October 6-7, 2010
Oct 06 07:06 Dayton Says Trust Me While Hiding Budget Details Oct 06 11:03 Party Of No Storyline Resurrected Oct 06 16:34 McMahon Staggers Blumenthal on Jobs Oct 06 19:16 Diazgate: Much Ado About Nothing Oct 07 09:03 Jobs vs. an Economic Boom Oct 07 11:01 Gingrich Rebuts Biden, Touts Annette Meeks, Tom Emmer Oct 07 21:18 Tim Walz's Solutions
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009
Dayton Says Trust Me While Hiding Budget Details
This morning, Tom Emmer questioned Mark Dayton's less-than-detailed budget, suggesting that Dayton would consider raising taxes on the middle class. Predictably, Dayton is expressing outrage :
"If there is, it's a secret to me too," Dayton said. "Absolutely not. It's just ridiculous. Representative Emmer up until now has been pretty forthright with his conduct. I hope that doesn't change but to me it's a sign of his desperation."
"As a fallback position, if necessary, I'll have to delay repaying some of the $1.4 billion shift. I'm going to find the savings with additional cuts and administrative services and if not, I've said what the fallback position is and none of it involves raising taxes."
Let's see if I've got this right. Sen. Dayton started the campaign promising that his tax-the-rich scheme and a few token spending cuts would balance the budget. Sen. Dayton said that he'd raise education funding each year "no exceptions, no excuses." Now he's breaking that promise.
What we know is that Dayton hasn't put a balanced budget together in two attempts. In fact, we know that he hasn't really come that close in those two attempts. At this point, why should Minnesotans have confidence that Sen. Dayton has a clue as to how he'll close that budget gap?
In light of Sen. Dayton's utter incompetence and in light of his breaking one of his biggest promises, he's asking us to believe that he'll break his education spending promise instead of raising taxes on the middle class.
That's before factoring in the DFL's history of campaigning on one thing and doing another. Let's remember the DFL campaigning in 2006, saying that they wouldn't raise taxes. The following spring, there wasn't a tax increase they didn't vote for.
Now Sen. Dayton is peddling the latest rendition of 'Trust Me' and he expects us to take him at his word?
That's before considering the fact that he called for a civil debate after his family ran a series of utterly dishonest ads against Tom Emmer. That's before considering the fact that he's said that the rich should pay their fair share while his family hid their wealth in tax shelters both offshore and in states that don't have an income tax.
That's without considering the fact that his story on being an educator has changed more often than his budget has.
It's apparent that Sen. Dayton plays by a different sent of rules than he'd impose on Minnesotans. That's why his plea to trust him should rightly fall on deaf ears.
There's too much at stake with this election to play another round of trust me. Only one candidate has put a budget plan together that (a) balances and (b) creates jobs. That candidate's name is Tom Emmer. We don't have to play another round of trust me with him because he's done nothing to suggest that he isn't trustworthy.
Posted Wednesday, October 6, 2010 7:06 AM
No comments.
Party Of No Storyline Resurrected
This LTE in this morning's St. Cloud Times provides us with proof that the DFL doesn't have a message to run on. Their strategy, if it can be called that, is to mischaracterize the GOP as the "Party of No":
We've been bombarded by the party of "NO," the Republican Party with all kinds of accusations, misleading commentary, distorted campaign ads and lately false promises.
The party of "NO"...has orchestrated a huge effort to divide this country and attempted or derailed every economic effort brought forward by our Democratic Party. The party of no wants a two-class society.
First, it's important to say no to reckless, unproductive spending like that contained in Obama's stimulus bill and Obama's budget. Second, it's important to remember that Republicans at both the state and federal level had alternative plans to Obamacare that wouldn't have required $670,000,000,000 in tax increases. Third, Republicans had a superior stimulus plan that CBO scored. The CBO said that the Republicans' stimulus plan would create twice as many jobs as the Obama stimulus and cost half the money that the Obama stimulus plan cost.
It's insulting that the DFL is continuing to push this storyline. It's also a sign of their desperation, which is driven by the fact that Democrats, both nationally and locally, don't have a message.
It's especially insulting because their gubernatorial candidate's jobs agenda is literally from the 1970s and 1980s. Their candidate for CD-6 thinks that taxing Minnesota's job creators is the best way to create jobs. Both of them think that giving special breaks to 'green energy' companies is the pathway to a prosperous economy.
Why doesn't the DFL extend those special breaks to industries other than green energy? Obviously, the DFL thinks those special breaks work. Why aren't proposing them for all businesses?
Tom Emmer wants to reform Minnesotacare by using Steve Gottwalt's Healthy Minnesota Plan. He wants to eliminate agencies that overlap with others. Most importantly, he wants to streamline the permitting process in an effort to create a business friendly image for Minnesota.
That's a pretty extensive list of things Tom Emmer has in store for Minnesota.
Paul Ryan's roadmap is the most extensive, detailed agenda. It's more detailed than the Democrats' budget blueprint that they passed this year. Oh wait. They didn't pass a budget this year.
The Democrats spent so much time shoving health care down our throats that they didn't even pass a budget. Still sitting on their plate are the 13 appropriations bills needed to fund government and extending the Bush tax cuts so they don't turn into the Obama tax increase.
Conservatives are the party of ideas. Democrats are the party of the status quo.
We can't afford more status quo government on autopilot.
Posted Wednesday, October 6, 2010 11:03 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 06-Oct-10 02:00 PM
Sometimes "no" is the right answer to the question.
McMahon Staggers Blumenthal on Jobs
Various pundits, including FNC's Bret Baier, said that there were no gamechanging moments in Monday night's debate between Richard Blumenthal and Linda McMahon. I'd vehemently argue that there was a game-changing moment in the debate; the moment when Richard Blumenthal couldn't answer how jobs were created :
BLUMENTHAL: A job can be created in a variety of ways by a variety of people but principly by businesses and people in response to demand for products and services and the main point about jobs in Connecticut is we can and we should create more of them by creative policies and that's the kind of approach I want to bring to Washington.
Blumenthal's answer takes 1:21. Linda McMahon's answer was brief:
MCMAHON: Government, government, government. Government doesn't create jobs. An entrepreneur takes a risk. He or she believes that he creates a good or service that is sold for more than the cost to make it. If an entrepreneur thinks that he can do that, he creates a job.
At a time when our economy is struggling, we need more entrepreneurs in Congress, especially to push back against President Obama's agenda of spend, spend, spend and hope things turn out right. That's essentially the mindset he brought to the table with stimulus.
More importantly, Connecticut voters got to see that Blumenthal is a total empty suit. Fifth- and sixth-graders could've given more coherent replies than Blumenthal's.
Don't be surprised if the debate marks the beginning of the end for Mr. Blumenthal. Lying about serving in Vietnam is bad enough. Looking utterly clueless on the most important issue of the cycle is potentially lethal.
As I said earlier, Connecticut either saw or heard that Richard Blumenthal is an empty suit. That sort of thing has a way of steamrolling down the stretch.
Posted Wednesday, October 6, 2010 4:34 PM
No comments.
Diazgate: Much Ado About Nothing
I'm sick of the shiny object media eating out of Gloria Allred's hands about Diazgate for a myriad of reasons. First, I'm tired of hearing how Meg Whitman is a hypocrite for hiring an illegal immigrant after preaching the gospel of cracking down on illegal immigration.
Where's the hypocrisy? Meg Whitman hired Ms. Diaz after going through an employment agency. Whitman saw what she believed was her Social Security card. She saw what she believed was her drivers license. When she found out that Diaz was her illegally, she fired her.
Next, the Shiny Object Media doesn't bother digging into whether Bob Mulholland was behind this because knew Jerry Brown didn't stand a chance if this race was about the issues. Why haven't they dug into this more? After all, he's the king of October dirty tricks and he isn't bashful about it.
Most importantly, I'm upset because Diazgate doesn't have anything to do with anything important. Does Diazgate have anything to do with creating jobs? Getting spending under control? Or getting California's economy back on stable ground?
Does Diazgate mean that Jerry Brown has suddenly learned how to put a great economy together? Get serious. He's still the same inept socialist he always was.
Here's the bottom line: Meg Whitman is still the best equipped to get California's economy going again. Meg Whitman is the only candidate in the race who will have credibility with California's businesspeople. She's the only candidate who will have credibility when talking about reducing regulations and spending.
Meg Whitman is the only decisionmaker who's capable of navigating California through turbulent economic waters. She's the only one who will win over California's voters in reforming their pension systems. If California doesn't get that under control, you can write California's economy off for a generation.
Diazgate is a great alternative for soap opera or reality TV show audiences but it's a distraction from deciding whether California hires a great CEO to run the state or whether they'll hire an erratic socialist to pound the last nail in California's coffin.
In reality, this isn't a difficult decision. There's only one right decision. That's hiring Meg Whitman to lead California back to prosperity.
Posted Wednesday, October 6, 2010 7:16 PM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 06-Oct-10 11:01 PM
It is possible that Jerry Brown, Attorney General, could and would indict Meg Whitman for the charge of "lawful termination." :-)
Comment 2 by eric z at 08-Oct-10 12:44 PM
If all the wealthy Republicans who've hired illegal house help were to be disqualified by that, the GOP would have no candidates to run. Who works in the Pawlenty kitchen, cleans the home? Has anybody pinned that kind of question down? It will come up if he considers himself a serious candidate for national office, so the GOP should be vetting it now.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 08-Oct-10 02:56 PM
There's 2 bigger issues. First, Whitman followed the law. Ms. Diaz broke the law. It isn't ok to falsify Social Security information. She should be put in prison for falsifying that information. Second, it's clear that Ms. Allred is playing a political game, most likely in an attempt to help her longtime friend Jerry Brown. Ms. Allred, acting as Ms. Diaz's attorney, didn't act in the best interest of her client. She brought her forward &, as a result, will likely either get her deported or imprisoned. Ms. Allred should be disbarred for pulling this stunt for political gain.
Comment 3 by eric z at 08-Oct-10 12:47 PM
Am I wrong, but Fiorina seemed like a stronger candidate? I understand Whitman is the candidate now, but why was Fiorina not viewed more favorably by GOP people? I look from the perspective of the other end of the spectrum, so it confuses me. And why did Fiorina not spring this kind of thing to win? It is as if she was not serious enough, or did not know.
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 08-Oct-10 02:51 PM
Fiorina is running for the U.S. Senate, Whitman for California gov.
Jobs vs. an Economic Boom
You know the DFL BS machine is kicking into high gear when they have Rep. Ruckavina talking about jobs . Rep. Rukavina's track record in creating jobs is suspect at best. He's predisposed to raising taxes on "the rich" just like Sen. Dayton.
Ruckavina and Dayton still haven't said how creating a new highest tax bracket of 10.95% will help create jobs. More importantly, they can't explain how punishing job creators will lead to a prospering economy.
Ruckavina and Dayton are two peas in a redistributive pod.
Their policies are more about redistributing wealth than economic policy. It isn't accidental that Dayton hasn't spoken about his tax policies in economic terms. He knows that confiscatory tax policies have never worked.
That's why he sells his plan in social justice language. His message trades in class envy. Dayton's message is an us vs. them message. Rep. Ruckavina's message is, too. Here's what Rep. Rukavina said:
It looked like the Fourth of July as state Rep. Tom Rukavina stood in front of 10 flags today to denounce Republican governor candidate Tom Emmer's record of voting against jobs.
"This whole election is about jobs," the Virginia, Minn., Democrat said, adding that Emmer has not supported bills that would have led to more work for Minnesotans.
Rukavina said Emmer, a fellow legislator, would follow incumbent Gov. Tim Pawlenty, under whose tenure Minnesota has gained an average of 185 jobs a year.
The fiery Iron Range lawmaker said that 34,400 new jobs were created each year under Gov. Rudy Perpich, 45,200 under Gov. Arne Carlson and 23,500 under Gov. Jesse Ventura.
Rep. Rukavina is wrong. This election isn't about jobs. All it takes to create or maintain jobs is a bonding/stimulus bill. Any idiot can do that. It's about building an economy that produces wealth and prosperity. That requires a different mindset.
Rep. Rukavina's comparison isn't relevant for a multitude of reasons. First, according to his biography, Rudy Perpich's tenure as Minnesota's 36th governor was during the Reagan administration. Creating jobs then was almost automatic. Arne Carlson's time in office coincided with Clinton's time in office. Again, creating jobs at that time didn't require alot of skill. Carlson is proof of that.
Meanwhile, let's look at what Gov. Pawlenty was faced with. During his time in office, Gov. Pawlenty dealt with an economy when California and Michigan were economic basket cases, which dragged the U.S. economy down. That's before talking about the mortgage meltdown.
It's also before talking about the DFL seized control of the Minnesota legislature. Once they did that, they set out to enact wildly expensive programs.
What the DFL, Dayton and Rukavina included, didn't understand is that Minnesota's economy didn't flourish because we spent too much money during the 80's and 90's. It's that Minnesota's economy flourished because the federal economy was flourishing.
History is littered with examples of economies taking off when taxes have been cut. History is devoid of examples of economies taking off when governments used taxes to punish job creators. Raising the top marginal tax rate by 40 percent is punishing job creators.
By comparison, Tom Emmer wants to liberate job creators by cutting taxes, eliminating foolish government regulations and restructuring government so that it works with people not against people.
It's worth noting that each time those policies have been applied, they've worked magnificently.
Trusting Minnesota's economy to Mssrs. Dayton and Rukavina is foolish. Their ideas have been tried before. Each time, their policies have failed. We can't afford turning Minnesota's economy over to them.
Posted Thursday, October 7, 2010 9:03 AM
No comments.
Gingrich Rebuts Biden, Touts Annette Meeks, Tom Emmer
Joe Biden has a reputation of being a legend in his own mind and for saying some foolish things. When Biden made his infamous "strangle" comment, it was just a matter of time before someone made him regret that statement. That wait wasn't long. Newt Gingrich put Biden in his place :
Biden told Democrats at a St. Paul fundraiser Tuesday that Democrats know how to balance budgets and joked that he'd "strangle" Republicans who say they can't.If you're part of the team that balanced the federal budget 5 straight years, then putting a plan together that balances Minnesota's budget shouldn't be difficult. In fact, the Emmer-Meeks plan has Newt's stamp of approval:
"He hasn't met Annette," Gingrich told reporters after speaking at a fundraising luncheon for Emmer at the Minneapolis Marriott City Center hotel. When Meeks headed his House staff from 1995 through 1998, he said, she helped put together four balanced federal budgets in a row.
The Republican-controlled Congress and Democratic President Bill Clinton produced budget surpluses by restraining spending and creating jobs that generated more revenue, he said.
"You control spending first, then you cut taxes to create jobs," the former Georgia congressman-turned-political analyst said. The next time Biden comes to Minnesota, Gingrich said, "I want to invite him to meet with Annette."
Gingrich praised Emmer for following his prescription for growing jobs by reducing taxes and government spending.
He said Dayton's proposal to increase income taxes on the wealthiest Minnesotans would drive productive people out of the state, make it "uncompetitive" and boost unemployment.
When Gingrich and John Kasich helped balance the budget, the first step in the process was getting Bill Clinton to agree to cutting spending. Part of the Contract With America was cutting taxes each year that they held the majority.
Annette Meeks was given the assignment of restructuring government. If implemented, there's no doubt but that it will change the trajectory of government spending. The minute businesses see that government is serious about keeping spending under control is the minute they'll know that they won't have to worry about tax increases.
What's charitably called Dayton's plan calls for tax increases that punish job creators, not the wealthy. It's important to make that distinction. His plan would make Minnesota's companies less competitive on the international stage. It won't help them compete with other companies stateside either.
What needs to happen is Tom Emmer and Annette Meeks need to tout more of their agenda. Their policies make sense. Making their case to the people will give them the momentum they'll need to finish their opponents off.
Minnesotans have a choice. They can pick a person who's interested in growing government and feeding the government beast or they can pick someone who knows how to build a great economy.
Picking Dayton or Horner will get you the status quo. Picking the Emmer-Meeks team will get you a dynamic team with a positive vision for Minnesota.
Posted Thursday, October 7, 2010 11:01 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 08-Oct-10 12:41 PM
I would think Gingrich is not that good a person to bring in to boost Emmer. Gingrich clearly is an opportunist, and Emmer is faced with wanting to lessen that impression among undecided voters, particularly women, about his candidacy. You probably disagree but I see Gingrich as an inflamatory choice. Mitt Romney or somebody more centrist than Gingrich, and more low key, might have been better. Emmer also projects an image of a shouter, a bully, and Gingrich ---
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 08-Oct-10 02:58 PM
In case you hadn't noticed, this isn't a centrist election. It's a conservative wave election.
Tim Walz's Solutions
After Randy Demmer's first TV ad started running, the Walz campaign predictably reacted to the ad :
In the e-mail it states "National Republicans are not coming after Tim Walz because they believe he is vulnerable, they are coming after Tim because he is strong. While Tim has focused on solutions that will improve people's lives, the NRCC leaders have chosen to help Randy Demmer because they know he will be a reliable vote for Wall Street and health insurance companies."
Rep. Walz doesn't explain how his voting for Cap and Trade is a positive solution. He can't explain it because the-Sen. Obama said this about his Cap and Trade bill:
When I was asked earlier about the issue of coal,under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket,even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad, because I'm capping greenhouse gasses, coal power plants, natural gas,you name it,whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retro-fit their operations. That will cost money,they will pass that money on to the consumers.
Is Rep. Walz suggesting that voting for Cap and Trade is a positive solution for farmers, small businesses and families? If yes, how is having electric prices "necessarily skyrocket" a positive solution for southern Minnesota?
I recall Rep. Walz telling the audience at FarmFest that he expected the conference committee report to fix many of the things in the House bills? What things did Rep. Walz expect to get fixed in conference committee negotiations? Which taxes did Rep. Walz expect to get eliminated in negotiations?
With Obamacare, insurance premiums aren't dropping. They aren't even stabilizing. They going up by almost 10 percent a year with no end in sight. How is that helping Minnesota families?
How is Obamacare a common sense solution for southern Minnesota? It's telling that Rep. Walz would try selling rising insurance premiums as a positive solution for Minnesota.
Posted Thursday, October 7, 2010 9:18 PM
Comment 1 by MplsSteve at 09-Oct-10 03:48 AM
Has anyone heard any polls coming out of the 1st District?
Since early summer, I've sent Demmer a couple of checks but this race (at least from where I am in the Twin Cities) doesn't seem to be as much of a barn-burner as I thought.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 09-Oct-10 09:07 PM
Steve, I haven't heard any polls from CD-1 but I'm pretty sure it's a tight race. The NRCC just moved Demmer into their Young Guns program, which means they're seeing things they like in terms of competitiveness.
Keep the faith, my friend. The liberal media establishment won't do anything to boost our morale. Just know that we're on the right track & standing for the right principles.
