"He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left."
Matthew 25:33

Saturday, September 29, 2007

Good News for Team Rudy

I just received this from Rob Hewitt. I, like many people I talk to, are not too thrilled by our choice of candidates. This goes for both Republicans and democrats that I speak with. To me, I dislike Rudy's 2nd amendment record and his donations to Planned Parenthood disgust me. I have personally heard him say that he favors separate gun laws for rural and urban areas.

Romney's 2nd amendment record is questionable to me also. He joined the NRA just two weeks before announcing his candidacy. I recently saw a campaign video made when he ran for Governor of Massachusetts where he stated that he firmly believed in a woman's right to choose whether to have an abortion or not.
I like Thompson, Hunter, Tancredo, and Ron Paul. Anything but a democrat!


Frontrunner Giuliani Leading Among Most Republican Subgroups
Thompson, Giuliani running even in southern states
By Jeffrey M. Jones

PRINCETON, NJ -- Rudy Giuliani has led the field of Republican candidates for the 2008 presidential nomination in every Gallup Poll since January. In the most recent nationwide poll of Republicans, 30% name Giuliani as their first choice for the party's nomination, giving him an eight-point lead over second place Fred Thompson who registers 22% support. John McCain is in third place at 18% and Mitt Romney is in fourth at 7%, with the five other announced candidates all polling at 4% or less.

While nowhere near as dominant as the Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton, Giuliani, like Clinton, leads among most subgroups within his party [see Related Items]. In fact, Giuliani does no worse than tie for first in each of a number of key Republican demographic groups. But some of Giuliani's weakest showings are among subgroups of the party not likely to embrace his current or past pro-choice, pro-gay rights, and pro-gun control positions -- Southerners, weekly churchgoers, Protestants, and men -- in particular married men.

These insights are drawn from an aggregation of 1,690 interviews with Republicans and Republican-leaning independents taken from four Gallup surveys conducted in August and September. The analysis is primarily limited to the relative standings of the top four Republican candidates, since the minor candidates' support tends to show little meaningful variation by subgroup.


Republicans are roughly twice as likely to describe their political views as "conservative" than as either "moderate" or "liberal." Giuliani has a lead among moderate and liberal Republicans as well as conservative Republicans, but his lead is much larger among the former group (21 points vs. 7 points). Thompson and McCain tie as the second place candidate among moderate and liberal Republicans, but Thompson is a clear second among the much larger conservative group.

Republican Nomination Preference by Ideological Self-Identification

Moderate/Liberal Republicans N=544

Giuliani 38%
Thompson 17%
McCain 16%
Romney 9%

Conservative Republicans N=1,131

Giuliani 30%
Thompson 23%
McCain 15%
Romney 10%

For more than two decades, the Republican Party has been closely aligned with conservative religious individuals and groups. There has been considerable media speculation that religious Republicans are not overly enthusiastic about any of the leading Republican candidates for the 2008 nomination, given some of their past positions on moral values issues. While their ballot choice cannot speak to that directly, the data do show that Giuliani does not fare as well among religious Republicans as he does among other constituencies within the party. Specifically, Giuliani (27%) and Thompson (24%) are running about neck-and-neck among the most religious Republicans -- those who attend church on a weekly basis. McCain is third among this key group, while Romney and former Arkansas Gov. and ordained minister Mike Huckabee essentially tie for fourth.

Among less religious Republicans, Giuliani is the clear leader, with double-digit leads.

Republican Nomination Preference by Frequency of Church Attendance

Attend Church Weekly N=689

Giuliani 27%
Thompson 24%
McCain 17%
Romney 9%
Huckabee 7%

Attend Monthly N=396

Giuliani 33%
Thompson 18%
McCain 16%
Romney 14%

Seldom/Never Attend N=577

Giuliani 39%
Thompson 20%
McCain 13%
Romney 8%

Historically, every Republican nominee for president to this point has been of a Protestant faith. So it is notable that the group of leading contenders for next year's nomination includes a Catholic (Giuliani) and a member of the Church of Latter Day Saints (Romney). Giuliani leads the field by a wide 26-point margin among Republican Catholics. But he has a much smaller 5-point lead among Republican Protestants (including those who identify as "Christian" but do not mention a specific Christian denomination).

Romney is supported by 8% of Republican Protestants, not appreciably worse than his showing among Republicans more generally. That is notable because Gallup research has shown that a majority of Protestants have a negative view of the Mormon religion.

Republican Nomination Preference by Religious Affiliation

Protestant/"Christian" N=765

Giuliani 28%
Thompson 23%
McCain 17%
Romney 8%

Catholic N=273

Giuliani 44%
Thompson 18%
McCain 13%
Romney 13%

Much of the Republican Party's success in electoral politics can be attributed to its strength in the South. Thus, it is important for a Republican presidential candidate to demonstrate an appeal to Southerners. Giuliani and Thompson have been running even among Republicans living in the South, with McCain and in particular Romney trailing by significant margins there.

As is usually the case in nomination campaigns, there is a strong element of a "native son" effect in support for the various candidates. Thompson (the South), Giuliani (the Northeast), and McCain (the West) all have the greatest support in their home regions. Romney's best showings are in the Northeast -- the home region for the former Massachusetts governor -- and in the West, which has a large population of Mormons and where he is known for his leadership of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Utah

Republican Nomination Preference by Region of the Country

Northeast N=327

Giuliani 43%
McCain 14%
Thompson 14%
Romney 13%

Midwest N=365

Giuliani 34%
Thompson 17%
McCain 16%
Romney 9%

South N=616

Thompson 28%
Giuliani 28%
McCain 12%
Romney 6%

West N=382

Giuliani 28%
McCain 19%
Thompson 18%
Romney 14%

Monday, September 24, 2007

Send Al Franken a Message

We need to send Al Franken a message

Dear Friends,

Last week, I joined 71 Senators from both sides of the aisle in voting for a bi-partisan measure condemning MoveOn.org's vicious personal attack on General David Petraeus. After repeatedly refusing to repudiate MoveOn's unprecedented tactic, Al Franken called the Senate's effort to defend one of America's most respected military leaders "ridiculous."

What's really ridiculous is that Franken helped raise money for MoveOn.org to pay for ads like the one smearing General Petraeus and undermining our troops in the field.

We need to send Al Franken a message. To do that, we've taken out a full page ad in tomorrow's edition of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune asking all Minnesotans to join me in telling Franken that he should be standing up to MoveOn.org, instead of standing with them.

Log onto http://www.colemanforsenate.com/ridiculous/moveon.aspx to leave a message for Al Franken letting him know that standing with MoveOn.org instead of our troops in the field is unacceptable.

We need to hold Al Franken accountable for his continuing silence on MoveOn.org's vicious personal attack on General Petraeus, and the brave men and women serving under his command.


Norm Coleman

US Senator - Minneosta

P.S. Log onto http://www.colemanforsenate.com/ridiculous/moveon.aspx, and join me in telling Al Franken he should be standing up to groups like MoveOn.org, instead of for them.

Sunday, September 23, 2007

Sticking it too the Middle Class

By Bill Jungbauer

Today we have a government that is not concerned about the will of the people on immigration issues and the security of our national borders. Millions of dollars have been appropriated to build a fence along our borders, yet very little has been done.

We have been told that amnesty for illegals is needed to provide low price labor for jobs that "Americans do not want to do." Now we are witnessing Mexican truckers on American highways despite the protests of the American people and the Teamsters Union.

One hundred years ago the city of San Francisco had proposed segregating Asian students from white students much like the blacks in the deep south. California was undergoing what they called the "Yellow Peril." Untold numbers of Japanese immigrants flooded into the west coast providing cheap labor to industry. James J. Hill is known to have said, "Why should I pay a fireman six dollars a day to shovel coal, when I can pay a Chinese man fifty cents." This was the cause of much anger among American workers, fueling riots and civil unrest on the west coast.

Theodore Roosevelt worked out a deal with the Japanese government to limit the number of exit visas to its citizens. When Japan moved too slowly in its implementation, President Roosevelt sent the entire United States Navy on a cruise to the far east in a show of force. This provided the Japanese the will to follow up on their promise of slowing the flow of cheap labor to California.

Here is what Mexico's President Calderon recently had to say,

"In the name of the government of Mexico, I again issue an energetic protest against the unilateral measures taken by the Congress and the United States government that exacerbate the persecution and the vexing treatment against undocumented Mexican workers.

The insensitivity shown toward those who have contributed to the economy and the United States society has been an inducement to redouble the struggle to recognize the enormous contribution to the economy of both countries and to defend their rights."

As in the past, Calderon called on the US Congress to pass changes in immigration laws to grant amnesty to the estimated twelve million illegal immigrants now living and working here in the US. He is also extremely unhappy with any attempts to build a fence along the border.

Criticizing the United States is a popular pastime in Mexican politics. Illegal immigrants send home about $20 billion dollars annually and the yearly migration of about 400,000 people relieves the Mexican government of masses of poor.

I am often told by people that they believe that the Republican party represents big business. I am a proud Republican and I believe in the Republican platform over that of the democrats. I believe in low taxes, and small government. I do not want my taxes going to organizations that promote abortion. I believe in a strong military. Theodore Roosevelt was once accused of being a sell out to Big Oil. He promptly returned a check from Standard Oil in the sum of $100,000. Are there any modern day politicians taking the moral high ground these days?

I am a middle class American carpenter. Through NAFTA, loose immigration enforcement, and a growing global economy, we can see that our wages will be driven down by those who are happy making less. As I see it, the rich and the poor receive the best health care, while the middle class gets less and less.

In the last days of Theodore Roosevelt's presidency he was quite concerned about what he called the "disgustingly wealthy." He did not believe that morrally, they were doing thier part as Americans. Today, union enrollement is an all time low of 7.4 percent of the national work force, compared to 35 percent in the 1950's. The average real wage today is just where it was nearly five years ago, in December 2002. Here in Minnesota, the AFL-CIO contiually backs nothing but democrats. Remember it's the democrats that claim to represent the working class and the down-trodden. But they are the ones that continually propose regresive taxes that hurt the middle and lower class citizens the most. It is also the democrats, and many unions, that are pushing for rights for illegal immigrants.

I beleive in the right to unionize. I know first hand how the boss can threaten his employees. I am fully aware that people fought and died for the working conditions we take for granted today. But we cannot continue to allow things to go on as they are today. Close up our borders. Deport illegal immigrants. Repeal NAFTA.

Friday, September 21, 2007

MoveOn's millions mostly fund hits on GOP

By Jim McElhatton
September 20, 2007

The political arm of MoveOn.org is spending far more money attacking Republicans than on behalf of the Democrats it supports, campaign filings show.

Since last year, Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings show the group has spent nearly 90 percent of more than $3 million in so-called independent expenditures to target a dozen Republican candidates, including presidential aspirants Rudolph W. Giuliani, a former mayor of New York City, and Arizona Sen. John McCain.

"The political and practical reality is that negative ads work, and they work better than positive ads," said Kenneth A. Gross, former associate general counsel for the FEC.

"That's particularly true of an independent group because candidates themselves don't want to be running negative ads if they can avoid it," Mr. Gross said. "They'd rather be taking the high road, and the independent groups can hit a little harder"

MoveOn's negative campaigning prompted criticism from Republicans and some Democrats after a recent ad in the New York Times called Gen. David H. Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, "General Betray Us."

According to FEC records, MoveOn has spent less than $400,000 in independent expenditures supporting approximately 60 Democratic office seekers since last year. But during the same period, the group spent about $2.7 million against Republicans.

The law defines independent expenditures as money spent expressly for or against a candidate, but not in concert with the office seekers or their campaigns.

In one race last year, MoveOn, which did not return messages, spent more than a half-million dollars in independent expenditures against Rep. Thelma Drake, Virginia Republican. But the group spent less than $10,000 supporting her unsuccessful Democratic challenger.

In another contest, MoveOn spent more than $440,000 against then-Rep. Nancy L. Johnson, Connecticut Republican, including ads that also targeted Republican incumbents in other contests. The group gave her successful Democratic challenger, Christopher S. Murphy, $3,507.

"Research showed the ad made a significant impact in those races," MoveOn said in a press release announcing the ad launch.

Most of the money targeting Republicans occurred in races where incumbents were viewed as vulnerable.

"They're going into races they think they can win," said Stephen Weissman, associate director of policy at the nonpartisan Campaign Finance Institute, a nonprofit group based in the District. "They're spending how they think they could best be effective."

But MoveOn isn't the only independent group to spend funds against candidates, filings show.

Congressional campaign committees for Democrats and Republicans spent hundreds of thousands of dollars against candidates in several key congressional races last year.

The political action committee for the pro-Republican Citizens Club for Growth this year has reported spending more than $120,000 against Kansas state Treasurer Lynn Jenkins, a Republican who is running for a congressional seat. The PAC considers her a "tax hiker." It spent more than $1.5 million against various candidates since last year, including several Republicans.

Records show MoveOn is starting to spend money against Republicans in the presidential race, including more than $100,000 against Mr. McCain. On Monday, the group reported to the FEC that it spent another $84,000 against Mr. Giuliani.

The strategy of running negative ads by independent groups such as MoveOn can backfire at times, Mr. Gross said.

"I've seen candidates who are supposed to be getting helped shudder at some of the outside ads," he said.


Campaign filings show MoveOn.org independent expenditures are used more often to target Republicans than to support Democrats.

Candidate Spent Candidate Win/Lose
Top 3 candidates opposing
Thelma Drake (R-VA) $592,000 Won
Nancy L. Johnson (R-CT) $444,000 Lost
Deborah Pryce (R-OH) $417,000 Won
Top 3 candidates supporting
Gwen Moore (D-WI) $43,000 Won
Francine Busby (D-CA) $37,000 Lost
* Sherrod Brown (D-OH) $25,000 Won
* Mr. Brown won a Senate seat; the others were running in House races.
Source: Federal Election Commission

Coleman Supports Bi-Partisan Measure Condemning MoveOn's Personal Attack on General Petraeus

Calls on Franken and Ciresi to End Silence
St. Paul - Joining a bipartisan coalition including 71 of his colleagues from both sides of the aisle, Senator Coleman today voted for a measure condemning MoveOn's vicious personal attack. The measure expresses the sense of the Senate that Petraeus "deserves the full support of the Senate," and goes on to "strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the Unite States armed forces."
Earlier this week, Senator Coleman called on both DFL candidates opposing him to refute MoveOn's attack, and repeated the call today:
"It's unfortunate that neither Al Franken nor Mike Ciresi can summon the courage to reject MoveOn's deliberate smear attack on General Petraeus. The Senate did the right thing and moved forward in a bipartisan way to condemn the attacks - Franken and Ciresi need to do the right thing and repudiate them as well."
Franken has long been a supporter of MoveOn, supporting them financially, and helping them fundraise. Ciresi seemed to have condemned the ad in a statement issued last week, but then retracted it.
"Al Franken can continue to call for cutting off financial support for American troops in Iraq, and Mike Ciresi can continue his support for beginning an immediate withdrawal of American troops, but they should join me and an overwhelming bipartisan majority in the Senate in repudiating the attacks of groups like MoveOn, which devalue the crucial debate over Iraq."

Monday, September 17, 2007

Coleman slams MoveOn.org

Coleman slams MoveOn.org for
"deliberate smear attack" against General Petraeus
Calls on Franken and Ciresi to condemn MoveOn attacks, and to reject MoveOn support and dollars
St. Paul - United States Senator Norm Coleman today called upon Al Franken and Mike Ciresi to unequivocally condemn the efforts of the radical left-wing organization, MoveOn, to smear the integrity and character of General David Petraeus.
"Its baffling that one week after Moveon.org's vicious and over the top attack ad that Al Franken and Mike Ciresi have not cleared the record on where they stand. This is a deliberate smear attack against one of America's military leaders during a time of war," said Coleman. "These types of attacks, designed to raise money for MoveOn and to further their radical left wing agenda does little to elevate the debate over the future of our course of action in Iraq. I call upon Al Franken and Mike Ciresi to do the right thing and repudiate these vicious attacks, and furthermore, to have the courage to reject MoveOn's political agenda, as well as their funds."
Franken has been a long-time supporter of MoveOn, having supported their financial efforts personally, and having helped them fundraise. Ciresi, seemed to have repudiated the ad in a statement last week, but then backtracked. Even United States Senator John Kerry, the Democratic candidate for President in 2004, rejected the MoveOn ad, saying:
"I don't like any kind of characterizations in our politics that call into question any active duty, distinguished general who I think under any circumstances serves with the best interests of our country."
Coleman said that differences of opinion on policies related to Iraq should not be confused with personal attacks on the character and integrity of a distinguished United States military leader.
"Al Franken has every right to call for ending financial support for American troops in Iraq - and Mike Ciresi has every right to support an immediate withdrawal of American troops - and, while I disagree with their positions, I would hope they would join me in repudiating the efforts of those who seek to dishonor this debate with personal attacks that do little to further the dialogue and debate about our need for success in Iraq."

Sunday, September 16, 2007

ACTION ALERT: Baby DNA Rule Yanked to Avoid Consent Requirement

To Contact Governor Pawlenty:
PHONE: 651-296-3391
TOLL FREE: 1-800-657-3717
FAX: 651-296-2089EMAIL:


Wednesday, September 12, 2007
For Immediate Release

Twila Brase, President
Citizens' Council on Health Care
651-646-8935 office
612-619-1889 mobile

MN Health Department Yanks Baby DNA Rule to
Avoid Judge's Parent Consent Requirements

Minneapolis/Saint Paul – The Minnesota Department of Health has suddenly and quietly withdrawn the newborn genetic screening rule which was set to be rolled out at the end of this month, says Citizens' Council on Health Care (CCHC).

"Clearly, the Minnesota Department of Health is not interested in protecting the genetic privacy and property rights of its newest citizens and their families. Instead they hope to use the legislative process to maintain their illegal ownership of baby DNA," says Twila Brase, president of CCHC.

After CCHC forced the Department to hold a public hearing on the proposed newborn genetic screening rule on January 23, 2007, administrative law judge Barbara Neilsen ruled that portions of the proposed rule had "defects" and required specific changes, including:
  • Against the Department's written wishes, Judge Neilsen required that parents of newborns be given a Tennessen Warning as requested by CCHC at the public hearing. The Warning, which is required for most data collection by government agencies, would fully inform parents of state government's involvement in the testing program, the parent's right to refuse government collection of DNA and genetic data, and how the data would be used and who could access the data if the parents permitted their baby to be tested for a list of genetic conditions.
  • The judge also required explicit opt-in parent consent for the retention of newborn blood and DNA, and for dissemination of blood and genetic information to genetic researchers. Countering the Department's executive decision ten years ago to begin retaining and disseminating newborn blood without parent knowledge or consent, Judge Neilsen specifically stated that Minnesota law does not authorize such retention and dissemination, and in fact such activities now specifically violate the 2006 Minnesota genetic privacy law.

In July, Commissioner Dianne Mandernach appealed the ruling to the Chief Administrative Law Judge, Raymond R. Krause. The appeal was denied.

According to a Department letter tucked away on the health department's website—no press release was issued—the Commissioner is now withdrawing the rule to "seek legislative guidance on storage and use of blood spots."

Ms. Brase provides the following statements:

"The health department has cleverly avoided getting specific consent from parents of newborn babies. They've avoided fully informing parents about what's happening to their children. They've withdrawn the rule in hopes of using the political process to sanction 10 years of illegal blood retention and genetic research, and specifically to get approval for state government ownership of the DNA of newborn citizens.

"The department's decision strips the judge's genetic privacy and DNA property protections from newborn babies and their families. The Department is clearly disregarding the privacy and property rights of citizens in hopes of eventually dismissing them through the legislative process.

"Obviously these DNA samples have great value, but they belong to parents and their children, and not the State of Minnesota," Brase adds.

"We again call on the Governor to make the Department follow the rule of law. "We call on the Governor to protect the genetic privacy and property rights of parents and children by dissembling the health department's warehouse of DNA wrongly taken from children and their parents, and by requiring the Department to get explicit fully informed consent from parents for newborn genetic testing.

"Minnesota's children and parents are waiting for the Governor to protect their legal rights."

Key Documents

MDH Letter to Judge Krause, August 29, 2007 http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/phl/newborn/nbruleswithdrawal082907.pdf

CCHC’s Letter to Governor Pawlenty, July 24, 2007 http://cchconline.org/pdf/PawlentyNBSletter072407w.pdf

CCHC’s Letter to Commissioner Dianne Mandernach, July 12, 2007

Chief ALJ Raymond R. Krause’s Reconsideration Order, July 3, 2007: http://www.oah.state.mn.us/aljBase/090017586.recon.htm

MDH Request for Reconsideration, June 27, 2007:

The ALJ Report (ALJ Barbara Neilsen), March 27, 2007: http://www.oah.state.mn.us/aljBase/090017586.rr.htm

CCHC Testimony/Submitted Comments to ALJ, January 23/31, 2007: http://www.oah.state.mn.us/cases/health4615/nbs-pc8.pdf

CCHC Attachments to Testimony, January 31, 2007:

Office of Administrative Hearing – Newborn Screening Rule page. Includes all letters from the public: http://www.oah.state.mn.us/cases/health4615/index.html

Ted Nugent Tells it Like it Is

By Bill Jungbauer

Any one who believes that the Second Amendment is obsolete, listen to my hero, the Nuge speak. In this video he tells it like it is. We the people who are citizens of these great United States of America have a God given right to defend themselves and their families, and, as far as I am concerned, each other. Watch and learn from a true American! Like Ted has said, and our patriotic hero's of our country's past have said, "Don't Tread On Me!"

Friday, September 14, 2007


This is from Representative Rick Hansen's email newsletter. Here is your chance to speak up about your concerns about light rail on Robert Street. Jon Zanmiller, W. St. Paul's mayor tells me that light rail will run from downtown St. Paul all the way to Rochester. When I asked him where is it going on Robert St., he tells me it will be elevated! What will the cost of that be?

In the last few years, $770 million has been spent on the Hiawatha light rail line. The fares collected on the Hiawatha line only cover 37% of it's operating expenses. The cost of the Central Corridor line is approaching $1.4 billion. Over $100 million has already been set aside for the North Star line. Who knows how much is going to be spent on the Red Rock line from St. Paul to Hastings. The total cost of this will be astronomical! After the I35W bridge collapse, I believe our priorities belong to roads and bridges.

Dakota County's Office of Transit will conduct a series of workshops to collect public comment on possible alternative transit modes and transit corridors in the development of a long term transit vision for the County. The public is encouraged to attend one of three Public Workshops in September where public comment will be collected as part of the development of the study document. The purpose of the study is to identify transit and transportation issues, opportunities, costs,benefits, and impacts of potential transit alternatives that may provide remedy for mobility issues identified in the corridor.

The Robert Street Corridor Transit Feasibility Study Public Workshops will begin with an hour-long open house, followed by a presentation and a group exercise designed to elicit public input. They will be held at the following central, southern, and northern Robert Street corridor locations:

Dakota County Northern Service Center
1 Mendota Road West, West St. Paul
Monday, September 17 2:00 to 5:00pm

Rosemount Community Center
13885 South Robert Trail, Rosemount
Wednesday, September 19 6:00 to 9:00pm

Wellstone Center
179 Robie Street East, St. Paul
Tuesday, September 25 5:30 to 8:30pm

Transit modes being considered along possible alternative corridors are light rail transit (LRT), commuter rail, bus rapid transit (BRT), modern streetcar, and an upgrade of conventional bus service. Possible alternative corridors include Hwy. 52, Hwy. 55, Robert Street, and a possible railroad corridor.

Thursday, September 13, 2007

Ed Schultz is Full of B.S.

By Bill Jungbauer

Last week I was woken up about 2:30 in the morning. After being unable to go back to sleep I decided that maybe I should turn on the TV. I grabbed the remote and started flipping through the channels. Lo and behold, there on C-Span 2 was Ed Schultz. I had never listened to Schultz before. I hope I never have to listen to him again.

During the brief time I chose to listen, I was witness to numerous lies. He claimed to have beaten Sean Hannity in a debate. He announced that he would debate any one, any time. I know for fact that Michael Medved has said that he would even fly to Fargo to debate him, and Schultz declined.

It amuses me that Rush and the EIB Network are based in New York City, and Schultz is stuck in Fargo!

The early morning that I lay witness to this fiasco was the day after the bathroom scandal with Senator Larry Craig broke. Schultz made a bazaar claim that “conservative talk shows have been defending the senator all day, if it was a democrat we would never hear the end of it from them.” He also claimed that Republicans spent the day doing damage control. I listen to all the conservative talk shows. Rush, Ingraham, Prager, Medved, Hannity, Lewis, Savage, and Beck to name a few, and none of them said one word in defense of the senators behavior in that bathroom stall in Minneapolis. In fact, it was Senator Norm Coleman as well as other Republican senators who called for his resignation.
I truly believe that Schultz was sacked a few too many times while playing college football. This weird behavior of his, is evidence enough for me, to see why he is in Fargo rather than New York City!

Monday, September 10, 2007

From the Desk of Tom Emmer

I received this letter from Tom Emmer on Friday, 7 September, 2007. We the people of Minnesota are continuously bombarded from all the various media outlets with the opinions of special interest groups. This letter from Rep. Emmer tells it like it is.

Earlier this year, during the 2007 session, we had the pleasure of hearing our esteemed Governor on the radio airwaves remind us that we did not need to raise taxes when we had a deficit, so why should we raise taxes when we have a surplus? Good point Governor! At this very same time, on KQRS radio was a group called "Progress in Motion" telling us that our Governor's policy of borrowing to finance our road construction was going to cost our children as much as $900 million in interest alone! This very same story was told buy the "Coalition of Minnesota Working Families" on 102 FM.

One thing I find fishy about these special interest groups is that no one knows who they are until it's too late. I gave a call to the Campaign Finance Board and this is what I was told. A special interest group does not have to register until they hire a lobbyist. They do not have to file a report until the end of the year, well after the session is over and sometimes well forgotten. So it comes down to this, anyone with the money can run ads to influence you and you will have no idea who is financing their agenda! The two special interest groups I mentioned are partially funded by the Transportation Alliance as well as some other special interest groups that only care about you shelling out your hard earned dollars to fund their dreams.

The following letter is written by a good Minnesotan who is well aware of the influence of the media and special interest groups and their desire to gouge us. I must remind you of this great quote,

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed."
Mark Twain

Tom Emmer
State Representative
District 19B

House of Representatives

September, 2007

Dear Friends:

As we know, our state has been hit hard in the last several weeks. First by the tragic I-35W bridge collapse and more recently by the flood disaster in southern Minnesota. Our hearts and prayers go out to those directly impacted by these events. During times of extreme challenge, we can’t help but be reminded of the strength and courage of the human spirit.

The American people - and especially we Minnesotans - have a tradition of overcoming adversity. I have no doubt that our state will meet the challenge that these tragic events have laid before us. We will rebuild and we will be there for our fellow Minnesotans who need our help.

We cannot, however, in times like this, be divided. We must be united behind our governor to help us help ourselves. We cannot, under any circumstance, allow politics to play a role in facing the challenges before us. Recently, you have no doubt heard the politicians and the editorial pundits crying out for a special session of the legislature. These cries are based on the false premise that the legislature must convene to get the bridge rebuilt and lend disaster relief to our southern Minnesota citizens.

The legislature does not need to convene in order to accomplish anything in regard to these tragedies. Our governor has the authority to rebuild the bridge and in cooperation with the federal government lend assistance and disaster relief to our friends in the southern part of the state.

As his recent actions demonstrate, our governor has the character and leadership skills necessary to implement an effective and efficient emergency response. While he maintains an “open door” for input from the legislature, the Governor clearly recognizes that calling a special session to bring the politicians back to St. Paul will only bog down the recovery and relief process.

Unfortunately, our media has been complicit and encouraging our self-aggrandizing politicians to demand a special session to deal with non-emergency matters; for instance, taxes and bonding. We must keep in mind that this is how these folks make their living. If the legislature is not in session, they have little if anything to do.

Over the past year we have constantly been reminded how special interests can corrupt the democratic process. From my perspective, the media special interests and attention seeking politicians are no different than any other special interest attempting to move a personal agenda. Remember, now is not the time for politics. Now is the time for action!

We do not need 201 legislators getting in the way of efforts to rebuild and recover. Please call our Governor and encourage him to refrain from calling a special session of the legislature and to continue to exercise his executive powers to help those in need immediately.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.

Tom Emmer
House Republican Deputy Minority Leader

Thursday, September 6, 2007

Rudy Visits Minnesota

I just recieved this from Rob Hewitt,

From Janet Beihoffer:

The press was there, the grassroots people were there. It was a wonderful, happy crowd.Where? Lisa Murphy's Parkview Cafe in St. Paul, MN, the heart of MN liberalism. As Rudy said, "In a national election, you need to be able to take the battle to the opponent's turf, including a traditionally democratic state like MN. I can do that better than anyone else running for the Republican nomination."Rudy and his team arrived on time. He was great with the wall-to-wall crowd, shaking hands, posing for multiple photos, sitting at one table and just talking with three young people. He spent at least 45 minutes with the crowd then went outside to hold his press conference.He's at ease, comfortable with himself, the press, everyone.

From Gary Miller:

I entered the cafe on the bubble but left in Rudy’s camp because of his response to me stressing the importance of appointing originalist judges to the federal judiciary.

Other stories:







Tuesday, September 4, 2007

Dear Mr. Ex President Clinton


Worse than you thought & worth remembering and this came from a democrat.

Dear Mr. Ex President Clinton,
I recently saw a bumper sticker that said, "Thank me, I voted for Clinton-Gore." So, I sat down and reflected on that, and I am sending my "Thank you" for what you have done, specifically:

1. Thank you for introducing us to Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky, Dolly Kyle Browning, Kathleen Willey, and Juanita Broderick. Did I leave anyone out?

2. Thank you for teaching my 8 year old about oral sex. I had really planned to wait until he was a little older to discuss it with him, but now he knows more about it than I did as a senior in college.

3. Thank you for showing us that sexual harassment in the work place (especially the White House) and on the job is OK, and all you have to know is what the meaning of "it" is. It really is great to know that certain sexual acts are not sex, and one person may have sex while the other one does NOT have sex.

4. Thank you for reintroducing the concept of impeachment to a new generation and demonstrating that the ridiculous plot of the movie "Wag the Dog" could be plausible after all.

5. Thanks for making Jimmy Carter look competent, Gerald Ford look graceful, Richard Nixon look honest, Lyndon Johnson look truthful, and John Kennedy look moral.

6. Thank you for the 73 House and Senate witnesses who have pled the 5th Amendment and 17 witnesses who have fled the country to avoid testifying about democratic campaign fund raising.

7. Thank you, for the 19 charges, 8 convictions, and 4 imprisonment's from the Whitewater "mess" and the 55 criminal charges and 32 criminal convictions (so far) in the other "Clinton" scandals.

8. Thanks also for reducing our military by half, "gutting" much of our foreign policy, and flying all over the world on "vacations" carefully disguised as necessary trips.

9 Thank you, also, for "finding" millions of dollars (I really didn't need it in the first place, and I can't think of a more deserving group of recipients for my hard-earned tax dollars) for all of your globe-trotting. I understand you, the family and your cronies have logged in more time aboard Air Force One than any other administration.

10. Now that you've left the White House, thanks> >> for the 140 pardons of convicted felons and indicted felons-in-exile. We will love to have them rejoin society. (Not to mention the scores you pardoned while Governor of Arkansas)

11. Thanks also for removing the White House silverware. I'm sure that Laura Bush didn't like the pattern anyway. Also, enjoy the housewarming gifts you've received from your "friends."

12. Thanks to you and your staff in the West Wing of the White House for vandalizing and destroying government property on the way out. I also appreciate removing all of that excess weight (China, silverware, linen, towels, ash trays, soap, pens, magnetic compass, flight manuals, etc.) out of Air Force 1. The weight savings means burning less fuel, thus less tax dollars spent on jet fuel. Thank you!

13. Please ensure that Hillary enjoys the $8 million dollar advance for her "tell-all" book and you, Bill, the $10 million advance for your memoirs. Who says crime doesn't pay!

14. The last and most important point - thank you for forcing Israel to let Mohammed Atta go free. Terrorist pilot Mohammed Atta blew up a bus in Israel in 1986. The Israelis captured, tried and imprisoned him. As part of the Oslo agreement with the Palestinians in 1993, Israel had to agree to release so-called "political prisoners". However, the Israelis would not release any with blood on their hands. The American President at the time, Bill Clinton, and his Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, "insisted" that all prisoners be released. Thus Mohammed Atta was freed and eventually thanked the US by flying an airplane into Tower One of the World Trade Center. This was reported by many of the American TV networks at the time that the terrorists were first identified. It was censored in the US from all later reports. Why shouldn't Americans know the real truth? What a guy!!

If you agree that the American public must be made aware of these facts, pass this on. God bless America and THANK YOU (once again) for spending my taxes so wisely and frugally. SINCERELY, A US Citizen

PS. Please pass along a special thank you to Al Gore for "inventing" the Internet, without which I would not be able to send this wonderful, factual e-mail.

AND THE REST OF THE STORY? Hillary Rodham Clinton, as a New York State Senator, now comes under the "Congressional Retirement and Staffing Plan," which means that even if she never gets reelected, she STILL receives her Congressional salary until she dies. (Would it not be nice if all Americans were pension eligible after only 4 years?) If Bill outlives her, he then inherits HER salary until HE dies. He is already getting his Presidential salary until he dies. If Hillary outlives Bill, she also gets HIS salary until she dies. Guess who pays for that? WE DO! It's common knowledge that in order for her to establish NY residency, they purchased a million dollar-plus house in upscale Chappaqua, New York. Makes sense. They are entitled to Secret Service protection for life. Still makes sense. Here is where it becomes interesting. Their mortgage payments hover at around $10,000 per month. BUT, an extra residence HAD to be built within the acreage to house the Secret Service agents. The Clintons charge the Federal government $10,000 monthly rent for the use of that extra residence, which is just about equal to their mortgage payment. This means that we, the taxpayers, are paying the Clinton's salary, mortgage, transportation, safety and security, as well as the salaries for their 12 man staff -- and, this is all perfectly legal! When she runs for President, will you vote for her? How many people can YOU send this to? WAKE UP AMERICA................

Monday, September 3, 2007


An activist judge in Iowa has struck down that state's Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), ordering the county register to immediately begin issuing marriage licenses to homosexual couples. Against their will, the citizens of Iowa are about to have homosexual marriage thrust down their throats!
The similarities between Iowa and Minnesota are uncanny. While a supermajority of voters in both states oppose legalizing homosexual marriage, state legislators in both states have repeatedly blocked efforts to allow voters to decide whether their state constitution should be amended to strengthen the protection for marriage. Both states have DOMA statutes and legislators in both states have repeatedly claimed that DOMA provides adequate protection for marriage.Minnesota should take a lesson from its neighbors. Voters in North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin have all passed state marriage amendments permanently protecting marriage as the union of one man and one woman. But in Canada and Iowa where marriage did not have constitutional protection, laws were overturned thereby legalizing homosexual 'marriage'.


In just a few clicks of your mouse, you can send a message to both your state legislators and Governor Pawlenty urging them to support the Minnesota Marriage Amendment bill. This bill would allow Minnesota voters to decide if our state constitution should be amended to permanently protect marriage as the union of one man and one woman. If it can happen in Iowa, it can happen in Minnesota. Just click on the TAKE ACTION NOW link and let you voice be heard!


About Minnesota Majority
Minnesota Majority is new non-partisan group fighting to restore traditional values to Minnesota's public policy. Learn more about us by visiting our website at

Saturday, September 1, 2007

Discounts for Military Personnel

I recently was made aware of this great website,


It has listed companies that provide discounts to military personnel. I suggest that we all do the best we can buy supporting these establishments when we need to make a purchase!