July 2-7, 2017
Jul 02 00:35 Guthmann gives a hint, Part III Jul 02 09:58 Strib's Walz propaganda gets thick Jul 03 08:40 Walter Hudson's common sense Jul 05 08:12 Guthmann gives a hint, Part IV Jul 06 03:54 Chris Cuomo's nastiness & stupidity Jul 06 08:30 Is Schumer the new Pelosi? Jul 06 12:32 Rebecca Otto's nonstop quest Jul 06 16:44 Jim Acosta gets hammered Jul 07 16:42 Sen. Durbin, political hypocrite
Prior Months: Jan Feb ~ May Jun
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Guthmann gives a hint, Part III
Friday night on Almanac's roundtable, Mike Hatch said something that Gov. Dayton probably didn't want him to say. First, Gov. Dayton wants to get Republicans to renegotiate parts of the bills Gov. Dayton signed. Speaker Daudt and Senate Majority Leader Gazelka have steadfastly refused to do that.
Specifically, Gov. Dayton wants Republicans to repeal parts of the Tax Bill and renegotiate the teacher licensure reform bill that Gov. Dayton signed. At this point, there's no incentive for Republicans to renegotiate any of those things because, in Hatch's opinion, Judge Guthmann essentially said that the legislature is a core function of government that has to be funded.
One of the precedents established by Minnesota's courts is that things that are deemed core functions of government get funded.
Needless to say, the St. Cloud Times published an Our View editorial that's virtually incomprehensible. The Times is famous for blaming both sides in a political fight. This time, it's mostly Gov. Dayton's fault, though you wouldn't know that from the Times' editorial:
In the wake of a judge's ruling last week granting temporary funding for the Minnesota Legislature, let's hope the lawsuit in need of the ruling drags on, and on and on and on, ideally until Election Day 2018.
Why? Perhaps if this lawsuit, paid for 100 percent with tax dollars, stays in the news that long, voters will have a top-of-mind reminder to finally cast ballots for state office holders whose top priority is public service through compromise, not political gamesmanship through stubbornness.
What the Times omits from their editorial is that none of this would've happened if Gov. Dayton hadn't reneged on his promise to cut taxes in 2016. Originally, Gov. Dayton agreed to a massive tax relief package. After the legislature passed the bill with overwhelming bipartisan support, Gov. Dayton vetoed the bill.
Minnesota doesn't need tons more "state office holders whose top priority is public service." Minnesota needs one less dishonest governor who reneges on legislation that he's agreed to sign. Let's be clear. Gov. Dayton isn't trustworthy. He's proved that the last 2 years.
Finally, I hate to disappoint the Times editorialists but this lawsuit is virtually over. Gov. Dayton has lost the suit. The only thing that'll save him is if the Minnesota Supreme Court rules that the entire legislative branch isn't essential. That won't happen because the Court would become a laughingstock.
Posted Sunday, July 2, 2017 12:35 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 02-Jul-17 05:26 AM
This wouldn't have happened had people realized what a horrible person Mark Dayton is from the start. The guy has never had a job outside of government and he has performed poorly at any job he has had within government. It just goes to show that for the DFL, the ends justify the means.
Strib's Walz propaganda gets thick
This article on Tim Walz is filled with inaccuracies and propaganda. Then again, it was written by a Strib writer.
For instance, it says "Politicians who reach a hand across the aisle in Washington sometimes pull back a stump. But once a week, Walz laces up his sneakers and joins a bipartisan running group as it sprints away from a Capitol convulsed by bitter partisan disputes over health care, immigration, budgets and taxes. In a House divided, Walz would rather run with his colleagues than against them. 'Being bipartisan may be viewed as a weakness in some quarters,'" said Walz, who has signed on to more bipartisan bills than almost anyone else in Congress. 'I reject that idea.''
The Strib's Jennifer Brooks then includes "Of the 351 bills Walz co-sponsored last term, more than half - 54 percent - were sponsored with non-Democrats. The legislative site GovTrack ranked him as the 9th most bipartisan member in Congress in 2016. Walz's seats on committees like Veterans Affairs and Agriculture lend themselves to cooperation and blurred party lines."
As a congressman, Rep. Walz can steer clear of controversial issues like health care. Governors can't. Recently, Rep. Walz tried portraying himself as independent of the DNC on health care. The Republican Governors Association, aka the RGA, put together this video of Rep. Walz's townhall meeting:
That sounds centrist. Unfortunately, Walz hasn't lived up to that billing. First, he voted for the ACA. Next, after the ACA started failing, Rep. Walz refused to offer a single amendment that would fix the ACA. In this post, I wrote "Rep. Walz hasn't lifted a finger to propose a solution that would fix the ACA. It's one thing to whine about bills. It's another thing to fix bills that are 'failing my constituents in a lot of ways.' This is typical Democrat do-nothing complaining that don't offer solutions."
Rep. Walz hasn't said whether he'd eliminate MNsure. Rep. Walz has said that the ACA is "failing my constituents in a lot of ways." What's his solution to that crisis? Congressmen can hide from those crises. Governors can't. Without explaining how he'd solve the problem, we won't know if Rep. Walz is truly a moderate. All we have to go by is his word. That isn't enough. Actions are required. If the actions don't match the rhetoric, then we know he's a phony.
Posted Sunday, July 2, 2017 9:58 AM
Comment 1 by Mark Hagebak at 05-Jul-17 07:22 AM
Good Morning:
This is my take on Walz.
1. He will run whether or not he gets the party nomination.
2. Because as shown in the last election, the only area the democrats won in Minnesota were the metro. I think Walz sees this and will make his play for out state voters to elect him.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 05-Jul-17 08:15 AM
Mark, I think you're exactly right.
Walter Hudson's common sense
During Friday night's Almanac Roundtable, Walter Hudson made a fantastic point about voter fraud. I don't have Walter's exact wording but the point Walter made was that people don't wait until they're robbed before putting a lock on their doors.
This conversation was made in the context of news that Steve Simon told the Trump administration that they wouldn't supply them with voter lists. While Democrats insisted that this was important symbolically, it really isn't. The truth is that anyone can buy those lists. The DFL's resistance is just an example of how far they're willing to go to please their special interest activists.
Despite the DFL's protests that voter fraud doesn't exist, they're lying. In the past, Phyllis Kahn has accused her DFL primary opponents of committing voter fraud. Regardless, there are lots of people who are registered in multiple states. President Trump's commission will identify those people and, hopefully, eliminate them from voter rolls.
Mark Ritchie refused to eliminate these people, saying he didn't have the authority to update Statewide Voter Registration Systems, aka SVRS. Actually, the Help America Vote Act, passed by Congress in 2002, not only gives secretaries of state this authority. It requires them to " perform list maintenance on their SVRS with respect to the computerized list on a regular basis."
It's time to clean up each state's SVRS and each state's voting system. It's time to start incorporating more common sense and accountability into our voting system. It isn't just implementing photo ID, though. It's about implementing a system that's hack-proof, too.
Walter's points are important and sensible. It's time to start.
Posted Monday, July 3, 2017 8:40 AM
Comment 1 by JerryE9 at 03-Jul-17 10:17 AM
Voter fraud is a proven fact in Minnesota, and there is reasonable suspicion of much more. Not only that, but the ability to do it is actually written into state law, the SOS violates the law to protect it, in multiple ways, and then turns a blind eye to the legal ways in which it could be prevented (partially) under current law.
Comment 2 by Chad Q at 04-Jul-17 07:04 AM
Mitch Berg brought up that very point on Saturday that anyone can get the voter information if they want it. What exactly is the DFL trying to hide?
How does Mr. Simon explain the 30,000 + returned voter registration cards a few years ago due to no such or wrong address? How does he explain the Franken win in 2008?
Comment 3 by JerryE9 at 04-Jul-17 07:28 AM
Even I got a copy of the list a few years back. I used it to discover over 100,000 duplicate voter names.
Guthmann gives a hint, Part IV
Hopefully, this will be the final article on the lawsuit between the Legislature and Gov. Dayton that Judge Guthmann will rule on. I'd hate to have to write another post about the SC Times' dishonest Our View editorial. In that editorial , the Times editors wrote "As you probably recall, Dayton's unprecedented decision to cut most funds to the Legislature as of Friday ended (or did it?) the 2017 session. He explained his decision as a way to get the Republican-led Legislature to negotiate a handful of measures to which he objected. And most certainly worth noting is that legislation forced Dayton to either accept the Republican tax bill or defund the state Department of Revenue."
Actually, Gov. Dayton didn't "cut most funds to the legislature." As former Attorney Gen. Mike Hatch explained, the funding for the legislature is a single line. It's a binary choice. It's all or nothing. Gov. Dayton cut all funds for the legislature. Second, the Times didn't mention that Gov. Dayton agreed to the tax relief he now wants to renegotiate.
Here's a message to Gov. Dayton: You agreed to the tax relief. Twice. Now you want to renegotiate the bill you just signed. Instead of using such slippery tactics, try keeping your word instead. Dishonest politicians like you created the Trump administration.
Judge Guthmann ruled that the legislature is part of government's core function. That means it'll get funded.
Finally, it's time to call the SC Times out for making both sides appear culpable for this fiasco. The DFL agreed to these budget deals. If they didn't like them, they shouldn't have agreed to them. The GOP tax relief plan provides tax relief to farmers and small businesses. The DFL plan allows government to get bigger and more intrusive.
It isn't difficult to see which side is on the people's side and which is on the special interests' side.
Posted Wednesday, July 5, 2017 8:12 AM
Comment 1 by Rex Newman at 07-Jul-17 09:45 AM
I have to agree with Mike Hatch's assessment, both legally and politically. As he says, the judge would be reversing himself to suddenly agree with Dayton. Politically, the judge has the Constitution(s) to cite - correctly so. And, politically, I think it's safe to infer that Hatch speaks for many in the DFL who would greet such a ruling with the usual spontaneous planned outrage - and quiet relief!
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 07-Jul-17 02:47 PM
Rex, I think the average DFL legislator wants this fiasco to disappear ASAP. The longer this lawsuit hangs around, the more damage it does to DFL legislators. This can't be good for their campaigns. It simply can't. Couple this lawsuit with Rebecca Otto's lawsuit & Republicans have to be rejoicing.
Otto's lawsuit is just as baseless as Dayton's. At some point, don't Minnesotans have to figure out that these DFL politicians aren't too bright?
Chris Cuomo's nastiness & stupidity
Wednesday morning, Chris Cuomo essentially bragged about threatening a Reddit user with violence if this Reddit user didn't apologize to CNN. Forget about Big Brother chilling speech. Now, big multi-national corporations are getting into the act. I'm not here to defend the man who created the now-infamous Gif of President Trump clotheslining CNN at a WWE event. I'm here to criticize big corporations who use their position to bully people that mock them. I'm also here to criticize them for not being smart journalists.
Friends know I'm not a Bill O'Reilly fan. Still, I agree with pretty much everything in this op-ed . That's especially true of when O'Reilly said "On live TV during the campaign, Donald Trump told me I should see a psychiatrist because I was too 'negative.' So what? I continued to cover him fairly and retained access, even though I criticized him when I felt it necessary. But I based my analysis on facts, did not cheap-shot him, and did not quote anonymous sources that made him look bad. I was straight with Trump and, in return, he was straight with me."
Let's be clear about this. CNN hasn't been straight with President Trump. In fact, they haven't tried to be straight with him. They've seemingly tried to undercut him at each time they've had the opportunity. They aren't a news network when it comes to President Trump. They've looked like the DNC Network most of the time.
PS- Their chief anchors aren't too bright, either. Check this video out as proof:
Hint to Chris Cuomo: Hate speech is protected by the First Amendment. Popular speech doesn't need to be protected.
Finally, on a serious note, it's worth asking whether CNN is capable of setting aside their Trump hatred and report the news on a consistent basis. At this point, it doesn't seem possible. As long as they have Chris Cuomo as an anchor, it's difficult to take them seriously.
Posted Thursday, July 6, 2017 3:55 AM
No comments.
Is Schumer the new Pelosi?
I love watching Greg Gutfeld demolish Democrats. He isn't quite the new Breitbart but he's more than the average Dem can handle. The latest Gutfeld attack comes against Chuckles Schumer. Recently on The Five, Gutfeld highlighted Schumer's dishonesty.
Speaking on the subject of illegal immigration, Schumer said "The president's immigration policies are destroying local economies, causing chaos and panic in families and communities who have done nothing, nothing, nothing wrong. By using racial profiling and fearmongering to target law-abiding immigrants, the Trump administration is putting people with a traffic ticket or a status violation in the same category as serious violent criminals."
Gutfeld's reply was sharp and to the point. Gutfeld said "The economy is fine, unemployment is down, as for profiling and harassing legal immigrants, by conflating illegal with legal immigration, it's Schumer who is the real guilty party here."
This is said in the context of Schumer saying that "Dems will block all funding for more immigration agents and for the wall too."
It's inescapable that Sen. Schumer is fast becoming the Democrats' next Pelosi. Sen. Schumer dances to the tune of NCLR, aka the National Council of La Raza. NCLR is the biggest of the open border-promoting special interest organizations.
At a time when people want to feel secure, Sen. Schumer is selling insecurity. At a time when Democrats need to win back blue collar workers who simply want laws that make sense, Sen. Schumer is pitching laws that don't make any sense except to the Democrats' special interest allies.
Democrats need to win over lots of voters to recapture the House and Senate in the 2018 midterms. If they keep playing the identity politics of 2016 that they're deploying now, they'll fall short of that goal. Rest assured that Republicans will tie Sen. Schumer to Claire McCaskill, Jon Tester, Joe Donnelly and Heidi Heitkamp. These are each states that President Trump won handily. Tying these Democrats to a 'New York liberal' like Sen. Schumer won't make these senators' jobs easier.
Here's the video of Gutfeld's monologue:
Posted Thursday, July 6, 2017 8:30 AM
No comments.
Rebecca Otto's nonstop quest
This article highlights Rebecca Otto's nonstop quest for relevance. It also shows how she doesn't respect the taxpayers.
First, some history is important. According to the article, "In September, Otto lost in district court, but she appealed to the state Appeals Court, saying that under the state Constitution only the state auditor can decide who audits county books. The state Court of Appeals upheld the lower court's ruling that the legislation was constitutional on a 2-1 decision."
This wasn't surprising to constitutionalists. Minnesota's constitution establishes the office. It doesn't tell the auditor what to do. In fact, the only office that's told its responsibilities. That's the governor's office. Further, the lt. governor receives their responsibilities from the governor they serve with. Minnesota's attorney general, secretary of state and auditor get their responsibilities from Minnesota state statute.
Rebecca Otto knows that the auditor's job is a holdover job meant to help a politician stay in the public eye until they run for higher office. What we're finding out is that audits are getting done faster and for a cheaper price since they've been privatized. Frankly, it's time to let all audits be privatized.
Posted Thursday, July 6, 2017 12:32 PM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 07-Jul-17 05:42 PM
How can a private accounting firm undercut a government agency that doesn't have to show a profit? Sounds like the auditors office should be abolished.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 07-Jul-17 07:22 PM
Chad, yes, private accounting firms are cheaper and faster. A friend of mine told me that quite a few counties got hit with penalties for being late with their audits. As a result, they lost federal pass-through grant money.
As for abolishing the auditor's office, that's something I'm totally for. It's essentially an office for politicians to hold until they run for higher office.
Jim Acosta gets hammered
Jim Acosta probably didn't see it coming. When he tweeted that President Trump had held a fake news conference , it isn't likely that he anticipated getting crushed on Twitter. That's what happened, though. It all started after the press conference when Acosta tweeted "Isn't it a 'fake news conference' to take a question from a reporter who is essentially an ally of the White House?"
That's where the bloodbath began.
Donald Trump Jr. replied "So by that logic, was every news conference for the last 8 years #fakenews Jim?" After that, Ari Fleischer replied "Jim - care to guess how many questions I took from reporters who went on to join the Obama WH?"
Acosta's beatdown didn't finish there. Next, he said "The other thing that was 'fake news' coming from President Trump is when he said, 'Well, I keep hearing it's 17 intelligence agencies that say Russia meddled in the election, I think it's only three or four,' Acosta said. 'Where does that number come from? Where does this 'three or four' number come from? My suspicion: is that if we go to the administration and ask them for this question, I'm not so sure we're going to get an answer.'"
That's what happens when you when you send a boy to do a man's job. Here's the administration's official reply:
The assessment was made by four intelligence agencies - the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizers in the American intelligence community.
When didn't the media ask softball questions of Jay Carney? The only tough questions he got were from Ed Henry. Follow-up questions were few and far between. The people who asked questions of Carney were more like stenographers than reporters. I'd argue that Acosta is part of the Stenographers Brigade after watching this video:
When will the MSM start digging into that scandal? Will they ever dig into that scandal? Apparently, it's ok to do nothing while Russia is hacking into our election system but it isn't ok to have people start rumors about the possibility of a Trump campaign worker making contact with a Russian.
A decade ago, I created the term Agenda Media. It's more true now than it's ever been. Since President Trump was inaugurated, the MSM have acted like the Agenda Media. They aren't reporters anymore. They're partisans with press badges.
Posted Thursday, July 6, 2017 4:44 PM
No comments.
Sen. Durbin, political hypocrite
This morning, Sen. Dick Durbin appeared on Morning Joe ahead of President Trump's G20 meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Being the political hack that he is, Sen. Durbin didn't waste the opportunity to berate President Trump and rewrite history.
With regards to rewriting history, Sen. Durbin said "He is trying to restore a Soviet empire which is long gone in history. He's intimidating a lot of his neighbors in a variety of different ways and it really is up to the United States to stand up to stand up to this tyrant."
What a disgrace. First, the Soviet empire "is long gone in history" because President Reagan rejected the Democrats' policies. President Reagan believed, as I believe now, that the United States is the only economic and military superpower in the world. The Soviets' economy isn't strong enough to support their military ambitions. Next, then as now, a US president is unleashing the US energy sector to drive down Soviet/Russian oil price while starving the Soviet/Russian economy of much needed revenues to keep their economy going.
Third, President Obama didn't stand up to Putin:
President Obama was a wimp when it came to standing up to Putin. People remember President Obama telling Mitt Romney that the 80s were calling, that they wanted their foreign policy back. Further, people remember the hot mic conversation between President Obama and Putin where President Obama told Putin that he'd have a lot more flexibility after the election.
Those weren't examples of the US standing up "to this tyrant." They were examples of Democrats appeasing that tyrant. At this point, I'm wondering what Sen. Durbin is babbling about. Is Sen. Durbin just attempting to spin history? It appears so.
The Democratic Party, like CNN, just isn't a serious organization anymore. For that matter, Sen. Durbin isn't a serious person, either.
Posted Friday, July 7, 2017 4:42 PM
No comments.
