October 25-28, 2015
Oct 25 02:20 TINA Time? Oct 25 09:47 Hillary Clinton's dishonesty Oct 25 16:45 Vikings defeat Detroit behind Bridgewater, Diggs, smothering defense Oct 26 08:18 St. Cloud Times sanity alert Oct 27 11:31 Tech property tax increase update Oct 27 16:07 Hillary Derangement Syndrome? Oct 28 03:45 Thanks for the excitement, Torii Oct 28 11:11 Hillary's war on military vets Oct 28 17:31 It's immoral and everyone knows it
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
TINA Time?
Robert Tracinski's article introduces us to a new acronym for the Democrats. That acronym is TINA, which stands for "There Is No Alternative", which is what the Democrats have now that Hillary is finally the inevitable candidate she's always thought she'd be. The good news for Democrats is that Hillary is their all-but-official presidential nominee. The bad news for Democrats is that Hillary is their all-but-official presidential nominee.
Thanks to Hillary's 'competitors' either dropping out or showing that they aren't seriously attempting to win the nomination, the excitement that a competitive campaign would've produced disappears. That's easy to illustrate. CNN's GOP debate attracted over 20,000,000 viewers. CNN's Democratic debate attracted less than 15,000,000 viewers. Now that the Democratic nomination is essentially finished, what's there to get excited about?
Bernie Sanders was attracting big crowds before he said he was tired of hearing about Hillary's emails. Since then, those types of headlines have disappeared, too. That's predictable. The far left was aching for a serious hardline progressive candidate. Their first choice was Elizabeth Warren but they would've settled for Bernie Sanders.
Now, they don't have either as a legitimate option.
Prior to Sanders' surprising rise in the polls, Hillary had a significant enthusiasm gap crisis . Now that it's obvious that they're stuck with Hillary, what is there to get excited about??
Meanwhile, Republicans still have a competition on their hands. That guarantees large viewing audiences for their debates. That means people can see the difference between solutions-oriented conservatives and a career politician with a thin list of accomplishments.
If Republicans nominate a principled conservative, the swing state map will expand in the Republicans' favor.
Posted Sunday, October 25, 2015 2:20 AM
No comments.
Hillary Clinton's dishonesty
Hillary Clinton's worldview is shaped by a visceral hatred of Republicans. This article highlights Hillary's hatred of Republicans by quoting her as telling Rachel Maddow that "the constant berating of the VA that comes from the Republicans, in - in part in pursuit of this ideological agenda that they have. They try to create a downward spiral, don't fund it to the extent that it needs to be funded, because they want it to fail, so then we can argue for privatization."
Wow.
That's a glimpse into the stunning dishonesty of Hillary Clinton. The VA scandal wasn't caused by underfunding of the system. The VA scandal is about corrupt bureaucrats that didn't deliver medical care to veterans while paying themselves huge bonuses. Further, there was bipartisan support in the House and Senate to give veterans the option of getting treatment at private clinics or hospitals. It was so bipartisan that Bernie Sanders attended the bill-signing ceremony . If Rachel Maddow and Hillary Clinton think that Bernie Sanders is interested in privatizing government, then they need to be institutionalized, preferably to a VA facility.
Let's hear Hillary explain this away:
An inspector general's report last year found that veterans in Phoenix waited 115 days on average for an initial doctor's appointment, while official data claimed that the average wait was only 24 days.
The IG's report showed that this didn't just happen in Phoenix, either. It happened all across the nation, which means the corruption has metastasized to the point of being inoperable.
Hillary should admit that.
Posted Sunday, October 25, 2015 9:47 AM
No comments.
Vikings defeat Detroit behind Bridgewater, Diggs, smothering defense
When the Vikings hired Mike Zimmer, they hired him because they were impressed with his ability to coach up defenses. Zimmer's reputation looked a bit shaky early on because Detroit scored easy touchdowns on their first 2 drives of the game. While it's impossible to predict the final score, it isn't impossible to predict the fact that Zimmer's in-game adjustments would change the complexion of the game.
Trailing 17-6 with 5:08 left in the first half, Zimmer unleashed his defense. Matthew Stafford, who played courageously, didn't stand a chance once the Vikings dialed up the pressure. The Vikings finished with 7 sacks of Stafford, robbing him of the time to pick out his weapons like Calvin Johnson, Golden Tate and Eric Ebron. Offensively, they kept giving the ball to Adrian Peterson but they also unleashed Teddy Bridgewater and Stefon Diggs. Saying that Diggs has been the hottest wide receiver in the game the last 3 weeks is understatement.
Against the Broncos' outstanding secondary, Diggs caught 6 passes for 87 yards. Against a solid Chiefs secondary, Diggs caught 7 passes for 129 yards. Today, against Detroit, Diggs caught 6 passes for 108 yards, including this catch, which might be the best TD catch in the NFL this season:
These stats, especially the highlighted statistics, speak to the Vikings' defensive dominance:
Honestly, I didn't know that the Vikings outgained Detroit by 150 yards. I didn't know that they had the ball 13 minutes more than Detroit. I was aware that the Vikings pressured Stafford mercilessly from the middle of the second quarter, sacking him a total of 7 times for the game.
At one point late in the third quarter or early fourth quarter, Fox NFL announcers Chris Meyers and Ronde Barber highlighted the fact that the Vikings had outgained Detroit something like 350 yards to 3 yards since the end of the first quarter.
The Vikings have some things they need to fix during the week. Fixing their defense isn't their highest priority, though.
Posted Sunday, October 25, 2015 4:45 PM
No comments.
St. Cloud Times sanity alert
It isn't often that I find sanity on the St. Cloud Times Opinion Page. This LTE from Loren Weinberg fits the criteria for sanity.
One of the points Mr. Weinberg makes is that the sample ballot and the flyers sent out by the St. Cloud School Board are significantly different. According to Mr. Weinberg, "the ballot ... only mentions the final amount, $167 million." Meanwhile, the flyer sent out by the School Board tells voters "exactly how much will be spent on each of the four projects."
That's an important difference. Information in a flyer might or might not be accurate. It certainly isn't legally binding. If a majority of voters vote to approve the bonding request, the School Board won't be obligated to spend the $167,000,000 on the things their flyer said they'll spend the money on.
Voting no on this referendum is the only responsible thing to do. First, school district residents don't have any guarantees that the money will be spent on the projects the School Board says they'll be spent on. Second, school district residents haven't seen blueprints of what the Apollo renovation or the new Tech High School look like. Third, school district residents didn't have input on the front end as to what the district's needs are. Supposedly, the plan is for both high schools to hold 1,800 students each.
John Palmer, now a retired professor from St. Cloud State, worded things this way:
The fundamental problem I have is, if you were going to be buying something as an individual, the first thing you would do is identify the need - not the want. I can see no evidence of what specifically the need is. The capacity of the two new buildings, if this should pass, would be 1,800 (each). Enrollment right now is about 2,800 (total between Tech and Apollo). I don't know if that capacity would be high, low or in between because I don't believe there has been any work done on determining what it will be in the future.
In the interest of full disclosure, I've known John since 2005 and consider him a friend. The points that John makes aren't just legitimate. They're the heart of the matter.
There's nothing I've heard that suggests that high school enrollment will increase by 30% over the next 20 years. The recent trend, in fact, is heading in the opposite direction. If that's the case, why should school district residents build schools that are significantly bigger than what's needed?
It isn't difficult to argue that the School Board wants us to essentially write them a blank check, then trust them. However, it's difficult for thoughtful people to trust this school board considering how secretive and deceptive they've been.
Voting no is the only right way to vote.
Posted Monday, October 26, 2015 8:42 AM
No comments.
Tech property tax increase update
The latest update on the Tech bonding referendum is that the school district knows exactly how much money they need to build a new Tech High School but they aren't finished designing the building.
According to Barclay Carriar, a 57-year-old adviser with Ameriprise Financial and co-chair of Neighbors for School Excellence, "What a lot of them don't recognize is, with the cost of designing a building, 80 percent of it isn't going to be designed until after the referendum. And the plans we've got now are still tentative."
Picture this. Picture a homebuilder just starting out going into a bank and telling the loan officer that he wants to borrow $250,000 to build a home. The first thing that loan officer will do is ask about how big the house is, whether the contractor already has a buyer, etc. Imagine the contractor telling the loan officer that he's got a good lead on someone who might buy the home but that he hasn't had someone draw up the blueprints.
That contractor's interview would end abruptly. This referendum should end quickly, too. This argument is absurd:
The group also points out that homeowners in the district already pay lower taxes than almost every other district in the immediate area. St. Cloud's annual school tax expense on a $150,000 home is $521. The other metro area districts of Sauk Rapids-Rice ($741), Sartell-St. Stephen ($686) and Rocori ($627) all are higher. Even with passage of the referendum, St. Cloud taxes would rise to $739, still just below Sauk Rapids-Rice...
My first reaction is "So what?" If other cities want to spend more, that's their decision. I've never been a fan of keeping up with the Joneses. If you want to win my vote, explain with specificity how spending additional money will improve the students' learning experience.
Telling me that 'we must invest in education' is fluff. It isn't a serious argument.
Originally posted Tuesday, October 27, 2015, revised 19-Nov 6:32 AM
Comment 1 by John Palmer at 27-Oct-15 09:09 PM
Gary, I still have not seen any information about enrollment projections over the expected life of the proposed construction. Projections are guesses but there are methods to improve the accuracy of the guess. In the case of the ISD 742 proposal, we have not even seen a WAG let alone a SWAG concerning high school enrollment in district 742. Building for a high school student capacity of 3600 when today's enrollment is about 2700 in a school district surrounded by school districts with much better records of achievement and a district in crisis due to changing demographics (e.g. a rapid influx of non English speakers) is a disaster waiting to happen. It is not at all beyond the possible that taxpayers are going to be stuck with many empty classrooms and the need to service debt with a declining tax base. A perfect storm may be on the horizon that will sweep St. Cloud into a death spiral of decline leading to more decline. I have already voted no and hope many others will vote no to slow and perhaps reverse the trends feeding that perfect storm threatening this community.
Comment 2 by Dave Steckling at 29-Oct-15 07:41 PM
Well stated Mr. Palmer. Anyone voting yes may as well at the same time purchase disaster
survival insurance for that perfect storm sure to follow any new school construction. To
quote a neighbor friend-"Right now we need good instruction not new construction".
Hillary Derangement Syndrome?
Normally, Kirsten Powers is one of the somewhat sane liberals in the national media. Ms. Powers' latest USA Today article proves that there's an exception to every rule.
The subject of Ms. Powers' latest column is last week's Benghazi hearing. According to Ms. Powers, who seems to have digested the Democrats' chanting points then regurgitated them for this column, Republicans "bungling and bullying at Thursday's hearing should count as an in-kind donation to the Clinton campaign." Of course, Ms. Powers then said that what "happened in Benghazi matters" before saying that "investigating security failures, especially those that resulted in the deaths of Americans, is a laudable endeavor."
Unfortunately, she then asked "does anyone really believe that's what the Republicans were up to last week?"
The reason I suspect that this is a world-class spin job is this question:
But is it really a mystery as to why a friend of at least two decades would have her email address?
That's spin. It isn't surprising that Sid Blumenthal would have Hillary's email address. It's that Christopher Stevens didn't have it. This emphasizes the point:
"During the hearing Michael McFaul tweeted, 'As ambassador in Russia, I enjoyed multiple ways to communicate with Secretary Clinton. Email was never one of them.'
Actually, McFaul might've highlighted something important in that tweet. Clearly, he was able to "communicate with Secretary Clinton." Why wasn't Ambassador Stevens able to communicate directly with Mrs. Clinton? It's clear that Stevens tried getting Mrs. Clinton's attention often. According to documentation introduced at the hearing, Christopher Stevens literally made hundreds of requests for additional security.
According to Mrs. Clinton's testimony, she never received a single request. She said that she "neither rejected or approved" any of Christopher Stevens' security requests.
Ms. Powers says that "hate-blinded Republicans" bungled the hearing. That's a cheap shot and then some. Republicans weren't blinded with hate. They were determined to find out why Mrs. Clinton failed to protect Christopher Stevens, the man Mrs. Clinton called her "dear friend." Is it typical for Mrs. Clinton to treat dear friends like that? If it is, then I'm thankful I'm not one of Hillary's dear friends.
Does Ms. Powers think that it isn't a big deal that Mrs. Clinton repeatedly told the American people for well over a week that a video caused the terrorist attack after telling her daughter that it was a terrorist attack? Does Ms. Powers think it isn't a big deal that Mrs. Clinton told the Egyptian prime minister and the Libyan president that Christopher Stevens died in a terrorist attack?
If asking tough questions of Mrs. Clinton is bullying, then this nation's best days are in its past. If trying to hold Mrs. Clinton accountable for her decisions is proof that Republicans hat Mrs. Clinton, then Ms. Powers has a dramatically different definition of hatred than I do. Does Ms. Powers think Mike Pompeo bullied Mrs. Clinton when he asked her why nobody at the State Department got fired for not approving Christopher Stevens' requests for additional security? Does Ms. Powers think Susan Brooks bullied Mrs. Clinton when she asked Mrs. Clinton if she ever talked with Christopher Stevens after he was sworn in as U.S. ambassador to Libya?
Personally, I'd call those important, thoughtful questions proof that Republicans on that committee took their jobs seriously.
Finally, I'd love hearing Ms. Powers response to whether these questions are either a) inappropriate or b) proof that I'm trying to bully Mrs. Clinton.
Posted Tuesday, October 27, 2015 4:07 PM
No comments.
Thanks for the excitement, Torii
Torii Hunter, one of my all-time favorite athletes in any sport, announced his retirement this week. It's a sad week for Minnesota sports fans, especially coming so soon after Flip Saunders died way too young of Hodgkin's Lymphoma.
Officially, Torii retired without winning a World Series Ring or even without reaching the Fall Classic. Hopefully, though, Paul Molitor will hire him as a coach or Terry Ryan will hire him as a minor league instructor to teach young Twins prospects the Twins way. Torii's outgoing personality and Torii's commitment to being the consummate professional were instrumental to the Twins' revival this season.
If you're a Torii Hunter fan, then you've got a lengthy list of Gold Glove-worthy plays that he made. To the national audience, though, there's only one play that people are likely to remember. This is that play:
In the first inning of the All Star Game in Milwaukee, against Barry Bonds, Torii soared over the fence to steal a home run away from Bonds. Still, there were other plays that Twins fans will remember besides just that catch. Lifelong Twins fans won't forget Torii barreling through White Sox catcher Jamie Burke in the opening game of a series in Chicago. After that collision, the White Sox played like a timid team. After that collision, the Twins played like they were the home team while sweeping the series.
In December of 2001, Major League Baseball tried to contract the Minnesota Twins but were unable to dissolve them thanks to a judge's ruling. In February, 2002, I attended Twins spring training. After the workout, I got Torii's autograph, which I still have. Though Torii was still young at the time, he was respectful of the fans. He carried on a conversation for over 45 minutes while signing autographs. Throughout the autograph session, Torii's infectious smile shined brightly.
The thing about Torii isn't just that he was a great athlete or that he was a charismatic leader. Certainly, he'll be remembered as both of those things. It wasn't just that he knew how to play pranks in the clubhouse or have fun with his teammates.
The thing I'll remember most about Torii now that his playing days are over is that he was stubbornly professional. This year, he was essentially the father of the Twins outfield. At season's end, Torii had taught Aaron Hicks, Byron Buxton and Eddie Rosario a ton of lessons on how to play the game right, to have fun and to be a professional. Aaron Hicks finally became a major league hitter. In 2013 and 2014, Hicks' batting average was .201. This year, with Torii's arrival, Hicks' batting average improved to .256 with 11 home runs.
Thanks to Terry Ryan's drafting and Torii Hunter's leadership, the Twins outfield should be in good shape for years.
Posted Wednesday, October 28, 2015 3:45 AM
No comments.
Hillary's war on military vets
Hillary Clinton has started using the gender card so often that I wonder if she thinks that the only qualification she needs to be the next president is being a female. The truth is that the biggest thing Mrs. Clinton is missing is a heart. This past weekend, Mrs. Clinton agreed to a softball interview with Rachel Maddow. Let's just say that Mrs. Clinton managed to piss off an entire group of people. This time, she shot her mouth off about the VA hospital system. According to S.E. Cupp's article , things got ugly pretty quick.
It started when Ms. Maddow asked about the VA scandal. That's when Mrs. Clinton said "You know, I don't understand why we have such a problem, because there have been a number of surveys of veterans and, overall, veterans who do get treated are satisfied with their treatment." Unfortunately for Mrs. Clinton, she was just getting started. Next, she said "Now, nobody would believe that from the coverage that you see, and the constant berating of the VA that comes from Republicans in part in pursuit of this ideological agenda that they have."
That's breathtakingly dishonest. It isn't surprising that Hillary blamed the VA scandal on Republicans. That's a reflex with her. What's disappointing is that she deflected blame away from the corrupt administrators who gave themselves bonuses while veterans died while waiting to get treatment. No amount of money would've fixed that. In fact, more money might've made the problem worse.
Ms. Cupp then asks a pair of important questions:
When did it become politically permissible to either ignore or accept the systematic negligence of our servicemen and women? And then blame the other political party for pointing it out?
Hillary Clinton doesn't care about people outside her inner circle of friends. Think about this:
- Will Hillary fight for a single mother's right to defend her family in the crime-infested neighborhoods of her hometown of Chicago?
- Will Hillary fight for veterans to get timely medical treatments from some of the nastiest medical conditions?
- Will Hillary fight for unemployed construction workers who want to build the Keystone XL Pipeline?
We know the answer to those questions. The answer isn't no. It's hell no .
This is a presidential campaign. I know that the candidates will play hardball. That's fine. Presidential politics is a contact sport. What's beyond the pale, though, is saying that 300,000 veterans dying without getting treatment is the fault of partisan politics.
That's as disgusting as Hillary saying that she takes "full responsibility" for Benghazi in one sentence, then insisting that she neither approved or rejected any of Christopher Stevens' requests for additional security.
Posted Wednesday, October 28, 2015 11:11 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 28-Oct-15 11:54 AM
Hillary Clinton lacks a heart?
What, the Bush family stole it from her? So they could have one?
Unlike Pete Hegseth, she has no heart?
Get real.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 28-Oct-15 05:33 PM
Saying that 300,000 vets dying without getting treatment from the Obama VA is the Republicans' fault? In what bizarre galaxy?
It's immoral and everyone knows it
Last night, Glenn Beck was on Megyn Kelly's show. Beck said that Republicans should listen to Bernie Sanders in one respect. Beck paraphrased Sanders as saying "the way that Washington is functioning is immoral." Later, he revisited that part of Bernie's riff, saying that Sanders added "and everybody knows it."
First, it's important to note that Beck said to "take away everything of what his solutions are because his solutions just don't work." What's important for Republicans to note, however, is the outrage at how Washington is corrupt.
This week, the Justice Department announced that they wouldn't prosecute Lois Lerner, the corrupt IRS agent who tried to prevent American citizens from exercising their rights to participate in the political process.
Last Friday, Hillary Clinton said that the VA scandal wasn't as widespread as Republicans would have you believe. Then she said that Republicans were criticizing the VA in their attempt to privatize VA hospitals.
Here's what Beck said:
These fit perfectly with what Mr. Beck said:
The IRS is immoral and everyone knows it. Lois Lerner wasn't prosecuted because the Justice Department is immoral and corrupt and everyone knows it. The way that the VA mistreats veterans is immoral and everyone knows it. When Democrats defend Planned Parenthood's practice of infanticide for profit, it's immoral and everyone knows it.
Hillary Clinton's State Department didn't supply additional security to Libya, which got Ambassador Christopher Stevens murdered by terrorists. That was immoral and everyone knows it. Telling the American people that Christopher Stevens died as a result of an anti-Islam video but telling the Libyan president and the Egyptian prime minister that it was a terrorist attack is immoral and everyone knows it.
Most importantly, Hillary saying that 300,000 veterans died without getting medical treatment is the Republicans fault is highly immoral and everyone knows it.
I won't pretend that there's no corruption within the Republican Party. I also won't pretend that the Democratic Party gives a damn about morality. The Democratic Party is corrupt to the core and everyone knows it.
Posted Wednesday, October 28, 2015 5:31 PM
No comments.
