Archive for the ‘Tina Smith’ Category

After reading Tina Smith’s quote in this article, it isn’t difficult to not trust Democrats when guns are concerned.

When asked if she thinks Congress would pass universal background checks this year or next, Smith is quoted as saying “I’m not optimistic. We’ve seen this cycle over and over again: concerns, promises to take action and then backtracking.”

Then there’s Angie Craig, another Democrat who sounded like an idiot when she said “The fact is most Americans support common-sense gun legislation. The only thing stopping it is the special interests that seem to have control over some politicians in Congress. I’m sick and tired of the NRA.” The article nots that “Craig supports universal background checks and banning what she called ‘military-style assault weapons.'”

What’s appalling is that neither Craig or Smith know the first thing about guns, yet they want to tell gun owners what they can’t do. As for Craig saying “I’m sick and tired of the NRA”, that shows how ignorant of who the NRA is. The NRA are people from all across the United States determined to prevent politicians from gutting the Second Amendment. Before people say that that’s conspiracy theory talk, I’ll show you a trio of Democrats running for president who support firearm confiscation:

Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.) told reporters in New Hampshire on Friday that mandatory buybacks were “a good idea.”

Presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke, the former congressman from El Paso, spent the final weeks of August demanding mandatory buybacks of millions of assault rifles currently owned by law-abiding Americans. “All of them,” he tweeted defiantly.

Elizabeth Warren is the other Democrat presidential candidate who supports a mandatory confiscation of assault weapons.

Democrats love using the euphemism buyback instead of confiscation for obvious reasons. Confiscation is the right term. It’s impossible to buy something back that wasn’t your property previously. Since the government didn’t own the guns previously, it can’t buy them back. Democrats know this but that won’t prevent them from using that dishonest term repeatedly during this debate.

Here’s something to contemplate: if felons commit crimes, is it logical to violate law-abiding citizens’ Constitutional rights? Here’s another question worth pondering: will any of the Democrats’ solutions stop even 1 mass shooting? Thus far, the answer to that question is an emphatic no.

That’s because the Democrats aren’t looking at what’s caused mass casualties. With the Parkland shooting, the shooter told people that he was going to kill students. Rather than taking him seriously, the people running Marjorie Stoneman Douglas turned a blind eye towards the shooter. That was just a continuation of what they did earlier in his school career:

Cruz’s eighth-grade language arts teacher, Carrie Yon, kept diligent notes on his behavior for Cruz’s “Functional Behavior Analysis”:

Sept. 3: While reviewing [a] homophones worksheet, when another student mentioned the amendment that talks about ‘the right to bear arms’ Nick [sic] lit up when hearing the word that related to guns and shouted out “you mean like guns!” he was overly excited thinking that we were going to talk about guns. Nick later used his pencil as a gun … shooting around the classroom.

Then there’s this:

Yon provided her opinion for the “Functional Behavioral Analysis”:

“I feel strongly that Nikolas is a danger to the students and faculty at this school. I do not feel that he understands the difference between his violent video games and reality. He is constantly showing aggressive behavior and poor judgment. His drawing in class show violent acts (people shooting at each other) or creepy sexual pictures (dogs with large penises) … I would like to see him sent to a facility that is more prepared and has the proper setting to deal with this type of child.”

That doesn’t include talking about the other government failures prior to Cruz’s Valentine’s Day massacre. Those things don’t fit into the Democrats’ narrative so they’re ignored. The Democrats’ constant focus is on things that won’t stop these shootings. Democrats only want things that are ineffective or are marginally effective. For instance, the 1994 assault weapons ban didn’t prevent a single mass shooting.

Until Democrats study what’s causing these shootings and become interested in connecting the dots with the people pulling the triggers, I’ll remain skeptical of the Democrats’ gun-grabbing plans.

Democrats love saying that budgets are moral documents. Democrats then say that budgets reflect our priorities. If that’s true, which I think it kinda is, then Tina Smith’s budget priorities are disgusting. As Minnesota’s junior senator, she’s opposed all projects that would’ve helped the people of northern Minnesota. That isn’t opinion. It’s fact. She’s fought the Line 3 Pipeline. She’s opposed the PolyMet and Twin Metals mining projects.

Just those projects alone would’ve had the opportunity to transform the Iron Range from a region with sky-high poverty rates and a virtually nonexistent middle class into a prospering region of the state. The median household income in Virginia, MN is $36,327, compared with the statewide average of $65,699. The percentage of people living below the Federal Poverty Level in Minnesota is 10.5%, compared with 24% living below the FPL in Virginia, MN.

While visiting southern Minnesota, Sen. Smith said “I think at the end of the day, I’m just thinking about what Minnesotans are thinking about, which is prescription drug costs being too high, how can they get the kind of amazing workforce training that they need to get great jobs like they can get here at Red Wing Shoes, and that’s where I’m going to stay focused as long as I can.”

If Smith was honest, which she isn’t, she’d admit that she’s thinking about what Minnesotans are thinking about as long as they aren’t living in rural Minnesota. That isn’t just true now that she’s a US senator. It was true in her time as Minnesota’s Lieutenant Governor. It was true when she was Gov. Dayton’s chief of staff.

Writing off a huge geographical part of the state, including the part that feeds the rest of the state, is disgusting. Still, that’s what Tina Smith is doing. That’s been a staple of her political life for years.

If Smith won’t pay attention to rural Minnesota, she should get fired next November. Tina Smith isn’t about doing the right thing for the entire state. Tina Smith and the DFL is only interested in doing what’s best for the metro DFL. That’s why the DFL has lost the farm vote and the laborer vote. When the Metro DFL unanimously opposes the Line 3 Pipeline, which provides the vast majority of jet fuel for Minneapolis International Airport, they’re saying that serving their special interest masters is more important than doing right by the biggest airport in Minnesota.

How foolish is that? Does that like the decision that a person who is “just thinking about what Minnesotans are thinking?” I’m betting that a significant majority of Minnesotans would disagree with Tina Smith and the Democrats on that issue.

It’s time to fire the DFL, Tina Smith included. The DFL’s priorities, like Tina Smith’s priorities, increasingly aren’t Minnesota’s priorities.

One of the links in TakeAction Minnesota’s weekly newsletter was to this article on Bernie Sanders’ Green New Deal proposal. According to Kenza Hadj-Moussa, TakeAction Minnesota’s Communications Director, “Bernie Sanders rolled out a climate plan today that seems designed to terrify fossil fuel executives. And we love it.” Bernie’s plan is beyond utterly unrealistic. It’s frightening that a top Democrat presidential candidate could be this stupid. Unfortunately, Bernie’s that stupid and then some:

There are novel, meaty policy proposals that make Sanders’s proposal stand out from an already ambitious field: a cash-for-clunkers and financial assistance program to scale up electric vehicle usage, and plans to boost public transit ridership 65 percent by 2030; a requirement that the Congressional Budget Office work with the Environmental Protection Agency to give new legislation a “climate score,” like the budget scores it currently doles out; and abiding by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to ensure the free, prior, and informed consent by Indigenous peoples.

TakeAction Minnesota is part of the DFL’s labyrinth of activist outlets. TAM thinks that boosting transit ridership 65% within 10 years is achievable. No sane person thinks that. TAM, aka TakeAction Minnesota, thinks that giving Native American tribes veto power over fossil fuel projects is a fantastic thing. TAM thinks that ending “fossil fuels imports and exports” is a great idea. What type of idiot thinks that’s smart economically? These guys:

Sanders outlines an expansive system, building on the resolution introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey in April, that would generate publicly owned clean energy and 20 million new jobs.

First, it’s insulting that they think there’s that many net new jobs to be created through the Democrats’ Green New Deal. If TAM thinks that, then they’re using illegal drugs. Either that or they’re that stupid. Next, anyone that thinks that there isn’t tons of corruption within the environmental activist community is kidding themselves. (Think Solyndra, etc.)

It’s clear that the DFL is attached to the Democrat fringe. Today’s Democrat Party has virtually nothing to do with Bill Clinton’s Democrat Party. In Detroit, presidential candidate after Democrat presidential candidate criticized President Obama’s signature accomplishment, Obamacare. Now Tina Smith wants to pretend that she’s a moderate or a centrist? I don’t think so.

As I’ve said before, a moderate Democrat is one campaigning for office. Once they’re elected, Democrats suddenly start talking about their mandate, etc.

Tina Smith couldn’t be clearer about her position on taxes. If Tina Smith was queen for a day on taxes, Minnesota and the entire nation’s economy would screech to a standstill in a New York minute.

In an interview, Smith said “Jason Lewis supported the Republican tax bill that gave giant tax cuts to big corporations and the richest among us, and I wouldn’t have supported that.” Those “giant tax cuts to big corporations” have led to companies moving back from overseas. Had Democrats been in charge, they would’ve kept the corporate tax rates at 35%, which was making the United States uncompetitive with other countries.

This isn’t a fairness issue. It’s a competitiveness issue. President Obama’s policy focused on fairness. As a direct result of that, the Obama economy grew at a sluggish pace. If Tina Smith wants to defend anemic economic growth while the US economy is booming, that’s her option. It isn’t a particularly attractive option but it’s the Democrat’s option. Further, Minnesota Republicans defeated Gov. Walz on the tax issue because money was pouring at a stronger-than-expected clip.

Lewis didn’t waste time before going after Smith’s record on the environment, highlighting Smith’s opposition to the Line 3 Pipeline project. Lewis pointed out that over 80% of the jet fuel for Minneapolis International Airport airplanes. While Smith insists that she’s fighting against special interests, she’s in bed with Twin Cities-based special interests opposed to mining on the Range.

“Senator Smith has a record of working hard for the people of Minnesota, taking on powerful special interests and working across the aisle to get things done, whether it’s fighting to protect health coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, standing up to the big drug companies to lower prescription drug prices or making sure young people have the skills they need to fill high-demand jobs,” Furlong said.

Right now, there are more job openings than there are people to fill those jobs. That means 3 things. The Tax Cuts & Jobs Act that Jason Lewis voted for is working. The deregulation that happened through the use of the Congressional Review Act has revived entire communities, especially in the Rust Belt states of Ohio and Pennsylvania. Lewis voted for most, if not all, of the deregulation. Third, it means that Democrats were wrong to unanimously vote against the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act.

No Democrats in the House or Senate voted for the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act. That means that Democrats were terribly wrong on economic policy. The Tax Cuts & Jobs Act took a barely-growing economy and kicked it into a higher gear virtually immediately. When Smith says that she wouldn’t have voted for the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act, she’s telling Minnesotans that she would’ve voted against the policies that jump-started the economy.

Do we really want to vote for a senator that wouldn’t vote for prosperity-inducing policies? Do we really want to vote for a senator who is totally controlled by special interests that’ve stopped Iron Range prosperity, that have killed blue collar jobs and that would’ve stopped the US from becoming energy independent?

If killing jobs, undermining national security and preventing Iron Range prosperity are your highest priorities, then Tina Smith is your candidate. If you want prosperity, then voting for Jason Lewis is imperative.

It’s incredibly clear why Jason Lewis is running for Paul Wellstone’s former seat. According to his announcement address, we are at an inflection point in US history.

In his announcement, Lewis stated quite correctly that “Today we are at a crossroads in Minnesota and across this country not seen since the chaos and turmoil of the 1960s. Private property, religious liberty, due process, the pride of citizenship, the national anthem, the Pledge of Allegiance, even Betsy Ross’s flag, are now seen as dispensable relics to a radical political movement that appears to be gaining steam in the corridors of power.”

In his announcement statement, Jason Lewis essentially said that he’s running do-nothing Senate Democrats, the Squad and against the entire Resist Movement. People who’ve assumed that today’s Democrats are just wrong on the issues but have debated the issues in good faith are kidding themselves. This isn’t to say that people who believe that are evil or something. It’s that that’s what Democrats like Daniel Patrick Moynihan, John Breaux and Hubert Humphrey did.

Today’s Democrats are centuries different than those Democrats. Al Franken wrote a book titled “Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them.” It’s categorized as satire. There isn’t anything in the book that proves that. Barack Obama had a phone and a pen. He didn’t give a rip about making deals with Republicans. Harry Reid was President Obama’s chief henchman. Reid prevented any bill that was passed by the Republican House from even getting a committee hearing.

Tina Smith is cut from the same cloth as Al Franken. I’ll stipulate that she doesn’t have Franken’s gruff mannerisms. Still, she’s just as close-minded and hyper-partisan as Franken. She voted against Justice Kavanaugh. She even announced that she wouldn’t vote for whoever President Trump picked before the pick was made.

Congressman Lewis isn’t afraid to debate issues. He thrives on those debates. Jason Lewis has an independent streak, too. He’s willing to break from Republicans on issues. Every newspaper in the state has pined for politicians who break from their parties on the pages of their newspapers. Now that Jason Lewis has announced his candidacy for the Senate, what are the odds that these two-faced newspapers will endorse Jason Lewis? I’d put it at almost zero percent.

Earlier, I spoke about the Resist Movement. More than AOC + 3, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, the Resist Movement is the biggest impediment to getting things done in Washington, DC. Jason Lewis and President Trump are the perfect tag-team to trounce the Swamp, aka the Resist Movement. If we want to end gridlock in DC, a vote for Tina Smith is a wasted voted. She’s proven that she’ll do whatever Chuck Schumer tells her to do.

Tina Smith a typical Democrat. Tina’s got an independent streak that’s a quarter of an inch wide and a millimeter deep. Smith is the political equivalent of a Rambler. That isn’t what Minnesotans need. Minnesotans, especially blue collar Minnesotans and entrepreneurs, need a fighter who will fight smart fights. That describes Jason Lewis perfectly. He’s the political equivalent of a championship debater. That’s what Minnesotans need.

Finally, check out this announcement video:

The first thing that’s apparent is that Jason Lewis isn’t a cookie cutter politician. He’s a policymaker who isn’t afraid to challenge the status quo or expose the flimsiness of a politician’s argument.

That’s what Minnesota needs in the US Senate. God knows we’ve sent too many buffoons to DC since 2000. The list of Democrat buffoons include Al Franken, Mark Dayton and Tina Smith.

Saying that Sen. Tina Smith’s intellectual heft isn’t impressive is understatement. Sen. Snith’s op-ed is filled with Schumer-styled partisanship. What isn’t said is that Senate Democrats went all-in with the Resist Movement in slowing down the confirmation of President Trump’s appointees. What isn’t said is that Democrats did this to keep Obama appointees in key positions as long as possible.

Now, Sen. Smith has written this op-ed to complain that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that the Senate is in the personnel business. Sen. Smith has a problem with that, saying “…McConnell has transformed the Senate into little more than the Trump administration’s personnel office, the place where good ideas go to die.”

Had Sen. Schumer, (D-NY), not tied the Senate up in nots with procedural gimmicks, President Trump’s appointees might’ve gotten finished by now. That’s why Senate Republicans changed the rules to limit debate on nominees. Sen. Smith doesn’t mention that fact, though. Then, to pour white gas on the fire she just started, she wrote this:

What that means is that day in and day out, the work of the Senate has been reduced to voting to pack the courts with Trump-appointed, lifetime federal judges, as fast as we can. And because McConnell and the Republicans have dramatically reduced the time for debate on most of these judges — from 30 hours to two — they can pack the courts faster than ever before.

Democrats created this problem. Had Pelosi and Schumer not pledged to empty the rules toolbox to slow down President Trump’s entire agenda, perhaps Sen. McConnell might be more willing to debate bills. Why should he take up far-left bills from the Democrat House knowing that they won’t fix America’s problems?

Then there’s this howler:

Voting on these nominees is part of my job as a senator, and I take this responsibility seriously. I make time to research the background of each nominee, but the truth is, there’s never any real debate.

That’s BS. She was part of a press conference prior to President Trump nominating Justice Kavanaugh to fill the opening caused by Justice Kennedy’s retirement. At that press conference, held hours before the nominee was known, a bunch of Democrats announced that they’d oppose whoever President Trump nominated. What part of that sounds like Sen. Smith and those other Democrats took “time to research” that nominee?

It’s well-known that Smith was the vice president of external affairs for Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, South Dakota and North Dakota. Sen. Smith’s decision to announce how she’d vote on the nominee wasn’t the result of painstaking, exhaustive research. It was the result of Sen. Smith’s far-left ideology on abortion on demand. Sen. Smith tries to keep that part of her history secret. Imagine that.

Sen. Smith is a waste of a Senate seat. She does whatever the Democrats tell her to do. That isn’t just on major issues. Sen. Smith follows the Democrats’ instructions to the letter on virtually every issue. In this video, Sen. Smith looks like the robot she’s been since becoming part of the Democrats’ minority:

Like Al Franken before her, Sen. Smith has been a partisan hack. The thought of her working across the aisle on important issues is laughable. It’s that simple.

Amy Klobuchar loves portraying herself as a moderate. That façade disappeared when she voted against the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. She’s so extreme that she didn’t even want to debate the bill.

Politico’s ‘article, if it can be called that, said that “The Senate on Monday rejected a bill making it a felony for a doctor to harm or neglect an infant who survives an “attempted abortion,” part of a Republican effort to squeeze Democrats ahead of the 2020 campaign.”

If a baby survives an abortion, that live, breathing human is a human. Therefore, that baby has the same rights as you or me. This isn’t about abortion. It’s about infanticide. Yesterday, Democrats voted to become the ‘Infanticide Party’.

In a speech just before the vote, bill author Sen. Ben Sasse quoted campaign stump speeches by Democratic Sens. Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand and independent Bernie Sanders vowing to look out for society’s “voiceless and vulnerable” and accused them of hypocrisy for opposing his bill’s regulations for the care of newborns.

“Was that all just clap track for the campaign trail and for soundbites? Or do people mean the stuff that they say around here?” he said of his colleagues with White House aspirations.

Amy Klobuchar isn’t a moderate. Neither is Tina Smith. They’re proud to be members of the Party of Infanticide.

This MPR article highlights what happens when politicians dabble in economics.

The article starts by interviewing a couple of business owners about the effect that the Trump/GOP tax cuts have had. Ultra Machining president Eric Gibson told MPR that he’s happy for the tax cuts, saying “From a business owner perspective, we’ve got a lot of great things going on right now. From a tax perspective, as an example, a lot of what we can reinvest in the business is from those tax reductions.”

At Yeager Machine in Norwood Young America, company president Mike Yeager said “I like what the Republicans and President Trump have done for me personally and my business. I will vote for people that support the current administration’s policies.”

Rather than listening to her constituents, Tina Smith thinks that she knows better, saying this:

“It doesn’t feel like a difficult position to me.” Smith said she would not have voted for the bill because it showers wealthy people with tax breaks at the expense of the middle class and will add more than a trillion dollars to the national debt.

“It’s not like that money was sitting in a bank somewhere waiting to be passed out. That’s money that we borrowed from our children and our grandchildren. I do not think that’s responsible.” Smith said increasing investment in workforce training and innovation would help more people get ahead.

How stupid is that? Tina Smith wants the government to “invest” our taxes in government workers because … government has such a great track record of “workforce training and innovation”? Let’s get a little serious. Then there’s this:

President Trump inherited a growing economy, and the tax cut has helped sustain the growth, said College of Saint Benedict and Saint John’s University economics professor Louis Johnston.

Technically, the economy was growing but it was the worst growth rate during a recovery in 75 years. The average annual growth rate during the Obama years was 1.9%. That’s pathetic. Since President Trump got rid of President Obama’s policies, the economy has been growing at a 4% average annual growth rate.

Republican Karin Housley (right) is a big fan of the Republican tax cut and is convinced that campaigning on it will help her win. Democrat Tina Smith said she’s not a fan because it showers wealthy people with tax breaks at the expense of the middle class. Mark Zdechlik | MPR News
Also, wages are rising during the Trump administration. They were stagnant during the Obama administration. Finally, small business confidence, which had been trending downward during President Obama’s second term, are skyrocketing under President Trump’s administration.

This is why leftists like Tina Smith and Prof. Johnston aren’t qualified to be economists.

Tim Walz just couldn’t resist the opportunity to play politics after the Tree of Life Synagogue shooting. After the shooting, Walz took to Twitter to say “As we learn more about what’s happened in Pittsburgh, my heart goes out to the victims, loved ones, first responders, and Jewish community at large. This is a pain that is all too familiar in America. We can and must take action to reduce gun violence in our communities.”

Does anyone seriously think he cares about the people killed by this gunman? I certainly don’t. This is just another attempt by Walz to curry favor with the gun grabber fringe in the DFL.


It’s clear that Tim Walz has gone from being a reliable vote for the NRA to being a reliable vote for Michael Bloomberg. He’s no longer a centrist. He’s a leftist. On Nov. 6, it’s time to retire Tim Walz, Tina Smith and Keith Ellison.

Stephanie Dickrell’s article on Tina Smith’s St. Cloud visit should be laughed at. It isn’t because the article was poorly written. It’s that Tina Smith said some ridiculous-sounding things.

For instance, Tina Smith is quoted as saying “It’s such a visceral reminder of how we need to get back to respecting one another, even if we disagree. We need to tamp down the anger and we can disagree with one another, but we need to also respect each other.”

It isn’t that we shouldn’t respect each other. It’s that Tina Smith hasn’t practiced what she’s preached since she got to the Senate. When Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement from the Supreme Court, President Trump nominated then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh.

Within minutes, Tina Smith announced that she wouldn’t vote for Kavanaugh. When Dr. Christine Blasey-Ford was outed by Sen. Feinstein as having been attacked by Kavanaugh, Smith again said that she wouldn’t vote for Kavanaugh, saying that the charges were too serious. The charges were serious. The evidence wasn’t. The 4 people who were supposed to verify Dr. Ford’s story sided with then-Judge Kavanaugh. Dr. Ford’s best friend said that she didn’t even know Kavanaugh.

If Sen. Smith thinks it’s important to “get back to respecting one another,” why didn’t she bother showing up for the only debate that was televised statewide? I remember this disastrous picture:

Where’s Tina?

Tina Smith’s words are nice. Unfortunately, her actions speak louder than words. That’s why I’m voting for Karin Housley. She’s a woman who gets things done. When she heard about seniors in nursing homes getting abused. Karin dug in to fix the problem. Unfortunately, she ran into a roadblock named Mark Dayton, who vetoed the bipartisan bill that would’ve fixed the problem.

Compare that with Tina Smith’s inaction. The problem happened while she was Lt. Gov. She did nothing. No investigations. No disciplinary actions, either. Many of the complaints weren’t in the Twin Cities so, to Tina, they didn’t exist. To Tina, land outside the Twin Cities exists only for photo ops.