The smell of fresh-cut grass.

A whiff of the “hops” from my Dad’s freshly-opened Hamm’s, and the smell of baked beans coming from the kitchen.

That hot-tar smell you get in small towns on brutally warm days, when the sun’s been beating down all day – hot tar and dust from the alley, mixing with lilacs from the back hedge as the day finally starts to cool down.

And the crackling from Dad’s old portable transistor radio, as Herb Carneal called a Twins game on WCCO (rebroadcast on KEYJ), calling out names I can still practically recite in batting order; Rod Carew, Tony Oliva, Bob Allison, César Tovar, Jim Holt, Greg Nettles, Leo Cardeñas…

…and of course Harmon Killebrew.

All, each of them inseparably, are part of remembering summer when I was a little kid.

Killebrew, the Twins’ first Hall-of-Famer, as you’ve heard, passed away this morning at age 74.

Joe Doakes writes from Como  Park:

The folks opposing the Stillwater bridge have taken a new tack: we don’t need the bridge because the economy is so bad nobody can afford to move out of the city to commute. In the New Ecomony, we’ll all ride light rail to the soup kitchen.

“Everything we needed to know, we learned during the FDR administration”.

Joe has a larger point:

I may not agree with their conclusion but they’ve got a point: old solutions may not work in the new Obama-ized economy, with double-digit unemployment, double-digit inflation, poorer immigrants replacing Baby Boomers and trillions of dollars lost from the middle class to foreign banks. Time to look at new solutions in light of the new economic reality.

I spend a lot of time looking at real estate records especially foreclosures. I frequently find properties with two, three, sometimes four loans from do-gooder groups and government agencies, often forgivable if the borrower lives there long enough.

The problem with those loans is they are made only to low income people for small improvements to crappy houses in crappy neighborhoods. Putting a new furnace and water heater into a crappy house doesn’t buy you a house worth more or a nicer neighborhood to live in; you just get a warmer crappy house.

Low income borrowers tend to have less cash in reserve so when they have trouble making payments, that crappy house goes into foreclosure and sits vacant until inspected by the city as a Vacant Building at which time it needs a total upgrade to wiring, plumbing, insulation and energy efficiency. No foreclosing bank-owner or new buyer would sink that kind of money into a crappy house in a crappy neighborhood so the house is abandoned until torn down by the city.

Thereby wasting the new furnace and water heater, if they haven’t already been stolen by vandals along with the copper pipes.

New Economic Reality Solution? Stop giving money to poor people to make trivial improvements to crappy houses in crappy neighborhoods. De-fund the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency and the St. Paul Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Stop giving taxpayer money to feel-good do-gooder groups such as Greater Frogtown Community Development Corporation or Neighborhood Energy Connection.

If society must help homeowners improve their homes, the funds ought to be prudently invested in loans to middle income folks with decent homes in decent neighborhoods who actually have a chance of keeping them up and repaying the loans. Otherwise, the money is simply wasted. We all work too hard for our money to simply waste it.

As for the crappy neighborhoods, urban renewal Chicago-style: start a fire at Lexington and let it burn to the freeway. We’ll worry about the East Side next year.

Joe Doakes

Como Park

This blog does not endorse pyromania – but Joe knows real estate.

But it is a fact that Saint Paul is trying to do exactly what New York City did, following every single step of the process that has led every part of Manhattan that isn’t a squalid slum to be completely unaffordable to anyone who’s not a network anchor or a hedge fund manager; harassing small landlords out of business (in the time I’ve lived in the city, the number of small, independent, non-governmental-or-non-profit landlords running less than ten units of housing has dropped from the thousands into the hundreds), destroying the stock of inexpensive housing (as Joe described above), and enforcing absurd requirements on the landlords and other property owners that are left.

Of course, there are no networks or hedge funds based in Saint Paul.  There are fewer and fewer businesses of any kind, beyond government.  Downtown vacancy rates are catastrophic (and masked by government renting more and more space); University Avenue is in the process of being turned into a desert.  The North End, Frogtown and East Side are being gutted, just as Joe describes, by government intervention, coming and going.

Maybe they’ll start a new non-profit to fix it all.

Tony Jones, writing at MinnPost,notes that M the “Marriage Amendment” is, as he says, a “ploy”:

Dear State Senator Geoff Michel and Representative Pat Mazorol,

Your party’s move to put to a statewide vote a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between a man and a woman is unnecessary (we already have a state law on the books that defines marriage as such).  It is also a political ploy, attempting to fire up the conservative base, bringing them to the polls in hopes of defeating Barack Obama.  I hope it backfires on you (and, if a recent poll is correct, it will).

The “recent poll” is just a Strib Minnesota Poll.  I’d normally say no more – Minnesota Polls are unfiltered DFL propaganda at worst, printed mulch at best.  Actual reputable polls disagree.

What this amendment campaign will do is flood our state with outside money from groups that thrive on an embittered and polarized electorate.

And I just looooove the way the DFLers are crying about that now.  The DFL spent the past two generations building an outside money machine; they’ve politicized our public employees, our teachers, our higher education system, turning all of them not only into DFL contributors, but spigots for outside money.  “Outside money” is a huge reason we have a Governor Dayton.

But, most tragically, it will send a message to my friends (and your constituents) like Rachel, that she is not a valued citizen of our state.

And here we get out of “obvious” and into “cynical”.

As I’ve noted, Gay Marriage isn’t a huge issue to me, in terms of policy – but it’s also not a government issue.   So when people like “Rachel” write…

In more than 515 ways (and more than twice that federally) our marriage is inferior to that of my opposite gender counterparts.I am not asking anyone to bless what Karen and I have. God has, and will continue to do that. What I am asking is for our marriage to not be constitutionally banned. I am asking that the state in which I live and love and have my being to not put my right to ever be married to Karen to a vote.

So rather than change those “515 ways” “Rachel’s” “marriage” is “inferior”, we should impose her version of marriage  – which she believes is recognized by God, and I won’t argue, but it certainly isn’t recognized by any major religion, or denomination, or anything, anywhere in the world – on all the rest of us?

The proposed amendment protects absolutely no one. It does not create jobs or attract visitors and would be Minnesotans to our state.

Either do most of our laws.

Back to Jones, who closes with a strawman that I’m getting tired of:

Read her whole post and answer me this: How is Rachel’s marriage a threat to yours, or to our state?

It’s not.

Stop asking.

Her “marriage” is of no consequence to me – I wish them well, personally.  It’s all the more reason to get government out of the business of defining marriage; let people sign contracts (or not) and get them blessed (or not) by any religion they want (or not).

That may or may not be what Tony Jones wants.  It’s certainly not what Big Gay or Big Progressive wants.  It’s not about gays’ ability to marry; it’s about solidifying “progressive” control of society and all its institutions.

The poll was as drearily predictable as the annual stadium extortion-fest; notwithstanding last November’s electoral GOP legislative sweep, yet another Star/Tribune “Minnesota Poll” shows that the public is, mirabile dictu, entirely on board with the DFL agenda:

Sixty-three percent of respondents said they favor a blend of higher taxes and service reductions to tackle the state’s $5 billion projected deficit. Just 27 percent said they want state leaders to balance the budget solely through cuts.

The poll comes [with utter predictability – Ed.] as the Republican-led Legislature and the DFL governor head into the final week of a legislative session still dug in on their vastly different approaches to balancing the budget.

Dayton said the results show the public backs his position. Republicans said the results run counter to last fall’s election and what they are hearing from Minnesotans.

Predictable?  Absolutely.  Whether through editorial perfidy or lazy methodology, the Strib/”Minnesota” Poll has a long history of releasing “news” the DFL needs, exactly when it needs it.  Especially when the issue is especially close-fought; the harder-fought the issue, the more absurdly lopsided the  Strib poll, like the “Humphrey Institute” Poll run for many years by the U of M and MPR polls, seem to be.  Right when the DFL needs it.

My theory; the DFL knows full well how the “bandwagon effect” in polling works for manipulating public perception; the Strib serves the DFL, wittingly or not.

And, sure enough, the poll’s methodology was as predictable as the Strib’s smug headline; emphasis is added by me:

Today’s Star Tribune Minnesota Poll findings are based on 565 landline and 241 cellphone interviews conducted May 2-5 with a representative sample of Minnesota adults. Interviews were conducted under the direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates International.

Results of a poll based on 806 interviews will vary by no more than 4.7 percentage points, plus or minus, from the overall population 95 times out of 100.

The self-identified party affiliation of the random sample is 33 percent Democrat, 23 percent Republican and 37 percent independent. The remaining 7 percent said they were members of another party, no party or declined to answer.

Results for the question about the best approach to solving the budget deficit — primarily through service reductions or through a combination of tax hikes and spending cuts — are based on interviews with 548 of the 806 respondents. The question was reasked in follow-up calls to all respondents because of a problem in the original wording of the question, and 548 of the respondents were reached. Results of a poll based on 548 interviews will vary by no more than 5.7 percentage points, plus or minus, from the overall population 95 times out of 100.

In other words, a group which self-reports its political leaning, whose geographical weighting and mix are unknown (remember the Humphrey Institute’s overweighting of Minneapolis respondents? Which they didn’t bother to report until after the election, even though their actual poll, which indicated a 12 point blowout for Mark Dayton, went out on schedule, right before the election?), and where the “independents” are given no known context, and which gives the DFL a completely unearned 50% head start, shows the public solidly behind Mark Dayton.

Just like it needed to.

I doubt the Twin Cities media will ever admit that the “Minnesota Poll” and the “Humphrey Institute” polls are, intentionally or not, pro-DFL propaganda. But it’s gotten to the point where the evidence doesn’t support any other conclusion.

Speaking of forgetting history – while the  legislative website page for the vote on HF1467 is down as this is written, I’m told that GOP representatives McFarlane and Doepke voted against the bill.

(And, since the final vote was 79-50, by my math as many as nine DFLers voted for the bill, along with some no-shows).

It’d be good to politely let Representatives Doepke and McFarlane know that their vote for against human rights is not appreciated.  It’s good for all legislators – especially the GOP – to know that we Human Rights activists have long memories and sharp electoral teeth.

The House passed the “Stand Your Ground” bill in a solid vote Saturday night.  The margin was 79-50:

The bill sponsored by Rep. Tony Cornish, a Good Thunder Republican and a small-town chief of police, would give a person in a home, car, tent or other dwelling the legal right to decide how much force should be required to defend oneself.

(Although – and the media never notes this – the consequences for choosing wrong have not changed.  The DFL narrative on this has been pretty universally, cynically misleading).

The bill has drawn the ire of gun-control advocates and is opposed by a number of chiefs of police and prosecutors around the state.

But let’s be clear – every single one of these “chiefs of police” and prosecutors are politicians  – elected or appointed- who serve at the pleasure of a DFL city or county administration.

Just like every time a proposal to broaden our Second Amendment human rights.

Just like they did when the Minnesota Personal Protection was being debated.

They were wrong then, too.

A spokesman for Gov. Mark Dayton says the governor is likely to take that opposition into account.

He should “take into account” the fact that during the campaign, he neutralized the Second Amendment vote by claiming to be friendly to self-defense shooters – to have “a pair of 357 Magnums” in a lock box at home.

Think he might have lost 8,000 votes if he’s come out hostile to the Second Amendment?

Think whatever support he has outstate might have gotten gut-shot?

If he doesn’t remember 2000, and 2002, that’s just fine by me.

I have a hunch this happens more often than I’d like to believe…

(More here).

Trading in a “moderate” tyrant for extreme theocratic tyrants?

It may not just be for Carter anymore.  Andrew McCarthy in NRO:

Screaming “With our blood and soul, we will defend you, Islam,” jihadists stormed the Virgin Mary Church in northwest Cairo last weekend.

(Trivia question: Which traditional Lutheran, Episcopal, Catholic or Presbyterian hymn does “with our blood we defend you, Christianity” come from?)

They torched the Coptic Christian house of worship, burned the nearby homes of two Copt families to the ground, attacked a residential complex, killed a dozen people, and wounded more than 200: just another day in this spontaneous democratic uprising by Muslim hearts yearning for freedom.

Just another day on the Arab Street?

Well, yeah – but we did put them there.

Worse (in a sense); the media, always running interference for the Administration, is covering up the true nature of the violence:

In the delusional vocabulary of the “Arab Spring,” this particular episode is known as a sectarian “clash.” That was the Washington Post’s take. Its headline reads “12 dead in Egypt as Christians and Muslims clash” — in the same way, one supposes, that a mugger’s fist can be said to “clash” with his victim’s face. The story goes on, in nauseating “cycle of violence” style, to describe “clashes between Muslims and Coptic Christians” that “left” 12 dead, dozens more wounded, “and a church charred” — as if it were not crystal clear who were the clashers and who were the clashees, as if the church were somehow combusted into a flaming heap without some readily identifiable actors having done the charring.

The narrative was set over the winter; the “Arab Spring” was an unalloyed good thing; it was Obama’s foreign-policy baby; it unleashed a wave of arabic Madisons and Jeffersons.  If we just keep believing.

Really.

“The Ryan Plan is scary! The Ryan Plan is scary!”

While Medicare won’t have sufficient funds to pay full benefits starting in 2024, five years earlier than last year’s estimate, Social Security’s cash to pay full benefits runs short in 2036, a year sooner than the 2010 projection, the U.S. government said today in an annual report.

“The Ryan Plan is scary!”

Both forecasts were affected by a slower-than-anticipated economic recovery, the government said. The estimates for funding add urgency to talks between Democrats and Republicans on ways to cut spending to reduce the U.S. budget deficit.

“The Ryan Plan is soooooooooooo scary!”

“Projected long-run program costs for both Medicare and Social Security are not sustainable under currently scheduled financing, and will require legislative corrections if disruptive consequences for beneficiaries and taxpayers are to be avoided,” according to the report summary.

“Let’s keep doing what we’re doing.  Because whomever is in office in ten years will need some challenges, right? Because the Ryan Plan is scary!”

The Dayton Soup Truck website.

Obama’s campaign – really, has his administration ever not been a campaign? – now claims Texas is winnable in 2012:

Obama’s 2012 campaign manager, Jim Messina, speaking to big-money Lone Star State Democrats at closed-door meetings in Austin and Dallas in March, predicted Obama could make a “serious play” in the cornerstone of GOP presidential politics, according to people in attendance.

And Obama’s senior adviser David Plouffe has told fellow Democrats the nation’s second most populous state might add to his national “map” of contested states, arguing that the huge increase in voting-eligible Hispanic Texans in recent years could bring the state into play sooner than expected.

It’s a theory.  Not a good one; Obama”ll need every penny he’s got in his war chest defending putative Dem strongholds in the next election.  Allahpundit has more.

But just out of a sense of personal endzone-spiking, I gotta ask; where have we heard Obama’s people making absurd claims about their power to turn conservative states on with his smile?  To take a nothing day and suddenly make it all seem worthwhile?

Why, it was right here, folks, and you should know it!

We’ve know for years that billionaire speculator George Soros was funding “progressive” media.  In addition to direct support of many “progressive” “news” outlets (including the local Minnesota Independent, a news site seemingly entirely dedicated to covering Bradlee Dean and Michele Bachmann), Soros also helped launch and fund “Media Matters For America”, which generates the memes that the leftyblog hive uses up and down its chain of command.

But the mainstream media?

Yep, so it seems:

When liberal investor George Soros gave $1.8 million to National Public Radio , it became part of the firestorm of controversy that jeopardized NPR’s federal funding. But that gift only hints at the widespread influence the controversial billionaire has on the mainstream media. Soros, who spent $27 million trying to defeat President Bush in 2004, has ties to more than 30 mainstream news outlets – including The New York Times, Washington Post, the Associated Press, NBC and ABC.

Prominent journalists like ABC’s Christiane Amanpour and former Washington Post editor and now Vice President Len Downie serve on boards of operations that take Soros cash. This despite the Society of Professional Journalists’ ethical code stating: “avoid all conflicts real or perceived.”

Of course, journalistic “ethical codes” are merely frameworks by which journalists can rationalize bad behavior, so that’s fairly meaningless.

The investigative reporting start-up ProPublica is a prime example. ProPublica, which recently won its second Pulitzer Prize, initially was given millions of dollars from the Sandler Foundation to “strengthen the progressive infrastructure” – “progressive” being the code word for very liberal.

And the Pulitzer itself, while perhaps not a Soros joint, also has its slant.

In 2010, it also received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from the Open Society Foundations. In case you wonder where that money comes from, the OSF website is www.soros.org. It is a network of more than 30 international foundations, mostly funded by Soros, who has contributed more than $8 billion to those efforts.

We’ll be following this as it develops.

It’ll be interesting watching the mainstream media rationalizing this.  Expect lots of…:

• “The front office doesn’t affect the newsroom” (although they ignore that nuance when talking about Fox News…)
• “Oh, yeah? What about the Kocb Brothers?”  (Not sure that the Kochs perfectly legal contributes are to any organizations that are ostensibly “non-partisan” and “free of bias”).

But don’t expect to violate the “Society of Professional Journalists’ “Code of Ethics”” in any way.  Nothing ever does.

I’m not sure what bugs me more about this Doug Grow column; the fact that he deemed a bit of screeching DFL illogic newsworthy, or that he doesn’t seem to realize that it’s screechingly illogical at all.

He’s writing about the MN Senate debate over a Human Services bill which would change the way the state delivers health care to the poor, from a bureaucratic entitlement to a voucher system.

Grow:

Apparently, what’s good for the goose isn’t always good for the gander.

That little truth came to light during Tuesday’s Senate debate over health care for the poor.

Sen. David Hann, R-Eden Prairie, introduced one of the GOP’s plans for cutting Human Services costs by taking about 15,000 single adults out of MinnesotaCare and giving them vouchers so they can buy their own health insurance.

Hann sang the praises of the bill: It will save the state money. It will give the poor more choices. It will improve the health care of the poor. It will get government out of health care. It’s the American way!

No sarcasm clogging Grow’s keyboard there.  Nosirree Bob!  It’s the Twin Cities Media way!  All them poor folks is too dumb to take care of themselves!

But that’s not really the issue here:

Then, Sen. Barb Goodwin, DFL-Columbia Heights, rose to speak. She offered a simple amendment to this GOP plan.

She said her amendment would require legislators to test the plan for two years, before the poor were forced into it.

“I hear what a wonderful deal this is for people,” Goodwin said. “We can determine if this plan is working as it should.”

Amendment greeted with silence

For a moment, you could have heard a pin drop in the Senate chambers. What? Us on this plan?

When columnists try to play mind-readers, it’s pretty my much their own minds they end up reading.  Because I know that if I’d been sitting in that Senate chamber, I’d have been quiet, myself.  But not from taking offense at someone thinking I’d dream of being lumped in with the hoi-polloi.

No, it’d be because I’d be wondering…:

• …if Senator Goodwin gets the difference between people doing a job who get health insurance as part of their compensation – the legislators, in this case – and people who come to the taxpayers for help with getting health care?  If she recognizes a difference between someone who takes a job (yes, even an elected one) with full knowledge of what the health benefits are, just like most of us in the private sector do (with benefits that are admittedly not nearly as nice), and…
• …if she realizes how much of the private sector is moving in the direction of self-directed health care – where the consumer makes the key decisions about their own health care…
• …whether she appreciates the idea that vouchers, compared to the trough-slopping reality of most government entitlement programs, gives the recipient some dignity…
• …or, for that matter, giving public healthcare for the poor any chance of being sustainable at all…
• … or if any of that matters compared to her prevailing priority – keep the bureaucracy fat ‘n happy?

Doubt it’d be fit all that into a politic statement if I didn’t have the floor.

A rookie senator, Gretchen Hoffman, R-Vergas, stood, clearly offended by Goodwin’s amendment.

“We’re citizen legislators,” she said, adding that she’d waived her right to receive the health insurance benefits that most legislators receive.

After proclaiming her own goodness, she attacked the Goodwin amendment.

One wonders if Grow would ever call a DFLer a “Rookie”, or write off their defense as “proclaiming their goodness”.

“Political tomfoolery,” Hoffman said.

Again there was silence in the Senate. It had been years since anyone had heard the expression “tomfoolery.”

And later, Goodwin said that “tomfoolery” had never been applied to her before.

If “tomfoolery” means ‘incapable of carrying on a logical argument”, I’ll be it has.

Anyway, here’s what they’re arguing about;

Back up for a moment and look at the plan Hann sings the praises of but — as it turned out — wouldn’t want for himself.

Single working adults who have incomes of between 133 percent and 250 percent of poverty-level would no longer be covered by MinnesotaCare, the publicly subsidized health insurance program for the working poor that’s been in existence since 1990. Under MinnesotaCare, low-income working people pay premiums on a sliding scale based on ability to pay.

The Republican plan would force those earning between $14,400 and $30,000 off MinnesotaCare and into the “free” market. With the help of state vouchers, they could select the health insurance they want for themselves.

Hann says that by “allowing” these people to go into the free market, the state would save $100 million per biennium.

And since they’re “single, working” adults – unlike Grow, I’m using using scare quotes in place of an actual argument – it seems like a great compromise.  Grow’s, and Goodwin’s, only argument seems to be that Senators don’t want to trade their current plans for it.

By that “logic”, Goodwin and Grow should both shut up and go on welfare, including MNCare.

It’s come to my attention that there are Republicans flirting with a public “Racino” – a state run casino, intended to rack up tax money for the state.

There are so many reasons this is just plain wrong.  I’ll give the Republicans the top ten.  Any one of them should be good enough.

10.  A new tax on the stupid is still a new tax. You were sent to Saint Paul to hold the line on taxes.  That doesn’t mean “find reasons to rationalize them”.

9. Gambling has done such wonderful things for Nevada ‘s deficits, hasn’t it? Seriously.  Panacaeas never works.

8.  Ditto New Jersey. Sheesh. Gimme a break.

7. Guido Greaseaballa and his syndicate thank you. Don’t wanna pay up? F*** you!

6. Giving the state more money is like giving teenagers more booze.

5. Yeah, Biloxi, too. We can be a cold Gulf.

4. How does it help pass the budget? I’m sorry – the DFL says it all the time.  Just thought I’d see how it felt.

3. Gambling addiction?  No action on that bet! It harms Afro-Americans more…

2. We owe the Indians.  We took this state from them. It’s only fair that we give them something in return.  Best of all? It’s not “reparations”; it’s a free-market solutions. Everyone wins.

1. Mark Dayton wants you to support it.  The state’s tribes have been solid DFL supporters for a generation- but that’s fading.  Fast.  It’s falling rapidly toward even.  And Indian gaming has been a huge cash cow for the DFL for a couple decades now. If the GOP can be tied to a Racino, Dayton will veto it immediately, and claim credit with the tribes, turning the spigot back on into the DFL’s coffers.

So – it helps the DFL, and it hurts everyone else.

What’s to like?

Bob Collins at NewCut notes the impact of the proposed Vikings Stadium tax on Ramsey County (Ramco):

The county has agreed to come up with $350 million, paid for with a half-cent sales tax increase. That puts Saint Paul, in particular, as the most expensive city to buy things in in Minnesota because it already has a city sales tax in addition to the state sales tax and the transportation tax.

He’s got the figures:

City or County Sales Tax

• Saint Paul 8.125%
• Minneapolis 7.775%
• Ramsey County 7.625%
• Hennepin 7.275%
• Dakota 7.125%
• Washington 7.125%
• Anoka 7.125%
• Carver 6.875%
• Scott 6.875%

It’s all mostly academic, of course; between the taxes and the Central Corridor and the blight, hardly anyone shops in Saint Paul anymore.   If it weren’t for all the people tumbling out of the Xcel Center with their capacities all diminished, not much gets bought in Saint Paul but groceries.

“Oh, Berg, you’re just talking like a Tea Partier”.

Well, no – Collins notes it too:

A person buying a new car in Saint Paul (there aren’t many car dealers left in Saint Paul) would pay a sales tax of about $2,031 on a $25,000 car. Someone in Scott County, by comparison, would pay about $1,718.

Between Saint Paul’s idiotic housing policy, its stifling taxes and it’s  moronic light rail construction, pretty soon the city is going to be like a cold Manhattan.

Only without the jobs and social life and money.

Maybe “cold Flint” is better.

Fox cancels Lie to Me.

Grrr.

…this is how it’s done!

3M had its shareholders meeting yesterday.  Now, you may recall during last year’s Gubernatorial race when Target Corporation donated $150K to “MN Forward”, a pro-business advocacy group.  Notwithstanding the fact that Target is historically among the most gay-friendly companies in one of the most gay-friendly cities in the country, “Alliance for a Better Minnesota” – an astroturf group funded by unions and members, ex-members and friends of the Dayton family – ran an epic toxic sleaze campaign calling Target “anti-gay”, because MN Forward supported Tom Emmer, who had supported a version of the same Marriage Amendment that will likely be on the ballot in 2012.  It was a classic disinformation campaign – a corporate version of “when did you stop beating your wife”.

It didn’t really succeed commercially (Target’s stock tracked pretty closely with other mid-market retailers) or politically.  But it did cow Target into a pusillanimous reaction; the company instituted new controls on their political donations, despite the fact that outside the social media and the lefty echo chamber, the protest was much ado about nothing.

By the opposite token, 3M CEO George Buckley shows how it should be done:

Stockholders sided with 3M’s board and defeated a proposal seeking more accountability on political contributions and another asking the company to reevaluate its position on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s board. The company did not provide vote totals. Both proposals were aimed at 3M’s support of conservative causes, including its $100,000 contribution last year to MN Forward, a group that supported Republican Tom Emmer in the governor’s race.

Buckley knows how to call “astroturf” when he sees it:

“I do compliment Macalester College on having 427 students come and ask questions today,” said Buckley, responding to a question on the first shareholder proposal, co-sponsored by Trillium Asset Management and Walden Asset Management, two Boston-based investment firms.

It was a good-natured exaggeration, although it betrayed a certain weariness on Buckley’s part. About 10 people in the crowd of 400 at St. Paul’s River Centre, including students and faculty members from Macalester and Carleton College, spoke as Walden proxies. In slightly differing ways, they asked Buckley to explain why 3M chose to support Emmer, whose stand against gay rights became a campaign issue. A $150,000 contribution to MN Forward by Target Corp. sparked a store boycott, and the retailer changed its policies on political contributions in February.

As a side issue – how long will the Twin Cities media keep pretending that “Trillium Asset Managment” and “Walden Asset Management” are real companies?   Because they are not.  They are to “investment” what the Minnesota Independent is to “news”; a potemkin front designed more for propaganda than any of its purported stated purposes.

Buckley answered all the questions basically the same way: That 3M doesn’t take social issues into account when deciding which candidates to support and that it had backed Emmer because of his pro-business stance. Buckley also defended 3M’s continued presence on the U.S. Chamber board, something one speaker at the meeting criticized because of the group’s opposition to some environmental protection laws and the health care reform bill. Buckley said staying involved with the Chamber is one way to make 3M’s voice heard in the organization.

So kudos to George Buckley. It’s nice to know we still have some CEOs who can be executives out there…

During World War II, there was a story recounted by legendary Marine fighter pilot “Pappy” Boyington in his book Baa Baa Black Sheep.  He and his flight were involved in a dogfight high over the Pacific; they were outnumbered by a flight of Japanese planes.  He and his wingman, George Ashmun, got separated.  Ashmun called out on the radio trying to find Boyington.  After a moment, Boyington called back “I’ve got five Zeros (Japanese fighters) surrounded”

“Where?” called Ashmun.

“Outside this cloud I”m in”.

I think Hamline U prof David Schultz has gotten a touch of the same thing in  his “Schultz’s Take” post from yesterday:

If ever a party were trapped by its political rhetoric it is the Republican Party of Minnesota (RPM). With two weeks to go before the end of the regular legislative session it is more than ever clear that there will be no budget deal by then, forcing a special session and perhaps running a risk of a partial government shutdown on July 1.

Right now it does not look like there is a common ground or room for compromise–mostly because of the GOP–and the Republicans stand to be the biggest loser if there is a shutdown, so long as the DFL can play it right. Fortunately for the RPM, the DFL is probably unable to set the political hook.

That’s because the GOP is “trapped” by “rhetoric” that won it not just an epic victory last November, but turned around two cycles’ worth of crushing defeats.

We’re surrounded outside that cloud they’re in.

And they’re trying to “set the hook” with nothing but…

• …a message most of Minnesota refudiated last fall – 22% spending hikes per biennium, and private sector workers being obliged to work ’til they’re 70 so government workers can retire at 55.
• …A lot of sniping, carping and attacks.

Schultz:

Since January the positions of Dayton and the Republican legislature have hardened even more, with them turning more firm in the last few weeks.

First, Tony Sutton, RPM Party Chair, sent a letter to the Republican legislators urging them to remain firm on no tax increases. Second, Geoff Michel has stated that the Republicans have already compromised enough in agreeing to spend $34 billion or $3 billion more than they wanted. (Yet he did not indicate how with that compromise the Republicans planned to pay for that extra spending).

Er…with growing state revenues?  The way conservatives always pay for more spending?

Maybe Schultz was busy in March…

Conversely, Dayton has made it clear that he does not support these cuts. He also stated last week he would prefer a special session rather than sign these bills.

The lines have been drawn in the sand. There seems to be no room or avenue for compromise. Both sides are playing chicken, waiting for the other side to blink or give in. As of now, there seems to be no middle ground for compromise, rendering deadlock and partial shutdown a possibility.

Good.

Let Dayton impale himself on the message of “you peasants can work ’til you die so AFSCME can retire at 55”.

The “Fisk” is to blogging what the T formation is to football; almost a historical artifact.

But unlike the “T”, every once in a while a good fisk is a wonderful thing, if only to blow the carbon out of the old rhetorical cylinders.

Sisyphus over at Fraters uncorks one on Noam Chomsky.

Oneo of many highlights, with Chomsky in italics:

We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic.

I would answer myself that I would be strongly against it, because I am on the side of America and not al Qaeda-Iraq. If Taliban commandos landed at President Obama’s compound and assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic, I would be strongly against that, because I am on the side of America. If anti-linguistics terrorists landed at Noam Chomsky’s Martha’s Vineyard compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic, I would be strongly against it because Noam Chomsky is not a mass-murderer – he is merely the mass-murderers’ not-so-useful idiot.

Uncontroversially, his crimes vastly exceed bin Laden’s …

I don’t think the noted linguist understands the meaning of the word “uncontroversially”. No, it does not mean “whatever dumb ass notion Noam Chomsky believes”.

Read the whole thing.

(Scene: Sergeant BUCK SLAUGHTER,a 29 year old veteran of two tours overseas in the War on Terror, is  just home from his tour in Afghanistan.  Hestops by the Veterans Affairs office.  Looking worried he steps up to the desk.  ANASTASIA BECKETT-SCHLUMBERGER  is sitting at the desk.

SLAUGHTER: Hello.

BECKETT-SCHLUMBERGER: Take a number.

SLAUGHTER: I’m the only one here.

BECKETT-SCHLUMBERGER: Then you shouldn’t have to wait long.

SLAUGHTER:  Um, OK.  (Takes a number).

BECKETT-SCHLUMBERGER: (Waits, typing passive-aggressively for about 40 seconds.  Looks up at “Next Number” sign).  “Number 1”.

SLAUGHTER:  That’s me.

BECKETT-SCHLUMBERGER:  (Grimaces). How can I help you?

SLAUGHTER:  Well, I’m just back from Afghanistan.  I just wanna know what I can do about education benefits, and also VA benefits for the shrapnel I got.

BECKETT-SCHLUMBERGER:  (Hands SLAUGHTER a couple packets of information).  Anything else?

SLAUGHTER:  Well, yeah.  I’ve never been all that into politics, but I’m hearing that they’re going to cut funding for Veterans.

BECKETT-SCHLUMBERGER: Oh, yes.  Republicans are trying to cut everything. Grandma, kids, veterans, even kittens.

SLAUGHTER: OK, well, what can we do?

BECKETT-SCHLUMBERGER: You need to call your state representative and demand that they put the following language into the budget… (goes on her computer):  ”

“Add specific language in The Ominous [sic] Bill…”

SLAUGHTER: “Ominous” bill?

BECKETT-SCHLUMBERGER: Whatever.  Let me continue:

“…UES1047-2 on both sides (House and Senate) on page R19 when addressing any overall general cuts and on pages R20 and R21 at the opening of both Military and Veterans Affairs budgets.”

” To read:”

“In respect to the fact we are a nation at war at the Departments of Military and Veterans Affairs are paramount in those operations providing manpower…

SLAUGHTER: So far so good!

BECKETT-SCHLUMBERGER: (continues)

…support programs and services, the following special consideration is hereby adopted for the Biennium ending 2013: The Department of Military Affairs and the Department of Veterans Affairs are to be held harmless to any budget cuts…

SLAUGHTER: Excellent!  They’ll hold all veterans benefits harmless!  Right?

BECKETT-SCHLUMBERGER: (continues)

…in salary, staff, FTE, personnel, equipment, programs and or services including any reductions of deputy commissioners, or the combining of commissioners of these two agencies.”

SLAUGHTER: Um – what’s that?

BECKETT-SCHLUMBERGER: We’re going to make sure nothing harms any of the program administrators or management!

SLAUGHTER: And what about the actual veterans?

BECKETT-SCHLUMBERGER:  The what?

SLAUGHTER: US!  The veterans!

BECKETT-SCHLUMBERGER: Oh, yeah…

SLAUGHTER: US:  I mean, “holding harmless” the bureaucrats and administrators is like sending Military Police on patrol.

BECKETT-SCHLUMBERGER: Don’t care.  Number two!

SLAUGHTER: There is no  number two.

(And scene).

Joe Doakes from Como Park writes:

Two jerks yelling and waving signs about animal rights outside your store for half an hour, scaring away customers and reminding you they know where you live and where your family lives: protected by the First Amendment.

A bunch of people yelling and waving signs protesting government gay rights policy outside your soldier-son’s funeral: protected by the First Amendment.

A mob of union thugs yelling and waving signs protesting economic policy outside your home while your kids are home alone: protected by the First Amendment.

Yes, this is what Jefferson and Madison had in mind for a civilized society, I’m certain of it.

I’m pretty sure Jefferson and Madison knew that democracy had a downside, and that it could withstand having one.

Of course, I’m not sure they foresaw how stupid some Americans would get…

The Legislature – really the GOP majority – has released its take on Congressional redistricting.

Two points:

Elections Have Consequences: If adopted – more later – this map will have some pretty hefty consequences.  While it leaves the three “safest” districts in the state – the solid DFL 4th and 5th, and the very red 6th – pretty much as is (if anything, more solid), it makes some changes that could have impact on the 2012 House races.

• It cuts Tim Walz’ mushy-left stronghold Mankato out of the 1st CD, putting it into John Kline’s solidly-conservative 2nd District.  This means the 1st CD’s fundamentally conservative, rural nature can be maintained.  It’ll be interesting to see how the DFL rationalizes pushing back against this, while fighting to keep the 5th and 6th districts uncorruptedly institutional-blue.
• Other than adding Mankato, the 2nd CD stays pretty solid.
• The 3rd CD’s “purple” days would seem to be over, with the addition of a stretch of solid red to its southwest.
• The 4th and 5th CDs become brighter-blue than before, from the looks of it.
• The 6th appears to jettison most of St. Cloud – the one place where Michele Bachmann faces serious opposition – and consolidate solid-red Wright County
• The 7th morphs immensely, losing the Red River Valley (and, it’d seem, Colin Peterson) and picking up Saint Cloud (blueish) and the far-northern Twin Cities exurbs currently in the 8th CD.
• The 8th swoops west, covering the entire northern part of the state, diluting the solid-blue Duluth and Arrowhead areas with good conservative northwestern counties.

Gerrymandering? That’s the claim you’re seeing from some lefties.  I think it’s worthwhile to note that most of the changes – the First, Seventh and Eighth – actually undo some of the gerrymandering that took place on the DFL’s watch (the Ventura-era court-drawn settlement in 2000 favored the DFL; Arne Carlson completely caved to the DFL in 1990, court settlement notwithstanding.   The DFL isn’t going to like it – but redistricting isn’t supposed to be predicated on the happiness of the party that loses the election.

Dayton has said he won’t pass any redistricting plan that doesn’t have “bipartisan support” – and when DFLers say “bipartisan support”, what they mean is they want to nag the GOP into giving them a victory they didn’t earn at the polls.  There was no talk of “bipartisanship” when the DFL controlled the process with an iron fist; it’s disingenuous, and playing to the ignorant (but typical politics) that they demand it now.

I don’t know that anyone is covering the stadum debate  like Mr. D.

On the debate between Minneapolis and Arden Hills sites:.

The Arden Hills site may not make it through the legislature this time around, because there are far more important issues than a Vikings stadium. But one thing is clear — the Arden Hills proposal is the only one that has any chance. At this point, Minneapolis has to be rooting for gridlock.

Read the link to see why.

And re Sid Hartman’s crabbling about the team leaving downtown (and his employer’s backyard):

Sid’s been grumpy since well before any of us were born, so you have to take this statement with at least two grains of salt. He’s a company man and if the Vikings were to somehow find a way to stay near the Metrodome, it could potentially benefit his longtime employer, which owns a fair amount of real estate in the area. He’s also a Minneapolis man and in the eternal struggle between the Mill City and the Capitol City, he cannot in good conscience support any advantage going to the hated rival to the east (and I don’t mean the Packers).

He’s got several posts on the subject.  Check ’em out.

Then call your legislator and tell them not one dime of taxpayer general fund money.  Wilf is going to make out like a bandit on either site, especially the Ammo Plant site.  His takeaway, and his progeny’s, is going to be well into ten figures in the nine figures.

About a week ago, I started seeing leftybloggers writing posts titled “Why Does The GOP Hate Teh Veterans”.  I knew they were up to something…

The DFL, and Govenor Dayton, have moved from their usual tactic – beating us over the head with women and children and the elderly – to beating us over the head with veterans.

Via Gary at LFR, the commander of the MN American Legion begs to differ, in a letter from Senator Mike Parry (emphasis added):

Dear Governor Dayton,

This morning, I received a letter from the State Commander of the American Legion that recognizes the legislature has openly and publicly defended our stance to hold veterans and the Department of Military Affairs harmless in our budget. The State Commander correctly recognized that the honorable men and women that serve in our armed forces have been a top priority with both the Senate and House for the entirety of this session.

The rhetoric being used by your administration completely disregards the legislature’s intent to provide the funding necessary to provide care to our veterans in our state’s veterans homes, to assist veterans in securing federal benefits and to maintain the readiness of our national guard. At the first hint of discretionary authority, you directed your staff to cut veterans and military affairs.

And I loved this bit:

I grew up in a military household. I served eight years in the National Guard. I have been around the military and veterans my whole life and I know what leadership looks like. What you have done to the military and veterans community is not leadership.

Gary adds:

The sound you hear is Gov. Dayton’s facade of nonpartisanship shattering. The State Commander of the American Legion isn’t an honorary title given to someone for being a swell guy. They’re picked because it’s known that they’ll be the veterans’ fiercest advocate.

Furthermore, the American Legion isn’t a partisan organization. They’ve shown their appreciation for those legislators who’ve been the veterans’ staunchest allies, regardless of political affiliation. Testiment to that principle is the praise Republican Dan Severson and Democrat Larry Haws received in 2007 for their work on the veterans bill.

The real problem, of course, is that the DFL – faced with a GOP majority that has acted with unusual decisiveness to release a balanced budget that capitalizes on savings – is stuck arguing that the Minnesota Management and Budget office, whose commissioner (Schowalter) is appointed by Dayton and serves at his pleasure, is “non-partisan”, and that their fiscal models, which ignore realized savings, are valid in analyzing a budget that counts heavily on them.

MMB Commissioner Showalter has been at the heart of this administration’s attack on the truth. He’s insisted that his numbers are right even though the plain language of the House and Senate bills have mocked him.

Schowalter is a key part of Dayton’s campaign of obfuscation; he – they – are trying to make reform seem impossible…