Search
Archives
Categories

Anyone that thinks that Tim Walz’s recent statements will help him get elected is kidding himself. Rep. Walz is a con artist. Those of us in Minnesota know that about Rep. Walz. According to this article, Rep. Walz said “The DNC wanted the message to be the ACA [Affordable Care Act] is working fine and don’t talk about the warts. I said I can’t do that because it’s failing my constituents in a lot of ways.”

Rep. Walz’s statement is transparent in that he’s a) voted for the ACA, b) criticized the AHCA and c) criticized the Senate Republicans’ health care bill. The thing is that Rep. Walz hasn’t lifted a finger to propose a solution that would fix the ACA. It’s one thing to whine about bills. It’s another thing to fix bills that are “failing my constituents in a lot of ways.” This is typical Democrat do-nothing complaining that don’t offer solutions.

I don’t know why Rep. Walz would make a statement like this while he’s running for governor. Saying that the ACA is failing his constituents in a lot of ways is a shortcut to alienating a huge part of the DFL primary voters. RNC Chairwoman Ronna Romney-McDaniel criticized Democrats obstruction in this video:

Here’s what she said:

It’s unfortunate because people are suffering across the country. Let’s look at the evolution of this, they passed 30,000 pages of legislation without reading it. They said you could keep your doctor. They said you can keep your healthcare plan. They said it was going to be affordable, and none of that has been true. And now, premiums have doubled across the country, you have insurers pulling out of marketplaces. People are suffering and Democrats are sitting on their hands when they created this problem. Republicans are working together. We have reached out to them, we want them involved in the process. It is unfortunate they have obstructed every step of the way and they are not putting the American people first.

Tim Walz fits that description perfectly. He voted to create this crisis, then voted multiple times against fixing the problem. Here’s the video of Rep. Walz whining about the ACA without offering a solution to fixing it:

I can’t picture a way for Walz to win the DFL gubernatorial primary. Until now, he’d been predicted to be the DFL frontrunner. I’ve got to think that his criticisms of the ACA will hurt him with primary voters.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

Judge John Guthmann might’ve given Minnesotans a hint as to how he would eventually rule on the legislature’s lawsuit against Gov. Dayton. Judge Guthmann ordered the “state budget chief to take all steps necessary” to fund the legislature.

In issuing that order, Judge Guthmann said “Absent (temporary) relief, the public would be irreparably harmed through the deprivation of a basic constitutional right —a fully functioning Legislative Branch.” That sounds to me like Judge Guthmann is leaning in the legislature’s direction. Gov. Dayton’s attorneys had argued that the “Governor has explicit and unqualified authority under the Minnesota Constitution to veto any line item of appropriation. The Minnesota Constitution authorizes the Governor’s line-item vetoes, without any qualification as to the Governor’s subjective intent or purpose.”

In his ruling, Judge Guthmann said that “the public would be irreparably harmed” by being deprived “of a basic constitutional right – a fully functioning Legislative Branch.” I said earlier this week that the line-item veto was a tool that might be used to shape budgets. Further, I wrote that doesn’t compare in importance to depriving the people of a basic constitutional right to representation.

This lawsuit shouldn’t have been needed. Gov. Dayton should’ve signed last year’s tax relief package. Vetoing that bill demolished Gov. Dayton’s credibility. That veto led to the GOP legislature to play hardball with Gov. Dayton this year. Thankfully, this was the last budget session Republicans will have to deal with Gov. Dayton.

Frankly, Gov. Dayton’s last day can’t come soon enough.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

John Jasinski’s op-ed in the Owatonna newspaper is hard-hitting and to the point. The point that caught my eye the most was when Sen. Jasinski said “But the biggest problem is the precedent it sets: if the governor’s decision is allowed to stand, then every future governor will effectively be able to hold the Legislature or Supreme Court hostage until they get everything they want. Imagine a governor withholding funding to the courts over a ruling they didn’t like. Gov. Dayton’s veto has opened that door.”

Think of the power that precedent would give a (God forbid) Gov. Thissen or Gov. Erin Murphy. Minnesota would turn into an autocratic state almost immediately. Let’s remember that Rep. Thissen already verbally abused paid staffers. Imagine what he’d do if the courts ruled in Gov. Dayton’s favor and Thissen became governor. It’s a frightening thought.

Another of Sen. Jasinski’s points came when he said “We also won’t be able to have session, so every urgent project will face another year without funding. Want Highway 14 to get done? Thanks to the governor’s action, we won’t be able to provide any more money for it until 2019. That goes for any other road, bridge, or infrastructure project, or any law that needs to be fixed.”

Gov. Dayton’s latest temper tantrum essentially stops the state for 2 years, though you wouldn’t know it if you got your information from the Twin Cities media’s reporting:

Gov. Dayton agreed to this budget, including the tax relief. He intended to veto this tax package just like he vetoed the tax relief package he agreed to last year. Gov. Dayton even accused Republicans of “political blackmail.” If anyone’s playing political blackmail, it’s Gov. Dayton. He agreed to the budget. Now, he’s trying to get Republicans to renegotiate major parts of the tax relief package.

Thank God Gov. Dayton won’t preside over another budget session. Every group of taxpayers is paying more taxes. Minnesotans aren’t getting more services for those additional taxes, either. It’s time he retired and spent more time with his family.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

In his lawyers’ briefs, Gov. Dayton’s arrogance shines through in stunning, repulsive fashion. This article highlights both sides’ arguments.

Let’s start with the arguments that Gov. Dayton’s attorneys made. In their filing, Gov. Dayton’s attorneys said “The Governor has explicit and unqualified authority under the Minnesota Constitution to veto any line item of appropriation. The Minnesota Constitution authorizes the Governor’s line-item vetoes, without any qualification as to the Governor’s subjective intent or purpose.”

Technically, that’s true. Then again, no right is absolute. Each right must pass a balancing test. That’s why rights don’t come “without any qualification.” It’s arrogant for Gov. Dayton’s attorneys essentially argue that a governor’s right to shape appropriations through the governor’s line-item authority is more important than the people’s right to representation. The line-item veto is a budget tool, nothing more. If the line-item veto disappeared, governors would have one less tool to shape budgets. If the legislature disappeared, the people would lose their representation. It isn’t difficult to argue that the people Losing their right to representation is infinitely more important than giving governors an additional budget tool.

The Legislature’s argument is that “Without injunctive relief, Plaintiffs are unable to fulfill their constitutional obligations, will not be able to represent their constituents, and the People of the State of Minnesota are deprived of their constitutionally-mandated voice in the administration of their government.”

If Minnesota governors lost the line-item veto, they’d lose a budget-shaping tool. If the people lost their right to representation, democracy would immediately disappear. In filing their brief, Gov. Dayton’s attorneys are arguing against democracy. In filing their brief, the Legislature’s attorneys argue for full-throated democracy.

If the court get this one wrong, the judges that sided with Gov. Dayton should be immediately impeached and removed from office.

Technorati: , , , , ,

To say that Sen. Grassley gave Jim Comey and Chuck Schumer a tutorial in integrity is understatement. This article highlights Sen. Grassley’s speech on the Senate floor that should’ve been delivered months ago.

First, Sen. Grassley reported that “then-FBI Director James Comey briefed ranking member Dianne Feinstein and him on the Russia probe.” Sen. Grassley then said the briefing included “telling us who was, and who was not, under investigation.” Then Sen. Grassley opened both barrels and trained them on then-FBI Director Comey and Senate Minority Leader Schumer.

During his speech, Grassley said “After that meeting, I publicly called for Mr. Comey to tell the public what he had told us about whether President Trump was under investigation. The public had a right to know. Mr. Comey told me and other Congressional leaders that President Trump was not under investigation. He even told the President himself – repeatedly. But, Mr. Comey didn’t listen to my request for transparency. He didn’t listen to the President’s request. Only months later has the truth finally come out.”

With that, Sen. Schumer was exposed. Then Sen. Grassley added this:

So the media was wrong. So the Democrats were wrong. So the wild speculation and conspiracy theories ended up harming our country. They played right into Russia’s hands. And how did we all learn about this truth? In President Trump’s letter removing Mr. Comey from office.

At first most didn’t believe it. The media scoffed when they wrote what the president said in that letter. They insisted that Mr. Comey would never tell the president that he was not under investigation. Well we learned earlier this month from Mr. Comey himself that he had done exactly that. It wasn’t a surprise to me because Mr. Comey had told me the same thing.

Check out this video of Sen. Grassley’s speech:

Let’s be clear about something. Mr. Comey didn’t tell the American people that President Trump wasn’t being investigated. Further, Senate Minority Leader Schumer didn’t tell the whole truth about the FBI’s investigation when he knew that it wasn’t focusing on President Trump. Instead, Sen. Schumer stuck with the Democrats’ chanting points, pretending that President Trump was under investigation.

At this point, Sen. Schumer’s integrity doesn’t exist. What politician ignores that type of information for political gain? A: The most corrupt leader of Senate Democrats since Harry Reid. People hate politicians because they’re morally bankrupt. Sen. Schumer is the poster child of moral depravity in the Senate. As the Democrats’ leader in the Senate, Schumer should be a leader. Instead, he’s the chief obstructionist in a party without a message.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

I don’t know whether this editorial is dishonest or if the person writing it is sloppy. Perhaps it’s both.

I take exception, though, when the editorial says “Instead Republican legislators inserted a last-minute shutdown bomb into a must-pass budget bill: Unless Gov. Mark Dayton signed off on everything Republicans wanted, the Minnesota Department of Revenue would cease to function and our state operations, highway, police, parks, and everything else, would shut down. Dayton signed the bill because a shutdown would hurt everyone. In return, however, he vetoed operating funds for the Legislature.”

Actually, Gov. Dayton is the culprit. In 2016, he agreed to a tax relief package, then vetoed it. This year, he agreed to a trimmed-down tax relief package. This time, Republicans didn’t take Gov. Dayton at his word. That’s why they planted the provision in the bill that would’ve defunded the Department of Revenue if he didn’t sign the Republicans’ tax relief bill.

The fact that Gov. Dayton line-item vetoed the legislature’s funding tells me that Gov. Dayton planned on vetoing the tax relief again. Otherwise, wouldn’t Gov. Dayton have signed the tax relief when he signed the other budget bills? There wouldn’t have been a need for Gov. Dayton to throw another hissy fit. There wouldn’t have been a need for Gov. Dayton to try to shut down the legislature for the next 2 years.

Perhaps, too, Gov. Dayton didn’t like the fact that he got called out for reneging on his tax promise in 2016. Gov. Dayton’s dishonesty is his problem. Minnesotans shouldn’t be punished with higher taxes because Gov. Dayton is dishonest.

Finally, Gov. Dayton eroded the public’s trust. Republicans didn’t renege on passing tax relief. That’s all on Gov. Dayton’s shoulders.

Technorati: , , ,

If this article is quoting Rep. Adam Schiff right, then he’s either dumber than a sack of hair or he’s one of the shiftiest (and not in a good way) politicians in Congress.

Thursday, President Trump admitted that he didn’t tape his conversations with former FBI Director Jim Comey. Rep. Schiff issued a statement, saying “This raises a lot of questions about why he would suggest in the first place there were tapes, what he hoped to gain from that? And, moreover, why he kept the country guessing about this issue for weeks, and weeks and weeks.” He said it also raises questions about “what lengths he will go to try to intimidate people from speaking out?”

I’m betting that Rep. Schiff isn’t interested in the truth in this instance. I’m betting that he’s mostly interested in keeping this story alive. I’m betting that’s because it’s the only thing that makes him politically relevant. Further, I’m betting that he’s doing what Nancy Pelosi has told him to do. Does anyone doubt that Ms. Pelosi thinks that’s the only way to keep distracting from Trump’s agenda? Honestly, for all the talk about how the Democrats’ brand is toxic outside California, New York and universities, it’s pretty apparent that the Democratic Party is Ms. Pelosi’s party.

At the moment, here’s Ms. Pelosi’s chief wimp:

Until Democrats stand up to Ms. Pelosi, they’ll deserve to be the minority party.

Technorati: , , , ,

It isn’t surprising that Chuck Schumer is dishonest. He’s been dishonest for a decade. It’s who he is. After listening to his prepared speech, which was filled with dishonest statements and outright omissions, I had to sit down before writing this post because people shouldn’t write angry. I haven’t always done that. When I’ve written angry, I’ve written poorly. Trust me. I can tell the difference.

One of the things that Sen. Schumer said during his dishonest criticism of the Senate Republicans’ health care bill was that Democrats had committee hearings on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare. While that’s technically true, it’s intentionally misleading. Democrats had hearings in multiple committees. After those hearings, though, the various bills were collected and brought up to Harry Reid’s office. That’s where a handful of Democratic senators, led by Max Baucus, wrote the final bill. Only committee chairs were allowed into the inner sanctuary of Sen. Reid’s office during the writing of the final bill.

Further, while it’s true that the Senate held hearings on the bill, it’s impossible to honestly say that they listened to the American people. This is video of one of those town hall meetings:

That certainly isn’t listening to the people. Neither is this:

If Sen. Schumer wants to say that Democrats held hearings, that’s fine but if he wants to say that Democrats listened to the people, then he’d better expect to hear tons of criticism during the 4th of July recess. Further, I’d caution Sen. Schumer against insisting that Democrats care about the policy. They’ve said repeatedly that getting the ACA passed was their goal. They didn’t say that making health care affordable and options plentiful was their goal in any meaningful way. (They mouthed the words but they were lying – think if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.)
This video should instruct the American people on how little Democrats care about health care policy:

Almost 6 minutes into the video, Sen. Schumer talked about how Republicans are like a driver who spots an accident and wants to help but, since they’re not doctors, they don’t know what to do. With all due respect, Sen. Schumer isn’t the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Sen. Barrasso, Sen. Cassidy and Sen. Rand Paul are each doctors. In fact, 12 of the 14 doctors in Congress are Republicans.

If Sen. Schumer isn’t taken seriously, it’s the epitome of chutzpah for Sen. Schumer to say that Democrats are experts on health care policy. If they’re experts, why are insurance companies either raising premiums or getting out of the exchanges? That doesn’t sound like much of an expert to me.

While reading this article that announced that Hugh Hewitt was getting his own show on MSNBC, I read something that almost made me start laughing uncontrollably.

The article said “NBC News chairman Andy Lack is known to favor hard news, and has programmed the network to feature a broader range of editorial opinions in addition to traditional newsmen like Brian Williams.” Since when is Lying Brian Williams a “traditional” newsman? Have industry standards dropped that low?

For instance, this article highlights “Choppergate.” That’s where it said “During the January 30, 2015, NBC Nightly News broadcast, Brian Williams referred to “a terrible moment a dozen years back during the invasion of Iraq when the helicopter we were traveling in was forced down after being hit by an RPG.” Williams later said he was not in the helicopter that was hit by an RPG, but in a helicopter directly behind it. The pilots of Williams’ helicopter say their chopper was not directly behind the hit Chinook, but in a different company altogether.”

Based on the things other anchors have said, perhaps Williams is a traditional news anchor. Compared with Scott Pelley’s recent accusations against Steve Scalise, Williams’ statements don’t seem that terrible. Williams’ statements are just verifiably dishonest. Pelley’s questions are downright offensive. Here’s a reminder of Pelley’s disgusting outburst:

It’s time to ask whether journalists have any integrity left. I’m not betting they do.

Technorati: , , , ,

After going O-fer on this year’s special elections, Democrats aren’t in a good mood. Let’s fix that. They’re mad as hell and they aren’t going to take it anymore. Simply put, they’re in the mood for a lengthy round of circular firing squads.

That’s especially obvious in this article. Early in the article, it says “Many were upset that Democrat Jon Ossoff blunted what was arguably his greatest asset — antipathy toward President Donald Trump — by going relatively easy on the president and avoiding controversy at all cost. Others, however, countered that Ossoff was a fine candidate who was the victim of a party that is too cautious and has lost its ability to connect with voters.”

I’d be lying if I said I thought Ossoff was a good candidate. He isn’t. He tried being something he isn’t. He isn’t a centrist, which is how he tried portraying himself. The ads were right. He’s a Pelosi hardline liberal. It’s just that he couldn’t admit that in GA-06 because he would’ve gotten obliterated if he’d been honest.

The Democratic Party needs to be rebuilt. The proof comes in this paragraph, which says “Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), one of the party’s rising stars, said Democrats have been distracted by the investigation in Trump’s alleged ties to Russia and need to focus more on making a concrete impact on voters’ lives.” Watch this video, then tell me this guy is talented:

It’s apparent that Sen. Murphy is part of the establishment wing of the Democratic Party. He just knows that he can’t admit that and attract the contributions he’d need for a presidential run. This paragraph is definitely true:

Democrats also have an “authenticity” problem, he said, noting, “I think that there are a lot of people who look at the Democratic party and aren’t sure that we aren’t also captive by special interest, and that’s not true.”

Sen. Murphy has an authenticity problem and an honesty problem. When was the last time Democrats sided with blue collar miners over the environmentalists? I can’t remember. President Obama sided with the environmentalists over the pipefitters on the Keystone XL Pipeline. It’s that simple.