November 22-25, 2017
Nov 22 01:01 It's time to amend the Constitution Nov 22 10:59 Liberals attack Leeann Tweeden Nov 22 19:08 Moore game-changer? Nov 22 23:55 Can the DFL hold Franken's seat? Nov 24 01:30 Editorial foolishness Nov 24 18:06 DFL, Ellison & Franken Nov 25 09:46 Thank Sen. Grassley, Sen. Reid Nov 25 14:26 Bullshit from start to finish
Prior Months: Jan Feb ~ May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
It's time to amend the Constitution
Sen. Dave Senjem isn't happy with the Minnesota Supreme Court's ruling that Gov. Dayton was within his rights to veto the Legislature's funding. That's why he's proposing putting a constitutional amendment on the 2018 ballot .
Because the legislature decides whether constitutional amendments are allowed on the ballot, Gov. Dayton doesn't have a say in the matter. Further, this should frighten rural DFL legislators. Republicans should highlight the fact that this constitutional amendment is required because a) Gov. Dayton vetoed the funding and b)the Supreme Court got their ruling badly wrong. The first vote taken by the House will be to override Gov. Dayton's line-item veto of the Legislature's funding. If DFL legislators vote to sustain Gov. Dayton's veto, they'll be tarred and feathered and it'll be deserved.
Sen. Senjem made a good point when he said "We're not co-equal anymore because I believe the precedent has been set that yes, it's OK for a governor to veto legislative appropriations, and there are no consequences, and I think that puts the Legislature in almost a subservient position."
The Supreme Court got this wrong. Thanks to that ruling, the legislature has 2 terrible choices. Either they can cave to the governor's demands or they can stop representing their constituents. Actually, there's a third option. That third option is to spend down the money appropriated for the operation of the Legislative Auditor's Office and the Revisor of Statutes' office.
Spending down the money that's supposed to run the OLA is terrible because they're the state equivalent of the IG at the federal level. Should we shut down the office that caught April Todd-Malmlov mismanaging MNsure? Should we shut down the office that caught Ted Mondale and Michelle Kelm-Helgen using luxury suites at U.S. Bank Stadium to entertain friends, political allies and family?
It's time to put this constitutional amendment on the ballot. It's time to shame these Supreme Court justices for getting the decision wrong.
Posted Wednesday, November 22, 2017 1:01 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 22-Nov-17 02:58 PM
Don't be so sure the GOP has this one in the bag and that the DFL will be tarred and feathered if they go along with the veto. Based on what I've heard and read around the metro, the DFL faithful are strongly in the governor's corner on this and it is the nasty tax cutting GOP who did wrong. It's all partisan politics and liberals know how to circle the wagons even when they're wrong.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 22-Nov-17 07:19 PM
Key words in your comment are "around the metro." If they weren't in Gov. Dayton's corner, I'd be surprised. Once you get beyond the outer ring suburbs, the DFL is in trouble. It's been that way for 5 years. I won't predict how rural DFL legislators will vote but I'll predict that rural voters will punish rural DFL legislators that don't vote for their interests.
Comment 2 by Chad Q at 23-Nov-17 12:48 PM
Again, the DFL will rally around the party in the metro and state wide. To them it's better to have a DFLer in the elected position even if they don't have the constituents best interests in mind than it is to have a GOPer who only votes for tax cuts and the rich, even if that's not true. My rural parents are a perfect example of that.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 23-Nov-17 09:52 PM
What are you talking about? This is about amending the constitution.
Comment 3 by Rex Newman at 24-Nov-17 07:10 PM
My choice is to totally remove line item veto. It really hasn't limited spending. And it can invite other mischief besides current mess. I prefer 201 reaching hard compromises over peevish retaliation by just 1 executive.
Comment 4 by MtkaMoose at 25-Nov-17 11:13 PM
I'm thinking the first order of business should be to pass a bill restoring legislative funding. After that gets signed the legislature should adjourn sine die. Then the governor would have to call them back to a special session for anything else!
Liberals attack Leeann Tweeden
It's rather disgusting that liberals are attacking Leeann Tweeden. This LTE is to-the-point. It simply says "In response to the compromising photo of U.S. Sen. Al Franken, internet-aware readers can become a bit more informed about Franken's 'victim' by Googling her and clicking on 'images.'" There are multiple pictures showing Ms. Tweeden wearing a bikini.
Is this liberal trying to insinuate that Ms. Tweeden isn't a victim because she used to be a swimsuit model? That's apparently the message he's sending by putting victim in air quotes. Here's a question for the disgusting liberal who wrote this trashy LTE. Do you think that being a sexy swimsuit model means you can't truly be a victim of sexual harassment? That's what he's inferring.
It's clear that Democrats are circling their wagons around Sen. Franken. Apparently, they're thinking that he's a dirtbag but he's the Democrats' dirtbag. Apparently, they're willing to fight for Franken's vote in the Senate. Apparently, character doesn't matter to Democrats.
Finally, I return to the LTE suggesting that a woman who posed for this picture can't be the victim of sexual harassment:
One look at this picture suggests that it's possible to be a victim:
Posted Wednesday, November 22, 2017 10:59 AM
Comment 1 by Lady Logician at 22-Nov-17 12:27 PM
Are we shocked? It's all part of their playbook. If the perp has an R behind their name, the victims are all saints who would never lie about something this serious and should NEVER BE QUESTIONED and if the perp has a D behind their name, then the accuser is notjing more than a partisan, lying slut who deserved it. It's all too predictable anymore.
LL
Comment 2 by JerryE9 at 24-Nov-17 08:33 AM
Funny, LL. And notice that almost nobody notices the absolutely massive political convenience of the timing of these decades-old allegations? That Democrats started out vilifying the "perpetrator" Judge Moore, and then when the shoe was on the Franken-foot they shifted to vilifying the victim. That's your point. The only victim here seems to be the truth.
Moore game-changer?
Is Doug Jones toast in Alabama? While it's too early to answer that question affirmatively, it isn't too early to say that Donald Trump's statements about Jones didn't help Jones' campaign. Specifically, President Trump said "We don't need a liberal person in there, a Democrat, Jones. I've looked at his record. It's terrible on crime. It's terrible on the border. It's terrible on military. I can tell you for a fact we do not need somebody who's going to be bad on crime, bad on borders, bad for the military, bad for the Second Amendment."
That's a pretty good signal to Alabama Republicans to stop thinking about staying home or voting for Doug Jones. That's a good start but it isn't enough by itself to defeat Jones. What this represents, though, is a turning point. Moore has to focus his campaign on bread-and-butter conservative issues like the Second Amendment, being pro-life and cutting taxes.
Jones has done better-than-expected thus far because it's been a personality-driven race. It hasn't been about Jones' support for partial-birth abortion and gun control. Jones peddled the notion that he's a moderate. Appearing on Outnumbered today, Guy Benson blew that storyline to smithereens:
[Video no longer available]
If Moore can convince enough Alabama Republicans to turn out, he'll defeat Jones. I've thought from the start that Jones' support was more about trying to convince Moore to drop out than it was about supporting Jones. It'll be interesting to see how Alabama voters react to Trump's criticism of Jones.
Guy wasn't finished beating up the Democrats:
[Video no longer available]
Here's his exchange with Zac Petkanas:
GB: I understand why you'd be on a high horse, morally, about this because sometimes there are very bright distinctions when it comes to politics. But I would challenge you -- maybe not directly, but a lot of Democrats -- if Bill Clinton were up for election again...let's say he ran for president and were the nominee in 2020. He was credibly accused of forcible rape. Would they vote for him over a Ted Cruz? I think history shows the answer is 'yes.'
ZP: Look, I was 15 years old when Bill Clinton left office. That's the age when Roy Moore goes after most of his girls...
GB: That's a fair shot...
ZP: So I can't speak to that, however I...
GB: Would you vote for Bill Clinton if he ran again?
ZP: I think that all of these women need to be believed, and that we need to hold everybody accountable, whether it's Al Franken or whether it's John Conyers, or whether it's Bill Clinton, or whether it's Donald Trump.
GB: So you wouldn't vote for Bill Clinton for president against Ted Cruz?
ZP: Would you vote for Donald Trump?
GB: I didn't . Your question. Back to you.
As you saw in the video, Guy's final reply all but officially finished that debate.
Posted Wednesday, November 22, 2017 7:08 PM
No comments.
Can the DFL hold Franken's seat?
Liz Mair's article strongly hints that the DFL would hold Sen. Franken's seat if Sen. Franken resigned as a result of this ethics scandal. In her article, Mair wrote "It just so happens that Minnesota has a lot of Democratic women who could make for viable Franken replacements; at least six, depending on who you ask. One is Minnesota Lt. Gov. Tina Smith. Another is Attorney General Lori Swanson. A third is State Auditor Rebecca Otto. A fourth is state House Minority Leader Melissa Hortman. A fifth is Rep. Betty McCollum. And a sixth is former state House Majority Leader Erin Murphy."
Mair isn't wrong that each of these women would be viable candidates in the eyes of DFL activists. The thing that Ms. Mair is missing is the fact that these candidates have in common is that they're from the Metro. In the eyes of rural Minnesota, especially the Iron Range, these women would be rejected like Hillary was rejected. In fact, I'd posit that they'd get rejected worse than Hillary was in 2016.
Trump won the Eighth District with 53.76% of the vote to Hillary's 38.27%. None of these candidates would do that well on the Range. Further, most of these candidates favor single-payer health care.
Meanwhile, Republicans have 2 candidates that would be able to run well in the suburbs, the exurbs & rural Minnesota. If Stewart Mills or Kurt Daudt were to run, they'd be favored because they both support the Iron Range, they both support the construction unions and they're both seen as sensible policymakers.
The DFL's biggest problem is that they're the urban party, which helped them win statewide races in the past. That's coming to an end because farmers and unions are abandoning the DFL because of the DFL's hostility towards building pipelines, approving mining projects and Gov. Dayton's hostility towards farmers. The sad part for the DFL is that Gov. Dayton is sensible compared with the 6 ladies mentioned earlier.
If Sen. Franken resigns, which looks more possible each week, Gov. Dayton will have a difficult decision. It'll take quite a bit to wash the bitter taste of Sen. Franken out of people's mouth:
[Video no longer available]
At the end of the day, I'd put the DFL's chances of holding Sen. Franken's seat as a toss-up.
Posted Wednesday, November 22, 2017 11:55 PM
Comment 1 by JerryE9 at 23-Nov-17 05:45 PM
I had heard that Keith Ellison had the inside track as Franken's replacement. Same difference as Betty McCollum, but with perhaps even less draw outside the metro. Sure would be nice to get a GOP pickup in either the 4th or 5th District.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 23-Nov-17 09:51 PM
Choosing Ellison would turn 2018 into 1978 in a heartbeat. Please, please, please pick Ellison. He'd get zero support outside of Minneapolis/St. Paul.
Editorial foolishness
One of the reasons why Republicans should write more letters to the editor is because editorial boards aren't that bright. This Our View editorial is a perfect example of their bias.
It starts by saying "The Minnesota Supreme Court last week upheld the line-item veto of the state Legislature's budget and told its warring co-equal branches to work out their problems themselves. The court is right on that. It remains to be seen if Gov. Mark Dayton and the leadership of the Legislature are willing to do that."
Let's be clear about this. While there's a political component to this, it's still a constitutional issue. By siding with Gov. Dayton, the 5 clowns in black robes gave future governors the upper hand in budget negotiations. All that's required is for the governor to reach an agreement on a budget, the legislature passes that budget, the governor signs the agreed-upon budget before he line-item vetoes the legislature's operating budget. At that point, the governor would have a stacked deck in demanding the opposition party renegotiate parts of the deal that the governor didn't want to compromise on.
We are where we are: Dayton has his hand on the Legislature's financial windpipe and appears quite willing to strangle it to get what he wants. The Legislature's argument that the governor is effectively abolishing the legislative branch fell on deaf ears with the justices. And the relationship between the governor and the Legislature grows ever more toxic.
It's wrong to call the black robe bandits justices. They're DFL operatives first. They aren't principled jurists who understand the concept of co-equal branches of government. Further, they're cowards. They didn't want to be criticized by the media, which is overwhelmingly liberal, so they ruled in the DFL's favor.
It is well past time for Dayton and Daudt to rise above their mutual contempt. It is not enough for one to do so. It is incumbent on both to act in good faith. The poison pill provisions must stop; the veto should be the last option if a deal has been struck.
Again, this editorial board plays the 'they're both guilty' card. That's BS. Forgotten is the fact that Gov. Dayton agreed to the tax bill. If he didn't agree with it, he shouldn't have agreed to it before calling the special session.
When the legislature opens its session in February, the House should pass a bill funding the legislature, then send it to the Senate. After it's passed by the House and Senate, they should send it to Gov. Dayton. If he vetoes the funding bill, the House should immediately schedule an override vote. If the DFL legislators want to kill their political careers for a lame duck governor, let them vote to sustain Gov. Dayton's veto.
If they vote to override Gov. Dayton's veto, Republicans should highlight the fact that every DFL legislator voted against the GOP tax relief bill in 2017. I'd love hearing them explain why they voted to not cut taxes but voted to override Gov. Dayton's veto of the Republicans' tax relief bill in 2017.
Posted Friday, November 24, 2017 1:30 AM
No comments.
DFL, Ellison & Franken
The DFL will have quite the tightrope to walk during the midterms. While state legislators from both parties have resigned because they sexually harassed women, the DFL has the problem of explaining why they're attacking Leeann Tweeden because she was once a swimsuit model. Ms. Tweeden was recently criticized in an LTE in the Duluth News Tribune, which I wrote about in this post . The LTE simply said "In response to the compromising photo of U.S. Sen. Al Franken, internet-aware readers can become a bit more informed about Franken's 'victim' by Googling her and clicking on 'images.''
In other words, the liberal who wrote this LTE is saying that Ms. Tweeden shouldn't be trusted because she's looked sexy while wearing bikinis. It's almost as if the person who wrote this LTE was saying that Ms. Tweeden had it coming because she wore sexy clothing. Only Neanderthals think like that.
Keith Ellison's reaction is more than a bit bizarre. Ellison said "It must have taken her tremendous courage? to make this kind of statement. I'm saddened by it. But, you know, we now live in a time that, thankfully, women can feel safe to come forward and talk about what happened to them. : It's painful when it's a dear friend, somebody you admire and has been great to you - and Al has been all those things to me. I admire him tremendously. But that doesn't mean that this kind of thing is OK."
[Video no longer available]
What's to admire about Sen. Franken? First, he's a pervert with a nasty temper. Next, he hasn't owned up to the nastiest part of his attack on Ms. Tweeden, which is his 'kiss rehearsal', where he stuck his tongue into her mouth. Third, he isn't that bright, especially for being a sitting US Senator.
Most importantly, it took great courage for Ms. Tweeden to come forward because the DFL attack machine is questioning her because she's a patriot who's appeared on Sean Hannity's show from time to time. That picture of Franken groping her says everything about Franken's lack of character. Isn't it time for the DFL to stop rationalizing their politicians' unforgivable behavior?
Hillary attacked the women her husband assaulted in her quest to become the first female president. Hillary wasn't a woman's champion. Hillary was an attacker of women because they stood in her way to the White House. Political power drove Hillary's attacks. She didn't care whether she destroyed Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broaddrick, Jennifer Flowers or Paula Jones.
Finally, the DFL's Franken problem isn't inconsequential because he isn't fessing up to what's happened. Saying that he doesn't remember the kiss doesn't ring true. Ms. Tweeden said that she nicknamed Franken "Fish Lips" after the incident. It's impossible to believe that a thin-skinned politician like Sen. Franken could've forgotten that. Further, Sen. Franken hasn't said that it didn't happen. He said that he didn't remember it the way Ms. Tweeden remembers it. That's what a non-denial denial sounds like.
Posted Friday, November 24, 2017 6:06 PM
No comments.
Thank Sen. Grassley, Sen. Reid
This week, I failed to write a Thanksgiving Day post. Consider this my belated Thanksgiving Day post. Mostly, I'm thankful for my friends. I'm thankful for politicians, too, partially because they do some of the dumbest things imaginable. Thanks to this article , I've gained a new appreciation for a pair of U.S. senators. Specifically, I appreciate Sen. Grassley, (R-IA), and Sen. Reid, (D-NV).
Before he retired, Harry Reid eliminated the filibuster. President Trump is thanking him all the way to the Supreme Court to the appeals courts. Sen. Grassley took away the Democrats' hidden filibuster 'tool', aka "the blue slip courtesy."
The article states the "growing rift between [President Trump] and Republican Senators John McCain, Jeff Flake, and Bob Corker alone has made headlines for months." Those stories have buried something much more important. According to the article, "that story ignores a bigger and longer-lasting development in the federal judiciary. That brings us first to naming the Republican gift giver: Senator Chuck Grassley from Iowa. The longtime member of Congress has big time clout as the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. And Grassley has just used that clout to eliminate one of the final hurdles in the already furious pace of Trump administration judicial appointments to the federal bench."
The article continues:
Late last week, Grassley decided not to honor a Senate tradition of holding up hearings for judicial nominees who aren't cleared by their own home state senators. That tradition is known as the "blue slip courtesy" born out of time before nationwide communication technology when a given state's senators had access to much more information about nominees than their colleagues from the rest of the country. Grassley correctly noted that Democrats were now trying to use the blue slips tradition to replace the filibuster, and he's having none of that. As recently as last month, the Democrats and much of the news media's punditry were expecting Grassley, who is no fan of the president, to keep the blue slip tradition in place. But Grassley gave Trump this very special gift instead.
And that brings us to the Democrat who provided the initial generous source of President Trump's solid triumph: Former Senate Majority Leader, and Democrat, Harry Reid. Reid is a major reason this good fortune has befallen President Trump because Reid was the one who killed the filibuster rule for judicial nominees in 2013. And when he killed it, it was gone for good.
This is why all this matters:
Consider that as of November 3rd, 13 Trump nominees to the courts have been confirmed this year. The big name is Supreme Court Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, but we also have eight new federal appeals court judges, and four new U.S. district court judges. President Trump has now already surpassed the last four presidents' records for first-year judicial confirmations. And he's even tied President Ronald Reagan number of appeals court confirmations in year one.
But this isn't just about sheer numbers, it's about ideology too. While President Trump and conservatives have diverged in matters of policy several times over the past year, the judicial nomination process is decidedly not one of them. The nominees sent to the Senate from the White House are more conservative and even younger than what we saw during President George W. Bush's two terms in office.
This wouldn't be possible if not for Harry Reid's short-sighted decision to eliminate the filibuster. Thanks Harry. I finally found something that he's responsible for that I'm thankful for.
Posted Saturday, November 25, 2017 9:46 AM
No comments.
Bullshit from start to finish
The bluntest description for Interim President Ashish Vaidya's op-ed is to say what it really is: bullshit from start to finish.
The op-ed starts by saying "The opportunity to serve as Provost and Interim President for St. Cloud State for the last 2 ~ years has been one of the most professionally rewarding experiences of my career. St. Cloud State University is a campus of significance and I was drawn to it because of the university's unending commitment to students and a focus on engagement, both local and global. Together we have weathered some difficult challenges, but we have achieved some important successes that will position St. Cloud State University for a very successful future."
Why does Dr. Vaidya think we're stupid? St. Cloud State was "a campus of significance." It isn't anymore, thanks to the terrible decisions that the late President Potter made. Further, the University hasn't done enough to "position St. Cloud State University for a very successful future." It's still on the treadmill of failure with no end in sight.
The finances are a disaster. Enrollment is worse. According to public data, SCSU has fallen from the second largest post-secondary in the state in 2010, as measured by new-entering freshmen, aka NEF, to the fifth largest in the state, having fallen behind this past year both Duluth and Winona as well as Mankato in previous years.
That doesn't sound like St. Cloud State is positioned for a successful future. That sounds more like it's positioned for more of the same. This is BS, too:
I am grateful that our university is a strong, caring institution and committed to serving our educational mission.
It's time for leadership at the University. There are people there that are legitimate leaders. Unfortunately, they're surrounded by 'what's in it for me' parasites.
[Video no longer available]
Posted Saturday, November 25, 2017 2:26 PM
No comments.
