal-progressives and Tea Party being cast adrift w/o the powerful caring whether either be put into a sound boat, made to share a boat, or simply cast naked into cold waters. Nobody liked that deal cutting theater show better than K-Street. Single digit approval percentages were earned. There seems no answer because, it appears, divide and conquer works so pleasantly for the few who drive the engine of the train. Who captian the ship, choose your metaphor. Geithner and Bernanke belong to the same country club., Gary, neither of us will ever be asked to join. If asked, neither of us could afford membership fees. Go figure.
Comment 4 by walter hanson at 06-Jan-13 12:38 PM
Eric:
Just exactly what planet do you live on? If Obama allied himself with wealth GOP he would've worked out a bill that lowered rates with fewer deductions (aka Romney's plan).
We had great economic growth and tax growth in the late 1980's with the top rate being just 28%. If Obama really wanted revenue why not go back to those rates. Oh that will be admitting that lower tax rates on the rich generates economic growth and tax revenues for the government.
Obama's idea of fairness is raising the rate. Not the dollar amount that it generates.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Obama's sycophants shocked he raised their taxes
Last week's fiscal cliff deal brought reality crashing down on some unsuspecting people's heads, according to this delightful, tongue-in-cheek column by Joseph Curl .
Using quotes from a comment thread on DemocratUnderground, Curl's article shows how uninformed some Democrats were about President Obama's tax increase. This is a perfect illustration of how uninformed they were:
Some in the thread argued that the new tax, or the end of the 'holiday,' which makes it a new tax, wouldn't really amount to much. One calculated it would cost about $86 a month for most people. 'Honeycombe8,' though, said that amount is nothing to sneeze at.
'$86 a month is a lot. That would pay for : Groceries for a week, as someone said. More than what I pay for parking every month, after my employer's contribution to that. A new computer after a year. A new quality pair of shoes : every month. Months of my copay for my hormones. A new thick coat (on sale or at discount place). It would pay for what I spend on my dogs every month : food, vitamins, treats.'
I'd like to welcome these fools to the Democrats' middle class squeeze tax increases. This tax increase isn't likely to change Honeycombe8's voting habits. I'd be stunned if it did. Still, the Democrats, starting with President Obama and including Sen. Reid and Nancy Pelosi, can't fight their tax increase fever. With that trio of ideologues, it's always about ideology, It isn't about what's best for America.
Last week, I wrote a 2 part series about how the DFL isn't the party of the people anymore. (See here and here .) DC Democrats are just as out of step with the people as the DFL is here in Minnesota.
Here's another dose of reality for the left:
The Twittersphere was even funnier.
'Really, how am I ever supposed to pay off my student loans if my already small paycheck keeps getting smaller? Help a sister out, Obama,' wrote 'Meet Virginia.' 'Nancy Thongkham' was much more furious. 'F***ing Obama! F*** you! This taking out more taxes s*** better f***ing help me out!! Very upset to see my paycheck less today!'
Though the Democrats' anger is sky-high, that hasn't led to clear thinking:
Of course, dozens of posters on DemocraticUnderground sought to blame it all (as usual) on President George W. Bush. 'Your taxes went up because the leaders need to dig us out of this criminal deficit hole we are in which has been caused because taxes were too low during the Bush years. Everyone has to help by spreading the wealth around a little. Power to the correct people!' posted 'Orinoco.'
This is typical Democratic stupidity. Spending has skyrocketed during the Obama administration. Economic growth has lagged, thanks directly to President Obama's policies. Revenues have dropped because he's attacked industry after industry.
Let's repeat this fact: these deficits are the direct result of President Obama's policies. The ACA is killing jobs by giving small businesses who employ fewer than 50 people an incentive to not hire additional workers. The EPA is killing jobs, too. Last year's regulations have led to 98 coal-fired power plants to either close their doors or to announce their shutting.
There's just one thing to say to people who were foolish enough to vote for President who now are upset that he's raised their taxes: You bought it. Now you're paying for it. You're getting what you deserve.
Tags: President Obama , Taxes , Tax Increases , FICA Tax , Tax Holiday , Unemployment , ACA , EPA , Regulations , Democratic Underground , Democrats
Posted Tuesday, January 8, 2013 2:04 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 08-Jan-13 07:15 AM
Silly democrats. They think taxes are only for the rich to pay yet there aren't enough rich to support the massive government spending. Everyone is going to pay for the re-election of Obama and even worse, the total DFL control in MN.
Comment 2 by Bob J. at 08-Jan-13 10:50 AM
Elections have consequences. Romney wouldn't have been much better, but perhaps now people will see what their Democrat vote bought them -- or rather, what it bought for Baraq I's cronies.
Comment 3 by walter hanson at 09-Jan-13 06:56 PM
The worse problem is that Obama and the Democrats are ignoring the one solution to the problem. Cut spending!
I've cut the service on my cable bill.
I eat a lot of $1 tv dinners for meals. People on food stamps spend more money on food every month then I do.
I only go to movies I want to.
I need to do an upgrade to my computer. That has to wait until I clear the balance for it on the credit that pays it.
Unfortunately on the federal level whole departments and thousands of employees need to be fired.
Instead Pelosi is talking about another trillion in tax increases. Nancy over ten years we have to cut spending by $8.4 trillion dollars even with all of the tax increases you want.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
A lengthy battle, a 2 minute fight?
Ed's post highlights how disrespectful Democrats are on the Constitution. Democrats are currently telling President Obama he should unilaterally raise the debt limit .
Democratic lawmakers are urging President Obama to force Republicans to take him to court over the controversial issue of raising the debt ceiling.
They believe the Supreme Court ultimately will have to resolve the battle over spending now raging between Republicans and the president.
But how the courts will rule is shrouded in uncertainty because little case law exists to serve as meaningful precedent, legal scholars say.
Democrats in Congress argue Obama should not feel constrained by the 1917 debt-limit law, which the federal government is projected to hit in late February, because it conflicts with other laws.
'The president, I think, has the authority under the Constitution and under the various statutes that are passed, if nothing is done, he must do something about paying the bills,' said Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.). 'That issue may well go to the courts in our system.
It's disgusting that a US senator would say something this deceitful. Ed excoriates Sen. Udall's argument in a New York minute:
Supporters of this newfound presidential power over statute have been pointing to the 14th Amendment, specifically its fourth clause: 'The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law , including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.' However, that passage doesn't give the executive branch authority to do anything, and in fact requires that the debt 'be authorized by law.'
Who does the authorizing? The more directly relevant Constitutional reference comes in Article I, Section 8, which specifically assigns Congress the authority to borrow: 'The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; To borrow money on the credit of the United States[.]' The debt limit itself is Congressional authorization for the executive branch (through the Treasury) to borrow what is needed.
If President Obama attempted to raise the debt limit through executive fiat, he'd be challenged in the courts before the announcement would be an hour old, most likely in the DC Circuit. One thing that might happen is that the court could grant a TRO prohibiting President Obama from enforcing this. The other option is that they'd rule against President Obama's anti-constitutional action.
The clear language of the Constitution gives the power of the purse to Congress. That means the executive branch is prohibited from taking this extraconstitutional action. Further, any ConLaw professor will quickly note that laws that conflict with the US Constitution are unconstitutional, meaning that they're a moot point.
It isn't likely that President Obama will take this action because it would clearly expose him as running an imperial presidency. That isn't the type of thing he'd want as part of his legacy.
Tags: Power of the Purse , Legislative Branch , Executive Branch , Separation of Powers , Article I , Constitution , Tom Udall , President Obama , Democrats , Lawsuits , GOP , DC Circuit , SCOTUS
Posted Tuesday, January 8, 2013 11:31 AM
Comment 1 by Bob J. at 08-Jan-13 03:18 PM
Der Leader will not be amused.
Comment 2 by J. Ewing at 09-Jan-13 09:31 AM
I think at this point it would be a bad bet to assume that exposing Obama as "running an Imperial Presidency" would be the least bit dissuasive to His Majesty.
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 09-Jan-13 09:35 AM
Jerry, There's no upside in this fight for him. That's why I think he won't push this. That plus the fact that he'll have to expend a ton of political capital to get Sen. Hagel confirmed as Defense Secretary.
Comment 4 by walter hanson at 09-Jan-13 06:57 PM
Gary:
The worse part of this post is that if the US Supreme Court didn't stop Obamacare Obama thinks that they won't stop anything he does.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Downey announces candidacy for GOP State Party Chair
Yesterday, former Rep. Keith Downey announced that he is a candidate to replace Pat Shortridge as chairman of the Republican Party of Minnesota :
A former state representative says he wants to be the next head of the Minnesota Republican Party.
Edina's Keith Downey told fellow Republicans on Wednesday that he'll vie for the party chairmanship in early April. Current chairman Pat Shortridge is stepping down.
Downey was a two-term House member before he tried to move up to the state Senate. He lost that race in November. Downey says the Republican Party is due for a turnaround with a critical 2014 election cycle looming. The governor's office, a U.S. Senate seat and many more key offices are on the line.
First, this isn't an endorsement, mostly because I won't have a vote on RPM Chair. This post is merely this activist's opinion on what Rep. Downey brings to the table.
It's bound to sound corny that Rep. Downey is one of the great thinkers of the GOP and the conservative movement. If Rep. Downey is elected to be the next chairman of the Minnesota GOP, the GOP's message discipline would significantly improve. Keith Downey is a great conservative who knows why he believes what he believes.
In his letter to state convention delegates, Rep. Downey said something that's sure to resonate with the activists:
As a businessman and recent State Representative, I hope to earn your confidence with the right combination of principle, skill and experience, and a concrete plan for the gains we need to make.
As a legislator, Rep. Downey earned a reputation as a reformer and strong fiscal conservative. I suspect he'll have a plan to transform state GOP operations. That's been his history as a legislator.
Good luck to all the candidates. This is a crucial time in Minnesota's history. If the GOP doesn't turn this state around soon, the DFL will significantly damage Minnesota for a decade or more.
Posted Thursday, January 10, 2013 6:44 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 14-Jan-13 08:47 AM
"First, this isn't an endorsement, mostly because I won't have a vote on RPM Chair. This post is merely this activist's opinion on what Rep. Downey brings to the table."
I don't follow the logic of that. It surely reads as an endorsement, and that's First Amendment speech, and whether you have a vote in some inner party stuff is irrelevant to your endorsing the guy, isn't it?
It's something like Michele Bachmann being able to endorse people she likes in the Sixth District, even while she lives and votes in the Fourth. Or am I missing something?
I think Andy at Residual Forces is keeping a scorecard of all the position seekers.
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 14-Jan-13 08:19 PM
Eric:
Michelle did move to the sixth district.
As for the nonedorsement which you're critizing keep in mind Gary is trying to say hey this is what I think we need the chair of the Republican party to think. Besides since you're a liberal democrat I thought you wouldn't care who is our party chairman let alone who Gary endorses.
Of course maybe the real reason why you're upset is that Dowling is an adult that will help promote the Republican party agenda and make them a force in 2014 that the Democrats won't like.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 3 by Bob J. at 15-Jan-13 12:48 PM
I'd be curious to see how Downey -- or any conservative -- would deal with the RuPaul wing of the party.
DFL's war against taxpayers, U of M edition
I'd hoped to write about a WSJ's op-ed about the bloated spending at the U of M before this but that's what happens when you're recovering from surgery. This WSJ article says some things that can't be overlooked. They must be put into context. Here's an example:
Like many public colleges, the University of Minnesota went on a spending spree over the past decade, paid for by a steady stream of state money and rising tuition. Officials didn't keep close tabs on their payroll as it swelled beyond 19,000 employees, nearly 1 for every 3 students.
It's important that we put this information in the proper political context, which I did in this post :
Higher Education Chairwoman Sandy Pappas, DFL-St. Paul, said college and university funding is far from enough. 'We are starving higher education,' she said.
Under the Senate targets, public education would get the most of $1.3 billion in new money: $498 million in the next two years. Following would be higher education ($296 million) and health and human services ($245 million). Other parts of the budget would get relatively insignificant increases considering the total state spending will top $34 billion over the next two years.
Pappas predicted existing plans to increase public college and university tuition about 4 percent each of the next two years may jump to twice that much.
At the time, a $296,000,000 increase for higher education represented an 11.3% increase. At the very time that the U of M's spending was skyrocketing, DFL legislators like Sen. Pappas were complaining that higher education spending wasn't enough.
In that environment, what incentive did the U of M lobbyists have in asking for more fiscally responsible spending increases?
Fast forward to 2013, where the DFL is attempting to create the image that they're fiscally responsible. The people that spent like drunken sailors are attempting to tell Minnesota taxpayers that they'll reject their past ways today.
When the final higher education budget is passed, let's see how many reforms are included in it. Let's see if the DFL eliminates funding for the U of M's and MNSCU's lobbyists. Let's see if they'll cap the amount of money universities can spend on Taj Majal buildings like the STSS on the U of M campus:
Here's a glimpse at the inside of the STSS:
That's a pretty lavish building for a university that's getting starved by the legislature.
Posted Friday, January 11, 2013 5:43 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 11-Jan-13 07:19 AM
For the DFL, there will never, ever be enough money spent on education even if the evidence points to the contrary. If the price of gas and food had increased as much as the price of a so called education has, the people would be outraged yet most just say 'it's for the kids' and go on their merry way.
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 12-Jan-13 12:36 PM
Chad:
Lets not forget that it's voter recruitment money that is being spent. The professors and the line staff are told by people if the DFL doesn't have the governor's office let alone the legislature their salaries won't grow and their jobs might be cut.
In the mean time to get the votes of the young people they will say they care by spending more money on grants and loans instead of trying to contain costs.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 3 by Jethro at 13-Jan-13 05:21 PM
OMG!! The pictures truly tell the story. Is anyone in the legislature going to rein in this foolishness?
Comment 4 by eric z at 14-Jan-13 08:34 AM
What is STSS?
Which campus is at?
In finding fault with the system, is your complaint focused mainly on the TC campus, or the outlying efforts besides the TC campus, its professional science and engineering graduate programs, its medical and dentistry programs?
The TC campus is the flagship, and if any of the fleet needs cutting, I would argue that keeping the flagship shipshape is priority numero uno; all else secondary and subject to debate.
Theis vs. Dorsher in HD-14A special election
Though the DFL endorsing convention for the special election caused by Rep. Steve Gottwalt's resignation isn't until Jan. 26, the matchup is essentially set. That's because Joanne Dorsher is the DFL's only declared candidate for the Gottwalt special election.
After winning Saturday's GOP endorsing convention, St. Cloud businesswoman Tama Theis will meet Ms. Dorsher in the Feb. 12 special election to represent HD-14A.
After a drama-filled convention, the GOP can now get into the serious business of getting Theis's message out, then getting their voters out.
This was a drama-filled convention for several reason. First, Saturday's GOP endorsing convention wasn't settled until the seventh ballot. Second, this was a hotly contested endorsement, with Theis, former St. Cloud city councilman John Severson and Iraq War veteran Scott MacHardy each acquitting themselves well.
John Severson led the first and second ballots with 13 votes each time, with MacHardy getting 12 votes and Theis getting 11 votes the first ballot. On the second ballot, Theis got 12 votes and MacHardy 11.
Theis got the most votes on the third ballot with 14, followed by 12 votes each for Severson and MacHardy. Theis got the most votes in each of the following ballots until she won on the seventh ballot.
Ms. Theis will need to hit the ground runnning, starting Monday, because the DFL would love to steal this special election. They know that anything can happen in a special election.
Ms. Dorsher is a known commodity in St. Cloud, having been a member of the St. Cloud School Board and after runnning against Rep. Gottwalt in 2008. One that's certain is that EdMinn's foot soldiers will be out in force for Ms. Dorsher.
The biggest question is whether the business community does a better job of getting out their vote than EdMinn does in getting out the pro-government voters.
Posted Monday, January 14, 2013 4:18 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 14-Jan-13 08:09 AM
What IS her message?
I understand the intent was to describe the endorsement. Yet she went into the endorsement contest differing from the others on what policy grounds? Or was it a friendships and beauty contest? Was there much difference policy-wise?
I understand downplaying that from the "let's move on with solidarity for sake of the party" perspective, but were there any major policy differences?
And is there anything there beyond a remodeling business co-owned by the spouses, and " 'I will stand up for unborn babies and protecting our family values,' Theis said Saturday"?
That's from the SCTimes, which also reported, "Theis cast herself as a champion of the business community and of conservative social issues, citing her background as a small business owner and her opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage."
MPR reports online, "Theis owns a remodeling company. She touted her conservative values by saying she opposes abortion and same-sex marriage."
Does that about sum it up, or is there more gravitas?
Last thing, Bluestem Prairie, "A press release was sent out for Theis--dateline "St. Peter," so whomever is handling publicity is probably using a template and is connected to the Golgart campaign as well, since the Quists handle their own media."
Does that mean anything to you?
Ditto question re SCTimes, "Theis is president of the Board of Directors for Birthline Inc."
Having never heard of Birthline Inc., who 'dat?
I checked the website,
www.birthline.org/about-us/
and it looks to me to be something different from Planned Parenthood, which I bet does better counseling in unexpected pregnancy cases.
You guys, there in St. Cloud ...
Comment 2 by eric z at 14-Jan-13 08:11 AM
Clarification of an ambiguity, the "better counseling" judgment reflects back to Planned Parenthood, not Birthline Inc.
Comment 3 by eric z at 14-Jan-13 08:38 AM
Ms. Theis does have a Likedin page, touching upon the two corporations, and you should have a look. It shows me a skill and inventiveness in marketing a range of remodeling services. If elected I expect despite what I would call an anti-family-choice animus, she appears to be a vastly more suited person than Gottwalt, with his conflict-of-interest offensiveness. I do not see anything she represents leading in that negative direction.
Comment 4 by walter hanson at 16-Jan-13 08:41 PM
I got an idea. When the President proposes his budget cut every department 5% and then tell the President since you're spending what we tell you to spend you get to identify the spending cuts.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Is SCSU promoting unaccountability?
I wrote this article in December highlighting the fact that SCSU administrators were changing students' transcripts without telling their professors that classes were being deleted from students' transcripts:
The other piece of it is that it's difficult to do some things like helping with student success, some things like doing accurate assessment if people disappear from our records and we don't have that information in our records anymore or if we learn for example that, and this is kind of an odd example I suppose, you don't know that a student has taken a course three times because there is no record of it and the student is in there for the fourth time and you're trying to figure out a way to help that student be successful and yet you're blindsided by this lack of information.
In a subsequent meeting, the administration tried hiding the fact that they're helping students be unaccountable:
FA: What about the completion rate?
Admin: There is not completion rate. They have the obligation to pay that financial aid back. A W counts against them in the completion rate. That's why the students asked for the 'poof' because it affected their completion rate. There's a debate about whether they attempted.
FA: Some online classes don't have deadlines. And then all of a sudden in the last week they get it done. I teach a class and give them four weeks, and despite sending them emails and reminders they don't complete a test or quiz. I think there should be a record of this behavior. I have seven out of 60 students who haven't taken a test.
Admin: This is one section of 60?
FA: Yes.
FA: I think we train our students to not be accountable for their behavior. I've had students ask to make up work they didn't do and my response has been no. At what level are we telling students they don't have to be accountable? I know there are some excuses.
Admin: Like it or not, the Board of Trustees allows the students to withdraw without permission up to 80% of the course being completed. Those students can withdraw, and it will show W, and that's a W that shows that there might be an underlying good reason.
What's to like about the MNSCU Board of Trustees permitting students to withdraw without permission? The SCSU administration is attempting to legitimize a student taking a class 4 times, then getting the first three times they took the class deleted from their transcripts.
This isn't about a student having a legitimate excuse like an illness that prevented them from completing a course. This isn't about dealing with a death in the family late in the semester, either.
This is about students doing poorly in a class, then convincing the administration they shouldn't be held accountable for doing poorly in their classes.
There's another angle that SCSU apparently isn't concerned with. By doctoring student transcripts, they're giving potential employers an incomplete picture of a student's academic history. That's unethical.
Tags: SCSU , Students , Transcripts , Corruption , Administration , MnSCU , Faculty , Whistleblowers
Posted Monday, January 14, 2013 3:51 PM
Comment 1 by Jethro at 15-Jan-13 12:38 AM
Makes me wonder if the university's accreditation could be yanked.
Comment 2 by eric z at 15-Jan-13 03:00 PM
"What's to like about the MNSCU Board of Trustees permitting students to withdraw without permission?"
Is that like being permitted to be on voter rolls, without permission to be on voter rolls?
I don't like either, without not liking them.
I say, give the students photo IDs, make them have photo IDs, it fixes all, and everything will be honky dory.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 15-Jan-13 03:43 PM
Is that like being permitted to be on voter rolls, without permission to be on voter rolls?Eric, shouldn't people who've moved from Elk River to St. Cloud not be listed as an eligible voter in Elk River?
At SCSU, students have failed classes because they didn't put forth the effort or just didn't learn the material. In a number of instances, the administration has deleted the record that they've failed after the professor failed them. Should these students get preferential treatment for failing?
Comment 3 by eric z at 15-Jan-13 05:05 PM
Gary, seriously, it sounds like the classic cliche, you have to deliver some kind of steak even if what you are touting is the sizzle. The hockey program sizzles.
So, sizzle/steak.
Now, how about bait and switch:
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2020133934_graduates15m.html
Half way through a program, a big time GOTCHA. Because of miniscule minded legislators. I would bet which party was the advocate of austerity, let them pay more after we've paid out rope.
There are lots of bad things. Is SCSU simply a mediocre school, where you always look at the world wide stature of the faculty - or lack of it.
Even some small ponds require some fish.
First rate is first rate, and "rebranding" a party school as something else - well, remember the old western movies, the cattle rustlers using a running iron; changing an "S" brand to a "bar-8"?
By of all things, rebranding.
Comment 4 by Jethro at 15-Jan-13 06:12 PM
Eric Z . . . what does the hockey program have to do with doctoring grades? And then you meander into a rebranding discussion. Are you suggesting "rebranding" SCSU as a party school to a school that will now doctor student grades?
Comment 5 by Nick at 15-Jan-13 11:42 PM
SCSU did not delete my W's. Other people may have it happen to them.
Let's shut government down
Since his re-election, President Obama has acted more like an emporor than a president. He's clearly in his my-way-or-the-highway mode. He's the only president in US history to run up a $1,000,000,000,000 annual deficit. In fact, he's on track for his fifth straight trillion dollar deficit.
Yesterday, President Obama said "You don't go out to dinner and then...eat all you want and then leave without paying the check." In his column , Ed Morrissey highlights the fact that President Obama's Democrats aren't paying the bill, either:
A debt ceiling, after all, only allows the federal government to spend money already allocated by Congress. Obama made this point repeatedly on Monday, offering a restaurant analogy to claim that he's only being fiscally responsible by insisting on a clean debt-ceiling increase. "You don't go out to dinner and then, you know, eat all you want and then leave without paying the check," Obama lectured NBC's Chuck Todd. "And if you do, you're breaking the law." The only problem with that analogy is that we're not paying our bills; we're adding to the running tab and borrowing 40 cents on the dollar to make it look like we're covering our obligations.
It's disrespectful of the American people to say that America's paying its bills when it's running trillion dollar deficits. President Bush's last budget was for $3.1 trillion. Last year, the federal government spent $3.8 trillion. That's a 30% increase in spending.
It's time to take spending back down to 2007 or 2008 levels. We can't afford to spend at the pace we're currently spending at. President Obama won't tolerate that type of spending cut. He'll throw a hissy fit.
Whatever.
He'll insist on negotiating with Speaker Boehner on a new CR. Speaker Boehner should continually insist on the Senate passing a budget, then ironing things out in a conference committee. Then he should repeat the same message day after day after day until President Obama caves.
Republicans will take a short-term PR hit as a result. Whatever. Their ratings are lower than root canals and cockroaches already. It's time to highlight the fact that Democrats don't care about spending the taxpayers' money responsibly.
It's time to demand that President Obama and the Democrats to justify current spending levels. President Obama is long on demonization, short on reality. What's worst is that he knows it. President Obama strongly hinted that Republicans didn't care about the elderly and disadvantaged children, which he knows is BS.
It's time for him to show that there isn't massive amounts of waste in the HHS budget. Ditto with the Commerce Department. Ditto with the Energy and Education departments. Better still would be to force this administration and the Democratic Senate refute the GAO reports on duplication, fraud and waste.
In short, it's time for the GOP to take the gloves off and start taking the fight to the Democrats.
Finally, Republicans can highlight the fact that they compromised on taxes and the debt ceiling, then demand that President Obama is the one who won't compromise on real spending cuts that are badly needed.
Good luck winning that fight, Mr. President.
Tags: Government Shutdown , Debt Ceiling , President Obama , Spending , Deficits , Negotiations , Harry Reid , Budget , Democrats
Posted Tuesday, January 15, 2013 4:04 PM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 15-Jan-13 06:00 PM
I've suggested that Republicans pass an austerity budget and tie it right in the bill to a debt ceiling increase of no more than required for this year's budget. The only way one piece moves is if they both move. If the debt limit is an emergency, then the budget document is an emergency and the Senate needs to get on the stick.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 16-Jan-13 02:42 AM
I agree.
Comment 3 by Joseph at 16-Jan-13 09:25 AM
Excellent article Gary. Going back to 2008 levels would be a good start. Every budge year after that should go back 4 or 5 years spending levels until the budget balances.
