November 19th, 2009 • 3:05 amMark Ritchie: Still Partisan After All These Years

During the 2006 campaign, Michael Brodkorb’s MDE certainly questioned whether Mark Ritchie was as nonpartisan as Ritchie claimed. It’s 3 years later and questions remain as to whether Ritchie is as impartial as his DFL supporters tell us he is. This memo certainly suggests that Ritchie is still a partisan DFL activist:

Notice that this event isn’t a nonpartisan training program. It’s a training event designed to teach DFL union activists how to put together winning campaigns. the training includes conducting voter registration drives, doing voter ID and updating data bases and doing GOTV operations. The thing that I’m curious about is what they’re teaching about absentee ballots.

The fact that this training session is being held in a union hall doesn’t exactly inspire confidence that Mr. Ritchie’s role in this event is as an impartial Secretary of State. Considering the fact that the main campaigns will be represented at the event and considering the fact that the training is very DFL-specific, I’d say it’s unlikely that Mark Ritchie’s role is that of an impartial Secretary of State.

It’s important that we question whether Mark Ritchie ever stopped being the radical activist that helped start the leftist Campaign for America’s Future:

While Ritchie says that the office of Secretary of State should operate in a non-partisan manner, it should be noted that he’s listed as a founder and advisor to the Campaign for America’s Future, one of the left’s most partisan organizations. CAF shares office space in Washington, DC with Americans United for Change, Americans Against Escalation in Iraq and USAction. Americans Against Escalation in Iraq is run by Tom Matzzie, who also chairs MoveOn.org. This office space is located on K Street, the lobbyist capitol of the nation’s capitol.

The link for CAF’s founders was part of a post I wrote in 2007. Now that list has disappeared. What hasn’t disappeared from CAF’s website is the list of their board. A brief scan of CAF’s board made my eyes pop. Eli Pariser, one of the officers of MoveOn.org, is a board member. The deeper I dig, the more questions I have about whether Mr. Ritchie is nonpartisan. CAF’s treasurer is Robert Borosage. That name likely won’t trigger any alarms because he’s a below-the-radar operator. A quick search of Borosage’s name yields alot of fruit, thanks to the great work of DTN:

A former New Left radical and onetime Director of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), Robert Borosage co-founded (with Roger Hickey) both the Campaign for America’s Future and the Institute for America’s Future. He also founded and currently chairs the Progressive Majority Political Action Committee, the activist arm of a political networking organization whose aim is to help elect as many leftist political leaders as possible. In addition, he is a contributing editor at The Nation magazine and a regular contributor to The American Prospect.

It’s impossible for me to think that Mark Ritchie ever stopped being a far left radical/anarchist, especially after finding Mr. Ritchie listed as a founder/advisor of CAF in OCTOBER, 2006:

Listed as “Founders or Advisors” as of October 2006: Gar Alperovitz, Ira Arlook, John Atlas, Morton Bahr, Peter Barnes, Ann Beaudry, George Becker, Berkley Bedell, Lara Bergthold, Paul Berman, Jules Bernstein, Mary Frances Berry, Susan Bianchi-Sand, Moe Biller, Norman Birnbaum, Arthur Blaustein, Barry Bluestone, Julian Bond, Heather Booth, Robert Borosage, Jim Braude, Thomas Buffenbarger, Marc Caplan, David Carley, Hodding Carter III, John Cavanagh, Bob Chase, Richard Cloward, Jeff Cohen, Mitchell Cohen, Barry Commoner, Ken Cook, G. William Domhoff, Douglas H. Dority, Peter Dreier, Dudley Dudley, Barbara Ehrenreich, Robert Eisner, Jeff Faux, Diane Feldman, Edward Fire, Dick Flacks, Nancy Folbre, Steve Fraser, Betty Friedan, Jeannette Galanis, James K. Galbraith, Herbert Gans, Paul Gaston, Thomas Geoghegan, Todd Gitlin, Chester Hartman, Heidi Hartmann, Tom Hayden, Denis Hayes, Roger Hickey, Jim Hightower, Adam Hochschild, Patricia Ireland, Amy Isaacs, Jesse Jackson, Christopher Jencks, Jaqueline Jones, Michael Kazin, Jackie Kendall, Charles Knight, George Kourpias, Jonathan Kozol, David Kusnet, Robert Kuttner, Rev. Peter Laarman, Thea Lee, Nelson Lichtenstein, Judith Lichtman, David Liederman, Joseph Lowery, Ray Marshall, Steve Max, Jay Mazur, Michael McCloskey, Gerald W. McEntee, Howard Metzenbaum, Harold Meyerson, S.M. Miller, Lawrence Mishel, Nan Grogan Orrock, Paul Osterman, Maurice S. Paprin, Richard Parker, Wallace Peterson, Frances Fox Piven, Ron Pollack, Robert Pollin, Steve Protulis, Miles Rapoport, Robert Reich, Frank Riessman, Mark Ritchie, Dennis Rivera, Cecil Roberts, Joel Rogers, Richard Rorty, Sumner Rosen, Richard Rothstein, Lillian Rubin, Arlie Schardt, Tom Schlesinger, Susan Shaer, Stanley Sheinbaum, Jack Sheinkman, John Simmons, Theda Skocpol, Francis Smith, Paul Soglin, Andrew Stern, John Sweeney, Linda Tarr-Whelan, John E. Taylor, Ellen Teninty, Robert Theobald, Richard Trumka, Katherine Villers, Philippe Villers, Ron Walters, Michael Walzer, Roger Wilkins, Linda Faye Williams, William Julius Wilson, Leslie R. Wolfe, Stephen P. Yokich.

Some of the people on this list are so far left that they’d make Howard Dean look positively moderate. Mary Frances Berry, Julian Bond, Betty Friedan, Tom Hayden, Patricia Ireland, Jesse Jackson, Gerald W. McEntee, Howard Metzenbaum, Harold Meyerson, Robert Reich, Andy Stern, John Sweeney and Richard Trumka are a who’s who of far left lefties. In fact, Mary Frances Berry used to carry a copy of Mao’s Little Red Book in her purse. That’s what a committed leftist does.

I’m not willing to believe that Mark Ritchie ever shed his radical leftist spots. That’s why I’m skeptical that his presence at this training session is as an impartial secretary of state.

In fact, I’d argue that Mr. Ritchie is still committed to advancing the DFL’s radical agenda. I haven’t seen proof that Mr. Ritchie hasn’t eliminated his radical spots. Until I see that proof, I’ll assume that he’s a bitterly partisan man.

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

Post Comments RSS Feed Post Comments RSSTrackBack URI 10 Responses

  1. Just yesterday you were raging around about Michele Bachmann facing rules against partisan abuses of her congressional webpage as a “speech issue” and now you say an official cannot have freedom of association under the First Amendement.

    That means you are critical of Pawlenty going out of state to interfere [ineffectively] in New York’s CD 23?

    Or does it mean consistency is the hobgoblin of petty minds?

    Comment by eric z. • 19Nov2009 @ 9:05 am

  2. now you say an official cannot have freedom of association under the First Amendement.

    First things first: It’s an apples to green beans comparison. Ritchie is the chief election officer in the state. That means Ritchie’s supposed to be impartial.

    If Mark Ritchie sticks with telling them what the relevant laws are, he can associate all he wants. It’s my opinion that Ritchie isn’t there in an impartial role. I can’t prove that but his history suggests that he’ll forever be a partisan with strong ties to radical leftism.

    Comment by Gary Gross • 19Nov2009 @ 9:44 am

  3. Wow, you need a detective to just figure out what a partisan is! Apparently, one can even tell what Mark Ritchie secretly represents by looking at organizations he’s spoken to in the past and then figuring out what other businesses are sharing the same street and building in Washington. Did you hire Encyclopedia Brown for this report? It seems like the work of a third grader.

    Comment by Colin • 19Nov2009 @ 11:20 am

  4. The issue should be whether his personal political beliefs affect the objectivity of his office. That is the same test that dogged Republican Mary Kiffmeyer and every other personal. Surely the price of holding office is not denial of ones’ right to also have personal beliefs?

    Comment by owen • 19Nov2009 @ 6:23 pm

  5. Owen, you’re right. The benchmark should be whether his personal beliefs affect how he performs his job. It’s a FACT that he didn’t provide leadership in following the law on accepting & rejecting absentee ballots last year, which caused all kinds of problems in the Coleman-Franken recount. Based on his getting that big thing wrong, my answer is that he’s competent & should be sent packing.

    Comment by Gary Gross • 19Nov2009 @ 6:37 pm

  6. The event announcement you’ve included clearly describes it as a DFL event, not an official state function. The fact that an elected DFL office holder speaks at a DFL event is not news. Your post tells us a lot about your partisanship (as if we didn’t already know!); nothing about Ritchie’s.

    Comment by Larry • 20Nov2009 @ 7:06 am

  7. Larry, Don’t be stupid. The Secretary of State is required to be impartial. Yes, Ritchie has the RIGHT to talk at this event as long as his election advice stays impartial. The minute it meanders into being partisan, Ritchie would be showing that he isn’t impartial.

    We know he isn’t impartial. We know because he utterly botched the handling of the absentee ballots.

    Comment by Gary Gross • 20Nov2009 @ 11:37 am

  8. Gary, you can disagree with the State Supreme Court on the way Ritchie conducted the recount.

    Please do not take offense, but I value the Justices and their capabilities in deciding issues.

    You are saying Kiffmeyer was impartial? Get real. We both know her efforts at making it harder for people to register has always been to lessen the DFL counts in favor of the GOP regulars, and their counts.

    Ritchie is far, far, far less an advocate of any side over the other than Mary Kiffmeyer is, was, and likely will be.

    End of story.

    Spin things all you want.

    Ritchie is a vast improvement in office. Ritchie has character and intelligence.

    Comment by eric z. • 20Nov2009 @ 12:20 pm

  9. Every one of you has missed the one tiny little FACT that Mr. Ritchie called the former SOS a radical partisan for doing the EXACT SAME THING that he is now doing. He CAMPAIGNED saying that if he were elected he would NEVER EVER do the exact same thing he is doing now and all of the DFL apologists said “yeah - what he said…” so the freedom of association straw man really falls flat.

    LL

    Comment by The Lady Logician • 20Nov2009 @ 1:54 pm

  10. Eric, the KSTP investigation showed physical absentee ballots that didn’t have signatures on them. According to Minnesota’s election laws, absentee ballots that don’t have a signature on them must be rejected. With all due respect to the justices, they got it wrong. BADLY WRONG.

    Even a sixth-grader would’ve done better than they did.

    It’s insulting to hear you say that Ritchie is impartial. I thought you could set your partisanship aside to see that Ritchie screwed up but I guess that’s too much to hope for.

    Aside from being a partisan hack, Ritchie is incompetent, as this post clearly proves.

    Comment by Gary Gross • 20Nov2009 @ 8:03 pm





Categories