Yesterday, I wrote this post about how the UpTake just happened to be at the right Target outlet store with their camera at the exact right time to film an aggrieved mother making a purchase costing $226.32, then returning the goods and getting a refund for her purchas.

This morning, a commenter said that the woman described in my post sounds alot like a gay rights activist named Randy Reitan. When I googled her name and clicked on the images tab, it was clear to me that my commenter had the right insight.

Let me be clear about this: I don’t have a quarrel with someone being an activist for a cause, even if it’s a cause I don’t totally agree with. The First Amendment gives each of us the right to make statements of this nature.

This post is dedicated to putting yesterday’s chance meeting in the proper context. It’s equally important that UpTake’s and Mrs. Reitan’s actions are totally transparent and seen from the right perspective.

When I googled Randi Reitan’s name, it said that there were “About 210,000 results (0.16 seconds)” for the web for her name. Here’s a telling link about Randi Reitan:

Randi Reitan, Minnesota’s favorite, and I must say sweetest, PFLAG mom has a great editorial in the Star Tribune about the struggles her family have gone through with religion and love. Here’s a great excerpt:

“To leave this church, which was at the core of our family, is one of the most painful things we have done. But we can no longer worship in a church that treats God’s beloved gay children as sick and sinful based on their sexual orientation. We can no longer sing songs of justice on Sunday morning, knowing the injustice this church lives each and every day with its policies against God’s beloved gay community. We can no longer hear pastors preach of God’s love for all people when the church policy treats its beloved gay members as lesser children of God. We can no longer hear words of love and concern spoken to us in private but never hear them spoken from the pulpit or never see the hierarchy of the church lead with justice.”

If you ever get the chance to meet her, or see her speak, please go. You won’t be disappointed.

Let me repeat this: I don’t have a problem with Mrs. Reitan being an advocate on issues she feels strongly about. I’m writing this post because I want everyone to know, to borrow an old Paul Harvey phrase, the rest of the story.

Yesterday, this is what I said about UpTake’s filming of the shopping spree:

What I question is whether customers are leaving Target en masse. I’m betting they aren’t. I’m betting that UpTake was there to film this to give the impression that people are boycotting Target en masse.

Given this information and the fact that UpTake cameras were in exactly the right spot at exactly the right time to film this tells me that my initial instincts were right.

Readers of this blog are free to draw whichever conclusions they want. I’m just doing the best I can to put the video in the proper context.

Technorati: Activism, Randy Reitan, Gay Rights, Bloggers, UpTake, Transparency, Boycott, Target, MN Forward, PAC, Tom Emmer, Election 2010

The first reaction I had after reading this post was Does Tarryl really expect us to believe this”? My second reaction was Obamacare collapses without an individual mandate.

While meeting liberal activists at this year’s Netroots Nation conference in Las Vegas, Tarryl Clark said she opposes individual health care mandates like those included in the federal health care legislation.

“I’m against individual mandates,” she told Talking Points Memo while discussing the health care bill. “Minnesota’s been a leader in health care. We’ve shown that you can get just about everybody covered without having mandates.”

Clark also said the bill did not do enough “on cost containment.”

Clark spokeswoman Carrie Lucking said the state senator still would have voted for the health care bill had she been in Congress.

“Just because you have concerns about parts of the bill doesn’t mean that overall you don’t think it’s a step in the right direction,” Lucking said, noting that Clark is particularly supportive of the provision barring discrimination based on pre-existing conditions.

TRANSLATION: Tarryl knows that the individual mandate isn’t popular so saying that she’s against it is her best hope of earning her some brownie points.

Tarryl hasn’t figured it out that people don’t care whether you oppose the individual mandate if you’d vote for legislation that includes the individual mandate. People pay attention to a person’s actions, not their words.

Let’s look at the totality of Tarryl’s statement. First, Obamacare crumples without the individual and corporate mandates. PERIOD. END OF DISCUSSION.

Second, according to her spokester, Tarryl didn’t like the individual mandate but she would’ve voted for the bill anyway. Tarryl didn’t think the legislation did enough to control costs but she would’ve voted for the bill anyway.

Given the fact that it wouldn’t have controlled costs and given the fact that health care legislation would’ve fined people if they didn’t buy a health insurance policy that wouldn’t help control cost, what’s the reason for voting for it? Voting for it because Speaker Pelosi tells her to vote for something isn’t a legitimate reason.

Tarryl is a rubberstamp, pure and simple. She isn’t a policy wonk she doesn’t think in terms of doing what’s right for her constituents. Her votes are paybacks to the special interests that support her.

I’d take Tarryl seriously if she’d consistently said that she wouldn’t have voted for Obamacare because it didn’t do enough to lower health care costs or health insurance premiums. That would’ve should’ve proven that she’s got a spine. Because she didn’t show a spine, it’s appropriate to call her just another spineless politician.

That’s why I won’t take her statements seriously.

Technorati: Obamacare, Mandates, Health Care, Tarryl Clark, Health Care Costs, Health Insurance, Premiums, Rubberstamp, Speaker Pelosi, DFL, Election 2010

If anything’s clear about this election, it’s that ABM won’t hesitate to use every tool at their disposal to tell businesses that corporations contributing to candidate ABM doesn’t like that there will be financial consequences. A perfect illustration of that message plays out in this post:

After hearing about Target’s decision to back one of the most anti-LGBT candidates in the country (not only does Tom Emmer consistently back gay marriage bans, but he’s a constant voice of opposition to laws to protect LGBT youth from bullying in schools), one Eden Prairie mom and grandmother went to her local Target store to get some answers.

What follows was a video showing this “Eden Prairie mom and grandmother” using a Target gift card to purchase $226 worth of products, then turning right around and getting a refund on her purchase. Here’s a partial transcript of what she said:

Rondy Raiton: Last week when I heard that Target decided to give $150,000 to Tom Emmer for his political race for governor, I was just shocked. The Target I knew was the Target that embraced its gay employees. It was the Target that showed up at Pride.

After footage showing her taking the merchandise to the checkout counter and a brief discussion with a Target employee, the conversation resumes outside Target:

Ronda Raiton: I didn’t want to return the items until she [the store manager] was there to show her what I had purchased. I shared with her why I had purchased each item and who they were for and why that person wouldn’t want me to purchase them at a Target store.

A number of the items were for my grandchildren and they love their Uncle Jake so much and Jake is gay and they wouldn’t want things coming from a store that contributes to a campaign…that would have a governor candidate with the anti-gay views that Tom Emmer has.

With 3 seconds left in the video, this message appears at the bottom of the screen:

Produced for the UpTake By Bill Sorem

I won’t question whether the woman in the video feels strongly about these issues. It certainly appears as though she’s passionate about this set of issues. What I question is whether customers are leaving Target en masse. I’m betting they aren’t. I’m betting that UpTake was there to film this to give the image that people are boycotting Target en masse. Frankly, I don’t know if the average John Q. Public type has heard of ABM or MN Forward, much less what they stand for.

In fact, let’s question why UpTake was there. It isn’t like this Target store was the only Target stor in the Twin cities. What are the odds thta UpTake just happened to be at that particular Target at exactly the right time to film this woman giving Target a piece of her mind?

Would I be reasonable in guessing that the odds of all these things lining perfectly would roughly the same as getting struck by lightning twice while holding 2 winning lottery tickets?

The notion that this woman’s grandchildren “wouldn’t want things coming from a store that contributes” to a candidate like Tom Emmer is preposterous. I’m betting that, barring the total indoctrination of this woman’s grandchildren, the kids would like getting just about anything from just about anywhere.

Thanks to this preposterous video, ABM and UpTake have been exposed as propagandists of the highest magnitude. The UpTake isn’t a serious news organization like they told House and Senate leadership in getting credentialed. They’re another appendage on the progressives’ propaganda arm.

ABM isn’t just a grassroots organization that believes in the same things as any number of other progressive groups, whether the issue is health care, immigration, taxation, regulation or transportation.

They’re like Rush talking about catching the news: If you miss the CBS Evening news, then watch ABC. If you miss ABC, then tune in MSNBC. If you miss MSNBC, read the NY Times or the Washington Post. They’re interchangeable because they’re skilled in repeating their talking points fluently.

It isn’t a stretch to think that ABM and the UpTake get paid based on their willingness to put the most positive spin on the DFL’s agenda. I say spin because I’ve watched how people react to individual components of the DFL’s agenda. It isn’t pretty. There’s a reason why I’ve said that the DFL majorities in the State Legislature are obstructionist majorities.

It’s no secret that Linda Berglin’s committee is where promising health care reforms go to die. The merits matter not. If it’s a GOP proposal, it’s going nowhere as long as Linda Berglin holds the gavel.

It’s time that we rid ourselves of obstructionists like ABM, the UpTake and Linda Berglin. We need fresh ideas, something that the DFL, the UpTake and ABM are sorely lacking in.

Finally, it’s time that people started openly questioning the things that ABM has said. I’ve been doing that on this blog all summer. Mitch Berg has written alot about it, too, including the definitive piece on ABM’s funding.

Technorati: UpTake, ABM, Smear Campaign, Gay Rights, Progressives, Mark Dayton, Target, Boycott, DFL, Tom Emmer, Capitalism, Conservatism, MNGOP, Election 2010

This article tells us everything we need to know why Democrats, starting with President Obama and Chuck Schumer, hate the Citizens United ruling. This is absolutely rich with irony:

When the Citizens United Supreme Court decision came down earlier this year, holding that corporations could spend an unlimited amount of money in trying to influence elections, it was criticized by scores of people, including President Barack Obama himself, who worried that the decision would lead to a corporate takeover of American elections.

“They can buy millions of dollars worth of TV ads, and worst of all, they don’t even have to reveal who’s actually paying for the ads,” President Obama said in his 2010 State of the Union address. “Instead, a group can hide behind a name like ‘Citizens for a Better Future,’ even if a more accurate name would be ‘Companies for Weaker Oversight.’ These shadow groups are already forming and building war chests of tens of millions of dollars to influence the fall elections.”

You got that right. And if you needed proof, look no further than retail giant Target Corporation, which has stepped into a mess the size of Lake Superior by being caught giving $150,000 to a political action committee (PAC) in Minnesota known as Minnesota Forward. That PAC, in turn, funneled money to support a conservative candidate for governor, Tom Emmer. And Tom Emmer not only opposes same-sex marriage, but he has financially supported and pals around with a religious ministry that has been quoted as advocating for violence against gays and lesbians, wanting to overturn Minnesota laws in order to criminalize homosexuality, and calling all gay people pedophiles.

Oh, Target. The wicked things your money now touches. Perhaps you were hoping your $150,000 would advance “Minnesota Forward.” A more apt name may be Minnesota Backward.

Mitch Berg did a great job of exposing the funding sources for ABM in this post. What’s most disgusting to me is that ABM got most of their funding from people who used to own Dayton and Target:

So far in 2010, “Win Minnesota” lists the following donors to “Win Minnesota”’s current warchest (currently worth $1,173,500), again with emphasis added by me:

» Andrew Dayton $1,000
» David Dayton $50,000
» John Cowles $25,000 [Remember him from 2006?]
» MaryLee Dayton $250,000
» Emily Tuttle (MN) $5,000
» Ronald Sternal (MN) $5,000
» Alida Messinger (NY) $500,000
» James Deal (MN) $50,000
» Roger Hale (MN) $10,000 [Remember him from above?]
» Barbara Forster (MN) $25,000
» Democratic Governors Association $250,000;
So of the $1.1 and change million warchest, $851,000 came from Daytons, and Alida Messinger.

Mitch notes later in the post that Alida Messinger is the “ex-wife of candidate Mark Dayton.” Let’s see if I’ve got this straight: It’s evil when Target contributes $150,000 to a PAC that promotes pro-growth economic policies but it’s just fine if the people that made tens of millions of dollars while they owned Daytons to establish a shadowy organization whose main purpose is to criticize the GOP’s candidate, the only pro-growth candidate in the race?

I’m betting that ABM is upset with the Citizens United ruling because they could spew the most vile, the most wildly inaccurate statements imaginable with impugnity until Minnesota Forward was formed. Here’s one of the first things I quoted ABM as saying about Tom Emmer:

We’ve become accustomed to some extreme Tea Party characters from conservatives in this state (you know who I mean, I don’t need to link), but Tom Emmer’s vision for “prosperity” using his “principles” for this state rank right up there with even the most caffeinated of Tea Partiers. What do I mean? I mean drastic cuts to school budgets, essentials services like road plowing in the winter, and Minnesotans having to hold out their tin cup begging for a charity check-up from their doctor.

ABM’s statements have nothing to do with reality. ABM’s statements have everything to do with smearing a political opponent. If they need to make things up, that’s what they’ve done.

Just a few minutes ago, Republican party Chairman Tony Sutton issued this statement on ABM:

St. Paul- Republican Party of Minnesota Chairman Tony Sutton today called on Democrat gubernatorial candidate Mark Dayton to denounce his family’s funding of the pro-Dayton front groups Win Minnesota and the 2010 Fund. In this election cycle, Dayton family members have already donated $851,000 to Win Minnesota and the 2010 Fund, which in turn, have funneled over $1.6 million to the Alliance for a Better Minnesota.

“With the family of Mark Dayton flooding the campaign coffers of WIN Minnesota and the 2010 Fund to run the Alliance for a Better Minnesota’s negative attack ads against Tom Emmer, it’s time Dayton himself stood up and denounced this obvious effort to buy the election. Dayton likes to rail against the ‘rich,’ but it’s precisely his rich family members who are funding this unprecedented onslaught of negative personal attacks. While Dayton gives his family a wink and a nod, Minnesotans will see right through his cynical attempt to hide behind these front groups.”

I think that Dayton and his family have alot of explaining to do, not because they’re major funders of this group, but because that organization has said some of the most outrageous things imaginable.

I’ll go a step further and say that ABM isn’t just Dayton Family Politics, Inc. It’s that the other DFL gubernatorial candidates have used the misinformation from ABM’s website. For example, during her interview with Tom Hauser on last Sunday’s @Issue, Speaker Kelliher said something very similar to this ABM golden oldie:

I mean drastic cuts to school budgets, essentials services like road plowing in the winter.

Instead of using the phrase drastic cuts to school budgets, Speaker Kelliher said that class sizes would increase dramatically.

ABM can’t get away with their smear campaign against Tom Emmer thanks to Minnesota Forward. ABM doesn’t like it that it’s more difficult, though not impossible, to define Tom Emmer on their terms.

Thankfully, the Roberts Court respected the First Amendment and made the proper ruling. The other thing that’s needed is transparency, though not the type found in the DISCLOSE Act.

Because of the Citizens United ruling, Minnesota Forward can tell Minnesotans about Tom Emmer’s pro-growth policies. In the end, that’s a very positive thing for Minnesota.

Technorati: SCOTUS, Citizens United, First Amendment, Transparency, Tom Emmer, Capitalism, Prosperity, Target, Inc., MNGOP, Alliance For a Better Minnesota, Mark Dayton, Speaker Kelliher, Smear Campaign, Special Interests, Election 2010

Former Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer deserves special thanks for writing this op-ed because it gives the felons who voted illegally in the 2008 election an identity. Here’s the identity of a few of the felons who voted illegally:

• Theresa Marie Barslou (known to police by this name and six others): priors for multiple check forgeries, multiple instances of giving a peace officer a false name, and malicious punishment of a child.
• Karen Louise Burrell McKinney (known by this name and five others): multiple priors for check forgery, wrongfully obtaining assistance, and malicious punishment of a child.
• Antoinette Davida Molinar (known by this name and four others): priors for drug possession, giving a peace officer a false name, wrongfully obtaining assistance, aiding and abetting theft, and fifth-degree assault.
• Donald James Diamond: multiple priors for issuing dishonored checks and theft.
• Dustin James Norring: multiple priors for disorderly conduct, aiding and abetting theft, and third-degree assault.

Minnesota Majority has identified other felons but that should suffice in proving that felons voting.

What’s shameful is that it was Minnesota Majority that investigated the story, not soon-to-be-former Secretary of State Mark Ritchie. Ritchie has said on more than one occasion that voter fraud didn’t exist in Minnesota. This group of felons, uncovered in Minnesota Majority’s investigation, says that Mr. Ritchie is wrong.

What’s notable is the prevalence of identity theft-related offenses. Anti-reform special interests like Common Cause, the League of Women Voters and the misnamed Citizens for Election Integrity in Minnesota will say there has never been an instance of a voter impersonating someone else prosecuted in Minnesota. But there is no system even to detect that activity.

I’ve said it before but I’ll repeat it again: it’s impossible to find what you refuse to look for. Mark Ritchie isn’t interested in making sure the voter rolls are kept updated. Based on what I’ve seen, election integrity isn’t a priority with him.

Though Mr. Ritchie’s efforts are disgraceful, what’s worse is that political hacks like Nick Coleman are providing cover for Mr. Ritchie:

Nick has…made up “facts” (for example, in his July 19 column, saying that I started the nonprofit public policy organization Minnesota Majority. I did not, though I did help as a consultant).

Looking back at the 2008 U.S. Senate recount, in his usual sarcastic and sophomoric way, Nick takes about 800 words to belittle the people at Minnesota Majority who painstakingly did due diligence where Secretary of State Mark Ritchie did not, discovering problems with our election system, specifically, that felons were allowed to vote in 2008.

Nick Coleman hasn’t payed attention to details in ages. Let’s not forget his anti-Pawlenty diatribe following the collapse of the I-35 bridge in which he declared as settled fact that Gov. Pawlenty’s no new taxes pledge had caused the bridge collapse. Months later, the NTSB said that the gusset plates were defective.

Coleman stated authoritatively that the I-35 bridge collapse was caused by Gov. Pawlenty’s no new taxes pledge, an absurd accusation that Sarah Janacek called him out on in this article. First, here’s Coleman’s accusation:

For half a dozen years, the motto of state government and particularly that of Gov. Tim Pawlenty has been No New Taxes. It’s been popular with a lot of voters and it has mostly prevailed. So much so that Pawlenty vetoed a 5-cent gas tax increase, the first in 20 years, last spring and millions were lost that might have gone to road repair. And yes, it would have fallen even if the gas tax had gone through, because we are years behind a dangerous curve when it comes to the replacement of infrastructure that everyone but wingnuts in coonskin caps agree is one of the basic duties of government.

Here’s Sarah’s rebuke of Coleman:

The $3.3 million price tag was being paid mostly by the federal government ($2.97 million) and not the state ($330,000).

The National Bridge Inventory conducted by the federal government in 2003 reported that the bridge had a “sufficiency” rating of 50% on a scale of 120. That’s not great, but that’s where about 80,000 of the country’s bridges stand. The significant finding of that Inventory, however, was that structurally, the bridge “meets minimum tolerable limits to be left in place as-is.”

The federal government didn’t flag structural issues; neither did MnDOT.

Pawlenty could have raised the gas tax $50 a gallon and nothing would have happened. The structural condition of the bridge was not on anyone’s radar screen. At this point, that appears to be the real issue: All levels of government may have failed us.

The point is this: if liberals are whining about an issue, Nick’s reliably there to amplify their whining whether the facts support them or not. (FYI- more often than not, Coleman’s whining hasn’t been supported by the facts.) Here’s Coleman’s logic-free column on the felons voting issue:

I believe that felons voted illegally in the last governor’s election, helping Tim Pawlenty defeat his crime-busting DFL foe, Attorney General Mike Hatch, by less than 1 percent of the votes in the 2006 contest, the closest Minnesota governor’s race in years.

I have not one jot or tittle of evidence to support my suspicions. But a lack of credible evidence did not stop Pawlenty when he used one of his frequent national TV appearances, where he is seldom pestered by journalists with actual knowledge of events on the ground back here in Flyover Land, to renew the stench of uncertainty over the Al Franken-Norm Coleman U.S. Senate recount.

Mary Kiffmeyer wrote a response after reading Coleman’s column. Unlike the professional columnist Nick Coleman, though, Mary Kiffmeyer’s op-ed included real information, including the names of felons who voted illegally.

I’d call for Coleman to resign but that’s just a waste of good bandwidth. I’d call for Coleman to do a little research before writing his latest diatribe but that’s another waste of good bandwidth. He is who he is: a loudmouthed jerk who can’t be bothered by factchecking and doing his due diligence.

Mark Ritchie is much the same way. Obviously, he isn’t interested in doing his due diligence. Obviously, he can’t be bothered by doing even the minimum amount of research and investigation required to do his job.

The bad news is that I can’t do anything to get Nick Coleman fired. That’s beyond my control. The good news is that I can play a vital role in getting Mark Ritchie fired this November. That’s my intent. Mr. Ritchie willfully ignoring of one of his most important responsibilities is all the reason I need to vote the bum out of office.

Technorati: Felons, Voter Fraud, Mark Ritchie, Nick Coleman, Due Diligence, DFL, Minnesota Majority, Investigations, Mary Kiffmeyer, Op-ed, Elections, Election 2010