Jungbauer 2010

2011-09-08T21:57:00.001-05:00

Jon Stewart Destroys Media for Ignoring Ron Paul

2011-08-16T18:40:00.000-05:00

This is truly bipartisan!

2011-05-17T22:11:00.001-05:00

Press Release, for immediate release.

Contact information:

Ramsey County DFL Chair, Rod Halvorson, halvorrod@yahoo.com , 66 9th St East, Unit 1312, St Paul, 651-235-6036

4th Congressional District Republican Chair, James Carson, jbcarson@comcast.net , 3425 McKnight Rd N, White Bear Lake, MN 55110, (651)773-0488

Bi-partisan Opposition to the Vikings Deal

Today, the Chair of the 4th Congressional District Republicans, James Carson, and the Chair of the Ramsey County DFL, Rod Halvorson, announced their joint bi-partisan opposition to the Viking stadium deal that was recently agreed to by the leadership of the Vikings and two Ramsey County Commissioners, Tony Bennett and Rafael Ortega.

“We urge our party activists and all citizens of Ramsey County to contact Governor Dayton, their State Senator and Representative, as well as their County Commissioner to urge them to vote against this horrible agreement,” said Carson and Halvorson. “It is simply wrong to force a $350 million sales tax onto the people and businesses of Ramsey County, especially without a vote of the people. Why are these politicians so afraid of their own voters?”

Halvorson said, “I find it offensive that at a time when the state is planning to cut billions from education, health care and human service programs for our children, elderly, disabled and poorest Minnesotans that we would even consider raising the regressive sales tax by a half-cent to fund a luxury stadium that will only be a serious benefit to their billionaire owners and millionaire players.”

Carson said, “I would always be skeptical of any proposal by the Ramsey County Commission to fund a stadium with a sales tax increase. However, it is simply outrageous to propose this at a time when the legislature is struggling valiantly to keep government spending within its means. An increase in the sales tax will not only burden already stressed household budgets in these difficult times; it would also harm retailers and their employees who may well lose their jobs and businesses. In particular, I am dismayed that Commissioner Bennett would so blithely ignore the principles of limited government under which he sought and received Republican endorsement years ago.”

Halvorson and Carson agreed that “we are also offended as citizens of Ramsey County that the Ramsey County Commissioners would disenfranchise their constituents.” As a member of the Ramsey County Charter Commission, Halvorson added, “The Ramsey County Charter firmly places our county at the forefront of voter involvement in our county’s public policy. Our county is the only charter county and it stands out with its voter approval of the charter that includes initiative, referendum and recall provisions. With such history of direct voter involvement, how could our Commissioners ever justify ignoring the voters will?”

Finally, we want to recognize and thank all the legislators in the Ramsey County delegation who have already said no in public statements and interviews and we urge the others to join the majority of their colleagues in opposition. We urge the Governor, legislators and our Ramsey County Commissioners to take note of this unprecedented bi-partisan opposition.

Oil Company Profits

2011-04-29T13:02:00.001-05:00

How much do the industry fat cats get?

WASHINGTON, September 19, 2007 – Who owns ‘Big Oil?’ It’s not who you think. As Congress debates national energy policy, a new study finds that ownership of oil and natural gas company shares is made up of a broad cross section of Americans.

“This study disproves the popular misconception that ‘Big Oil’ is owned by a small group of industry insiders. In reality, across the oil and natural gas industry only 1.5 percent of shares of public companies are owned by company executives,” said study author Robert J. Shapiro, undersecretary of commerce for economic affairs under President Bill Clinton. “The data show that ownership of industry shares is broadly middle class, with the majority of industry shares held by institutional investors, often on behalf of millions of Americans through mutual funds, pension funds and individual retirement accounts.”

API Chief Economist John Felmy added: “When politicians seek to punish these companies and ‘take their profits,’ they are not targeting industry executives but the hard-earned savings of working people.”

Shapiro and economist Nam D. Pham’s study was commissioned by API. The study shows that:

1. Almost 43 percent of oil and natural gas company shares are owned by mutual funds and asset management companies that have mutual funds. Mutual funds manage accounts for 55 million U.S. households with a median income of $68,700.

2. Twenty seven percent of shares are owned by other institutional investors like pension funds. In 2004, more than 2,600 pension funds run by federal, state and local governments held almost $64 billion in shares of U.S. oil and natural gas companies. These funds represent the major retirement security for the nation’s current and retired soldiers, teachers, and police and fire personnel at every level of government.

3. Fourteen percent of shares are held in IRA and other personal retirement accounts. Forty five million U.S. households have IRA and other personal retirement accounts, with an average account value of just over $22,000.

For a complete text of the study, more information on the authors and an audio podcast of an interview with Robert Shapiro and John Felmy visit www.energytomorrow.org or www.sonecon.com.

Always room in the budget for white guilt

2011-04-11T21:19:00.001-05:00

Teachers are headed for a conference that brims with fashionable grievances.

Katherine Kersten
April 10, 2011

These are tough times for Minnesota schools. In Lakeville, for example, the school board recently announced wrenching cuts of almost $7 million.

Ninety-four teachers will lose their jobs, arts programs will suffer and a school will be closed. There was wailing and gnashing of teeth, but the board set its jaw: There's not a dime for anything extra.

Unless you've got an ax to grind with white folks. Then the money spigots open.

The Lakeville schools are sending a delegation of teachers to the 12th annual "White Privilege Conference" at the Bloomington Sheraton from April 13-16. The district is shelling out $160 a pop -- plus $125 a day for teacher subs -- for this "white guilt" festival.

Organizers say they expect attendees from a number of other Minnesota districts.

The conference is "built on the premise that the U.S. was started by white people, for white people," according to conference materials.

Its mission is to get participants to confront their biases in a "journey in understanding white supremacy, whiteness, privilege, power and oppression," and to "agree to take action in [their] own circle of power."

The conference is sponsored by the Minnesota Justice Collaborative, a consortium of local higher-education and philanthropic institutions.

It is expected to draw 1,500 teachers, students, activists, artists, social workers and counselors from more than 40 states. Minnesota public schools are represented on the list of speakers and workshop presenters.

What can Lakeville parents and taxpayers expect for their investment?

To find out, we can peruse the keynote address for the 2009 conference. It was delivered by "social justice educator" Paul Kivel and appeared in the conference journal, "Understanding and Dismantling Privilege."

Kivel begins with what passes these days as a prayer: "I want to acknowledge the creative spirits in the world that nurture and sustain us and that connect us to each other and to the plant and animal life around us."

Then he winds up for a fire-and-brimstone sermon. We Americans "are completely dependent on U.S. imperialism and war to sustain our daily lives."

Our schools, too, are riddled with racial bias. "Our school system has been set up ... to perpetuate white supremacy and white privilege." Poor and minority students "do not drop out -- they are pushed out."

What's gone wrong? For one thing, Christianity has far too much influence.

It "has played a key role in developing and justifying sources of oppression" such as "violence and genocide," Kivel tells us, and is "the beginning of modern or biological racism."

But don't despair, he counsels.

We must look beyond our "declining empire" to "exciting progressive developments" in Hugo Chavez's Venezuela -- among them, "land reform and redistribution of wealth, neighborhood committees, recognition of women's unpaid labor, end of spanking."

I feel better already.

At this year's conference, participants can look forward to a tongue-lashing from Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz, author of "Outlaw Woman."

"Clamor" magazine describes Dunbar-Ortiz as "a fiery, indefatigable public speaker" on issues of capitalism and imperialism who cut her teeth in Cuba with the Venceremos Brigade, then built "associations with other revolutionaries across the spectrum of radical and underground politics."

In addition to drinking in Dunbar-Ortiz's wisdom, Lakeville teachers will have countless opportunities for navel-gazing or self-flagellation. They can sample workshops where participants will "discuss how white privilege, white supremacy, and oppression affects daily life."

Every grievance get its due, with topics including not just skin color but sexuality, gender, class and disability.

Teachers also can seek counsel from Ruth King, "a recognized authority on emotional wisdom and the author of the groundbreaking book 'Healing Rage and the Emotional Wisdom Cards'" -- or relax with Victor Lee Lewis of the Radical Resilience Institute, who will instruct them how to "rapidly release and overcome stress, trauma, drama and toxic beliefs."

Whom should we thank for this rich smorgasbord of white guilt? Sponsors include the University of Minnesota, MnSCU, the St. Paul Foundation, Hamline University, Gustavus Adolphus College, the YWCA of Minneapolis and Augsburg College, among others.

"This conference is on the radar of conservatives because it threatens the status quo, because we're not just talking about individual change, we're talking about systems change," University of Minnesota professor Lisa Albrecht, a local organizer, told MinnPost last fall.

The website reported: "There's always the possibility that the 'haters,' as one of the organizers puts it, will descend in mass and try to disrupt peaceful discussions about the advantages of being white in America and the oppression that has led to."

Not a chance. We're laughing too hard.

Katherine Kersten is an American Experiment Senior Fellow. She is at kakersten@gmail.com.

This commentary originally appeared in the Star Tribune on April 10, 2011.
Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted.

White Privilege Conference?

2011-04-10T14:17:00.000-05:00

Sent to me by a friend,

April 13th marks the beginning of the 12th Annual White Privilege Conference at the Sheraton Hotel in Bloomington, Minnesota.

This event is being sponsored by such left wing institutions as the St. Paul Foundation, the University of Minnesota's Office for Equity and Diversity, and the Minneapolis YWCA.

The White Privilege Conference offers three days of liberal indoctrination on "white guilt" and "social justice." This is the same old propaganda that says White Men are responsible for all the poverty and injustice in the world, and the only solution is more laws and welfare programs.

Here are some examples of "White Privilege" from their website: http://www.whiteprivilegeconference.com/white_privilege.html

'White people can go out in public without fear of being harassed or constantly worried about physical safety'

Reality check: According to the National Crime Victimization Survey for 2001-2003 Blacks were 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against Whites than vice versa. Blacks were also 2.25 times more likely to commit a hate crime against Whites or Hispanics than vice versa.

'Being able to assume that if you work hard and follow the rules, you will get what you deserve'

Reality check: generous social welfare benefits such as food stamps, section 8 housing, and school lunch programs are available to poor and minorities. Meanwhile, for working Americans the more they earn the more they have to pay in taxes to support such programs.

'Being able to assume that most of the people you or your children study in history classes and textbooks will be of the same race, gender, or sexual orientation as you are.'

Reality check: Millions of dollars are spent in public schools to raise awareness and teach children about figures such as Harriet Tubman, Booker T. Washington, and W.E.B DuBois. Martin Luther King Jr. is the only American to have his own holiday and the entire month of February is dedicated to Black History. The above claim is simply a part of the liberal agenda to remove "Old White Men" such as the Founding Fathers from American schools and abandon traditional values.

Dear Friends it is time to show the liberal left, that us hardworking Americans are not feeling the "privilege."

On April 13th-16th, 20011. Wednesday thru Saturday, 10:00 AM to 8:00 PM

Please join us to protest their event: Minneapolis Sheraton Hotel
7800 Nomandale Blvd.
Minneapolis, MN 55439
(952) 835-7800
MAP http://www.starwoodhotels.com/sheraton/property/area/map.html?propertyID=1493

Dear Friends and Neighbors:

2011-04-03T07:57:00.003-05:00

Earlier this past week, virtually all of our local weathermen were forecasting lots of rain and even the potential for quite a bit of wet snow by this Sunday night and into Monday morning. Watching the 10 p.m. news last night (less than 5 days after the gloomy forecast), they are now saying, whoops – never mind, it looks like this system will be far to our north. I have a friend who often says that he wishes he had a job where he could be so wrong, so often and still get paid so much!

What does this have to do with a legislative update? Let me explain:

Our state government hires an economist to do what weathermen do, create long range forecasts to determine the amount of revenue we will (could, might?), bring in over the next two years. Politicians then create spending plans based on that forecast. Unfortunately, our economic forecasts have proven to be as reliable as our weather forecasts.

As an example, our economic forecast for revenue in the 2010-2011 biennium fell approximately $2 billion dollars short of what was desired, forcing Gov. Pawlenty and (eventually) the legislature to implement a series of immediate budget cuts (unallotments), and budget shifts (paying June’s bills in July), to meet the constitutional requirement for a balanced budget. Again, in November 2010, our economist predicted a revenue amount of approximately $32 billion dollars for the 2012-2013 biennium. By February 2011, that forecast had grown to $34 billion dollars, a huge difference in less than four months. Large swings have become the rule, not the exception.

Here is where things currently stand at the Capitol: Both the House and Senate have passed budget bills that spend every penny that the state is forecasted to have over the next two years. The Governor trumps that by about $3 billion more; spending every forecasted penny AND proposing a number of tax increases which will hit the pocketbooks of every single Minnesotan. Unfortunately, if our economist’s forecast follows recent trends and are far rosier than what actually happens, two years from now we’ll be seeing exactly what we are seeing today in terms of huge deficits. This will be true under either plan and under a plan which will ultimately be the compromise solution.

There is a more sane and rationale way. A number of us legislators are pushing for a change in how we develop budgets by basing revenue not on forecasts, but on what was actually collected in the last biennium. For this biennium it would mean creating spending plans of approximately $30 billion dollars. Yes – the hue and cry would be tremendous as folks would surly say we are gutting the state of all that is good and wholesome, but to put it into perspective, this level of spending is approximately what the state spent in 2006-2007. Unfortunately, the number of legislators who espouse this philosophy is currently too small to carry the message of fiscal responsibility. Yet, it is our hope that clearer heads will prevail before the end of this budget setting process. If not, we will continue to fight for this fundamental change for the next budget setting cycle.

When weathermen make long term forecasts, we often create family plans that fit the forecast. When they are wrong, we shrug our shoulders, grumble a bit and then adjust our plans. However, when the state economist’s forecast falls short and government has spent every dollar based on a crystal ball prediction, people’s lives are greatly effected through either higher taxes on families and job providers or cuts in promised services to those most needy. We can and must do better!

God bless and please stay in touch,

Mark Buesgens
State Representative, 35B

Biden: Impeach President for Unauthorized Attack

2011-03-27T11:54:00.001-05:00

Vice President Joe Biden has a very clear idea of what should happen to a president who orders U.S. military forces to launch an attack on a foreign country without congressional authorization: impeachment.

With some voices saying President Barack Obama should face impeachment for attacking Moammar Gadhafi’s forces in Libya, a videotape has surfaced from the 2007 campaign trail showing Biden threatening to impeach President George W. Bush if he attacked Iran without the approval of Congress.

“I have written an extensive legal memorandum with the help of a group of legal scholars who are sort of a stable of people, the best-known constitutional scholars in America, because for 17 years I was chairman of the Judiciary Committee,” Biden said in an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews on “Hardball.”

"I asked them to put together [for] me a draft, which I'm now literally riding between towns editing, that I want to make clear and submit to the United States Senate pointing out the president has no authority to unilaterally attack Iran.

“And I want to make it clear, I want it on the record … if he does, as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and former chair of the Judiciary Committee, I will move to impeach him."

He went on to say: “I think the best deterrent is for the president to know, even at the end of his term, we would move and move to follow through with that so his legacy would be marred for all time if he acted in what was clearly, clearly an impeachable offense.

“In the absence of that, what happens is, and you're going to think I'm joking about this — I'm not. If you're going to impeach George Bush you better impeach Cheney first. Not a joke.”

UNION SUPERPOWER! Featuring "Wisconsin Vern"

2011-02-24T21:45:00.000-06:00

UFCW Exposed: Thanks UFCW Bosses

2011-02-20T12:56:00.001-06:00

Meet the Liberal Elite!

2011-01-30T07:34:00.000-06:00

DEPORT HER TO AMERICA !

2011-01-28T16:58:00.003-06:00

The Rambo Granny of Melbourne , Australia

Gun-toting granny Ava Estelle, 81, was so ticked-off when two thugs raped her 18-year-old granddaughter that she tracked the unsuspecting ex-cons down... And shot off their testicles.

"The old lady spent a week hunting those men down and, when she found them, she took revenge on them in her own special way," said Melbourne police investigator Evan Delp.

Then she took a taxi to the nearest police station, laid the gun on the sergeant's desk and told him as calm as could be: "Those bastards will never rape anybody again, by God."

Cops say convicted rapist and robber Davis Furth, 33, lost both his penis and his testicles when outraged Ava opened fire with a 9-mm pistol in the hotel room where he and former prison cell mate Stanley Thomas, 29, were holed up.

The wrinkled avenger also blew Thomas' testicles to kingdom come, but doctors managed to save his mangled penis, police said. "The one guy, Thomas, didn't lose his manhood, but the doctor I talked to said he won't be using it the way he used to," Detective Delp told reporters. "Both men are still in pretty bad shape, but I think they're just happy to be alive after what they've been through."

The Rambo Granny swung into action August 21 after her granddaughter Debbie was carjacked and raped in broad daylight by two knife-wielding creeps in a section of town bordering on skid row.

"When I saw the look on my Debbie's face that night in the hospital, I decided I was going to go out and get those bastards myself 'cause I figured the Law would go easy on them,"' recalled the retired library worker. " And I wasn't scared of them, either - because I've got me a gun and I've been shootin' all my life. And I wasn't dumb enough to turn it in when the law changed about owning one."

So, using a police artist's sketch of the suspects and Debbie's description of the sickos, tough-as-nails Ava spent seven days prowling the wino-infested neighborhood where the crime took place till she spotted the ill-fated rapists entering their flophouse hotel.

"I knew it was them the minute I saw 'em, but I shot a picture of 'em anyway and took it back to Debbie and she said sure as hell, it was them," the oldster recalled...

"So I went back to that hotel and found their room and knocked on the door, and the minute the big one opened the door, I shot 'em right square between the legs, right where it would really hurt 'em most, you know. Then I went in and shot the other one as he backed up pleading to me to spare him. Then I went down to the police station and turned myself in."

Now, baffled lawmen are trying to figure out exactly how to deal with the vigilante granny. "What she did was wrong, and she broke the law, but it is difficult to throw an 81-year-old woman in prison," Det. Delp said, "especially when 3 million people in the city want to nominate her for Mayor."

DEPORT HER TO AMERICA - WE NEED HER!
******************************************************************** ************
Australian Gun Law Update

Here's a thought to warm some of your hearts....

From: Ed Chenel, A police officer in Australia

Hi Yanks, I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under.

It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.

The first year results are now in:

Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent,
Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent;
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!

In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)

While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.

There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.

Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in 'successfully ridding Australian society of guns....' You won't see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.

The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note Americans, before it's too late!

Will you be one of the sheeple to turn yours in? WHY? You will need it.

Red Skelton on The Pledge Of Allegiance

2010-12-02T21:05:00.001-06:00

RULES OF MINNESOTA

2010-11-26T09:53:00.001-06:00

Sent by email from Stan G.

Thanks Stan.

Here's to all of us who live in Minnesota , some born and raised here. Some got here as fast as they could and others who would like to be from Minnesota . This is the best version of this that I have seen.

1. Pull your droopy pants up. You look like an idiot.

2. Let's get this straight; it's called a "gravel road." I drive a Pickup truck because I want to. No matter how slow you drive, you're going to get dust on your Lexus. Drive it or get out of the way.

3. You say our lakes smell to you. They smell like money to us. Get over it.

4. So you have a $60,000 car. We're impressed. We have $250,000 combines that are driven only 3 times a year.

5. So every person in every pickup waves. Its called being friendly. Try to understand the concept.

6. If that cell phone rings while a bunch of ducks are coming in, we WILL shoot it out of your hand. You better hope you don't have it up to your ear at the time.

7. Yeah, we eat walleye & northern pike and love it. You really want sushi & caviar? It's available at the corner bait shop.

8. The "Opener" refers to the first day of deer season It's a religious holiday held the closest Saturday to the first of November.

9. We open doors for women. That is applied to all women, regardless of age.

10. No, there's no "vegetarian special" on the menu. Order steak. Or you can order the Chef's Salad and pick off the pound of ham & turkey.

11. When we fill out a table, there are three main dishes: meats, vegetables, and breads. We use three spices: Onion, Pepper, and Garlic!

12. College and High School Football is as important here as the Lakers and the Knicks, and a hell of a lot more fun to watch.

13. Yeah, we have golf courses. But don't hit the water hazards --it spooks the fish.

14. Colleges? Try St. Olaf, Concordia, or St John's . They come outta there with an education plus a love for God and country, and they still wave at passing pickups when they come home for the holidays.

15. We have more folks in the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, than any other state, so "Don't screw with Minnesota .." If you do, you will get whipped by the best.

Minnesota is the greatest state ever!

Quantitative Easing Explained ... in simple terms!

2010-11-22T19:26:00.001-06:00

Emmer for Governor, Republican Party of Minnesota Petition Minnesota Supreme Court to Ensure Number of Total Votes Matches Total Voters

2010-11-17T17:16:00.001-06:00

Concerns have been raised over more votes than voters

St. Paul– Republican Party of Minnesota Chairman Tony Sutton and Deputy Chairman Michael Brodkorb today announced that Emmer for Governor and the state Party have filed a petition with the Minnesota Supreme Court asking the court to ensure that reconciliation has occurred in each of Minnesota’s 4,136 precincts as required by Minnesota law (Minn. Stat. § 204C.20). The petition includes affidavits from election judges throughout Minnesota who prepared or observed preparation of summary statements for their precinct and did not witness election judges count the names of individuals signing the polling roster or the names of individuals who registered to vote on Election Day.

“The most basic right of our election system is one person, one vote. We cannot have a system that allows more votes to be counted than legal voters. After the 2008 election, estimates varied that there were between 17,000 and 30,000 or more ballots than total voters. In 2009, Secretary of State Mark Ritchie pledged to match voter registration with canvassing board results to within a thousand. Ritchie has had two years to address this issue and yet we’re receiving reports today from election judges stating they did not reconcile the ballots cast with the number of signatures on the polling roster on Election Night 2010. These reports raise concerns about the instructions and written guides given to election judges by the Secretary of State’s office as to the statutorily required reconciliation procedures for Election Day but more importantly, raise serious questions about the integrity of the result of the election.

“Phantom votes have no place in the final vote count. There is a clear statutory remedy that must be followed, namely, that excess phantom ballots are removed from the certified vote count. Until reconciliation has been completed in each precinct, the legislatively mandated recount cannot begin. Today's petition is of course within the legal framework of the canvassing process and the recount. We are seeking the court’s assurance that only legally cast ballots are counted. The next governor should be seated on January 3 with an outcome that has followed the letter of the law,” said Republican Party of Minnesota Chairman Tony Sutton.

“It is incumbent upon our election system to count each and every legally cast ballot and not include phantom ballots in the vote count. Our petition today is simply asking the Supreme Court to confirm that the number of votes matches the total number of voters on Election Day, as required by state law and that election officials follow the clear statutory remedy for the removal of phantom votes before the results are certified,” added Republican Party of Minnesota Deputy Chairman Michael Brodkorb.

Click here to read Minn. Stat. § 204C.20

Click here to read the filing

In 2008: Estimates Varied that there were Between 17,000 and 30,000 More Ballots Than Total Voters

Estimated 17,000 more ballots than total voters. "Kiffmeyer is 'absolutely sure' that Ritchie's efforts to eliminate voting regulations ensured Franken's victory. 'The first thing he did when he got into office was to dismantle the ballot reconciliation program we started. Under that program districts are required to check that the number of ballots issued by matching them with the number of ballots cast,' she said, ‘that way we know immediately that the vote count is accurate.' But that isn't what happened, she said. 'We now have 17,000 more ballots cast than there are voters who voted and no way to determine what went wrong. Why anyone would eliminate that basic check, I don't know,’ she said." (Ed Barnes, “States' Secretaries of State Are Tipping Balance of Power,” FOX News, February 1, 2010)

Estimated 30,000 more ballots than total voters. "He said the goal was to match voter registration and the certified canvassing board totals within 1,000 names. ‘You'll never get a perfect correlation between the two,' he said. 'We were at 40,000 in April. We're at about 30,000 now.'" (Patricia Lopez, “Ritchie is sued over voter-registration records,” Star Tribune, May 28, 2009)

In 2009: Ritchie Pledged to Match Voter Registration with Canvassing Board Results to within a Thousand

Secretary of State Mark Ritchie pledges to match voter registration and canvassing board result to within a thousand. "He said the goal was to match voter registration and the certified canvassing board totals within 1,000 names. 'You'll never get a perfect correlation between the two,' he said. 'We were at 40,000 in April. We're at about 30,000 now.'" (Patricia Lopez, “Ritchie is sued over voter-registration records,” Star Tribune, May 28, 2009)

Hitler on the Election

2010-11-16T21:22:00.000-06:00

How Our Tax System Works - Explained in Beer

2010-11-16T07:25:00.000-06:00

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100…

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this…

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

The fifth would pay $1.

The sixth would pay $3.

The seventh would pay $7..

The eighth would pay $12.

The ninth would pay $18.

The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do..

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20″. Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).

The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).

The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).

The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).

The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

“I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving,” declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,”but he got $10!”

“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!”

“That’s true!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison, “we didn’t get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!”

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

Thomas Jefferson said...

2010-11-14T18:45:00.000-06:00

When we get piled
upon one another in large cities, as in Europe,
we shall become as corrupt as Europe .
Thomas Jefferson

The democracy will cease to exist
when you take away from those
who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
Thomas Jefferson

It is incumbent on every
generation to pay its own debts as it goes.
A principle which if acted on would save
one-half the wars of the world.
Thomas Jefferson

I predict future happiness for
Americans if they can prevent the government
from wasting the labors of the people under the
pretense of taking care of them.
Thomas Jefferson

My reading of history convinces me
that most bad government results from too much
government.
Thomas Jefferson

No free man shall ever be debarred
the use of arms.
Thomas Jefferson

The strongest reason for the
people to retain the right to keep and bear arms
is, as a last resort, to protect themselves
against tyranny in government.
Thomas Jefferson

The tree of liberty must be
refreshed from time to time with the blood of
patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson

To compel a man to subsidize with
his taxes the propagation of ideas which he
disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson said in 1802:
'I believe that
banking institutions are more dangerous to
our liberties than standing armies.
If the American people ever allow
private banks to control the issue of their
currency, first by inflation, then by
deflation, the banks and corporations that will
grow up around the banks will deprive the people
of all property - until their children
wake up homeless on the continent their fathers
conquered.'

Eric Magnuson Named Lead Litigator for Emmer for Governor, Republican Party of Minnesota

2010-11-09T14:39:00.001-06:00

St. Paul- Republican Party of Minnesota Chairman Tony Sutton today announced that former Minnesota Supreme Court Chief Justice and State Canvassing Board member Eric Magnuson has been named chief litigator for Emmer for Governor and the Republican Party of Minnesota. Former Chief Justice Magnuson joins a legal team headed by Michael Toner.

“I’m very pleased to announce that former Minnesota Supreme Court Chief Justice Eric Magnuson will serve as lead litigator for Emmer for Governor and the Republican Party of Minnesota. Eric is an enormously talented litigator who is independent minded, thoughtful and substantive. As a former member of the State Canvassing Board, Eric understands the issues at stake during this process. Eric is a tremendous addition to our legal team, and I know he will do his part to make certain that every legally cast vote is counted,” said Republican Party of Minnesota Tony Sutton.

Eric Magnuson’s biography can be viewed here.

An agenda in the mainstream

2010-11-09T07:01:00.001-06:00

Here is a great article taken from the Pioneer Press.

By Frank Luntz

The United States has just witnessed its third straight rubber band election.

Once again, Americans had their patience stretched, fired a Washington run amok and now want their new leaders to snap back to attention. The government Americans seek is simpler, more efficient and more accountable; one that takes on less but does better; one that executes the essential and eschews the excessive.

For two election cycles, the winners overpromised and underdelivered. So, will a newly divided Washington finally learn how to govern effectively in dire times?

First, a warning to both sides. Republicans, for their part, must realize that the voters have given them a reprieve, not an endorsement. In my polling last week, GOP voters agreed with this statement by more than 2-to-1: “I am willing to give the Republicans another chance, but if they mess up again, I’ll vote them out again, too.” That’s hardly a cause for GOP celebration.

Similarly, Democrats must grasp that their defeats were not about deficient personalities or insufficient communication, but about their philosophy and substance. Roughly two out of three voters agreed with the statements that President Obama “has failed to deliver hope and change” and that in the midst of an economic crisis, Democrats “had their priorities wrong.”

Over the past two years, I’ve polled tens of thousands of Americans. Their top complaint about politicians is that they fail to “say what they mean and mean what they say.” Their top complaint about government is that it lacks “accountability.” Their top complaint about Washington is that “government has grown too big, too inefficient, and too out of control to do even the bare minimum things it is supposed to do.”

These concerns explain why Hurricane Katrina ended President George W. Bush’s presidency three years before his term expired. They explain why the gulf oil spill disaster crystallized voters’ concerns that Obama is in over his head. And they explain why the stimulus — after all those billions in debt, unemployment is still near 10 percent — has been deemed a failure.

Americans’ agenda is simple. In broad terms, they want the government to spur job growth, but not by subsidizing more government jobs with taxpayer dollars. They want Washington to balance the budget and reverse the growing influence of government on daily life. They want the government to encourage success, allow failure, punish those who break the law — and then get out of the way. And above all, they want politicians to follow through on their promises, even if that means tempering those promises in the first place. They also show clear support for the following five ideas:

● Balance the budget as quickly as possible through spending reductions, a hard spending cap and a constitutional amendment so that it never gets unbalanced again.

● Eliminate all earmarks until the budget is balanced, then require a two-thirds vote by Congress for future earmark legislation.

● Keep taxes down by requiring supermajorities for increases, and eventually enact tax reform with a simple, low, fair rate that drastically reduces the length of the IRS code.

● Create a blue-ribbon task force that engages in a complete, line-by-line forensic audit of federal agencies and programs to end waste and reduce red tape and bureaucracy.

● And require Congress to provide specific constitutional authorization for every bill it passes so that the government stays within the boundaries imagined by the founders.

I’ve found that each of these policies has at least 60 percent public support, so if you agree with most of them, it means you’re in the American mainstream. It also means that — wait for it — you agree with the tea party.

These points come directly from the teaparty- backed “Contract From America,” a document compiled from and voted on by the various tea party organizations and promoted by FreedomWorks, a conservative advocacy group. This governing agenda is supported not only by conservatives, but also by largely nonideological, anti-political voters in the middle.

The tea party is not some fringe coalition hopelessly removed from the mainstream. The movement supplied the ideas that made independent voters flip from favoring Democrats by an 18-point margin in 2006 to supporting Republicans by 15 points Tuesday — and it will keep pressuring the government to change until the government truly changes.

As much as Democrats rightfully fret over the tea party, establishment Republicans should fear it just as much. The movement has already put Republicans on notice: Deliver or get dumped. Nearly six in 10 registered voters I surveyed the weekend before the elections agreed with the following statement: “If Republicans do win a majority in the House and Senate and fail to deliver on their promises, I would consider supporting the creation of a new third party dedicated to reducing the size and scope of Washington.” (Only 17 percent disagreed.) And when asked “which best represents your views?,” about a third of registered voters, 36 percent, chose Democrats, while 25 percent chose the GOP and 22 percent opted for the tea party. Together, Republicans and the tea party movement represent 47 percent of America to the Democrats’ 36 percent. That’s a recipe for massive electoral success in 2012 if they stay united, but unprecedented failure if they pull apart.

This is the whole story of American politics today. When conservatives are divided or dispirited, Democrats win. But united, conservatives control the political landscape.

The last time Republicans gained control of the House, in 1994, they achieved more in the first 100 days than some Congresses have in two years. From welfare reform to tax cuts to a balanced budget amendment, they passed every one of their 10 “Contract With America” items. Some of this agenda stalled in the Senate, and much of it was vetoed by President Bill Clinton, but they held on to their majority for a dozen years because of those first 100 days. They worked with the president when they could, opposed him when they couldn’t — and the American people were satisfied with the results.

Once again, Republicans cannot be timid. American voters overwhelmingly support spending cuts to balance the budget; six in 10 of them support a 21 percent across-theboard cut in nonmilitary discretionary spending, even if it means reductions in education and health programs. With their “Pledge to America” in September, House Republicans campaigned on this 21 percent cut.

The question: Do they have the courage and the determination to deliver what they promised? If so, they can look forward to a governing majority nationally and locally for a decade, perhaps even a generation.

Frank I. Luntz, a pollster and communications adviser and frequent Fox News commentator, is the author of “ What Americans Really Want . . . Really.” He wrote this column for the Washington Post.

Marco Rubio gives the best speech of election night!

2010-11-04T12:53:00.001-05:00

New members elected to the House

2010-11-03T17:15:00.001-05:00

Republicans will take over the majority of the Minnesota House of Representatives when the 87th Legislature convenes Jan. 4, 2011.

The DFL held an 87-47 majority heading into Election Day, but Republicans now hold a 72-62 edge.

All totaled the House will see 36 new members — 33 Republicans and three DFLers.

According to the Office of the Secretary of State, three races may be subject to recount. They are in District 15B where Republican King Banaian leads DFLer Carol Lewis by 10 votes; District 25B where Republican Kelby Woodard leads incumbent David Bly (DFL-Northfield) by 31 votes; and District 27A where incumbent Robin Brown (DFL-Moscow Township) trails Republican Rich Murray by 58 votes.

Two previous members of the House, Sondra Erickson and Linda Runbeck, both Republicans, will be returning.

The State Canvassing Board is scheduled to meet at 10 a.m., Nov. 23, in State Office Building room 10 to certify the election results.

For a guide to the members-elect of the House of Representatives, based on unofficial results compiled by the Office of the Secretary of State, go to www.house.mn and click on “2010 Election Directory.”

New members-elect are:

Diane Anderson (R-Eagan)

King Banaian (R- St. Cloud)*

Bob Barrett (R-Shafer)

Mike Benson (R-Rochester)

Kurt Bills (R-Rosemount)

Roger Crawford (R-Mora)

Kurt Daudt (R-Crown)

Sondra Erickson (R-Princeton)

Dan Fabian (R-Roseau)

Mary Franson (R-Alexandria)

Kerry Gauthier (DFL-Duluth)

Marion Greene (DFL-Minneapolis)

Glenn Gruenhagen (R-Glencoe)

David Hancock (R-Bemidji)

Andrea Kieffer (R-Woodbury)

Deb Kiel (R-Crookston)

John Kriesel (R-Cottage Grove)

Ernie Leidiger (R-Mayer)

Mike LeMieur (R-Little Falls)

Kathy Lohmer (R-Lake Elmo)

Pat Mazorol (R-Bloomington)

Joe McDonald (R-Delano)

Carolyn McElfatrick (R-Deer River)

Rena Moran (DFL-St. Paul)

Rich Murray (R-Albert Lea) *

Pam Myhra (R-Burnsville)

Tim O’Driscoll (R-Sartell)

Branden Petersen (R-Andover)

Duane Quam (R-Byron)

Linda Runbeck (R-Circle Pines)

Joe Schomacker (R-Luverne)

Kirk Stensrud (R-Eden Prairie)

Chris Swedzinski (R-Ghent)

Bruce Vogel (R-Willmar)

Doug Wardlow (R-Eagan)

Kelby Woodard (R-Belle Plaine)*

*Subject to recount based on unofficial Secretary of State numbers.

Drunken Democrats, Vote Emmer!

2010-11-02T09:31:00.001-05:00

As a parent of two wonderful children, I hope to never feel the pain of losing one of them. In that respect, my heart goes out to Margaret Everson, the woman in the ads run by the Alliance for a Better Minnesota. I must ask, how can we expect a “Better Minnesota” from a liberal organization attacking one of our candidates for governor with such a misleading hit piece?

What hypocrites the liberals can be considering that Senator Metzen weaved down the highway in 2007 and was defended by his Democratic peers and even retained his post as Senate President. And how can anyone forget Ted Kennedy who crashed his car into the Chappaquiddick River and killed a young lady while driving drunk, then went on to serve a lifetime as a Democratic U.S. Senator.

While Emmer's troubles were decades ago, Mark Dayton admits to a drug and depression problem today. Tom Emmer gets my vote for governor.

From the Minnesota Freedom Council

2010-10-31T20:04:00.003-05:00

Minnesota Freedom Council

CROW WING COUNTY

ABSENTEE VOTER FRAUD?

Are AFSCME Union Members involved in Voter fraud?

Complaint to be filed with CW Co. Attorney

AFSCME has been making a big push to get Dayton elected, because Dayton's tax hike put's money in AFSCME pockets. Could this be a reason some have gone too far?

More coming in on Minnesota Freedom Council's exclusive! Developing!

Interview with Deb Erickson Crow Wing Co. Auditor

Deb Erickson explains more on this

An Afscme member interviewed about incident

Developing

Get up and vote!

2010-10-29T20:21:00.001-05:00

SEASON'S GREETINGS

T'was the night before elections

And all through the town

Tempers were flaring

Emotions all up and down

I, in my bathrobe

With a cat in my lap

Had cut off the TV

tired of political clap-trap

When all of a sudden

There arose such a noise

I peered out my window

Saw Obama and his boys

They had come for my wallet

They wanted my pay

To give to the others

Who had not worked a day!

He snatched up my money

And quick as a wink

Jumped back on his bandwagon

As I gagged from the stink

He then rallied his henchmen

Who were pulling his cart

I could tell they were out

To tear my country apart!

'On Fannie, on Freddie,

On Biden and Ayers!

On Acorn, On Pelosi'

He screamed at the pairs!

They took off for his cause

And as they flew out of sight

I heard him laugh at the nation

Who wouldn't stand up and fight!

So I leave you to think

On this one final note—

IF YOU DON'T WANT SOCIALISM

GET OUT AND VOTE !!!!

Lori Swanson gets Desperate!!

2010-10-28T21:56:00.004-05:00

Lori Swanson is worried about Chris Barden. One of the nicest men I have ever met! Below is one of her recent emails begging for money. It just drips of desperation. LOL! Poor Lori.

Contribute to Chris Barden here,

https://secure.yourpatriot.com/ou/barden4ag/700/donate.aspx

LORI SWANSON
ATTORNEY GENERAL

WWW.LORISWANSON.COM

Dear Fellow Minnesotan:

I need your help because I am under attack from a Tea Party opponent with a history of vicious name-calling. I ask that you make an online contribution now so that I can continue to stand up for ordinary citizens as the People’s Lawyer.

I am proud that our campaign has received endorsements from newspapers around the state—from Albert Lea to Duluth, from St. Paul to Minneapolis (and even Fargo, North Dakota)!

The Albert Lea newspaper said of our work in the Attorney General’s Office:

“She is working for the ordinary citizens of this state. She pursues cases to protect consumers and senior citizens, rather than making her office a political distraction. Swanson takes on cases that affect people’s everyday lives, opposing large power-rate hikes, fighting debt-negotiation companies that make promises and fail to deliver, and taking on living-trust mills that seek to fool elderly citizens.”

The Duluth News Tribune said that: “Minnesota’s little guys…have a fighter in their corner in Swanson.”

Unfortunately, my opponent has announced that he will not abide by campaign finance limits—which means that I must raise even more money. His attacks are talking points coming out of the Tea Party spout--that I should sue the President to stop health care reform, that I rigged the Franken/Coleman Senate election, that I am responsible for illegal immigration, etc. He attacks me for being“anti-business” because I enforce the law and stand up for average consumers.

My opponent wants to dismantle the good work we are doing in the Attorney General’s Office and wants to turn the office into a political tool to advance his Tea Party agenda. I need to raise money to respond to his attacks so this does not happen. To do that, I must turn to you for help. I ask that you please help me out by making an online contribution today.

I am determined to win this election, and we will win with your help.

Sincerely,

Lori Swanson

Prepared and paid for by Swanson for Attorney General, PO Box 65490, Saint Paul, MN 55165

Donate

Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy

The House the Otto's Built, The Shawn and Rebecca I Know

2010-10-25T22:23:00.004-05:00

I first met Shawn and Becky Otto about 20 years ago. A friend worked for a company known as Fresh Paint, a non union shop owned by Shawn and Becky Otto. The purpose of this introduction was to go over the details of the construction of a two story addition to the farm house owned by Shawn and Becky Otto in Lake Elmo located on Manning Trail. My friend at the time, Steve Dreher, was laid off and unemployed and was to assist me in the construction of the work on the Otto residence. As I recall, Steve was receiving unemployment compensation, after being laid off from Fresh Paint, and was being paid in cash, for the work done by the two of us.

Since then I had worked on a rental property in downtown Stillwater owned by the Otto's in which the order of the day was to get things done as quickly and as cheaply as possible.

From http://homepower.com/files/webextras/HP47_pg6_Otto.pdf

Shawn Otto is a poet, writer and entrepreneur. He and

his wife Becky own and operate Fresh Paint Inc, a

commercial painting contractor, which they established

10 years ago. They also own several historic

commercial properties which they have restored.

In my opinion, none of the work I have ever seen on an Otto property was ever performed by a union contractor or employee, nor was it intended to contribute to the community but only to benefit the Otto's. “Commercial properties” meaning property they rent or lease for profit.

Five or so years later, I bumped into Shawn in the parking lot of a hardware store. Shawn had said that the farm house had been sold and he asked if I would finish up the work needed in the main floor bathroom. I told him it would be no problem and would be glad to help. I took a look at the work needed, called Shawn and gave him a price and he gave me the go ahead. Upon completion of the work, along with some extras that the new owner had requested, I gave Shawn a call to let him know the work was completed as he asked along with the extras. Shawn said to me, “It's going to take about thirty days to pay you as the money is in escrow.” My response was something like, “Damn Shawn, it would have been nice if you would have told me this up front.” This is when I witnessed a side of Shawn I had never seen before. He had the gall to say, “Watch how you f**king talk to me if you ever want to see a damn dime. You talk to me with respect if you ever want to get paid.” I did the work expected of me and this is how I get treated. Never in my life have I been treated in such a manner after completing a job for someone.

This experience makes me question how their new “green home” was built. Was it built by unemployed people paid by cash under the table or was it built by union contractors? Is it of the quality expected of a union contractor? My knowledge of Shawn leads me to believe that he went with the lowest bids possible. I also question whether he tried to screw any of the people under his employ during construction as he threatened to do with me.

This also makes me question the leadership of these unions,

AFSCME Council 5

AFSCME Council 65

Duluth FirePAC

Education MN

IBEW Local 292

IBEW State Council Local 49

Operating Engineers

MAPE Minnesota

AFL-CIO Minnesota

International Association of Fire Fighters Local 21

Minnesota Nurses Association

Minnesota State Building & Construction Trade

Minnesota State Council of Unite Here Unions

SEIU Mn State Council Pol Fund

Sheet Metal Workers PAC #10

State Council of Machinists

Teamsters

UAW MN State CAP Council

Are the leadership of these unions truly aware of who they have endorsed? Is the union leadership that have endorsed and contributed to the Otto campaign aware that Rebecca was the founder and president of a non union painting company named Fresh Paint that employed as many as fifty people? If so, is it only because Rebecca is a Democrat? Do they ignore the fact like hypocrites that she gives lip service to the unions but allows her husband to hire unemployed construction workers to do work on their home at well below prevailing wage? Does anyone of these union leaders believe that Rebecca turns a blind eye to the people employed to work on their home?

According to this site, http://homepower.com/files/webextras/HP47_pg6_Otto.pdf, the Otto's had a “volunteer crew” assemble and erect their wind tower on their property in Marine on St Croix. Who was there to insure that the work done met industry standards or that the work met OSHA safety standards?

Let's take a look at Shawn and Rebecca's political history. You may recall that Rebecca first started out as a state representative in 2003. Shortly afterward, she and her husband were indicted by a grand jury for false campaign practices – essentially lying in an eleventh hour hit piece about her opponent Matt Dean.

“A Washington County grand jury has indicted state Rep. Rebecca Otto, DFL-Marine on St. Croix, and her husband and campaign manager, Shawn Otto, for distributing false campaign material for her special election in February. The offenses are gross misdemeanors. The indictment, made public on Monday by Washington County Attorney Doug Johnson, charged the Otto's with falsely alleging in a piece of campaign literature that Rep. Otto’s Republican opponent, Matt Dean of Dellwood, ‘put his own children in private school.’ In fact, one of Dean’s children was attending a public school and a second child was enrolled to start kindergarten this fall.” (Bill Salisbury, “Grand Jury indicts lawmaker”, Pioneer Press, August 12, 2003)

“Rep. Rebecca Otto, DFL-Marine on St. Croix, and her husband, Shawn, have been indicted on a rare charge of issuing false political campaign material before her special election victory in February. A complaint from House Speaker Steve Sviggum, R-Kenyon, spurred a Washington County grand jury investigation that led to the gross misdemeanor charges filed Thursday against the Otto's. They allegedly published campaign literature falsely claiming that Republican candidate Matt Dean had ‘put his own children in private school.’” (Conrad deFiebre, “2nd legislator charged with false claims”, Star Tribune, August 12, 2003)

Also during the 2003 campaign Shawn made what appears to be an attempt at buying an election when he contributed $10,000 to the DFL House Caucus. On the exact same day the DFL House Caucus of his contribution, they began independent expenditures on behalf of his wife Rebecca. Read the DFL House Caucus Campaign Finance Report here..

According to the Campaign Finance Board, Shawn Otto had no prior history of contributing to the DFL House Caucus.

Shawn Otto's contribution to the DFL House Caucus coincided exactly with the start of independent expenditures on behalf of his wife's campaign raises serious ethical questions.

It is illegal in the state of Minnesota to “earmark” contribution money. No one can contribute to a committee and at the same time have any say in how the money is spent.

The beauty of all of this is that the voters saw the Otto's for what they really are, Matt Dean soundly defeated Rebecca easily in 2004.

Having spent some time digging a little deeper into Shawn and Rebecca, this question has been popping up,

“How in the hell can Rebecca Otto claim she can "serve as a watchdog for the citizens of Minnesota"

Issues such as these come up,

According to the campaign finance board, Pat Forciea contributed $250.00 on January 19, 2003 to Rebecca Otto's campaign.

Pat Forciea, a convicted felon, signed on as a "supporter" to a letter defending Otto from the "politics of intimidation."

Shawn Otto is no longer Rebecca's campaign manager, but is active as her campaign treasurer during this campaign cycle in which she is running for reelection for state auditor.

During the 2010 Minnesota State Fair, I did what I always do and stopped by the DFL headquarters where Rebecca was campaigning. The two of us have bumped into each other on occasion the past couple of years. We had a little small talk and it was interesting to note that Rebecca and I have both read Atlas Shrugged. This surprised me and I asked her why she was a Democrat after reading such a great book. I never did get a reply, but, my instincts tell me that her and Shawn decided long ago, if you are to run for office in Minnesota, it's much easier as a Democrat. As Thomas Jefferson once said, “Whenever a man has cast a longing eye on them [offices], a rottenness begins in his conduct.” It reminds me of some irate father watching his son playing little league baseball. The father is living the game through his son. Is it possible that Shawn is living politics through his wife Rebecca? Unlike a child, who has no choice in the situation, Rebecca, as an adult accepts Shawn's behavior in a mutual, corrupt grasp for power, attention, and recognition.

The Haircut

2010-10-18T07:21:00.001-05:00

One day a florist went to a barber for a haircut. After the cut, he asked about his bill, and the barber replied, "I cannot accept money from you, I'm doing community service this week." The florist was pleased and left the shop. When the barber went to open his shop the next morning, there was a 'thank you' card and a dozen roses waiting for him at his door.

Later, a cop comes in for a haircut, and when he tries to pay his bill, the barber again replied, "I cannot accept money from you, I'm doing community service this week." The cop was happy and left the shop. The next morning when the barber went to open up, there was a 'thank you' card and a dozen donuts waiting for him at his door.

Then a Congressman came in for a haircut, and when he went to pay his bill, the barber again replied, "I can not accept money from you. I'm doing community service this week." The Congressman was very happy and left the shop. The next morning, when the barber went to open up, there were a dozen Congressmen lined up waiting for a free haircut.

And that, my friends, illustrates the fundamental difference between the citizens of our country and the politicians who run it.

BOTH POLITICIANS AND DIAPERS NEED TO BE CHANGED OFTEN AND FOR THE SAME REASON!

Mark Dayton: One of the Worst Senators in America

2010-10-12T14:22:00.001-05:00

You may remember that 6 years ago on October 12^th, 2004, then Senator Mark Dayton made an erratic and unprecedented decision to shut down his U.S. Senate office over an unsubstantiated terrorist attack. Even though the other 534 members of Congress kept their offices open, Dayton, citing a ‘phantom’ threat, closed his down. During these difficult times, Minnesota needs a Governor with calm, steady and reassuring leadership qualities. These are qualities that Mark Dayton clearly lacks. Even members of Dayton’s own Democrat party criticized his bizarre and irrational decision. Minnesota needs a tough leader and liberal Mark Dayton is not it.

Click here to make your $25, $50 or $100 contribution to defeat Mark Dayton!

That’s why it’s so important we have the resources to help elect Republican endorsed conservative Tom Emmer. Tom Emmer won’t run away at the first sign of trouble. He will meet today’s challenges head on and do what’s right for the people of Minnesota! We have just begun implementing our Get Out The Vote efforts which include advocacy phone calling, sample ballot distribution, lit drops and more. But, to be successful, we need to make sure we have the funds available to implement the plans necessary for victory.

Take Action Now & Click Here To Contribute Today!

Tom Emmer will lower taxes, slow the growth of government and get government out of the way so private sector businesses can get back to the business of creating jobs. Minnesotans can’t afford Mark Dayton’s erratic behavior in the Governor’s office. Tom Emmer and all of our endorsed Republican candidates will need your support as we approach the finish line. Victory this November will help secure a brighter future for all Minnesotans! Click here to help stop the erratic tax and spend liberal Mark Dayton!

The Brain of a Socialist

2010-08-31T22:15:00.004-05:00

From thepeoplescube.com

Goodbye Liberals!

2010-08-30T07:05:00.002-05:00

'Tracking' the candidates

2010-08-24T14:16:00.002-05:00

Over the last several months, I have met trackers of our gubernatorial candidates from both the GOP and DFL and have found them to be fine young citizens ("Dayton, Republicans quarrel over 'trackers,' " Aug. 17).

Therefore, it was a surprise to hear Mark Dayton complain about the tracker from the GOP who has been tailing him. All along, throughout the campaigns of the candidates leading up to the primary, they all have been assigned a tracker from the opposing party.

Now that the primary is over, we begin to see the real contrasts between our candidates. Mark Dayton and the other DFLcandidates were doing their all to attack Tom Emmer leading up to the primary. It was good to see Tom stand tall, refusing to stoop to that level. Now that Dayton stands alone, he wants the attack ads to stop. He can dish it out but he can't take it. Also, while Dayton complains about a young GOP tracker, Tom Emmer recognizes and welcomes his DFL tracker at every GOP event I've attended.

Running for governor is not for the weak of heart. Dayton wanted to run with the big dogs but is proving to be thin-skinned. It's obvious Tom Emmer is the leader of the pack.

Jim Metzen Got Off So Easy!!!

2010-08-16T21:45:00.002-05:00

Anyone whoever got a DWI knows the penalties for their actions behind the wheel. Jim got a lousy 20 hours of community service. What a slap on the wrist!

Read it here,

http://pa.courts.state.mn.us/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=760812284

Read carefully and you will see that he was using more than one lane. He was weaving down the road.

Here's more. Jim got a speeding ticket a year ago on 07/23/09. 84 in a 70 with no proof of insurance.

http://pa.courts.state.mn.us/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=1612920472

Two years after he said how much he has learned his lesson.

Obama the Giant!

2010-08-10T10:19:00.002-05:00

From The People's Cube...

Protest a Betty McCollum fund raiser tonight!!

2010-08-08T10:14:00.004-05:00

Make a sign and peaceably assemble outside 466 Mississippi Blvd this evening and let Betty and her fellow socialists know how you feel. Signs that say things like "One Nation UNDER GOD, Betty!" or "Why are you afraid to debate?" Use your imagination. There is much to say when it comes to Betty the invisible commy!

How Eisenhower solved illegal border crossings from Mexico

2010-08-02T07:33:00.000-05:00

George W. Bush isn't the first Republican president to face a full-blown immigration crisis on the US-Mexican border.

Fifty-three years ago, when newly elected Dwight Eisenhower moved into the White House, America's southern frontier was as porous as a spaghetti sieve. As many as 3 million illegal migrants had walked and waded northward over a period of several years for jobs in California, Arizona, Texas, and points beyond.

President Eisenhower cut off this illegal traffic. He did it quickly and decisively with only 1,075 United States Border Patrol agents – less than one-tenth of today's force. The operation is still highly praised among veterans of the Border Patrol.

Although there is little to no record of this operation in Ike's official papers, one piece of historic evidence indicates how he felt. In 1951, Ike wrote a letter to Sen. William Fulbright (D) of Arkansas. The senator had just proposed that a special commission be created by Congress to examine unethical conduct by government officials who accepted gifts and favors in exchange for special treatment of private individuals.

General Eisenhower, who was gearing up for his run for the presidency, said "Amen" to Senator Fulbright's proposal. He then quoted a report in The New York Times, highlighting one paragraph that said: "The rise in illegal border-crossing by Mexican 'wetbacks' to a current rate of more than 1,000,000 cases a year has been accompanied by a curious relaxation in ethical standards extending all the way from the farmer-exploiters of this contraband labor to the highest levels of the Federal Government."

Read the rest of the story here...

Betty McCollum, are you out there? If so, you should watch this video.

2010-07-31T22:20:00.000-05:00

Who is Betty McCollum?

2010-07-31T15:31:00.003-05:00

Here is a great website! www.trueknowledge.com/q/who_is_betty_mccollum
It allows you to enter answers to questions such as "Who is Betty McCollum?"
I urge all good patriots to go to www.trueknowledge.com/q/who_is_betty_mccollum and enter your very own description of Betty!

Below is my short description of Betty. Short and not too nasty. But I do believe it is truthful. Let's see how long it stays up!

She is the five term U.S. representative from Minnesota's 4th Congressional District. Politically Betty runs as a Democrat but her votes and philosophy are communist/socialist in nature. She has authored only forty bills while in office ten years and only one has ever made it out of committee and passed. That bill authorized a name change for a post office. She is on the budget committee which failed to pass a budget in 2010 while government spending and our national deficit has sky rocketed. Communication with her constituents is totally lacking. Contact her office via phone, letter or email and you will receive a form letter which has no relevance to the issue of your concern. During campaigns, Betty hides out and does not do any visible campaigning, leaving that to volunteers. It is a rare occasion when she agrees to a debate with an opponent from the GOP as well as any DFL challenger.

Teresa Collett and Betty McCollum agree to a debate!!

2010-07-30T09:17:00.003-05:00

Teresa Collett and Betty McCollum (pictured on the left) shook hands and had a friendly chat at the Rice Street Parade and agreed to a debate. Teresa Collett and Betty are running against each other in Minnesota's 4th Congressional District. Betty, the incumbent, has been virtually invisible on the campaign trail. Over the last ten years she has rarely if ever consented to a debate so voters have no clue as to her stand on issues beyond her completely socialist voting record.

The Video Betty McCollum Doesn't Want You to See!!!

2010-07-28T11:27:00.005-05:00

This is totally stolen from

MN CD4 Needs Change

House Session - C-SPAN Video Library

Betty leads in the Pledge of Allegiance only to stop, and not say "under God." She begins at 1:50 into the video.

Thanks to another pissed off MN CD 4 voter for finding this and sharing with me. THIS IS THE VIDEO BETTY DOESN'T WANT YOU TO SEE!!! Here it is obvious she intentionally OMITS "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance. At the time, her staffers claimed she took a breath...uhm, yeah that's it. Betty, here is what I think...due to the nature of the Bill before you, that somewhere in your liberal head you did this intentionally to make a point!!! We don't believe you!!!

What is really pathetic about this, is Betty was leading the House in the Pledge of Allegiance!!! This is on CSPAN!!! It's not like she was at her little desk in the back, or holding Nancy Pelosi's notepad, but she was leading the HOUSE in the Pleadge of Allegiance!!! Free speech is one thing, disrespect to your position, the Flag and the American people is another. Pathetic Betty, absolutely pathetic...Remember in November!!!

Did Betty intentionally omit "under God"? You decide...

More to come, stay tuned.

Susan B. Anthony List Candidate Fund Endorses Pro-Life Advocate Teresa Collett for MN-04

2010-07-23T12:09:00.001-05:00

WASHINGTON, July 21 /Christian Newswire/ -- Today the Susan B. Anthony List Candidate Fund, a national pro-life political action committee, announced its endorsement of Teresa Collett, candidate for U.S. House of Representatives in MN-04.

"Minnesota families deserve the pro-life feminine leadership Teresa Collett has already demonstrated in multiple pro-life advocacy roles," said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of SBA List Candidate Fund. "Collett's commitment to rescinding taxpayer funding of abortion in health care is urgently needed in the next Congress."

Collett's record of pro-life advocacy spans for more than a decade in which she has briefed a committee of the U.S. Senate about the consequences of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, the U.S. House of Representatives and various state legislatures about the constitutional right of parents to know of their daughter's decision before an abortion and the U.S. Supreme Court regarding partial birth abortion and parental notification.

Read more here...

Setting the Record Straight: Rebecca Otto`s Lavish Spending as State Auditor

2010-07-23T06:52:00.000-05:00

Claim #1: Otto Required To Attend Conferences Out Of State. “Otto said her travels to pension related meetings are required travel. ‘I am required by statute to go these conferences,’ she said. ‘Nothing has gone wrong. I’ve done a good job.’” (T.W. Budig, “Republicans accuse Auditor Rebecca Otto of lavish expenses,” ECM Publishers, July 19, 2010)

The Truth: Minnesota Statute 356A regarding Public Pension Fiduciary Responsibility does not make any reference to the fact that the state auditor must attend such conferences.

Claim #2: Otto Is Required To Stay At Lavish Hotels. Otto: “The conferences are pre-arranged and you sign up to go and it’s a package so…” [Reporter] “Do you have the option of, uh, looking at their rates and saying that seems a little high and maybe I’ll stay at the holiday inn. Does anybody do that?” Otto: “You could ask PERA, I guess. I don’t know.” (“Auditor Spending Reports,” KSTP-News, July 19, 2010)

The Truth: No state statute requires the state auditor to stay at any hotel or motel. In addition, the hotels Otto which stayed at were reimbursed separately from the conference registrations. There is no question she could have gone down the street to a cheaper hotel and saved the taxpayers money. In fact , this was a point KSTP reporter Tom Hauser specifically made at the end of his report: “I did a quick internet search and found many hotel rooms in the area of the Sheraton Chicago between one and two hundred dollars, including in the Sheraton Chicago for $199 that, of course, as you heard, Otto paid $368 for.” (“Auditor Spending Reports,” KSTP-News, July 19, 2010)

Claim #3: Otto Reimbursed Only $31, Regardless Of Cost Of Meal. “As for the $44 lobster and cream pie, Otto said that was the total cost of the meal — not the portion she was reimbursed. Depending on whether a state employee skips breakfast and lunch, the reimbursement amount could be $31, she explained.” (T.W. Budig, “Republicans accuse Auditor Rebecca Otto of lavish expenses,” ECM Publishers, July 19, 2010)

The Truth: According to Otto’s Employee Expense Report, she declares “under penalty of perjury, that this claim is just.” Otto claimed $44.52 for the lobster dinner and $45.96 for other expenses during that trip for a total of $90.48. Otto signed the expense report on 12/1/2008 and then submitted it. According to the form provided to The Republican Party of Minnesota, this $90.48 was paid on 12/5/2008, without any corrections. She was obviously paid more than the $31 dollars she claims. (Primary Source Documents, page 79)

Claim #4: Otto Says Some Travel Never Occurred. “If you look at the GOP press release, you’ll see that Sutton lists $1,472.52 of staff travel that never even occurred.” (Rebecca Otto Press Release, “Pat Anderson, GOP chair Sutton ‘have trouble with numbers’” July 19, 2010)

The Truth: According to the Employee Expense Report signed by Celeste Grant, Otto’s Deputy State Auditor/General Counsel, on June 28, 2007, reimbursement claims were made for $1,472.52. The form is marked paid on June 29, 2007, without any corrections. Rebecca Otto cannot claim that this travel never occurred when the claim is clearly marked paid. (Primary Source Documents, page 7)

The Greatest Play In Baseball

2010-07-04T22:50:00.000-05:00

Is the NRA turning against us?

2010-07-03T20:09:00.003-05:00

A recent article from Redstate.com. This disgusts the hell out of me. The organization that touts the Bill of Rights as something that can never be compromised is compromising with a socialist enemy!

NRA Now Leans Toward Endorsing Harry Reid

Posted by Erick Erickson (Profile)

Thursday, July 1st at 8:00AM EDT

131 Comments

Multiple sources tell me the National Rifle Association is planning to endorse liberal Harry Reid against pro-gun champion Sharron Angle.

Two weeks ago, I told you about the carveout the NRA received in exchange for their support for the DISCLOSE ACT deal.

Then this week, RedState broke the story of the “gag order” the NRA issued to members of its Board on the Kagan nomination.

Now, I’m getting credible reports that the NRA is leaning toward endorsing Harry Reid, even though the NRA is finally saying it will score a vote on Kagan — something that was not a sure thing.

Why would they do this? Why would they go out of their way to protect a Senator who has demonstrated a repeated hostility to the Second Amendment in his votes and his leadership?

Well, I thought perhaps the NRA carveout in the DISCLOSE Act might be the answer. But, there is more. It turns out, Reid secured a $61 million earmark for a gun range in Clark County, Nevada.

NRA members were recently treated to a three-page spread in the American Rifleman about a visit to Nevada by Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox to “thank” Reid for the earmark. The article even includes a cliché picture of Reid cutting a ribbon with a gigantic pair of scissors. (Every good porker has his own giant pair of gold earmark scissors.) More here.

Here is a video of the event from Reid’s youtube site.

At 3:25, you can hear LaPierre touting Reid’s record on guns saying, “I also want to thank you, Senator, for your support every day for the Second Amendment and for the rights of American gun owners. “

The American Rifleman article also commends Reid’s Second Amendment record noting, “His dedication to this project is just one of the ways Sen. Reid has demonstrated his support for gun owners and the Second Amendment.”

Well, that’s all very nice. What politician representing a pro-gun red state wouldn’t want Wayne LaPierre to come out for a personal photo op at their earmark ribbon cutting.

But, here is the problem. Reid has not supported the Second Amendment “every day.” Or ever.

Reid has a lifetime rating of “F” from Gun Owners of America (who Ron Paul once called “the only no-compromise gun lobby in Washington”). GOA is actively supporting the 100% pro-gun Republican nominee, Sharron Angle, in her campaign to unseat Harry Reid.

But if you don’t believe GOA, see for yourself below the fold. Then call (800) 392-VOTE (8683) before it is too late and make the NRA knows they’d be betraying second amendment voters by endorsing Harry Reid.

Below are just a few of the votes that demonstrate Reid’s longstanding hostility to guns and the Second Amendment. Not included in this list is the long list of consistent and active support for anti-gun nominees to the Federal Judiciary and to high level cabinet posts. The reason I did not include anti-gun nominees is because he supported every last one of them.

June 28, 1991. Vote No. 115. Voted for a 5 day waiting period for handgun purchases.

October 21, 1993. Vote 325. Voted to eliminate the Army Civilian Marksmanship Program. Only the most fringe anti-gun Senators voted for the amendment.

November 19, 1993. Vote 385. Allow states to impose waiting periods over and above the 5 days waiting period required under the Brady Bill.

November 19, 1993. Vote 386. Voted to eliminate he 5-year sunset in the Brady Bill.

November 19, 1993. Vote 387. Voted to close off debate on the Brady Bill.

November 19, 1993. Vote 390. Voted to close off debate on the Brady Bill.

November 20, 1993. Vote 394. Voted for the Brady Bill, which imposed a 5-business-day waiting period before purchasing a handgun.

August 25, 1994. Vote 294. Voted to close off debate on the Clinton Crime Bill, which contained the ban on so-called “assault weapons.”

August 25, 1994. Vote 295. Voted for the Clinton Crime Bill, which contained the ban on so-called “assault weapons.”

April 17, 1996. Vote 64. Voted to expand the statute of limitations for paperwork violations in National Firearms Act from 3 years to 5 years.

June 27, 1996. Vote 178. Voting to destroy 176,000 M-1 Garand rifles from World War II, and 150 million rounds of 30 caliber ammunition, rather than giving them to the Federal Civilian Marksmanship program.

September 12, 1996. Vote 287. Voted to spend $21.5 million for a study on putting “taggants” in black and smokeless gunpowder.

September 12, 1996. Vote 290. Voted to make it a Federal crime to possess a gun within 1,000 yards of a school.

May 12, 1999. Vote 111. Voted to give the Treasury Department expansive new authority to regulate and keep records on gun shows and their participants, and criminalize many intrastate firearms transactions.

May 13, 1999. Vote 116. Voted to ban the importation of ammunition clips that can hold more than 10 rounds.

May 14, 1999. Vote 119. Voted to criminalize internet advertisements to sell legal firearms in a legal manner.

May 18, 1999. Vote 122. Voted to for Mandatory triggerlocks.

May 20, 1999. Vote 133. Voted to create new Federal regulation of pawn shops handling of guns.

May 20, 1999. Vote 134. Voted to give the Treasury Department expansive new authority to regulate and keep records on gun shows and their participants, and criminalize many intrastate firearms transactions. The vote was 50-50, with Vice President Gore casting the tie-breaking vote.

May 20, 1999. Vote 140. Voted for the Clinton Juvenile Justice bill, which contained a package of gun control measures.

July 29, 1999. Vote 224. Voted to close debate on the Clinton Juvenile Justice bill, which contained a package of gun control measures.

February 2, 2000. Vote 4. Voted to make firearms manufacturers and distributors’ debts nondischargeable in bankruptcy if they were sued because they unknowingly sold guns to individuals who used the gun in a crime. 68 Senators voted against Reid’s position, including 17 Democrats including Bryan of Nevada.

March 2, 2000. Vote 27. Voted to say that school violence was due to the fact that Congress “failed to pass reasonable, common-sense gun control measures” and call for new gun ownership restrictions on the anniversary of the Columbine shootings.

March 2, 2000. Vote 28. Voted to say that school violence was due to the fact that Congress “failed to pass reasonable, common-sense gun control measures” and call for new gun ownership restrictions on the anniversary of the Columbine shootings (reconsideration of vote 27).

March 2, 2000. Vote 32. Voted to use Federal taxpayer funds to hand out anti-gun literature in schools and to run anti-gun public service announcements.

April 6, 2000. Vote 64. Voted for a gun control package including new onerous restrictions on gun shows.

April 7, 2000. Vote 74. Voted against an amendment to provide for the enforcement of existing gun laws in lieu of new burdensome gun control mandates.

May 16, 2000. Vote 100. Voted to commend the participants of the so-called “Million Mom March” for their demand for more Federal restrictions on firearms ownership, and to urge the passage of strict gun control measures.

May 17, 2000. Vote 102. Vote to overturn the ruling of the chair that the Daschle amendment (commending the participants of the so-called “Million Mom March” for their demand for more Federal restrictions on firearms ownership, and to urge the passage of strict gun control measures) was out of order.

May 17, 2000. Vote 103. Voted against an amendment stating “the right of each law-abiding United States citizen to own a firearm for any legitimate purpose, including self-defense or recreation, should not be infringed.”

May 17, 2000. Vote 104. Voted for an amendment commending the participants of the so-called “Million Mom March” for their demand for more Federal restrictions on firearms ownership, and to urge the passage of strict gun control measures.

February 26, 2004. Vote 17. Voted for mandatory triggerlocks.

March 2, 2004. Vote 25. Voted for Federal regulation of gun shows.

July 28, 2005. Vote 207. Voted for mandatory triggerlocks.

March 5, 2009. Vote 83. Voted against a ban on the United Nations imposing taxes on American citizens after France and other world leaders proposed a global tax on firearms.

TALK IS CHEAP

2010-07-01T20:56:00.000-05:00

Obama Tries Again To Pitch Failed Stimulus Today, But His Policies Have Never Managed To Meet His Promises

______________________________________________________________________

View This Research Briefing At GOP.com

Follow RNC Research on Twitter

Learn More in our "Stomping Grounds" Blog

"President Barack Obama Will Hold A Town Hall Meeting On The Economy In Racine On Wednesday." (President Obama To Visit Racine Wednesday," The Associated Press, 6/26/10)

OBAMA HAS FAILED TO DELIVER RESULTS ON THE ECONOMY

CLAIM: Obama Said In February That Stimulus Would "Jolt Our Economy Back To Life." "Obama defended the role of government in the recovery process, saying that 'with the private sector so weakened by this recession, the federal government is the only entity left with the resources to jolt our economy back to life.'" (Anne E. Komblut and Michael Fletcher, "Obama Says Economic Crisis Comes First," The Washington Post, 2/10/09)

REALITY: Since The Stimulus Was Passed, The U.S. Has Lost 2.2 Million Jobs. (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, www.bls.gov, Accessed 6/15/10)

CLAIM: White House Predicted Unemployment Would Not Rise Above 8 Percent With Stimulus. (Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein, "The Job Impact Of The American Recovery And Reinvestment Plan," 1/9/09)

REALITY: Currently, The Unemployment Rate Is 9.7 Percent. (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, www.bls.gov, Accessed 6/15/10)

CLAIM: Obama: "More Than 90 Percent Of The Jobs Created By This Plan Will Be In The Private Sector." ("Transcript: Obama's Prime Time News Conference," The New York Times, 2/9/09)

REALITY: Since The Stimulus Was Passed Public Sector Employers Have Added 399,000 Jobs While The Private Sector Has Shed 2,652,000 Jobs. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, "The Employment Situation - May 2010," BLS.gov, 6/4/10)

CLAIM: Obama Promised His Housing Plan Would Prevent 7 to 9 Million Families From Foreclosure. "And we will pursue the housing plan I'm outlining today. And through this plan, we will help between 7 and 9 million families restructure or refinance their mortgages so they can afford--avoid foreclosure." (President Barack Obama, Remarks On The Home Mortgage Industry In Mesa, Arizona, 2/18/09)

REALITY: The President's Foreclosure Prevention Program Has Only Helped 340,000 Homeowners, More Have Been Dropped From Program Then Helped. "Since the program's launch last year, about 340,000 homeowners have received a permanent loan modification that lowers their mortgage payment for five years. . . The number of borrowers dropped from the program, about 436,000, eclipses those who have been helped, according to Treasury Department data. More than 100,000 borrowers lost their mortgage aid in May." (Renae Merle, "U.S. Reports Few Enrollees, More Dropouts In Federal Mortgage R elief Program," The Washington Post, 6/22/10)

Between 65% And 75% Of All Mortgages Modified Under HAMP Will Default Within Next Year. "Most borrowers who have had their mortgages modified through a government-sponsored program will redefault within 12 months, according to a report released Wednesday. Between 65% and 75% of loans that are modified through the Home Affordable Modification Program but not backed by the federal government are likely to go bad, according to the report released by Fitch Ratings, a N.Y.-based credit-rating agency." (Les Christie, "75% Of Modified Home Loans Will Redefault," CNN Money, 6/16/10)

CLAIM: Obama: "Businesses Are Going To Get Help With Their Health Care Costs -- In Fact, Small Businesses Are Already Learning They're Eligible For Tax Credits To Cover Their Workers This Year." (President Barack Obama, Remarks By The President At A Tele-Town Hall With Seniors, Wheaton, MD, 6/8/10)

REALITY: ObamaCare's Small Business Tax Credit's Much-Touted "Broad Eligibility" Falls Short As It "Drops Off Sharply Once A Company Gets Above 10 Workers And $25,000 Average Annual Wages." "When the administration unveiled the small business tax credit earlier this week, officials touted its 'broad eligibili ty' for companies with fewer than 25 workers and average annual wages under $50,000 that provide health coverage. ... Lost in the fine print: The credit drops off sharply once a company gets above 10 workers and $25,000 average annual wages." (Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, "FACT CHECK: Tax Cut Math Doesn't Add Up For Some," The Associated Press, 5/20/10)

Springfield, IL: Small Business Owner Says He'd Have To Cut Jobs, Slash Wages To Benefit From The Credit. "To get the most out of the new federal credit, Hoffman said he'd have to cut his work force to 10 employees and slash their wages. 'That seems like a strange outcome, given we've got 10 percent unemployment,' he said." (Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, "FACT CHECK: Tax Cut Math Doesn't Add Up For Some," The Associated Press, 5/20/10)

CLAIM: Candidate Obama Promised No Tax Increases Of Any Kind On The Middle Class. "I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes." (Senator Barack Obama, Remarks In Dover, NH, 8/12/08)

REALITY: Hoyer Is Laying The Groundwork To Further Break Obama's Pledge Not To Increase Taxes On The Middle Class. "Tax cuts that benefit the middle class should not be 'totally sacrosanct' as policymakers try to plug the nation's yawning budget gap, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said Monday, acknowledging that it would be difficult to reduce long-term deficits without breaking President Obama's pledge to protect families earning less than $250,000 a year." (Lori Montgomery, "Rep. Steny Hoyer Says Middle-Class Tax Breaks May Not Be Affordabl e Long-Term," The Washington Post, 6/22/10)

The Administration Now Argues That The Individual Mandate Is A Tax. "The federal government formally responded to the most serious legal challenge to the health-care overhaul, invoking its powers under the Constitution to regulate interstate commerce and impose taxes. ... The department's filing noted that virtually everyone needs medical care at some point. Existing laws guarantee a right to emergency care, and the new law requires insurance companies to allow people to buy insurance after they get sick. Congress was entitled to pass a law punishing people who go without coverage because their decision could impose future costs on the nationwide health system, the filing said. The law 'imposes a tax on the choice of a method to finance the future costs of one's health care,' it said." (Janet Adamy and Evan Perez, "U.S. Fights Challenge To Health Law," The Wall Street Journal, 6/18/10)

Which Will Hit Middle Class Americans, Breaking Obama's Promise Not To Raise Their Taxes. "Nearly 4 million Americans -- the vast majority of them middle class -- will have to pay a penalty if they don't get insurance when President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law kicks in, according to congressional estimates released Thursday. The penalties will average a little more than $1,000 apiece in 2016, the Congressional Budget Office said in a report. Most of the people paying the fine will be middle class ... In his 2008 campaign for the White House, Obama pledged not to raise taxes on individuals making less than $200,000 a year and couples making less than $250,000." (Stephen Ohlemacher, "Nearly 4m People Could Pay Without Health Coverage," The Associated Press, 4/22/10)

And After SCHIP, Obama Broke Pledge Not To Tax Middle Class Families By Increasing Cigarette Taxes. "One of President Barack Obama's campaign pledges on taxes went up in puffs of smoke Wednesday. The largest increase in tobacco taxes took effect despite Obama's promise not to raise taxes of any kind on families earning under $250,000 or individuals under $200,000. This is one tax that disproportionately affects the poor, who are more likely to smoke than the rich." (Calvin Woodward, "Promises, Promises: Obama Tax Pledge Up In Smoke," The Associated Press, 4/1/09)

Come out and Play Betty McCollum!

2010-06-26T13:29:00.004-05:00

According to local sources, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was to drop into town to tour the area and visit the old Union Depot.

Pelosi, McCollum, Oberstar and Ellison did not "tour the area" but stayed locked inside the depot protected by police, highway patrol and security guards well away from those of us "hard core" activists who arrived to voice our opposition to their socialistic national policies.

I tried to attend and was told, "Invitation only" and was turned away at the door. It was clearly an election year photo op and press opportunity for Pelosi's favorite Minnesota liberals. It was absolutely not a public event.

Pelosi was sped away with a state highway patrol escort out of the tunnel underneath the depot.

As usual, and in predictable Betty McCollum fashion, she was not available to the public, or to address the concerns of us gathered outside. She refuses to debate Teresa Collett or any past opponent running against her and survives as a candidate by wearing the "D" after her name.

What is Betty afraid of? As the 4th Congressional District candidate, Teresa Collett once said, "Come out and play Betty." This is what the people want, to see and hear the candidates so they can have the ability to judge and decide for themselves.

Betty is afraid to debate. Why? Because she is not very good at it. Take 2008. Ed Matthews put her to shame at a League of Women Voters forum. This should have gone well for Betty but it didn't. However "non-partisan" they try to be, they generally come up short in their attempt. So does Betty as a debater.

So it's obvious why Betty does not debate. But in the end it's we the people, the voters, who come up getting short changed with her lack of participation in public debate.

Dennis Prager Q & A At University of Denver

2010-06-12T14:17:00.001-05:00

This is a must see. Dennis Prager describes what has gone wrong in America and how important this fall's election is.

To see what Dennis means when he says The American Trinity", go to http://www.prageru.com/ and click on "The American Trinity" for a 5 minute video explanation by Dennis.

Entenza's running mate, Robyne Robinson, gives advice on receiving "oral pleasure"

2010-05-29T15:15:00.002-05:00

It was recently discovered that Robyn Robinson once filled in as a sex advice columnist for the U of M student newspaper. Because of this, I'm sure there will be a big stink in Minnesota's political world. It has been discussed on KTLK with Ron Rosenbaum with the question being asked, How will voters react to this? Personally, I won't vote for her or her running mate simply because I am a wingnut, a ding bat, a right wing radical. I am a conservative. No need to mention that I am a staunch supporter of Tom Emmer and Annette Meeks.
My opinion leads me to believe there are plenty of good Christian voters of all political varieties throughout the state that, because of their Christian values, will have nothing to do with Entenza/Robinson because of this. Makes you wonder if the Entenza camp bothered at all to Google her and do a little background research.
Recently Robinson told MPR she wants her issues to be "Education, teen pregnancy, [and] schools." She obviously has experience with sex education and is sharing her knowledge. I wonder what grade level she has in mind for her future endeavors into education.

Here is Robyn's advice to a young female student,
I would be the first to admit that I am not too experienced when it comes to men. That being said, I did have a fling this winter with a guy who was a few years older than me and more experienced. We had fun together and fooled around a little bit. At one point, he decided to take his tongue downstairs, yet I felt nothing. And I mean NOTHING. Not when using his hands or his mouth. I'm assuming he knew what he was doing, and I can't help but feel it might have had something to do with the fact that I was slightly intoxicated. Is there such a thing as "whiskey dick" for women? Should I be worried that I couldn't be pleasured in that way? I'm a little worried for my sake, so any advice you could give would be greatly appreciated.

--Numb and Hating It

Numb,

You met a guy who actually likes "giving oral pleasure" without being asked, and you let him get away?! There are many of your fellow co-eds shaking their heads in disbelief right now. Now, you do admit to a few things: inexperience and inebriation. Both could play significant roles in this failed fling, and I'm not talking about just you. Every woman's body is different. It could be as simple as dude was pushing the wrong buttons and poorly. Don't worry. Sometimes it takes a few sessions for women to experience what makes the bells and whistles go off. And when they do ... honey, you'll know. And probably everyone else in the dorm will, too.

The Uneducated March for Betty McCollum

2010-05-17T09:52:00.006-05:00

Betty had a small group of people in the parade but she was a no-show. I approached these liberal supporters and asked them all several times, "Can you recite any amendment to the U.S. Constitution?" The old gray beard holding Betty's banner finally responded to the question saying, "The sixth amendment says that none of the others apply." What a genius! He must have learned about the Constitution working with Betty. Based on how she conducts herself in office, it is evident that she and her supporters don't have a clue. Liberals like Betty should have to take a class on the Constitution before they are sworn in to office. Maybe even a refresher course annually. Imagine a teacher saying, "Betty, you get an F for your voting record. You have to take the class over this summer."

Thank God we have a great candidate running against her in the 4th District. Teresa Collett is a constitutional attorney who we can count on to respect the Constitution in every way. Why do I say this? Because Professor Collett actually knows the Constitution. Unlike Betty who just gives it lip service. Betty's claim to survival on Capitol Hill is to play puppet to Nancy Pelosi and vote the party line as she is told.

Bye Bye Betty!

DFL Attack on Missed Votes Backfires

2010-05-13T19:06:00.000-05:00

Since Endorsement, Kelliher Has Missed 51 Votes; Obama Missed 300 Votes During Pres. Campaign

Today Minnesota Democrats launched their most hypocritical partisan attack yet of 2010. The DFL Party, Rep. Tony Sertich, and Rep. Ryan Winkler launched a coordinated attack against Rep. Tom Emmer over missed votes.

But a quick review of Margaret Anderson Kelliher and Barack Obama’s missed votes reveals the hypocritical nature of the attack. Given that Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher sets the House schedule, you would think she wouldn’t miss any votes.

Where’s The DFL Outrage?

Barack Obama Missed 300 Votes Running For President: View The Missed Votes Here, Here, Here, Here.
Margaret Anderson Kelliher Has Missed 51 Votes Since She Was Endorsed By The DFL Party: A Complete List Is Below.

4/26/2010

House Journal Page Action

10409 Repassage

10410 Passage

10411 Passage

10413 Passage

10414 Amendment

10415 Passage

10422 Amendment

10430 Passage

5/5/2010

11393 Repassage

11394 Repassage

11396 Repassage

11400 Repassage

11408 Repassage

11440 Amendment

11444 Amendment

11445 Amendment

11446 Amendment

11453 Passage

11455 Amendment

11456 Amendment

11457 Amendment

11458 Passage

11521 Amendment

11523 Amendment

11524 Passage

11525 Passage

11526 Passage

11528 Passage

11529 Passage

11531 Passage

11532 Passage

11534 Passage

11535 Passage

11537 Passage

11538 Passage

11539 Amendment

11540 Amendment

11541 Passage

11542 Passage

11543 Passage

5/6/2010

11550 Remove From Table

11567 Lay on Table

11568 Repassage

11570 Lay on Table

11571 Repassage

11573 Adjourn

11574 Repassage

11579 Passage

5/7/2010

11987 Amendment

Total Lack of Class by Margaret Anderson-Kelliher and Democrats at the Cinco De Mayo Parade

2010-05-09T10:30:00.004-05:00

Walked in the Cinco de Mayo Parade on Saturday, May 8th with a great group of my fellow Republicans. While we had a great time and the people who came to attend were wonderful, there was a number of people who came to disrupt, annoy, and harass us. They did nothing productive during their lame attempt at protest and caused nothing but turmoil and disgust amongst us and those citizens who, with their children, only wanted to see a parade and enjoy the festivities.

The focus of their little protest was against Republican candidate for Governor, Tom Emmer and the recently passed Arizona immigration law. I estimate that about eight of them were on either side of us, screaming derogatory comments such as "racist" and "bigot" at us. One person actually started to walk among us, in with our group holding a sign saying "No racist Arizona laws in Minnesota." Rather than allowing us to peacefully participate in the parade and promote and support our candidates, this small group of liberal fascists chose to infringe upon our right to free speech and freedom of expression. So typical of leftist extremists, free speech for them and no one else, let alone any real evidence of any knowledge of immigration laws.

I had to approach a lady named Roxanne who was driving a golf cart and working for the event. After explaining that these people were disruptive and threatening to us, she called the police. After four officers on bikes showed up I was told there was nothing they could do about it. "Wait a minute," I said, "We paid to be in this parade, they did not." So then the police ordered them to vacate the parade route and get on the sidewalk. They were nice enough to escort us the during the remainder of the parade. For that I am thankful to the St Paul Police and the parade organizers that helped out.

Another event that was totally outrageous occurred when we passed the dfl booth. About fifteen people stood in front of the booth in the street and chanted loudly in our faces, "KKK go away." Among the crowd was none other than Margaret Anderson-Kelliher, the endorsed democratic candidate for governor. The fascist, tax and spend feminazi was the ring leader amongst her merry band of liberals. So, rather than everyone sharing in our right to free speech and expression, these leftists, led by MAK, chose to disrupt and disturb us and those around us. The wonderful people of the community who only wanted to enjoy their celebration stood in witness to MAK and the democrats leftist hatred, exposing to us all their true fascist tendencies.

The day ended on a positive note. Most of us headed to the Capitol for the Tax Cut Rally, where of course, we were among thousands of freindly, patriotic, freedom loving people.

See you at the polls in November Marge! LOL

Charlie Chaplin Speaks

2010-05-06T11:29:00.001-05:00

Republican Party of Minnesota to Kelliher: What Now, Margaret?

2010-05-05T12:17:00.000-05:00

St. Paul- Republican Party of Minnesota Chairman Tony Sutton today issued the following statement regarding the Minnesota Supreme Court’s unallotment ruling.

“The Republican Party of Minnesota unequivocally opposes today’s 4-3 ruling by the Minnesota Supreme Court and believes it represents the worst in judicial activism. Now the onus for balancing the budget lies squarely with Margaret Anderson Kelliher and the big spending Democrat-controlled legislature. Kelliher and the DFL failed to produce a balanced budget last year and now that failure is coming back to haunt the taxpayers of Minnesota. Raising taxes on families and businesses is the last thing Minnesotans need right now. Since Kelliher failed to balance the budget in the first place, it’s time for her to explain in detail how she plans to pay for $2.7 billion in new spending when the state is broke.”

Betty McCollum's majority of campaign contributions are from special interest PAC's

2010-05-02T09:07:00.005-05:00

52% of campaign contributions to Betty McCollum consist of money from PAC's! This is a common trend for the democrats within Minnesota.

Read more here...

PAC Money Comprises Only 5 Percent of Bachmann's Q1 2010 Fundraising

Marty Seifert Sinks to New Low with Desperate April Surprise

2010-04-21T17:48:00.001-05:00

Breaks his own code of ethics with personal smear

Wednesday, April 21, 2010 · Saint Paul

Saint Paul — Eight days before the start of the Minnesota Republican State Convention, after falling behind in the straw poll vote, Marty Seifert sunk to a new low in dirty campaigning today by attacking Tom Emmer for his two DWIs from 20 and 30 years ago. Seifert used the story of a woman whose husband and son were injured by a drunk driver to help deliver his cynical personal attack.

“We’re all used to October surprises by the Democrats, but we never thought Marty would sink so low to launch this April surprise against a fellow Republican at the last minute before the convention,” said Rep. Mark Buesgens, Chairman of the Emmer for Governor Campaign. “The fact is that Tom has been upfront with delegates about this issue. They were the subject of a newspaper article last year and Tom has been very forthcoming about his actions to anyone who asked.”

The Emmer for Governor campaign added information rebutting these claims to its EmmerTruth.com website.

The Seifert campaign has been consistently attacking Emmer for his voting record and public statements, but this personal attack coming directly after more straw poll losses indicates a significant change in strategy. Political science professor Steven Schier already called out Seifert’s negative campaign in a recent article in MinnPost:

In Schier’s eyes and those of other political observers, Seifert has seemed to be more of the attacker, which fits with the general belief that, for the moment, Emmer has momentum on his side. “If you’re seen as being negative in a two-person race in your own party, it’s a sign of weakness," Schier said. "You’re doing it because you have to.”

“Marty Seifert will do anything to win this nomination and he’s clearly more concerned about his own political future than he is about the well being of the Republican Party and our ticket,” added Buesgens. “We are confident delegates will see this desperate attack for what it is and join the Emmer campaign as we take the high road to victory.”

“Perhaps Marty should read his own published code of ethics: ‘Any member of the Seifert for Governor team that engages in negative campaign tactics of a personal nature … will be fired.’”

Lobbyists do not belong at the head of the table

2010-04-21T15:35:00.000-05:00

ST. PAUL The head of a committee table in the Minnesota Legislature is no place for a registered lobbyist, according to State Representative Mark Buesgens, R-Jordan. Buesgens, who formerly chaired the House Education Policy and Reform Committee, criticized Democrat legislators for allowing Education Minnesota President and registered lobbyist Tom Dooher to sit at the table with legislators during Tuesdays hearing on Minnesotas Race to the Top application.

Special interests have absolutely no place at the committee table, no matter who they represent, Buesgens said. This one in particular has consistently stood in the way of education reform and spent millions upon millions of dollars over the years to elect reform-averse legislators. Putting him at the head of the table for all to see sent a clear message, like having Vito Corleone watching over his foot soldiers.

According to Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board records, Dooher is registered lobbyist number 2005, having first registered on June 18, 2007. Board documents also show that the EdMinn PAC gave $155,700 to the Minnesota DFL House Caucus in 2008, the most recent election year.

Special interests do not run the Legislature, or at least thats what we are told. But apparently if you are willing to fork over enough cash, Democrats can find room for you at the head of the table. Its a disgrace, Buesgens said.

EdMinn PAC and Education Minnesota are technically separate entities, but the PACs 2008 year-end report shows $691,320 in income from Education Minnesota coming in monthly installments of $57,610. The report also shows the union giving the PAC miscellaneous income totaling $93,946 that was used to record staff time.

They are one and the same in every way that matters, and today they got to lord over the Legislature, Buesgens said.

The Only Bipartisan Thing About Obama's Health Care Experiment Is The Opposition To It

2010-03-23T13:47:00.001-05:00

34 Democrats Joined Republicans In Opposition To Obama's Government-Run Health Care Experiment. (H.R. 3590, Roll Call Vote #165, Approved 219-212; D 219-34; R 0-178, 3/21/10)

Rep. John Adler (D-NJ): "I Will Vote Against This Health Care Bill. The Final Health Care Reform Bill Does Not Do Enough To Make Health Care Affordable For Middle-Class Families, Small Businesses, Seniors And Taxpayers." (Rep. John Adler, "Congressman Adler Statement On Health Care Bill," Press Release, 3/19/10)

Rep. Adler: "Once Again, Congress Is Failing To Make The Tough Choices. ... We Need Reforms That Will Spur Job Growth And Reduce Health Care Costs For Future Generations." (Rep. John Adler, "Congressman Adler Statement On Health Care Bill," Press Release, 3/19/10)

Rep. Jason Altmire (D-PA): "The Cost Of Inaction On Health Care Is Great, But It Would Be An Even Bigger Mistake To Pass A Bill That Could Compound The Problem Of Skyrocketing Health Care Costs." (Rep. Jason Altmire, "Altmire Statement On Upcoming Health Care Vote," Press Release, 3/19/10)

Rep. Mike Arcuri (D-NY): "The Health Care Package Expected To Be Voted On In The Coming Days Doesn't Do Enough To Keep Health Care Costs In Check." (Rep. Mike Arcuri, "Arcuri Announces Stance On Proposed Health Care Reform Package," Press Release, 3/18/10)

Rep. Arcuri: "My Opposition To This Health Care Reform Package Is Based On Three Items... Doesn't Allow Medicare To Negotiate Drug Prices. Doesn't Remove The Anti-Trust Exemption For Insurance Companies; Includes An Excise Tax On High-Quality Health Insurance Plans..." (Rep. Mike Arcuri, "Arcuri Announces Stance On Proposed Health Care Reform Package," Press Release, 3/18/10)

Rep. John Barrow (D-GA): "I Am Strongly In Favor Of Reforming The Health Care System, But I Don't Think This Bill Is Going To Do It... It Puts Too Much Of The Burden Of Paying For It On Working Folks Who Are Already Being Overcharged... It Threatens To Overwhelm Medicaid In Georgia... And It Barely Touches The Insurance Companies..." (Rep. John Barrow, "Barrow Statement On Health Care Legislation Before Congress," Press Release, 3/19/10)

Rep. Marion Berry (D-AR): "[T]he Senate Health Care Reform Bill Does Not Adequately Address The Issue Of Federal Funds Being Used To Pay For Abortions. Despite The Recently Announced Executive Order Addressing This Issue, I Remain Concerned That This Legislation Does Not Go Far Enough To Satisfy My Concerns." (Kate Phillips, "Live Blogging The House Vote," The New York Times's "Prescriptions" Blog, 3/21/10)

Rep. Dan Boren (D-OK): "'I Will Be Voting 'No' ... Boren's Two Biggest Concerns With The Bill Are The Cost Of The Bill Overall, And The Cost To Taxpayers Through Tax Increases Included In The Legislation." (Kevin Duke, "Boren To Vote 'No' On Health Care Bill," Durant Daily Democrat, 3/19/10)

Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA): "U.S. Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Va., Said Friday He Could Not Support Health Care Reform Legislation That Includes Heavy Cuts To Medicare..." (Steve Igo, "Boucher Won't Support Health Reform With Medicare Cuts," Kingsport Times-News, 3/13/10)

Rep. Bobby Bright (D-AL): "I Remain A Firm No On The Proposed Health Care Plan... I Simply Believe We Cannot Afford The Massive Cost Associated With These Proposals, Especially While Our Fragile Economy Continues To Recover." (Rep. Bobby Bright, "Where I Stand On Health Care Legislation," Press Release, 3/2/10)

Rep. Ben Chandler (D-KY): "'Congressman Chandler's Position On The Bill Remains The Same. He Expects To Vote Against The Legislation,' Chief Of Staff Denis Fleming Said In An E-Mail Wednesday." (James R. Carroll, "Chandler Again Opposes Health-Care Bill," The Louisville Courier-Journal, 3/17/10)

Rep. Chandler: "But Chandler Said In An Interview After That [November 7, 2009] Vote That His District Overwhelmingly Opposed The Bill And That He Was Concerned The Measure Would Not Cut Costs For Federal, State And Local Governments, For Small Businesses, For The Medical Community And For Individuals." (James R. Carroll, "Chandler Again Opposes Health-Care Bill," The Louisville Courier-Journal, 3/17/10)

Rep. Travis Childers (D-MS): "I Have Reviewed The Bill And I Remain Deeply Concerned About The Legislation's Large Price Tag And The Absence Of Sufficiently Strong Language To Prohibit Federal Funding Of Abortion. ... In Addition, Insurance Companies, Which Are A Large Part Of The Problem, Need To Be A Bigger Part Of The Solution." (Rep. Travis Childers, "Congressman Childers Releases Statement On Upcoming Health Care Reform Vote," Press Release, 3/18/10)

Rep. Artur Davis (D-AL): "I Will Vote No... I Will Repeat What I Said Several Weeks Ago: A Comprehensive, 2000 Page, Near One Trillion Dollar Overhaul Of The Healthcare System Is Just Too Cumbersome And Too Costly In A Time Of Trillion Dollar Deficits." (Rep. Artur Davis, "Congressman Artur Davis To Vote Against Final Health Care Legislation," Press Release, 3/11/10)

Rep. Lincoln Davis (D-TN): "Davis, Who Represents Tennessee's 4th District, Said He Supports Health Care Reform, But On A Smaller Scale. Davis Is Looking For Reform That Addresses Some Of The Gaps And Problems In Health Care Coverage Experienced By Americans, 85 Percent Of Whom Have Coverage, Without Redoing The Entire System." (Susan Ferrechio, "Two Tennessee Democrats Announce 'No' Votes," The Washington Examiner's "Beltway Confidential" Blog, 3/21/10)

Rep. Chet Edwards (D-TX): "I Voted 'No' On The House Health Care Reform Bill, And I Will Be A 'No' Vote On The Senate Health Care Reform Bill. At A Time Of Massive Federal Deficits, I Believe These Bills Could Make Those Deficits Worse." (Rep. Chet Edwards, "Edwards Will Vote "No" On Senate Health Care Reform Bill," Press Release, 3/10)

Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD): "I Will Not Vote For The Senate Bill As Is... I Will Not Vote For A Package Of Changes That Would Go Through The Reconciliation Process. ... I Don't Support Using Reconciliation..." (Kevin Woster, "Herseth Sandlin Says No To Senate Health Bill, Reconciliation," Rapid City Journal, 3/5/10)

Rep. Tim Holden (D-PA): "I Will Not Vote For The Senate Bill... It Makes Significant Cuts To Medicare And Medicaid ... And The Restrictions On (Federal Funding For) Abortion Are Not As Strong." (Ben Wolfgang, "Conservatives Urge Holden To Oppose Reform Bill; Holden Says He's Planning To Vote 'No,'" The Republican Herald, 3/11/10)

Rep. Larry Kissell (D-NC): "I Made A Promise And Commitment That I Would Look Out For Medicare, And I'm Doing That...The Method Of Funding Makes It Impossible For Me To Change My Vote On That Bill." (Jim Morrill, "Kissell Faces Pressure On Health Care," The Charlotte Observer, 3/03/10)

Rep. Frank Kratovil (D-MD): "[A] Number Of The Concerns I Have Raised Throughout This Debate Have Still Not Been Addressed, Which Is Why I Will Be Voting 'No'. The Bill's Overall Price Tag Of $1.07 Trillion Is Above The Target Set By Democratic Leadership Earlier In The Debate..." ("Kratovil: 'No' On Health Care," The Baltimore Sun's "Maryland Politics" Blog, 3/21/10)

Rep. Kratovil: "I Am Also Concerned About The Impact This Bill Will Have On The Cost Of Coverage For Middle Class Families In The Non-Group Market, As Well As The Impact That The Employer Mandate Would Have On Employment At A Time When Job Creation Must Be Our Top Priority." ("Kratovil: 'No' On Health Care," The Baltimore Sun's "Maryland Politics" Blog, 3/21/10)

Rep. Kratovil: "And While Some Of The Most Egregious Backroom Deals In The Senate Bill Would Be Ended By The Reconciliation Package, Other Provisions Benefitting Individual States At The Expense Of Maryland Taxpayers Would Continue." ("Kratovil: 'No' On Health Care," The Baltimore Sun's "Maryland Politics" Blog, 3/21/10)

Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL): "Congressman Lipinski Remains Concerned About Whether The Bill Does Enough To Lower Soaring Health Care Costs For Families, About Its Long-Term Effect On America's Budget, And About Its Impact On Seniors On Medicare." (Rep. Dan Lipinski, "Final Health Care Bill Is Released - Lipinski Stands Firm Against Senate Bill Providing Federal Funds For Abortion," Press Release, 3/18/10)

Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA): "[L]ynch (D-South Boston) Said He Was Not Persuaded And Made It Official: 'I Am Firmly A "No" Vote.' ... Lynch Said His Biggest Objections In The Senate Bill Are A Proposed Surcharge On So-Called 'Cadillac' Health-Care Plans, Anti-Trust Provisions Favoring Insurers And Lack Of Cost Restraints." (Jay Fitzgerald, "Stephen Lynch Strong 'No' On Health Bill Despite Talk With President Obama," The Boston Herald, 3/19/10)

Rep. Jim Marshall (D-GA): "People Are Very Concerned About Cost; I'm Concerned About Cost. If You Just Do More Of The Same, Which Is Largely What This Does, More Third Party Pay, That's Basically What The Problem Is Here, Then You're Going To Get Continued Explosive Costs." (Jon Ward, "Blue Dog Democrat Says Obama Health-Care Plan Will Bankrupt Country," The Daily Caller, 3/5/10)

Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT): "I Am Saddened That The Year-Long Debate On Health Reform Has Resulted In Legislation That Is Too Expensive, Contains Too Many Special Deals, Does Not Contain Health Care Costs And Will Result In Increases In Health Insurance Premiums And Therefore I Will Vote Against The Legislation." (Rep. Jim Matheson, "Matheson Statement On Health Care Reform Vote," Press Release, 3/20/10)

Rep. Mike McIntyre (D-NC): "Health Care Reform Is Needed, But The Bill Before Us Is Too Expensive, Does Not Adequately Address Rising Medical Costs And Skyrocketing Insurance Premiums, And Tries To Do Too Much Too Soon. We Simply Cannot Afford To Create A New Federal Bureaucracy That Costs Nearly $1 Trillion When Our National Debt Is $12 Trillion And There Is No Plan In Place To Address It. I Will Not Vote For It." (Rep. Mike McIntyre, "McIntyre Says, "Yes To Jobs, No To Proposed Health Care Reform Bill," Press Release, 3/19/10)

Rep. McIntyre: "The Critical Issue Facing Our Nation Is Jobs. ... After We Help Jump Start Our Economy, We Should Again Turn Our Attention To Health Care Reform - But With A Clean Slate." (Rep. Mike McIntyre, "McIntyre Says, "Yes To Jobs, No To Proposed Health Care Reform Bill," Press Release, 3/19/10)

Rep. Mike McMahon (D-NY): "'I've Made My Position Clear,' McMahon Said Yesterday. 'I Don't Feel Left Out. I Don't See Anything That Will Cause Me To Change My Mind And I Don't Want To Give The Wrong Impression.' ... Rather, He Has Advocated Incremental Changes, Including Insurance Reform, Keeping Children On Their Parents' Coverage Plans Longer And Eliminating Discrimination For Pre-Existing Conditions." (Judy L. Randall, "Staten Island Rep. Michael McMahon On Island Of His Own," The Staten Island Advance, 3/17/10)

Rep. Charlie Melancon (D-LA): "We Need To Work In A Bipartisan Way To Make Health Care More Affordable And Accessible For All Louisianians, But I Am Opposing The Senate Bill And The Reconciliation Package Because They Cost Too Much And Don't Do Enough To Lower Health-Care Costs For Middle-Class Families And Small Businesses..." (Robert Zullo, "Melancon To Vote Against Health Measure," WWLTV.com, 3/20/10)

Rep. Walt Minnick (D-ID): "'The Bill Has Not Changed In Any Substantive Way In The Last Few Weeks. And I'm Going To Vote Against It For The Same Reason I Voted Against The First One.' ... He Says His Biggest Concern Remains That He Doesn't Believe Enough Has Been Done In The Bill To Control The Cost Of Health Care." (Erika Bolstad, "For Idaho Democrat Minnick, It's Still 'No' To Health Overhaul," McClatchy Newspapers, 3/16/10)

Rep. Minnick: "My Biggest Complaint About All Of This From Day One, Is It Was Not A Bill That Was Developed With Bipartisan Input And Therefore Didn't Develop Bipartisan Support And Didn't Represent The Thinking Of The Middle Of The Political Spectrum -- Which I Tend To Pay Particular Attention To..." (Erika Bolstad, "For Idaho Democrat Minnick, It's Still 'No' To Health Overhaul," McClatchy Newspapers, 3/16/10)

Rep. Glenn Nye (D-VA): "[I]t Became Very Clear That This Bill Was Not The Right Solution For Virginia's Health Care Challenges... This Bill Did Not Fix The Key Flaws With The Original Health Care Bill, Including Devastating Funding Cuts For CHKD In Norfolk And I Am Not Convinced It Will Effectively Reduce The Cost Of Health Care For Families And Small Businesses..." (Rep. Glenn Nye, "Nye: Not Convinced Health Care Bill Will Reduce Costs For Families & Small Businesses," Press Release, 3/21/10)

Rep. Nye: "Our Military Families Need To Be Able To Count On Their Health Care Benefits, And I Am Not Willing To Risk Negative Consequences For Our Military Personnel And Their Families, Particularly At A Time When Our Troops Are Serving Overseas In Harm's Way..." (Rep. Glenn Nye, "Nye: Not Convinced Health Care Bill Will Reduce Costs For Families & Small Businesses," Press Release, 3/21/10)

Rep. Mike Ross (D-AR): "I Have Said All Along That I Oppose Reconciliation... Or Any Other Parliamentary Tactic That Circumvents The Normal Legislative Process. The American People Deserve A Transparent Process And I Will Continue Opposing Any Effort By Either Party To Play Partisan Games With An Issue Of This Magnitude." (Rep. Mike Ross, "Ross Statement On House Leaders' Decision To Drop 'Deem & Pass' Efforts," Press Release, 3/20/10)

Rep. Heath Shuler (D-NC): "There Is No Question That Our Current Health Care System Is Broken And That We Need To Make Significant Reforms To Improve It In An Equitable, Fiscally Responsible And Sustainable Manner. In My Opinion The Bill As Written Does Not Meet Those Criteria..." (Bill Theobald, "Shuler Says He Will Vote No On Health Care Reform," The Asheville Citizen-Times, 3/19/10)

Rep. Ike Skelton (D-MO): "At The End Of The Day, Each Of These Proposals Still Could Have Serious Unintended Consequences For Those With Private Insurance And Could Negatively Impact Rural Health Care. Therefore, I Will Not Vote For Them." (Rep. Ike Skelton, "Health Reforms Are Needed, But Congressional Proposal Falls Short," Weekly Column, 3/21/10)

Rep. Zack Space (D-OH): "U.S. Rep. Zack Space Of Ohio Has Announced That He Will Not Support President Barack Obama's Health Care Bill. ... Space Says He Believes The Bill Would Financially Burden The Working Class By 'Opening The Door To Taxing Employee Benefits As Income' And Be A 'Windfall' For Insurance Companies." ("Ohio's Space To Vote 'No' On Health Care Bill," The Associated Press, 3/21/10)

Rep. Gene Taylor (D-MS): "Taxpayers Cannot Afford A New Federal Health Insurance Program. ... With The National Debt Nearing $12 Trillion And Projected To Grow Far Into The Future, I Believe That Congress Should Focus On Fulfilling The Promises That Have Already Been Made Rather Than Make New Promises That We Cannot Afford." (Rep. Gene Taylor, "There Are Better, Less Costly Ways To Make Health Care More Efficient, More Affordable," Sun Herald, 3/13/10)

Rep. John Tanner (D-TN): "After Thorough And Careful Review Of The Legislation, I Am Unconvinced That The Long-Term Trend Of Rising Health Care Costs Is Adequately Addressed And Am Therefore Unable To Support The Legislation." (Rep. John Tanner, "Tanner Statement On Health Care Vote," Press Release, 3/21/10)

Rep. Harry Teague (D-NM): "[I] Do Not Believe That The Bill Does Enough To Contain Costs And It Definitely Does Not Do Enough To Rein In The Out Of Control Insurance Companies That Are Driving Up Healthcare Costs In This Country." (Rep. Harry Teague, "Teague Statement On Health Care Bill," Statement, 3/19/10)

Another Cheap Shot from the Seifert Camp

2010-03-20T13:44:00.003-05:00

Marty Seifert and his campaign continues to bash his opponent for endorsement, Tom Emmer, with their latest hit piece shown above. This is the fourth negative piece in a row since the precinct caucuses that Marty has mailed out to party activists.

The first piece titled, Seifert Continues to Stretch the Truth, which I critiqued on this blog, was misleading, much like this one. It makes me wonder if Marty and his supporters are in desperation mode with such tactics, and, if Marty is willing and able to "walk-the-walk" if he is to be elected governor. Why do I say this? Because Marty has, in my opinion, a history of the "do as I say, not as I do" mentality. Take for example this line from an email I received from Marty, "Any trashing severely on me now will be documented and used should I be the endorsed candidate." Marty and I had much back and forth correspondence after my previous post in which I questioned the accuracy of his literature. He considered my previous post to be trashing him. Yet I get the impression from him and his campaign that it's the acceptable thing to trash Tom Emmer.

Here is what Tom Emmer's campaign chair, Representative Mark Buesgens has to say about Marty's latest hit piece,

A message from Mark Buesgens

March 19, 2010

Fellow Delegates:

To quote Ronald Reagan: “There he goes again.”

Marty Seifert once again found it necessary to mail a negative attack piece into the homes of delegates and alternates to the state convention. By my count, this is the third or fourth piece he’s mailed – if he keeps up this pace, the post office might be able to stay open on Saturdays after all. And this does not include the negative messages he’s passed out at conventions, sent in emails or whispered over the phone.

Unless Marty Seifert figures out that delegates would rather hear about his vision for the future of our state instead of what’s wrong with Tom Emmer, it’s going to be a long 40 days until the convention.

This week’s attack on Tom’s profession as a lawyer and his votes on tort reform are not new but are very ironic. Tom spent his career as an attorney defending businesses and individuals from frivolous lawsuits – he is the last person who would oppose comprehensive tort reform. Tom Emmer’s real world experience in the courtroom as a defense attorney makes him uniquely qualified to advocate for a comprehensive tort reform package, not the piecemeal attempts he has opposed in the past.

Unfortunately, political campaigns run by career politicians always resort to taking votes out of context. A robust discussion of voting records is valuable as long as it realistically informs how a candidate will act once in office.

Seifert’s attack that Tom Emmer voted against some of the piecemeal tort reform efforts in the past is technically accurate, but not informative. When he takes those votes out of context and calls Tom a “trial lawyer,” he does not make a convincing case that Emmer will somehow oppose tort reform efforts as governor. Because he won’t.

Seifert’s attack that Tom Emmer voted against an amendment to strip Northstar rail funding from a bonding bill is technically accurate, but not informative. When Seifert fails to explain he actually supported final passage of the bill while Emmer opposed it, he doesn’t make a convincing case that Emmer will support frivolous rail projects as governor. Because he won’t. In fact, Seifert’s support of numerous bonding bills actually calls into question his ability to say no to pork spending if he is elected governor.

Seifert’s attack that Tom Emmer voted against an amendment to allow Hennepin County residents to hold a referendum on the Twins stadium is technically accurate, but not informative. When Seifert fails to tell you Emmer voted against the Twins stadium, he doesn’t make a convincing case that Tom will support future stadium projects as governor. Because he won’t. In fact, Seifert’s support for bonding money for a football stadium in his hometown of Marshall calls into question his ability to say no to stadium proposals in the future.

And the same standard should be used for Seifert’s cap and trade vote. Marty now says he’s against cap and trade and will veto any efforts to create such a system in the future. I take him at his word. But in order for delegates to understand the context of Seifert’s support of the Next Generation Energy Act (and other pro-environment bills), they need to ask why Marty got caught up in the green energy movement that was sweeping the nation before the economy collapsed. Will Seifert stick to core principles in the future and resist the urge to join the latest big government fad? That is the question.

Our job as delegates is to sift through the voting records of each candidate and examine each communication from the campaigns in the proper context. What is the point of the attack? Is it technically accurate but out of context and not informative? Does it credibly make the case that the candidate will act a certain way in the future?

On April 30th, I trust my fellow delegates to see through the attacks and make the right decision. To help in this effort, we launched EmmerTruth.com to provide accurate context for the negative attacks and misrepresentations of Tom Emmer’s record.

Over the next 40 days, please visit this website or call the campaign if you have any questions about Tom’s voting record. During that time, you will hear Tom talk about his vision for leading this state to economic prosperity and his plan for winning the November general election.

Thank you,
Mark Buesgens
Delegate, SD 35

P.S. For the most part, Marty Seifert’s attacks on Tom Emmer have involved his voting record, but I’m afraid the way the campaign is going he will soon switch to negative personal attacks. Please visit EmmerTruth.com to get the facts on the Republican race for governor.

39A Meet and Greet with the Candidates

2010-02-17T19:56:00.003-06:00

Hosted by the 39A Republicans

To be held at the,

Croatian Hall
445 2nd Ave S
South St Paul, MN 55075

When: Wednesday, February 24, 7:30PM

You are invited to join us at our meet and greet with the candidates for Minnesota's constitutional offices! Come on out and mix and mingle with these great candidates,

Tom Emmer, Marty Seifert, Bill Haas, Phil Herwig, Leslie Davis, Dan Severson, Pat Anderson, Tom Conlon, Randy Gilbert, Jeff Wiita, and our very own candidates for congress in the 4th CD, Joe Blum, Teresa Collett, Anthony Hernandez and Brad Lee!

MC'ing will be the one and only Sue Jeffers!

This event will be at the historic Croatian Hall in S St Paul by the House District 39A Republicans. We are having this Meet & Greet so you can get to know our candidates more intimately!

Tid Bit of Trivia: The last four candidates fore governor that spoke at the Croatian Hall went on to win the election!

We've got munchies and a cash bar.

The fun starts at 7:30 with a suggested donation of $10.

This will be a great opportunity for you to have personal interaction with the candidates that will lead our great state forward. This will also be a great time to introduce that new-comer to the fold-- so bring that sitting-on-the-fence friend or neighbor of yours!

I look forward to seeing you on the 24th!

HD 39A Chair,

-Bill Jungbauer

THE TROUBLE WITH PROGRESSIVES OR SOME OF IT, ANYWAY

2010-02-14T11:46:00.003-06:00

By: Roderick T. Beaman

Progressives are perpetual malcontents. They have little appreciation of the world and life and our civilization’s accomplishments. Somehow, deep inside them is the conviction that they, and they alone, can make it better. IT’s what leads them to their incessant drives for power. This is also at the heart of socialism and communism.

Also deep inside them is the conviction that Western Civilization and Christianity are frauds and have been responsible for most of the world’s troubles and consequently we are to be ashamed for their iniquities. It is their drive for power to effectuate their vision of perfection that leaves them at odds with the Judeo-Christian belief that mankind struggles with its own imperfection since its metaphorical emergence from ignorance and subsequent expulsion from the Garden of Eden. Force, always by them, is to prevail over voluntarism. They are their God.

A multiplicity of forces came together around the turn of the twentieth century that foresaw a triumph over our collective sorrows through the application of various ‘scientific principles’. At the heart of this was a kind of determinism that if progressives were entrusted with this power, then mankind’s problems would be surmounted. These forces were loosely called progressivism. They had been simmering for decades.

They became personified with the first activist president, Theodore Roosevelt. The Bully Pulpit would forever change the presidency from being the agent of Congress to being a superior director, far from the original intent of the Founders. America would never be the same.

Progressivism was multi-pronged. It encompassed the seemingly benign drive for universal education of John Dewey and the most sinister eugenicism of Margaret Sanger. The common goal to all was the betterment of society through control of individuals and their behavior.

Much of the impetus emerged from the socialism and even communism of the nineteenth century. They, in turn, arose from the changes wrought by the Industrial Revolution with its sudden diversity of consumer goods.

Established social orders that had existed for centuries were upended. No longer was wealth determined by one’s genetics. It was achievable for all and in many cases entrepreneurs and captains of industry accumulated fortunes in excess of royal families.

Wealth came to neighborhoods. A man down the street might be as well heeled as a prince the common man never saw. Mansions he may have helped build sprouted nearby and he walked past them daily while he may never have laid eyes on the nobleman’s castle. Along with these things, his diet diversified with foodstuffs from around the globe. He became aware of his clothes as more than protection from the elements. On all fronts, he prospered.

Much of the impetus emerged from the socialism and even communism of the nineteenth century. They, in turn, arose from the changes wrought by the Industrial Revolution with its sudden diversity of consumer goods.

Established social orders that had existed for centuries were upended. No longer was wealth determined by one’s genetics. It was achievable for all and in many cases entrepreneurs and captains of industry accumulated fortunes in excess of royal families.

Wealth came to neighborhoods. A man down the street might be as well heeled as a prince the common man never saw. Mansions he may have helped build sprouted nearby and he walked past them daily while he may never have laid eyes on the nobleman’s castle. Along with these things, his diet diversified with foodstuffs from around the globe. He became aware of his clothes as more than protection from the elements. On all fronts, he prospered.

And just as his access to new things increased, the tools to produce them consumed resources and left debris nearby, visible and often ugly. As more entered the ranks of the wealthy, their presence was far more conspicuous. Commoners rejoiced and celebrated their new found prosperity. Progressives found them objects for derision.

It is no accident that progressivism took root in Germany, France and Britain, the most industrialized nations in Europe. In many ways progressivism, socialism and communism were responses to this upending of the established order. They are the reactionism; to prosperity, which in their souls, they abhor.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels had little personal familiarity with poverty. Marx was from a comfortably middle class family, rabbis on both sides, and Engels’ family was much more than ‘well off’. His father owned a very successful textiles firm in Prussia.

Marx published his Manifesto, often called The Communist Manifesto, in 1848. It became the greatest selling political pamphlet in history and even today is read by millions.

The pamphlet is a rambling screed that outlines Marx’s view of history and mankind as solely economic. Mankind is reduced to a puppet, responding only to economic strings controlling him. He made no room for any other factors. Faith, hope, charity, love, honor, trust, the arts and the family were either mirages or economic frustrations.

To Marx, religion was the ultimate fraud, famously calling it the opiate of the masses. This explains the hostility to religion that lies at the heart of progressivism and its ultimate expression, communism. It is why progressive, socialist and communist societies must eliminate religion and replace all religious functions with governmental in their Church of Man. Religion and God must offer no refuge and no solace from the trials of this world for the human soul. They must come from government.

Progressives have always thought that the human race could be perfected through man’s institutions, institutions of their own making, through the application of scientific principles. Just figure out the equations and the rest falls into place.

A look at Marx’s agenda is instructive. This is directly from The Manifesto.

"Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production.

These measures will, of course, be different in different countries.

Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.

6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of wasteland, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc, etc."

Even a casual reading of this excerpt leaves one with the indelible impression that force is to be used to accomplish them, which goes a ways to explain how communist societies deteriorated into the violence and slaughter that characterized every last one of them. And although plank 10 seems admirable, one hesitates to wonder what it really means. Why does education need to be combined with industrial production? Is there an ultimate, more sinister goal? The answer is yes.

Education was meant to prepare students to become workers for the government. That’s what Karl Marx and Dewey meant. It wasn’t education for the fulfillment of the individual and the sake of education. It was to have a purpose, namely the fulfillment of the state’s needs. From autonomy to automatons.

And although, I have no use for the child factory labor practices that existed at that time nor do I think do most people, I have to wonder what was his true goal. Or does this just confirmation that even a stopped clock is right twice a day? Or is there something else I miss? I am not sure.

Inevitably, the progressives intersected with the eugenicism. It was a byproduct of Charles Darwin’s ‘Origin of the Species’ that was published in 1859. Darwin and Marx were contemporaries.

Darwin concluded that most characteristics, including intelligence, were inherited through ‘survival of the fittest.’ So, if improvement of the species will be accomplished anyway through natural selection, why not accelerate it? Jump start it by deciding who the fittest are and eliminate the rest.

Proponents included Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, socialist playwright George Bernard Shaw, progressive economist John Maynard Keynes, H. G. Wells and two American presidents, Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt. Yes, Theodore Roosevelt and the messianic, progressive Woodrow Wilson were eugenicists. Elitists at their cores.

Wilson who regularly makes the list of ‘near great’ presidents, was a racist and a true progressive, willing to impose his beliefs on the rest of the world through any means including war ‘to make the world safe for democracy’. No need to ask the rest of the world what it wanted.

Theodore Roosevelt isn’t far behind Woodrow Wilson and is enshrined on Mount Rushmore. It is no accident that Roosevelt and Wilson were proponents of the same philosophy that gave us Adolf Hitler’s extermination program.

Hitler, along with the other twentieth century mass murderers, Josip Stalin, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot and Fidel Castro were cut from the same philosophic cloth. While people like Roosevelt and Wilson might be appalled at the extent to which these tyrants took it, nevertheless they are its descendants. Ideas have consequences.

The most telling of Marx’s statement though his first sentence, " ..., this cannot be effected except by means of despotic (italics mine) inroads on the rights of property,...,by means of measures,..., which appear economically insufficient and untenable,..., outstrip themselves, (and) necessitate further inroads upon the old social order,... " This a direct rejection of his belief in the withering away of the state once communism was in place and in fact, it is his acknowledgment that there would be no end to the effort.

Marx was the ultimate progressive and this is part of the trouble with progressives. Violence and the destruction of society, along with all of its progress in the form of its material things are their direct descendants and without end. But you’ll never hear them acknowledge it.

South Carolina now requires ’subversives’ to register

2010-02-08T02:22:00.000-06:00

Five-dollar registration fee for persons planning to overthrow US government

Terrorists who want to overthrow the United States government must now register with South Carolina's Secretary of State and declare their intentions -- or face a $25,000 fine and up to 10 years in prison.

The state's "Subversive Activities Registration Act," passed last year and now officially on the books, states that "every member of a subversive organization, or an organization subject to foreign control, every foreign agent and every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States ... shall register with the Secretary of State."

DFL Party's plan for new jobs: tax breaks

2010-01-30T21:02:00.003-06:00

When I first read the title, I thought hell had froze over. That was until I read the fine print.

First in a three part series in the House effort to put jobless to work by Bill Salsbury at the Pioneer Press leading up to the 2010 session.

Minnesota House Democrats on Friday unveiled a package of 10 tax breaks they intend to pass quickly in the 2010 legislative session to spark job creation.

The legislation would provide tax credits for investments in high-tech, manufacturing and green businesses, give cities and counties more flexibility in using local tax incentives for economic development and egg on the Mall of America's Phase II expansion.

The chief architect of the package, House Tax Committee Chairwoman Ann Lenczewski, DFL-Bloomington, said it was designed to put building contractors and construction workers back to work.

"It's what we can do at a very scarce time in the economy," she said.

The plan would offer incentives for private-sector investment by providing $10 million for "angel investment credits" and "historic rehabilitation credits." The money would come from closing what Lenczewski called a real estate investment tax loophole.

The legislation also would relax state restrictions on "tax-increment financing," which allows local governments to use the additional tax revenue from a business development to help pay for the project.

The Mall of America and Bloomington would get more flexibility to use local taxes generated at the giant shopping center to help finance a nearly $2 billion expansion on 42 acres of vacant land just north of the mall.

The mall would not get any state funds or local property tax dollars, Lenczewski said. "To pay those taxes, you would have to shop there," she said.

House Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher, DFLMinneapolis, said the tax breaks are one of three parts of a Democratic strategy to "put thousands of Minnesotans back to work again." The other two elements are a $1 billion public works bonding bill that will be introduced next week and an economic development initiative that is still being fleshed out. Kelliher said a bipartisan House jobs task force that she appointed in August generated the ideas.

The leading House Republican, Minority Leader Kurt Zellers, of Maple Grove, said the DFL package was a "good starting point" but a relatively small one that is "not quite enough to get us over the hump."

Lenczewski said the proposals were developed in consultation with Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty's tax commissioner and DFL senators. She predicted quick agreement on them.

"We are working in the world of the doable. This is not fantasy legislation," she said.

The angel credit is for individuals who invest in start-up companies. It would provide a 25 percent tax credit for investments in businesses with fewer than 100 employees and less than $2 million in gross receipts.

"It will make Minnesota competitive with our neighboring states and states across the country, it will help to build and reinforce the culture of entrepreneurship and it will leverage investments that Minnesotans make each and every year in the University of Minnesota," said Rep. Jim Davnie, DFL-Minneapolis, chief sponsor of the angel investor bill.

The university generates innovative ideas, but the state has fallen short in moving those ideas into businesses and jobs, Davnie said. The tax credit would help transfer those ideas into new enterprises.

The governor likes that tax break, as long as it comes in a clean bill.

"Gov. Pawlenty has long championed an angel investment tax credit and hopes the DFL will break from their pattern of including it in a bill that gets vetoed, because it also has a truckload of other job-killing tax increases," Pawlenty spokesman Brian McClung said in an e-mail.

The historic rehabilitation incentive would piggyback on an existing 20 percent federal tax credit for restoring historic buildings. The state would provide another 20 percent credit for a combined 40 percent tax break.

Mall of America spokesman Dan Jasper said in a statement that mall officials have not seen Lenczewski's proposal for their project but are eager to learn the details. He said they are exploring the possibility of moving the second phase from a single-phase construction project to multiple phases in order to complete it in a "still difficult economic environment."

"We are encouraged by the announcement today and hopeful that it can help us get started on the first phases of expansion," Jasper said.

The tax-increment changes would allow cities and counties to help finance projects that can't get bank financing. Local governments also could use that tax tool to revitalize housing in blighted areas and encourage "transit-friendly dense development" in areas such as the proposed Central Corridor light-rail line between St. Paul and Minneapolis.

Another piece of legislation would allow cities and counties to issue industrial revenue bonds to finance green buildings. A separate bill would let business owners ask a city to levy special assessments on their property to pay for making them more energy efficient.

These are nothing but token efforts on the part of the democrats. The construction jobs that will be created by the DFL's efforts target only those workers that are union. Any big commercial construction job is totally union controlled. Only 15.1% of Minnesota's workforce is union and those are the people who would get jobs under this phony, minuscule attempt at government controlled job creation. What about the other 84.9% of the Minnesota workforce? Nearly 85% of us will get nothing from this, but the unions who helped get the liberals elected are sure going to get taken care of.

The "angel tax" does not even come close to putting our state on equal footing with neighboring states. Wisconsin gives a 25% tax write off for the first four years in business.

And a billion dollar 'public works' bonding bill on top of all of this. Again targeted toward the unions and not the workforce as a whole. Why don't they call it the Minnesota stimulus bill for shovel ready jobs? This is nothing but a cheap copy of Obama's failed stimulus bill. We have seen how successful that was.

I would also like to point out that this 'bipartisan jobs task force' was hardly bipartisan as it was made up of 24 democrats and only 8 Republicans. And as for input from business, there was little if any.

If this passes, watch them all pat each other on the back and tell the voters how wonderful they are. Of course they are attempting this in an election year. Bet they are all shaking in their boots worried about their jobs this November.

Brod backs Emmer

2010-01-29T14:58:00.002-06:00

Here is Laura's statement which will be posted on her Facebook later today.

Friends,

These are difficult and challenging times for our state and our nation.

Now, more than ever, we need strong, determined leadership that will focus on the issues that matter most to our citizens.

Today, our friends, our neighbors and our families are concerned about their jobs, about their mortgage and about the future of their children.

There are no simple solutions. No trite slogans will solve our problems.

But, fearless leadership is demanded in these most anxious of times.

From the moment Governor Tim Pawlenty said he would not seek re-election, Minnesota Republicans began an important conversation about who could best carry the banner of conservative fiscal ideals and common sense government throughout the state.

Many of you were so kind to offer encouragement to me to consider a statewide campaign for Governor. I thank you for your support. As honored as I have been about that encouragement and that possibility, I have decided this is not the year for me to run for statewide office.

Before us stand many good candidates for Governor in our party.

Each and every one of them I consider to be a friend, and each and every one of them I believe carries with them the promise of a better tomorrow for our state.

I have been honored to serve with Marty Seifert when he represented our GOP Caucus in the House and also with David Hann and Bill Haas. I believe them all to be sincere and dedicated public servants.

I have been honored to serve with Tom Emmer, as well.

And, I believe Tom best represents our hopes for continued conservative Republican leadership for our state's future as Governor of Minnesota.

Tom Emmer has the heart of a warrior, but he has the soul of a common-sense Minnesotan who stands for the best of who we are as a state.

Tom Emmer represents the fearless leadership that is demanded in these most anxious of times.

He knows that lower taxes and responsible spending is a catalyst for strong economic growth and job creation.

For Tom Emmer, government is not the enemy of the people - nor is it the solution for every problem we face.

Minnesotans need jobs. Our neighbors need hope. Our communities need the promise of a better tomorrow.

Minnesota needs a leader who can inspire, not just with words and passion, but with action and accomplishment. Tom Emmer is that kind of leader.

We need a leader who can stand with those who wish to move our state forward.

A leader who will stand up against those who want to move it backwards.

A leader who knows that every Democrat, every Republican and every Independent who wants to make Minnesota a better place to live, work and raise a family must have a voice in our state's future.

I believe our future needs Tom Emmer.

There may be many issues we cannot ever find complete agreement upon.

Yet, there is far more that brings us together than drives us apart.

I intend to campaign with all my heart for the endorsed candidate of our party.

And, my hope is that Tom Emmer is that candidate.

With Tom at the top of our ticket, we will see a strong, determined voice who will not be afraid to put forward his commitment to fiscal responsibility at every level of government and in all parts of the state.

With Tom at the top of our ticket, we will see an individual who understands that lower taxes, responsible spending, and partnerships with the public and private sector are crucial to restoring our economic vitality.

With Tom at the top of our ticket, we will see someone who can and will reach out to both the businesses owners on Main Street as well as the Houses of Labor and let the men and women who fuel our economy and build our future, know that Republicans are the party of economic growth, of prosperity and of jobs.

With Tom at the top of our ticket, small business and big business will know they are not the enemy - but they are key partners in finding solutions to the economic challenges facing our state.

Business. Labor. The public sector. The private sector. Minnesotan citizens.

Tom Emmer will have a seat at the table for every one of them as we seek to ensure our state gets back on track toward prosperity. We are all in this together.

This election and the implications of it for the next four years comes down to this basic question: Which candidate, and which party, is best equipped to restore the economic engine of our state and get job creation going again for the people of Minnesota?

When it comes to the candidate, I am confident the answer is Tom Emmer. And when it comes to the party, the answer is the Republican Party, with Tom Emmer at the top of its ticket.

I ask you to join me in supporting Tom Emmer for our next Minnesota Governor and in working hard to come together to ensure our endorsed Republican candidates win in November.

Laura Brod says no to Marty Seifert

2010-01-29T11:37:00.001-06:00

From Politics in Minnesota

Gubernatorial candidate Rep. Marty Seifert (R-Marshall) asked Rep. Laura Brod (R-New Prague) to be “considered on his short list” to be his Lt. Gov. running mate.

Brod said no, accordingly to several impeccable sources.

Read more here...

Seifert Continues to Stretch the Truth

2010-01-24T15:06:00.007-06:00

Despite being confronted on his claim to have been the chief author of the Woman's Right to Know legislation, Marty Seifert and his campaign continues to deceive both voters and delegates with this boast, leaving them with a false impression. On a recent lit piece to Republican Party activists that hit our mailboxes on Friday, January 22nd, Marty again makes the claim that he was the chief author.

Representative Mary Liz Holberg is well known and respected for this landmark legislation. She worked endless hours on this legislation and introduced four different bills to accommodate all the cosponsors to Woman's Right to Know. To take the credit for her work is a poor form of disrespect to legislative perspective.

Marty Seifert has been traveling throughout the state since announcing his candidacy for governor making the claim that he was chief author. After being confronted on this issue, he has done little more than acknowledge Rep. Holberg for her work as chief author of the Woman's Right to Know legislation. Despite the fact that his campaign has promised to drop this issue from future lit pieces as claimed on Wednesday, January 20th, "Marty had the Woman's Right to Know stricken from his new lit piece out of respect for you," he is continuing to take credit for the work of others.

Another claim Marty makes on this piece is "Chief Author, Minnesota Sovereignty (10th Amendment) Bill." Marty can lay claim to his bill, HF997 which is nothing more than a resolution reaffirming states rights under the 10th Amendment of the US Constitution. Tom Emmer authored HF998, which is virtually identical to HF997, but, Tom Emmer takes it one step further with the introduction of HF 2376, known as the Firearm Freedom Bill,

(1) The tenth amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees to the states
and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the
Constitution and reserves to the state and people of Minnesota certain powers as they were
understood at the time that Minnesota was admitted to statehood in 1858. The guaranty
of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Minnesota and
the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon
and adopted by Minnesota and the United States in 1858.

Tom Emmer also authored HF171, which is known as the Freedom of Choice in Health Care Bill. This bill calls for a vote on a new amendment in our State Constitution that would declare all Minnesotan citizens right to freely choose the health care they desire. This too is a bill aimed at our 10th Amendment rights under the US Constitution.

One other claim on this lit piece of Marty's that I must point out, it was Tom Emmer who was the chief author of HF2579 which would require that voters present a valid picture ID to vote. Marty Seifert was not even a coauthor on this bill so I fail to see his support for this.

As a delegate, and a conservative activist, I will keep a close eye on all claims made by candidates leading up to the November election. Honesty and integrity are top priority to win my vote this Fall.

Der Fuhrer finds out about Scott Brown

2010-01-22T13:50:00.001-06:00

THE MARK DAYTON RECORD

2010-01-20T09:15:00.000-06:00

Self-Admitted Failure, One of America’s Worst Senators, Big Tax Hikes

SELF-DESCRIBED FAILURE WANTS PROMOTION

Dayton Graded Own Senate Performance An “F.” “If U.S. Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minn., was to grade himself on his accomplishments in Congress, it would be an ‘F,’ he told students Thursday at the Renville County West High School in Renville.” (Tom Cherveny, "Senator Says He Gives Himself An ‘F,’” West Central Tribune, April 21, 2006)

Time Magazine: Dayton One Of America’s Five “Worst Senators.” "When he was elected in 2000, Minnesota Democrat Mark Dayton seemed well prepared, having worked as an aide to Walter Mondale in the 1970s. But he has exhibited erratic behavior since then: in October 2004 he shut down his office for almost a month, citing an unspecified terrorist threat." ("America's Worst - Mark Dayton: The Blunderer," Time, April 14, 2006)

Time: Dayton “Passed Few Bills,” Tried To Create A Department Of Peace & “Confounded His Colleagues.” “Inside the Senate, Dayton has passed few bills partly because some are too liberal for the Republican-controlled body, including one that would have created a Department of Peace and Nonviolence. He has confounded his colleagues by complaining about basic facts of the job, such as his limited power in a chamber where authority derives from seniority.” ("America's Worst - Mark Dayton: The Blunderer," Time, April 14, 2006)

Associated Press: Dayton Brings Brings A Lot Of Baggage” To Governor’s Race. “But he brings a lot of baggage to the race. With his Senate term set to expire after 2006, Dayton opted against running for re-election amid faltering poll numbers and fundraising difficulties. The department store heir had sunk $12 million into his 2000 campaign, and had no plans to dig that deep again. He left with a jaded view of the Senate and his place in it.” (Brian Bakst, “Ex-Minn. senator seeks revival in governor's race,” Associated Press, December 31, 2009)

“He called Washington a ‘cesspool’ and told a group of students that Congress, including himself, deserved ‘an F for results.’ Outsiders graded him just as harshly: Time magazine labeled him ‘The Blunderer’ on a list of ineffective senators, citing his widely criticized decision in 2004 to temporarily close his Senate office over fears that terrorism endangered his staff and visitors.” (Brian Bakst, “Ex-Minn. senator seeks revival in governor's race,” Associated Press, December 31, 2009)

Minnesota State University, Mankato Political Science Professor: Dayton Faces “Real Obstacles.” “Yet Dayton could have trouble turning the debate from his senatorial struggles, said Joseph Kunkel, a political science professor at Minnesota State University in Mankato. ‘He's singularly lacking in charisma. By his own admission, his term in the Senate was not too successful. He's not a new face on the scene. He's been around a long time,’ Kunkel said. ‘Those things are going to be real obstacles.’” (Brian Bakst, “Ex-Minn. senator seeks revival in governor's race,” Associated Press, December 31, 2009)

DAYTON’S DISASTROUS SENATE TERM

Dayton Only Member Of Congress To Shut Down Office Over Hypothetical Threat

Dayton Shut Down His Washington Senate Office Over Theoretical Terrorist Threat. “When Senator Mark Dayton shut down his Washington office last week, ostensibly out of concern for his staff's safety, many on Capitol Hill wondered if the Minnesota Democrat knew something everyone else didn't. The answer, it turns out, is far from it. Dayton last month received the same briefing as his fellow Senators about a CIA worst-case scenario involving simultaneous terrorist attacks across the country. Yet he apparently took the hypothetical threat as an imminent one. ‘Most people who heard the briefing,’ sniffs an intelligence official, ‘understood the context. It was theoretical.’” (Elaine Shannon, “Why Didn't 99 Other Senators Close Up Shop Too?” Time, October 25, 2004)

Star Tribune Rebuked Dayton For Shutting Office. “We join the Capitol Hill security chief, the Homeland Security leadership, the mayor of Washington and, apparently, every other member of Congress in scratching our heads at Mark Dayton's preemptive shuttering of his Senate office. What can he really be thinking?” (Editorial, “Dayton's alarm; A self-defeating take on terror,” Star Tribune, October 14, 2004)

“It's simply impossible to take Dayton's alarm seriously in the absence of any other lawmaker or security official, so far, coming to a similar conclusion. Take it as political theater, it is farcical - and counterproductive. The vulnerability of this nation and its institutions to terrorism is an urgent and vital subject, one that is generating too much sloganeering and too little scrutiny in this election season. If Dayton's purpose was to underscore a legitimate issue of national security - how much remains to be done to ensure Americans' safety from terrorist attack - he could have chosen many a better way of making the point. Indeed, it's difficult to imagine a worse way. Instead of pointing out the emperor's startling nakedness, Dayton has cast himself as the lone little chicken who claims the sky is falling.” (Editorial, “Dayton's alarm; A self-defeating take on terror,” Star Tribune, October 14, 2004)

Roll Call: Dayton’s Actions “Irresponsible.” “Sen. Mark Dayton (D-Minn.) has done himself, his staff and Congress no good by shutting down his Senate office through the election period because he fears a terrorist attack. His action seems panicky and based more on speculation than information. Thankfully, not one other Member of Congress has followed Dayton's example.” (Editorial, “Irresponsible,” Roll Call, October 21, 2004)

Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D- D.C.) Blasted Dayton Decision To Close Office. ‘I regret that any office in the Capitol would be closed today,’ Norton said. ‘Such action is particularly perplexing,’ she said, ‘in light of the briefing of House and Senate Members that occurred two weeks ago. I have been unequivocally assured by security officials this evening that there was no specific intelligence concerning a risk at the Capitol two weeks ago and there is none today. Like every Member of Congress, I would never put any of my staff or constituents in danger. The Capitol is in a residential neighborhood where I also reside. At the same time, we have an obligation to avoid signals of alarm to the public when there is no evidence to support increased danger.’” (Press release from Eleanor Holmes Norton, “Del. Norton Says No Evidence or Inlelligence Of Risk To Personnel At Capitol,” October 12, 2004)

Other Minnesota Democrats Kept Offices Open. “Mary Kerr, a spokeswoman for Rep. James L. Oberstar, D-Minn., said that her office had checked with the office of the House Sergeant at Arms , and was advised not to do anything differently…’My staff and I rely on the sound professional judgment of U.S. Capitol Police to keep us informed and safe. At this time, our office has not received any notice of a heightened threat,’ said a written statement from Rep. Betty McCollum, D-Minn. ‘My congressional offices in Washington and St. Paul will remain open for business.’” (Allison Stevens, “Sen. Dayton Closes Washington Office, Citing Security Concerns,” Congressional Quarterly Today, October 12, 2004)

D.C.’s Democrat Mayor Puzzled By Dayton’s Decision. “‘I'm literally scratching my head, trying to figure out what frequency he's on,’ Anthony Williams, Washington's Democratic mayor, told reporters. ‘This is a safe city. I just think this is a very strange aberration.’ (Fred Frommer, “Dayton defends decision to close office,” The Associated Press, October 13, 2004)

D.C. Residents Questioned Dayton’s Move. “In addition to mocking responses from city leaders and congressmen, Mr. Dayton's decision was greeted with outrage yesterday from D.C. residents, including hot dog vendor Imam Lete. ‘I think he's selfish,’ said Miss Lete, 49, at her hot dog cart on C Street NW near Capitol Hill. ‘He's rich, he can afford to stay home. If I stayed home, I wouldn't eat. I'd be broke and I'd be homeless.’” (Tarron Lively and Charles Hurt, “Leaders in D.C. mock Dayton,” The Washington Times, October 14, 2004)

Dayton Attacked South Dakota

Dayton: Mayo Clinic “Worth A Hell Of A Lot More Than The Whole State Of South Dakota.” “The Mayo Clinic, which is in Rochester, Minn., was opposed to a South Dakota--based company's plan to expand its railroads into Rochester because it would mean dozens of trains passing by the clinic each day. Dayton told FORTUNE magazine the Mayo Clinic is ‘worth a hell of a lot more than the whole state of South Dakota.’" ("America's Worst - Mark Dayton: The Blunderer," Time, April 14, 2006)

“Thune, R-S.D., who lobbied for the railroad while campaigning for the Senate in 2004, condemned the comments Tuesday, calling them ‘unconscionable, offensive and wholly unbecoming of a United States senator.’ ‘Unlike Senator Dayton, we may not all be millionaires in South Dakota, but we understand the value of hard work and appreciate real-world experience,’ he said.” (Aaron Blake, “Dayton apologizes for dig at S. Dakota,” Star Tribune, March 1, 2006)

Dayton Sued By Former Staffer

Former Dayton Staffer: I Was Fired Staff Because Of Medical Condition. “Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minn., has been sued by a former aide who alleges he was illegally fired after developing a heart condition. Brad Hanson, who served as Dayton's Minnesota office manager until last September, said Dayton fired him after he met with the senator to discuss the need for an operation to correct his cardiac arrhythmia. In the lawsuit, filed last week in U.S. District Court in Washington, Hanson claims the dismissal violated the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Americans With Disabilities Act and the Fair Labor Standards Act. He is seeking his old job back, with back pay, and unspecified monetary damages.” (Staff Report, “Dayton faces suit by a fired aide”, Pioneer Press, June 4, 2003)

Barney Frank Filed Friend Of The Court Brief On Behalf Of Former Dayton Employee. “Retired Sen. Mark Dayton has been trying to shield himself from a lawsuit by a former congressional aide by using a legal defense so unusual that it has alienated his former colleagues and been scorned by the courts…After the senator left office last year, he changed legal tactics by arguing he could no longer be sued for conduct that occurred when he was an elected official. That argument was rejected by a federal court last month, but not before Reps. Barney Frank, Massachusetts Democrat, and Christopher Shays, Connecticut Republican, filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the former employee. Granting Mr. Dayton immunity because he had left office ‘would render the protections [granted by the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995] wholly illusory and defeat the goals of the [law],’ the two lawmakers argued. The Senate Legal Counsel's Office also filed a brief in the case, saying Mr. Dayton should not be allowed to escape liability just because he had left office.” (Tom Ramstack, “Ex-senator’s legal tactics spurned”, The Washington Times, March 6, 2008)

Other Lowlights From Dayton’s Senate Term

Dayton Boycotted Visiting Foreign Leader. “Sen. Mark Dayton boycotted the congressional address of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki Wednesday, saying the visiting leader had unfairly blamed Israel in its standoff with Hezbollah in Lebanon…’I further believe that addressing Congress should be a rare honor, one accorded to historic international leaders, such as Winston Churchill or Nelson Mandela,’ Dayton added.” (Fred Frommer, “Dayton boycotting Iraqi Prime Minister’s speech,” The Associated Press, July 26 2006)

Dayton: “Giving A Bible To A Politician Is Akin To Giving A Blowtorch To A Pyromaniac.” “In addition to being un-American, this amendment is also Un-Christian. I hesitate to bring religion into this debate. I am highly skeptical of politicians who do so. Giving a Bible to a politician is akin to giving a blowtorch to a pyromaniac.” (Mark Dayton, Congressional Record – Senate, S5467, June 6, 2006)

IS DAYTON READY TO EMPTY THE TRUST FUND?

After Spending $12 Million On 2000 Senate Run, Dayton Promised He Wouldn’t Self Finance Another Campaign. “Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minn., who spent nearly $12 million of his personal fortune on his 2000 campaign, said Wednesday that he is not planning to finance his 2006 reelection bid out of his own pocket. ‘I can not either politically or financially afford to finance my campaigns in the future the way I have in the past,’ Dayton said… In financial records disclosed last year, Dayton listed assets of between $14.4 million and $65 million, with a checkbook balance in the range of $5 million to $25 million. He also has millions in a blind trust.” (Todd Milbourn, “Dayton says he won’t finance reelection bid”, Star Tribune, February 28, 2002)

Dayton Will Spend Own Cash On Gubernatorial Campaign. “It took Mark Dayton two tries and many millions from his personal fortune to win one of Minnesota's U.S. Senate seats...Mark Dayton's name recognition and personal wealth make him a legitimate contender for the Democratic nomination. Dayton has said he will contribute to his own campaign, though he hasn't said how much. He plans to run in the summer primary even if party activists endorse another candidate at their April convention; most in the race say they'll drop out without that earlier seal of approval.” (Brian Bakst, “Ex-Minn. senator seeks revival in governor’s race”, The Associated Press, January 1, 2010)

DAYTON PROMISES TAX HIKES

Hard Left Dayton Attacked Governor Pawlenty For Refusing To Tax Raises. “That Pawlenty won't raise taxes ‘even one penny,’ Dayton said, ‘is a disgrace.’” (Brad Swenson, “Beltrami County DFL fundraiser: Gubernatorial candidates blast budget,” The Bemidji Pioneer, February 17, 2009)

Dayton: “The Foundation Of My Platform Is That We Will Raise Taxes On The Wealthiest 10 Percent Of People In The State.” “Former Democratic U.S. Sen. Mark Dayton said he would tax the wealthiest Minnesotans. ‘The foundation of my platform is that we will raise taxes on the wealthiest 10 percent of people in the state,’ Dayton said.” (Jason Hoppin, “In first bipartisan debate, gubernatorial candidates offer their solutions to hunger, poverty,” Pioneer Press, October 14, 2009)

Dayton’s Number One Priority: Raise Taxes. “Asked what bill they would want passed first if they were elected governor, Gaertner said the main thing is to balance the state's budget. Former U.S. Sen. Mark Dayton said he would increase funding for public education and ‘link it to progressive tax increases on the wealthiest people, who can afford it.’" (Bill Salisbury, “700 turn out to hear 11 DFL governor hopefuls make case,” Pioneer Press, November 24, 2009)

Dayton Wants Rich Taxed More. “During a state AFL-CIO forum in Bloomington attended by 11 announced or potential 2010 Democratic-Farmer-Labor gubernatorial candidates, former U.S. Sen. Mark Dayton called for increasing income taxes on the wealthiest 10 percent of Minnesotans to pay for more state aid to schools. ‘Read my lips: Tax the rich; they can afford it. I know that,’ said Dayton, the wealthy heir to a department store fortune.” (Bill Salisbury, “DFL gubernatorial hopefuls call for tax hikes to fund education,” Pioneer Press, October 1, 2009)

Dayton “Vocal” About Raising Taxes. “Dayton and Marty were the most vocal about increasing taxes on Minnesota's wealthiest people. At one point, Dayton addressed the GOP camera and said he would increase taxes on 10 percent of the wealthiest earners in Minnesota.” (Charley Shaw, “DFL candidates seek the competitive edge for 2010 Minn. gov race,” The Legal Ledger, August 31, 2009)

Dayton: Tax The Rich. “Mark Dayton has a simple foundation for his campaign to be Minnesota's next governor -- tax the rich.” (Linda Vanderwerf, “Dayton talks gov. run during Willmar visit, says richest pay more taxes under his plan,” West Central Tribune, December 17, 2009)

Revenue Department And Other DFL Candidates Call Dayton’s Plan Unrealistic. “[Tom] Bakk, the chairman of the Senate Tax Committee, says Minnesota can't realistically tax the rich enough to erase the state's projected $5.4 billion deficit in the next biennium and can't afford to pump a boatload of new money into schools when the state is awash in red ink… The Revenue Department's [Paul] Wilson told Minnesota Public Radio that Dayton's proposal would require a 40 percent income tax increase on those top earners, raising their rate from 7.85 percent to around 13 percent. That would be by far the highest income tax rate in the nation… Bakk called Dayton's plan unrealistic… Bakk said he isn't trying to pick a fight with… Dayton. But he said all the candidates should stop suggesting easy but out-of-reach solutions to the state's budget problems. He said it's going to be ‘really tough medicine’ to take. ‘But we should tell them the truth.’" (Bill Salisbury, “Tax the Rich? Is it that simple?”, Pioneer Press, December 12, 2009)

Dayton Suggested Taxing Emails. “Sen. Mark Dayton (D-Minn.) believes lawmakers ought to go after spammers' wallets… ‘I think it's worth looking at some very, very small charge for every e-mail sent’.” (John Goff, “Re: That Spam I Sent You”, The Economist, June 12, 2003)

Dayton: Senate Might Need To Consider Taxing Emails. “If Congress is going to stop unsolicited commercial e-mail from swamping computer users, Sen. Mark Dayton says legislators might need to consider ‘a minuscule tax’ on e-mail. ‘It's difficult to prevent the use of spam when there's no cost associated with sending thousands, tens of thousands or even millions of e-mails,’ Dayton, D-Minn., said in a recent conference call with reporters.” (Elizabeth Dunbar, “Dayton: Tax may be spam remedy”, Star Tribune, November 19, 2003)

Dayton Voted Against Repealing Death Tax. (Congressional Record – Senate, Page S5434, Roll Call #151, June 12, 2002)

DAYTON’S LEFT-WING RECORD

Dayton Used Fortune To Donate To Radical Causes. ”Between government jobs, Dayton managed his fortune, dabbled in civic activities and became legendary as a generous donor of his department-store family fortune to charitable and political causes. He gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Democratic Party, its candidates and many liberal and even radical causes, including the Black Panthers legal defense fund.” (Bill Salisbury, “Dayton again picks up thread of life of public service,” Pioneer Press, November 1, 2000)

Dayton Supports Gay Marriage. "’I'll vote against it, speak against it, do everything I can to convince people that this is one of the fundamental tests of a democracy: the ability of people to accept individual differences,’ said Democratic Sen. Mark Dayton. He said the amendment is not necessary because Congress in 1996 passed a law banning gay marriage.” (Rob Hotakainen, “Bush ignites new fight to try to ban gay marriage”, Star Tribune, June 6, 2006)

Dayton Voted Against Ban On Partial Birth Abortion. “Marking a milestone in the nation's abortion wars, the Senate approved a bill that prohibits doctors from performing the procedure, which opponents call partial-birth abortion. The bill bars doctors from committing an "overt act" designed to kill a partially delivered fetus…"Does it appear that we're avoiding something? Well, we are," Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minn., said on the Senate floor. He voted against the ban…Public opinion polls show 70 percent support for a ban on the procedure.” (Rob Hotakainen, “Senate votes to ban late-term abortion method”, Star Tribune, March 14, 2003)

"Quite disturbing"

2010-01-14T17:46:00.005-06:00

I have heard rumors before that the federal government might try to "force" retirees to invest in T-bills. I dismissed this because I was sure that the american electorate would never permit it. It is outrageous and tyrannical.

Read this.

They describe it as "quite disturbing". I agree. Options have a tendency to turn into incentives, which turn into mandates. Soon you have no choice.

This is the stuff of third world dictatorships and petty dictators. It is not possible in the land of free citizens.

More commentary here and here and here and here.

Very disturbing.

Our government imposes on us, much as the British government once imposed upon us

2010-01-13T22:25:00.002-06:00

Today we have the 111 Congress actively imposing on us a great many taxes on virtually all aspects of our lives. Our businesses face an overabundance of regulations and taxes. Our school districts are no longer "Independent School Districts," but are over burdened with federal and state mandates. We, the residents of these school districts, no longer have a say in what is taught our children. The rights of the states, once recognized under the Tenth Amendment, have been trampled on by the federal government. The Fifth Amendment has lost its meaning. We are no longer secure in our possessions, citizens continue to lose our property to government entities through unsavory eminent domain practices.

Today our elected officials are busy picking which business will succeed and which will fail. Banks and auto manufacturers are a couple of examples. Next in line is our health care. Doctors, drug manufacturers, and insurers will be told they must succumb to the wishes of our government. And while this is happening, we will be told that it is for our own good. Meanwhile, our taxes go up, our pay goes down or we lose our jobs, and inflation devalues our currency because of the policies of the nanny state.

Three hundred years ago, our country was founded by immigrants who sought freedom in a new land. By the time the colonies were well established and many of the cities grew large and prosperous, they became the victims of a nanny state. Not one of their own making, but that of an overbearing government bent on maintaining an empire. The British government imposed excessive taxes and levy's on imported goods to the colonies. The production of items such as glass and nails was prohibited within the colonies in an attempt to protect businesses in England at the expense of our own people. Foreign troops were quartered in our homes. British ships blockaded our ports.

In 1774, Ben Franklin was living in England representing the interests of the colonies. After the Boston Tea Party, Franklin argued for the compensation to the East India Company as a kindly gesture, but as the British government was insisting, he changed his mind and insisted against it. To a Boston merchant he said something quite prophetic.

"If you should ever tamely submit to the yoke prepared for you, you cannot conceive how much you will be despised here, even by those who are endeavoring to impose it on you. Your very children and grandchildren will curse your memories for entailing disgrace upon them and theirs, and making them ashamed to own their country."

Because of these words from one of our greatest Americans, we are reminded of our duty to defend our liberties against another tyrannical government. This time within our own borders. Witness the disdain with which our officials see us. We are looked down upon as the ignorant masses. We are seen as incapable of comprehending that which they decide for us. No longer are the cameras allowed in hearings. They are working behind closed doors to decide our future while we are kept away. We cannot stand by idly while our government runs up an unpardonable deficit to be paid by our descendants. Can we look our children or our grandchildren in the eye when they ask us what we did as we lost our liberties? Will our descendants tell tales of pride or disgrace and shame when they speak of us? The responsibility for that is ours. The time is now.

Republican Party of Minnesota Applauds Fines Against Kelliher, DFL Party

2010-01-13T13:30:00.000-06:00

St. Paul- Republican Party of Minnesota Chairman Tony Sutton and Deputy Chairman Michael Brodkorb today issued the following statement after the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board fined DFL gubernatorial candidate Margaret Anderson Kelliher $9,000 and the DFL Party $15,000. The Board’s ruling was in response to a Republican Party of Minnesota complaint filed in December.

“Today’s ruling vindicates our belief that Margaret Anderson Kelliher deliberately circumvented Minnesota’s campaign finance laws to benefit her campaign for governor. Along with R.T. Rybak, Kelliher is now the second DFL gubernatorial candidate to have been involved in a scheme to get around Minnesota's campaign finance laws. Kelliher and other Democrats are wrong to think they don't have to play by the rules. These sort of schemes demonstrate Kelliher does not have the judgment to lead our great state.”

The Shape of Things to Come

2010-01-10T21:39:00.004-06:00

Economics is may be the "dismal science", but some economic laws are a lot like gravity. The laws of supply and demand are ironclad.

We have learned over the last 100 years, in repeated experiments, what happens when governments ignore this, and try to dictate market outcomes. In Cuba, the Soviet Union, and even in the 1970s in the USA when President Nixon imposed wage and price controls, we have learned that trying to engineer economic outcomes against markets is a fool's errand.

In most cases, these market interventions are simply failures, resulting in long lines, and/or wasted resources. If the governments are more determined to impose their will, the result is much more severe. In some cases it has been mass starvation and death, as in Pol Pot's Cambodia, and Stalin's Ukraine in the 1930s.

Our next lesson is unfolding in Venezuela. Mr. Chavez is unhappy with the way the economy is going. You can read about his current situation here.

The people of Venezuela have allowed someone who neither understands, nor supports markets and private property to gain power. Mr. Chavez is showing a willingness to bypass legal protections and process and to use force to impose his agenda.

We have seen where this leads. Mr. Chavez will fail to force the markets to bend to his will.

Ultimately, Mr. Chavez will back off, and the markets will do their work. If brute force is used to try to impose Mr. Chavez's will on the Venezuelan people, it will do great damage to the nation, but not change the economic outcome much.

The USA recently elected a new government that has limited respect for markets and private property, and a zeal for enacting its agenda over the objections of some citizens.

We need to watch Venezuela carefully, because it could be a preview of things to come.

America Rising Video, An Open Letter to Democrats

2010-01-10T11:58:00.001-06:00

This is a powerful video, a must see,

NPR - your tax dollars at work

2010-01-06T18:13:00.006-06:00

Dig the following video, posted by NPR here.

This is an editorial, and as an editorial, it is reasonable for NPR to publish it, even though I find it pretty insulting and distasteful. That said, when NPR's request next comes before Congress, I will be reminding my representatives that I don't appreciate my tax dollars going toward efforts to insult and demean me.

This sort of thing reminds us why organizations like NPR should be funded by donations, not tax dollars.

Transparency and Process

2010-01-05T16:22:00.005-06:00

The Hill has an article here about the White House ducking questions about a C-SPAN request for access to the negotiations on health care "reform".

Mr. Gibbs is quoted in the article as saying that "I don't think there's anyone who would say there hasn't been a thorough, robust debate on healthcare," and adds "I do not believe the American people have lacked for information on what's in these bills."

These bills weigh in at over 2000 pages each, and various members of congress have admitted not reading them, not understanding them, and not feeling that they even have an obligation to read them. (here, and here) When asked about constitutionality, Speaker Pelosi famously asked "are you serious?".

Many of the provisions in Senate bill were written into a "manager's amendment", that was only revealed to the Senate hours before the final vote. The public analysis of this legislation has barely started, much less been completed.

(See Harry Reid comment on "managers amendments" here)

No one understands these bills, or their consequences. The CBO estimates their cost, but it is generally agreed that this is little more than a guess. The Senate bill is estimated to spend $1 Trillion dollars, and raise taxes an equal amount. That's a LOT of money.

We should support the C-SPAN request for access. Process matters.

Benjamin Franklin is said to have replied that we have a republic "if you can keep it". Now is the time. Write your representatives. Both the legislation being considered, and the process that is being used to pass it should be condemned by every responsible citizen.