consultants are sandburs

Wednesday, October 01, 2014

Your chance - two rich guys talk. You can watch a video, or listen while doing other workstation stuff.

Franken v. McFadden in Duluth this morning, video, here. Audio, here.

UPDATE: Watched a little. Luckily I already voted a no-fault absentee ballot. So I can watch as much or as little as feels right. Early on, neither said, but I think McFadden is the wealthier. Franken's style is smoother and on point.

McFadden is proud to have lived the American Dream, he said that. I am ready to fastforward, more and more ready. McFadden going negative. We can do better. Yes, and keep Franken in office too. They are mutually consistent goals, Mike.

McFadden - loves pipelines. "Huge fan of pipelines." "We are on the edge of an energy Renaissance." He really said that. Who writes his stuff? Bill O'Rilley? A Polymet champion, McFadden stakes that territory. "... we become a manufacturing superpower again ...". A chicken in every pot.

Franken mentions renewables. Mentions the crop railway bottleneck per Bakken crude. He's concerned about it. McFadden had the question, ignored the crop tie-up.

Boy that mergers/acquisition guy looks like, talks like Romney. Gestures, intones as if insulted about something, somebody banged a car door into his, while parked. That kind of perturbed intonation. It's galling. Less wealth then Romney, same attitude. Rude and interrupting. Demagogue.

Leave it at that. View/listen on your own or not. Good luck. Form your opinions.

UPDATE: This image. One talking to people. One finger pointing. Body language speaks. Turn down the audio, watch. McFadden: Finger pointing. I have a plan. I talk simplistically because it reflects the respect I have for voters. Compare that.

FURTHER UPDATE: McFadden supports sending US ground troops back into Iraq. He said so. Asked directly, he said so. He criticized getting out; wishes a residual boots on the ground presence in Iraq would have been maintained. Lives he'd have kept at risk after failure was clear. Ground troops back in Iraq.

FURTHER: Asked how to fund infrastructure, Franken proposed ideas, McFadden simply threw stones. Not a single funding thing said by McFadden. Zero. He said it's the federal government's role to fund infrastructure, zippo on where the money's to be raised from. No howto, only j'accuse. Saddening. Later in closing, he accused Franken of being for big government. How's a little government to fund all that infrastructure? I have trouble reconciling this. Government's role to have a lesser role, but a bigger one when somebody has to pay for roads and bridges. And boots on the ground in Iraq. I have trouble understanding the logic of the McFadden approach. The guy kept saying 97% to indicate Franken is not an obstructionist, and because almost all the votes of Democrats have proven needed to secure governmental continuity because obstructionism is the rule of the minority Senate and majority House party. The factions and their leaders, McConnell and Boehner, and Cruz.

FURTHER: This YouTube link. Same underlying item as embedded per the opening City Pages link.

The very tail end of the McFadden closing statement had the audio go dead. No big loss. There was enough before it. Watch. Judge. Vote.

No comments: