Search
Archives

You are currently browsing the archives for the Al Franken category.

Categories

Archive for the ‘Al Franken’ Category

This afternoon, I had the good fortune of meeting a woman named Agnes Gibboney. According to her Twitter profile, she’s an “Angel Mom standing up for Americans and the USA.” Agnes is a legal immigrant who was born in Budapest, Hungary and who lived in South America with her parents waiting to become American citizens. How ironic (and painful) that her son was killed by a stray bullet fired by an illegal alien, who immediately fled to Mexico.

The semi-good news is that the illegal alien that killed Agnes’ son returned to the United States. He’s currently serving a 20 year sentence. This article from Sept. 2016 explains part of what she’s gone through. Be sure to keep the tissues handy when reading it.

The article starts by saying “Agnes Gibboney knows Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is the only one who is going to help secure the border. It’s an issue that is very personal for the Rancho Cucamonga resident whose son, Ronald da Silva, was killed 2007 in El Monte by a gang member who was in the United States without legal permission, and had been previously deported.”

Unfortunately, this isn’t an isolated incident. While Democrats try painting the picture that DACA recipients are either valedictorians or military heroes or aspiring entrepreneurs, that isn’t the truth for the majority of them. Too often, DACA recipients are criminals who’ve gotten their charges reduced from a felony to a misdemeanor so they can stay in the US.

When I wrote this post with the intent of introducing Mary Ann Mendoza to LFR readers, I noted that her son Brandon was killed by an illegal alien drunk driver whose blood-alcohol content at the time of the fatal accident was .24%.

While the MSM won’t cover the backstories of the victims whose lives are forever changed, LFR will. America needs to know that illegal immigration isn’t just about migrant workers who come to the US for a better life. Far too often, they’re criminals who are part of a drug cartel or into human trafficking or a member of MS-13.

Agnes “is known as one of the ‘Angel Moms,’ ‘a term used by the Texas-based nonprofit organization The Remembrance Project, which supports families of victims of crimes committed by people in the United States illegally. On Wednesday, she was in Phoenix standing behind Trump as he delivered a speech on immigration policy. At one point during his speech, Trump asked Gibboney to step up to microphone and share her story. Afterward, he put his arms around her and kissed her on the forehead. ‘I live every day with the fear that another one of my children is going to get killed,’ recounted Gibboney.”

The next time that Democrats refuse to build the wall, Republicans should criticize them and highlight the public safety hazards that illegal aliens present. The left is playing hardball with immigration. The next time a Democrat incumbent tries painting illegal aliens as valedictorians or military heroes or future entrepreneurs, the Republican candidate should have a set of pictures of families who’ve lost loved ones to illegal aliens. At the right time during the debate, I’d coach them to show the pictures while challenging the Democrat to explain why Democrats rationalize these deaths but raise holy hell when a loved one is killed with a firearm.

Here’s the video of Agnes testifying to the House Subcommittee on National Security:

Moms like Agnes Gibboney and Mary Ann Mendoza deserve answers, too. Dads like Jim Steinle and Steve Ronnebeck and uncles like Mike Ronnebeck deserve answers, too. Check out Al Franken’s facial expression while Jim Steinle testified in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee:

It’s pretty disgusting. Then again, the Democrats’ indifference to people suffering at the hands of illegal alien felons is disgusting, too.

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

The media bias that Jason Lewis is running against is stifling. For instance, this MinnPost article said “Yet Lewis was on the floor of the House on March 24, they day of the scheduled vote, railing against Obamacare and urging his colleagues to do the “right thing” by dismantling it, something he’d been saying for weeks. Ultimately, Lewis was one of the last speakers to take to the House podium that day: he spoke minutes before Speaker Paul Ryan decided to pull the bill because it didn’t have enough votes to pass. That episode is emblematic of the approach that Lewis, a former pundit on right-wing talk radio, has taken to Congress in his first year on the job. Instead of tacking to the center on key issues or keeping a low profile, as some vulnerable lawmakers faced with a difficult election might, Lewis has been an outspoken advocate for conservative policy priorities like gutting the ACA, slashing taxes and undoing scores of federal regulations.”

It’s appalling that the media would think that voting against repealing the ACA is “tacking to the center.” The ACA still isn’t that popular, though some low-profile GOP improvements have made the ACA less onerous on families. As for “slashing taxes and undoing scores of federal regulations”, the US economy is doing better than at any time during the Obama administration.

It’s interesting to see the left’s explanation for how purple MN-02 is. This is a good example:

On the congressional level, former Rep. John Kline, a Republican, represented CD2 for seven terms. But the plurality of CD2 voters chose to send former Sen. Al Franken to Congress in 2014, and a 30-point majority voted to grant Sen. Amy Klobuchar a second term in 2012.

It isn’t surprising that then-Sen. Franken garnered a plurality of the votes in 2014. His opponent wasn’t a top-tier candidate. As for Sen. Klobuchar’s victory, that’s typical. Most people ignore the substance of her votes and vote for the personality.

Lewis’ belief is that being clear and unambiguous about his policy stances will position him well for the election, and that voters will reward his authenticity even if they disagree. “Sincerity goes a long way,” he said. “It’s the difference between those members that are constantly dictated by the polls, and people who just say, I came here to do something, I’m going to do it. I just think having convictions is a real asset in politics.”

The reason why American institutions have terrible favorability ratings is because people don’t trust their institutions. People that find a politician who actually believes something are thrilled. People want to find a politician who believes something and can explain why they believe that.

That’s Jason Lewis. That isn’t Angie Craig. Look at how significantly she’s changed on health care. This is from Ms. Craig’s campaign website:

We must work to repair our healthcare system, starting with immediate fixes to the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and work toward universal health coverage. It’s time to stop playing politics with people’s lives. Many families, particularly those who are self-employed as small business owners and family farmers, cannot afford the healthcare available in the individual marketplace, but Washington has done nothing to help. Congress needs to work across the aisle immediately to stabilize healthcare costs for these families.

We can do this without giving up the good things that have come from the ACA. Current law has eliminated the penalty for pre-existing conditions, ended lifetime limits, allowed young adults to remain on their parent’s insurance, and given tens of millions of Americans access to healthcare who didn’t have it before.

I wrote this post to highlight this NRCC ad:

That NRCC ad cost her the election in 2016. Just 2 years later, bold Angie Craig has morphed into timid, calculating Angie Craig. A year from now, who knows how she’ll portray herself? This is what a calculating career politician that’ll sell their soul does. This isn’t about “tacking to the center.” It’s about selling out.

This is another thing that career politicians do:

Third, we need to stop suspected terrorists on the no-fly list from purchasing firearms and reinstate a rule recently repealed by Congress that stopped some people with mental illnesses from purchasing guns.

Banning people on no-fly lists from buying guns sounds sensible — until people find out that those no-fly lists included Stephen F. Hayes, the Editor-in-Chief of the Weekly Standard, and the late Sen. Ted Kennedy. Had Ms. Craig gotten her way, law-abiding citizens would’ve had their civil rights violated because the federal government was incompetent. As for “people with mental illnesses” purchasing firearms, it’s more likely that the federal, state and local governments will miss warning signs. That’s what happened in Parkland.

Assuming that the federal or state government will promptly update their data bases is like assuming that career politicians will keep each of their campaign promises.

That’s why sincerity, honesty and consistency are cherished by voters. That’s why Jason Lewis stands a good shot at getting re-elected.

If ABC’s hit piece against Jeff Sessions was meant to rehabilitate Andrew McCabe’s credibility, it failed. ABC might’ve helped McCabe if it hadn’t written “During his confirmation in January 2017, Sessions told the Senate committee that he had not been in contact with anyone connected to the Russian government about the 2016 election.”

Saying that that’s a shortcut through the truth is understatement. Here’s what was actually said:

Sen. Al Franken: CNN has just published a story and I’m telling you this about a news story that’s just been published. I’m not expecting you to know whether or not it’s true or not. But CNN just published a story alleging that the intelligence community provided documents to the president-elect last week that included information that quote, “Russian operatives claimed to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.” These documents also allegedly say quote, “There was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump’s surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.”

Now, again, I’m telling you this as it’s coming out, so you know. But if it’s true, it’s obviously extremely serious and if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do?

Then-Sen. Jeff Sessions: Senator Franken, I’m not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I didn’t have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I’m unable to comment on it.

First, Sen. Franken either isn’t too bright or he’s exceptionally dishonest. (BTW, I can make a strong case either direction.) Then-Sen. Sessions said that he didn’t “have communications with the Russians” as a Trump campaign surrogate. As a US senator sitting on the Senate Armed Services Committee, it would’ve been routine for him to meet with Russian ambassadors or government officials.

The context is important because “Sen. Patrick Leahy, (D-VT), and then-Sen. Al Franken, (D-MN), wrote a letter in March 2017 to the FBI urging agents to investigate ‘all contacts’ Sessions may have had with Russians, and ‘whether any laws were broken in the course of those contacts or in any subsequent discussion of whether they occurred.'” Also important in terms of context is the fact that “McCabe authorized the criminal inquiry.”

The ABC article continues, saying “It is a federal crime for anyone to knowingly provide false information to Congress – or to a federal law enforcement agency. No charges have been announced against McCabe, and there’s no indication that the FBI has recommended he be charged.”

It’s impossible at this point to know whether charges will be brought against McCabe. However, Christopher Wray told NBC that “I’m committed to doing things objectively and independently and by the book. I think that has to extend not just to our investigations, our intelligence analysis, but it also has to expand to personnel decisions and disciplinary decisions.”

When asked specifically about the timing, Wray reiterated that the FBI followed its normal process. “I want to be careful what I can say about the process,” he said. “But I will tell you that my commitment to making sure that our process is followed, that it relies on objective input, and that, most importantly, it is not based on political and partisan influence, is something I am utterly unyielding on.”

The thought that Jeff Sessions terminated McCabe out of spite is understandable but it’s completely wrong.

It’s fair to say that ABC’s hit piece attempted to help Mr. McCabe. It’s fair to say, too, that Jeff Sessions followed the proper protocols in determining whether Mr. McCabe should be terminated.

It either takes a friend or a biased partisan to defend Al Franken’s behavior. Wy Spano, a longtime DFL operative and liberal crank, might be both. His op-ed offers an insight into the DFL mindset about Franken. It isn’t pretty.

First, Spano said that “Franken got hosed.” Then he admitted that “the women of the Senate were complicit in the hosing.” Wy, they weren’t complicit in the hosing. They threw Franken under the bus because they put their presidential ambitions ahead of everything else. These were Democrats throwing Franken out. Further, they admitted that they planned the attack. If Spano is upset, he should tar and feather Democrats. Criticizing Democrats without calling them Democrats is the coward’s option.

Earlier in the op-ed, Spano said “Because I think Al Franken got a bum rap and was driven from office by members of his own party. We had the most effective Democratic senator on women’s issues and on helping to elect Democrats, and then we didn’t.” Later, he said that Franken “led on women’s issues.”

My only question about that last statement would be whether Franken led on women’s issues like Ted Kennedy, Harvey Weinstein and Bill Clinton led on women’s issues. What Spano doesn’t seem to understand is that Franken was a pervert through and through.

This statement jumps out:

Franken’s military escort on the tour said he was with Franken every minute and didn’t see what she described.

I question whether this statement is accurate. First, I wonder if Spano knows the name of Franken’s military escort. If he doesn’t, I’d question whether Spano is accepting Franken’s word or whether Spano confirmed it independently. I’m betting it’s the former. That isn’t true verification. That’s accepting gossip.

Then there’s this:

What about the other seven accusers? We’ll never know if their experience with Franken rose to the level of harassment. Individual women became victim, prosecutor, judge and jury.

It’s true these cases never got tried in court. That isn’t the accusers’ fault. That’s the fault of female Democrat senators with political ambitions. Spano is a slick operator in that he skillfully directs the accusations at Franken’s accusers even though they’ve done nothing wrong.

In Lindsay Menz’s case, was she supposed to let Franken put his hand on her ass? Finally, does this look like a guy telling the truth?

Thanks to a little research help from some loyal readers of LFR and thanks to some clever thinking of my own, I’ve figured out a way to turn the tables on Gov. Dayton and Sen. Bakk. First, Sen. Fischbach needs to get sworn in as lieutenant governor the minute Tina Smith is sworn in as Minnesota’s U.S. senator. Next, Fischbach needs to resign as lieutenant governor by the end of this week.

Thanks to some research from a loyal reader of LFR, I’m able to publish as fact that state statute 204D.19 subd. 2 says “The special election shall be held as soon as possible, consistent with the notice requirements of section 204D.22, subdivision 3(The county auditor of a county in which a special election is to be held shall direct the clerk of each municipality in which the election is to be held to post a notice of the special primary and special election at least seven days before the special primary and at least 14 days before the special election in the manner provided in sections 204B.33 and 204B.34.), but in no event more than 35 days after the issuance of the writ. A special election must not be held during the four days before or the four days after a holiday as defined in section 645.44, subdivision 5 (Washington’s and Lincoln’s Birthday(2/19/18), the third Monday in February).”

Notice that the statute says the special election shall be held as soon as possible. It doesn’t say that it should be held as soon as possible. The instant that Fischbach resigns as senator, Gov. Dayton is obligated to call a special election “as soon as possible.”

At that point, the Senate will have 33 Republicans and 32 Democrats. It will stay that way until the special election is held to replace Sen. Schoen in the Senate. If Karla Bigham wins, the Senate is tied with 33 Republicans and 33 Democrats. It’s worth noting that this is the best the DFL can hope for. Things would get much worse for the DFL if Denny McNamara wins. That would give Republicans a 34-32 majority. When the special election is held to replace Sen. Fischbach, Republicans will win that seat handily. At that point, Republicans would either have a 35-32 majority or a 34-33 majority.

Either way, Republicans would have a majority going into the start of the 2018 session. At that point, Republicans could elect any DFL senator to be the President of the Senate. Presumably, Republicans could elect the most vulnerable DFL senator as the President of the Senate. At that point, the DFL wouldn’t have a say in the matter. There’s nothing to prevent Republicans from naming someone like Matt Little to be the President of the Senate. That means Little would assume the responsibility of being Gov. Dayton’s lieutenant governor. Remember that this used to be Dave Thompson’s seat. I’d think that’d give Republicans a fantastic opportunity of flipping that seat.

The DFL is intent on flipping the Senate from a Republican majority to a DFL majority. They’ve made that perfectly clear. Why shouldn’t Republicans use this opportunity to their political advantage? That was the DFL’s intent. If Republicans beat the DFL at their own game, that’s the DFL’s fault.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

This afternoon, Sen. Orrin Hatch announced that he’ll retire from the Senate rather than seek re-election. This opens the door for former GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney to run for Sen. Hatch’s seat.

I can’t help but contrast the difference between Sen. Hatch and Sen. Franken, who resigned in disgrace earlier this afternoon. Sen. Franken was a hot-headed malcontent who didn’t get along with others. Sen. Hatch, though, was well-liked by all of his colleagues, including Democrats. Sen. Hatch figured out a way to work with liberals like Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Ted Kennedy. By comparison, there isn’t a Minnesotan who could picture Sen. Franken working with Ted Cruz or Mike Lee.

In typical Hatch fashion, Sen. Hatch graciously exited the stage, saying “every good fighter knows when to hang up the gloves. I may be leaving the Senate, but the next chapter in my public service is just beginning.” By comparison, Sen. Franken was as defiant as he was disgusting, even suggesting that he’d been unfairly accused. With all due respect, Sen. Franken, if you were innocent, why didn’t you fight to clear your name? Perhaps, it’s because you weren’t that innocent?

Here’s Sen. Hatch’s gracious retirement speech:

As I said earlier, that opens the door for Mitt Romney to run for Sen. Hatch’s seat:

Mr. Hatch’s decision clears the way for the political resurrection of Mr. Romney, the former Massachusetts governor and 2012 Republican presidential nominee who is now a Utah resident and is popular in the Mormon-heavy state. Mr. Romney has told associates he would likely run if Mr. Hatch retires. “It would be difficult to defeat Mitt Romney if he were running here,” said David Hansen, a longtime Utah Republican strategist and chairman of Mr. Hatch’s political organization.

After the 2018 elections and Congress is wrapping up business, politicians from both sides of the aisle will praise Orrin Hatch. At the end of business today and Al Franken leaves the Senate, few people will remember him a month from now.

The DFL has made it clear that they hope to retake the majority in the Minnesota Senate by ‘capitalizing’ on Sen. Franken’s impending resignation. The bad news for them is that their too-clever-by-half strategy is destined for failure.

The Minnesota Constitution states quite clearly that the president of the Senate will replace the lieutenant governor if there’s a vacancy. In this instance, Sen. Fischbach would replace Tina Smith as lieutenant governor. Here’s where things start getting complicated. The minute Sen. Fischbach becomes Lt. Gov. Fischbach, Gov. Dayton has to call a special election to fill Fischbach’s seat. The minute that special election is announced, Fischbach has announced that she’ll resign as Lt. Gov., then file to run for the seat she still holds.

Thanks to Sen. Franken’s disgusting behavior, the next step potentially gets messy. With a 33-33 tie in the Senate, the DFL has made clear that they wouldn’t vote for a DFL politician to become the Senate President. Their goal is to become the majority party. Period. They won’t achieve that goal. Period. That’s my prediction and I’d bet the proverbial ranch on it. The DFL doesn’t stand a snowball’s prayer in hell of flipping Sen. Fischbach’s seat:

But their hopes for a majority would then depend on winning a special election for Fischbach’s seat — something Republicans scoff at. She won the conservative district by more than 37 percentage points in 2016. And Fischbach told KSTP-TV she’ll run for her seat in another special election if she’s forced out of office.

This would become moot, however, if Republicans flip Sen. Schoen’s seat in a Feb. 12 special election:

The Feb. 12 special election in Cottage Grove is to replace Democratic Sen. Dan Schoen, who resigned last month after sexual harassment allegations. The district has been in Democratic hands for more than a decade, but Republicans have made inroads in the area and recruited a longtime former House member to run.

That longtime House member is Denny McNamara and he’s a great fit for the district. Republicans should get behind McNamara for a couple reasons. First, flipping that seat guarantees that Republicans maintain their majority in the Senate at least until 2020. Further, while McNamara isn’t a hardline conservative, he’s a reliable vote on the important issues. I’ll take a reliable majority over a purist minority 100% of the time. In fact, that isn’t a difficult decision. But I digress.

If Republicans suddenly gain a 34-32 majority, Gov. Dayton’s and Sen. Bakk’s plans immediately get thwarted. There’s nothing I’d enjoy better than seeing their too-clever-by-half strategy fail miserably. Any Republican that doesn’t appreciate that needs to rethink their priorities and motivations.

In November, let’s topple the DFL’s sick plans by defeating Tina Smith, flipping Tim Walz’s seat, replacing Gov. Dayton with a Republican, re-electing Jason Lewis and maintaining a Republican majority in the Minnesota House.

If Bill Hanna’s op-ed makes anything clear, it’s that Tina Smith likely will replace Al Franken as a shill for anti-mining environmentalists. Hanna wrote “Prettner-Solon was a strong advocate for issues so vital to the Range. Smith was a great big question mark. And Smith did little to allay my concerns during that initial meeting. She admitted to not knowing much about the proposed PolyMet and Twin Metals copper/nickel mining projects and had yet to even talk or meet with officials of those two companies. But she would be doing so, she assured. Not exactly a vote of confidence for a new era of mining on the Range. Smith has since been the dutiful lieutenant governor in line with Dayton on issues, while doing what she does best, raising political funds. So on mining, Smith was in step with Dayton, eventually supporting PolyMet in the footprint of the former LTV Mining plant near Aurora and Hoyt Lakes while giving a thumbs-down to the desired Twin Metals underground copper/nickel/strategic metals venture near Ely and Babbitt.”

It’s clear that Gov. Dayton’s intention in picking Smith was to stay away from picking a Range DFLer like Tony Sertich. Sertich would’ve been qualified (from a DFL policy standpoint) with the exception that he might’ve been too pro-mining for the Metrocrats’ liking.

But the Range needs a modern-day mining/logging/land use promoter in the Senate, not a reluctant follower or, worse yet, a reliable “no” vote. Smith connects well with Twin Cities Progressives who show off their penmanship when writing checks for liberal causes. She will definitely do the same on a national level.

But Progressives don’t like mining, even though they relish their computers, vehicles, medical devices and cell phones that are only made possible by minerals extracted from below the ground. It’s all so odd; don’t you dare mine, but do make sure we’ve got plenty of tools to connect with the Internet. And you better not mess with my Facebook Page abilities. It’s like believing milk just magically appears in stores in cartons, without the aid of cows.

Come Election Day, 2018, the Iron Range, as well as the rest of the Eighth District, Sixth District and Second District, better turn out in huge numbers. Further, they’d better vote for Karin Housley. Unlike Smith, Housley will represent the entire state.

She won’t pay lip service to the Range. She’s already speaking out in favor of the Range:

Compare that with this blather from Tina Smith:

It’s clear that Smith isn’t interested in the Iron Range or the construction industries. Smith is for these unions except when they want to mine ore, precious metals or want to build pipelines. When they want that, Smith is a less-than-enthusiastic supporter of those unions.

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

Minnesota’s story of the year isn’t difficult to find. It’s Al Franken’s resignation from the Senate. Pervy Al, as Harold Hamilton likes to call him, finally showed that he’s a total jerk. Thanks to Leeann Tweeden’s bravery, Franken’s career crashed as part of this year’s #MeToo movement.

The initial reaction was typified by Amy Klobuchar and Chuck Schumer. They both said that Sen. Franken should subject himself to a toothless investigation from the Senate Ethics Committee. The rules of the Ethics Committee are toothless because they’re written by the politicians they’re meant to protect. They do just enough to whitewash the situation without actually holding the corrupt politician accountable for his/her actions. Those rules also make sure that politicians can’t be punished for things they did before they were elected.

How convenient. Pervy Al groped Ms. Tweeden before getting elected:

What type of pervert does that to a woman? Better yet, what woman not named Hillary Clinton, lets her husband do something like that without divorcing him? The next stage of the Franken saga happened when other women stepped forward and spoke about Franken’s disgusting behavior. One of them, Lindsay Menz, accused him of grabbing her buttocks at the Minnesota State Fair.

Yet another stage in the Franken saga came when Democrats criticized Ms. Tweeden, essentially deploying the ‘she asked for it’ defense:

In response to the compromising photo of U.S. Sen. Al Franken, internet-aware readers can become a bit more informed about Franken’s ‘victim’ by Googling her and clicking on ‘images.’

At times, Democrats tried telling Americans that they were virtuous because they maintained a zero-tolerance policy towards perverts. Somewhere far outside the spotlight, Bill Clinton was heard laughing. Of course, Democrats called for Franken’s resignation after the eighth woman stepped forward. (Nothing says zero tolerance like waiting until the eighth victim steps forward.) People understood what was happening. Franken was forced to resign.

Good riddance.

Technorati: , , , , , , ,

In his farewell speech to the US Senate, Sen. Franken said that as “I leave the Senate, I have to admit that it feels like we’re losing the war for truth. Maybe it’s already lost. If that’s what happens, then we have lost the ability to have the kinds of arguments that help build consensus.”

Later in that speech, Sen. Franken said “Often, the ‘debate’ here in Washington can sometimes seem arcane and tough to understand. Other times—especially in recent years—it can be so bitter that it doesn’t even feel like we’re trying to resolve anything, just venting our spleens at each other. I get that. I get why people want us to stop arguing and start, well, doing stuff. But since I am leaving the Senate, I thought I would take a big risk and say a few words in favor of arguments.”

What BS. Literally the day after all Democrats in the House and Senate voted against the Tax Cut and Jobs Act, Sen. Franken is attempting to justify the Democrats’ refusal to cooperate with Republicans in cutting people’s taxes. This is a Democrat difficulty. It isn’t just Sen. Franken who has difficulty working with Republicans. So-called moderate Democrats like Joe Manchin, Joe Donnelly, Heidi Heitkamp and Jon Tester made initial ‘friendly noises’ before voting like Elizabeth Warren.

It used to be said that the US Senate was the “greatest deliberative body in the world.” It isn’t that anymore. The definition of argument is “an oral disagreement; verbal opposition; contention; altercation.” Meanwhile, the definition of deliberation is “careful consideration before decision.”

With the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, Democrats immediately opposed the legislation before the first page was written. That’s the opposite of deliberation. There’s nothing deliberative about that. That fits the definition of argument more than it fits the definition of deliberation.

Here’s Sen. Franken’s final speech on the Senate floor:

There isn’t any proof that Sen. Franken tried identifying the truth. That’s why it’s one of the first casualties upon entering Washington, DC. Rather than lamenting the death of the truth, Democrats should try employing it more consistently.

Technorati: , , , , , ,