We submit for your consideration the case of Rev. Paul Ibisch, of LaCrescent and (sometimes) Mapleton. On July 21, the good reverend posted a comment on an article contrasting Brian Davis's and Dick Day's fundraising in Q2 2008 that began:
"I hope Sen. Dick Day will reconsider challenging Brian in a primary. I
like Dick, and think he is a great state senator. He can quote chapter
and verse about everything in state government. However, Dick has not
convinced people that he can do the same on the federal level."
The Republican Party at the state convention made clear by their
endorsement of Dr. Brian Davis on the first ballot (over an excellent
state politician) that Brian is best suited to represent our district.
Dick Day avoided embarrassment at the convention by not participating.
Demanding a primary may result in a greater embarrassment for Dick.
Brian Davis ideas are energizing voters across the district. People are
willing to back him. Brian Davis will make us proud we sent him to
Congress. "
Ibisch repeated that sentiment word-for-word in a letter published by the Albert Lea Tribune on July 29 that included the passage:
. . .I hope state Sen. Dick Day will reconsider challenging Brian in a
primary. I like Dick, and think he is a great state senator. He can
quote chapter and verse about everything in state government. However,
Dick has not convinced people that he can do the same on the federal
level.
The Republican Party at the state convention made clear by their
endorsement of Dr. Brian Davis on the first ballot (over an excellent
state politician) that Brian is best-suited to represent our district.
Dick Day avoided embarrassment at the convention by not participating.
Demanding a primary may result in a greater embarrassment for Dick.. . .
Slightly over a month later, Ibisch isn't so positive, or motivated by concern that Day might be embarrassed in the primary. He writes in a letter to the Winona Daily News:
Do yourself, Minnesota and our nation a favor, and vote for Brian Davis on Sept. 9. . . .
. . .Although Brian
Davis was endorsed as the Republican candidate, his opponent, Dick Day,
knew how to get around the endorsement.
Dick
is betting you’ll stay home on Sept. 9, and he will be able to get the
people from Owatonna and Waseca to turn out for him. Dick isn’t risking
anything, because he knows his state Senate seat is safe whether he
wins or loses. Is that what we need in Washington? Isn’t the real
problem that Washington is already full of crafty politicians? They
manage to get elected, but don’t have a clue how to solve the problems. . . .
That's possibly one of the quickest evolution creations of a "crafty politician" from a "great state senator" in Minnesota political history. Guess Ibisch doesn't like Tricky Dick.
And we're frankly puzzled by the idea that "Dick isn't risking anything" because his state senate seat is safe. We imagine Brian Davis has some job security at the Mayo Clinic--our inside sources tell us he's a pretty doggone good cancer doctor.
A National Journal headline caught our eye: House Races Heat Up Twin Cities when it Mr. Google sent it our way. Given that headline, we figured we'd be reading about the red-hot race in MN-03 that Ash Madia is running, with a dash of the Mr. El and Michele show. The lead looked promising [emphasis added]:
The presidential race isn't the only contest heating up the Twin
Cities. No less than three congressional races in Minneapolis and its
outlying suburbs are competitive this year, and they offer a microcosm
of the national political landscape. . .
Cool, we thought. Steve Sarvi as well.
. . .In one contest, the parties are battling over an open seat; in another,
a Republican incumbent is fending off a tough Democratic challenge; and
in the third, a Democratic incumbent is on the defensive.
That puzzled us, then we laughed out loud to learn that this Twin Cities suburban district is none other than our beloved Southern Minnesota:
Meanwhile, two area House freshmen are facing big challenges come
Election Day. In the 1st District, which includes the southernmost part
of the state, Democratic Rep. Tim Walz has drawn a serious challenger. Walz upset six-term Republican Rep. Gil Gutknecht two years ago, 53 percent to 47 percent.
Articles like this make us happy that the National Geographic Education Foundation gave Congressman Walz the "Geography Legislator of the Year" in honor of his "commitment to promoting improved geographic literacy." The National Journal needs some geography lessons.
The First isn't a suburban district that "includes the southernmost part of the state," dear National Journal staff, it is the southern tier of counties. It's not a suburb of Minneapolis, however outlying it might be.
We're also wondering why the staff thought this race is a "big challenge":
This time, his likely Republican challenger is Brian Davis, an oncologist at the Mayo Clinic, who won the state party's endorsement in March. However, state Sen. Dick Day,
who lost out on the GOP nod, is still hoping to defeat Davis in next
week's primary. Both emphasize their conservative principles and a
desire to restrain Washington spending. Although Walz's district leans
Republican, The Cook Political Report has rated this race "likely Democratic."
Pretty much every other political handicapper has done so as well, with the exception of CQ Politics, which puts it in the "leans Democratic" column. (The Mankato Free Press's Mark Fischenich put together a good review of the rankings last week; see the material under the subheading "A competitive race").
Incumbent Walz reported around $250,000 (two-thirds from individual contributors), putting his August 20 cash on hand at $1,263,829. By that date, Walz's grassroots army of volunteers had knocked on 60,000 doors and made 100,000 phone calls.
The "big challenge" here maybe the geographically challenged media itself. We recommend that the DC press corps come out to Southern Minnesota and check it out: Rochester's booming medical metropolis, the growing sustainability movement in Southeastern Minnesota's driftless area, the hopping college towns of Winona, Mankato, and St. Peter, the wind industry gleaning power from the very air across district, the Mayberry-esque small towns, the packing towns of Austin and Worthington, the history. . .
And some of the best beer in the country from Schell's in New Ulm. Two hours away from the airport--pick a designated driver, please.
Photo: Our mom's hometown of Madelia, Pride of the Prairie, and Minneapolis's newest outlying suburb.
We were looking up the email address of an old college friend who has spent the last dozen years or so working as a journalist in Alaska. Why not contact Bill, our thinking went, and see what he thought about his adopted state's governor.
We hadn't had contact since the spring, when we'd asked him a question about his grandmother, who is reputed to be the model for Jane Dalton in Richard Wright's Native Son. The email address we had didn't seem to be working.
August 12, 2008, Fairbanks, Alaska – Governor Sarah Palin today
announced the appointment of Bill McAllister as Communications Director
and Press Secretary.
“We are fortunate to have someone of Bill’s caliber joining our
team,” Governor Palin said. “His talent, intelligence and incredible
gift of communicating with the public will serve Alaska well. I am
pleased he will be part of our efforts to build an effective,
responsive and positive branch of government.”
McAllister recently served as the Capitol bureau chief for KTUU-TV
from 2004 to 2008. He has also worked as a political reporter for the
Juneau Empire, the Alaska Budget Report and KTOO-TV. His work has been
recognized by the Alaska Press Club, the Alaska Broadcasters
Association and the Society of Professional Journalists. McAllister
also covered politics in Minnesota for the St. Cloud Times and the St.
Paul Legal Ledger.
“I had been covering politics for most of the past 30 years, from
Capitol Hill to the Iowa caucuses to the city council in Winona,
Minnesota,” McAllister said. “As an Alaskan now for more than 11 years,
I’m honored to be part of an administration that’s making a pivotal
change for the better in how state government is conducted.”
McAllister received a bachelor’s degree in mass communications in
1978 from Hamline University. He resides in Anchorage with his wife and
three children.
Entertaining historical tidbit: while working for the St. Cloud Times, McAllister broke the story of Arlan Stangland's marital infidelity--a story that led to the election of Collin Peterson. We're betting that McAllister, old friendship or not, won't give us any dish on his new boss.
Another old grad school friend played point guard against her in high school. Small world.
Irony is a powerful thing. Less than 24 hours ago, the Army Times published Groups decry DoD ‘betrayal’ of vets. We're reprinting the entire article rather than have readers miss a single nuance [emphasis added throughout the text]:
In a letter going out to members of Congress next week, the
directors of two major veterans’ groups say the Pentagon’s personnel
chief has intentionally withheld benefits from wounded service members.
“We
need your immediate assistance to help end the Defense Department’s
deliberate, systemic betrayal of every brave American who [dons] the
uniform and stands in harm’s way,” states the letter, signed by David
Gorman, executive director of Disabled American Veterans, and Paul
Rieckhoff, executive director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of
America.
“Sadly, the 2007 Walter Reed scandal, which resulted
mostly from poor oversight and inadequate leadership, pales in
comparison to what we view as the deliberate manipulation of the law”
by David S.C. Chu, undersecretary of defense for personnel and
readiness, and his deputies, the letter states.
Kerry Baker,
legislative director for Disabled American Veterans, said Chu sent out
a memorandum in March redefining which injuries qualify as
“combat-related.”
The definition is important because Section
1646 of the 2008 Defense Authorization Act said service members with
combat-related disabilities no longer must pay back any disability
retirement severance they receive from the Defense Department before
they become eligible for disability compensation from the Department of
Veterans Affairs, as has been the case under longstanding policy.
The
policy affects service members who receive a disability rating of 20
percent or less from the Defense Department, and thus receive a
severance payment rather than lifetime disability retirement pay.
Baker
said he has seen cases in which, for example, a veteran receives a
$30,000 severance payment from the Pentagon, uses it for medical care
or education, and then, even if subsequently awarded a full 100 percent
disability rating by VA, must pay the $30,000 back first before he can
draw any VA compensation.
Baker
said this leaves many veterans who may not be able to work in a
quagmire of debt. DAV and IAVA think no veteran should have to pay back
money he or she earned before becoming eligible for VA benefits, but
they still see the new law extending such waivers to veterans with
combat-related disabilities as a step forward.
Under a separate
program called Combat Related Special Compensation, which eliminates
the offset in retired pay required of some retirees who also receive VA
disability compensation, “combat related” is defined as any injury or
illness incurred in a combat zone or performing tasks related to
combat, such as training for deployment or hazardous assignments like
jumping out of airplanes.
But according to Chu’s memo, the
definition of “combat related” for the purposes of the new severance
pay waiver is limited only to those injured in a combat zone in the
line of duty or as a direct result of armed conflict.
In June,
Defense Department spokeswoman Eileen Lainez told Military Times that
Chu did not remake the definition to save money, as Baker has charged.
“Saving
money was not the driver in the implementation,” she said in an e-mail.
“The statutory intent of [the law] clearly and appropriately focuses
the ‘enhanced disability severance’ to those service members where the
unfitting condition is a result of direct participation and
participation of duty in the war effort.”
She also noted that the law on repaying severance money left it to the secretary of defense to define “combat related.”
But
three lawmakers have told Military Times that their interpretation puts
Baker in the right and Chu in the wrong — that they expected the
Defense Department to adopt the existing definition used for the CRSC
program.
“The Department of Defense appears to be interpreting
this law in the most narrow and tightfisted way possible,” said Rep.
Timothy Walz, D-Minn., a House Veterans Affairs Committee member. “I am
disappointed that [the department] is implementing this policy in a way
that makes as few veterans as possible eligible for the benefit.”
After
Walz weighed in, DAV sent a letter to Chu asking for an explanation.
William Carr, one of Chu’s senior deputies, responded in a letter dated
Aug. 14 by saying the intent “was to direct the enhanced benefit to
those hurt in combat.”
“Such an approach is consistent with our
strong belief that there must be a special distinction for those who
incur disabilities while participating in the risk of combat, in
contrast with those injured otherwise,” Carr wrote.
But Baker,
and the authors of the new letter, continue to insist that
congressional intent was not to make a special distinction that leaves
out service members hurt in activities defined as “combat related”
under other programs.
“The law defines such disabilities as those
caused by armed conflict, instrumentalities of war, hazardous service
and conditions simulating war,” Gorman and Rieckhoff wrote. “The
[Defense Authorization Act] did not change these definitions; in fact,
it reinforced them, and it added disabilities incurred ‘in the line of
duty in a combat zone.’ ”
The letter states that Chu “lacks the authority to change the will of Congress.”
In
an interview with Military Times, Baker laid out cases of veterans
already affected by the new memo. A female soldier in her 30s, who
asked that her name not be used, dove for cover into a pile of rocks in
Iraq during a mortar attack wearing full battle rattle — Kevlar and
body armor that can weigh 20 pounds.
Afterwards, she suffered a
fused spine and had to have her hips replaced, all of which her doctors
said was directly attributable to her dive to safety.
“The rating
was good, but they said it was not combat-related,” Baker said. “You
can see Chu’s memo confusing the issue. This is a disease process that
began in Iraq in the line of duty.”
In a second case, Marine Cpl.
James Dixon incurred a traumatic brain injury from a roadside bomb on
his third tour in Iraq. He has headaches, insomnia, short-term memory
loss, hearing loss and post-traumatic stress disorder.
According to the Pentagon, “the disability did not result from a combat-related injury,” Baker said.
Dixon’s
ruling was changed on appeal, but Baker said there should have been no
question to begin with about whether his injuries were combat-related.
Army
Sgt. Richard Manoukian served two combat tours, but when he was
diagnosed with PTSD and bipolar disorder after he tried to commit
suicide — as well as suffering a spine disability after a hard
helicopter landing in Kuwait — the Defense Department called his
injuries “not combat related,” Baker said.
“The list of cases
like this is reprehensible and growing every day,” Gorman and Rieckhoff
wrote in their letter. “Moreover, if cases like these are ruled not
combat-related, then one can only imagine how many other less obvious
cases are suffering the same fate.”
They asked Congress to look
into how many cases have been ruled not combat-related under Chu’s memo
and have them reviewed by a group independent of the Pentagon.
“Congress
should then take immediate action to ensure DoD upholds the plain and
unambiguous language of the law,” they wrote. “Most of these service
members have no representation in the military disability evaluation
system and are therefore unaware of the benefits stolen from them —
they are depending on you.”
I attended a meeting with Rep. Tim Walz and Sen. Amy Klobuchar on
veterans issues. I had to leave early and did not get to state my
thanks for how well vets and the troops have been treated in recent
years. I also wanted to point out vets are citizens and taxpayers who
do not want pandering and seeking to buy their votes with tax funds. . . .
that's ironic.
As a member of the House Veterans Affairs committee, Congressman Walz has consistently gone to bat for America's military
personnel and veterans--from making sure those National Guard members
heading to Kosovo received combat pay, to fighting to update the G.I.
bill for educational benefits, to introducing legislation to address
problems created by traumatic brain injury and working to make sure the
watchdog agency within the VA receives the funds it needs to root out
waste.
Does Schleck define any of this activity as pandering or buying votes? Schleck brought it up--he should supply the details. Perhaps Brian Davis--who has been largely silent on veterans issues--might actually break that sphinx-like reserve and discuss some details about where he stands on vets issues himself. Doing a rotation at a VA hospital while in medical school isn't exactly policy making.
We'll be watching how far down this road the Republicans are willing to go without actually saying anything substantial about veterans programs themselves.
Note: Former infantry sergeant Hal Kimball looked at the "pandering to vets" meme earlier in Republican "Pandermania".
Photo: Congressman Walz meeting with vets in the Albert Lea American Legion.
After graduating from high school, he attended the University of
Illinois and received a degree in nuclear engineering in 1982, then
given a one-year scholarship to attend college in West Germany. He was
hired by an engineering firm in Chicago working on the design and
licensing of nuclear power plants. . . .
As written, the letter makes it appear that Davis received a scholarship after graduating in 1982, then was hired by an engineering firm. However, according to the resume on Davis's Facebook page, Davis attended college in Munich on an exchange scholarship in 1979-1980. He worked for an engineering firm for eight months after graduation in 1982, and then went to MIT in 1983.
We certainly hope that letter writer Dorothy Erlandson was confused, rather than being intentionally misleading. Whatever the circumstances, Erlandson's re-mix turns an undergraduate exchange scholarship into a post-graduation award. Um: no, it wasn't.
First District DFL chair Lori Sellner--one of the hardest working and
most effective Democratic activists in the state-blogs her impressions
from Denver at the Rochester Democrat. Rebecca Otto was responsible for the dancing. Honest.
In a reaction piece to Sarah Palin becoming the veep on the GOP presidential ticket, KAAL reports that Women in Politics is motivating women in Southern Minnesota. The details:
. . .One young woman has found inspiration in this election in her passion for politics.
Minnesota State Representative Kim Norton says the Palin VP
selection is just the latest national example of women excelling in
politics.
"I think we'll see a lot in the future of women and our young
stepping out and putting themselves out there for election,” she says.
I've already seen an upsurge of young people, young women in politics
and I’ve had the opportunity to work with some dynamic Rochester high
school students in the last few years."
17-year-old Frances Bruce is one of them.
She's just beginning to explore politics.
She's volunteering for Barack Obama’s campaign. . . .
The video clip is priceless. Bruce has many local examples of women succeeding in politics in Southern Minnesota, as women have been elected to the state house and senate in growing number. Of the seventeen DFLers serving from the district, eleven are women. Three Republican women representing district residents serve in the legislature, and Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau farms with her husband near Lafayette in Nicollet County.
New campaign reports filed by the three candidates in the 1st
Congressional District show Rep. Tim Walz, D-Mankato, significantly
outpaced his two GOP challengers in money raised over the last two
months, putting him in a commanding financial position as the election
season hits the stretch run.
. . . Walz, who is running far ahead of the cash he raised at this point
two years ago as a challenger, pulled in $246,831 for the reporting
period of July 1 through Aug. 20. The total brought his overall
campaign donations to $2.18 million. The campaign previously borrowed
and repaid $126,657, leaving him with no campaign debt.
Davis, who appealed to donors to help him raise $250,000 for the
period, fell well short of that goal, with donations of $95,397. The
total included $2,749 in a personal donation, bringing his total
contributions to the campaign to $63,363.
Davis also made a $24,000 personal loan and a $100,000 loan from a
personal line of credit secured by his Rochester home, both made on
Aug. 20, the last day of the reporting period. The loans lifted his
total receipts for the period to $219,407. Davis' previous loans were
made with similar timing. A $24,000 loan was made on March 31, the last
day of the first quarter, and $100,000 was loaned on June 30, the last
day of the second quarter reporting period. Both were repaid on July
15.
So the Davis campaign routinely makes loans to itself at the end of reporting periods--and on July 15, repaid the loans, then received the same amount back at the end of the pre-primary period. Why was this done?
His campaign manager, Brad Biers, said the campaign did not need to tap
the loans during the summer and Davis refinanced the line of credit in
the interim. He added that the loans were put back into the campaign
treasury to show financial strength.[emphasis added]
Er, no, that doesn't show "financial strength." Making a goal shows financial strength. What this oh-so-clever move shows is trying to show financial strength.
However, at least the clap-trap about Davis's numbers showing grassroots strength has ceased, and for that we're grateful.
The PB's Matt Stolle reports that the Davis-Day GOP primary begins, a rather odd headline choice given that the contest has been underway for awhile. We rather like a different title Google News served up Day, Davis race has its intriguing elements but that link only leads to news that the story is no longer available.
In the remaining article, we read:
The match-up has its intriguing elements, pitting Davis' money and
organization against Day's name recognition. It also pits Davis'
conservative credentials as the endorsed candidate against Day's
reputation as an shoot-from-the hip maverick. . . .
Go read the whole thing. We are most amused by Ron Carey's claims of growing momentum for Davis (see above story on fundraising):
[Carey] said by almost every measure he can see -- money, numbers of
supporters at parades, enthusiasm -- "the Brian Davis campaign is just
growing and Dick Day is stuck in neutral."
Senator's Day response is priceless:
Day says he isn't bothered.
"It doesn't bother me. The more you could write about Ron Carey
saying, 'go get Dick Day,' the more I like it. He doesn't impress me,"
Day said.
We at BSP think that Davis's access to voter lists and volunteers will probably carry the primary, but agree with political scientist Steven Schier, who was interviewed for the article:
Some political observers say the race is too close to call. But
Steven Schier, a political science professor at Carleton College, gives
the edge to Davis.
"I would think money and campaign apparatus will trump whatever name
recognition Day has. I think it will be reasonably competitive. I
wouldn't think it would be a blowout," Schier said.
Primary advantages
Primary contests are notoriously low turn-out affairs, a situation that confers advantages on both candidates.
Read the details in the article. One thing we are hearing from friends who have been volunteering from phone banks is that Davis's name recognition is still in the cellar. Davis will do best if the turn out is very, very low.
Four years ago, when Democrats were convening in Boston with
hopes of making George W. Bush a one-term president, Tim Walz was
watching John Kerry on TV as the Massachusetts senator accepted the
party’s nomination.
A Mankato West geography teacher who had
never been particularly active in partisan politics, Walz was watching
the speech on TV at his in-laws house. His wife Gwen — apparently
something of a nut when it comes to political conventions — never
misses either party’s big party, watching the television coverage from
gavel to gavel.
This time around, Walz was a delegate at the
Democratic National Convention and Gwen was at his side for Barack
Obama’s acceptance speech before more than 80,000 people at Denver’s
Invesco Field.
“It’s not often that you get to realize that
you’re probably standing at an historic moment,” said Walz, driving
home from the Twin Cities airport Friday morning. “... It was just
amazing.”
. . .Walz, too, said he’s ready for the campaign season to begin in
earnest. A former football coach, he compared everything before the
convention to the pre-season.
“We’re ready to kick things off and see what we can get done,” he said.
Rural southern and western Minnesota will be up
for grabs. Both the 1st District in the south and the sprawling 7th
covering the northwestern quarter of the state went for Bush in 2004
but elected Democratic congressmen — freshman Tim Walz in the 1st and
House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson in the 7th — two
years ago.
Democratic National Committeewoman Nancy Larson, of Dassel, a
superdelegate and lobbyist for small towns, acknowledged that
Republicans have a slight advantage in both districts.
But Obama is on the "right side" on some critical rural issues,
Larson said. McCain voted against — and Obama for — the popular
agriculture bill that Congress, led by Peterson, passed over Bush's
veto this year.
Since Pink's "Stupid Girls" YouTube embedding is disabled, we can't post it. So here's another song for women on the rise (an oldie but a goodie--and performed by the songwriter herself)
Photo: State Auditor Rebecca Otto. Everybody dance now!
While perpetual and peripatetic First District candidate Greg Mikkelson may be on the ballot as an Independence Party pick on September 9, it's not certain that he's informed the FEC of his candidacy.
Since there wasn't an electronic pre-primary report on file, we looked in the FEC's Images of All Financial Reports database, where one may "view actual financial disclosure reports filed by House, Senate and Presidential campaigns, Parties and PACs from 1993 to the present."
We found Mikkelson's original 2002 statement of candidacy for the Green Party. Next, Mikkelson ran under the banner of the Independence Party in 2004. Here's that statement of candidacy, which he filed as an amendment to his 2002 statement on November 2. In 2006, Mikkelson challenged Gil Gutknecht in the Republican primary, filing a completely separate statement of candidacy in September.
Financial reports for Mikkelson's 2002, 2004 and 2006 bids can be found here and here. Sort it out for yourself. In both the Independence and Republican Party bids, Mikkelson's campaigns were funded by relatively small contributions from the candidate.
Mikkelson may have filed a statement of candidacy and a pre-primary report, though if he did, it does not appear that he did so electronically. We have not heard or seen evidence of his campaigning, either.
It will be interesting to see if Independence Party voters in the First move down their ballot in the contested IP Senate primary ballot, to vote for Mikkelson, who has been both all over the political map--and nowhere as well--since 2002.
Over at the Winona Daily News' blogging project, the paper's political reporter looks at charges that Brian Davis's first cable ad is misleading. Mark Sommerhauer writes:
. . .when I spoke
to Davis spokesman Brad Biers on Thursday, Biers clearly misstated at
least one element of Walz's new position on offshore drilling. . . .
. . .Biers responded that
the bipartisan bill [H.R. 6709] wouldn't open up any new offshore areas to
drilling. Biers also said Walz hadn't changed his position on the
drilling issue since June.
The first claim is demonstrably
false, and if I'm wrong on my understanding of what the bipartisan bill
would do, then so is the Los Angeles Times:
Regarding
the second claim, I've found nothing to support it, and Biers couldn't
offer anything to document it. . . .
. . .Other reporters in the First District have noticed
the Davis ad, including Mankato Free Press reporter Mark Fischenich,
who wrote it "could be seen as misleading." . . .
Go read the whole thing. Sommerhauer asks for comments. This is the strongest instance we've seen of a MSM reporter calling out the Davis campaign for spreading misinformation. Go give Sommerhauer a hand.
The Post Bulletin reports on reactions to Obama's speech last night. From Denver, Seth McLaughlin reports:
Illinois Sen. Barack Obama shook the Mile High City last night,
ripping the verbal gloves off in his presidential battle against
presumed Republican nominee John McCain and bolstering the message of
hope that has fueled his historic bid to be the nation's first
African-American president.
"I think he tackled the critics," said U.S. Rep Tim Walz. "It was a rare event."
Before roughly 80,000 people at Invesco Field, Obama accepted his
party's presidential nomination and tied McCain to the "failed
presidency of George W. Bush" and "the broken politics in Washington."
The address left local patrons in many Denver bars whooping and
hollering, well-known Republicans openly awestruck, and Walz and the
rest of the local Minnesota delegation gushing. . . .
. . .Obama used the roughly 42-minute speech to spell out the agenda he
would push if elected president -- from ending the country's reliance
on foreign oil to keeping "the promise of equal pay" for women.
"The speech went right through what he would do, how he would invest
in middle class, invest in alternative fuels and help veterans," Walz
said.
. . .Andy Tollefson said his family could have watched Obama's acceptance
speech in the comfort of their own home, but they wanted the
camaraderie of the Labor Temple meeting.
"I like the idea that I'm not the only one that feels the same about this particular candidacy," Andy Tollefson said. . . .
We submit for your consideration the case of Rev. Paul Ibisch, of LaCrescent and (sometimes) Mapleton. On July 21, the good reverend posted a comment on an article contrasting Brian Davis's and Dick Day's fundraising in Q2 2008 that began:
