Search
Archives

You are currently browsing the archives for the DFL category.

Categories

Archive for the ‘DFL’ Category

It’s clear from Sen. Klobuchar’s statement that she wants nothing to do with Sen. Franken. Further, it’s apparent that she’s doing her best to sound like she’s doing something without actually doing anything. In her Facebook statement, St. Amy said “This should not have happened to Leeann Tweeden. I strongly condemn this behavior and the Senate Ethics Committee must open and conduct a thorough investigation.”

Actually, there isn’t a need to “conduct a thorough investigation” in Sen. Franken’s perverted behavior. Ms. Tweeden made serious and credible accusations against Franken. She included photographic proof of Franken’s disgusting behavior, too. It’s worth noting that Franken confirmed that the incident happened.

In his statement about the incidents (plural), Franken said “I certainly don’t remember the rehearsal for the skit in the same way, but I send my sincerest apologies to Leeann. As to the photo, it was clearly intended to be funny but wasn’t. I shouldn’t have done it.”

It’s obvious that Franken is a pervert. What other person thinks that groping a woman while she’s sleeping should be interpreted as being funny? Check out this picture and tell me whether a normal person would think it’s funny:

Here’s Franken’s pathetic statement on the matter:

Let’s be clear. It’s dishonest for Franken to say “I respect women. I don’t respect men who don’t. And the fact that my own actions have given people a good reason to doubt that makes me feel ashamed.” He’s a total pervert who deserves to be perp-walked out of Capitol Hill this afternoon.
UPDATE: Another accuser has stepped forward:

Democrats have a growing problem on their hands that’s impossible to walk away from. This story is about to get bigger.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday will be D-Day for Gov. Dayton and the Minnesota Supreme Court. According to Brian Bakst’s reporting, the “Minnesota Supreme Court is expected to deliver its long-awaited decision Thursday in a court case between the governor and Legislature. A notice from the clerk of courts to parties in the case said a decision has been made in the lawsuit regarding Gov. Mark Dayton’s vetoes.”

Bakst continued, saying “If [the] high court invalidates the line-item vetoes, it would cause funding to spring back. If [the] justices uphold the vetoes, it will push the Legislature toward a financial crisis.” That’s true but more than that, if the Supreme Court sides with Gov. Dayton, it will have reversed itself.

In this post, I highlighted the fact that the Supreme Court ruled that Gov. Dayton, like previous governors, has line-item veto authority. I also highlighted the fact that the Supreme Court said that a constitutional provision (the line-item veto) can’t “be used to achieve an unconstitutional result.” In the Supreme Court’s ruling, they also said that Minnesotans have a “constitutional right to three independent branches of government.”

The Minnesota Supreme Court, whether it realizes it or not, is on trial here. If they rule that the legislature must spend down the money appropriated to the Legislative Coordinating Commission, aka the LCC, they will be violating multiple Minnesota statutes. First, part of the money appropriated to the LCC pays for the operations of the Office of Legislative Auditor, aka OLA. In this post, I wrote “Legislative Auditor Jim Nobles has already expressed concerns about certain functions of his office being suspended – specifically the certification of state financial reports that support the state’s credit rating and the receipt of federal funds.” It’s inconceivable to me that the Supreme Court would rule against funding the OLA simply for those reasons.

I don’t doubt that the DFL operatives in black robes want to justify siding with Gov. Dayton. It’s just that I can’t imagine them saying in their preliminary ruling that you can’t use part of the state constitution to achieve an unconstitutional result. Saying that a governor has the right to temporarily disable the part of the government that represents the people is incomprehensible.

Check in with LFR Thursday for the Supreme Court’s final ruling in this important case.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

Something jumped out at me while reading this article. Specifically, I’m upset with Melissa Hortman after she said “I think that Senator Gazelka should work with Democrats like Governor Dayton and me and Senator Bakk to solve a problem rather than using people as pawns in a political dispute.” Actually, Gov. Dayton is the problem. If he hadn’t negotiated in bad faith, this wouldn’t have happened. In fact, he negotiated in bad faith twice, once when he said he’d sign the Republicans’ tax relief plan 2 years ago. He negotiated in bad faith this year when he signed the tax relief bill, then line-item vetoed the funding for the legislature.

Gov. Dayton’s holding the people of Minnesota hostage because he wants to renegotiate legislation he’s already signed. Giving a governor that type of authority is unforgiveable. With that authority, governors could hold the legislature hostage every budget session. Is the Supreme Court willing to give the executive branch that authority over the legislative branch? If they’re willing to do that, then the Supreme Court is corrupt. They’re willing to give one branch of government the upper hand in budget negotiations. It isn’t difficult to envision a governor holding the legislature hostage if the legislature doesn’t give him what he wants.

Here’s what I’d tell Rep. Hortman. Rather than defending people in the DFL, she should defend the people of Minnesota. Thus far, she’s defended the DFL. She hasn’t defended Minnesotans.

By vetoing the legislature’s funding, then filing the appeal after losing the first court case, Gov. Dayton has endangered the funding for the Office of Legislative Auditor, aka OLA, and the Revisor’s Office. I wrote in this post that those offices aren’t inconsequential offices:

The office of the Legislative Auditor is funded through the LCC. Legislative Auditor Jim Nobles has already expressed concerns about certain functions of his office being suspended – specifically the certification of state financial reports that support the state’s credit rating and the receipt of federal funds.

The Office of the Revisor of Statutes is also funded through the LCC and they work year-round with state agencies on rule making authority. The Revisor’s office would also be necessary to draft a bill to restore legislative functions once session begins in February.

Thanks to Gov. Dayton’s line-item veto, the office that certifies Minnesota’s financial reports that keep our credit rating healthy is getting its funding stripped. The Revisor of Statutes Office is essential to Minnesota’s rule-making and legislation writing processes. What is Gov. Dayton thinking when he’s stripping funding from these essential offices? Was Gov. Dayton thinking when he forced the stripping of these funds?

Anyone that’s willing to shortchange these offices just so he can renegotiate a bill that he’s already signed is disgusting. Gov. Dayton isn’t a man of integrity. He’s a man who thinks that the ends justify the means. How pathetic.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , ,

You’d better sit down to read this LTE because it features talking in circles. Let me explain.

It says “Although people sometimes paint our campaign as ‘anti-mining,’ we respect the need to maintain that industry in places where it cannot threaten the Boundary Waters.” The definition of anti is “a person who is opposed to a particular practice, party, policy, action, etc.” It’s fair to say that someone who opposes mining is anti-mining. Later in the LTE, it says “We truly believe those Minnesotans who want copper mining near the Boundary Waters are sincere when they say they believe it can be done safely and without risk. However, so are we when we say it cannot be done safely and that the risk is too great. Because of this, we will continue to do everything we can to protect this special place for future generations. We appreciate the position of our fellow Minnesotans who don’t agree with us, and we look forward to continuing this debate not as enemies but as members of a community.”

TRANSLATION: We’re opposed to mining but we don’t want to fight over it. Maintaining the anti-mining status quo is what we’re hoping to maintain.

Continuing the debate is a polite way of saying keeping mining interests stalemated. Taking no action is fine with the environmentalists. That’s precisely what they want. That’s because they win stalemates. This sentence is BS:

Everyone weighing in on sulfide-ore copper mining near the Boundary Waters is doing so because they care about the future of our state and communities.

I don’t buy the notion that Becky Rom and Reid Carron “care about the future of our state and communities.” Carron is quoted as saying “Resentment is the primary driver of the pro-mining crowd here. They are resentful that other people have come here and been successful while they were sitting around waiting for a big mining company. They want somebody to just give them a job so they can all drink beer with their buddies and go four-wheeling and snowmobiling with their buddies, not have to think about anything except punching a clock.”

That isn’t what respectful dialogue sounds like. That’s what know-it-all elitists sound like. This video shows how aggressive Northeastern Minnesotans for Wilderness are:

NMW is one of the organizations that Mr. Niemela works with. Save the Boundary Waters is another one of the organizations he coordinates with. Check out this handout to find out how hostile NMW and Save the Boundary Waters are. This LTE is nothing more than a political spin job. Niemela is worried that miners are turning against the DFL because the DFL passionately opposes mining. He’s likely worried that a Republican governor, working with GOP majorities in the House and Senate, might sign reform legislation that would support the mining community.

That’s likely Mr. Niemela’s worst nightmare.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

A trip to the Walz-Flanagan campaign website exposes the DFL’s lack of an economic message. Their campaign website doesn’t have an issues page, which is telling. On its homepage, it has a tiny portion of the page dedicated to explain why they’re running. That portion of the page says “running for Governor and Lieutenant Governor to make our vision of One Minnesota a reality. We are united in this vision: A Minnesota where every child has the opportunity to succeed and hope for the future, a Minnesota where the people whose lives are most impacted by public policy choices have a seat at the table, a Minnesota with fair wages, fully funded public schools, and affordable healthcare as a right, not a privilege and a Minnesota where we protect our environment, invest in renewable energy and jobs, and maintain our roads, bridges, and transit across the state. We want to bring this vision to the governor’s office and support the Minnesota we know and love.”

In other words, they’re running for Gov. Dayton’s third term. They’re running without explaining what economic goals they’ll fight for.

A quick view of Paul Thissen’s website doesn’t lay out a vision for Minnesota’s economy, either. It talks about how the Supreme Court should protect labor unions. It talks briefly how we should implement single-payer health care statewide. Thissen talks about legalizing marijuana, too. There isn’t anything in that pile of words that sounds like he has a clue about capitalism. Then again, his legislative record hasn’t shown him to have a clue about creating high-paying middle class jobs so we shouldn’t be surprised.

Erin Murphy’s campaign website has a ‘Why I’m Running‘ page but it doesn’t have an issues page, much less an explanation of what economic policies she’d implement.

Of the 4 DFL gubernatorial candidates’ websites that I visited, only Rebecca Otto talked about the economy. Even then, she only spoke about raising the minimum wage:

Across her statewide listening tour Rebecca met hard-working people who are under-compensated, making it hard to make ends meet. This is hurting our families, our communities, and our way of life. Rebecca Otto supports increasing the minimum wage and indexing it to inflation. She will also be releasing an economic plan that will help increase wages across the state.

There’s nothing on any of these candidates’ websites that talks about infrastructure, especially pipelines. Why is that? Is it because the DFL’s special interest masters won’t let them support legitimate projects that create middle class wages? Is it because the DFL doesn’t think that fossil fuels will play an important part in our economy?

Finally, it’s apparent that the DFL doesn’t understand capitalism whatsoever. This morning on At Issue with Tom Hauser, Katharine Tinucci said that cutting the corporate tax rate won’t create jobs because “the rich” won’t invest the money. What an idiot. What wealthy people want most is more money. The best way to get wealthier is by investing that money.

Isn’t it apparent that the DFL doesn’t understand human nature?

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

This article is just what the Trump administration wanted to hear. I’d have to think that the Trump administration started smiling when they read “Consumers were even more optimistic in October than economists polled by Reuters expected. Consumer confidence rose to 125.9 in October, according to the Conference Board. The index ‘increased to its highest level in almost 17 years,’ Lynn Franco, Director of Economic Indicators at The Conference Board, said in a statement. That was in December 2000, when the index hit 128.6.” Franco added the “high level of confidence suggests the economy will continue to expand ‘at a solid pace’ for the rest of 2017.”

This article is sure to add to the Trump administration’s positive attitude. According to the article, “President Donald Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers on Friday released the second in a series of reports on how proposed changes to the tax code could influence economic growth. The CEA predicted that corporate tax cuts alone would produce GDP growth of between 3 and 5 percent in as little as three years. The cuts are part of the tax reform package currently being finalized in Congress and expected to be unveiled as a bill next week.”

Here in Minnesota, though, Gov. Dayton sounded like Mr. Pessimism:

“One of the most offensive proposals would eliminate the deductibility of Minnesota’s state income and sales taxes and local property taxes from our citizens’ federal tax liabilities,” Dayton said. “It would completely remove these important tax deductions which total over $12.3 billion per year for 900,000 Minnesota families.”

The good news is that a Republican governor, working with Republican majorities in the House and Senate, will fix Minnesota’s anti-growth tax and regulatory system. Why the DFL hasn’t figured out that people really want to keep the money they’ve earned is baffling. The good news is that the next Republican governor will get things straightened out.

Rick Santelli is back and he’s excited:

If we know anything about Gov. Dayton, it’s that he’s a political opportunist. This article insists that Gov. Dayton has “shrewd political instincts”, too. J. Patrick Coolican’s article is nothing more than another Strib pro-Dayton puff piece.

It opens by saying “Since Gov. Mark Dayton came out in favor of a controversial proposal by PolyMet to mine copper, nickel and other precious metals in northeastern Minnesota, he and his allies have said that his support is guided by sound environmental and economic policy, not politics. But Dayton’s decision and its timing showed the shrewd political instincts, as well as the loyalty to the DFL Party, that have helped him win statewide office four times. By giving his public support to PolyMet he offered an olive branch to the Iron Range, knowing that he could take the political hit from environmentalists since he’s not running for re-election next year, and at the same time forge a temporary peace in the ongoing conflict.”

Actually, it’s guided by politics. Gov. Dayton hasn’t changed into a consistent supporter of the Range. He’s still opposed to the Twin Metals project. He’s still vehemently opposed to the Line 3 Pipeline project that would create approximately 3 times as many jobs as a typical end-of-session bonding bill would create.

This quote is telling:

“It diminishes PolyMet as an issue going forward. It’s one less flash point. That’s what a responsible steward of his party would do,” said Joe Radinovich, a former DFL state legislator who was U.S. Rep. Rick Nolan’s 2016 campaign manager.

It hasn’t had that effect whatsoever. It’s telling that Coolican said that Gov. Dayton “could take the political hit from environmentalists since he’s not running for re-election next year.” Doesn’t that mean that the candidates running to replace him can’t afford to get on the environmental activists’ bad side? Further, a page will get turned when the DFL picks their gubernatorial candidate. From that point forward, the Range will make their decision based on that candidate.

This paragraph is telling, too:

For some, it came too late. Dayton’s DFL has taken heavy losses in legislative districts in greater Minnesota, as Republicans have successfully tied them to Twin Cities environmentalists and other progressives at the expense of economic development in struggling communities.

Do the people in this video sound like they’re pro-mining?

Further, Coolican is right. Republicans have flipped rural Minnesota. The DFL have repeatedly proven that they’re anti-farmer, anti-labor. You can’t be anti-mining and pro-labor. You can’t ignore the farmers’ agenda and stay on the farmers’ good side.

This isn’t just about PolyMet. The Range wants to vote for someone who’ll always have their backs. The DFL is still the divided party, with a heavy anti-mining slant:

The DFL factions hit a breaking point recently when Reid Carron, well-known environmentalist in Ely, made disparaging remarks about miners in a Sunday New York Times Magazine story. “They want somebody to just give them a job so they can all drink beer with their buddies and go four-wheeling and snowmobiling with their buddies, not have to think about anything except punching a clock,” he said, before later apologizing.

It didn’t take long for Gov. Dayton suddenly react to the article:

So Dayton stepped on the fire. Just eight days after publication of the explosive story in the Times, the governor announced in an interview that he favors the PolyMet project if it meets permitting requirements and financial assurances that would protect Minnesota taxpayers in the event of a fiscal or environmental catastrophe.

What a coincidence! Immediately after environmental activists show their true colors, Gov. Dayton made his pro-mining announcement. If he was truly pro-mining, why hasn’t Gov. Dayton done anything to make the permitting process fair and transparent? If he’s truly pro-mining, why didn’t Gov. Dayton take on the environmental activists?

Perhaps, it’s because he’s a political opportunist who isn’t really pro-mining.

Last week, Gov. Dayton announced that he’s finally supporting the PolyMet precious metals project. In this post, I wrote “Why should Rangers tolerate a regulatory system that’s this convoluted? How many studies are enough? How many hearings need to be held? Chip Cravaack tried getting this pushed through when he was in office. He was elected in 2010, the same election that gave us Gov. Dayton. It’s clear that Gov. Dayton hasn’t jettisoned the environmentalists. He’s still siding with the environmentalists on Twin Metals and the Line 3 Pipeline project.”

Speaking of the Line 3 Pipeline project, Rep. Matt Grossell, Rep. Sandy Layman, Rep. Matt Bliss, Rep. Dale Lueck, Rep. Debra Kiel, Sen. Justin Eichorn and Sen. Paul Utke wrote a letter to Gov. Dayton. Their letter’s opening paragraph says “The proposed Line 3 Replacement Project (L3R) is a vital energy infrastructure project for Minnesota and the region that will generate more than $3 billion in private investment. It will create thousands of good-paying construction jobs and provide millions in much-needed tax revenue to local governments in our districts and our region.” Follow this link to read the entire letter.

It isn’t likely that Gov. Dayton will back off. His Commerce Department testified that (a) the L3R isn’t required and (b) the existing pipeline should be shut down. That’s the public part of Gov. Dayton’s policy. That doesn’t mean, though, that he doesn’t see the political difficulties and complexities this might cause the DFL.

Yesterday on @Issue with Tom Hauser, former DFL Chair Brian Melendez said that Gov. Dayton allegedly told environmentalists ‘Good luck with the Republican governor in 2019′, implying that the environmental activists’ demands will hurt the DFL in 2018.

This video is part of the reason why Gov. Dayton won’t abandon environmental activists:

The truth is that Gov. Dayton and the DFL aren’t consistent with their beliefs. First, they’re constantly talking about the importance of infrastructure projects. When this infrastructure project was proposed, though, they ran from it like it was toxic waste. Finally, the DFL is constantly pushing bonding bills as their annual “jobs bill”. This pipeline project is the size of three bonding bills.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , ,

State Sen. David Tomassoni’s op-ed expresses his disgust with Becky Rom and her husband Reid Carron with a sense of humor. This fight started with this article, which includes quotes from Rom and Carron that got under miners’ skin.

Specifically, the quote from Rom that’s bothering Tomassoni and the miners is “Danny Forsman drives to the mine in his truck, comes home and watches TV, and he doesn’t know this world exists.” The quote from Carron that’s got miners upset is “Resentment is the primary driver of the pro-mining crowd here; they are resentful that other people have come here and been successful while they were sitting around waiting for a big mining company. They want somebody to just give them a job so they can all drink beer with their buddies and go four-wheeling and snowmobiling with their buddies, not have to think about anything except punching a clock.”

Sen. Tomassoni’s tongue-in-cheek reply starts with “It came to me as I was sitting on my deck drinking a beer (metal chair, a byproduct of mining; wooden deck, from logging; beer, from hops and grains from farming). I thought, now what’s wrong with sitting on my deck and drinking a beer. Then I thought, I wonder if the anti-mining people have metal chairs on their decks? Maybe they don’t. Maybe they have plastic chairs (that came from drilling oil).”

Tomassoni’s needling continued:

Getting hungry, I came into the house for a BLT. I fried some bacon on a metal stove in a copper lined pan. (Copper pans don’t stick and they clean up in a breeze). The bacon was in my metal refrigerator, which has a cooling element going through copper pipes.

Of course, none of that copper was mined on the Iron Range and anti-mining forces seem content to get their copper from another country that has no environmental, safety laws nor child labor laws. I thought, what’s wrong with this picture?

Great environmental laws, child labor laws and safety regulations are good things. Shouldn’t we be doing the mining where all are enforced?

Sen. Tomassoni finishes Rom and Carron off, saying:

That’s why I’m always puzzled when mining opponents say they will support projects: “If the science proves it safe.”

Well, let’s see:

We have been mining for 135 years in virtually the same area that PolyMet will mine. PolyMet will use a former iron ore mining site to process the ore.
The Minnesota Environmental Quality Board recently published an environmental report card on Minnesota’s statewide water quality. Guess where you’ll find the only area that has really good water? Yup. Right here in Northeastern Minnesota. The heart of mining country IS the Land of Sky Blue Waters. Pretty good science if you ask me.

Rom and Carron aren’t trustworthy people. Rom is especially willing to mislead.

Our history proves we helped America become a global economic powerhouse. We need minerals, paper, lumber and food from our own backyards and we can provide them in a safe and reliable manner.

So, back on my deck with my beer and BLT, I couldn’t help but think that the environmentalists must drink beer too. Maybe even one of those craft beers made in those great big copper vats. But hey, at least we have something in common. Or maybe we have a lot in common as we all need mining and mining jobs.

Apology accepted. Now show me it’s sincere.

The unmistakable commonality running through this article is that most of the DFL gubernatorial candidates are distancing themselves from Gov. Dayton while singing Gov. Dayton’s praises.

For instance, Rebecca Otto said “Every leader is different. Every leader brings strengths and every leader has challenges.” Tina Liebling replied “I’m certainly not running to be a clone of Gov. Dayton, although I think he’s done a lot of good things. My campaign is not one of, let’s just continue on the road we’re on, because I think we need to make some change.” Paul Thissen isn’t running from Gov. Dayton, saying “I don’t think it would be bad to have another four years of Mark Dayton. Mark Dayton has been authentic and he’s been true to his word and I think he’s been a very good governor.”

What’s apparent is that they’re all distancing themselves from Gov. Dayton, which isn’t surprising. It’s understatement to say that Minnesota is changing and not in the DFL’s direction. The biggest problem with the DFL’s candidates is that they’re moving in the opposite direction of the state.

Minnesota is getting more red each cycle. The DFL is heading further left each cycle. It isn’t surprising that each of these DFL candidates is working hard to win over Bernie Sanders’ delegates. The DFL candidates are fighting for the ‘true believer’ vote.

The candidate that wins most of the Sanders delegates likely will win the DFL endorsement. Which one of these candidates accomplishes that is anyone’s guess:

If this election cycle is like the 2016 election, then this will be a change election. It’s my opinion that leftward change isn’t the type of change Minnesotans are looking for.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,