---
Housley has a record, Votesmart.org objectively presents it, and it puts her into the Abigail Whelan camp, of divisive bill mongering and posturing while fully knowing the mischief could never survive a Dayton veto. Votesmart lists:
Karin Housley Co-sponsored - SF2849 - Requires Abortion Physicians to Give Patients Option of Ultrasound
Karin Housley was rated 88% by American Conservative Union(State Legislature Positions) [higher than Jeff Howe, a percentage point below Sondra Erickson, Kurt Daudt and Steve Drazkowski, identical to Peggy Scott, and 30 points ahead of Mary Franson; i.e., in the ozone layer of "Conservative"; compare Debra Hilstrom at 0% and Jim Abeler at half the percentage given Housley]
Karin Housley was rated 0% by Voices for Racial Justice ("Minnesota Legislative Report Card on Racial Equality")
Karin Housley was rated 100% by Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life (Positions)
Karin Housley was rated 100% by Minnesota Chamber of Commerce (Positions)
Karin Houlsey was rated 29% by Minnesota Association of Professional Employees (Lifetime Score)
Karin Housley was rated 0% by AFSCME Council 5 (Positions)
Karin Housley voted Yea (Passage With Amendment) - HF600 - Prohibits Local Laws Regarding Minimum Wage or Paid Sick Leave
Karin Housley was endorsed y National Rifle Association
---
The dumpster fire guy, running an early gimmick ad with no actual content except saying the man will campaign by criticizing Trump; i.e., by trying to divert voters having anti-Trump sentiment from voting for a clear and actual Democrat with a track record as one, to instead support a Bushco "ethics" guy; who stayed and collected paychecks [despite Bush whoring to evangelicals when it seemed he was not at all really one himself and despite Bush-Hank Paulson's kllling of the economy and handing the basket case to Obama while the Republicans in Congress impeded Obama's effort to dig out of the Republican engineered disaster. And lo, Obama had Geithner, another Goldman Sachs alum in his Cabinet for which Obama can be faulted but that is old news. This time it will be Trump seeking 2020 reelection with an economy better than Bush left, but with an opportunity if given a second term to mirror the down-cycle engineering, in perhaps a worse way, with a host of Cabinet Goldman Sachs alums in tow; just as Paulson was when the fan loaded up big time.
Do you have the willing suspension of disbelief that supporting Painter requires?
Dick Painter has a reported net worth roughly equal to that of Hously and Mr. and Mrs. Smith combined. [Please note updating at the end of this post]. Painter says he is highly offended by Trump, as an ethicist, but criticism is easy and voters can be too easily deceived. John Anderson as a vote-siphoning stalking horse for Reagan against Carter should never be forgotten, much as George Wallace was a red-neck race-bating stalking horse for Lyndon Johnson. A half century of evidence of stalking horses showing up in elections exists and should not be at all discounted.
If Painter is serious he'd publish his portfolio. While saying he loves Boundary Waters sanctity and wants single payer, what mining (and fossil fuel) extraction stocks he is holding and what med-industrial complex stocks he is holding would show whether or not he is talking a position mix differing from his own financial best interests. Absent that, "trust me" seems hollow. Rhetoric to not resonate very much at all, absent proof.
Tina has the Dayton years in her resume, super-moderate Dem status, but sincerely standing as a Democrat. Trust the record, as much as the words. If Painter denies DC was a Dumpster Fire during Bush years, Iraq war based on lying and all, phony-Jesus stuff and all, bless him. Along with blessing Karl Rove, from an ethics standpoint. It's a situation where there seems to be a logical disconnect, along with an apparent glide-and-slide on any Bushco "Dumpster Fire" questioning being advanced/permitted by mainstream media coverage - be it Republican Glen Taylor's Strib or GOP money-man Stan Hubbard's radio-TV empire doing the coverage. Free pass? You decide.
The ethics of lying the nation into the Iraq war; of Karl Rove; of Bush schmoozing Billy Graham; of firing capable U.S. Attorneys it's in the record. Who else remembers the "lost" email non-governmental email server situation which the media suppressed, unlike per Ms. Clinton?
Go figure. We rightly should question a Dumpster Fire video-bite thing coming from one who served through the second term of the Bush Dumpster Fire years ["chief White House ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush administration from 2005 to 2007" per Wikipedia, admittedly starting after Bush/Powell/Rove lying us into war and after most of working the fundamentalist bloc to get elected, and before the tanking of the economy]. Yet for several years Painter was a GOP insider getting a regular Republican paycheck; a fact nobody denies.
Surely Wikipedia paints an entire picture having merit, but John Anderson's record had merit too. The jury is still out on Painter. It would be too extreme to say otherwise, but as a noted contributor to the Federalist Society he is on a par with John Roberts, that way, which might appeal to dyed in the wool conservatives while giving progressives pause. Progressives will recognize the Federalist Society is nobody's den of Bernie backers, but for those feeling themselves in the moderates' DFL camp do they view the Federalist Society as more Republican than neutral? You'd have to poll them, but I have a guess. Recall that Painter debated running GOP vs DFL, before filing. Strib in a photo caption to a report from before Painter filed noted "an exploratory committee" involvement, without naming names of said explorers. Detail there would be helpful. Who voiced pros and cons either way might matter.
Doubts need answers.
--
BOTTOM LINE: So Tina "lesser evil" time is upon us, and as an "evil" Tina is less that than merely a well intentioned but vexing regular DFL moderate unlikely to push single payer - yet in essence - a clear choice-by-elimination at least in my mind.
Karin Housley deserves a later separate post, beyond what's presented in opening this Tina "warts and all seeming the better choice" post.
A post looking at an elder care anti-abuse "advocate come lately" spieler status; one of trying to draw attention away from contentious positioning per the Votesmart evidence toward a single issue no voter would dispute; shuffling cards that smarmy way.
But that is for later.
Absent a peek at least into the Dick Painter holdings, voluntarily disclosed, why buy into "trust me" from a Bushco Dumpster Fire alum? Credibility gap, who can say none is there; Bush minion to Trump critic as winds of politics change? No portfolio disclosure would leave only words, which from a lawyer absent a presentation of evidence, leaves doubt.
Yes, the Smith Amendment legislative Polymet land-swap cramdown effort can offend progressives, as did the Nolan blessing of same, but leaving ideology aside and focusing upon practical matters, disarming Stauber's main blather serves the purpose of Stauber having to show more to define himself than "mine, mine, mine, for jobs, jobs, jobs, I love you Ranger dudes" simplicity:
[...] said he "will not tiptoe around the fact that I support responsible taconite and precious metals mining in northeast Minnesota."
Well, nobody in Minnesota CD8 is against taconite mining, so read the essence of the Stauber positioning for what it is.
Disarming the Republicans of that Iron Range posturing opportunity per a "me too" stance and actions enhances the chance of a Blue Wave reaching Lake Superior, and if left to the Republicans the mining decision would be worse, where the Democrats would at least champion a fair sized escrow from Twin Metals where anticipated GOP tokenism that way seems the alternative. If sulfide mining happens, at least expect the Dems to be better on the sizing of any required pre-event remediation escrow against potential/expected environmental devastation. Those massive snow geese die-offs associated with copper mining quarry pit water in Butte, Montana, is a real and ongoing thing; and a lesson.
________________UPDATE_______________
A KEY UNCERTAINTY: Posting above and yesterday was based upon not finding any Painter disclosure with the FEC, but noting this item, online. That involved error.
See; this FEC link, hat tip to this item's linking.
Without combing through the Painter FEC disclosure form it would be improper to question either report, the $9 million net worth claim, nor the detail of Painter's disclosure. Given large "range" disclosure valuation and a leading "Unascertainable" valuation item, per the FEC report, along with key missing valuations for some items Painter listed, squaring the two items is not attempted here. Nor is it possible with blank valuations of some assets.
Yet, FOLLOW THE MONEY is an essential factor.
Ask Painter. The press should resolve FOLLOW THE MONEY questions as a routine matter, but it does require diligence.
In any event, while no obvious smoking gun investment appears as detailed in the Painter FEC disclosure, MPR's indication is that Painter most certainly is a man of wealth well above "middle class":
Richard Painter, the ethics attorney running in a Democratic primary for U.S. Senate, made hundreds of thousands of dollars the past couple of years from speeches, expert witness testimony, book royalties and articles.
The combined $370,000 in payments to Painter are outlined in a required disclosure for federal candidates, which he submitted this month. They are in addition to a $200,000 salary as a law professor at the University of Minnesota, where his wife also works.
Such an annual income fits being a Republican now, as well as being a former Republican federal office holder during Bush/Cheney.
With Archie and Tina Smith quite wealthy, into the millions, perhaps follow the money is a wash.
If so, subjective judgments enter into things. That judgment, here, favors Tina Smith. The ghost of John Anderson might motivate thinking of others less than it motivates me. But it is as it is. Regardless of what Painter says; regardless of how assertively he says it.
Opinions can differ.
The Dumpster Fire video bit may impress many. In stating the obvious, it does not impress me enough for my vote. Between now and the August primary voting, who knows what might be an "August Surprise" to tip the balance one way or another.
Early primary voting in person or by mail opens July 29.
________________FURTHER UPDATE______________
Sometimes the BS meter unpegs, and you have to ask . . .
PowerLine, March 7, Let Freedom Ring, March 8, then PowerLine, again, April 3, all before Painter filed to run DFL. Conscious parallelism of that manner gives off the smell of a skunk, and raises an immediate question: were - respectively on the timeline - either John Hinderaker, Gary Gross, or Scott Johnson, or some combination of them on the Painter exploratory committee; i.e., was coordinated hijinks afoot, back then? As in "doth protest too much." Too uniformly.
Strib, March 8, using "exploratory committee" language, Gary Gross and Scott Johnson tracking the usage. Hinderaker a day before Strib publishes, setting a theme for follow-up punditry. It looks too cute.
Unconscious parallelism? What? Three self identified Republican ideologues; same theme, trash Painter in advance of . . .
Urban dictionary: Jumping in as a passage rite of membership.
If setting up a stalking horse, how would you preamble it, hoping for greatest street cred?
_____________FURTHER UPDATE_______________
The timeline of those Minnesota table setting posts overlap other things: Dust it up with Dershowitz on MSNBC with having Breitbart publish of it as news the very same day, May 5; file with FEC as DFL May 15, so add those to the timeline. Getting a compressed timeline of preamble online drum beating - with name calling and such - leading up to a mid-month of apparent self-discovery as a Democrat.
Cute? Or coincidental? WWKRS - What Would Karl Rove Say?
______________FURTHER UPDATE_______________
The gift keeps giving. The stalking horse uncertainty has its charm. After digesting first impressions of the latest "Annals of Muffing It" left.mn posting of dissatisfaction with the Tina Smith amendment which does disarm Pete Stauber and cohorts of a sharp stick to poke in the DFL eye; and then really seriously thinking how worse things would be with an Iron Range tilt leading to more Republican success in November; I can see logic in the Smith move parallel to the earlier same move by Nolan. Perhaps Timmer was drinking too liberally at Drinking Liberally when Koolaid was being served. Wool pulling over eyes is not to be discounted, even if involving the most savvy of eyes. Perhaps. Perhaps not. Timmer wrote:
The land that PolyMet has its eye on is currently owned by We The People. The US Forest Service is our land agent here, and the swap under consideration is being examined administratively [and now in the courts, ed.] from an environmental standpoint and the fairness of the price (which it doesn’t seem to be).
Anyway, Tina said “What, the hell; let’s just do it!” So she offered her “amendment” to a defense authorization bill, claiming the metals that would be produced at the mine are “strategic.” Strategic for China, perhaps, since that is where any copper from the mine is going for the first several years, anyway.
It is a brazen and disingenuous end-around due process to benefit a Canadian “mining” company (PolyMet) and its effective bad-boy Swiss conglomerate parent (Glencore). We The People are just chopped liver, I guess. When first approached after she offered the amendment about why she did, she didn’t have a response. No ready justification for what she had just done? Later she told the AP it wouldn’t interfere with rigorous environmental review. [chortle] Naturally, that is what it is supposed to do. But lying about it just compounds the felony.
[...] It didn’t take Tina Smith very long to go native in Washington.
But you can hear dollars clapping in some places, the PolyMet corporate offices for one. Three PolyMet executives, President Jon Cherry, Vice President Brad Moore, and Vice President Bruce Richardson have each contributed to Tina Smith’s campaign.
You will never guess who they contributed to last cycle. (And apparently their only contributions.) Oh, of course, you can guess: Rick Nolan. Rick has offered the same legislation as the Smith Amendment in the House.
You might compare all of this to the position of Senate candidate Richard Painter. He is unalterably opposed to sulfide mining in Minnesota. He has said so in many places, including Drinking Liberally last week.
We can only guess on some things and we always have incomplete information when voting. After a day's reflection, I split hairs differently than Timmer does. After reading good writing and forming a similar first impression, nonetheless my bottom line is I have to trust my own ambiguous but dominant gut feelings. Putting qualms aside -
Tina Smith. For Senate.
I sure wish Dayton had appointed someone else, however. He made things much harder for progressives, as Nolan has done.
Look at the names running in Minnesota CD5. There were alternatives ignored by Dayton. Corporatist Dems surfing an anti-Trump Blue Wave into office while DNC/DCCC/DSCC each aggressively spurns progressives is hardly an ideal world scenario. As the Corporatists smugly say, yet again, what choice have you, that gets really stale and truly is maddening. It insults. At least it appears the Corparate Dems at least are trying to keep Hillary Clinton and Debby Wasserman Schultz in the closet this cycle, showing a kind of barbaric cunning, if not wisdom. At least there is that.
_____________FURTHER UPDATE_____________
Some might want to reflect upon why Painter has had little to nothing to say about the ethics of Tim Pawlenty. Nor is he loudly faulting Mike Pence for his immediate after-the-fact straight out lying about the Trump motive for firing Comey. It would be guessing, but the questions have merit. Sherlock solved one case by the dog that didn't bark.
_____________FURTHER UPDATE______________
The Tina Smith amendment might best be viewed in light of this thousand word bullshit equivalent aimed at simplistic minds on the Range.
