March 20-22, 2011
Mar 20 09:43 @Issue Notes Mar 20 11:13 First Rule Of Holes Mar 20 13:40 Higher Ed Reform Questions Mar 20 15:23 Biden's Disaster Mar 21 13:16 LGA, Property Taxes Aren't Linked Mar 21 23:52 What's Wrong With This Picture? Mar 22 12:57 Airport Commission Meeting Notes Mar 22 18:02 McCaskill Is History
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
@Issue Notes
I just finished watching @Issue With Tom Hauser. Thank God the Political Analysis segment isn't longer. Matt Entenza, the former House Minority Leader, former AG and former gubernatorial candidate, said something utterly preposterous.
Like other DFL TV hamsters, he said that the message voters sent last November was to "get along, work together and get things done." He's right that they said get things done. He's wrong on the rest of it. The gubernatorial race was a virtual tie. Gov. Dayton didn't get a mandate. PERIOD.
The House and Senate races were a different story, though. For the first time since the Senate became partisan, Republicans became the majority party. They gained a net 16 seats, going from the minority in a veto-proof body to being the majority party.
That's a rather emphatic message.
In the House, Republicans went from having 47 members in a 134 member body to 72 members and the majority. House and Senate GOP candidates ran on a clearly articulated message: live within our means, not raising taxes and reforming the size and function of government.
That message found ethusiastic, widespread support. DFL veterans once thought safe for life bit the dust. Dave Olin got trounced and Bernie Lieder lost in the first district. Brita Sailer lost in 2B. Loren Solberg got defeated in 3B. Al Doty and Al Juhnke lost in 12B and 13B respectively, Doty by 14 points. Gail Kulick-Jackson got trounced in her rematch with Sondra Erickson 55-45.
On the Senate side, Dave Brown trounced incumbent Lisa Fobbe by 15 points. Al DeCruif defeated incumbent Kevin Dahle. Jeremy Miller defeated Sharon Erickson-Ropes. Pam Wolf defeated former Senate President Don Metzen.
District after district told St. Paul that they were sick of annual DFL tax increase proposals, that they were tired of the DFL's spending money on frivolous things. Most of all, they said they were tired of business-as-usual status quo governance.
Republicans are delivering on those promises. They've already passed and gotten signed into law permitting reform. They're on their ways to passing dramatic budget reform with HF2, which would make priority-based budgeting a fact of life for government bureaucrats. HF2 will likely cause a radical transformation of government flow charts.
Spending habits will change. Priorities will shift from 'How can we expand government?' to 'Are we doing what the state constitution says government is supposed to do?'
I get the DFL's strategy. In 2009-2010, Democrats ignored the will of the people and shut Republicans out of the cycle. It started with the failed federal stimulus plan when Republicans met with President Obama. When Republicans suggested something, President Obama's response was "We won." They've acted on that principle ever since. They're still acting like that after the shellacking they took this past November.
Week after week, DFL flacks come on TV preaching the 'gospel of kumbayah'. Week after week, their special interest allies preach the gospel of 'the MNGOP is out of touch with Minnesota'.
It's laughable.
The MNGOP ran a campaign of not raising taxes, establishing the right priorities and living within their means. That's th message that helped them win thundering victory after thundering victory in the House and Senate. Thus far, they've kept their promises.
Still, the DFL insists that it's the GOP is out of touch. What a joke. In that respect, Matt Entenza is the perfect face for the DFL.
Posted Sunday, March 20, 2011 9:43 AM
No comments.
First Rule Of Holes
The first rule of holes is to stop digging. According to Scott Rasmussen's polling , President Obama hasn't learned that lesson:
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Voters show that just 31% rate Obama's handling of economic issues as good or excellent. Forty-five percent (45%) say the president is doing a poor job handling these issues.
This information says one thing: President Obama isn't getting re-elected. When the economy is people's biggest worry, a president can't afford to be seen by a near-majority as doing a poor job.
Couple that with a significant majority of people approving of repealing his signature acomplishment, aka PPACA, aka Obamacare, and you've got a toxic mix that suggests President Obama has a foot on a slippery slope, the other on a banana peel.
While the unemployment rate dropped to 8.9 percent, people are still having great difficulty finding a job. The economic reports can say what they want. If people don't find jobs, they won't cut President Obama slack for the unemployment rate artificially dropping.
Governors like John Kasich, Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal and Rick Perry are instituting reforms that will or have put their states on the right path economically. People like Paul Ryan, Mike Pence, Marco Rubio, Jim DeMint and Rand Paul are growing in popularity as they try to limit government's reach.
As they gain in popularity, President Obama's popularity sinks. When the presidential campaign starts, Republican presidential candidates will spend more time running against President Obama than against their fellow Republicans.
Meanwhile, Republican Senate and House candidates will run equally against their opponents and President Obama. It figures to be a target-rich environment for Republican candidates.
Couple President Obama's mishandling of the economy with his insistence of ramming ineffective, counterproductive policies down our throats against our will and you've got a difficult platform to campaign from.
If these numbers don't improve dramatically, President Obama will lose by a dramatic margin. If that happens, he'll drag alot of Democrats down with him. It's that simple.
Posted Sunday, March 20, 2011 11:13 AM
No comments.
Higher Ed Reform Questions
Yesterday afternoon, an Aviation Department student attending the SD-15 townhall meeting asked about transportation in general and aviation in particular as an economic development tool. I didn't get the young man's name but it's clear he sees SCSU's Aviation Department as a tool for economic development.
Clearly Mayor Kleis does, too, as he addressed the subject during Saturday's townhall. He said that the minute that get a regional carrier serving either Chicago, Denver or Atlanta, businesses will move here.
The thing I keep returning to are the comments at last Monday night's City Council meeting. According to the students, there is a pilot shortage coming, probably within the next 2-3 years.
At last week's city council meeting, Mayor Kleis recommended the city council adopt a resolution sending the official message that they see the Aviation Department as important to St. Cloud's economic viability.
Setting aside the Aviation Department momentarily, what I'm wondering is what level of public input went into the process. It is, after all, a community asset designed to generate economic prosperity while educating people. What weight was given to that input? Could other programs have been put online statewide to save money? Would these savings have kept core, job-creating programs open?
The 10 biggest programs at SCSU are: Mass Communications with 379 students enrolled, Criminal Justice Studies with 319, Accounting with 295, Management with 293, Elementary/K-8 Education with 285, Finance with 253, Psychology with 245, Marketing with 222, Community Psychology with 214, Aviation with 192 students.
Other programs with more than 100 students enrolled are Nursing with 177 students, Social Work with 137 students, Studio Art with 133 students, with Communications Studies 131 students and Biomedical Sciences with 106 students.
Speaking global prioritizing and budgeting, how many subjects should get moved into a new online university? Obviously, you couldn't do that with classes like biology, chemistry, etc. because of the lab times but how many classes could fit into that new model?
Yes, I know that the vast majority of universities offer online classes. What I'm saying is that we should identify which university offers the best program for each subject, then let that university be the university that teaches that program online. Think of it as the online version of Wisconsin's Centers of Excellence concept.
The current economic difficulties are forcing us to accelerate innovations to keep pace with 21st Century demands. SCSU and the Aviation Department are but a microcosm of the challenges, AND OPPORTUNITIES, sitting before us. It's our choice to drag our feet or embrace the opportunities.
Visionaries see the possibilities. Now it's up to the universities, the legislature and Gov. Dayton to work together to rebuild higher ed AND rebuild it at a much more reasonable cost to taxpayers.
I have no illusions that this will happen with the snap of our fingers. Still, setting the right priorities in terms of which programs should be offered at physical university campuses and which should be offered by online centers of excellence campuses can usher in a new era of educational excellence at fiscally conservative prices to taxpayers.
That's the type of higher ed reform Minnesotans can get excited about.
Posted Sunday, March 20, 2011 1:40 PM
Comment 1 by Rex Newman at 20-Mar-11 10:09 PM
I'm encouraged to see that the majors you list all have actual employment prospects. Not sure the UofM flagship could say the same, what with philosophy and women's studies.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 21-Mar-11 12:48 AM
Rex, The sad news is that SCSU eliminated Aviation, Art History & another program. After hearing the public outcry, they restored ART HISTORY. What's worse is that the University turned down FedEx's offer of a transport plan for their STEM (Science, Technology, engineering & Math) program. Think of the learning opportunities that would've presented for the engineering department alone.
I'm growing more skeptical of this administration. I'm not totally skeptical but I've seen things that raise concerns.
Comment 2 by eric z. at 21-Mar-11 10:35 AM
Gary, when you talk about "higher education" please start with what matters most.
Having one of the better land-grant Universities in the Twin Cities, where graduate programs in science and engineering and the med school have led to community growth and innovation - good, high paying, professional jobs for the post-graduate degree holders.
That's the seed corn of the future and the GOP seems unwilling to admit that educated people are important, Tea Party blather over meritocracy, and it's spelling doom for the country as the Chinese and Indians do appreciate excellence.
Republicans, from a view of funding, do not.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 21-Mar-11 01:48 PM
WRONG!!! We believe in funding the essential parts of Higher Ed. When the SCSU provost recommends shutting down the Aviation Dept., then submits plans to hire 8 people in his office, I question his decisionmaking abilities. When I hear about cutting departments without cutting the bureacracy first, I'm more than a little suspicious.
In the SCSU case, the other thing that's bothering me is that the provost's recommendations eliminate an economic development tool while adding fat to the bureaucracy. If you want to defend that, that's your choice. I WON'T.
Biden's Disaster
Joe Biden's mouth has gotten him in trouble more times than historians can count. Still, he's never said anything as disgusting as what he said in this article :
Ratcheting up the rhetoric in the Washington budget battle, Vice President Biden on Friday likened the Republican strategy of seeking to slash federal spending while championing tax breaks for the wealthy to rape victims being blamed for the rape.
At a lavish Philadelphia fundraising luncheon that raised $400,000 for Democratic congressional campaigns, Biden began his attack on Republicans by crediting the 1994 Violence Against Women Act that he and former Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter (who was in attendance) authored for changing society's attitude about blaming rape victims.
"When a woman got raped, blame her because she was wearing a skirt too short, she looked the wrong way or she wasn't home in time to make dinner," he said. "We've gotten by that."
Then Biden turned his focus to the current spending debate in which Democrats and Republicans are fighting over how much to cut from the federal budget.
"But it's amazing how these Republicans, the right wing of this party, whose philosophy threw us into this godawful hole we're in, gave us the tremendous deficit we've inherited, that they're now using the very economic condition they have created to blame the victim, whether it's organized labor or ordinary middle-class working men and women," he said.
What a blithering idiot. He's a national embarrassment of the highest magnitude. President Obama will go down as one of the worst presidents ever, thanks to Obamacare, his failed stimulus plan and his repeatedly ignoring the will of the people.
At least when we had President Carter, we had a relatively stable Walter Mondale as VP. I'm not a huge fan of Mondale's but he's light years more competent than VP Biden. I'm not sure they aren't in different galaxies.
Equating spending policies with violent crime is beyond the pale. BY MILES AND MILES!!! Vice President Biden should immediately apologize for his disgusting statements.
RNC Chairman Reince Preibus immediately criticized Biden's statement:
"Using a rape analogy to describe one's political opponents is inexcusable & beneath the office of the Vice President," RNC Chairman Reince Priebus tweeted.
That first Tuesday in November, 2012, can't arrive quick enough. It's time to put this national nightmare behind us.
Another thing that Vice President Biden conveniently omitted from his speech was that it was the Obama administration that, upon inheriting a major recession, spent money on everything that wouldn't improve the economy. What they did didn't have a prayer of strengthening the economy.
The only thing that it would do was strengthen unions, which it did. As a DIRECT RESULT, America's unemployment spiked and stayed high.
Posted Sunday, March 20, 2011 3:23 PM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 20-Mar-11 11:26 PM
Gary:
I suppose Biden isn't aware of the fact that spending went from $2.7 trillion for fiscal year 2007 the last time Republicans controlled both chambers of Congress to basically $4.0 trillion. It seems like $1.3 trillion of that deficit can be blamed on the Democrats spending money we don't have.
And if he's so concerned about rape why doesn't he care that President Obama is raping over 300 million americans with this ridiculous OVER SPENDING!
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
LGA, Property Taxes Aren't Linked
According to Gov. Dayton and the DFL, LGA cuts are directly tied to property tax hikes. Mark Haveman disputes that :
Mark Haveman, with the Minnesota Taxpayers Association, said it's true that property taxes increased over the past eight years when LGA was cut. But he said property taxes also increased in the early 1990s when LGA funding increased.
"Even in the LGA boom days, there has always been historical increases in per capita city property taxes," Haveman said. "They've been lower than in recent periods, but that doesn't say it won't happen."
Haveman said he believes local governments would spend differently if they didn't receive state aid.
This information supports my contention that it's tied directly to local spending decisions, not LGA. In the fat times, people expanded local governments beyond their mission.
Having read through St. Paul's operating budget in 2008, I know whereof I speak. Though I don't remember the specific things in the budget that I would've cut, I remember thinking that I could've cut a third of their operating budget and nobody would've noticed.
The thing that should frighten people is that reading through St. Paul's operating budget took me an entire week. A CITY BUDGET!!! I'm betting that I could get through St. Cloud's operating budget in a day, possibly a little bit longer.
I spoke with a friend last night who lives in northern Minnesota. We spoke about how cities can save money. I told him about the fact that I'm a 4th of July baby, which explains why I'm such a big fireworks addict.
Last year, after another year of cutting St. Cloud's budget, Mayor Kleis spoke to the community about the city not paying for the event. Several of the major businesses contributed to the fund. Local citizens contributed, too, some giving $5, some giving $50, some giving $250.
By the time they finished collecting money, they'd collected enough money to put on the most spectacular fireworks display in my lifetime. It lasted about twice as long as in previous years. The fireworks were much more dramatic, too. In short, businesses and private citizens provided the solution to what had previously been a government expenditure.
I'm betting that last year's solution will become tradition.
The point is that local communities can often provide solutions to things that shouldn't have been government expenditures in the first place.
This likely wouldn't have happened without the Great Recession. Using the DFL model, however, the first reaction likely would've been to raise taxes or to lobby for more LGA rather than looking for this type of solution.
Posted Monday, March 21, 2011 1:16 PM
Comment 1 by Chad Quigley at 21-Mar-11 09:35 PM
Well of course property taxes are tied to local spending but most people in large cities (Minneapolis, St. Paul, Duluth) are DFL faithful and really don't know how to think for themselves so whatever the party heads tell them (LGA cuts lead to higher taxes) is what they believe and spew.
What's Wrong With This Picture?
Anytime that you're talking about education, there's likely to be a few points of disagreement. Thanks to this article , though, we're given a point of clarity. Here's what I'm talking about:
Charlie Kyte, who lobbies on behalf of school superintendents , said he likes several policy changes Republicans proposed. But he was most worried by a cap on state special education funding.
First, they're talking about this in the context of Gov. Dayton probably vetoing the K-12 bill.
Next, it's important to ask how many Charlie Kytes lobby the legislature on behalf of school superintendents? If superintendents are hiring lobbyists, how many other state agencies are lobbying the state legislature on the taxpayers' dime? Why shouldn't those types of positions be totally eliminated from the government's organizational chart?
This is why the convoluted system that's currently in place must be demolished. At Saturday's meeting, Rep. Gottwalt said, rightly, that it should be every legislator's responsibility to look for wasteful spending. The system as it exists is riddled with waste that's been rationalized for too long.
I wrote here about the Beltrami County administrator's findings:
Murphy discovered that many county employees believed that their primary customers were not county residents, but rather state regulators.
I don't know whether the Beltrami County system works as well as it sounds but when county employees think their primary responsibility is to state regulators, something's wrong. It isn't just about the spending, though that's certainly important. It's about setting the right priorities.
At Saturday's townhall, King talked about the commissioners, the deputy commissioners, the assistant commissioners and the legislative liaisons he's dealt with. Yes, they have all 4 in a significant amount of state departments.
The superintendents who hired Charlie Kyte didn't set the right priorities. It doesn't sound like the commissioners are setting the right priorities either. It wouldn't surprise me if this problem is systemic, not random.
It's got to stop and it's gotta stop ASAP.
Posted Monday, March 21, 2011 11:52 PM
Comment 1 by Rex Newman at 22-Mar-11 12:17 AM
It wouldn't win friends or influence people, but were I a Legislator, I would refuse to see lobbyists, even a Phil Krinkie or David Strom. I'd talk to other elected officials who also represent a significant number of my constituents, but not their city managers, police chiefs, or superintendents. They have no standing to be heard over those I represent.
But as for making it illegal, wish I could, but the First Amendment must rule.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 22-Mar-11 07:33 AM
I don't mean making it illegal. I'm talking from the standpoint of cutting budgets to the point where they don't hire the people.
Comment 3 by Rex Newman at 22-Mar-11 07:59 AM
I agree, that would be a good law. Any money spent lobbying the State will be deducted ten fold from any state payments to them. Ditto the money non-profits spending lobbying, like the Association of Metropolitan School Districts, League of Minnesota Cities, etc.
Comment 4 by gman at 22-Mar-11 09:24 AM
Well beings that we're still trying to teach the way that they did in the pioneer days, education always uses the oh kids scare tatics, Look you spend darn near half the budget on K-12 on up. My kid goes across the border because its cheaper? What gives. No I think you have to do away with the education board and treat it more like a business.
This mightier than you attitude the teachers union has has to stop. Look you work part time you get paid part time. If the pay isn't satisfactory to you, find a different job. Enough already with the crying.
Why not utilize technology. Maybe not everyone has to come into school classroom. Teach self respondsibility. Sure you can watch class on line and participate. Make students take ownership of their own lives. Now not everyone can learn that way but give it a try. And books who needs them.. you go out and purchase a kindle or something like that...yep you download your class books onto one for the quarter...and dont say it's not fair. I spent about 125 bucks on a calculator that they needed for 2 weeks of math class.
But utilize that technology and cuts down on buildings, maintenance, travel on the roads, buses, hiring people to shut off the lights. And we should be getting that now, with the amount of money we spend. And don't tell me it can't be done. Plenty of the ALC - and we all know the name tied to that other than alternitive learning center. I mean really sleep til 11 , get up go on line for 2 classes at home and you get a degree. Then complain that they can't hold a job because the employer wants to see you at work before MacDonalds open. what a thought. Come on.. people in other countries with more people , dirty floors are doing it on a buck a day.. where are your priorities.. just spend it because you can.. shame on you
Airport Commission Meeting Notes
Yesterday, I attended the St. Cloud Airport Commission meeting. I was disappointed with what I learned about the ramifications of closing SCSU's Aviation Department.
One thing that disappointed me was the fact that there will be a very real need to replace a ton of pilots within the next 2-3 years, perhaps as many as 1,500 in that time period. That's a big shortage. It's also a great opportunity to place SCSU students into a great career.
Another thing that was discussed was the economic impact a regional air carrier would have on St. Cloud's economy. Before yesterday, I didn't know the amount of small businesses located at the airport. I didn't know that the air traffic control tower was privately run. I didn't know that the airplanes that SCSU Aviation students use for training are owned by a small business. I didn't know that the people who own the airplanes also own another small business that does maintenance/mechanical work on planes.
If the Aviation Department is shut down, these small businesses don't have a reason for staying open. What's worse is that this will make it next to impossible to attract another regional airline to St. Cloud. After all the work that various individuals have invested in this effort, it would be a shame to see this opportunity pass St. Cloud by.
Another thing that was discussed was the argument that the Aviation Department costs too much to operate. With small businesses actually buying and maintaining the airplanes, and with students paying for airtime rental, another major cost is the flight simulators.
The thing with those simulators is that they've been paid for for years. Yes, they're owned by SCSU but, since they're paid for, they aren't costing SCSU anything anymore.
Another major cost to the program, as with all programs, are the teachers. It seems to me that that cost is highly controllable. Why shut down the entire department when other solutions are available, especially when the alternative doesn't negatively impact St. Cloud's economy?
Also discussed was how the decision was reached. In the commission's opinion, the public's input was limited at best. The commission is putting a resolution that a) talks about the economic impact closing the department down will have on St. Cloud's economic development and b) will call for a more transparent, public process.
Though it wasn't said, the implication was that they think the process should start over.
Finally, there is the worry that students will be priced out of an aviation education if the North Dakota aviation program is the only program left standing. The upside is they have a Cadillac program. The downside is that is it has a Cadillac pricetag on it.
At first, my writing about the Aviation Department was about higher ed reform. The more I dug into it, though, the more it's about the quality of SCSU's decisionmaking and the process used to reach their decision.
Perhaps the conclusion would've been significantly different had the process included more public input. According to their own website , SCSU promises to maintain "a commitment to meeting the needs of our community" and to "Institutionalize our commitment to civic and community engagement."
How did the decision to eliminate the Aviation Department live up to their stated goals?
Only after SCSU starts living up to its stated goals can we be certain that SCSU meant what it said in its Strategic Action Plan. If it doesn't live up to that standard, people should think that they're empty words on a page.
Posted Tuesday, March 22, 2011 12:57 PM
Comment 1 by Darlene Thompson at 22-Mar-11 07:14 PM
I am extremely pleased to see your article. SCSU has not followed a proper process in their decision to shut down the aviation department, has shown no concern at all for the impact to our community and those in the vicinity, and has decided instead to keep other departments open for just a few students. And those are studies that will not help students get jobs. You made great points on every issue, and it's time for the community to put pressure on SCSU to re-do this whole process! They are dealing with our tax money, and it's time for the people to hold them accountable. I hope everyone who reads your article contacts President Potter and whoever else made these decisions!
Comment 2 by Jackie Marvel at 23-Mar-11 04:51 PM
Imagine that. Draconian budget cuts OF public institutions actually result in draconian budget cuts AT public institutions. Maybe you should have thought better of your support for eliminating public institutions before doing your homework on the economic benefits that public investment in higher education has on local and state economies. This is the direct result of policies YOU and your ilk support. And there's much more to come, thanks to you and your Tea Party compadres. Just wait for the 16% budget cuts for all MN universities that the Republicans just recommended at the legislature. They aren't just going to ground airplanes. They are going to take apart public higher education. Go ahead and try to pay yourself for a $50K plus per year private college without any help from the government. See how that works for you.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 23-Mar-11 05:21 PM
If you insist on maintaining the failing status quo models because the unions won't let you vote for changes that Higher Ed institutions need, then you'll eventually get trapped in impossible situations. If, however, you start thinking in terms of whether there's a better model that a) costs less, b) shoves MnSCU into the 21st Century & c) transforms the Higher Ed system, you don't get trapped in impossible situations.
The draconian cuts could be eliminated with reforms that the unions won't accept. THAT'S REALITY!!! You think in terms of everything having to stay the same. That's a terrible premise, one that should be discarded ASAP. You won't because it's easier for you to criticize people rather than coming up with a new thought that actually improves life.
No wonder why life as a liberal is so miserable. Screw your head on straight. Think outside the box for once in your life. Or stick with the status quo & be miserable the rest of your life.
It's your choice.
McCaskill Is History
Claire McCaskill's re-election was in trouble long before people found out this scandal :
What began earlier this month as a small story about tax dollars being spent to pay for Sen. Claire McCaskill's (D-Mo.) charter flights has dragged on, evolving into a narrative that could do lasting damage to both McCaskill and Senate Democrats in 2012.
On Monday, McCaskill revealed she owed over $287,000 in back property taxes on the aircraft that has caused her much consternation in recent weeks. Her admission was just the latest development in a story the Show Me State's senior senator can't seem to shake. While it's very early in the cycle, here is a look at why both McCaskill and Democrats should be worried:
1) It cuts against the grain of her good-government image: McCaskill has cultivated a reputation as a figure devoted to standing against corruption. After all, she was the state auditor before she became senator; and has developed a populist brand attacking the excesses of the wealthy. When you embrace the image of being a no-nonsense reformer, this kind of story has even more sticking power.
They should stop worrying. Instead, they should get out the butter because Sen. McCaskill is toast. She might want to announce her retirement because this is the type of thing that people a) won't like and b) won't forget anytime soon.
DC pundits are wondering whether this coming out this early might remove this from the campaign. I'll save them time pontificating. IT WON'T. People now know that her "good-government image" is a sham.
First, she uses her family's private plane, often for purely political purposes, and bills the taxpayers for the flights. Then she goes several years without paying over a quarter million dollars in property taxes. You don't accumulat $287,000 worth of overdue property taxes in a single year.
It gets wors for Sen. McCaskill:
"It makes fair game all the unsavory things about all the offshore tax shelters she started in order to avoid paying the same amount in taxes the rest of us do," said longtime Missouri GOP strategist Gregg Keller, who was recently named executive director of the American Conservative Union.
Democratic strategist Mary Anne Marsh concurred: "If ever there was a textbook oppo hit job it is the one on Claire McCaskill right now."
What oppo hit job, Ms. Marsh? Sen. McCaskill's corruption is exceptionally well known. This is public information. This isn't difficult to find. In 2006, it took me less than 15 minutes of googling to find a rich history of McCaskill family corruption. A novice could've found this stuff after a 15 minute crash course on researching things.
Sen. McCaskill only has herself to blame. Family corruption was a difficult topic in 2006. She had to know it would be something her opponents would check to see if the corruption file had grown. Sen. McCaskill had to know that taxes would be one of the first places they'd look.
This is nothing more than an arrogant senator getting her comeuppance. Have a nice private sector life, Sen. McCaskill. You won't have long to wait for that next chapter to start.
Posted Tuesday, March 22, 2011 6:02 PM
Comment 1 by Chad Quigley at 22-Mar-11 07:51 PM
Just more evidence that democrats only want you and me to pay taxes. McCaskill will probably get swept into another term because democrats don't care about stuff like this and the GOP will wuss out in taking it to her.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 22-Mar-11 08:00 PM
I'll bet the proverbial ranch you're wrong. Prior to this scandal, she had one foot in the grave, the other on a banana peel. This scandal was the equivalent of the banana peel slipping.
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 23-Mar-11 01:02 PM
Chad:
She barely won in what was a strong Democrat year. People in 2006 were worried about out of control deficits which were at $200 billion. Now it's over $1.4 trillion.
She voted for the health care bill. The same health care bill which Missiouri reject by over 70% of the vote.
She's toast. Now we have to get 12 other Democrats to join her to get to sixty to stop Harry from stopping the Republican President in 2013 getting the bill to repeal Obamacare.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 23-Mar-11 03:06 PM
Walter, we actually don't need 60 to repeal. According to Bill Hennessey, it'd only require a majority.
Comment 3 by walter hanson at 24-Mar-11 03:50 PM
You mean the Democrats won't be be able to filibuster the repeal act! yeah!!
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 4 by Dumass299 at 26-Mar-11 04:18 PM
Silly only repubs need to pay taxes.
/Sarc
