The post headline summarizes things where an excerpt would not help as much as reading the entire item.
_____________UPDATE___________
More, in Larry's own words, here.
Friday, April 29, 2016
The Stanford Daily publishes: When specifically asked his opinions on Ted Cruz, Boehner made a face, drawing laughter from the crowd. “Lucifer in the flesh,” the former Speaker said. “I have Democrat friends and Republican friends. I get along with almost everyone, but I have never worked with a more miserable son of a bitch in my life.”
Boehner coverage, here. This from CNN:
Oops. Wrong image. Got the CNN based caption correct, but . . .
Try this -
UPDATE: Here and then here and how far can you get into that second link before being repulsed? Far enough to say you cannot disagree with Boehner?
(I made it through 3 min 6 sec, but to be honest, I was repulsed from the outset)
 |
| "After a great deal of consideration and prayer, I have come to the conclusion that if I am nominated to be president of the United States that I will run on a ticket with my vice presidential nominee Carly Fiorina," Cruz said during a rally in Indianapolis. |
Oops. Wrong image. Got the CNN based caption correct, but . . .
Try this -
UPDATE: Here and then here and how far can you get into that second link before being repulsed? Far enough to say you cannot disagree with Boehner?
(I made it through 3 min 6 sec, but to be honest, I was repulsed from the outset)
What a total bozo. [UPDATED]
This link.
Hateful, spiteful control freaks waste time while real issues exist.
There is budget.
There is capital project planning, bonding.
There is long term mining policy and consequences.
There is diddling while others do the real work.
Hello, Ms. Whelan. Wake up and do the real job.
Voting straight party leadership commandments on the real issues, and then Bachmanning on the crap is not representing anybody.
UPDATE: This link. We have too many like minded in kind, if not in details of doctrine.
FURTHER: Another blog takes a more extended viewpoint. Friend Abigale did forget one point, whatever your gender identification or attraction; she'd rather you don't leave the seat up. Leaving it up shows gender bias. Birth-certificate gender bias.
FURTHER: Well gee. Today is my day to apologize. I went and confused "news" a day ago, with "news" a year ago.
Now how could such an error happen. I suppose for hatred and ignorance the motto is: revive to thrive. Or is it: reprise the lies? Or: an annual event, transgenders - "Repent." Whatever -
How about those first-stone throwers; ain't they really something? Never letting a year pass by.
FURTHER: Apologies again. It is not Bozo; but Bozos in the plural. Bozoes? What's the plural form of Bozo? Do you add an "es" or only an "s?" Abigale and Warren should know how that's pluralized. Like a murder of crows; is it a squad of bozos, or a collective of them? How about, of course, a Brigade of Bozoes?
FURTHER: A Tangle of Transphobians?
FURTHER: While possibly drawing criticism for the observation, two images of Whelan from the same right wing outlet; the recent item here; earlier a two-fer, here. From that, subjectively, she at least appears a more serious legislator to be taken seriously, without the warpaint.
FURTHER: Faint praise, but at least giving some credit, Whelan's chief author bill on fetal tissue use in U. Minn. research aims not that all such research be forced to cease, but that only tissue from stillborns should be considered appropriate; in a manner similar to a distinction Dr. Ben Carson was reported to have stated. Not a total troglodyte; thought ninety percent there. Only partial troglodytism there, hinged onto choice hatred. Other coverage has not yielded that degree of attention to detail - recognition that less than a total ban is proposed in the Whelan bill.
Whatever other criticism I have for Whelan I do not doubt she will have the intellectual honesty to continue that in-between distinction into the future, even perhaps during a Republican governorship where a bill such as her present one might be less a total grandstanding exercise in futility by bill sponsors:
I am in no position to, nor particularly disposed to attribute an equal degree of intellectual honesty and integrity to Whelan's fetal tissue research constriction bill's cosponsors.
The crystal clear insight, however, from this Whelan bill making the stillborn exception is that it is an anti-choice bill, pure and simple, as now drafted with the utility of aborted tissue Verboten, but at least it is not a bill wholly repudiating the advancement of medical science. Choice hatred at least being a lesser evil than science hatred, which is the norm in Bible-as-unalterable-word-of-God Bachmannistan, where evolution is repudiated as counter-Biblical. There are degrees of bozodom.
LAST: Transphobic mindset commentary in the context of Ted Cruz pandering for votes; this item.
The strategy seems to be to narrow the scapegoat population yet further than those hated against via the failed Minnesota marriage amendment circus. Transgender folks are fewer than the entire gay-lesbian segment of the population, so go after them.
If you want a really small group for focused hatred; what about that list of bill sponsors? Twenty to twenty-five individuals; a sound hate-focus number well below the number of Minnesota transgender identifiers among us, and who knows, among that list there may actually be some harboring a healthy degree of merited self hatred and loathing. Likely not, but who knows?
FURTHER: One thing that really honks me off about Whelan, via this video she talks about district need, particularly related to traffic, and via a somewhat late-in-session bill number she's gone through the motions; this link. However, Peter Perovich running for that seat aggressively promised to bring back a parity in what the district pays the state, and what it gets back in public spending in district. Whelan then in her public statements while running against Perovich co-opted his agenda as hers; got elected that way; but she's not delivered jack.
Going through the motions of throwing a text into the bill hopper at the legislature is quite less than getting the allocation for the district's achieving a parity in payments - what's paid by the district into the state coffers coming back for project needs within the distinct in something like balancing numbers. Now, the session's not over, something however unlikely may happen, and if it does a less harsh view of Whelan capability and actual priorities may be merited. But is that how the smart money would bet the odds?
This page, 482 days in the legislature collecting pay checks; and she's focused on this kind of Strib op-ed publicity-oriented marginalia; not the core job. She was not elected to serve Jesus and the fetuses, to get that ticket punched, she was elected to do the clear job of capably representing the needs of the district. She's failed. She's fiddled, the district got the Armstrong interchange largely because Jason Tossey and others on the Ramsey Council supported it and made annual payments to Elwyn Tinklenberg to lobby, and because Jim Deal can get things done with Democrats holding statewide office. Jim Deal's done Whelan's job while she's put time into ticket-punching op-ed nonsense along with others:
It appears Jim Deal has to be doing Whelan's job because she is either insufficiently interested or insufficiently talented to do it herself. Bottom line. Pure and simple.
That listed bunch of "no aborted fetus shall defeat us" conniving nonsense peddlers will not be the ones getting our district's parity in payments for us, nor will she. It is time for a broom. Sweep things clean and start over.
FURTHER: This from Strib:
Being unnecessarily hateful toward transgender people is not really what Minnesota nice is about, nor fitting to the parable of who should be stoning "sinners." Not that transgender people should be called sinners, but unfortunately pseudo-Christians more into power-tripping than gospel insights are afoot, feeding demonizing biases as much as they can, with mischief in mind, dark in their hearts. Let us hope Dayton holds firm against bigotry. Bigotry and budget are, and must remain two separate things. Giving something in one, to secure favorable things in the other, is not long-term sound government. It would be exactly what Dayton termed it; "pandering." To the more base moods afoot now in the nation, being inflamed as they are, by who we clearly see stoking those dark, unpromising fires.
FURTHER: In terms of pandering to the worse of the Minnesota north-metro GOP Gestalt, do notice Peggy Scott right on up there on the lists with Whelan. The Batman and Robin of the female gender of that GOP segment's hate squad. Not too much to say for either. They reinforce the worse in one another. Whelan uses less makeup.
Hateful, spiteful control freaks waste time while real issues exist.
There is budget.
There is capital project planning, bonding.
There is long term mining policy and consequences.
There is diddling while others do the real work.
Hello, Ms. Whelan. Wake up and do the real job.
Voting straight party leadership commandments on the real issues, and then Bachmanning on the crap is not representing anybody.
UPDATE: This link. We have too many like minded in kind, if not in details of doctrine.
FURTHER: Another blog takes a more extended viewpoint. Friend Abigale did forget one point, whatever your gender identification or attraction; she'd rather you don't leave the seat up. Leaving it up shows gender bias. Birth-certificate gender bias.
FURTHER: Well gee. Today is my day to apologize. I went and confused "news" a day ago, with "news" a year ago.
Now how could such an error happen. I suppose for hatred and ignorance the motto is: revive to thrive. Or is it: reprise the lies? Or: an annual event, transgenders - "Repent." Whatever -
How about those first-stone throwers; ain't they really something? Never letting a year pass by.
FURTHER: Apologies again. It is not Bozo; but Bozos in the plural. Bozoes? What's the plural form of Bozo? Do you add an "es" or only an "s?" Abigale and Warren should know how that's pluralized. Like a murder of crows; is it a squad of bozos, or a collective of them? How about, of course, a Brigade of Bozoes?
FURTHER: A Tangle of Transphobians?
FURTHER: While possibly drawing criticism for the observation, two images of Whelan from the same right wing outlet; the recent item here; earlier a two-fer, here. From that, subjectively, she at least appears a more serious legislator to be taken seriously, without the warpaint.
FURTHER: Faint praise, but at least giving some credit, Whelan's chief author bill on fetal tissue use in U. Minn. research aims not that all such research be forced to cease, but that only tissue from stillborns should be considered appropriate; in a manner similar to a distinction Dr. Ben Carson was reported to have stated. Not a total troglodyte; thought ninety percent there. Only partial troglodytism there, hinged onto choice hatred. Other coverage has not yielded that degree of attention to detail - recognition that less than a total ban is proposed in the Whelan bill.
Whatever other criticism I have for Whelan I do not doubt she will have the intellectual honesty to continue that in-between distinction into the future, even perhaps during a Republican governorship where a bill such as her present one might be less a total grandstanding exercise in futility by bill sponsors:
I am in no position to, nor particularly disposed to attribute an equal degree of intellectual honesty and integrity to Whelan's fetal tissue research constriction bill's cosponsors.
The crystal clear insight, however, from this Whelan bill making the stillborn exception is that it is an anti-choice bill, pure and simple, as now drafted with the utility of aborted tissue Verboten, but at least it is not a bill wholly repudiating the advancement of medical science. Choice hatred at least being a lesser evil than science hatred, which is the norm in Bible-as-unalterable-word-of-God Bachmannistan, where evolution is repudiated as counter-Biblical. There are degrees of bozodom.
LAST: Transphobic mindset commentary in the context of Ted Cruz pandering for votes; this item.
The strategy seems to be to narrow the scapegoat population yet further than those hated against via the failed Minnesota marriage amendment circus. Transgender folks are fewer than the entire gay-lesbian segment of the population, so go after them.
If you want a really small group for focused hatred; what about that list of bill sponsors? Twenty to twenty-five individuals; a sound hate-focus number well below the number of Minnesota transgender identifiers among us, and who knows, among that list there may actually be some harboring a healthy degree of merited self hatred and loathing. Likely not, but who knows?
FURTHER: One thing that really honks me off about Whelan, via this video she talks about district need, particularly related to traffic, and via a somewhat late-in-session bill number she's gone through the motions; this link. However, Peter Perovich running for that seat aggressively promised to bring back a parity in what the district pays the state, and what it gets back in public spending in district. Whelan then in her public statements while running against Perovich co-opted his agenda as hers; got elected that way; but she's not delivered jack.
Going through the motions of throwing a text into the bill hopper at the legislature is quite less than getting the allocation for the district's achieving a parity in payments - what's paid by the district into the state coffers coming back for project needs within the distinct in something like balancing numbers. Now, the session's not over, something however unlikely may happen, and if it does a less harsh view of Whelan capability and actual priorities may be merited. But is that how the smart money would bet the odds?
This page, 482 days in the legislature collecting pay checks; and she's focused on this kind of Strib op-ed publicity-oriented marginalia; not the core job. She was not elected to serve Jesus and the fetuses, to get that ticket punched, she was elected to do the clear job of capably representing the needs of the district. She's failed. She's fiddled, the district got the Armstrong interchange largely because Jason Tossey and others on the Ramsey Council supported it and made annual payments to Elwyn Tinklenberg to lobby, and because Jim Deal can get things done with Democrats holding statewide office. Jim Deal's done Whelan's job while she's put time into ticket-punching op-ed nonsense along with others:
[...] Abigail Whelan, R-Anoka, is a member of the Minnesota House. This commentary was also submitted on behalf of the following legislators, all Republicans: Sens. Michelle Fischbach and Warren Limmer. Reps. Mark Anderson, Jeff Backer, Brian Daniels, Bob Dettmer, Steve Drazkowski, Sondra Erickson, Steve Green, Glenn Gruenhagen, Dave Hancock, Josh Heintzeman, Kathy Lohmer, Eric Lucero, Tim Miller, Jim Nash, Marion O'Neill, Cindy Pugh, Peggy Scott, Dennis Smith, Anna Wills.
It appears Jim Deal has to be doing Whelan's job because she is either insufficiently interested or insufficiently talented to do it herself. Bottom line. Pure and simple.
That listed bunch of "no aborted fetus shall defeat us" conniving nonsense peddlers will not be the ones getting our district's parity in payments for us, nor will she. It is time for a broom. Sweep things clean and start over.
FURTHER: This from Strib:
Tensions are rising between Gov. Dayton and GOP leaders as Minnesota legislative session winds down --
Dayton, Republicans stand fast as taxes, transportation remain unfinished.
By J. Patrick Coolican Star Tribune - April 29, 2016 — 7:48am
[...] Dayton said he relented on a few policy provisions in 2015 because they were tucked inside key budget bills needed to keep state government running for two years.
Not this year, Dayton said, refusing any negotiation over GOP measures like restrictions on which bathrooms transgender people can use and the defunding of Planned Parenthood. He called these provisions “pandering to their extreme right wing base.”
Daudt replied: “We had a very pleasant breakfast, and he didn’t bring up any of those things to me, so I wonder if he was potentially doing it for the cameras. I don’t know.”
Daudt gave no indication of backing down. “We feel like we’re in a great position because we’re on the side of the public,” he said, citing support for tax cuts and transportation spending that are at the heart of the GOP agenda.
Being unnecessarily hateful toward transgender people is not really what Minnesota nice is about, nor fitting to the parable of who should be stoning "sinners." Not that transgender people should be called sinners, but unfortunately pseudo-Christians more into power-tripping than gospel insights are afoot, feeding demonizing biases as much as they can, with mischief in mind, dark in their hearts. Let us hope Dayton holds firm against bigotry. Bigotry and budget are, and must remain two separate things. Giving something in one, to secure favorable things in the other, is not long-term sound government. It would be exactly what Dayton termed it; "pandering." To the more base moods afoot now in the nation, being inflamed as they are, by who we clearly see stoking those dark, unpromising fires.
FURTHER: In terms of pandering to the worse of the Minnesota north-metro GOP Gestalt, do notice Peggy Scott right on up there on the lists with Whelan. The Batman and Robin of the female gender of that GOP segment's hate squad. Not too much to say for either. They reinforce the worse in one another. Whelan uses less makeup.
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
Here it is, read all about it: From Mammon to The Almighty. Eighteen million reasons Pastor Mac Hammond should feel envy.
This link.
The Highway 10 landscape evolves. Or at least changes. "Evolution" might be inappropriate phrasing. I would not know, and would be unable to pick Bob Merritt out of a police lineup. Never seen the guy. Don't know him. Could not find a Linkedin page. Yet, wish him luck on the business risk of his next step.
____________UPDATE____________
Look for the trademark, your sign of quality:
__________FURTHER UPDATE___________
So, will this new town of Anoka venture on the busy highway meet the competition, or perhaps up the ante?
If so, it would not be the sole prominent trademarked brand of a nonprofit along the Hwy 10 corridor:
The Highway 10 landscape evolves. Or at least changes. "Evolution" might be inappropriate phrasing. I would not know, and would be unable to pick Bob Merritt out of a police lineup. Never seen the guy. Don't know him. Could not find a Linkedin page. Yet, wish him luck on the business risk of his next step.
____________UPDATE____________
Look for the trademark, your sign of quality:
__________FURTHER UPDATE___________
So, will this new town of Anoka venture on the busy highway meet the competition, or perhaps up the ante?
If so, it would not be the sole prominent trademarked brand of a nonprofit along the Hwy 10 corridor:
Friday, April 22, 2016
Doth protest.
A year ago today, this online item detailing aspects of a defense of Clinton conduct. Same day certain pundits alleged to have separately said "nuts."
__________UPDATE___________
If you want to see something as phony as a three-dollar bill, the opening of the post here; but check the thread at this point and following. Arguably, Franken ran for his Senate seat on Paul Wellstone's grave, and is not being Wellstonian to any great degree this election. His cozying up to Clintondom thus offends more than Klobuchar's doing it since she was one of the unanimous [except for Elizabeth Warren] female members of the US Senate who signed on early in a gender move.
Some Wellstone statements within that post at this point deserve traction:
Heed the message, lest we forget and be deluded.
In all honesty, I'd expected more from Al. Per those Wellstone quotes and Al grabbing the coattails so thoroughly. Al's claim to be a Wellstonian channel. There seems to be a disconnect at play.
FURTHER: This ad attained this viewer response thread. Vapid stupidity; aptly reviewed. On one of those 3 am phone calls, wouldn't you want somebody besides an egoist owing more to Goldman Sachs, Arab nations, and the weapons industry than to the electorate? Someone like Bernie; in a word. A 3 am phone call response, "Take two extra drone strikes and then call me in the morning," would not impress.
_________FURTHER UPDATE___________
Two additional DU posts, here and here, telling things as they are. That first link; reflect on who you'd want to be taking a 3 am phone call from Goldman Sachs. (It would NOT be Ted Cruz either.)
_________FURTHER UPDATE___________
Recent AP follow-the-money-and-shudder item, posted with interesting accompanying graphic images. Reader help - does any reader know an online link for a larger, readable version of this hummer? Even being unreadable, it has an intrigue to its layout and suggested complexity. All that complexity, all that money; so is it really that complex or merely the old fashioned story, ever and again, where money meets open handed politicians and stuff results?
__________UPDATE___________
If you want to see something as phony as a three-dollar bill, the opening of the post here; but check the thread at this point and following. Arguably, Franken ran for his Senate seat on Paul Wellstone's grave, and is not being Wellstonian to any great degree this election. His cozying up to Clintondom thus offends more than Klobuchar's doing it since she was one of the unanimous [except for Elizabeth Warren] female members of the US Senate who signed on early in a gender move.
Some Wellstone statements within that post at this point deserve traction:
"Never separate the life you live from the words you speak."
"Politics isn't about big money or power games; it's about the improvement of people's lives."
"The people of this country, not special interest big money, should be the source of all political power."
Heed the message, lest we forget and be deluded.
In all honesty, I'd expected more from Al. Per those Wellstone quotes and Al grabbing the coattails so thoroughly. Al's claim to be a Wellstonian channel. There seems to be a disconnect at play.
FURTHER: This ad attained this viewer response thread. Vapid stupidity; aptly reviewed. On one of those 3 am phone calls, wouldn't you want somebody besides an egoist owing more to Goldman Sachs, Arab nations, and the weapons industry than to the electorate? Someone like Bernie; in a word. A 3 am phone call response, "Take two extra drone strikes and then call me in the morning," would not impress.
_________FURTHER UPDATE___________
Two additional DU posts, here and here, telling things as they are. That first link; reflect on who you'd want to be taking a 3 am phone call from Goldman Sachs. (It would NOT be Ted Cruz either.)
_________FURTHER UPDATE___________
Recent AP follow-the-money-and-shudder item, posted with interesting accompanying graphic images. Reader help - does any reader know an online link for a larger, readable version of this hummer? Even being unreadable, it has an intrigue to its layout and suggested complexity. All that complexity, all that money; so is it really that complex or merely the old fashioned story, ever and again, where money meets open handed politicians and stuff results?
The dismal, depressing march of the establishment Dems to cram Hillary Clinton down our unwilling throats aside, there are good local DFL candidates in SD35.
The New York snub of indepentent Bernie voters wanting to vote that way in the recent primary, where you had to declare a party affiliation there back in October, is a symbol of non-openness that is both oppressive and ugly.
The GOP planning on the other side to undermine Trump is equally off-setting; but together both trends show the total sickness of the two-party stranglehold in our nation. It needs to be undone.
If a Clinton Cramdown together with GOP counter-Trump effort leads to a Clinton vs Ryan, or a Clinton vs. Cruz contest it's hold-your-nose-because-this-time-is-truly-lesser-evil-time. It would be awful. If the Trump insurgency succeeds, as still seems likely, a Trump vs Clinton contest would feature two obscenely rich 1%ers, one who in business competition enlarged greatly an inherited fortune and the other who has been a career politician taking money as given, doing so along with spouse and daughter appearing to have the exact same modus operandi. Figure out who's the better choice there if busting the two-party establishment's stranglehold on behalf of lobbying wealth and disgraceful influence peddling is necessary in your mind. Or does the "other party" bogey man [woman] thing bias your choice in two-party think mode?
HOWEVER: Locally, things are less awful; where GOP same-old Peggy Scott and Peggy Scott clone Abigale Whelan are opposed by decent humans; with a side bar item linking and excerpting ABC Newspapers reporting, originlly online here.
_____________UPDATE____________
An item linked to before, needing re-emphasis. Frank Zappa, here.
_________FURTHER UPDATE__________
It looks as if the copyright police got to that Zappa link. If you shop around YouTube you'll likely find a still-posted Zappa musical version. If not, metrolyrics, here. A Chumbawamba cover, effectively done, online here.
If a Clinton Cramdown together with GOP counter-Trump effort leads to a Clinton vs Ryan, or a Clinton vs. Cruz contest it's hold-your-nose-because-this-time-is-truly-lesser-evil-time. It would be awful. If the Trump insurgency succeeds, as still seems likely, a Trump vs Clinton contest would feature two obscenely rich 1%ers, one who in business competition enlarged greatly an inherited fortune and the other who has been a career politician taking money as given, doing so along with spouse and daughter appearing to have the exact same modus operandi. Figure out who's the better choice there if busting the two-party establishment's stranglehold on behalf of lobbying wealth and disgraceful influence peddling is necessary in your mind. Or does the "other party" bogey man [woman] thing bias your choice in two-party think mode?
HOWEVER: Locally, things are less awful; where GOP same-old Peggy Scott and Peggy Scott clone Abigale Whelan are opposed by decent humans; with a side bar item linking and excerpting ABC Newspapers reporting, originlly online here.
_____________UPDATE____________
An item linked to before, needing re-emphasis. Frank Zappa, here.
_________FURTHER UPDATE__________
It looks as if the copyright police got to that Zappa link. If you shop around YouTube you'll likely find a still-posted Zappa musical version. If not, metrolyrics, here. A Chumbawamba cover, effectively done, online here.
Tuesday, April 19, 2016
Republicans: Toying with your -- psyche?
Mr. Cruz, here. Mr. Kiffmeyer, here and here. The saving grace for Mr. Cruz, of the two, is he is not the total idiot; this excerpt:
Uh, which gender is it having Viagra as a policy grounding? What about Mr. Cruz having a view on the pill, or RU 486 for that morning after, or the human papilloma vaccine? It seems an active fact-focused press would press such questions. Why is there this letting Cruz skate?
Though the criminal charges against Webb were eventually dropped, a collection of sex-toy companies sued in federal court to challenge the constitutionality of the state's ban.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court of Appeals later ruled that the Texas law violated 14th Amendment privacy rights. Then-Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, now the state's Republican governor, unsuccessfully appealed, asking the full appeals court to review the case.
As solicitor general Cruz co-wrote an 83-page brief arguing that the U.S. Supreme Court "has never suggested that the substantive-due-process doctrine ensures individuals' ability to stimulate their genitals in ways that are neither connected to procreation nor associated with any particular lifestyle."
In an interview Friday night on New York's WABC radio, Cruz was asked if he would ban the sale of sex toys if he became president.
"Look, of course not, it's a ridiculous question, and of course not," Cruz responded. "What people do in their own private time with themselves is their own business and it's none of government's business."
Cruz campaign spokeswoman Alice Stewart noted in an email that as solicitor general, Cruz had an obligation to defend Texas' laws in court, regardless of whether he agreed with them.
"Senator Cruz personally believes that the Texas law in question was, as (Supreme Court) Justice (Clarence) Thomas said in another context, an 'uncommonly silly' law," Stewart said. "But the office was nevertheless duty-bound to defend the policy judgment of the Texas Legislature."
Cruz defended the Texas ban as "protecting public morals — discouraging prurient interests in sexual gratification" and argued that in doing so the state had a vested moral interest in discouraging "autonomous sex."
Cruz's brief also suggested that the legal sale of sexual enhancement drugs such as Viagra was different because it can't be described as a "device."
Uh, which gender is it having Viagra as a policy grounding? What about Mr. Cruz having a view on the pill, or RU 486 for that morning after, or the human papilloma vaccine? It seems an active fact-focused press would press such questions. Why is there this letting Cruz skate?
HuffPo posts of a petition. Everybody should sign the petition as proper. The shoe fits and she should wear it. "Hillary Clinton's stances, while fluid during this election cycle, are historically most in tune with classical Republican ideas, as advocated by Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, and others. As a young woman, she volunteered for the conservative Barry Goldwater, and while today she's become liberal on some social issues, she's generally at home with moderate conservative ideas, such as a hawkish military, strict immigration laws, reduced welfare, laissez-faire rules for Wall Street, and international business treaties that favor large corporations. One group started a petition this year asking Clinton to run as a Republican, suggesting that while she is 'liberal on some issues, on a wide range of important issues she lands squarely as a moderate conservative.' "
HuffPo, this link, the petition, this link. Readers are urged to access and read the entire HuffPo item.
Bernie is a New Deal democrat, hence the only real Democrat running; and the party of Franklin Roosevelt has turned its back on Franklin Roosevelt, Justice Douglas, Hugo Black, and too many of the unions cannot deliver rank and file votes in the interest of rank and file union members.
Dick Nixon would smile as Mrs. Clinton references Henry Kissinger. He was a crook. Nixon that is. Kissinger was what you'd make of him, and Peter Sellers' Dr. Strangelove characterization was indicative of how some might regard Dr. K. as well as Edward Teller.
Bernie is a New Deal democrat, hence the only real Democrat running; and the party of Franklin Roosevelt has turned its back on Franklin Roosevelt, Justice Douglas, Hugo Black, and too many of the unions cannot deliver rank and file votes in the interest of rank and file union members.
Dick Nixon would smile as Mrs. Clinton references Henry Kissinger. He was a crook. Nixon that is. Kissinger was what you'd make of him, and Peter Sellers' Dr. Strangelove characterization was indicative of how some might regard Dr. K. as well as Edward Teller.
Sunday, April 17, 2016
Teachers targeted. Do YOU think it's mere coincidence that a tenure challenge suit has happened in Minnesota?
The Minnesota tenure suit has gained national attention; e.g., NY Times, "Teacher Tenure Is Challenged Again in a Minnesota Lawsuit - By MOTOKO RICHAPRIL 13, 2016."
In California an intermediate court has been reported by AP as saying judicial review is not about wisdom of legislation, but about its constitutionality; this link.
That surely seems to be precisely what should be handed back to the agitators against teacher unionization here too. The aggressors want to have this "Gee, it's for our kids" appearance, but appearances can be fooling.
And here I was naive. I always thought Republicans favored honoring contracts; such as the union and schools have reached in serious give-and-take negotiation. Honoring "CONTRACT" As a principled policy position. As they often say. Wow. What an eye opener. They only like their contracts when they hold contractual strangleholds and/or escape clauses; which is not what they say.
UPDATE: Stan Hubbard's propaganda machine does its "for the kids" spiel:
NY Times characterizes it somewhat differently:
It is a state by state coordinated attack, each time asserting a state's constitution and not the federal one. The stink of Koch and ALEC is all over it. Face the fact. It's a crappy and thankless job putting up with the often ill-brought-up and ill-mannered children of others, in oppressively large numbers per classroom because of budget bending class size impositions on the profession; and those taking on the job deserve praise and not mud slinging by right wingers who don't take the job in regarding it as something below their station.
The Koch empire is founded on pollution, not on responsibility or respect for others. They could care about the children of any but the fiscally elite, who have private schools with tiny student to teacher ratios along with lavish funding.
FURTHER: It is an ongoing assault; e.g. this earlier MinnPost item. Coming to mind is a domino theory; by going after individual state court systems and touting individual state constitutions; get one domino to fall and perhaps break the entire union. It's rehashed Scott Walkerism, and stinks as such.
In California an intermediate court has been reported by AP as saying judicial review is not about wisdom of legislation, but about its constitutionality; this link.
That surely seems to be precisely what should be handed back to the agitators against teacher unionization here too. The aggressors want to have this "Gee, it's for our kids" appearance, but appearances can be fooling.
And here I was naive. I always thought Republicans favored honoring contracts; such as the union and schools have reached in serious give-and-take negotiation. Honoring "CONTRACT" As a principled policy position. As they often say. Wow. What an eye opener. They only like their contracts when they hold contractual strangleholds and/or escape clauses; which is not what they say.
UPDATE: Stan Hubbard's propaganda machine does its "for the kids" spiel:
A group of Minnesota parents and national education reform groups have filed a lawsuit challenging Minnesota tenure and dismissal laws that protect teachers.
The lawsuit was filed Thursday in Ramsey County. The Minnesota plaintiffs include four mothers from Duluth and the Twin Cities metro area.
NY Times characterizes it somewhat differently:
Opening a new front in the assault on teacher tenure, a group of parents backed by wealthy philanthropists served notice to defendants on Wednesday in a lawsuit challenging Minnesota’s job protections for teachers, as well as the state’s rules governing which teachers are laid off as a result of budget cuts.
Similar to cases in California and New York, the plaintiffs, who are filing the lawsuit in district court in Ramsey County in St. Paul, argue that the state’s tenure and layoff laws disproportionately harm poor, minority children because, they say, the most ineffective teachers are more likely to be assigned to public schools with high concentrations of those children.
In the lawsuit, parents of children in public schools across Minnesota argue that the state’s tenure laws, which grant teachers job protections after three years on the job, deprive students of “their fundamental right to a thorough and efficient education” under the state’s Constitution.
It is a state by state coordinated attack, each time asserting a state's constitution and not the federal one. The stink of Koch and ALEC is all over it. Face the fact. It's a crappy and thankless job putting up with the often ill-brought-up and ill-mannered children of others, in oppressively large numbers per classroom because of budget bending class size impositions on the profession; and those taking on the job deserve praise and not mud slinging by right wingers who don't take the job in regarding it as something below their station.
The Koch empire is founded on pollution, not on responsibility or respect for others. They could care about the children of any but the fiscally elite, who have private schools with tiny student to teacher ratios along with lavish funding.
FURTHER: It is an ongoing assault; e.g. this earlier MinnPost item. Coming to mind is a domino theory; by going after individual state court systems and touting individual state constitutions; get one domino to fall and perhaps break the entire union. It's rehashed Scott Walkerism, and stinks as such.
Is a bent paddle something like a curved hockey stick? Aside from that, news from the north gets more curious.
Latest Silver Bay City Council development reported here. Bent Paddle responds online to an earlier municipal boycott spite. This web search link. The Downstream Business Coalition's home page
http://www.downstreambusinesscoalition.org/
and Facebook page.
Coalition membership list.
Aside from all that, they brew good but pricey beer. In cans, drink from a glass. The Surly way, they being pricey and in cans too.
In addition Bent Paddle has higher quality politics and beer than Coors; where the latter advertises clean water while Bent Paddle goes a step further.
UPDATE: Are considerations of IRRRB policy and practices related to the above? Two links, one partisan Republican, the other analytical Aaron Brown posting, here and here. Re the first Republican aimed item, Gary is having his pledge week, and Republicans should pay attention and contribute.
http://www.downstreambusinesscoalition.org/
and Facebook page.
Coalition membership list.
Aside from all that, they brew good but pricey beer. In cans, drink from a glass. The Surly way, they being pricey and in cans too.
In addition Bent Paddle has higher quality politics and beer than Coors; where the latter advertises clean water while Bent Paddle goes a step further.
UPDATE: Are considerations of IRRRB policy and practices related to the above? Two links, one partisan Republican, the other analytical Aaron Brown posting, here and here. Re the first Republican aimed item, Gary is having his pledge week, and Republicans should pay attention and contribute.
Who is Calvin Bahr, and how does he fit in with the gunman of Planned Parenthood Parking?
An entirely open thread for reader comment.
Not today's purchase. Just one more tedious odious installment payment.
Guardian, here. From mid-item:
To those protesters and like minded souls, read the headline of this post.
It is an interesting article. Touching of all things, worker exploitation.
Nearly 200 Bernie Sanders supporters gathered last night with pots and pans outside Shervin Pishevar’s star-studded Clinton fundraiser, co-hosted by George and Amal Clooney. The Sanders supporters argued corporate interests were buying Clinton that night – tickets for Pishevar’s dinner started at $33,400 (for a seat at the Fairmont hotel) and went up to $353,400 (for a seat at his house). Most of those in the streets were young, and many were in tech.
To those protesters and like minded souls, read the headline of this post.
It is an interesting article. Touching of all things, worker exploitation.
Friday, April 15, 2016
A quick post on indecent predation - a.k.a. cable TV.
Hardware: Fine and dandy, Strib reports our president says there should be competition on cable TV boxes for signal descrambling to TVs.
Great.
Software: Where's the dude on the question of unbundling cable packages? Yes, they can say you subscribe to "x number of channels" as a minimal service connection requirement - but let us pick and choose. I detest Pat Robertson's being bundled into our household, while some cable sports are "premium" content. Not that Par Robertson on anyone's spectrum would be termed "premium," but that's not the question.
Great.
Software: Where's the dude on the question of unbundling cable packages? Yes, they can say you subscribe to "x number of channels" as a minimal service connection requirement - but let us pick and choose. I detest Pat Robertson's being bundled into our household, while some cable sports are "premium" content. Not that Par Robertson on anyone's spectrum would be termed "premium," but that's not the question.
It appears that presently there is no DFL prcinct chair, Ramsey, Ward 2 Precinct 2.
It's a precinct with a number of DFL supporters, so any volunteer interested in the post should contact Minnesota DFL Senate District 35 officials about the process needed to attain the precinct chair position. If the information is in error, and there is a person reading this who is serving as precinct chair, that person should contact leadership. This is the contact link:
http://www.dfl.org/sd35/contact-us/
Since the recent SD 35 convention/caucus, leadership personnel may have changed, but if any contact info is outdated, using that link will still get the info routed correctly.
http://www.dfl.org/sd35/contact-us/
Since the recent SD 35 convention/caucus, leadership personnel may have changed, but if any contact info is outdated, using that link will still get the info routed correctly.
Overtime, to get rid of the thugish blowhard. Out of party leadership in any way or fashion, even if his district eats up his spiel. He SHOULD be voted out of the legislature to join a pack of shameless lobbyists and compromisers, where he belongs.
Strib, this link, this opening explanation:
[italics added] The serpent was being helpful to Eve. What is wrong with a party lacking the courage to do what they know is right? Courage? Judgment? Decency? Dignity?
Strib links to a pdf of the Cook County Board resolution online here. The County's homepage, here.
State Senate Majority Leader Tom Bakk warned county commissioners in northeastern Minnesota that they would risk losing state money if they passed a resolution to ban copper mining near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCA).
The issue erupted earlier this week after a Cook County commissioner proposed a nonbinding resolution backing DFL Gov. Mark Dayton’s opposition to copper mining in the sensitive wilderness area.
Commissioners quickly dropped the idea after local business leaders said they were told by Bakk and others that critical funds from the Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation Board (IRRRB) could dry up if the board took an anti-mining stance.
The debate at the Cook County board meeting in Grand Marais, a region that relies on tourism and the wilderness area for much of its economy, laid bare the rough local politics of Minnesota’s Iron Range. It also underscored how businesses, citizens and local governments are being forced to choose sides in the increasingly bitter fight over mining and the future of the wildest and most scenic corner of the state.
“I don’t think we should run our government by extortion and coercion and bribery,” said Marco Good, who owns a small custom logging and timber business and supported debating the resolution.
Bakk, a powerful DFL legislator who represents the region and also serves on the board of the IRRRB, said he was merely being “helpful” in discouraging passage of a resolution that he thought would only antagonize area legislators.
[italics added] The serpent was being helpful to Eve. What is wrong with a party lacking the courage to do what they know is right? Courage? Judgment? Decency? Dignity?
Strib links to a pdf of the Cook County Board resolution online here. The County's homepage, here.
The cowardness of anonymity strikes again.
Wes Volkenant, the DFL's candidate for Minnesota's HD 35B House seat is posting interesting things online:
http://www.wesvfor35b.org/blog/
Earlier Wes had posted at length about a self-appointed self-annointed community scold with sufficient free time to send unwanted stuff to people per the anonymous rubric: American News Center, 55401.
I got such a mailing earlier this week, hand addressed in an unsteady hand, postmarked 553xx and not from the 55401 zipcode.
The stamp cancelling did not print the final two digits in postmarking the item.
Inside the envelope, stuff. Wasted paper, wasted trees. However the fine baby-Jesus stamp, a reproduced Raphael from the Walters Art Museum got torn in opening the envelope, below Mary's eye line.
That stamp item is a 2011 Christmas memorial stamp, so the nuisance mailer must have bought a civil defense shelter's supply when put out by the USPS; this link, the Raphael being titled for U.S. Mail purposes, " Item 679500, First Class Mail, Nondenominated Madonna of the Candelabra by Raphael (Forever priced at 44 cents), PSA Double-sided Booklet of 20 Stamps."
It is most unfortunate that this sicko who with a stash of 2011 issued Madonna/Child stamps is still going on and on like the pink battery bunny pursuing a nuisance mailing campaign w/o exhausting the years-old stamp stash; (giving an intended but unreal impression of being a Good-Christian that way); had to go to the head during the part of the one sermon on loving others as much as you love yourself. Hopefully it was a trip to the head, and not a burning self-loathing that has this first-stone throwing idiot acting like a spoiled five-year-old.
My only request, should this posting cause another "American News Center, 55401" letter to reach my mailbox, aside from hoping it is as the last one, free of anthrax spores, is that it again be posted under the Madonna/Child stamp, (Raphael did good work); and also in an informed and adept true Christian spirit of addressing a scorning blog post, that it turn the other cheek. In fact, a long seven page hand written letter explaining motivations (use two stamps given the weight) would be more appreciated than clipped trashbasket fodder. That's not asking much. Indeed, it is not asking the coward to change approach and disclose his/her identity as reasonableness might dictate. After all, this is clearly an unreasonable person, so why ask a stranger to change? That's a question between the individual and his/her Savior, whoever each might be.
_______________UPDATE________________
In noting Wes Volkenant had posted earlier about a similar mail in the mailbox situation, it is proper to emphasize that the writing Wes is posting goes well beyond that past event and is worth reading for its merit, including the most recent post on the Scalia "originalism" fetish over a document passed by a batch of wealthy landowners fearing mob rule but wanting to dump a taxing authority an ocean apart when wars on the Continent provided opportunity, such wealthy land barons: owning title to other humans, not wanting women to vote or hold office, delivering messages by horse and buggy, without a CIA, NSA, the bomb, the pill, or other intrusiveness and without an entrenched two-party chokehold on their world. So, Scalia said following - indeed tracking as best achievable in his infallible mind - the very footsteps of that hooty lot was fine with him and growth and change should not get in his way. Wes says it more discretely and with less bias, so have a look.
Again: http://www.wesvfor35b.org/blog/
________FURTHER UPDATE________
How about this for "American News Center,55401?"
Are you now or have you ever been a card carrying member of the Freedom Club of Minnesota's west metro?
Along those Freedom Club lines, from the SD35 GOP candidate that Freedom Club sabotaged by going negative in mailings against Jim Abeler; this "hello world" promise of more to come. New apple logo on the browser tab bar, neutral feel-good-rural-America-enjoy-apple-pie header image. The hope is that Aplikowski resumes online publishing as candid as ever. His forthright postings were a good adjunct to a morning cup of coffee, and checking email. In writing, Aplikowski never hesitated to "speak" his mind. He was not a politician talking around things.
http://www.wesvfor35b.org/blog/
Earlier Wes had posted at length about a self-appointed self-annointed community scold with sufficient free time to send unwanted stuff to people per the anonymous rubric: American News Center, 55401.
I got such a mailing earlier this week, hand addressed in an unsteady hand, postmarked 553xx and not from the 55401 zipcode.
The stamp cancelling did not print the final two digits in postmarking the item.
Inside the envelope, stuff. Wasted paper, wasted trees. However the fine baby-Jesus stamp, a reproduced Raphael from the Walters Art Museum got torn in opening the envelope, below Mary's eye line.
That stamp item is a 2011 Christmas memorial stamp, so the nuisance mailer must have bought a civil defense shelter's supply when put out by the USPS; this link, the Raphael being titled for U.S. Mail purposes, " Item 679500, First Class Mail, Nondenominated Madonna of the Candelabra by Raphael (Forever priced at 44 cents), PSA Double-sided Booklet of 20 Stamps."
It is most unfortunate that this sicko who with a stash of 2011 issued Madonna/Child stamps is still going on and on like the pink battery bunny pursuing a nuisance mailing campaign w/o exhausting the years-old stamp stash; (giving an intended but unreal impression of being a Good-Christian that way); had to go to the head during the part of the one sermon on loving others as much as you love yourself. Hopefully it was a trip to the head, and not a burning self-loathing that has this first-stone throwing idiot acting like a spoiled five-year-old.
My only request, should this posting cause another "American News Center, 55401" letter to reach my mailbox, aside from hoping it is as the last one, free of anthrax spores, is that it again be posted under the Madonna/Child stamp, (Raphael did good work); and also in an informed and adept true Christian spirit of addressing a scorning blog post, that it turn the other cheek. In fact, a long seven page hand written letter explaining motivations (use two stamps given the weight) would be more appreciated than clipped trashbasket fodder. That's not asking much. Indeed, it is not asking the coward to change approach and disclose his/her identity as reasonableness might dictate. After all, this is clearly an unreasonable person, so why ask a stranger to change? That's a question between the individual and his/her Savior, whoever each might be.
_______________UPDATE________________
In noting Wes Volkenant had posted earlier about a similar mail in the mailbox situation, it is proper to emphasize that the writing Wes is posting goes well beyond that past event and is worth reading for its merit, including the most recent post on the Scalia "originalism" fetish over a document passed by a batch of wealthy landowners fearing mob rule but wanting to dump a taxing authority an ocean apart when wars on the Continent provided opportunity, such wealthy land barons: owning title to other humans, not wanting women to vote or hold office, delivering messages by horse and buggy, without a CIA, NSA, the bomb, the pill, or other intrusiveness and without an entrenched two-party chokehold on their world. So, Scalia said following - indeed tracking as best achievable in his infallible mind - the very footsteps of that hooty lot was fine with him and growth and change should not get in his way. Wes says it more discretely and with less bias, so have a look.
Again: http://www.wesvfor35b.org/blog/
________FURTHER UPDATE________
How about this for "American News Center,55401?"
Are you now or have you ever been a card carrying member of the Freedom Club of Minnesota's west metro?
Along those Freedom Club lines, from the SD35 GOP candidate that Freedom Club sabotaged by going negative in mailings against Jim Abeler; this "hello world" promise of more to come. New apple logo on the browser tab bar, neutral feel-good-rural-America-enjoy-apple-pie header image. The hope is that Aplikowski resumes online publishing as candid as ever. His forthright postings were a good adjunct to a morning cup of coffee, and checking email. In writing, Aplikowski never hesitated to "speak" his mind. He was not a politician talking around things.
Tuesday, April 12, 2016
Giants among us. Big banks - too failed to be big? Imperious. Feet of clay?
Daniel 2:32 et seq. Here, plus a web search.
Strib local coverage and NOT a carried AP feed, Adam Belz, here and more recently, here.
Prior to the Bushco Sept. 2008 big splat, the question of bank capital levels was a can kicked down the road, and kicked further, many agreeing with their friends on either side of the question; but leverage offers the potential for both greater gains and greater risks; so is risk aversion best among bankers; an allegedly sober bunch - but my, how they can gamble. There was/is Basel I, and II, and still among us, Basel III, and still the blighters stay as thinly capitalized and as highly leveraged as they believe they can get away with and in anticipation of public bailouts when/if their fans load up. Such bailout history fits under the term "moral hazard" which economists use from time to time, but bankers seldom do except when squeezing on debtors owing them monthly money - where granting grace is a moral hazard encouraging inadequate attention to on time, full amount.
Re Basel variants: This websearch, the IBS here and here, and from within the belly of the Beast, here and here. Also, you can do your own web searching. Prior to the Bushco 9/08 splat (bigger than 9/11 in reach, but we invaded nobody over that one). Numerous academic items were posted before and after 9/08, e.g., explore SSRN online literature (not behind a paywall); IDEAS, (specifically here); NBER (if you can get past the paywall; see also IDEAS, here).
If sampling anything from all that literature, recall the saying that GATT stands for "Gentlemen Always Talk and Talk," an interesting word play still, even if anachronistic in light of Yellen, etc. Back to feet of clay, this interesting online item gets biblical about Daniel re Revelations, citing Revelation 17:12-13 where there are twelve and not ten Federal Reserve Districts; and with the head Fed that's thirteen and we could go into biblical numerology over that situation; but will not. Instead, imaging that pyramid with the big eye on top being built on quicksand.
Enough?
By the way, readers, don't you think credit card debt interest rates are usurious? And shouldn't citizens be able to get out from under the big rock crushing them by full debt discharge via a Chapter 7 bankruptcy (absent fraud and after passage of a mandated waiting period after a last prior use of bankruptcy total debt liquidation rights)? Why do we have those lingering hooks in our flesh, and those sky-high Capital One rates? Is it because bankers lobby and pay candidates from presidential elections down to state legistures, perhaps more locally in instances? Would that matter, in an ideal political world? Do you suppose our legislature could propose a Minnesota Constitution amendment expanding regular usury coverage to credit card debt, or would that, conveniently, be federally preempted? One does not know without trying. Kurt Daudt could be a sponsor. He likely might have the will, but would his colleagues in both houses have the will, and would our good governor need to sign off, if an amendment ballot proposal format were used? Might such a proposal liven up this November's election, if our legislature were to pass one? Hypotheticals can be intriguing, as can lobbyists in another sense of the word.
A final note, pundits can disagree; and if you can get the video to load and play you can see they also can disagree rudely, each trying to talk over the other, neither being shy when it comes to talking out an opinion. Same online news outlet, some trumpery, again if you can get the video to load and play. Some browser settings will affect whether you can.
Strib local coverage and NOT a carried AP feed, Adam Belz, here and more recently, here.
Prior to the Bushco Sept. 2008 big splat, the question of bank capital levels was a can kicked down the road, and kicked further, many agreeing with their friends on either side of the question; but leverage offers the potential for both greater gains and greater risks; so is risk aversion best among bankers; an allegedly sober bunch - but my, how they can gamble. There was/is Basel I, and II, and still among us, Basel III, and still the blighters stay as thinly capitalized and as highly leveraged as they believe they can get away with and in anticipation of public bailouts when/if their fans load up. Such bailout history fits under the term "moral hazard" which economists use from time to time, but bankers seldom do except when squeezing on debtors owing them monthly money - where granting grace is a moral hazard encouraging inadequate attention to on time, full amount.
Re Basel variants: This websearch, the IBS here and here, and from within the belly of the Beast, here and here. Also, you can do your own web searching. Prior to the Bushco 9/08 splat (bigger than 9/11 in reach, but we invaded nobody over that one). Numerous academic items were posted before and after 9/08, e.g., explore SSRN online literature (not behind a paywall); IDEAS, (specifically here); NBER (if you can get past the paywall; see also IDEAS, here).
If sampling anything from all that literature, recall the saying that GATT stands for "Gentlemen Always Talk and Talk," an interesting word play still, even if anachronistic in light of Yellen, etc. Back to feet of clay, this interesting online item gets biblical about Daniel re Revelations, citing Revelation 17:12-13 where there are twelve and not ten Federal Reserve Districts; and with the head Fed that's thirteen and we could go into biblical numerology over that situation; but will not. Instead, imaging that pyramid with the big eye on top being built on quicksand.
Enough?
By the way, readers, don't you think credit card debt interest rates are usurious? And shouldn't citizens be able to get out from under the big rock crushing them by full debt discharge via a Chapter 7 bankruptcy (absent fraud and after passage of a mandated waiting period after a last prior use of bankruptcy total debt liquidation rights)? Why do we have those lingering hooks in our flesh, and those sky-high Capital One rates? Is it because bankers lobby and pay candidates from presidential elections down to state legistures, perhaps more locally in instances? Would that matter, in an ideal political world? Do you suppose our legislature could propose a Minnesota Constitution amendment expanding regular usury coverage to credit card debt, or would that, conveniently, be federally preempted? One does not know without trying. Kurt Daudt could be a sponsor. He likely might have the will, but would his colleagues in both houses have the will, and would our good governor need to sign off, if an amendment ballot proposal format were used? Might such a proposal liven up this November's election, if our legislature were to pass one? Hypotheticals can be intriguing, as can lobbyists in another sense of the word.
A final note, pundits can disagree; and if you can get the video to load and play you can see they also can disagree rudely, each trying to talk over the other, neither being shy when it comes to talking out an opinion. Same online news outlet, some trumpery, again if you can get the video to load and play. Some browser settings will affect whether you can.
Monday, April 11, 2016
Should you trust it when a politician suggests, don't ask me what I thought and did before, ask me where I differ from my opponent; that is, cut me giant slack on issue preemption? Would you like an actual example, or is a hypothetical your thing?
Actual example; IBTimes, days ago, and the nastiness to the 99% via the 1%'s will toward overarching tax haven abusiveness:
Panama position musical chairs aside, what about that Colombia mention? To labor people, no less.
Almost a year ago to today's date, IBTimes reported details, per a headline, "As Colombian Oil Money Flowed To Clintons, State Department Took No Action To Prevent Labor Violations." Details include:
[links in excerpt omitted] Yeah, that Frank.
See another item from roughly a year ago, here, headlined, "181 Clinton Foundation donors who lobbied Hillary's State Department." There's a chart, too vast to screen capture; have a look, where it's like 181 of the Fortune 500. More or less.
Here, with an aptly worded excerpt:
Yes, Ms. Clinton is a lesser evil than Mr. Cruz, should he be the other party's choice, but Mr. Trump is not owned by the same money sources that have financed Ms. Clinton and Mr. Cruz; and polls suggest Sanders has a better shot at beating Trump in a November general election than Clinton has. Trump can talk about all the money the Clintons have taken to become wealthy as career politician patrician family poster children. Cruz cannot, since he's done just that himself. Bernie can talk about all Trump's past, and what's Trump to say? That he is against democratic socialism? The Sanders message has drawn crowds equally large as the Trump nativist event herds.
Hillary Clinton said Wednesday at a campaign stop [...] “Some of you may have just heard about these disclosures about outrageous tax havens and loopholes and superrich people across the world are exploiting in Panama and elsewhere,” she said at the annual Pennsylvania AFL-CIO Constitutional Convention. “We are going after all these scams and make sure everyone pays their fair share here in America.”
But what Clinton left out of her speech was her support five years ago for the Panama Free Trade Agreement that critics say helped intensify tax secrecy in the Latin American nation.
Clinton’s rival for the While House, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, has seized on the issue since Sunday’s release of the Panama Papers, a massive trove of documents that exposed widespread use of tax shelters by rich and powerful people from all over the world.
Sanders has pledged to repeal the trade agreement with Panama if he’s elected president.
“I was opposed to the Panama Free Trade Agreement from day one,” he said on Tuesday. [...]
Sanders opposed the deal as it was being debated in Congress in 2011 on the grounds it would worsen secrecy and tax evasion. But Clinton at the time explicitly touted Panama for its tax transparency initiatives and helped pass the deal through Congress as secretary of state.
"I am happy to report we are making great progress on both agreements,” Clinton said in May 2011, referring to favorable trade deals with Panama and Colombia touted by the business community but criticized by labor and environmental activists.
Panama position musical chairs aside, what about that Colombia mention? To labor people, no less.
Almost a year ago to today's date, IBTimes reported details, per a headline, "As Colombian Oil Money Flowed To Clintons, State Department Took No Action To Prevent Labor Violations." Details include:
For union organizers in Colombia, the dangers of their trade were intensifying. When workers at the country’s largest independent oil company staged a strike in 2011, the Colombian military rounded them up at gunpoint and threatened violence if they failed to disband, according to human rights organizations. Similar intimidation tactics against the workers, say labor leaders, amounted to an everyday feature of life.
For the United States, these were precisely the sorts of discomfiting accounts that were supposed to be prevented in Colombia under a labor agreement that accompanied a recently signed free trade pact liberalizing the exchange of goods between the countries. From Washington to Bogota, leaders had promoted the pact as a win for all -- a deal that would at once boost trade while strengthening the rights of embattled Colombian labor organizers. That formulation had previously drawn skepticism from many prominent Democrats, among them Hillary Clinton.
Yet as union leaders and human rights activists conveyed these harrowing reports of violence to then-Secretary of State Clinton in late 2011, urging her to pressure the Colombian government to protect labor organizers, she responded first with silence, these organizers say. The State Department publicly praised Colombia’s progress on human rights, thereby permitting hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. aid to flow to the same Colombian military that labor activists say helped intimidate workers.
At the same time that Clinton's State Department was lauding Colombia’s human rights record, her family was forging a financial relationship with Pacific Rubiales, the sprawling Canadian petroleum company at the center of Colombia’s labor strife. The Clintons were also developing commercial ties with the oil giant’s founder, Canadian financier Frank Giustra, who now occupies a seat on the board of the Clinton Foundation, the family’s global philanthropic empire.
[links in excerpt omitted] Yeah, that Frank.
See another item from roughly a year ago, here, headlined, "181 Clinton Foundation donors who lobbied Hillary's State Department." There's a chart, too vast to screen capture; have a look, where it's like 181 of the Fortune 500. More or less.
Here, with an aptly worded excerpt:
For the Clintons, raising foreign money is part of the family business. The Clinton Foundation — now re-dubbed the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, so the whole family can share in the glory — is a fundraising juggernaut unbound by national borders.
It has raised about $2 billion during the course of its existence, and foreign governments and other foreign donors make up some of its heaviest hitters. “Rarely, if ever,” as The Washington Post put it, “has a potential commander in chief been so closely associated with an organization that has solicited financial support from foreign governments.”
The foreign fundraising continued apace even while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, a position that, in theory, has some influence over U.S. foreign policy. It is as if the wives of George Marshall and Dean Acheson were operating as globe-trotting money vacuums, with infamously slack ethical standards, while their spouses ran Foggy Bottom.
Yes, Ms. Clinton is a lesser evil than Mr. Cruz, should he be the other party's choice, but Mr. Trump is not owned by the same money sources that have financed Ms. Clinton and Mr. Cruz; and polls suggest Sanders has a better shot at beating Trump in a November general election than Clinton has. Trump can talk about all the money the Clintons have taken to become wealthy as career politician patrician family poster children. Cruz cannot, since he's done just that himself. Bernie can talk about all Trump's past, and what's Trump to say? That he is against democratic socialism? The Sanders message has drawn crowds equally large as the Trump nativist event herds.
Wednesday, April 06, 2016
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/ is the official website of candidate Clinton. Posted is a subpage screen capture, re donations.
Click the thumbnail to enlarge and read.
That page online is:
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/contribute/donate/go/
The page has an interesting footer:
[bolding in original] Fewer states listed than stars on our current Ol' Glory; 32 states, if I count correctly.
Why State-by-State? Good question.
In terms of today's big news, one state listed there:
WI
We know from headlines they just voted there, and we know who won.
Feel the BERN
That page online is:
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/contribute/donate/go/
The page has an interesting footer:
Paid for by Hillary Victory Fund, a joint fundraising committee authorized by Hillary for America, the Democratic National Committee and the State Democratic Parties in these states: AK, AR, CO, FL, GA, ID, IN, KY, LA, ME, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NV, NH, NC, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, UT, VA, WV, WI, and WY.
[bolding in original] Fewer states listed than stars on our current Ol' Glory; 32 states, if I count correctly.
Why State-by-State? Good question.
In terms of today's big news, one state listed there:
WI
We know from headlines they just voted there, and we know who won.
Feel the BERN
Morning chuckle. Brought to you by npr.
This link. Most readers can infer the body of the report from its headline. Making it all easier, opening words of the report:
Would you want that Scalia name anywhere near your's?
Anywhere?
Much less on a costly hard earned diploma? I'd not.
It must have seemed a straightforward way to honor a Supreme Court justice who was famous for, among other things, prizing straightforwardness. But then people began to titter about the unintended acronym of the Antonin Scalia School of Law – and now George Mason University has tweaked the name.
The new name for the institution in Fairfax, Va., will be the Antonin Scalia Law School, says law school dean Henry N. Butler, citing "some acronym controversy on social media" as the reason for the change. The name will become final in July, pending approval by the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia.
In another sign of fallout from the renaming, the university is now looking at how to accommodate law school students who don't want Scalia's name on their diplomas, Butler said. [...]
Would you want that Scalia name anywhere near your's?
Anywhere?
Much less on a costly hard earned diploma? I'd not.
Tuesday, April 05, 2016
Where Millennials are as rare as marsupials. In the two party system where they might think there's little there favoring them, nor anything too trustworthy. Not being a Millennial, I feel that way, so they may or may not, and projecting one's own biases upon others can be trumpery.
This could have been appended as an UPDATE here, or here, but editorial discretion puts it separate and anew.
This link. Read it fully, first.
The recent special election Zach Phelps candidacy suggests that a Drinking Liberally session on toking liberally might have a differing age range attendance than reflected in the link's image. That might be a possibility quelled in part by the feeble response out of between the ears of our Governor's mansion prime occupant. After all, Rand Paul trumps him on that issue (or do current events demand I use a different verb to avoid confusion about possible punishment).
As a liberty thing Rand/Ron together see clearly that recreational marijuana decriminalization is sane and sensible; and they have the political courage to simply say so without dithering or yining or yanging. They, that way, are a breath of fresh air (or should that be worded differently).
In any event, Millennial distancing from ossified political party stuff; the substance of that linked item, is both understandable and unfortunate.
I say that, having viscerally hated during earlier days the "you gotta change the system from within" business; in that it is a conundrum that until you've become corrupted you cannot affect corruption always gave cold comfort, if not wholly no comfort.
Abigale Whelan, a Millennial in name only, is too off the deep end to count; but she's entirely Republican mainstream and it's been that mainstream [Aplikowski being the other poster child] who disdained the infusion of new Ron/Rand ideas into their hive including invention of the derivsive term "Paulbots." Lost souls aside, there is the DFL; and the linked item shows an institutional understanding where a "Berniebots" terminology would be thought gauche.
But that is simply not enough. Taking the money may be business as usual, but most Millennials have not been sufficiently corrupted to "change the system from within." And a ho, ho, ho to anyone who'd wink and nod and say, "Yes, taking the money, going along to get along is how you can march to reform, one small step at a time," when their, the Millennials' kitchen has caught fire.
How lukewarm is the support around these environs for a fifteen dollar minimum wage, or for student debt relief? What are people thinking saying "Where are the Millennials," instead of saying any minimum wage less than fifteen bucks an hour is wholly obscene and unacceptable and MUST be changed. Where are the union voices on that? Where is press coverage? Where are the Clintons - historically and not as a new Bernie inspired fashion - on the plight of minimum wage workers and how was that reflected by eight entire years one after the other of Clintonhood in office?
Now years well into the succeeding post-Clintonian millennium, (despite the hanging on), the federal minimum wage still, eight Obama years later from 2008, still is obscenely and insultingly low?
Stand on a clear policy of ending the student debt enslavement bullshit and paying a fair wage at a minimum, and then ask how come the millenials are distant. Do those things, they may not be.
Also, that superdelegate Dem Party pile needs to be mucked from the stable, and then, who knows?
Millennials might show up.
Last, just as with RINO, a new term MINO might arise and be required to be applied to the likes of Abigale Whelan, who aside from age has cozened up to a real bunch of established myopic operators, and gotten her GOP chops and legislative paycheck; with nothing - not a jot - done for millennials by her ongoing voting of the pure GOP leadership party line along with sponsoring dumb and divisive bills properly dying in or before reaching committee but getting her "loves Jusus" card punched.
__________UPDATE____________
This link. Start a local chapter?
Without meaning to "Howard Beale" readers if the post tends a bit over the top, perhaps what's needed, is for the DFL to a degree to get Networked, but with gentleness, honesty and understanding, not the Network's good-for-ratings cynicism.
So stepping back for a better perspective, a thought experiment, out of ten educated [a/k/a in debt w/o possible bankruptcy court relief] millennials who were to be shown fairly short YouTube videos, here and here, (one being FOX serious about itself and the other ridiculing FOX), with both showing actual FOX footage but the latter without single item continuity, each of the ten being shown both segments; how many do you think could cogently explain the propaganda methods of each (including straw man, selective editing, glide and slide, ignoring contradictions, ganging up, etc.)?
I would guess nine of ten could, while the tenth would be a Republican. A Republican going to or hosting a fundraiser of one kind or another (where the latter had a speaker on citizenship):
That one single continuous FOX video, the first linked to above, beggars the imagination because it is serious televised stuff, and not self-parody.
This link. Read it fully, first.
The recent special election Zach Phelps candidacy suggests that a Drinking Liberally session on toking liberally might have a differing age range attendance than reflected in the link's image. That might be a possibility quelled in part by the feeble response out of between the ears of our Governor's mansion prime occupant. After all, Rand Paul trumps him on that issue (or do current events demand I use a different verb to avoid confusion about possible punishment).
As a liberty thing Rand/Ron together see clearly that recreational marijuana decriminalization is sane and sensible; and they have the political courage to simply say so without dithering or yining or yanging. They, that way, are a breath of fresh air (or should that be worded differently).
In any event, Millennial distancing from ossified political party stuff; the substance of that linked item, is both understandable and unfortunate.
I say that, having viscerally hated during earlier days the "you gotta change the system from within" business; in that it is a conundrum that until you've become corrupted you cannot affect corruption always gave cold comfort, if not wholly no comfort.
Abigale Whelan, a Millennial in name only, is too off the deep end to count; but she's entirely Republican mainstream and it's been that mainstream [Aplikowski being the other poster child] who disdained the infusion of new Ron/Rand ideas into their hive including invention of the derivsive term "Paulbots." Lost souls aside, there is the DFL; and the linked item shows an institutional understanding where a "Berniebots" terminology would be thought gauche.
But that is simply not enough. Taking the money may be business as usual, but most Millennials have not been sufficiently corrupted to "change the system from within." And a ho, ho, ho to anyone who'd wink and nod and say, "Yes, taking the money, going along to get along is how you can march to reform, one small step at a time," when their, the Millennials' kitchen has caught fire.
How lukewarm is the support around these environs for a fifteen dollar minimum wage, or for student debt relief? What are people thinking saying "Where are the Millennials," instead of saying any minimum wage less than fifteen bucks an hour is wholly obscene and unacceptable and MUST be changed. Where are the union voices on that? Where is press coverage? Where are the Clintons - historically and not as a new Bernie inspired fashion - on the plight of minimum wage workers and how was that reflected by eight entire years one after the other of Clintonhood in office?
Now years well into the succeeding post-Clintonian millennium, (despite the hanging on), the federal minimum wage still, eight Obama years later from 2008, still is obscenely and insultingly low?
Stand on a clear policy of ending the student debt enslavement bullshit and paying a fair wage at a minimum, and then ask how come the millenials are distant. Do those things, they may not be.
Also, that superdelegate Dem Party pile needs to be mucked from the stable, and then, who knows?
Millennials might show up.
Last, just as with RINO, a new term MINO might arise and be required to be applied to the likes of Abigale Whelan, who aside from age has cozened up to a real bunch of established myopic operators, and gotten her GOP chops and legislative paycheck; with nothing - not a jot - done for millennials by her ongoing voting of the pure GOP leadership party line along with sponsoring dumb and divisive bills properly dying in or before reaching committee but getting her "loves Jusus" card punched.
 |
| UPDATE from SD35 GOP click to read |
__________UPDATE____________
This link. Start a local chapter?
Without meaning to "Howard Beale" readers if the post tends a bit over the top, perhaps what's needed, is for the DFL to a degree to get Networked, but with gentleness, honesty and understanding, not the Network's good-for-ratings cynicism.
So stepping back for a better perspective, a thought experiment, out of ten educated [a/k/a in debt w/o possible bankruptcy court relief] millennials who were to be shown fairly short YouTube videos, here and here, (one being FOX serious about itself and the other ridiculing FOX), with both showing actual FOX footage but the latter without single item continuity, each of the ten being shown both segments; how many do you think could cogently explain the propaganda methods of each (including straw man, selective editing, glide and slide, ignoring contradictions, ganging up, etc.)?
I would guess nine of ten could, while the tenth would be a Republican. A Republican going to or hosting a fundraiser of one kind or another (where the latter had a speaker on citizenship):
That one single continuous FOX video, the first linked to above, beggars the imagination because it is serious televised stuff, and not self-parody.
Eylash beauticians and solar gardens are legislative matters this session.
Sorensen at Bluestem Prairie, here and here.
Then this, about "BLM."
To me the BLM always was the BLM. Abbreviation preemption just confuses us old folk.
It to me still means the ones Ted Cruz hates on in harmony with the Bundys, that BLM which is having 247.3 million acres of federal land to administer; that being 247.3 million acres more than Black Lives Matter holds to administer.
Just saying, my BLM's held sway since 1946. At my age I appreciate longevity over - should I say it - fads and fashions, because wisdom suggests holding one's breath until Black Lives Matter blasts through the load of stuff it has to push aside would not be a recommended practice, for one my age or younger.
UPDATE: This is the kind of news below much MSM radar at which Sorensen excels in reporting. As with the large scale "solar garden" conflict of interest posting headlined, linked to again, here.
Wherever there is even the possible appearance of a conflict of interest, the better practice is for the conflicted person to recognize things and to step back from an advocacy situation. Enough others are around to work situations out; the conflicted can rely on that, and look better doing so.
Then this, about "BLM."
To me the BLM always was the BLM. Abbreviation preemption just confuses us old folk.
It to me still means the ones Ted Cruz hates on in harmony with the Bundys, that BLM which is having 247.3 million acres of federal land to administer; that being 247.3 million acres more than Black Lives Matter holds to administer.
Just saying, my BLM's held sway since 1946. At my age I appreciate longevity over - should I say it - fads and fashions, because wisdom suggests holding one's breath until Black Lives Matter blasts through the load of stuff it has to push aside would not be a recommended practice, for one my age or younger.
UPDATE: This is the kind of news below much MSM radar at which Sorensen excels in reporting. As with the large scale "solar garden" conflict of interest posting headlined, linked to again, here.
Wherever there is even the possible appearance of a conflict of interest, the better practice is for the conflicted person to recognize things and to step back from an advocacy situation. Enough others are around to work situations out; the conflicted can rely on that, and look better doing so.
Reader help needed. There are certain Cruz land and earth-unfriendliness positions many progressives think obnoxious; so has Trump articulated and committed himself to any position in such directions, either way, any way; besides meeting great crowds of great people and doing fabulously in all the polls?
The headline does for me capture Trump specificity, aside from the "M-plurals," Muslims and Mexicans, where some of them can be great people, but for most/many of them, but he'd prefer a wall and Draconian "vetting."
But that's NOT the Ted Cruz positions that scare and offend; rather, see the return list of this
websearch = ted cruz epa public lands
The man's a clear and present danger. As if kin to the Kochs. As if a Glencore shareholder; he or Heidi.
__________UPDATE___________
Kidding aside, how did this gentleman ever ring up a 5%? What were those rating people smoking when according that lifetime score? He hugged Somky the Bear once? What?
http://scorecard.lcv.org/moc/ted-cruz
_______FURTHER UPDATE_________
Of the "even a blind pig can sometimes sniff out a truffle" nature, back in 2013 Cruz, possibly inadvertently, twice voted on the LCV's good guy scorecard side, but this is the same man who voted against the prairie chicken's interest, as an amendment to a bill favoring dirty cruddy oil pipelines that nobody needs.
And he gets a lifetime 5% rating? Him? He'd gut the EPA. That's strange to wholly inappropriate, or so it seems.
Perhaps he gets his 5% solely by a comparison?
But that's NOT the Ted Cruz positions that scare and offend; rather, see the return list of this
websearch = ted cruz epa public lands
The man's a clear and present danger. As if kin to the Kochs. As if a Glencore shareholder; he or Heidi.
__________UPDATE___________
Kidding aside, how did this gentleman ever ring up a 5%? What were those rating people smoking when according that lifetime score? He hugged Somky the Bear once? What?
http://scorecard.lcv.org/moc/ted-cruz
_______FURTHER UPDATE_________
Of the "even a blind pig can sometimes sniff out a truffle" nature, back in 2013 Cruz, possibly inadvertently, twice voted on the LCV's good guy scorecard side, but this is the same man who voted against the prairie chicken's interest, as an amendment to a bill favoring dirty cruddy oil pipelines that nobody needs.
And he gets a lifetime 5% rating? Him? He'd gut the EPA. That's strange to wholly inappropriate, or so it seems.
Perhaps he gets his 5% solely by a comparison?
2016 college men's basketball final. 'Nova wins.
| My guys won. |
Fraudster schools? On trial, not yet to any verdict. A post surprisingly without mention of Col. Kline.
Local reporting by Strib itself, not an AP feed, this link.
Attorney Anthony represents the defendant. Selling false and unproven medical elixirs was not illegal, prior to FDA legislation. Everybody did it. Without any help then from Col. Kline, since it was before he was born.
Oh, wait . . .
The headline promised . . .
“Selling an education is not illegal, it’s not improper. Everybody does it,” Anthony said.
Attorney Anthony represents the defendant. Selling false and unproven medical elixirs was not illegal, prior to FDA legislation. Everybody did it. Without any help then from Col. Kline, since it was before he was born.
Oh, wait . . .
The headline promised . . .
Already posted, Salon items editorialize more than report, especially on pre-convention presidential year politics. Yet a particular Clinton-Sanders analysis from days ago is good for DFL upper inner party attention, but hope IS slim . . .
This mid-item extended excerpt:
If the Sanders candidacy gets comparable respect from the establishment cramdown Dems as the Ron Paul candidacy got from the Republican cramdown powers, it will be a long term mistake. The future is in the new entrant energized voters reaching into a welcomed political relevance.
Caucus state results are particularly relevant. With no army the "generals" become ossified table fixtures, chess board caricatures (with no pawn structure), ultimately irrelevant and passed-by. The money can and will move on, but a base is a base and should not be crassly disrespected.
Put another way, as well as a State motto co-opted by Tea Party types, "Live Free or Die" could be a DFL warning, as in "Live Rigged and Die." With some, it ain't seen coming until it came. (current image, current top sidebar item)
Sanders often says he took on “the most powerful political machine in America,” by which he means the Clintons. He’s really fighting the whole Democratic Party: White House, Congress, DNC, elite media and, sad to say, national progressive groups. That includes organized labor but also nearly every liberal lobby in town. He’s been a more constant friend than Hillary Clinton to almost all of them — but he must face and defeat them all. That he’s done so in 14 states — 15 counting Iowa-and fought four more to a draw is a miracle — and a sign their days are truly numbered.
Donald Trump has accomplished little by comparison. Everything was easier for him. When he hit party elites, no one hit back. Democratic elites had a flawed but still formidable Clinton to carry their water. Republicans had Jeb Bush, and now Ted Cruz. Trump took the low road and then lowered it some more, yet could help himself to issues of broad populist appeal without an establishment type feigning agreement. The media that ignored or dismissed Sanders coddled and appeased Trump. Eight years of open GOP warfare prepared Trump’s way. Bernie’s in the first wave to hit the Democratic beach.
With each call to surrender, Sanders just gets stronger. The day the Politico story ran, he swept Democrats Abroad 69 percent to 30 percent. The next day Hillary took Arizona with 58 percent of the vote but Sanders blew her out in Idaho and Utah, polling an unheard-of 79 percent in caucuses that shattered turnout records. On Saturday he’d chalked up three more wins in Alaska, Hawaii and Washington with average margins of 76 perfent. In a Times/CBS poll out this week the man who started the race 60 points down closed the gap to five. In a Bloomberg poll released Saturday he took a 1 point lead.
It raises a question that the elites who rig rules, stifle debate and call on Sanders to withdraw must answer: Who do you think you are? It also raises a question for Washington-based organizations allegedly safeguarding progressive values[...]
 |
| image credit |
Caucus state results are particularly relevant. With no army the "generals" become ossified table fixtures, chess board caricatures (with no pawn structure), ultimately irrelevant and passed-by. The money can and will move on, but a base is a base and should not be crassly disrespected.
Put another way, as well as a State motto co-opted by Tea Party types, "Live Free or Die" could be a DFL warning, as in "Live Rigged and Die." With some, it ain't seen coming until it came. (current image, current top sidebar item)
Monday, April 04, 2016
For the easily impressed.
Breitbart reports it. "Ted Cruz Surge: 50 Wisconsin Faith Leaders Back Cruz for President." So?
What do you suppose 50 imprisoned Wisconsin felons think of Ted Cruz?
Should you care, either irrelevant group, either way?
What about finding fifty race track workers, see how they regard Cruz?
Fifth Harley factory workers; fifty hairdressers?
Go for sixty . . .
What do you suppose 50 imprisoned Wisconsin felons think of Ted Cruz?
Should you care, either irrelevant group, either way?
What about finding fifty race track workers, see how they regard Cruz?
Fifth Harley factory workers; fifty hairdressers?
Go for sixty . . .
The SD35 DFL's future.
Briefly, an encouraging thing at the weekend caucus/convention was that young people not only showed up but stood to become party delegates to move onward to Congressional District and State DFL conventions.
Some might challenge the conclusion that support of the Sanders populist-fairness candidacy was a key factor in such a development, but here that is a conclusion posted. Readers can make of it what they will. Another conclusion, this infusion of youth is a very good thing. For myself, remaining years still sucking air, I can put up with almost anything DC does to us.
These young people and their offspring are the ones who will have to live with whatever DC does to us. They should not only have a voice, they should have key voices. It's their world, moving on. The Minnesota DFL must, for its survival and prosperity, be as generous to such an entry by younger citizens as it can; and if it is, and these people are encourage not discouraged, good will result as surely as rain falls to the earth.
Some might challenge the conclusion that support of the Sanders populist-fairness candidacy was a key factor in such a development, but here that is a conclusion posted. Readers can make of it what they will. Another conclusion, this infusion of youth is a very good thing. For myself, remaining years still sucking air, I can put up with almost anything DC does to us.
These young people and their offspring are the ones who will have to live with whatever DC does to us. They should not only have a voice, they should have key voices. It's their world, moving on. The Minnesota DFL must, for its survival and prosperity, be as generous to such an entry by younger citizens as it can; and if it is, and these people are encourage not discouraged, good will result as surely as rain falls to the earth.
Saturday, April 02, 2016
DFL Senate district 35 convened, with candidates chosen for both House seats, and the Senate seat.
The turnout was encouraging and the Sanders candidacy brought in young people who will be the future of progressive thought. There were Clinton people, (no young among), and I suppose some like leftovers leftovers from the sad NAFTA '90s. Looked like a bunch that don't care to see transcripts. That lack of basic credible skepticism and curiosity befuddled me. How could anyone buy a high milage used car without knowing its history, how it's been driven, by whom, the wrecks its been in?
That's a brief impression, and the thinking here is still: if there were no Tom Bakk in leadership the state DFL would merit a contribution; while if Bakk's still in the saddle, give to individual DFL'ers you in good conscience CAN trust and support.
WITHHOLDING APPROVAL: How change will happen, how to break bad habits; the dog pees on the carpet you get the message to the dog that peeing on the carpet is not acceptable; else you and the carpet just suffer and suffer long term.
THE CANDIDATES:
Andy Hillebregt running HD 35A against the unappealing incumbent there.
Wes Volkenant running HD 35B against the equally unappealing incumbent there.
Roger Johnson, by acclimation was requested by the convention delegates to run again against Jim Abeler for the SD 35 seat, after Roger had hastily mounted his previous run seeking the balance of the Minnesota Senate term vacated by Branden Petersen who quit the legislature for personal reasons mid-term. If in Petersen's place with the colleagues he had on that side of the aisle and having to deal with them and their games and prejudices, I'd probably have gotten to feel jaded after a short part of an elected term of service too, if in such a place.
But projecting my feelings onto another is unsound. Petersen's reasons for walking as/when he did are his, not necessarily the same as mine.
Other things were done, slowly, while what everybody came for, selecting delegates and delegate support positions for the next DFL convening levels, Congressional District and State Convention - was held to last to forestall a mass exodus mid-session were that interesting part of things set earlier.
The Bern was felt, it was good, it was a message. Hopefully, unlike the GOP with the Ron Paul energy among younger people being callously rebuffed, hopefully ever so hopefully, the DFL will not be so cringingly dumb. Republicans are who they are; but the DFL has the capability of not missteping out of sheer spite. That being said while admitting some may well regard my extreme distaste and distrust toward the Clintons as wrong headed and not going along to get along DFL-style. Hey, though, she took the money; she's as much a money taker as Ted Cruz, re Wall Street, lawyers lobbyists, the energy elite. Open Secrets disclosures in earlier posts in fact indicate more the money taker than Cruz, indeed, in a league with JEB! And Goldman Sachs invests, they don't give freebies.
Lori Swanson and the State party treasurer gave speeches, too heavy on the "however you may feel we need solidarity going into November backing party candidates" spiel; knowing full well how SD35 precinct caucusing turned out a solid majority rejection of the Clintons and Clintonian ways and means, including insensitivities to the rest of us while favoring instead six-figure-a-pop wall street dog-pony stuff, Russian uranium, much else.
BOTTOM LINE: Transcripts matter, just like black lives do.
And with the Sanders candidacy grounded on personal convictions held and advocated over decades, consistently for what's best for the populace and what's sound foreign war avoidance policy, that matters. Especially so with the other candidate tardy in reaching some positions cutting contrary to a held 1% status and pecuniary interests attached to that status on the part of the spousal pair opposing Sanders.
Consistency matters. It matters big time, since "trust me" from the Clintons is not something I'd try to take to the bank [not even to the Goldman Sachs investment bank].
___________UPDATE___________
One thing the Clinton people must absorb - the question is not "a woman" as president. The question is "that woman" as president.
In that regard, I would want to see Goldman Sachs transcripts and State Department emails related to returns per this web search.
Arab Spring, and all that BS in getting Hosni Mubarak and relatives/cronies out of their strangle hold on Egypt but letting the Egyptian military and Israel continue holding Egyptian reins of power; while converting Libya from prosperous to a basket case where Islamic State jihadist types run rampant and it is a staging ground for weaponry used in deposing Qaddafi to be shipped along with individuals to Syria; all that is most suspect as a long term beneficial foreign policy NATO advantage.
That incredibly shameful gloating over death "We Came, We Saw, He died," video shows an individual, gender aside, unfit to be in government. Anywhere in government. Unfit for dog catcher. Using Roman Imperial banter as if a jolly fine jest about a modern day Rome having disposed of a modern day Carthage is unacceptable. You do not kill another head of state, whatever propaganda you've ginned up, and then go on video with a "We came, we saw, he's dead" laugh line.
It is beyond grotesque. It is incendiary. It is bloodthirsty. It is too disrespectful of all of the third world, and moreover, too flat-out stupid to do it on camera and to then pretend to be trustworthy to run our country non-stupidly and without a public show of unduly brutal hubris unbefitting the office of Secretary of State, and more so, unbefitting the office of President.
TRANSCRIPTS: While disarming a Qaddafi affront to the worldwide post-WW II banker arrangements being kept intact while also contact info might have been provided on who new in Egypt might facilitate banking and business dealings (if paid to give a speech); all that stuff might justify Goldman Sachs leadership feeling "that woman" is hunkey dory with them and a national leader they'd welcome; the clear fact is we are contemplating a perspective among a broader United States population wanting "good" government beyond what Goldman Sachs' highly compensated mover and shaker honchos might deem "good" government from atop their lofty opulent Wall Street towers.
So the problem now in 2016 and before in 2008 was not, either time, "a woman," but each time, "that woman."
Clintonian DFL'ers need to absorb that distinction as relevant.
Offer the job to Elizabeth Warren as Democratic Party candidate for President, that's as good as Bernie; their quality and integrity are about interchangeable, and Warren is younger. [a clarifying update - as best understood, Warren and Cantwell (next paragraph) and Ted Cruz are roughly contemporaries, at least a generation younger than Clinton, Trump and Sanders, each of whom is roughly the age of Ronald Reagan when first taking office in California - readers correct this impression in a comment if it is in error]
Give me a business success such as Maria Cantwell, Democratic Senator from Washington, as a moderate woman who could be a sound federal chief executive; I'd happily listen. I'd have zero problem supporting a Maria Cantwell inner party choice of ongoing candidate and I'd gladly conform my thinking to such a selection being sound.
Give me Hillary Clinton as an inner party cramdown against the clear will of the populace in attending and backing Bernie appearances unlike the small crowds of connected party regulars and their Clinton fund raiser dinners; well, giving me that means disrespect for the entirety of the Bernie insurgency - disrespect and disdain of a degree suggesting why not stay home. Stay home if the Republicans on their side show honor toward the Trump insurgency; but swallow the awful choice if they Ted Cruz us the same way the Democratic inner party intends to Hillary Clinton us. That would be as bad or worse than the JEB! - Hillary appearance of things six to twelve months ago as the nation's likely two-party inner party 2016 presidential package.
At least JEB! is out. The Bush royal family had no traction. Now sweep the other imperial family aside, and have us something more like a real choice. A Trump vs. Sanders election would be a fresh breeze, as is shown by how staunchly the corporate media is intent to dissuade us from it.
____________FURTHER UPDATE_____________
A most distasteful inner party DFL thing done to the delegates was to have Swanson and that central state party treasurer show up and shake a Supreme Court Justices bogey man at us. It was done crudely and was an insult to our collective intelligence. [update note - neither individual was agenda listed, but lo, each showed up with what looked to me to be a spiel instigated by the Clinton people who know how distasteful she is to some Sanders people, hence wanting to jolly us all into support the candidate whoever she ends up being stuff]
The fact is true, we need more Hugo Black, Bill Douglas, William Brennen quality on that bench, yes, but it will not come from Hillary Clinton. Bernie yes, and we know Ted Cruz would find a Scalia clone, a Roberts clone, an Alito surrogate or two, etc., but a simple fact is Trump is enough anti-establishment that he might be expected to pack a court as well or likely better than either of the Clintons have (for their two White House terms); and Trump if anything is not married to the lending bankers that bone picked his business firm bankruptcy carcasses, and that's to his liking. There is little Donald Trump to John Roberts. There is this nagging feeling Clinton, the Clintons, happily navigate within a Citizens United world, regardless of whatever the lady says. It, Citizens United thinking, is, by Goldman Sachs speech example, a worldview they understand and from which they attained great levels of career politician prosperity for themselves, spouses and child.
Honestly explain to me, what has Hillary PAClady in her endeavors to hold against the Citizens United Roberts court decision? What? Bloody nothing is the answer. It wholly befits her ways and means.
___________FURTHER UPDATE_____________
One of the more interesting exercises at the SD35 convention was the ranked choice opportunity to have at the four pages of fine-print "SD35 2O16 CAUCUS RESOLUTIONS." While possibly not representative of universally felt priorities among attendees, in order my first four choices were, respectively, listed items 30, 25, 27 and 32 (for those still holding their RESOLUTIONS pages. Since some readers may have not attended, and others may no longer hold the pages, they were:
It would have been nice had the list been provided online before the event for the greatest deliberative value, but it was not, so forgive any transcription error above.
You must first reform process if you are to reform substance. Procedural rigging of things such as the superdelegate affront are repulsive to your vote counting when the deck's been stacked by the entrenched beneficiaries of superdelegate nonsense. It offends.
Fifth and sixth choices here were:
For those caring about the collective will of attendees but who may not have held onto their blue AGENDA sheets, or for those who may have not attended, a copy of the "Resolutions report" can be requested by email from "Resolutions Chair Laurie Elvig" at:
jlriley1@comcast.net
Hopefully that email address was correctly transcribed, while I have not yet tested it.
Blue sheet text did expressly limit that report access to the group "delegate/alternate of this Convention" (where the "caucus" vs "convention" terminology is unclear to me), but given that publicly held elections will be forthcoming and voters in some measure may care what party caucus-goers believe are principles on which political decision making should or may hinge, limiting that information to only a handful of people who went to a middle school room in Coon Rapids seems counterproductive to having a greatest informed electorate. In any event, I went, so Ms. Elvig shall be emailing me, per request, an e-copy of the resolutions as handed out on paper, and whatever she condenses responses to, in committee with others, to produce a report.
__________FURTHER UPDATE___________
As to that Justices bogey man thing, Eric Ferguson over at MPP echoes the same theme, and if I understand things Ferguson in one Senate District holds an official position. So he states an official position.
I honestly cannot say whether I'd anticipate Trump court appointees to be any worse than Clinton ones; and I doubt Ferguson can either. With the Cruz spouse having been a Bush official, a Goldman Sachs Texas operative, and a CFR maven, I can guess that perhaps even Cruz/Clinton appointees might differ little; although Cruz can be expected to throw raw red meat to the Jesus Jockeys, to inflame the choice-hatred, because that kind of things fits the personna he's adopted as his character, while taking Wall Street, lawyer/lobbyist, and energy industry money in the top five in such categories per Open Secrets, along with Clinton.
BOTTOM LINE: There might be sense in seeing what Trump's insurgency would yield, if the Sanders insurgency gets deep sixed by an inner party elite putsch where a bulk of that inner party elite is not greatly unlike Heidi Cruz.
Remember, the Warren Court was succeeded by the Burgher Court, and that was Nixon who set that up while setting the stage for the Rhenquist Court, and you have to look back for days of wine and roses to Eisenhower's promise to Earl Warren (then the governor of California) that Warren would get the next Supreme Court appointment in exchange for officially liking Ike, and it turned out the next vacancy was Chief Justice.
Those were the days of better decision making, Justice Harlan mouthing the stuff the majority since Burgher's appointment has been making majority dogma; and the one sound thought is that Franklin Roosevelt knew how to use a Court packing threat to create responsiveness with Sanders bright enough and having comparable New Deal integrity, to have learned the lesson. Nine is nobody's magic number. Fifteen would do, if appointments were to come from a President Sanders with advice and consent of a Democratic Senate, Blue Dogs sadly being brake on any overenthusiasm as they were in trying to reform healthcare.
Back to the Ferguson MPP item, this link, it is interesting how he segues from a headline, "Why conservatives are freaking out over Obama picking Scalia replacement," to what has the faint odor of an organized fear-the-unknown propaganda putsch on multiple apparently disjoint fronts, by Clinton people. Always a skeptic, it's been a character fault of mine for decades. I fear Clinton appointments, based on the known rather than the unknown. A TPP loving, satisfied with Citizens United court from Goldman Sachs has no beauty to my beholding, and admittedly that is in theory since my crystal ball is no better nor worse than Lori Swanson's, just different.
______________FURTHER UPDATE________________
In a perfect world, one of the better RESOLUTION proposals was, as stated above:
Were I to have been on the DFL Resolution Committee that produced it, I would have felt proud, but would have sought amended text if allowed, to read at least "...and prevent members from lobbying or giving paid speeches for no less than five years after their term of service," while also liking the thought that such constraints might apply as well to cabinet heads and commission chairs such as head up the FCC, FTC, etc.; indeed, to their senior rank and file employees, Senate and House Committee staff, commission members aside from only chair occupants, etc., etc., everywhere there is a revolving door, and then also look at curbing sweetheart book deals. The one Washington law firm was keeping A.G. Holder's chair warm and his corner office open for him during his public service, his again after he left the Justice Department with no Wall Street banker having gone to jail over the 2007-2008 subprime securitized mortgage shenanigans or with regard to the subsequent market collapse and bailout of AIG and bank billionaires running shops that clearly stood too failed to be allowed big.
Back on point - that one paid speech loophole, you could shove a Goldman Sachs skyscraper through it.
__________FINAL UPDATE__________
Above: The names of the caucus-endorsed SD35 candidates have been highlighted, since despite digression, the post properly is about them.
An email inquiry has been sent to each of the three asking for website, donation, contact, and issues information - things that on the sidebar can be posted either directly or by links; and as we approach November a hope would be timely central-item posting here might highlight campaign activity and needs as they develop.
Finally a parting thought, Donald Trump must be pressed for specficity. How will he, specifically and not with handwaving generality, fix the Peggy Scott, Eric Lucero, Abigale Whelan mediocrity problem? Absent that, how can America be Great Again? It cannot.
That's a brief impression, and the thinking here is still: if there were no Tom Bakk in leadership the state DFL would merit a contribution; while if Bakk's still in the saddle, give to individual DFL'ers you in good conscience CAN trust and support.
WITHHOLDING APPROVAL: How change will happen, how to break bad habits; the dog pees on the carpet you get the message to the dog that peeing on the carpet is not acceptable; else you and the carpet just suffer and suffer long term.
THE CANDIDATES:
Andy Hillebregt running HD 35A against the unappealing incumbent there.
Wes Volkenant running HD 35B against the equally unappealing incumbent there.
Roger Johnson, by acclimation was requested by the convention delegates to run again against Jim Abeler for the SD 35 seat, after Roger had hastily mounted his previous run seeking the balance of the Minnesota Senate term vacated by Branden Petersen who quit the legislature for personal reasons mid-term. If in Petersen's place with the colleagues he had on that side of the aisle and having to deal with them and their games and prejudices, I'd probably have gotten to feel jaded after a short part of an elected term of service too, if in such a place.
But projecting my feelings onto another is unsound. Petersen's reasons for walking as/when he did are his, not necessarily the same as mine.
Other things were done, slowly, while what everybody came for, selecting delegates and delegate support positions for the next DFL convening levels, Congressional District and State Convention - was held to last to forestall a mass exodus mid-session were that interesting part of things set earlier.
The Bern was felt, it was good, it was a message. Hopefully, unlike the GOP with the Ron Paul energy among younger people being callously rebuffed, hopefully ever so hopefully, the DFL will not be so cringingly dumb. Republicans are who they are; but the DFL has the capability of not missteping out of sheer spite. That being said while admitting some may well regard my extreme distaste and distrust toward the Clintons as wrong headed and not going along to get along DFL-style. Hey, though, she took the money; she's as much a money taker as Ted Cruz, re Wall Street, lawyers lobbyists, the energy elite. Open Secrets disclosures in earlier posts in fact indicate more the money taker than Cruz, indeed, in a league with JEB! And Goldman Sachs invests, they don't give freebies.
Lori Swanson and the State party treasurer gave speeches, too heavy on the "however you may feel we need solidarity going into November backing party candidates" spiel; knowing full well how SD35 precinct caucusing turned out a solid majority rejection of the Clintons and Clintonian ways and means, including insensitivities to the rest of us while favoring instead six-figure-a-pop wall street dog-pony stuff, Russian uranium, much else.
BOTTOM LINE: Transcripts matter, just like black lives do.
And with the Sanders candidacy grounded on personal convictions held and advocated over decades, consistently for what's best for the populace and what's sound foreign war avoidance policy, that matters. Especially so with the other candidate tardy in reaching some positions cutting contrary to a held 1% status and pecuniary interests attached to that status on the part of the spousal pair opposing Sanders.
Consistency matters. It matters big time, since "trust me" from the Clintons is not something I'd try to take to the bank [not even to the Goldman Sachs investment bank].
___________UPDATE___________
One thing the Clinton people must absorb - the question is not "a woman" as president. The question is "that woman" as president.
In that regard, I would want to see Goldman Sachs transcripts and State Department emails related to returns per this web search.
Arab Spring, and all that BS in getting Hosni Mubarak and relatives/cronies out of their strangle hold on Egypt but letting the Egyptian military and Israel continue holding Egyptian reins of power; while converting Libya from prosperous to a basket case where Islamic State jihadist types run rampant and it is a staging ground for weaponry used in deposing Qaddafi to be shipped along with individuals to Syria; all that is most suspect as a long term beneficial foreign policy NATO advantage.
That incredibly shameful gloating over death "We Came, We Saw, He died," video shows an individual, gender aside, unfit to be in government. Anywhere in government. Unfit for dog catcher. Using Roman Imperial banter as if a jolly fine jest about a modern day Rome having disposed of a modern day Carthage is unacceptable. You do not kill another head of state, whatever propaganda you've ginned up, and then go on video with a "We came, we saw, he's dead" laugh line.
It is beyond grotesque. It is incendiary. It is bloodthirsty. It is too disrespectful of all of the third world, and moreover, too flat-out stupid to do it on camera and to then pretend to be trustworthy to run our country non-stupidly and without a public show of unduly brutal hubris unbefitting the office of Secretary of State, and more so, unbefitting the office of President.
TRANSCRIPTS: While disarming a Qaddafi affront to the worldwide post-WW II banker arrangements being kept intact while also contact info might have been provided on who new in Egypt might facilitate banking and business dealings (if paid to give a speech); all that stuff might justify Goldman Sachs leadership feeling "that woman" is hunkey dory with them and a national leader they'd welcome; the clear fact is we are contemplating a perspective among a broader United States population wanting "good" government beyond what Goldman Sachs' highly compensated mover and shaker honchos might deem "good" government from atop their lofty opulent Wall Street towers.
So the problem now in 2016 and before in 2008 was not, either time, "a woman," but each time, "that woman."
Clintonian DFL'ers need to absorb that distinction as relevant.
Offer the job to Elizabeth Warren as Democratic Party candidate for President, that's as good as Bernie; their quality and integrity are about interchangeable, and Warren is younger. [a clarifying update - as best understood, Warren and Cantwell (next paragraph) and Ted Cruz are roughly contemporaries, at least a generation younger than Clinton, Trump and Sanders, each of whom is roughly the age of Ronald Reagan when first taking office in California - readers correct this impression in a comment if it is in error]
Give me a business success such as Maria Cantwell, Democratic Senator from Washington, as a moderate woman who could be a sound federal chief executive; I'd happily listen. I'd have zero problem supporting a Maria Cantwell inner party choice of ongoing candidate and I'd gladly conform my thinking to such a selection being sound.
Give me Hillary Clinton as an inner party cramdown against the clear will of the populace in attending and backing Bernie appearances unlike the small crowds of connected party regulars and their Clinton fund raiser dinners; well, giving me that means disrespect for the entirety of the Bernie insurgency - disrespect and disdain of a degree suggesting why not stay home. Stay home if the Republicans on their side show honor toward the Trump insurgency; but swallow the awful choice if they Ted Cruz us the same way the Democratic inner party intends to Hillary Clinton us. That would be as bad or worse than the JEB! - Hillary appearance of things six to twelve months ago as the nation's likely two-party inner party 2016 presidential package.
At least JEB! is out. The Bush royal family had no traction. Now sweep the other imperial family aside, and have us something more like a real choice. A Trump vs. Sanders election would be a fresh breeze, as is shown by how staunchly the corporate media is intent to dissuade us from it.
____________FURTHER UPDATE_____________
A most distasteful inner party DFL thing done to the delegates was to have Swanson and that central state party treasurer show up and shake a Supreme Court Justices bogey man at us. It was done crudely and was an insult to our collective intelligence. [update note - neither individual was agenda listed, but lo, each showed up with what looked to me to be a spiel instigated by the Clinton people who know how distasteful she is to some Sanders people, hence wanting to jolly us all into support the candidate whoever she ends up being stuff]
The fact is true, we need more Hugo Black, Bill Douglas, William Brennen quality on that bench, yes, but it will not come from Hillary Clinton. Bernie yes, and we know Ted Cruz would find a Scalia clone, a Roberts clone, an Alito surrogate or two, etc., but a simple fact is Trump is enough anti-establishment that he might be expected to pack a court as well or likely better than either of the Clintons have (for their two White House terms); and Trump if anything is not married to the lending bankers that bone picked his business firm bankruptcy carcasses, and that's to his liking. There is little Donald Trump to John Roberts. There is this nagging feeling Clinton, the Clintons, happily navigate within a Citizens United world, regardless of whatever the lady says. It, Citizens United thinking, is, by Goldman Sachs speech example, a worldview they understand and from which they attained great levels of career politician prosperity for themselves, spouses and child.
Honestly explain to me, what has Hillary PAClady in her endeavors to hold against the Citizens United Roberts court decision? What? Bloody nothing is the answer. It wholly befits her ways and means.
___________FURTHER UPDATE_____________
One of the more interesting exercises at the SD35 convention was the ranked choice opportunity to have at the four pages of fine-print "SD35 2O16 CAUCUS RESOLUTIONS." While possibly not representative of universally felt priorities among attendees, in order my first four choices were, respectively, listed items 30, 25, 27 and 32 (for those still holding their RESOLUTIONS pages. Since some readers may have not attended, and others may no longer hold the pages, they were:
30. Be it resolved that the MN DFL support eliminating all super delegates for all future elections.
25. Be it resolved that the MN DFL support legislation, such as the Democracy for All bill, which would overturn the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens Unitd through constitutional amendment.
27. Be it resolved that the MN DFL support establishing term limits on congress and senate to no more than two 6-year terms for Senate and no more than four 2-year terms for Concress and prevent members from lobbying for no less than five years after their term of service.
32. Be it resolved that the MN DFL support abolishing super pacs.
It would have been nice had the list been provided online before the event for the greatest deliberative value, but it was not, so forgive any transcription error above.
You must first reform process if you are to reform substance. Procedural rigging of things such as the superdelegate affront are repulsive to your vote counting when the deck's been stacked by the entrenched beneficiaries of superdelegate nonsense. It offends.
Fifth and sixth choices here were:
35. [...] eliminating the Electoral College and using the popular vote.
36 [...] redistricting conducted and voted upon by a non-partisan citizxen committee which would exclude current or former federal or state elected officials.
For those caring about the collective will of attendees but who may not have held onto their blue AGENDA sheets, or for those who may have not attended, a copy of the "Resolutions report" can be requested by email from "Resolutions Chair Laurie Elvig" at:
jlriley1@comcast.net
Hopefully that email address was correctly transcribed, while I have not yet tested it.
Blue sheet text did expressly limit that report access to the group "delegate/alternate of this Convention" (where the "caucus" vs "convention" terminology is unclear to me), but given that publicly held elections will be forthcoming and voters in some measure may care what party caucus-goers believe are principles on which political decision making should or may hinge, limiting that information to only a handful of people who went to a middle school room in Coon Rapids seems counterproductive to having a greatest informed electorate. In any event, I went, so Ms. Elvig shall be emailing me, per request, an e-copy of the resolutions as handed out on paper, and whatever she condenses responses to, in committee with others, to produce a report.
__________FURTHER UPDATE___________
As to that Justices bogey man thing, Eric Ferguson over at MPP echoes the same theme, and if I understand things Ferguson in one Senate District holds an official position. So he states an official position.
I honestly cannot say whether I'd anticipate Trump court appointees to be any worse than Clinton ones; and I doubt Ferguson can either. With the Cruz spouse having been a Bush official, a Goldman Sachs Texas operative, and a CFR maven, I can guess that perhaps even Cruz/Clinton appointees might differ little; although Cruz can be expected to throw raw red meat to the Jesus Jockeys, to inflame the choice-hatred, because that kind of things fits the personna he's adopted as his character, while taking Wall Street, lawyer/lobbyist, and energy industry money in the top five in such categories per Open Secrets, along with Clinton.
BOTTOM LINE: There might be sense in seeing what Trump's insurgency would yield, if the Sanders insurgency gets deep sixed by an inner party elite putsch where a bulk of that inner party elite is not greatly unlike Heidi Cruz.
Remember, the Warren Court was succeeded by the Burgher Court, and that was Nixon who set that up while setting the stage for the Rhenquist Court, and you have to look back for days of wine and roses to Eisenhower's promise to Earl Warren (then the governor of California) that Warren would get the next Supreme Court appointment in exchange for officially liking Ike, and it turned out the next vacancy was Chief Justice.
Those were the days of better decision making, Justice Harlan mouthing the stuff the majority since Burgher's appointment has been making majority dogma; and the one sound thought is that Franklin Roosevelt knew how to use a Court packing threat to create responsiveness with Sanders bright enough and having comparable New Deal integrity, to have learned the lesson. Nine is nobody's magic number. Fifteen would do, if appointments were to come from a President Sanders with advice and consent of a Democratic Senate, Blue Dogs sadly being brake on any overenthusiasm as they were in trying to reform healthcare.
Back to the Ferguson MPP item, this link, it is interesting how he segues from a headline, "Why conservatives are freaking out over Obama picking Scalia replacement," to what has the faint odor of an organized fear-the-unknown propaganda putsch on multiple apparently disjoint fronts, by Clinton people. Always a skeptic, it's been a character fault of mine for decades. I fear Clinton appointments, based on the known rather than the unknown. A TPP loving, satisfied with Citizens United court from Goldman Sachs has no beauty to my beholding, and admittedly that is in theory since my crystal ball is no better nor worse than Lori Swanson's, just different.
______________FURTHER UPDATE________________
In a perfect world, one of the better RESOLUTION proposals was, as stated above:
27. Be it resolved that the MN DFL support establishing term limits on congress and senate to no more than two 6-year terms for Senate and no more than four 2-year terms for Concress and prevent members from lobbying for no less than five years after their term of service.
Were I to have been on the DFL Resolution Committee that produced it, I would have felt proud, but would have sought amended text if allowed, to read at least "...and prevent members from lobbying or giving paid speeches for no less than five years after their term of service," while also liking the thought that such constraints might apply as well to cabinet heads and commission chairs such as head up the FCC, FTC, etc.; indeed, to their senior rank and file employees, Senate and House Committee staff, commission members aside from only chair occupants, etc., etc., everywhere there is a revolving door, and then also look at curbing sweetheart book deals. The one Washington law firm was keeping A.G. Holder's chair warm and his corner office open for him during his public service, his again after he left the Justice Department with no Wall Street banker having gone to jail over the 2007-2008 subprime securitized mortgage shenanigans or with regard to the subsequent market collapse and bailout of AIG and bank billionaires running shops that clearly stood too failed to be allowed big.
Back on point - that one paid speech loophole, you could shove a Goldman Sachs skyscraper through it.
__________FINAL UPDATE__________
Above: The names of the caucus-endorsed SD35 candidates have been highlighted, since despite digression, the post properly is about them.
An email inquiry has been sent to each of the three asking for website, donation, contact, and issues information - things that on the sidebar can be posted either directly or by links; and as we approach November a hope would be timely central-item posting here might highlight campaign activity and needs as they develop.
Finally a parting thought, Donald Trump must be pressed for specficity. How will he, specifically and not with handwaving generality, fix the Peggy Scott, Eric Lucero, Abigale Whelan mediocrity problem? Absent that, how can America be Great Again? It cannot.