An informal list of 17 members the NRCC believes can be convinced to
step down, privately called the "Dem Retirement Assault List," makes
clear the party needs Dem incumbents to step aside if they have hopes of
taking back the majority. The NRCC has taken pains to attack those
lawmakers in recent weeks.
The list includes 14 members whose districts voted for Sen. John
McCain (R-AZ) in '08. McCain won districts held by Reps. Ike Skelton
(D-MO) and Bart Gordon (D-TN) with more than 60% of the vote, and
districts held by Reps. Rick Boucher (D-VA), Alan Mollohan (D-WV),
Marion Berry (D-AR), Nick Rahall (D-WV) and Mike Ross (D-AR) with more
than 55%.
McCain narrowly won seats held by Reps. John Spratt (D-SC), Allen
Boyd (D-FL), Vic Snyder (D-AR), Baron Hill (D-IN), Earl Pomeroy (D-ND),
Tim Holden (D-PA) and Collin Peterson (D-MN)....
But that pressure seems weak
so far: press releases criticizing the incumbents, plus a little money
thrown to media buys in certain districts. But the emphasis goes on the
word little: in three districts ” not including Petersons 7th ” a total
of $6,300 was spent by the NRCC on ad buys.
In a conference call with reporters Wednesday, NRCC Executive Director
Guy Harrison listed 10 moderate Democrats who are in the committee’s
sights for 2012: West Virginia Rep. Nick Rahall, Arkansas Rep. Mike
Ross, Minnesota Rep. Collin Peterson and Pennsylvania Rep. Jason
Altmire. All four were held under 60 percent Tuesday and represent
districts that voted for John McCain over Barack Obama in 2008.
Peterson increased his margin in 2012 against the hapless Lee Byberg.
In today's National Journal, Reid Wilson (remember him from the 2009 Hotline retirement piece?) reports in Parties Push For House Retirements:
In 1992, Minnesota Rep. Collin Peterson won re-election by a single
point. Two years later, he defeated Republican Bernie Omann again, but
by just two points. He hasn't faced a serious re-election bid since.
But this year, more than 18 months before Election Day, House
Republicans are trying to convince Peterson he's in for a tough race.
The National Republican Congressional Committee has already spent a
small amount of money on advertisements in Peterson's district, and the
committee has a press staffer dedicated to pushing opposition research
to reporters in Democratic-held areas that, like Peterson's, voted for
Mitt Romney in 2012.
The amount of money and effort Republicans are putting into
Peterson's race, at the moment, is negligible. The committee spent just
$2,000 on the early advertisement, a drop in the bucket compared with
the millions spent every cycle on competitive races. But the goal isn't
to beat Peterson so far out -- it's to get in his head on a daily basis
and, eventually, to get Peterson to retire rather than run for a 13th
term.
So far, Peterson doesn't seem bothered by the Republican attention. "They don't have anybody else to go after," he told the Minneapolis Star-Tribune last month, when the ads ran. "It's kind of ridiculous, but whatever."
But when he goes home next week, Republicans will seek to remind
Peterson that he's not alone. The NRCC has a dedicated tracker set to
follow Peterson around his district . . .
St. Paul attorney John Gilmore, who represents former Bachmann chief of staff Andy Parrish, also confirmed that his client is among those being interviewed by the FBI as a witness. “Andy Parrish has been contacted by the FBI for purposes of an interview,” Gilmore said. “That has been set up for next week and Mr. Parrish will cooperate fully.” . . .
. . .One source familiar with the FBI inquiry said an agent from the bureau’s public integrity section expressed interest in campaign finance allegations contained in a Federal Election Commission (FEC) complaint brought by whistleblower Peter Waldron, a Florida pastor who worked on the Bachmann presidential campaign in Iowa.
. . . In an affidavit to the Iowa Senate earlier this month, [Iowa State Senator Kent] Sorenson denied being paid directly or indirectly by any “Bachmann entities.” That contradicts an earlier affidavit from Parrish describing an “arrangement” to pay Sorenson through Short’s company. Parrish’s affidavit said Bachmann was aware of the arrangement, but thought it was legal. . . .
Read it and weep at the Star Tribune
Bluestem is curious about the status of Bachmann's seat should the investigations mature. As readers may recall, Bachmann barely won in the 2012 election, beating DFL challenger Jim Graves by 4,296 votes in a district where Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney received nearly 6 percentage points of the vote than she.
We've heard and read rumors that many Republicans wish she would retire. That set Bluestem to wondering how the GOP could find a candidate who isn't a client of John Gilmore. Perhaps Tom Emmer would be interested in the job.
Bachmann: It’s no secret that our nation may very well
be experiencing the hand of judgment. It’s no secret that we all are
concerned that our nation may be in a time of decline. If that is in
fact so, what is the answer? The answer is what we are doing here today:
humbling ourselves before an almighty God, crying out to an almighty
God, saying not of ourselves but you, would you save us oh God? We
repent of our sins, we turn away from them, we seek you, we seek your
ways. That’s something that we’re doing today, that we did on the
National Day of Prayer, it’s something that we have chosen to do as well
on another landmark day later this year on September 11. Our nation has
seen judgment not once but twice on September 11. That’s why we’re
going to have ‘9/11 Pray’ on that day. Is there anything better that we
can do on that day rather than to humble ourselves and to pray to an
almighty God?
Lovely. Perhaps Minnesotans need a rhetorical Patriot Guard to shield us from this sort of nonsense?
Here's the video:
Photo: Some Westboro Baptist signs.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
Here in Minnesota, we've always taken pride in our women being strong, the men good-looking and our children above average.
States like New Jersey were the butt of jokes.
Thus, it's a blow to our Minnesota exceptionalism to read that NJ.com has named the Gentlewoman from Minnesota's Sixth the newpaper chain's "Knucklehead of the Week."
But we in the “Knucklehead of the Week” department like to make our own selections, Governor. Thanks for the tip, though.
As for Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), it’s a wonder she made it
through the 2011-12 GOP presidential debates without a “knucklehead”
nod. She’s made a political career of making stuff up.
This week, we’re putting her back in the spotlight. Bachmann — a tea
party darling — recently claimed she voted against the federal budget
sequester because it would cut funding for the poor, and programs such
as Head Start and Meals on Wheels. As Mitt Romney liked to say, “We’re
not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers.”
In Bachmann’s case, the fact-checkers at the Washington Post are calling shenanigans.
She indeed voted against the sequester, but there’s no evidence she
warned against its “calamities,” as she claimed. What’s more, she
actually argued for deeper cuts to those poor-friendly programs.
Bachmann is currently the focus of a formal ethics investigation on
an unrelated matter, so she’s got bigger fish to fry. But we’re happy
she was able to brighten an otherwise slow week in the “Knucklehead”
department.
Bluestem is just wondering when they'll catch on to Bachmann understudies Glenn Gruenhagen and Cindy Pugh.
Photo: Michele Bachmann speaking at CPAC 2013.
If you enjoy reading posts like these on Bluestem Prairie, consider throwing some coin in the tip jar:
Hours after meeting with Representative Michelle Bachmann (R-CD6), Minnesota Latino immigrants remain hopeful, but cautious.
While grateful for an opportunity to discuss the issue of immigration reform with Representative Bachmann, members of organization La Asamblea de Derechos Civiles were disappointed that Representative Bachmann had opened up the meeting to an out-of-state congressperson whose comments in the meeting were inappropriate. While Representative Bachmann may believe that others are experts at the topic at hand, La Asamblea members believe that Representative Bachmann should be an expert in attempting to understand the experiences of her constituents.
However, La Asamblea members do applaud Representative Bachmann for agreeing to continue listening to stories and constituent perspectives regarding immigration reform. . .
The press release went on to praise the tone of the meeting:
"The meeting had a very positive tone of building bridges between the Latino community and Mrs. Bachmann. At the meeting, we had the impression that freedom for many immigrants is closer and we made it clear to her that the Latinos have a growing voting muscle in politics that we are ready to use," said Pablo Tapia, La Asamblea organizer.
Bluestem has learned that the other member of Congress was Alabama representative Mo Brooks, who serves his state's fifth congressional district on the Tennessee border.
Update: Bluestem's original post was not clear about the logistics of the meeting, which took place in Minnesota with Bachmann and one of her Washington staff members. Brooks joined the meeting via speaker phone. [end update]
Brooks 2011 statement: "I will doing anything short of shooting" undocumented workers
"As your congressman on the House floor, I will do anything short of
shooting them," Brooks said. "Anything that is lawful, it needs to be
done because illegal aliens need to quit taking jobs from American
citizens."
Rep. Charlie Gonzalez, (D-Texas) head of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, blasted Brooks remarks.
"Rhetoric referencing acts of violence has no place in the
discussion for realistic solutions to our country's immigration
problems," Gonzalez said. "Words have consequences"
Brooks 2.0: Gentler anti-immigrant rhetoric in 2013
We don't know yet what "inappropriate" comments Brooks made in the recent meeting, but he's one of a handful of congress people who have been critical of current bipartisan efforts to move comprehensive immigration reform.
His rhetoric does seem to have mellowed in the last two years.
After the media reported that an immigration deal among the Senate’s Gang of Eight was imminent, a number of conservatives in the House told their leadership on Wednesday that they didn’t want to get steamrolled by the upper chamber.
Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) told The Hill, “We probably won’t know anything until a bill is drafted and presented.
“Keep in mind, it’s just eight people. It’s not sanctioned by anybody,” he noted, adding “it’s going to be very difficult for me to agree to ratify illegal conduct.”
. . .With both groups seemingly close to producing legislation, King and
the others believe it’s time for them to make their voices heard before
the momentum becomes overwhelming.
“We’ve held our powder dry,” King said, but “decided its time
to come forward now because we are seeing the inertia and we are
concerned about having this wash over us and not have the opportunity
for the constitutional conservatives in this country and in this
Congress to have their voice heard.”
A group of Republican House members led by Iowa Rep. Steve King spoke forcefully in opposition to a mass legalization before first solving the problem of illegal immigration at an event with reporters Thursday. . . .
Alabama Republican Rep. Mo Brooks said that the immigration system should serve Americans and stressed that in terms of immigration, America “is the most compassionate nation in history when it comes to allowing foreigners to become citizens of our country.”
“I want to emphasize the culture that we have in America, that we welcome immigration,” he said, explaining the issue is illegal immigration.
“We have to make a choice: Are we going to have laws, or not have laws? If we are not going to have open borders then that means we have to have laws that restrict who can come and who cannot come in. And we have to enforce those laws,” Brooks said, explaining that it is only a small percentage of people “who have chosen to disregard our laws as their first act on American soil.”
He added that with so many people wishing to come to America, the country should focus on accepting the most valuable and productive people.
“I urge that we get behind an immigration policy that focuses on bringing to America those who are clearly going to be on the productive side of our economy, less likely to be on the consumptive side of our economy,” he said, adding that illegal immigrants contribute to keeping wages low and Americans out of work.
Florida Sen. Marco Rubio went on seven Sunday talk shows
to pitch a bipartisan immigration reform deal, while a handful of
Republican lawmakers famous for their wacky cable news interviews can't
get any attention. An anti-immigration "gang of six" in the House is
trying to stop the pro-immigration "gang of eight" in the Senate, The National Review's Robert Costa
reports, but hardly anyone's listening. The six are cable TV favorites:
Minnesota's Michele Bachmann, Iowa's Steve King, Texas' Louie Gohmert,
Alabama's Mo Brooks, Pennsylvania's Lou Barletta, and California's
Dana Rohrabacher. There were zero "anti-amnesty" Sunday show guests
the week before Rubio's grand tour. The most popular cable guests of
the six -- Bachmann, King, and Gohmert -- haven't been invited on cable
to talk immigration in the last three months, according to Lexis Nexis.
They complain the GOP isn't listening to them either.
In 2007, Costa explains, Republican immigration opponents "dominated
the headlines" and "scared off many Republicans who might otherwise have
supported it." Now, "the anti-legalization warriors wonder why their
party suddenly seems to be ignoring their concerns." But once the bill
comes out, he writes, "they think they, not Rubio, will be the
Republicans who shape the debate, especially on talk radio and within
the conservative movement." But that hasn't happened so far! According
to Lexis Nexis -- which, granted, doesn't have every single word uttered
on cable news -- Bachmann, King, and Gohmert haven't been able to get
much time on Fox to sell their view. They're all far more popular on
MSNBC as bad guys than on Fox as good guys.
Check out the tally sheet at the Atlantic Wire. In the National Review article, A Gang of Six Plots a Revolt Costa writes:
King and his crew are not driving the negotiations, and they
increasingly feel like outsiders within their own party. “The meetings
of the Gang of Eight and the secret meetings in the House of
Representatives — the people who have been standing up for the
Constitution and the rule of law haven’t been invited to those
meetings,” King tells the assembled group of reporters. The other
huddlers — Michele Bachmann (Minn.), Lou Barletta (Pa.), Mo Brooks
(Ala.), Louie Gohmert (Texas), and Dana Rohrabacher (Calif.) — nod and
grimace. “We’ve got all the rich guys and the elitists talking to each
other,” Rohrabacher says. “Unfortunately us regular folks don’t have
that kind of coordination.”
Brooks has long been in opposition to allowing leniency to those who
skirted the law to live in the United States. In 2011, Brooks said at a
town hall meeting that the U.S. should "do anything short of shooting them" to keep illegal aliens out of the country.
Tonight,
Brooks pointed to the financial burden illegal aliens are putting on
the economy. He said the U.S. Treasury was writing checks for about $4
billion per year in child tax credits to illegal aliens who are
submitting fraudulent tax forms. He also said that estimates in
Washington indicate illegal aliens are contributing $20 million per year
to the tax system while consuming $100 million per year in taxes.
He acknowledged, however, that his views on immigration are "in the minority" in Washington. Immigration reform, including the amnesty program, has been a rare issue receiving bipartisan support.
Brooks' expertise: caucus memberships
It's curious that Bachmann would invite a member of the Gang of Six to meet with Minnesotans on immigration reform, since that might chill the discussion. Brooks was the author of the died-in-committee "Jobs for Americans Act of 2011."
The caucuses favor closed borders, withholding all federal funding to
cities that do not strictly enforce federal immigration status laws,
and other measures generally characterized as anti-immigrant by those
seeking comprehensive immigration reform.
Research on immigrants and job creation
While Brooks' central assertion--that undocumented workers rob Americans of jobs--is a staple of anti-immigrant talking points, the record is mixed. The New York Times Magazine asked in 2012 Do Illegal Immigrants Actually Hurt the U.S. Economy?, noting:
. . .Labor economists have concluded that
undocumented workers have lowered the wages of U.S. adults without a
high-school diploma — 25 million of them — by anywhere between 0.4 to
7.4 percent.
The impact on everyone else, though, is surprisingly positive. Giovanni
Peri, an economist at the University of California, Davis, has written a
series of influential papers comparing the labor markets in states with
high immigration levels to those with low ones. . . . In states with more undocumented immigrants, Peri said, skilled
workers made more money and worked more hours; the economy’s
productivity grew. From 1990 to 2007, undocumented workers increased
legal workers’ pay in complementary jobs by up to 10 percent.
As Congress considers immigration reform, experts across the political spectrum say American jobs are safe.
That
immigrants take the jobs of American-born citizens is “something that
virtually no learned person believes in,” Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration
expert at the libertarian Cato Institute, said at a Thursday panel.
“It’s sort of a silly thing.”
Most economists don’t find immigrants driving down wages or jobs, the Brookings Institution's
Michael Greenstone and Adam Looney wrote in May. In fact, “on average,
immigrant workers increase the opportunities and incomes of Americans,”
they write. Foreign-born workers don’t affect the employment rate
positively or negatively, according to a 2011 analysis
from the conservative American Enterprise Institute. And a study
released Wednesday by the liberal Center for American Progress suggests
that granting legal status to undocumented workers might even create
jobs.
The CAP study,
led by the visiting head of the Washington College economics
department, sought to predict what would happen under immigration
reform. The researchers considered a handful of scenarios. In each, it
was presumed that the nation’s 11 million undocumented immigrants would
be immediately granted legal status. They then looked at the effect of
those undocumented immigrants not being granted citizenship at all over a
decade, getting it immediately, or getting it in five years.
Legal
status alone would lead to the creation of 121,000 extra jobs annually
over the next 10 years, they found. Getting citizenship within five
years would increase that to 159,000 jobs per year. And receiving both
legal status and citizenship this year would create an extra 203,000
jobs annually.
Photo: Alabama Congressman Mo Brooks, Michele Bachmann's go-to guy for meetings with Minnesota Latinos advocating comprehensive immigration reform.
If you enjoy reading posts like this on Bluestem Prairie, consider throwing some coin in the tip jar:
Back during the Republican Revolution in the 1990s, the drive to cut wages by weakening overtime took the form of then Senator John Ashcroft's "Family Friendly Workplace Act," but the principle was the same: allow private business to offer workers the supposedly voluntary option of working long hours, then taking time off rather than overtime. Nevermind that loophole that might allow management to schedule an employee for 60 hours one week, 20 hours the next, without receiving either comp time or overtime.
That was the 1990s version of family-friendly, because moms especially want time off and don't care so much about their paychecks, or so the "family friendly" narrative goes.
Say what
you will, but anti-worker politicians are good at giving deceptive names
to things. “Right to work” takes away your rights at work. “Paycheck
protection” puts your wages at risk. And who could forget Paul Ryan’s
plan to “strengthen Medicare” which ends Medicare as we know it.
House Republicans are pushing the “Workplace Families Flexibility Act of 2013,”
which they claim would allow busy working parents to spend more time
with their kids. That’s bogus. The bill replaces the 40-hour work week
with a “comp time” accrual system that would allow employers greater control over their hourly employee’s schedule.
What’s worse? The bill ends ”time-and-a-half” overtime pay for hourly
and non-exempt workers as we know it, giving renewed incentive for
businesses to work their employees as long as they want with near
impunity.
In other words, the bill does the opposite of what House Republicans say it will. . . .
Check out the deets in the post. Here in Minnesota's Seventh District, we'll be seeing web ads urging Blue Dog Democrat Collin Peterson to enlist in the Republican War on Women's paychecks. (Peterson's already in with the attack on reproductive rights and raising the minimum wage).
The National Republican Congressional Committee is demanding vulnerable House Democrats "support more freedom for working moms" in new web ads, a sign the committee is trying to improve the party's standing with female voters.
The ads call on Democrats to back the GOP-drafted "Working Families Flexibility Act," which would allow employers to give comp time for overtime hours rather than pay employees for them. The bill will likely be voted on in the House next week...
But a spokester for the D-Trip flipped the narrative:
Democrats fired back, pointing out that most House Republicans voted against the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Violence Against Women Act.
"House Republicans wish women voters would forget their past and ignore their agenda, but women voters are too smart for that," said Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokeswoman Emily Bittner. "This Republican Congress has been the most extreme, anti-woman legislature in American history with an agenda to deny women equal pay, quality health care services and even domestic violence protections. If Republicans think their problem is the style of their marketing campaign — not the substance they're selling — they've missed the message of the 2012 elections.
Bluestem hopes that Peterson can stuff his latent Republican tendencies back in the closet with his boots and resist the urge to cut working moms' paychecks.
Photo: Blue Dog Seventh District Congressman Collin Peterson.
If you enjoy reading posts like this on Bluestem Prairie, consider throwing some coin in the tip jar:
While winter's pale blue eyes linger on here in Chippewa County, signs of spring are making a tentative entrance: a wren taking shelter in the garage during an ice storm, Tundra Swans wondering if this might be the place, a puzzled Yellow-Rumped Warbler perplexed by the snow, and this cycle's announcement by the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) that Blue Dog Representative Collin Peterson is high on its list of targets.
In its first targeted campaign of the season, the National Republican Congressional Committee, the campaign arm of House Republicans, aired televised attack ads this month against Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minn. — more than 18 months before voters go to the polls.
The ads attempted to tie Peterson to President Obama and his health care reform law, the Affordable Care Act, both unpopular in his sprawling rural district. “Instead of voting to balance the budget, he voted to spend $1.8 trillion on Obamacare,” a narrator said in the ad.
Peterson did not vote for the Affordable Care Act, but voted against its repeal. He also voted against the House Republican budget, which brings federal spending in line with revenues over 10 years.
Peterson laughed off the attack. “They don’t have anybody else to go after,” he said. “It’s kind of ridiculous, but whatever.” . . .
. . .The NRCC spent $2,000 on the early ad campaign against Peterson, which is a paltry sum, said John Geer, a political scientist at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn. “It’s just not that much money.”
We're hoping that former state senator and ethically-challenged tweep Kvetchin' Gretchen Hoffman runs. Not because this would help the Republican Party's odds, but because Bluestem could revive our Tales of Hoffman series. She's rich, she's crabby, and she's from North Dakota. What's not for the RNC to love?
And then there's the press release, which is crystal clear about Peterson's offenses to humanity:
After chiding Peterson for expecting “Minnesota seniors to foot the bill for his unbalanced, irresponsible priorities,” the statement from communications director Andrea Bozek read: “Peterson owes Utah families an explanation for his poor record, and his support of wildly expensive law that hurts jobs and Utah’s seniors.”
That should provoke outrage from Biscay to Climax.
Photo: Utah, the extreme western part of Minnesota's Seventh District.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
While the Des Moines Register reports about the Iowa Senate Ethics Committee's scrutiny of the gentlewoman's presidential campaign committee capers in Michele Bachmann knew about financial deal with Sorenson, former aide alleges, the Young Americans for Freedom are using her endorsement of toxic metal Christian rocker and radio talker Bradlee Dean for a Dean event at Des Moines Community College (see image, right).
ongresswoman Michele Bachmann was aware of the financial arrangement
between an Iowa senator and her presidential campaign that’s now the
subject of three separate ethics investigations, according to a former
aide.
Campaign aide Andy Parrish, a confidential informant who agreed this
week to step forward to testify to the Iowa Senate Ethics Committee,
will detail an arrangement for potentially improper payments to state
Sen. Kent Sorenson, R-Milo, for presidential campaign work, his lawyer
said today.
Parrish’s testimony could bolster statements another Bachmann
campaign aide made in an ethics complaint filed in January that alleges
Sorenson violated Iowa Senate rules that prohibit senators from
accepting employment, directly or indirectly, from a political action
committee. . . .
Waldron also filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission in
January, citing the financial arrangement with Sorenson. And the Office
of Congressional Ethics contacted Waldron in February. . . .
Putting Bachmann's name at the head of a list of endorsements for Bradlee Dean must be capable of filling a couple of rows of seats.
Bradlee Dean has really screwed up the town of Dunkerton, Iowa.
Dean and his Christian-rap-metal troupe, Junkyard Prophet, hosted a supposed "anti-bullying" assembly
at the Dunkertown high school last week that literally left some of the
kids in tears. Among the more controversial messages delivered by the
anti-gay preacher and his cronies: The average lifespan for a gay man is
42, and if women have sex before marriage, they will have "mud on their
wedding dresses."
The principal of the school has since resigned, according to the WCF Courier, though school officials say there's no connection.
Earlier this week, a collective of advocacy groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, penned an open letter to school administrators, demanding that they be more careful about who is invited to talk to kids. . . .
That sort of attraction, in addition to ethically-challenged Bachmann's endorsement, should pack them in.
Image: A poster of April 25's coming attraction at the Des Moines Community College.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
Word comes to our new home office in sunny Maynard, Minnesota, via People for the American Way's Rightwing Watch, that Minnesotans Michele Bachman and Bradlee Dean will be taking part in the Awakening 2013 this weekend in Oviedo, Florida. The annual event is organized by the Liberty University-affiliated Liberty Counsel.
The theme? Fighting for the Soul of America. Food trucks are available on site on Saturday.
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) will be joining some of the most extreme right-wing activists in the country at the upcoming Awakening 2013
conference, which is organized by the Liberty University-affiliated
Liberty Counsel. Along with Bachmann, Rep. Steve Pearce (R-NM) and Jim
Bob and Michelle Duggar are scheduled to take part in the Religious
Right gathering.
Just how radical are the conference’s leaders?
The fact that it is hosted by Liberty Counsel, the anti-gay group led by Mat Staver and Matt Barber that has been implicated in the Lisa Miller kidnapping case,
is the first clue to the Awakening’s far-right bent. On top of that,
the event includes 9/11 and Sandy Hook truther Bradlee Dean,
self-proclaimed prophet Cindy Jacobs and convicted domestic abuser and
anti-women’s rights activist Timothy Johnson.
On the program, we learn that Bachmann's keynote address is "America at a Crossroad: Pressing Forward to Victory," while Dean will be a presenter in two breakout sessions.
The first, "Families Under Attack: Pornography & Sexual Promiscuity and How to Fight Back," teams the toxic metal preacher with Bishop Harry Jackson and Patrick Trueman. Judith Reisman will moderate.
High Impact begins by pushing Jackson and Barna's own
"research," purportedly based on 100,000 personal interviews conducted
over the last 20 years, which uncovered "areas in which whites and
blacks are clearly divergent." One of those areas, according to Jackson
and Barna, is sexual temptation. Black people, they allege, are far
more prone to it, and specifically to "physical intimacy with a
nonspouse or enjoyment of pornographic materials."
In spite of
this allegedly innate promiscuity — a quality that most white
supremacist "race scientists" and hate groups also claim is an intrinsic
characteristic of black people — Jackson and Barna conclude that
African Americans are spiritually superior to white Christians, in that
their faith is more "integrated" into their everyday life. Since black
Christians spend more time in church than white ones, the book argues,
black God-fearers are more observing of the Sabbath, while "this concept
was lost more than a quarter century ago in white America" – just one
more "sign that the spiritual focus remains paramount among blacks."
Jackson has played a leading role in campaigns against marriage equality
in Washington, D.C. and Maryland, fights he described as a spiritual battle against Satanic forces. He said
that a demon called the Queen of Heaven is behind the push for same-sex
marriage, which he warned “corrupts, perverts and pollutes” society.
Jackson has also called marriage equality “a Satanic plot to destroy our seed” and warned that gay rights advocates “want to recruit your kids” and are targeting young people “just like during the times of Hitler.”
Patrick Trueman is a lawyer who serves as president of Morality in Media, which placed Attorney General Eric Holder at the head of its "Dirty Dozen" list, The Hill reported on April 1. Holder was joined on the list by Comcast, Facebook, Twitter, Wikipedia, Barnes and Noble and the Department of Defense.
Reisman, a visiting Liberty University professor who is fighting to criminalize pornography, has claimed
that schools are brainwashing children into becoming gay and that gay
rights advocates are emulated the Nazis. She also said that the Gay,
Lesbian and Straight Education Network’s Gay-Straight Alliances are modeled after the Hitler Youth and promote pedophilia.
Age ranges in the population were 0.3% under the age of 18, 0.3% from 18
to 24, 1.5% from 25 to 44, 40.4% from 45 to 64, and 57.5% 65 years of
age or older. The median age was 66 years.
Photo: Bachmann and Dean.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
Last year's Farm Bill stalled in the House when Tea Party Republicans decided not feeding the poor was a winning meal ticket in the 2012 elections. That worked well for folks like Allen Quist, sent him back to his rural Nicollet County farm instead of the big hotdish contest in the Beltway.
. . .Some House Republicans, often from the rural Midwest, began proposing
putting food stamps—which make up more than 70 percent of the
Agriculture Department budget—into a separate bill. This would be a way
to reduce food-stamp spending or get the program turned over to the
states. These members seem to have forgotten that Congress created food
stamps as part of the farm bill in the 1960s, when the declining rural
population translated into fewer rural representatives in the House and
fewer votes for the farm bill, and that the number of rural
representatives continues to decline. . . .
. . . The participation in food stamps appears to remain higher than
anticipated, however, because wage rates are so low. Agriculture
Secretary Tom Vilsack has suggested that the way to resolve the problem
is to help food-stamp beneficiaries improve their skills and get better
jobs.
Meanwhile, House Republicans press for cuts and most
Democrats resist. House Agriculture Committee ranking member Collin
Peterson, D-Minn., said he has told his panel’s chairman, Rep. Frank
Lucas, R-Okla., that he wants to be part of any decision-making on
food-stamp cuts. Peterson also defended food stamps with a statement
that is sure to raise hackles in farm circles: “There is less fraud in
food stamps than in any government program. There is five times as much
fraud in crop insurance than in food stamps.”
Even an old Blue Dog can stay on point when the scent's strong even.
Leaders of congressional ag committees from both parties
seem optimistic that there will be a farm bill this year, but tough negotiating
remains, especially if committees have to trim spending even more than they did
when putting together bills in 2012. . . .
The House ag committee's ranking Democrat, Collin Peterson of Minnesota,
seems to be a strong supporter as well. But he is hearing complaints
from some of his farmer constituents about insurance not being limited
for very large farms. . . .
Just as a year ago, negotiating changes to the commodity
title of the farm bill and the spending level for the nutrition title remain
difficult.
Peterson said that more money
could be saved from SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, if the
federal government and not states, determined the income level for eligibility
for what used to be called food stamps.
The federal threshold for food stamp eligibility is 130% of
the poverty level, Peterson said, but in red states, it's actually higher--200%
in North Dakota, 165% in Texas and 185% in Arizona, versus 130% in Peterson's
state of Minnesota.
"The states that you would think would use this (the
lower, federal level) are not," he said.
Peterson said he's urging his committee colleagues "we
should be looking at policy here, instead of a number."
A good point, dawg.
Photo: Minnesota Seventh District Congressman Collin Peterson.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
It's no secret any longer: the secret ingredient in Congressman Tim Walz's first place "Hermann the German" hotdish is Schell's beer, brewed in New Ulm, Minnesota. Walz's hearty meal won Senator Franken's annual Hot Dish-off today.
U.S. Sen. Al Franken, the Minnesota Democrat and former comedian,
will host his third annual Capitol casserole contest today in
(appropriately) the Senate Agricultural Committee Hearing Room in
Washington.
Franken will be joined by Democrats Sen. Amy Klobuchar
and Reps. Rick Nolan, Collin Peterson, Betty McCollum, Keith Ellison
and Tim Walz and Republicans Eric Paulsen and Michele Bachmann.
Franken
started the friendly competition in 2011 as a way to bring the
delegation together to put partisanship aside and celebrate a Minnesota
culinary tradition. This year’s event will be judged by former Minnesota
congressmen Vin Weber and Gerry Sikorski.
Just as the contest began, Walz press secretary Tony Ufkin tweeted:
Walz's "Hermann the German" hotdish is in place. Secret ingredient from New Ulm... pic.twitter.com/fQ8Y4h1rAc
We guessed beer and Ufkin confirmed. The secret's also out on Franken's website:
Walz's Hermann the German Hotdish
Ingredients: 1 package of brats 1 bottle Schell's beer 1 onion 1 teaspoon garlic powder 1 cup of chopped celery 1 can cream of cheddar soup 1 can cream of mushroom soup 1/2 cup milk 1 cups sharp cheddar cheese 1 package tater tots.
Bring a pot of water to a boil, add beer, onions and garlic powder.
Submerge the brats into the pot and reduce heat to medium and cook for
10 min. Remove and let cool. Butter the casserole dish. Combine
remaining ingredients into a separate bowl, minus the tots. Chop up the
brats into bite sized pieces and add to the other ingredients. Pour the
mixture into the casserole dish, top with tater tots and bake for 1 hour
at 350 degrees. Sprinkle with cheese for the last 10-15 mins of baking.
Photo: The hotdish prior to judging. Twitpic by Tony Ufkin.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
In addition to the hailstorm of criticism Michele Bachmann is facing, unforeseen family circumstances caused her to beg off from a badge retirement ceremony today in honoring Cold Spring Officer Tom Decker, who was killed in the line of duty in November.
The Cold Spring-Richmond Police Department had planned a badge
retirement ceremony Wednesday in honor of Officer Tom Decker, who was
killed in the line of duty in November.
U.S.
Rep. Michele Bachmann was scheduled to be the keynote speaker. Bachmann
canceled the appearance in the middle of last week and the event was
called off.
Bachmann’s
Communications Director Dan Kotman told the Times that the
congresswoman unable to attend because of unforeseen family
circumstances. He said she regrets she can’t be there and her heart
remains with Decker’s family, the police department and the community.
The City Council had canceled its meeting that night to accommodate Bachmann’s availability.
The Gentlewoman from Minnesota's Sixth is having a rough time, an experience reflected in the headline of Esquire columnist Charles P. Pierce's column, Michele Bachmann's Bad, Awful Month:
Oh, mercy, it seems like The Girl With The Faraway Eyes may have discovered that running for president is not like an ATM after all.
Glenn Beck has a theory about why Michele Bachmann is under investigation by
the Office of Congressional Ethics, and it’s not because her 2012
presidential campaign allegedly committed campaign finance violations:
It’s because the U.S. has been “infiltrated” by “radical Islam,” and
Bachmann got on the wrong side of it.
“You see what they’re doing
to Michele Bachmann?” Beck asked. “Michele Bachmann is under all kinds
of ethics investigations now. Why do you suppose that is? She’s evil?
She is uber-clear on what’s going on. Uber clear.”
He continued
that the State Department is “pushing” Somalis into Minnesota, and
Bachmann tried to find out why. “She hasn’t gotten any answers, and now
she’s under investigation,” Beck said.
According to contemporary reports, as here and here,
Egyptian protesters who pelted the motorcade of then Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton with tomatoes during her visit to Egypt last July were
chanting "Monica! Monica!"
So who did Al Sharpton, on his MSNBC show this evening, blame for the
tomato pelting? Why, Glenn Beck and Michele Bachmann, of course!
According to the Reverend Al, it was the raising by Beck and Bachmann of
the possible connection of Hillary's top aide, Huma Abedin, to the
Muslim Brotherhood that outraged the Egyptian horde .. .
It's a bit of a stretch, even for Newsbusters. Meanwhile, Washington Post's Chris Cillizza reports in Can Michele Bachmann be beaten?:
Minnesota State Representative Pat Garofalo (R-Farmington) is having one heck of a spring break while the legislature is adjourned for the Passover-Easter Week holiday.
The six day jaunt on the all-gay Atlantis Cruise Lines was mistakenly booked after Marcus Bachmann visited a Minneapolis travel agent who assumed he was gay.
Although
the couple has reportedly requested to leave the ship, it won't reach
its next port in The Bahamas for another three days. The pair are
currently holed up in their suite waiting to disembark and return to
Miami by air.
Phillip Jennings, a partner at North Star Travel
agency in Minnesota, is deeply apologetic over the incident and explains
how the mishap occurred.
"Mr. Bachmann came into our office three
weeks ago," Jennings says. "He said he wanted to book a cruise for
himself and his partner 'Michele'.
"From his demeanor, I assumed that Mr. Bachmann was gay and that 'Michel' was a man who pronounced his name in the French way. So I booked them on one of our finest all-gay cruises in the Caribbean.
"In
retrospect it was unprofessional of me to assume his sexual
orientation. I am very sorry for the inconvenience this misunderstanding
has caused and we have offered to fully refund the cost of the
Bachmanns' trip."
Marcus the Bear
The
unexpected detour for the Bachmanns during Congress' recess
is especially ironic given their stated opposition to the "homosexual
lifestyle."
Michele has vociferously opposed same-sex marriage
from her perch in the U.S. House of Representatives, and Marcus operates
a counseling center which advocates "pray the gay away" reparative therapy.
The duo's anti-gay positions don't seem to be causing any animosity aboard the Rainbow Warrior,
however. A source on board the vessel says Marcus has attracted the
attention of the passengers and was even voted "cutest bear" on the
ship's traditional Bear vs. Twink night.
After reading that--or just seeing the headline--the Farmington lawmaker asked:
We must ask: with Garofalo on twitter, do we even need those old school, pre-Occupy Homes political pranks for entertainment? Or the Onion and the Daily Currant?
Photo: Michele and Marcus Bachmann campaign in Iowa.
Donate: If you enjoy reading posts like this at Bluestem, consider throwing some coin in the plate at Paypal:
Eighteen months ago, the Minnesota House member was considered an
unlikely but undeniable Republican rising star, winning the Iowa straw
poll that unofficially begins the primary season. Today, she is
embroiled in a litany of legal proceedings related to her rolling
disaster of a presidential campaign—including a Office of Congressional
Ethics investigation into campaign improprieties that has not previously
been reported.
The Daily Beast has learned that
federal investigators are now interviewing former Bachmann campaign
staffers nationwide about alleged intentional campaign-finance
violations. The investigators are working on behalf of the Office of
Congressional Ethics, which probes reported improprieties by House
members and their staffs and then can refer cases to the House Ethics
Committee.
“I
have been interviewed by investigators,” says Peter Waldron, a former
Bachmann staffer who’s embroiled in his own fight with his former boss,
involving his allegations of pay-to-play politics and improper payments by the campaign—making
him one of several members of Bachmann’s inner circle who’ve fallen out
with the woman they once hoped would become commander in chief. While
he was careful to avoid specifics in regard to the investigating body,
Waldron said that “investigators came [and] interviewed me and are
interviewing other staff members across the country.”
Two
other former staffers confirmed the existence of the investigation this
weekend, and on Monday Bachmann’s campaign counsel, William McGinley,
of the high-powered firm Patton Boggs, confirmed that the Office of
Congressional Ethics (OCE) was looking into the congresswoman’s
presidential campaign last year.
“There
are no allegations that the Congresswoman engaged in any wrongdoing,”
McGinley said. “We are constructively engaged with the OCE and are
confident that at the end of their Review the OCE Board will conclude
that Congresswoman Bachmann did not do anything inappropriate.” . . .
Read the lengthy article at the Daily Beast for the whole story, which comes on the heels of a very bad week for the Gentlewoman from Minnesota's Sixth Congressional District. As we noted over the weekend in St. Cloud Times: the two faces of Congresswoman Michele Bachmann:
Unlike our reluctant spring, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann has
roared back on to the national spotlight as speeches to CPAC and her
congressional colleagues were fact checked; the findings were not
pretty.
Political junkies, partisans and the media are abuzz as to whether a
closer-than-expected 2012 re-election victory changed the divisive tone
and lightning-rod tactics of U.S. Sixth District Rep. Michele Bachmann.
Two
events — a national speech Saturday and a St. Paul lobbying appearance
Monday — not only reflect how there is no clear answer to that question,
but highlight why district voters will remain frustrated if all they
want is a hardworking, level-headed House member.
The Saturday speech was vintage Bachmann — heavy on political red
meat and light on accuracy. Monday’s lobbying effort for expanding
Interstate 94 from Rogers to St. Cloud was about bipartisan service to
the western end of the district — a rare focus for her since elected.
CPAC speech
Up
until Saturday, there was a growing body of evidence — best symbolized
by her post-election low profile in national media — that Bachmann might
be taking to heart a message district voters delivered Election Day:
Her style isn’t what they want in Washington.
Yes,
the Tea Party champion won a fourth term. But it came by only about
4,200 votes in a long-held GOP district redrawn since 2010 to be even
more conservative. Plus, she needed a record amount of money and
outspent first-time candidate Jim Graves by $9.3 million. Yet she barely
won. . . .
Read the rest at the Times. They're hoping that they'll see more of
the bread-and-butter Bachmann, but her behavior in the House suggests
that's wishful thinking.
Unlike our reluctant spring, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann has roared back on to the national spotlight as speeches to CPAC and her congressional colleagues were fact checked; the findings were not pretty.
Political junkies, partisans and the media are abuzz as to whether a
closer-than-expected 2012 re-election victory changed the divisive tone
and lightning-rod tactics of U.S. Sixth District Rep. Michele Bachmann.
Two
events — a national speech Saturday and a St. Paul lobbying appearance
Monday — not only reflect how there is no clear answer to that question,
but highlight why district voters will remain frustrated if all they
want is a hardworking, level-headed House member.
The Saturday speech was vintage Bachmann — heavy on political red
meat and light on accuracy. Monday’s lobbying effort for expanding
Interstate 94 from Rogers to St. Cloud was about bipartisan service to
the western end of the district — a rare focus for her since elected.
CPAC speech
Up
until Saturday, there was a growing body of evidence — best symbolized
by her post-election low profile in national media — that Bachmann might
be taking to heart a message district voters delivered Election Day:
Her style isn’t what they want in Washington.
Yes,
the Tea Party champion won a fourth term. But it came by only about
4,200 votes in a long-held GOP district redrawn since 2010 to be even
more conservative. Plus, she needed a record amount of money and
outspent first-time candidate Jim Graves by $9.3 million. Yet she barely
won. . . .
Read the rest at the Times. They're hoping that they'll see more of the bread-and-butter Bachmann, but her behavior in the House suggests that's wishful thinking.
Obamacare “kills.” That’s what Rep. Michele Bachmann (R) of Minnesota
said Thursday on the floor of the House. In a fire-breathing speech, the
tea party favorite and former GOP presidential hopeful urged her fellow
lawmakers to “repeal this failure before it literally kills women,
kills children, kills senior citizens."
. . . Later, she came back on the floor and added that
Medicaid, the big federal/state health entitlement program for
lower-income Americans, is a “ghetto." . . .
. . . Bachmann may be trying to distract the political world from the other
stuff she’s been saying recently. In a speech at the Conservative
Political Action Conference last week, she charged that Mr. Obama has a
“lavish lifestyle” in the White House that includes “five chefs on Air
Force One,” as well as two live-in projectionists for the White House
movie theater and that “we pay someone to walk the president’s dog."
The
chefs and projectionists don’t exist. We wouldn’t rule out staffers
holding Bo’s leash, but there is no pro pet sitter on the White House
payroll. . . .
At
CPAC, Bachmann also said that Alzheimer’s disease could be cured if not
for government regulations, taxes, and lawyers. She added that 70
percent of every food stamp dollar goes to “bureaucrats."
Politifact.com rated
the former claim “pants on fire” false, saying researchers blame the
disease itself and lack of research funding for the fact that no cure
yet exists.
This is a major under-the-radar story. The House Agriculture
Committee, including its Democrats, voted just this week to gut the
Dodd-Frank regulation of derivatives by approving a series seven bills.
Of the seven, six are strongly opposed by public-interest regulation
watchdogs. All seven bills now go to the House floor for a vote there.
This is a bad-Dems story, and also a derivatives story.
Read the details at Americablog.
Minnesota's Democrats on the committee--ranking member Collin Peterson and Tim Walz--aren't among the "bad-Dems." Given Peterson's work on financial reform in 2010 when he chaired the ag committee, the "No" vote isn't a surprise. (The ag committee's oversight of commodity markets gives it the ability to consider legislation related to the financial industry).
The most controversial bill to advance Wednesday is explicitly
designed to expand taxpayer backing for derivatives. It was the only
legislation that lawmakers were required to cast individual votes for or
against; the others were all approved by unanimous voice votes. The
bill to increase taxpayer support for bank derivatives dealing was
approved by a vote of 31 to 14.
Prior to the vote, the top Democrat on the Agricultural Committee,
Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), gave a speech warning that the
legislation could repeat the deregulation debacles of the 1990s.
"Two of the worst votes I ever made in this place was the Commodity
[Futures] Modernization Act of 2000 that exempted all of these swaps
from any regulation or any margins," Peterson said. "I didn't know any
better. The other vote I made that was really bad is eliminating
Glass-Steagall. We should have never done that and I bought into that.
You know, if we had Glass-Steagall back, this wouldn't be an issue here
... You're putting taxpayers on the hook. And if you wanna do that,
fine. But I mean, you know, when I, when a lot of us were here, we
hadn't paid enough attention and this thing blew up on us. At the time
we did the Modernization Act, there were $80 billion in swaps, in
derivatives. We gave 'em legal certainty, we eliminated the regulation
requirements, and it went to $700 trillion and it blew up on us. So just
be careful: You can vote any way you want, but this could come back and
haunt you.
Here's Peterson speaking out about the bills:
Photo: Seventh District DFL Congressman Collin Peterson.
Donate: If you enjoy reading posts like this at Bluestem, consider throwing some coin in the plate at Paypal:
An "Earth Train" carrying 70 Minnesotans heading to Washington to ask President Obama and his administration to lead a clean energy transformation made an impromptu stop in Winona to meet local activists--and pick up another passenger.
Given the area's role in the ongoing grassroots fight about industrial scale sand mining, this development isn't a surprise.
In a critical test of Minnesota's approach to frac sand mining, two
state agencies have called on Winona County to order an in-depth study
of environmental and health risks associated with a cluster of proposed
mines and processing sites.
The commissioners of the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA) and the Minnesota Department of Health each published
formal comments this week strongly urging the county to require a full
environmental impact statement before deciding whether to approve at
least two silica sand mines proposed by Minnesota Sands LLC. The Winona
County Board will have final say on the study.
It's the first time either state agency has called for
such an in-depth, precautionary study of frac sand operations, which
have been booming in southeast Minnesota and western Wisconsin as firms
demand the sand suitable for new drilling techniques that have
revitalized the U.S. oil industry. The industry has created concerns as
well as jobs, with two MPCA commissioners noting possible contamination
of drinking water, lung disease and unsafe truck traffic.
Just down the road in Winona County, the Minnesota Proppant mine and processing complex has hit a wall of grassroots citizen resistance. As Bluestem noted in St. Charles Township and Red Wing City Council speaking truth to corporate frac sand power, over a 1000 people have signed a petition against the project--a lot of folks for a small town with a population of 3,735.
In the state senate district just to the north, State Senator Matt Schmit (DFL, Red Wing) and Tim Kelly (R-Red Wing) are paying attention.
North Star Sierra Club president Margaret Levin didn't speak at the unscheduled press conference in Winona, but responded to Bluestem's inquiries with this emailed statement:
This weekend the Sierra Club, MN350 and allies are joining a delegation of more than 200 Minnesotans who are traveling to D.C. to ask President Obama and his administration to lead a clean energy revolution that will end our dependence on fossil fuels and their devastating impact on our air, water and lands. Communities in southern and southeastern Minnesota are experiencing this impact firsthand with industrial-scale frac sand mining and processing proposals that threaten public health, worker safety, and our natural resources. The Sierra Club North Star Chapter has joined organizations across the state in calling for a moratorium on new frac sand mine proposals until environmental concerns have been adequately evaluated and addressed.
Instead of deepening our commitment to fossil fuels that will worsen the climate crisis -- and which often have greatest impact on rural and environmental justice communities -- we must instead fight for a clean energy future that will create good, family supporting jobs, clean our air and water, and improve public health.
The frac sand activists are gaining the attention of state groups; will they get their local representatives' attention?
Photos: Frac sand activists at the Winona Amtrak station (top photo,by Betty Tisel); Winona area activists Eric Nelson and Jim Gurley (left) and Rep. Frank Hornstein (right) (bottom photo).
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
The Winona Daily News has noticed that there's something about Steve Drazkowski. It's not just that he throws a copy-cat bill in the hopper at the state capitol.
It's that he does this repeatedly, ignoring the lessons of history and the consequences of his behavior for the Republican Party of Minnesota.
What part of the Constitution of the United States doesn’t Rep. Steve Drazkowski understand?
Well, considering the bill he introduced last week, he hasn’t figured out this part:
“This
Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in
pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under
the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the
land.”
That’s Article VI, Steve, if you want to look it up.
Too
bad he didn’t do that before authoring HF 419, which states that “...
no new federal firearms law shall be enforceable within the borders of
the state of Minnesota.”
We’d recommend he join Rep. Greg Davids
and the other 18 Republican members who signed onto the bill in a
weekend refresher course in constitutional law ... maybe the U of M
could arrange a legislators group discount on the tuition.
Of course, Draz, Davids and their co-signers aren’t being particularly clever or original here.
How's that? The editorial provides a history lesson, then continues:
Drazkowski defends his action saying that legislators in 17 other
states have introduced bills just like the Firearm Protection Act he
introduced last week.
If legislators in 17 other states jumped off a bridge, would that be reason for him to do it, too?
Do
we really need more monkey-see monkey-do legislation by Xerox machine,
or might we have learned something from the money, time and energy
wasted on last year’s ALEC-spawned controversies and ill-fated
constitutional amendments?
We might have learned, but Draz and his
co-sponsors haven’t. They’re ever so willing to waste taxpayer money
and state employees’ time on pointless pandering quests that have
absolutely no chance of becoming enforceable law.
Then again, self-promotion is a lot easier than governing.
Drazkowski introduced his Firearm Protection Act last week, which
says that law enforcement officers who attempt to enforce federal laws
on gun control could be charged with a felony.
“It’s intended to
demonstrate and communicate to the federal government that’s trying to
enforce an unconstitutional law that we’re not going to allow that to be
enforced here,” Drazkowski said.
Drazkowski’s legislation isn’t
unique in wording or intent. At least 17 statehouses are looking at
nearly identical laws, including Texas, North Dakota, Missouri and
Alaska. They’re seen as a response to President Barack Obama’s January
proposal to ban military-style assault weapons and high-capacity
magazines, among other reform measures.
Perhaps Draz, who works as a SEO professional, found the bill via a google search, rather than through his connections in the Tenth Movement. Readers may recall that he was quoted in a 2010 ALEC press release pushing the "Repeal Amendment":
“The federal government continues to squash the sovereignty rights of
the states as guaranteed by the 10th amendment to the U.S. Constitution
unrelentingly and at an accelerating pace. From countless unaffordable
federal mandates imposed upon Minnesota's healthcare system, education
programs, and even families, the overreach of Congress has gone
unchecked. It's time for the states to restore their
Constitutionally-protected autonomy, and that's why I am going to
sponsor the Article V application for the Repeal Amendment.” Steve Drazkowski, member, Minnesota House of Representatives
Trying to enforce a state law that would ban the enforcement of
federal law would be quite a challenge, said Winona County Attorney
Karin Sonneman.
“I think the act itself as proposed is very
problematic under interpreting the supremacy clause,” Sonneman said,
referring to the part of the Constitution that says federal law
supercedes state law.
Photoshop: The Chocolate Draz is back with another zombie bill. Once a victim is bitten, he just keeps spreading this malarkey. Image by Tild.
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
A St. Cloud Times reader noticed something amiss with a passage in former "Doctor No" state representative and Taxpayers League of Minnesota president Phil Krinkie's commentary Your turn: Government must curb spending:
With the Christmas of 2012 behind us and the “fiscal cliff” of 2013 narrowly avoided, it’s time to pause and consider what lies ahead for our country and our state.
In “A Christmas Carol” by Charles Dickens, the stodgy accountant Ebenezer Scrooge is visited by three ghosts. ... The last ghost to a visit is the “Ghost of Christmas yet to Come.” This spirit appears only in a black hooded robe. It never speaks but only gestures with one hand. He presents Scrooge with an ominous picture of the future to persuade him to change his ways. . . .
In “A Christmas Carol,” Scrooge’s former partner, Jacob Marley, who died seven years before, appears bound in heavy chains.
Every day that Congress fails to enact true spending reform adds another link in a chain of debt for future generations. . . .
As in the picture portrayed by the “Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come,” there is a bleak and gloomy future ahead unless our elected officials at every level of government tighten their belts and reduce the level of government spending. . . .
I just finished reading the Jan. 12 Your Turn “Government must curb
spending,” by Phil Krinkie, president of the Taxpayers League of
Minnesota.
Now I’m not a literary scholar,
mind you, but it seems to me the gentleman sort of missed the point of
Charles Dickens’ “Christmas Carol.”
Wasn’t
the whole reason that Marley was in chains was because he was a greedy,
selfish businessman who never wanted to help anybody, certainly not
because he spent too much?
Of
course, I guess maybe the opinion was referring to the government
charity businesses receive in various forms. My guess that’s not what
was meant. Well, maybe the writer needs to see “Christmas Carol” a few
more times to get its real message.
It's available on DVD.
So why was Marley in chains? And what did the Ghost of Christmas bring to Scrooge?
Vick may be no scholar, but his memory of Marley is close to Dickens' text:
"I have none to give," the Ghost replied. "It comes from other
regions, Ebenezer Scrooge, and is conveyed by other ministers, to other
kinds of men. Nor can I tell you what I would. A very little more, is
all permitted to me. I cannot rest, I cannot stay, I cannot linger
anywhere. My spirit never walked beyond our counting-house -- mark me!
-- in life my spirit never roved beyond the narrow limits of our
money-changing hole; and weary journeys lie before me!" . . .
"But you were always a good man of business, Jacob," faltered Scrooge, who now began to apply this to himself.
"Business!" cried the Ghost, wringing its hands again. "Mankind
was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy,
forbearance, and benevolence, were, all, my business. The dealings of
my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my
business!" . . .
"At this time of the rolling year," the spectre said "I suffer
most. Why did I walk through crowds of fellow-beings with my eyes
turned down, and never raise them to that blessed Star which led the
Wise Men to a poor abode! Were there no poor homes to which its light
would have conducted me!" . . .
"That is no light part of my penance," pursued the Ghost. "I am here
to-night to warn you, that you have yet a chance and hope of escaping my
fate. A chance and hope of my procuring, Ebenezer."
But perhaps Krinkie exercises the most literary license in chaining the Ghost of Christmas Yet To Come to the spirit of austerity. Dicken's Final Ghost may not speak, but he reveals only a tomb for Scrooge should the merchant cleave to his tight-fisted ways. Scrooge vows to abandon his tight-fisted ways and honor the spirit of Christmas:
"Spirit!" he cried, tight clutching at its robe, "hear me. I am not the man I was. I will not be the man I must have been but for this intercourse. Why show me this, if I am past all hope?"
For the first time the hand appeared to shake.
"Good Spirit," he pursued, as down upon the ground he fell before it: "Your nature intercedes for me, and pities me. Assure me that I yet may change these shadows you have shown me, by an altered life."
The kind hand trembled.
"I will honour Christmas in my heart, and try to keep it all the year. I will live in the Past, the Present, and the Future. The Spirits of all Three shall strive within me. I will not shut out the lessons that they teach. Oh, tell me I may sponge away the writing on this stone!"
The stone was that on his own grave. Dickens writes of the transformation Scrooge experienced upon his waking:
"Now, I'll tell you what, my friend," said Scrooge, "I am not going to stand this sort of thing any longer. And therefore," he continued, leaping from his stool, and giving Bob such a dig in the waistcoat that he staggered back into the Tank again; "and therefore I am about to raise your salary."
Bob trembled, and got a little nearer to the ruler. He had a momentary idea of knocking Scrooge down with it, holding him, and calling to the people in the court for help and a strait-waistcoat.
"A merry Christmas, Bob," said Scrooge, with an earnestness that could not be mistaken, as he clapped him on the back. "A merrier Christmas, Bob, my good fellow, than I have given you for many a year. I'll raise your salary, and endeavour to assist your struggling family, and we will discuss your affairs this very afternoon, over a Christmas bowl of smoking bishop, Bob. Make up the fires, and buy another coal-scuttle before you dot another i, Bob Cratchit!"
Scrooge was better than his word. He did it all, and infinitely more; and to Tiny Tim, who did not die, he was a second father. He became as good a friend, as good a master, and as good a man, as the good old city knew, or any other good old city, town, or borough, in the good old world. . . .
Poor Doctor No! The lessons in Christmas Carol is not belt-tightening nor are the chains that Marley rattles the chains of debt. And as a corrective allusion, it's a major fail--for who would root for the death of Tiny Tim in further belt-tightening? Other than Doctor No?
George Bernard Shaw remarked that Dickens' vision in Great Expectations was more seditious than Marx's Das Kapital; while Dickens created compelling storylines and memorable characters, his works addressed social inequity and class oppression.
One suspects that were he living today, Dickens would have skewered the likes of Krinkie and the West Metro One-Percent Club that funds the TP League, as well as their gospel of Grover Norquist. Krinkie can certainly have his opinions, but perhaps he'd best stick to Ayn Rand for literary allusions.
Images: Ghost of Christmas Present revealing Ignorance and Want (top); Marley's Ghost (middle); the Ghost of Christmas Yet To Come and Scrooge at his grave (bottom).
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
Last week, Minnesota learned that the National Republican Congressional Committee had once more ritually named Minnesota's Blue Dog Seventh District Congressman Collin Peterson vulnerable.
Beltrami County was represented during President Obama’s inauguration Monday morning. . . .And yes, that is Jay-Z and his wife Beyoncé standing behind him.
After the photobomb, can a cameo with Peterson's cover band, The Second Amendments, be far behind? Jay-Z did record Collision Course with Linkin Park, so anything is possible. This is America, after all.
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
All of the statements, opinions, and views expressed on this site by Sally Jo Sorensen are solely her own, save when she attributes them to other sources.
The opinions, statements, and views of contributing writers are their own.
Sorensen, editor and proprietor of Bluestem Prairie, served as a New Media training and strategy consultant for the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party from October 2009 through mid-April 2010. She now serves clients in the business and nonprofit sectors.
Recent Comments