consultants are sandburs

Saturday, October 27, 2012

Election time - Back ballot, judiciary. And, know your Niskas.

Ramsey resident Harry Niska ran for Ramsey City Council the last time Ward 1 was in play, and lost by 47 votes to incumbent David Elvig; with all in our household being part of the 47 vote majority. Elvig 1203 votes, Niska 1159.

Why do I dislike Harry. This link. I see him as a danger to political thought that seems best to me. Add to that spouse Jen Niska's effort in the Emmer run, wanting to inflict great disaster on us had Emmer won and had rabid majorities in both houses where we'd be a bigger laughingstock than Wisconsin is now. Add to that where Jen Niska is now. Add to that, they endorse a crazy woman.

So I write as no lover of the Niska spouses and what they and henchmen would do to our State if given the opportunity.

However, Harry Niska in advising his Republican minions on the judicial elections gives sound advice, for all, in key contests. Here and here, online, (at the less than centrist True North website).

Niska endorses and suggests others should vote:

Chief Justice Gildea - Niska does not say it directly, but Gildea's opponent, Dan Griffith, is a real turkey. There is no real choice. Gildea is the better of the two conservatives to vote for because she's not an idiot.

Justice Barry Anderson - Dean Barkley is his opponent. We all know his history. This is a tough one. Barkley is an opportunist, Anderson an uber-rightwinger. Wringing my hands in agony, I believe Niska is correct. I would probably favor Barry Anderson over Caligula too, if they dug his remains up and ran him. But, again a very close call.

Justice David Stras - Opponent is Tim Tingelstad. This one is easy. Since Stras can fog a mirror, and is not Tingelstad, vote Stras.

NOTE: Both Gildea and Anderson were in the minority on the suit against the Unalloter's unallotments, which Niska writes of as an advantage. Well, no, it's not. It's a blot and a blemish. Despite that, and the Unalloter's installing another Unalloter fan onto the court, because of the quality of the opposition more than any quality in the incumbents - Niska in my view offers the better choices in a lesser evil set of situations.

Let's have some vacancies that Dayton can fill. The Unalloter has had his shot at poisoning the Supremes' well, so the hope is Dayton gets an opportunity to restore reason, and move toward balance and felicity. The Ritchie case outcome proves the need, the man wanted to honestly word the constitutional tampering things presented voters, and lost, due to the Unalloter's minions. However, Tim Tingelsted and Dan Griffith would be infinitely worse than the sad stuff we now have in our top court.

Dean Barkley, to be honest, I really wish it were somebody else against Barry Anderson. Anyone differing from Niska and my suggestion of going with Anderson would be justified in supporting the opposing candidate in that contest. In the other two, the incumbents are clearly a cut above each opponent, but that's not setting the bar at all high in making such comparisons.

________UPDATE________
Forgot to say, as part of the Niska spouses' joint resume, Harry Niska chaired the GOP State platform committee, being point man on that hate-filled agenda in opposition to liberty of family planning and choice, MinnPost having noted:

“We tried to address concerns about the platform getting too big,” said Harry Niska, a 31-year-old lawyer from Anoka who chairs the party’s platform committee.

The committee of 18 volunteers had the responsibility of culling 60 resolutions from the more than 500 that were passed in the state’s eight congressional district conventions.

“We tried to get what we thought was not too specific, but not too general; salient issues that we thought had broad-based interest among the delegates statewide,” Niska said.

Some of the resolutions Niska described as “big, controversial,” like the resolution to strike the party’s objection to the expansion of gambling.

Yes, Harry is a danger. A young energetic Republican lawyer-activist, apparently very capable as an attorney, yet rooted in the Federalist Society and close to Jesus, (as he'd want all of to believe his Jesus was and is to be regarded, by us, as our Jesus too). But on the judicial part of the ballot, I agree with his choices, although clearly only because we have lesser-of-evils decisions there. Again, Barkley, minds can differ. (Minds cannot support the likes of Dan Griffith or Tim Tingelstad. Minds are repulsed by each.)

No comments: