June 23-26, 2014
Jun 23 01:20 Rosenstone's performance review from the Twilight Zone Jun 23 01:26 The Clintonistas' loyalty Jun 23 11:34 Pelowski disengaged on Rosenstone Jun 23 17:00 MNsure's impending disaster Jun 25 03:31 St. Cloud Times tries after-the-fact journalism Jun 25 14:02 Dayton attends Iron Range rally Jun 26 03:48 The multi-faceted Lerner-IRS scandal Jun 26 10:49 Prosecuting Lerner now imperative Jun 26 12:37 Quie endorses Seifert
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Rosenstone's performance review from the Twilight Zone
Mark Sommerhauser's article does a fantastic job of illustrating the fact that the MnSCU Board of Trustees has lost touch with reality:
"This has been a highly successful year for Minnesota State Colleges and Universities under the Chancellor's leadership," outgoing MnSCU board chairman Clarence Hightower said in a public summary of Rosenstone's evaluation.
Thank goodness Chairman Hightower's term is almost history. It's been a terrible year for MnSCU. The entire HR Department at Metropolitan resigned on the same day rather than getting fired for totally screwing up the payroll for several years. That isn't outstanding. That's frightful.
It's been a terrible year at Mankato, too. President Davenport fired head football coach Hoffner in 2013. This May, the Bureau of Mediation Services, aka BMS, ruled that Davenport wrongfully fired Hoffner. Then they ordered Hoffner be re-instated and that he be paid for the year he didn't coach.
The presidents at Metropolitan and Moorhead are 'retiring' effective June 30. If they hadn't accepted retirement, they would've been terminated.
Unfortunately for Minnesota's taxpayers, Chairman Hightower's replacement appears to be just as out of touch:
Trustee Thomas Renier, who on Thursday was elected the new MnSCU board chairman, was part of the committee that evaluated Rosenstone. In the public summary of the evaluation, Renier said Rosenstone excelled at focusing on the key question of what's best for MnSCU students.
Renier also commended Rosenstone's handling of a new strategic plan for MnSCU, "Charting the Future," which calls for the system's colleges and universities to work more collaboratively.
"We are extraordinarily enthusiastic about the new and powerful ways in which our colleges and universities have begun to work together under Chancellor Rosenstone's leadership," Renier said.
The IFO criticized Charting the Future in their Bill of Particulars :
It is time to re-focus on the present realities of our state university campuses instead of turning out a stream of planning documents that purport to chart the future.
The incompetence that's been verified at MnSCU's universities is breathtaking and disappointing. It's imperative that universities consistently get the basics right. If they can't get the basics right, there's no justification to think they'll get the vision thing right.
Further, I'd argue that "the system's colleges and universities" should've been working collaboratively without Chancellor Rosenston's document. I'd argue that doing one's job isn't justification for gushing about the job Chancellor Rosenstone is doing.
If that's justification for gushing praise, then we've set the bar far too low to be useful.
Here's the review:
Summary of Rosenstone evaluation
This stands out:
This has indeed been another highly successful year for our students, for our faculty and staff, and the communities we serve.
That's stunning. St. Cloud State just announced that they'll have to cut their operating budget by $3,600,000. That's due in large part to their declining enrollment and the glut of empty dorm rooms. According to SCSU's own budget documents, they'll be over 1,000 students short of full capacity. In fact, they're mothballing one dormitory entirely.
What part of that information says that MnSCU universities are a positive in the communities they serve? I'd love to see Chairman Hightower and incoming Chairman Renier visit with property owners just west of the St. Cloud State campus. If they visited that area, they couldn't honestly that SCSU is a positive influence on St. Cloud.
Originally posted Monday, June 23, 2014, revised 09-Jul 1:15 AM
No comments.
The Clintonistas' loyalty
It used to be said that Bill Clinton's support was a mile wide and an inch deep. Lest anyon think that that's true with Hillary, this should put that to rest:
A Hillary Clinton donor who serves as dean of the University of Arkansas libraries has banned the Washington Free Beacon from the school's special collections archives, after the news outlet published revealing stories about Hillary Clinton based on documents available at the university library.
The ban came days after the Free Beacon ran a story about Clinton's 1975 defense of a child rapist that drew from audio recordings available at the University of Arkansas library's special collections archives.
However, the ban was not mentioned in a June 16 email to this reporter from Steve Voorhies, manager of media relations at the university.
I'm betting Hillary didn't have to contact Dean Voorhies to stop the Washington Free Beacon's investigation. I'm betting he's trained well enough to do that without Hillary contacting him.
The important thing is that the WFB article exposes Hillary as someone who didn't hesitate in destroying an innocent person, then gloating about it afterwards:
The Taylor case was a minor episode in the lengthy career of Clinton, who writes in Living History, before moving on to other topics, that the trial inspired her co-founding of the first rape crisis hotline in Fayetteville.
Clinton and her supporters highlight her decades of advocacy on behalf of women and children, from her legal work at the Children's Defense Fund to her women's rights initiatives at the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation.
This part especially bothers me:
Clinton and her supporters highlight her decades of advocacy on behalf of women and children...
That's irrelevant. That's like the liberals looking the other way to Ted Kennedy's and Christopher Dodd's waitress sandwich :
Those to the manner born who've been in trouble, Ted Kennedy and Chris Dodd, for instance, who participated in the famous 'waitress sandwich' at La Brasserie in 1985, while their dates were in the bathroom, have tended to get out of it by claiming that their boyish high jinks had simply gotten out of hand.
Hillary is as disgusting as Ted Kennedy or Christopher Dodd.
When Clinton returned to Arkansas, she said she gave the prosecutor a clipping of the New York forensic investigator's 'Who's Who.' 'I handed it to Gibson, and I said, 'Well this guy's ready to come up from New York to prevent this miscarriage of justice,' said Clinton, breaking into laughter. 'So we were gonna plea bargain,' she continued.
When she went before Judge Cummings to present the plea, he asked her to leave the room while he interrogated her client, she said. 'I said, 'Judge I can't leave the room, I'm his lawyer,' said Clinton, laughing. 'He said, 'I know but I don't want to talk about this in front of you.' 'So that was Maupin [Cummings], we had a lot of fun with Maupin,' Clinton added.
Hillary's laughter is inappropriate in this situation. Laughing that she was about to get a rapist off with a year in jail is exceptionally odd behavior for a supposed child advocate. It's one thing to zealously represent her client. It's another to laugh about the outcome.
If there was ever a doubt that Hillary was as despicable as Bill, her laughing at getting a rapist a reduced sentence after he raped a 12-year-old girl ends that debate. Hillary's laughter suggests that she didn't care about the 12-year-old's rape. She couldn't have cared.
Hillary is a reprehensible, disgusting person. This nation needs a person of integrity inhabiting the Oval Office. We don't need someone who laughs while a thug gets off after raping a 12-year-old.
Posted Monday, June 23, 2014 1:26 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 23-Jun-14 08:46 AM
Couldn't we wait and destroy Hillary as a viable candidate until AFTER she gets the nomination?
Pelowski disengaged on Rosenstone
This Strib editorial rightly criticizes the MnSCU Board of Trustees for their negotiating Dr. Rosenstone's contract extension:
The 15 public appointees who oversee MnSCU, the state's crucial network of state universities and community and technical colleges, have serious work ahead of them to put the trust back in the board of trustees on which they serve. It's disappointing how difficult it is to tell if this reality has sunk in after the recent troubling news that the board renewed its well-paid chancellor's contract eight months ago, and gave him a healthy raise, without bothering to take a vote on the deal or make the details public.
These trustees have their heads buried so deep in the sand that it's impossible to think that they realize their credibility is on a par with the IRS. The legislature should void Dr. Rosenstone's contract and demand that it be more in line with his accomplishments, not the Board's childish gushings in their evaluation of Dr. Rosenstone's performance. That would require legislative leadership, something Rep. Pelowski isn't famous for. Mostly, he's known for criticizing things after-the-fact.
That Rosenstone's contract had been settled quietly, and with a bump in salary and expenses that made up for the administrative bonuses banned by state lawmakers, understandably raised ire statewide.
Outgoing Board Chairman Hightower negotiated a luxurious deal with Rosenstone, especially considering his history of failures. Let's remember that he didn't notice the payroll scandal at Metropolitan State until after the entire HR Department resigned right before they would've been fired. Let's remember that Chancellor Rosenstone didn't intervene when President Richard Davenport improperly fire Mankato head football coach Todd Hoffner.
Chairman Pelowski hasn't held a single hearing looking into any of these disgraceful events. Examining the minutes for the House Higher Ed Committee's meetings shows that Chairman Pelowski didn't devote a single minute on oversight. Chairman Pelowski didn't ask Clarence Hightower where negotiations were at between the Board and Chancellor Rosenstone. He didn't ask the MnSCU Board about contract negotiations between MnSCU and the IFO.
To be fair, 2 of the 4 hearings that Chairman Pelowski held dealt with the U of M's and MnSCU's bonding proposals.
Trustees are there to provide oversight on behalf of the public. It's hard to see how they lived up to their responsibilities by failing to follow up with board chairman Clarence Hightower after delegating to him negotiation duties with Rosenstone. Incredibly, some of the trustees apparently weren't aware of the terms until this week. That reflects poorly not just on Hightower, but on everyone serving.
I've written many times that MnSCU doesn't do oversight. It's common knowledge that Chancellor Rosenstone discourages Trustees from visiting the campuses. The trustees haven't fought him on that nor have they defied him on that. They aren't watchdogs. They're more like Rosenstone's lap puppies:
Hightower also did not help himself or the board by dubbing the lack of transparency 'an unfortunate oversight,' a 'distraction' and a 'lapse in communication." These characterizations trivialize a lack of judgment and raise concerns about the board's broader oversight.
While the Strib is critical of Hightower and the MnSCU Board, they aren't critical of Rep. Pelowski or Sen. Bonoff:
Pelowski and Bonoff have vowed to follow up on the questions raised by the poor handling of the contract. Good. Clearly the board charged with assessing Rosenstone's performance is in need of a job review itself.
If an unpaid board is charged with representing Minnesota's taxpayers, then paid legislators on the higher education committees should represent Minnesota's taxpayers, too. Apparently, they're too busy spending the taxpayers' money to be bothered with finding out whether that money is being wisely spent.
I'm totally on board with criticizing the MnSCU Board of Trustees. It's been repeatedly proven that they haven't done their job. It's just that the Strib's criticism shouldn't stop at the board. The Strib should've also criticized Rep. Pelowski and Sen. Bonoff. They've let the taxpayers down, too.
Posted Monday, June 23, 2014 11:34 AM
No comments.
MNsure's impending disaster
This op-ed by Reps. Tara Mack and Joe Hoppe criticizes Gov. Dayton for not releasing health insurance premium rates until after the election:
In 2013, Dayton's administration and insurance companies worked to release plan details a month before open enrollment. This gave people an idea of what to expect before shopping on MNsure, and consumers had three months to find, select and purchase a plan. This year Minnesotans won't know the price of plans until MNsure's next enrollment period begins on Nov. 15.
As disgusting as the DFL's secrecy is, this part is the most troubling:
They'll have just four weeks to find a plan and complete enrollment.
I won't hesitate in making this prediction: Based on Deloitte's report , 4 weeks won't be enough to get everyone enrolled who wants to be enrolled. Here's part of Deloitte's report:
As the nation moves toward the Fall of 2014 (open enrollment for Benefit Year 2015), in addition to supporting initial enrollment, a State's Health Insurance Exchange must also be able to process the renewal of existing enrollment base. These additional demands compound the remediation efforts that have been underway in Minnesota.
During the assessment, 47 of the 73 sub-functions addressed were found either to be absent or not functioning as expected. Six of the 73 sub-functions could be considered for implementation post-open enrollment. The remaining 41 sub-functions need to be provided for the 2015 Open Enrollment either through changes/enhancements to the systems or through contingent means.
In other words, minimal progress has been made on MNsure. According to Deloitte, Minnesotans shouldn't expect major progress this year, either:
The 3 most critical absent functions are included in this release plan: (1) Changes in circumstances, (2) Medicaid renewals and (3) Qualified Health Plan (QHP) renewals.
That's the least terrible news from pg. 8 of the Deloitte report. This is worse news:
Some of the system requirements for this functionality have not been finalized. If this functionality isn't implemented on schedule, its absence could have a significant adverse impact on MNsure operations during open enrollment.
Last year, the conventional wisdom was that a) Obamacare would remain flawed because it was built on terrible policies and b) the website would get fixed relatively quickly. Deloitte's report casts additional suspicion on last year's conventional wisdom.
The sarcastic side of me thinks there's a possibility we'll elect Obama's successor before Mnsure is operating properly. I'm not certain my sarcastic side isn't right.
The Dayton administration's own economists said MNsure and Obamacare will increase insurance costs in Minnesota by as much as 30 percent. A different report published recently from the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research shows that the price of premiums in Minnesota has increased on average by 47 percent after the implementation of Obamacare.
Whether the website is working or not, the reality is that premiums have jumped since Obamacare was signed into law. Obamacare, aka the Affordable Care Act, is expensive and unpopular. The MNsure website still isn't working. In fact, there's little reason for optimism that it'll be fixed anytime soon.
Add the Dayton administration's attempt to hide insurance premium information from Minnesota families and there's reason to be skeptical about Obamacare.
Posted Monday, June 23, 2014 5:00 PM
No comments.
St. Cloud Times tries after-the-fact journalism
On the bright side, the St. Cloud Times is attempting to commit journalism, albeit after the facts are known. This editorial is, at best, after-the-fact journalism. A week after this story broke, the Times' Editorial Board weighed in:
When the state's top public official, the governor, names you one of 15 public trustees to oversee the state's $1.9 billion public Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system, it should be understood you must operate with the public's interests top of mind.
When newspapers and legislators don't pay attention to low-profile institutions like MnSCU, they quickly turn into fiefdoms. The Times is now covering this story because what was just exposed is so outrageous that even the Times can't ignore it. Here's what just happened:
Sadly, as recent news reports have noted, the MnSCU board of trustees failed to come anywhere close to that when it allowed just one trustee, Chair Clarence Hightower, to set up a new three-year contract with Chancellor Steven Rosenstone eight months ago!
I'll be brief. Hightower shouldn't have had the responsibility of negotiating a new contract with Chancellor Rosenstone. Chancellor Rosenstone should've been told that his contract wouldn't be extended. Two MnSCU university presidents are 'retiring' rather than getting fired. Another president just cost his university hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees and $100,000 in back pay for wrongfully terminating their head football coach.
Still, the Times is right that the MnSCU Board of Trustees disgraced themselves. Consider what they said in their evaluation of Chancellor Rosenstone :
In the public summary of the evaluation, Renier said Rosenstone excelled at focusing on the key question of what's best for MnSCU students.
Renier also commended Rosenstone's handling of a new strategic plan for MnSCU, 'Charting the Future,' which calls for the system's colleges and universities to work more collaboratively.
'We are extraordinarily enthusiastic about the new and powerful ways in which our colleges and universities have begun to work together under Chancellor Rosenstone's leadership,' Renier said.
That's astonishing. Chairman-Elect Renier is acting like Charting the Future has been implemented and that it's producing incredible results. That isn't close to the truth. Charting the Future is a document that hasn't been implemented yet. What, exactly, is Chairman-Elect Renier gushing about?
The Board of Trustees' performance review of Chancellor Rosenstone came months after they'd negotiated a contract extension. Given the difficulties within MnSCU, they should've written Chancellor Rosenstone's performance review before authorizing Chairman Hightower to negotiate a new contract.
This recommendation isn't satisfactory:
Gov. Mark Dayton and legislators should follow the dismay and disgust they expressed about the new contract with a new protocol for such contracts.
First, the legislature and the next governor should pay attention to what's happening at MnSCU. That would be a major improvement from what they've done the last 4-8 years. Further, the DFL shouldn't just throw more money at MnSCU. They've done that the last 2 year, then patted themselves on the back for what they did.
Meanwhile, they didn't hold hearings on whether Chancellor Rosenstone deserved a contract extension. Obviously, the MnSCU Board of Trustees has the final say on that because they're the part of the executive branch that deals with that. Still, holding hearings would've allowed public input on whether Rosenstone deserved another contract.
The Times' brand of journalism is an indictment against institutional journalism. It's just a matter of time before the Times is history.
Posted Wednesday, June 25, 2014 3:31 AM
No comments.
Dayton attends Iron Range rally
Gov. Dayton attended a rally in Virginia Monday but that doesn't mean he's committed to mining.
DFL Gov. Mark Dayton urged iron miners to step up the fight against foreign countries illegally dumping steel in the U.S. and threatening the local mining industry.
'The story of the Iron Range is one of standing strong against exploitation and oppression, and too often of a government that will not stand with them,' Dayton said to a cheering crowd of 1,500 iron miners. 'Today's enemies are not the companies, but the countries that dump their steel in the U.S. market, depress the prices and take away your jobs.'
It's interesting that Gov. Dayton will rally with miners who work at existing mining companies but won't support new mining projects like PolyMet and Twin Metals-Minnesota. I didn't say that Gov. Dayton's behavior is inexplicable. It's quite understandable.
When it comes to taking a stand on jobs or the environment, Gov. Dayton is a wimp, always siding with environmental activists like his ex-wife Alida Messinger. This year, despite loud protestations from the Range, Gov. Dayton has insisted that he won't take a position on PolyMet until the reviews are done.
That isn't leadership. That's what spineless wimps do.
Republicans are capitalizing on the PolyMet issue:
GOP gubernatorial candidate Scott Honour's running mate, state Sen. Karin Housley, drove up to attend the rally. 'Scott Honour and I support the mining jobs in northern Minnesota,' Housley said. 'We are all about mining jobs.'
After the rally, Housley toured the proposed copper-nickel mine in Hoyt Lakes, where PolyMet Corp. is seeking approval for a mine that could bring hundreds of jobs and millions in new investment. But the 20-year mine would also require environmental clean-up that could stretch 500 years.
Housley said she has a long connection to PolyMet. She is a member of a small group of hobbyist investors who first invested in PolyMet about eight years ago and even toured the facility.
'There is room for common-sense growing jobs and protecting the environment,' she said. 'We are all over creating jobs up here.'
GOP-endorsed gubernatorial candidate Jeff Johnson issued a statement saying Dayton is not leading on job-creation issues on the Iron Range.
'Attending rallies is not leading - it is standing,' Johnson said. 'When I am governor, I am not just going to stand with people who are losing their jobs, I am going to do everything I can to ensure that mining jobs aren't just protected, they are expanded.'
Of course, the DFL doesn't like the possibility of losing support on a long-time electoral stronghold:
Dayton and other Democrats took direct aim at Republicans at the rally, saying that the GOP has repeatedly tried to raid special Iron Range funds whenever the budget got tight. Democrats said the Republican's sudden interest in the Iron Range is a fleeting political ploy.
First, Gov. Dayton's support of mining is questionable at best. He hasn't said a positive word about mining since becoming governor. Second, Democrats sound defensive now that GOP gubernatorial candidates are fighting for Iron Range votes.
Third and most importantly, Democrats talk about budget tightening while they're causing the tightness by not letting the Iron Range economy flourish. Their history of creating jobs on the Range is awful. That's why the MHI for Eveleth is $35,500 .
Dayton and other Democrats fought for projects and jobs 'that would improve your quality of life on the Iron Range, across Minnesota and across the country.'
On that front, Gov. Dayton and the DFL failed. One in 6 people living on the Range live in poverty. That isn't the definition of jobs that "improve your quality of life." That's the definition of failing the Range while leaving them in misery.
Originally posted Wednesday, June 25, 2014, revised 26-Jun 12:10 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 25-Jun-14 02:27 PM
If Governor Dayton was honest he would've said:
"The enemy to the steel industry today is the United States environment movement. You should vote out of office any body that listens to them and implements their policies. That is why you should vote me out of office!"
I guess he doesn't care about those miners.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
The multi-faceted Lerner-IRS scandal
Chuck Todd, NBC's Chief White House Correspondent, apparently hasn't figured it out that the initial IRS scandal isn't the only IRS scandal. Here's what he said on the matter :
On Monday, the IRS Commissioner testified before Congress. A week after the IRS told Senate investigators that two years of e-mails disappeared in a computer crash back in 2011. While this certainly doesn't make the Obama administration nor the IRS look very good, it's important to remember what this actual story is about because it's gotten lost.
The question at hand is whether explicitly political organizations should be filing as tax exempt social welfare groups under the tax code and both political parties are pointing blame. Republicans say that just conservative-sounding groups were targeted by the IRS.
The thing is that the IRS targeting of TEA Party organizations is just part of the scandal. Another facet of the scandal is Lois Lerner's illegal activities, starting with her sending confidential donor information of the National Organization of Marriage to the Human Rights Campaign.
Another facet of the scandal is how her emails were suspiciously 'lost'. That's actually a big deal because the only plausible explanation for 2 years of Ms. Lerner' emails disappearing is that they were intentionally destroyed to hide incriminating facts about how she was using the IRS to terrorize President Obama's political opponents.
In fact, it was learned Wednesday that Ms. Lerner used her position within the IRS to get a sitting US senator audited .
People that think this scandal is about whether 501(c)(3) organizations "should be filing as tax exempt social welfare" organizations have their head in the sand. This scandal is mostly about whether the Obama administration is using the IRS to terrorize its political enemies. Whether the tax code should be fixed is trivial in comparison.
When the IRS targets the president's political opponents, it's frightening because the IRS has the ability to destroy people's lives. When the IRS attempts to limit organizations' ability to participate in the political process, that's trampling on those organizations' constitutional rights. When a high-ranking official attempts to have a sitting US senator audited, That's about as corrupt as it gets.
In fact, I'd argue that that's more corrupt than Watergate. Here's part of what Article 2 in the Articles of Impeachment brought against President Nixon said:
He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavoured to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposed not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be intitiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.
It clearly states that Nixon tried to obtain "confidential information" from the IRS. Lois Lerner didn't resist HRC's request for confidential information from NOM's filing with the IRS. Ms. Lerner handed them over without hesitation.
If Chuck Todd thinks that Lois Lerner's allegedly illegal actions aren't the focus of this scandal, then he isn't qualified to be a journalist. That doesn't mean, though, that he isn't the closest thing MSNBC has to a journalist. In all seriousness, though, I suspect Todd would like to take that statement back.
Finally, I wish Lois Lerner was never a government employee. She's done tons of damage to average citizens over the past 5 years. If we had a real attorney general, she'd already have been indicted for her treachery.
Posted Thursday, June 26, 2014 3:48 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 26-Jun-14 02:42 PM
Gary:
I know that you're excited about the IRS, but:
One, Lois only thought that the Senator should be audited. She tried to put in motion the effort to get an audit going, but was struck down by somebody who said that an audit wasn't necessary for the item that was causing her to do an audit.
Two, the incident on the marriage group is that the person who got the document illegally won't tell the marriage group who gave him the document (the real criminal in this case) unless he has immunity from prosecution. Even though the group has asked the Justice Department to grant the immunity they won't. Thus they can't find out who at the IRS leaked their document. Thus it could be Lois L, but it can be somebody else unless you know something that the marriage group doesn't know.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Prosecuting Lerner now imperative
Now that it's been revealed that Lois Lerner targeted sitting US Sen. Chuck Grassley with an audit , the debate over whether to prosecute Ms. Lerner should be over. I say should be because we don't have a real attorney general or a real Justice Department. If we did, we'd already have an indictment in hand and a trial date would've been set.
The emails appear to show Lerner mistakenly received an invitation intended for Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, in 2012.
The event organizer, whose name is not disclosed, apparently offered to pay for Grassley's wife to attend the event, which caught Lerner's attention. The December 2012 emails show that in response, Lerner suggested to an IRS colleague that the case be referred for an audit.
"Looked like they were inappropriately offering to pay for his wife. Perhaps we should refer to Exam?" she wrote.
Her colleague, though, pushed back on the idea, saying an offer to pay for his wife is "not prohibited on its face." There is no indication from the emails that Lerner pursued the issue any further.
What's disturbing is the fact that Lerner is a lawyer within the IRS. Apparently, she didn't know that this offer didn't violate the law. Last night on Greta, she said that Lerner should know better. Then she said that everything is fine if the Grassleys report the payment on their income tax filings. Then Greta threw in a final caveat of import: At the time she wanted Grassley audited, it wasn't clear if Sen. Grassley would accept the speaking engagement.
It's stunning that Ms. Lerner targeted a sitting US senator. This clearly proves that, at least in her mind, the IRS should be weaponized against conservatives. This also proves that President Obama's statement that there "isn't even a smidgen of corruption" within the IRS is pure BS.
Lois Lerner is exceptionally corrupt. Ditto with John Koskinen and Steven Miller.
Grassley said in a statement that this kind of incident fuels concerns people have about "political targeting" at the highest levels. "It's very troubling that a simple clerical mix-up could get a taxpayer immediately referred for an IRS exam without any due diligence from agency officials," the senator said.
That type of corruption should make indicting and prosecuting Ms. Lerner an imperative. Unfortunately, like I said before, that won't happen because Attorney General Holder and President Obama are as corrupted by ideology as Ms. Lerner is.
Posted Thursday, June 26, 2014 10:49 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 26-Jun-14 02:36 PM
Gary:
Did you do a typo? The line, "Last night on Greta, she said ..." came right after you talked about Lerner. That sort of implies that Lerner was on Greta's show last night and then made the comment that you wrote about.
I assume you meant that this is what Greta said on her show last night.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 27-Jun-14 10:34 AM
Pay attention, Walter. Here's what I wrote:
Last night on Greta, she said that Lerner should know better.She refers to Greta, not Lerner.
Comment 3 by walter hanson at 27-Jun-14 12:05 PM
Gary:
The word "She" was used four times in that pargraph.
The first time in the previous sentence you had implied that the "She" was Lerner. The second time which I had assumed was Gretta finally the "She" was for Gretta. When the term "She" or "He" is used it shouldn't be given mulitple indenties in the same paragraph. That's why I was checking. I had finally figured it out. Given the fact that you had used the word "She" to describe Lerner the sentence should've read something like, "Last night on her show Greta this was shown clearly by comments by Gretta. Gretta said, "That Lerner should've known better ... "
Walter Hanson
Quie endorses Seifert
Former Minneota Gov. Al Quie has endorsed Marty Seifert's bid to replace Gov. Mark Dayton. Quie was once barred from participating in GOP events , including the 2012 Republican National Convention. First, here's Quie's endorsement:
'I have been impressed by Seifert's ability to connect with Minnesotans all over our state and his unique grasp of the issues that are important for our future,' said Quie. 'We need a leader who is dedicated to justice and he will appoint judges and justices who respect the law and the Constitution, have radical integrity, and who will respect the litigants.'
Quie is urging his fellow Republicans to vote for Seifert in the upcoming August 12th primary in order to defeat Dayton.
'Just as I defeated a DFL incumbent to become governor, Marty Seifert has the ability to bring people together and win in November.'
The notion that Seifert "has the ability to bring people together" is only credible if you think he pushed some of his supporters into supporting someone other than him when he tried to prevent Republicans from endorsing a candidate for governor.
Further, a substantial number of Seifert supporters also support judicial elections. Quie is the face of retention elections, which opposes judicial elections.
The reality is that Quie hasn't been relevant to Republican Party politics for almost a generation. He's from the RINO wing of the Minnesota GOP. Here's more on why Quie was disciplined:
MPR reports that delegates to the party's state central committee meeting voted 59-55 Saturday to bar 18 Republicans from party activities for two years, including the 2012 Republican National Convention.
The list of those who supported Independence Party candidate Tom Horner includes former Govs. Arne Carlson and Al Quie, former U.S. Sen. Dave Durenberger and donor George Pillsbury.
If Marty Seifert wants Quie's endorsement, that's his option. If Quie wants to endorse Seifert, that's fine, too. The question is whether Quie's support will have a positive impact on Republicans. I'm betting it won't because most of the people who will vote in August's primary don't know who Quie is because he served before they were born. Here's Seifert's spin on Quie's endorsement:
'Governor Quie has been universally praised for being a public servant willing to take risks, offering out-of-the-box ideas for education and judicial reforms,' said Seifert. 'I am looking forward to hearing more of his advice on how to make Minnesota an even better place.'
Now that's professional spin. Saying that Quie is "willing to take risks", I suspect, is Seifert's way of saying he's supported former Independence Party gubernatorial candidate Tom Horner's tax increases and Horner's candidacy. Nothing says 'Let's pull people together' like getting endorsed by one of the erstwhile Republicans who cost Tom Emmer the election in 2010.
Compare that with State Sen. Michelle Benson endorsing Jeff Johnson, the endorsed GOP gubernatorial candidate. Sen. Benson is a talented legislator with impeccable conservative credentials and who's very much relevant in Republican Party politics.
The latest KSTP-SurveyUSA poll showed Seifert trailing Jeff Johnson and Kurt Zellers by 10 points. There's no reason to think the endorsement battle will help Seifert close that gap in any substantial way.
Posted Thursday, June 26, 2014 12:37 PM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 26-Jun-14 04:15 PM
I might disagree on one point, which is that the most faithful voters are older folks, and the Republicans among them are familiar with many of Quie's and Siefert's multiple perfidies. To the extent ANY endorsement matters, I can't imagine this being a positive for Seifert's trying to woo conservative Republicans into his camp.
