consultants are sandburs

Wednesday, April 30, 2014

Abigale Whelan, do you have courage enough to accept the primary election debate challenge of Justin Boals? Or will you be another Scott Honour/Mike McFadden, and hide?

Earlier, a March 31, 2014 Crabgrass post, here, dealt with Minnesota HD 35B election prospects.

It was clear from that post that Peter Perovich is the candidate I favor, based upon personal knowledge of Perovich's ability, work ethic, character and willingness to listen and be reasonable. I completely trust his promise that if elected he could work with DFL leadership but also with the other party, in getting things done as needed rather than drawing silly lines in the sand over emotion-laden distractions from the business of running State government well and wisely. Reason over rhetoric.

That has not changed.

However, that post noted the Abigale Whelan [endorsed local Republican] primary likelihood, where Justin Boals is the other Republican seeking to advance to the general election. In comments to that post, Boals submitted information on his campaign website, which is:

http://www.democracy.com/justinboals

Again, to remove doubt about any biases of this site, after reading a bit Boals' site content, I believe he is the better choice of the two contesting Republicans. Go to the site, see for yourselves.

As best as I understand things (reader help via a comment would be most appreciated if I misunderstand), Abigale Whelan's campaign is using a Facebook page/site, which again is:

https://www.facebook.com/WhelanforHouse


Readers deserve an image fitting the post headline, so, these are the first three of Boals' homepage items:


[click the image to enlarge it for easier reading]

This very brief excerpt of the Boals site suggests the primary will shake out as a Liberty Republican vs. a Republican Theocrat. Boals being the former, Whelan being the latter. If true, a hope would be that the Liberty viewpoint between the two would triumph. Opinions may differ.

Here in thumbnail form are Boals' first seven items in his growing list of position bullet points [again click to enlarge]:


And that's "bullet points" in the sense of formatting parlance, not NRA related. I have no idea of how Boals and Whelan might differ on NRA stuff, nor do I care. Viewpoints may differ.

NOTE: Blogger sometimes for longer images presents barely legible image quality. Readers having any trouble reading the images are encouraged to access the two listed websites, Boals' and Wehlan's. Also, the post has been prepared quickly in the morning, so there may be UPDATE info, or typo/grammar corrections later.

THIS LOOKS AS IF IT COULD BE INTERESTING. ESPECIALLY IF WHELAN HAS THE COURAGE TO DEBATE BOALS. IT IS THE HOPE THAT FAIR PLAY NORMS MIGHT PREVAIL OVER ANY ENDORSED/FRONTRUNNER GAMESMANSHIP. THAT THERE WILL BE DEBATE.

________________UPDATE_______________
One thing I have to say, and some may view it as a bias, but I believe Boals is making a big-time tactical mistake with his "Contract With Minnesota" approach. It reminds me of Newt Gringrich, and his Contract With On America horseshit, and that man Gingrich and his ways and means makes my skin crawl. He is a weasel.

Others may harbor similar views of Gingrich, and Boals may be hurting his candidacy via that bit of conscious parallelism. If Boals has any character similarities to Gingrich I might have to reevaluate my weighing of his candidacy. I think it mistake rather than fellow-traveling, and my honest belief is Boals should stop that stuff right now and decisively. If he goes into debate thumping that theme strongly Whelan could turn him into chopped liver.

Again, opinions may differ.

__________FURTHER UPDATE___________
This HD 35B Republican primary contest differs greatly from the possible/likely HD 8B Republican primary contest noted here. In HD 8B, both Republican candidates appear to be both ignorant and frightful. In the HD 35B contest, in contrast, talent apparently is not lacking in either Whelan or Boals, and there seems to be a basic policy polarity of interest there, unlike HD 8B which seems contested on a lower and more sordid level. These are different. No apples/oranges comparison to insult either Whelan or Boals. Plus, in 35B there is already a strong DFL candidacy for voters to have a true and sound general election choice. It is unclear to me whether that will be so in HD 8B, where it seems to be circus time, all the time.

FURTHER UPDATE: Even re HD 8B, a collateral matter to this post, opinions differ (it would have benefited things if Gilmore had not turned a completely blind eye to the facts of the present and past Franson litigation).

___________FUTHER UPDATE____________
Back to the point of the post. And this is a bit of a letdown. After doing a word scan of Boals' campaign website homepage - and his "issues" page - I am saddened to report that neither contained either the word "minimum" or the word "wage." This augers poorly for any "debate" between Boals and Whelan touching upon the topic of relief for those putting in long hours for scant pay. That presumably will await debate between the GOP primary victor, and Perovich as the DFL candidate who favors worker rights and fair compensation for an hour's work. It makes one wonder whether employee rights of any kind might reach debate status, were there to actually be debate between Boals and Whelan.

Another disconcerting thing, found while looking at Boals' "issues" post, a will to amend our Constitution; yet another GOP penchant that way; but at least not [yet] any right-to-work [for less] suggestion there. Boals, instead offers this ticket-punching gem:

Amend!

As a responsible gun owner and shooting sport enthusiast, I believe in our right to own guns whether it is for personal protection, home security, sport or hunting. Currently, the Minnesota State Constitution has no wording that protects our right as law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. If elected, I will make it my first priority as a legislator to pick up a bill currently in the Senate to amend our Constitution to that effect. I will find support through like minded fellow legislators in the House and fight to have our constitution amended to guarantee and protect our right to keep and bear arms.

It is good to know Boals is "a responsible gun owner and shooting sport enthusiast," and perhaps he and Whelan in a debate might explore how far toward gross behaviorial excess one might need to go to transgress into the region of gun-related irresponsibility, before becoming an irresponsible gun owner.

Likely, they'd agree with the jury and with each other on Byron Smith's murder convictions for the Little Falls killings, but at least there is a hope they are confronted with the question and given an opportunity to respond. Any tub-thumper over NRA fodder should be called to opine, one way or the other, on "stand-your-ground" and the "castle" doctrine that there is no line to be crossed with intruders in the home. Each should go on record, one way or the other on each such debatable position.

Otherwise, where's debate vs. holding a love-in, GOP big-tent style, and then count primary votes?

FURTHER UPDATE: Perhaps here is a green issue the two can debate. "Nanny state" dimensions and all. It could be a hoot, Whelan on the issue (since Boals is already on record favoring a sane ending of the "War on Drugs" continuing its reach to marijuana).

Presumably neither of them were pulling for Walt to win out in Breaking Bad.


1 comment:

Justin Boals said...

Eric, feel free to reach out to me at boals4house@yahoo.com. I am more than happy to sit down and discuss my candidacy, my views and my hopes for our district and our State. I look forward to talking with you, Sir!