One of the things we learn about Zach Dorholt is that he’s proud of his being a small business owner. One of the things highlighted on Dorholt’s Meet Zach Dorholt page is this paragraph, which reads “Following his entrepreneurial instincts, Zach co-founded The Old Capital Tavern in Sauk Rapids with like-minded friends in 2012. The venture was a first step in building unique businesses that support local economics and highlight Central Minnesota culture.”
It’s understatement to say that the people LFR has talked with from central Minnesota are skeptical of Mr. Dorholt’s entrepreneurial enthusiasm. The biggest reason they question Mr. Dorholt’s entrepreneurial expertise is because he voted for a ton of tax increases that hit small businesses directly, then voted the next spring to repeal the tax increases he’d voted for in 2013.
Those don’t sound like the actions a pro-entrepreneurial politician would make. They sound like the actions of a pro-high taxes politician would make after he’s revealed his political leanings and he knows he’s gone too far to get re-elected.
As for being a small business person, apparently Mr. Dorholt thinks health regulations are optional:
MN Rule 4626.0225 Use spatulas, tongs, deli tissue or other dispensing equipment to limit direct hand contact with food or ice.
Cook was observed dispensing buns, French fries and other condiments with his bare hands.
The reason for these regulations is so that people don’t get sick. A true businessman pays attention to details like that. That wasn’t the only violation. Here’s another:
MN Rule 4626.0070 Food employees must wash their hands at the hand wash sink in the food preparation area by vigorously rubbing together their soap lathered hands and arms for at least 20 seconds, scrubbing underneath the fingernails with a fingernail brush, and rinsing with clean water.
Cook was observed working with raw fish and rinsing his hands in the sink for approximately 5 seconds.
I’m betting that Dorholt invested a little money in the business so he could say he’s a small businessman but doesn’t pay attention to things. Then again, I might be wrong. He might be a hands-on owner who thinks regulations are suggestions.
Barbara Banaian’s monthly column highlights the arrogance of the St. Cloud School Board while highlighting the fact that the school board hasn’t examined all of the different options available with regard to Tech High School.
If I sound like a broken record on the subject, it’s because the School Board hasn’t changed its plan much. They haven’t explained why a new Tech High School needs to be built. Based on some of the comments by a school board member, it’s apparent that they don’t think they need to justify their actions.
Mrs. Banaian nails the crux of the problem when she wrote “We can all agree they can’t make do with Tech in its current condition. But should we pay to build a new high school? The proposed new Tech is slightly smaller and slightly less expensive than the one rejected in the 2015 vote. The school board and interested parties have invested time and money in a detailed design for a new building. But what have they given for the option to renovate Tech?”
Then Mrs. Banaian drops the hammer:
A scant “cost opinion” based on what contractor R.A. Morton said was “limited information.” “A complete facility assessment would be required to accurately assess the mechanical, electrical and structural conditions of the existing building. An educational assessment would be required to assess the flow, function and viability of educational programming of any renovations completed,” Morton wrote to the board June 2.
When the contractor indicates that they couldn’t do a legitimate estimate because of “limited information”, that’s proof that the School Board isn’t interested in finding out how much a Tech renovation would cost. When the Board cites a “cost opinion”, it should be rejected as worthless.
This is the same problem that Claire VanderEyk and Sarah Murphy ran into when they looked into the situation.
There’s a two-step solution to this situation. The first step is in voting no against the Tech referendum. The other step is in electing members to the school board that will actually address citizens’ questions. The School Board, as currently configured, is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the ‘education community’. We need citizen leadership, not vested special interests. This group should be voted out of office ASAP:
Eliminating the Board’s institutional arrogance is the only way to fix this problem.
The more things change, the more the DFL insists on staying the same. It’s been months since DFL senators undermined a bonding bill agreement that would have paid for lots of road repairs. They’re still insisting on funding for the SWLRT project. Predictably, Gov. Dayton is throwing a temper tantrum, saying “The Legislature won’t let us improve the economic and social vitality of the metropolitan area. I think that’s really irresponsible.”
Gov. Dayton is wrong. Republicans won’t sign off on a project that’s pure pork. A handful of business leaders want SWLRT. As for improving “the economic and social vitality of the metropolitan area,” that won’t change one iota if SWLRT is approved.
Kurt Daudt, fresh off impressively winning a primary battle, has the right idea, saying “We’re going to lose everything that’s on the table right now. I don’t think that’s very good legislating. I don’t think that’s very good leadership.”
This is what he’s talking about:
Daudt warned that the benefits of tax cuts and a package of public works construction projects could be lost if Democrats walk away from the table over light rail.
Gov. Dayton vetoed $800,000,000 worth of middle class tax cuts in his attempt to force Republicans into funding SWLRT. Gov. Dayton’s veto stopped the tax cuts but it hasn’t rallied support for SWLRT funding. Thanks to Gov. Dayton’s idiotic decision, DFL legislators have to defend his veto of tax cuts for veterans, students, farmers and small business owners.
This is a political winner for Republicans. They shouldn’t give an inch on this. If the DFL wants to fight this, let them be highlighted as the party that doesn’t like outstate Minnesota.
Rep. Thissen’s latest diatribe is essentially his whining that Democrats didn’t get everything they wanted in the last session, mixed with a healthy dose of bragging that essentially says that the DFL would’ve done better.
For instance, when Rep. Thissen said “After nearly 3 months of indecision, this week is crunch time for a special session decision”, what Rep. Thissen doesn’t want to say is that Kurt Daudt has done a fantastic job of saying no to the DFL’s insistence on funding the SWLRT, a project that the citizens don’t want but that the special interests want in the worst way. Here’s what the GOP should say loudly to the DFL on this issue: “Shut up, go away or we’ll use this issue against you in the upcoming election.”
“Behind closed doors negotiations have produced little progress and all of the political obstacles to compromise, including Speaker Daudt’s primary, are behind us,” said Thissen. “After nearly 3 months of indecision, this week is crunch time for a special session decision. Once we hit the State Fair, it’s too late and we need some time for the promised public hearings. I continue to believe we should finish our job, but if agreement is not reached, I pledge that under a House DFL Majority we will bring a robust bonding bill to the House floor for a vote in the first 30 days of the next legislative session.”
It’s the DFL’s fault that a bonding bill wasn’t passed. An agreement was reached between the House and Senate. Rep. Thissen didn’t like the compromise so he worked with DFL senators to blow the agreement up. Now the saboteur is promising to fix the bill he helped demolish.
Notice that Rep. Thissen doesn’t mention any of his sabotage in his statement. Why would he? Rep. Thissen isn’t a leader. He couldn’t care less about the average person. That’s indisputable. While he was Speaker in 2013, Thissen worked with the unions on the forced unionization of in-home child care providers. The in-home child care providers fought against it. Thissen didn’t care. He had his marching orders from AFSCME and SEIU. The bill was passed. Gov. Dayton signed it into law.
This spring, the in-home child care providers had the final say, telling Rep. Thissen, AFSCME and the SEIU to shove it:
In the end, in-home child care providers rejected AFSCME’s forced unionization plan. In fact, the vote wasn’t that close. According to this article, the “vote was 1,014-392 in a Tuesday count by the state Bureau of Mediation Services from ballots mailed to providers last month.”
Voters would do well to remember that the DFL did exactly what the special interests wanted while ignoring the in-home child care providers. To Thissen and the DFL, you’re a nobody if you aren’t a special interest group aligned with the DFL.
In 2010, I supported Tom Emmer’s campaign against Mark Dayton for governor. Had Emmer won that election, I’m convinced that Minnesota would be far better off than it is today. Back then, Tom Emmer was a staunch conservative. Unfortunately, Tom Emmer isn’t the full-time conservative today that he was then.
That’s why he just received the lowest GOP primary vote percentage in a generation. That’s why he “won the primary … with 68.7 percent of the vote.”
Eric Ostermeier, who founded the blog Smart Politics, wrote that “Emmer’s win was the fifth-lowest out of 49 contested primaries since 1964. The only members of Minnesota’s U.S. House delegation to receive less support were DFLers Jim Oberstar in 1980 and 1984, Martin Sabo in 1992 and Gerry Sikorski in 1992.”
A quick look at Emmer’s issues page on national security shows that he isn’t listening to his constituents. Emmer started wrong by teaming with Keith Ellison to form the Somalia Caucus. It went downhill fast after that.
During a July 1, 2015 townhall meeting, Emmer laid the foundation for this primary fight by blowing off constituents who wanted a moratorium on Syrian refugees being resettled in St. Cloud, saying that he’d checked with the State Department and that there weren’t any refugees coming to St. Cloud. Clearly, Emmer was either badly misinformed or dishonest.
The reason why AJ Kern got 26.5% of the vote in this primary is because she fought for US national security. Emmer hasn’t. Here’s hoping that Rep. Emmer’s last day in Congress is January 3, 2019. Central Minnesota doesn’t need a squish who collaborates with Keith Ellison representing the Sixth District.
Tuesday night, Jason Lewis won his primary against Darlene Miller and John Howe. Saying that this was expected is understatement. Lewis now heads into the general election against the DFL’s Angie Craig. The DCCC is already spinning Lewis as a rigid ideologue from hell.
Craig’s only hope of winning this election is to make the focus on Jason Lewis. The minute that this becomes a fight between Angie Craig’s progressive agenda and Lewis’ ideas for creating jobs and protecting us from terrorists, this race is over.
Nowhere on Ms. Craig’s issue page, which has a heading of “My Priorities”, does it talk about protecting against terrorist attacks, though it mentions “Slowing the Pace of Climate Change.”
When Ms. Craig talks about veterans care, she’s all about describing the problem:
We owe so much to the brave men and women who volunteer to serve our country in the armed forces. When they come home from their service, they deserve access to every benefit and opportunity they’ve earned. However, so often our veterans are faced with long wait times at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and service-related health problems that aren’t fairly compensated.
A 2014 internal audit by the VA found that more than 120,000 veterans waited at least 90 days for healthcare appointments or never received appointments at all. And as of January 2016, over 82,000 veterans were still waiting for the VA to evaluate their claims for service-connected disability compensation more than 125 days after filing.
Nowhere in that word soup is an identifiable solution. I’m not interested in another cookie-cutter politician that can identify problems but can’t identify solutions.
Jason Lewis is into solving problems. He’s also a principled Constitution-first citizen. It’s time to elect Jason Lewis.
It feels good to finally be home again. Posting has been essentially been nonexistent on LFR because I had a heart attack last Monday. As in Monday, August 1, 2016. The cardiologists say I got lucky because the heart attack was caused by a major blockage of the left descending artery. The cardiologists that I spoke with said that that particular type of blockage is often nick-named widow-maker because it often results in the person suffering the heart attack dying.
There but for the grace of God go I.
The good news is that my heart is better than ever thanks to the fact that the fix was relatively simple. First, they did an angioplasty to remove the blockage, then they placed a stent at the point of the attack. The entire procedure took less than 45 minutes. The angioplasty was done Monday morning. This afternoon, I’m home pecking at my keyboard.
There are some people to thank. First among them is the Lady Logician. She sent out an email to my blogging colleagues, then started praying for me. The Bible says that the “prayers of a righteous man availeth much.” I’m proof of that.
If the Lady Logician needs to be thanked, as she deserves it, my pastor, Art Cotant, deserves that thanks, too. Art visited me twice, praying with me both times, all while empathizing with my situation. In fact, my church family deserves many thanks, including my friend Andrea from the singles group when I first joined First B.
The list of people that deserve my thanks is lengthy. Suffice it to say that I appreciate everyone that prayed for me or called me while I was in the hospital.
This morning, Hillary Clinton appeared on Fox News Sunday. During the interview, Chris Wallace asked her about Patricia Smith’s statement at the Republican National Convention. That’s where Mrs. Smith said “I blame Hillary Clinton — I blame Hillary Clinton personally for the death of my son. That’s personally.”
Mrs. Clinton’s reply was “As other members of families who lost loved ones have said, that’s not what they heard — I don’t hold any ill feeling for someone who in that moment may not fully recall everything that was or wasn’t said.”
To provide proper context, Chris Wallace said “She and the father of Tyrone Woods both say that on the day that their sons’ bodies were returned to the United States, that you came up to them and you said it was all because of a video, not terrorism. Now, I know some of the other families disagree with this, and I know you deny it.”
I won’t mince words. Hillary Clinton is a liar. It isn’t that Patricia Smith doesn’t recall Hillary’s statements correctly. It isn’t that Tyrone Woods’ father recalls Mrs. Clinton’s statements incorrectly, either. Days after the attack, Hillary was still pretending that an obscure internet video caused the attack in Benghazi:
It’s clear that Mrs. Clinton’s mission was to insist that an obscure internet video caused the terrorists’ attack. Here’s what Mrs. Clinton said days after Christopher Stevens’ body had been returned to the United States:
I also want to take a moment to address the video circulating on the internet that has led to these protests in a number of countries. Let me state very clearly, and I hope it is obvious that the United States’ government had absolutely nothing to do with this video.
There’s no need to rely on Patricia Smith’s recollection or Charles Woods’ recollection. Hillary’s statements have been captured on video and they’re quite revealing. So are Susan Rice’s statements:
This article highlights Mrs. Clinton’s dishonesty. Here’s the date on the article:
Updated 5:51 AM ET, Sat September 15, 2012
Here’s the opening paragraph of the article:
The remains of U.S. Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans landed on U.S. soil Friday afternoon in flag-draped caskets.
On Sunday, September 16, 2012, Susan Rice went on all 5 Sunday morning talk shows to deliver a simple message. Here’s what she said on CBS’s Face the Nation:
Based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is of the present is, in fact, it began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had happened hours before in Cairo, where, as you know, there was a violent protest in front of our embassy, sparked by this hateful video.
The video captured Mrs. Clinton’s statements accurately. There’s no mistaking that she’s lied repeatedly about the internet video being the cause for the terrorist attacks in Benghazi.
Therefore, Mrs. Clinton’s statement that she doesn’t “hold any ill feeling for someone who in that moment may not recall everything that was said or wasn’t said” is insulting. There’s nothing wrong with Patricia Smith’s or Charles Woods’ hearing. What’s wrong is Mrs. Clinton’s repeated dishonesty.
The video doesn’t lie. Unfortunately, Mrs. Clinton and Ms. Rice lied repeatedly. What kind of politician hints that grieving parents are wrong when the politician knows what she’s said is utterly dishonest?
Finally, J.C. Watts gave the perfect definition of character during the 1996 Republican Convention when he said that “character is doing the right thing even when nobody’s looking.” Mrs. Clinton apparently fails that test.
Technorati: Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, Benghazi Terrorist Attacks, Internet Video, Democratic National Convention, Christopher Stevens, Patricia Smith, Sean Smith, Charles Woods, Tyrone Woods, Republican National Convention, J.C. Watts, Character, Election 2016
Simply put, Kevin Sorbo is my new hero. He’s my hero for writing this post that questions why Michael Brown’s mother was invited to Hillary’s convention and that ridicules the entire Black Lives Matter movement and the hand-up-don’t-shoot myth. Considering the fact that he’s a Hollywood actor, that took courage.
It must’ve taken courage for Sorbo to write “Whatever questionable choices were made at the Republican National Convention last week, I didn’t hear of a single speaker whose sole accomplishment was raising a delinquent who attacked a cop. But as the country reels from the cold-blooded murder of five policemen in Dallas and three in Baton Rouge, Lezley McSpadden, mother of Mike Brown, America’s most famous cop-assaulting criminal, appeared on stage at the Democratic National Convention.”
It must’ve taken courage for Sorbo to write “It would be a lot easier if they were not being targeted for assassination and mass murders by homicidal nuts ginned up by BLM. (Shooting deaths of police are up 78 percent so far this year.) And it would be a lot easier without a group, officially supported by the Democrats, leading marches down city streets, chanting, ‘What do we want? DEAD COPS! When do we want it? NOW!’ Why does the Democratic platform endorse Black Lives Matter? And, most importantly, why was Mike Brown’s mother on stage at the Democratic National Convention?”
That’s a great question, Mr. Sorbo. Why was Mike Brown’s mother invited to speak at the Democratic National Convention? What did she contribute to the convention other than to gin up the African-American vote? This is an even better question:
However half-heartedly, Hillary claims to oppose cop-killing, so why is she using her convention to promote the biggest lie in the pantheon of anti-cop lies, and to celebrate a man whose most famous act was to violently assault a police officer?
It’s obvious that Hillary isn’t pro-cop. If she were, she would’ve told Al Sharpton off for perpetuating the myth of hands-up-don’t-shoot. The Democratic Party isn’t pro-cop. Gov. Dayton accused a Hispanic police officer of being racist while insisting that Philando Castile would likely still be alive if he was white. Sorbo wasn’t done:
Because of the despicable lies put out by BLM agitators, Wilson had to give up his career, move his family and will be forced to live in fear for the rest of his life. The town of Ferguson was destroyed, businesses burned to the ground, police officers attacked, people injured, the National Guard called in, and massive taxpayer money expended to contain the riots. But at the Democratic Convention, Lezley McSpadden (mother of Mike Brown) was wildly cheered.
Sorbo closed by sticking in the dagger, figuratively speaking:
Donald Trump, along with every other Republican ever to run for president, is required to repeatedly “disavow” David Duke — someone he’s never met, never mentioned, never thought of— and certainly didn’t invite to speak at his convention.
But Hillary invites to her convention the mother of a man whose criminality destroyed a police officer’s life, tore the country apart and gave birth to a murderous cop-hating movement. Will a single reporter ask Hillary to disavow that?
In terms of rhetorical questions, that’s one of the smartest I’ve ever heard. The answer, of course, is that Hillary won’t get questioned about inviting the mother of a thug to speak at her convention, much less be asked to disavow that decision.
Technorati: Hillary Clinton, Lezley McSpadden, Michael Brown, Hands Up, Don’t Shoot, BlackLivesMatter, Al Sharpton, Philando Castile, Mark Dayton, Mothers of the Movement, Democratic National Convention, Kevin Sorbo, Law Enforcement, Republicans, Election 2016
If this article is accurate, and the swelling crowds seem to verify its accuracy, German Chancellor Angela Merkel doesn’t stand much of a change in the next election. The tip-off, which isn’t much of a secret, is the opening paragraph of this article, which says “According to a poll performed by YouGov market research firm, at least 66% of the respondents said they do not agree with the chancellor’s policy towards refugees, with only 27% support.”
With France getting frequently hit with terrorist attacks and with some terrorist attacks happening in Germany, it won’t be long before German voters fire Merkel and replace her with a pro-border control alternative. It’s virtually inevitable.
Merkel incited this uprising when she said “[Germany] Will give asylum to those who are politically persecuted and we will give protection to those who flee war and expulsion according to the Geneva Refugee Convention,” adding “We can make it.” Never has a politician misread her constituents or failed to do what’s right in recent history more than Ms. Merkel.
These leaders’ statements offer differing perspectives:
Frauke Petry, leader of the Alternative for Germany (AfD), which strongly rejects the refugee inflow into Germany, also criticized Merkel’s policy towards migrants. “…Stop repeating ‘we’ll manage it’ and finally admit your mistake,” she said. The head of the Green Party Cem Ozdemir said that he feels “ashamed” due to “the failure of the world community, of Europe and above all of Germany” to resolve the refugee crisis.
Mr. Ozdemir sounds like a politician. Petry sounds like a patriot who would do what’s right. If the election were held today, I’d bet that Petry would win handily. I’m betting that Germans would pick the true believer in German sovereignty over the politician.
This doesn’t bode well for Ms. Merkel:
Bavaria’s state premier took aim at Chancellor Angela Merkel’s open-door refugee policy on Saturday, rejecting her “we can do this” mantra just two days after she defended the message following Islamist attacks in Germany.
The comments from Horst Seehofer, whose Christian Social Union is the Bavarian sister party of Merkel’s conservatives, exacerbate the chancellor’s difficulty in standing by a policy that her critics have blamed for the attacks and which risks undermining her popularity ahead of federal elections next year.
Five attacks in Germany since July 18 have left 15 people dead, including four assailants, and dozens injured. Two of the attackers had links to Islamist militancy, officials say. “‘We can do this’ – I cannot, with the best will, adopt this phrase as my own,” Seehofer told reporters after a meeting of his party.
The German people aren’t stupid. They’ve noticed that terrorist attacks are increasing. That won’t stop until a new leader is elected.