Foot In The Door: Tony Hernandez

If you live in the Fourth Congressional District and are anything but a teachers union member, a transit zealot, a peace creep, a radical supporter of the civil sacrament of abortion or an environmentalist weenie, you get used to not really being represented at all.  Some of us have taken to adopting John Kline and/or Michele Bachmann as our representative in Congress.

Because Betty McCollum is an out-and-out disaster.  If she were representing any district other than Saint Paul (which, up until this past redistricting, really was the Fourth CD), she’d have never gotten endorsed for soil and water commission.

And in normal times, she’d be the punch line for a thousand jokes starting “Everything else in the USA must be fixed, because look what Betty McCollum is babbling about…”;   read her website:  her big mission is cutting off military advertising…with NASCAR, “ultimate fighting” and professional fishing.

Seriously – watch the woman speak.  It’s like she memorizes chanting points from her staff, mentally tosses them up in the air, and randomly re-orders them before speaking, without really understanding any of it.  She is not, as they say, in line for a MacArthur Fellowship.

Redistricting is a potential game-changer.

Not as in a “flip the chessboard over” kind of game-changer; it turned the Fourth CD from a 70-30 district to a 60-40, probably.  But some of those 60 have reason to be upset; McCollum voted with her environweenie string-pullers in Saint Paul to keep her new constituents in Stillwater driving across a bridge built in 1452, or so it seems when you drive across it.  And some of those “60” were people who may have voted DFL most of their lives – but fled Saint Paul and Minneapolis to get away from all the results of having voted for people like Betty McCollum all their lives.

But politics is a little like dating; a lot of money can make a dim Congresswoman just as formidable as a homely guy. And McCollum has the bottomless pockets of the unions backing her up and, seemingly, doing all her thinking for her.

And so CD4 Congressional Candidate Tony Hernandez needs our help.

I’m not sure if he qualifies for the same sort of state match that the legislative candidates we talked about earlier this week do – but that’s even more reason to see if you can dig down and pony up a buck or two for Tony’s campaign.  Tony’s gotta fundraise like a madman to even have a shot at this – but every little bit helps.

So if you can spare a few bucks – well, you know the drill.  Now’s the time.

There hasn’t been a chance like this in the 4th CD in a long, long time.  You gotta try to run with these things.

The Wave Of The Future Has Not Yet Crashed On The Beach Of Public Opinion

Two years ago, during the run-up to the Minnesota Gubernatorial election, I published the results of some GOP-friendly internal polling that showed that Tom Emmer was leaving votes on the table, not so much for opposing gay marriage per se, but by not pushing a referendum on the issue (as opposed to the legislature or the courts deciding it).   Although I and many of Emmer’s libertarian base considered this a feature rather than a bug, it retrospect it may have been a bit of personal and philosophical integrity but a political mistake.

If it wasn’t a fluke.

And a new Quinnipiac poll indicates it wasn’t:

Quinnipac’s latest poll of the Sunshine State finds that 25 percent of voters say Obama’s endorsement of gay marriage makes them less likely to vote for him. On the other hand, 11 percent say that it makes them more likely to vote for him.

Among independents, 23 percent say that they’re less likely to vote for Obama over same sex marriage. Older voters (55 and older), born-again evangelical Christians, lower income voters and military veterans are all more likely than other demographic groups to say that Obama’s backing of same-sex marriage will sway them towards Romney.

And even a low-information DFL voter knows that 23 is bigger than 11.  Probably.

By the way, the Q-poll (insert all May polling disclaimers here) is bullish on Mitt:

On the whole, Romney beats President Obama by six points in Florida, leading 47 to 41 percent over the incumbent president.

We all know what polls in May are worth.  I’m disinclined to put much stock in any of them until Labor Day, when all the low-information voters (mostly Democrats) start putting their voting caps on.

Still, it’s a bit of a morale booster, seeing the Democrats racking up the unforced errors.

Just One More Try

To the Strib editorial board, DFL policy is like that ’87 Taurus you’ve been driving since ’92., on a very cold morning.  Just keep cranking the thing between pumping the gas and eventually – your almost-superstitious faith in that old beater tells you – it’s gonna start.

I was going to write something to that effect.  Joe Doakes beat me to it:

Democrats think Minnesotans should turn government over to Democrats, Star Trib’s main editorial [yesterday].

Nothing like thinking in the precise geometrical center of the box to solidly nail all your hopes to the failed policies of the past.

Joe Doakes

Como Park

And if you whack on the steering wheel, sometimes that helps, too…

Foot In The Door: CD4 Senate Candidates

As we noted yesterday, House of Representatives candidates that can raise $1,500 in $50 increments can qualify for a sizable bump in financing from the state.

Each Senate district covers double the area,  so it has to raise double the money  – $3,000 – for double the bump.

Here are the MN Senate candidates in CD4.

SD 38 – Roger Chamberlain – I haven’t actually heard if incumbent Chamberlain has hit the hit the threshold yet – I wouldn’t doubt that he has.  But if you’re a Tea Partier, a Ron Paul supporter or a fiscal hawk of any stripe, Chamberlain is one of the brighter spots in what was a dismal year in the Senate.  It’d be a nice sign if he were not merely to win his race, but to crush his opponent.  He hasn’t updated his page for the new race yet – I’m sure that’s coming – but I suspect his “donate” link works just fine.

SD 39 – Ray Vandeveer Another incumbent, Vandeveer is a hawk that voted against the stadium and has been a solid conservative throughout.

SD 41 – Gina Bauman – Bauman, a New Brighton businesswoman and city councilwoman, is in her second campaign for the Senate.  She’s the kind of person we need more of in the Senate.  And SD41 is winnable – but getting the bump from the state would be a huge help. She’ll be up against Barb Goodwin.  Need I say more?.

SD 42 – April King is running in the new 42; the good news is it’s an open seat; the less-good news is that it’s one of those twisty-turny gerrymandered districts that pairs some good right-leaning districts up north with a few bat spittle crazy ones in Vadnais Heights.  But this is winnable; that extra bump from the state would help a lot. (UPDATE: I had an outdated link up there before; if you haven’t been there, go!  If you went to the old one, go back!)

SD 53 – Ted Lillie – Ted’s another fiscal hawk.  I suspect he’s doing fine – but again, the worse he crushes his DFL opponent, the better.  Any help will be appreciated.

SD 65 – Rick Karschnia‘s got a tough race – but I’l be donating, since it’s my district.

 

Just So We’re Clear On Things

Joe Doakes from Como Park – who has been getting used to driving down Como and Hoyt rather than University, just like the rest of us lately – writes:

A federal court judge has ordered the light rail agencies to do this study – twice – and two years later they’re finally going to START it?

http://www.twincities.com/stpaul/ci_20648864/central-corridor-constructions-impact-businesses-be-studied

At this rate, the study ought to be done about the same time as the construction.

Near the end of the article:

“Many businesses have reported losing months of revenue, and some have relocated from University Avenue or closed their doors. The 2011 assessment stated it was impossible to separate the impact of construction from “external factors” such as the economy and “world events.”

Dude, let me help you out here. This is “the economy”:

Photo courtesy the Instapundit archives: http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/category/photos/

This is a “world event”:

Photo courtesy US Navy: http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/wwii-eur/normandy/normandy.htm

This is the “impact of construction”:

Photo courtest Minnesota Public Radio: http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/05/13/central-corridor-university/

Are we clear? ARE WE CLEAR???

Joe Doakes, Como Park

Oh, Joe.  If people were clear, we would not  be in this mess.

It just occurred to me – the great Saint Paul tradition of cruising the hot rods down University Avnenue – is now, forever, completely dead.  A hundred shrieking DFL-supporting biddies in Merriam Park can now rest easy; one more bit of fun in Saint Paul has been extinguished.

By world events.

The District, Part III: Shut Up, He Explained

Last week, I asked – what role should a Congressional District GOP committee and administration have when it comes to assisting its associated Congressional District’s congressional candidate, as well as its various BPOUs’ legislative races?

Yesterday morning, I went over some of the feedback I’d gotten.  And yesterday at noon, we looked at an email by newly-elected 4th CD GOP chairman John Kysylyczyn which seems to mean that he thinks that, as regards the district’s various races, there really is no role – and that, in Kysylyczyn’s own words, “To be frank, it does not matter if we are up to any particular speed for this fall’s elections…I sat down the first week on the job and read the state and CD constitutions and the bylaws. My analysis is strictly based off of those documents”.

In writing this series, I wrote to Kysylyczyn to ask him what he, the chairman, thought the role of the 4th CD in fact was.  His response:  “I read your blog and with all due respect, it didn’t rise to a journalistic standard where I would feel comfortable participating”.   Further:  “Because I own a print newspaper, maybe my standards are unreasonable high, but they are my standards and I would ask for your understanding”.

Are Kysylyczyn’s standards as a print newspaper owner too high (he owns the Anoka County Recorder, a paper that prints public notices, syndicated copy and press releases)?  Are mine too low?

Maybe he’ll answer questions for the mere peasants who live and work and try to support a party in the 4th CD?

UPDATE:  Yesterday, on the CD4 Facebook page and website, it was announced that the district will have its first full committee meeting, on June 11.

What else do you notice about the CD4 website/blog?

The Foot In The Door: CD4 House Edition

Elections take money.

Especially if you’re a Republican in what is, for GOPers, a pretty hardscrabble place, the Fourth Congressional District, where the GOP is in an extended period of rebuilding, even as it faces the smothering miasma of union money keeping the DFL fat and happy and fat once again.

Minnesota does, however, offer a bit of a leveler; campaigns that meet a certain threshold in donations get a nice chunk of matching money from the state.  (Yes, it’s government funding of elections – but I’m paying for it, so I’m going to do my best to help my party use it).

Here’s the deal:  candidates for the House of Representatives need to raise $1,500 – in denominattions of $50 or less – to qualify for this match.  In other words, 30 $50 donations, or 1,500 $1 donations, or 150 $10 gifts, all work.  15 individual $100 donations, however, only count for $750 – only the first $50 of each donation counts.  A single $1,500 donation would only count for $50 (and is, I suspect, illegal anyway).

Anyway – the GOP candidates in the 4th CD need to top that threshold to get that money, which in turn gives them both a reasonable amount of money to work with as well as giving them proof they are viable races for purposes of bigger, better fundraising later in the race.

So I’m going to ask you to help out by ponying up something – anything – to help out these GOP candidates for the Minnesota House in the 4th CD. The list, by the way, includes challengers for seats; I’m not going to include incumbent Republicans (of whom redistricting has brought several to the 4th CD; also, for now I’m only including candidates with websites), along with notes about their current fundraising status.

HD 42A – Russ Bertsch

HD 42B – Ken Rubenzer

HD 43A – Stacey Stout – Stacey may have actually hit the threshold.  While she’ll be happy to get any help she can, she may be set – for purposes of matching the state threshold.

HD 53A – Pam Cunningham:  Pam’s about 2/3 of the way there; she’s got about $500 to go.  She’s doing well, but could use any help she can get.

HD 64A – Andrew Ojeda is about halfway there and climbing.  He’s in a tough district – but he’s a good candidate.  Help if you can.

HD 64B – Brandon Carmack is fairly new to the race, running against eleventy-teen term union tool and stadium stooge Michael Paymar.   He could use a financial leg up.

HD65A – Dan Lipp is running against Rena Moran in my district.

HD 65B – Carlos Conway is in one of the tougher districts – but one where he should be able to make a dent, a heavily Hispanic district for whom Obama’s tenure has been a disaster.  Let’s make this one a fight, shall we?

HD 66A – Mark Fotsch and HD 66B – Ben Blomgren are running against Alice Hausman and John Lesch, two DFLers that will be kept alive in suspended animation by the unions for centuries if that’s what it takes to keep their reliable votes.  They could both use a hand.

Senate tomorrow.  The Hernandez campaign on  Wednesday.

The District, Part II: Not My Job, Man

At last month’s 4th Congressional District GOP convention, John Kysylyczyn was elected Fourth CD chairman after a short, acrimonious campaign.  He unseated Jim Carson, the architect of Senator Roger Chamberlain’s successful Senate race in 2010 – which was, before redistricting, one of the Fourth CD’s very, very few successful elections.

In the interest of full disclosure, I was the Secretary for CD4.  I was “the establishment” – for exactly a year.  And I did purely because someone challenged me, once upon a time, to put up or shut up; as a pundit, I freely criticized party officials who I felt were falling down on the job; they asked me if I thought I could do it myself.  They had a point.

And so I got involved,  And I found that some of it, I actually can do!  Anyway – I have no ambition within the party except to help good (i.e., conservative) people get elected.  Which its he same ambition I have outside the party – on this blog, and on my show.

Long explanation short;  No sour grapes.  To blame this article series of articles on “sour grapes” is to dodge the point.

Which is why I’m elaborating on the point so careully.

———-

Beyond that? I’m not one of the “establishment” Republicans who are especially upset that the Ron Paul crowd took over.  Especially in the Fourth CD, the influx of passionate newbies is more than welcome.  I’m a former big-L Libertarian; I disagree with Ron Paul, but I agree with 80% of what his supporters believe.  Oh, I believe the baby got thrown out with the bathwater – the 4th was making some headway – but as a general thing, I think some good people got elected to BPOU and Executive Committee offices.

Now, Twin Cities Republican activist, attorney and blogger John Gilmore is upset.  John – a Saint Paul GOP activist and one of the bloggers at Minnesota Conservatives, has railed against Ron Paul and his movement since the very beginning.

And some of his railing is pretty acerbic…:

The hideous Ron Paul invasion of the Minnesota Republican Party is not quite over–the denouement known as its state convention in St. Cloud this weekend awaits–but enough evidence is in hand to draw some grim conclusions for those who are not enamored of a Jew hating fringe cult political figure who speaks to alienated, fairly ignorant and frequently unwashed lost souls. There are just enough exceptions to this characterization on an individual basis to prove its general truth.

The Paul zombies™ tried their best last cycle and were rebuffed by the party establishment. To these strange persons this was akin to living in North Korea. Their bleating about tyranny is perhaps the easiest example by which to show how they are simply not serious people in a political sense. They have no idea what tyranny is except the infantilized one fed them by friend of David Duke Ron Paul.

…and some of it was counterproductive, in my humble and inbidden opinion; John’s a friend, but let’s be honest; he’s about as subtle as Jesse Ventura on a coke binge; if you know John, you know I’m right.  Right?

Notwithstanding that, I generally support John, because he’s generally right, or at least right enough.

At any rate, at the last convention, CD4 got a new chair – former Roseville Mayor Kysylyczyn (who, combined with deputy and incumbent vice-chair Mike Boguszewski, gives CD4 the least-spellable executive 1-2 team in Minnesota politics).

And while the leadership at different Congressional Districts has many ideas about what the CD committee should do when it comes to helping races for the Legislature and the district’s affiliated US House seat (as we discussed this morning), Kysylyczyn seems to have a different one altogether, if one is to believe an email he apparently sent to CD4 activists. (Gilmore carries the letter in its entirety; I have a copy of the whole message):

…CD’s have nothing to do with legislative races.  It is clearly stated in the constitution.  We also have little to do with the congressional district race.  We are not the candidate’s committee.  In fact, we are not the committee of any candidate running for office this fall.

The email was apparently in response to concerns that, in the month-and-change since the CD4 convention, the 4th CD has not held a committee meeting.

Kysylyczyn (with emphasis added by me):

To be frank, it does not matter if we are up to any particular speed for this fall’s elections.

If you are a Republican in the Fourth CD, you may be wondering if you read that right.  Did the Chair of the 4th CD GOP, in the middle of a hotly-contested election season, coming off a redistricting that gives CD4 Republicans a welcome boost in numbers, really just say the district doesn’t really need to be “up to any particular speed” come election-time?

We’ll come back to that.

I understand that many may not agree with this or maybe things have been done differently in the past.  As someone new to the position, I sat down the first week on the job and read the state and CD constitutions and the bylaws.  My analysis is strictly based off of those documents.

Now, I can’t speak for Kysylyczyn (and as we’ll discuss in tomorrow’s installment, either will Kysylyczyn). but I’ll try to summarize what the thinking appears to be, here:  the constitution doesn’t say we have to do anything, so we won’t.

Read the Minnesota and CD4 GOP Constitutions – I did. The Consitutions spell out relatively few actual duties; elect officers, hold endorsing conventions where delegates elected by BPOUs endorse candidates for Congress, elect State Central Committee members and State and National convention delegates when needed, and a bunch of other little bits of electoral administrivia.

But the two Constitutions are pretty silent on lots of things that Congressional Districts do as a matter of course; fundraising, Voter ID and database maintenance, organizing volunteers, working with candidates, or allowing committee members to go to the bathroom during meetings, for that matter.

And yet Congressional Districts do – and in the 4th CD, did – all those things.  The 4th CD has a few thousand dollars in the bank.  What does the Constitution say to do with it?

Kysylyczyn:

There seems to be this mistaken belief that the CD is some sort of super campaign committee.  It is not.  There also seems to be this mistaken belief that CD’s win elections.  This is not true.

While it’s entirely possible that there are people who believe those things, it’s not nearly as important as the question “then what is a Congressional District Committee there for?”

Marshaling volunteers?

Helping with fundraising?

Transferring expertise?

Collecting and helping to maintain voter lists?

Candidate committees win elections.  There also seems to be a mistaken belief that CD’s sort of bind together BPOU’s that choose to operate as house districts.  This is not true.

So what is true?

If the 4th CD isn’t there to help provide expertise and data and boots on the ground to the BPOUs, and to help drum up help and fundraising and volunteers for the Congressional candidate…

…then what is it there for?  Why does it exist?  To hold conventions, to elect officers, and to kill time until the next election cycle?

Remember – campaigns come and go with electoral seasons. The party?  It’s the part that’s there between the elections.

We’ll come back to the actual “role during campaigns” bit.  Kysylyczyn responds to questions about the dearth of meetings since the CD4 convention (emphasis added):

We are required to hold four full committee meetings per year.  It is my intention to have 4 full committee meetings a year.  It is my intention to have actual agendas for meetings and a real purpose for having a meeting.  Every time we have one of these meetings, there is potentially 100 of our best volunteers who are not spending an evening on the campaign trail.

The emphasized bit is a red herring.

While the 4th CD held monthly meetings over the past year, those were suspended during the thick of campaign season; Carson made it clear that campaigning came first, and excused committee members readily and without question for campaign activities.

Sum total of volunteers taken off the street during committee meetings in 2011:  0.

In the past, there appears to have been a cattle call mentality concerning the calling of meetings.  Just have one every month.

I’m not aware that John Kysylyczyn attended a meeting at CD4 over the past year.  I certainly did – I was the secretary, and except for three meetings where family health issues intervened, I was there for every one.  None of them were held for “the sake of holding meetings”.

It doesn’t matter if we have any agenda.  Don’t bother sending out agendas.  Whoever shows up does.  Fill the time allotted.  To be clear, I do not operate in this fashion.

To be clear and honest, either did Jim Carson.

But all that is administrivia behind the real question:  if the CD4 leadership doesn’t plan on doing something to help candidates – even something as simple as being a clearinghouse for volunteers, training, and the social engagement that helps bring a district together in pursuit of a common electoral cause – then what is it there for?

A launching pad for delegates to Tampa, with quarterly meetings to look at the slide shows?

The big question is this: If you’re a Republican in the 4th CD, do you think your CD should be sitting on the sidelines during the campaign, as the email seems to indicate Chairman Kysylyczyn says it should?

———-

In the interest of fairness, one might ask “is that really what Kysylyczyn meant to say?”

It’s a good question.  More on this tomorrow morning.

Where Was Ellison?

It was a year ago today a tornado skittered through North Minneapolis, killilng one, injuring 30, and spreading damage throughout a neighborhood that didn’t need any more damaging.

Government sprang into action…

…and a year later, the neighborhood is still pocked with damage, with some damaged buildings still scattered about the place.

Congressional candidate Chrs Fields, writing in the Strib, takes Keith Ellison to task over the government’s response:

 A continual lack of focus by U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison, a Democrat representing the Fifth District, led to a failure in making the case for the North Side in Washington. Who else is there to make the case? Instead, Ellison focuses on issues in the Middle East concerning Palestinians, Syrians and Egyptians. They are not the 99 percent of constituents, are they?

To be fair, at least North Minneapolis is free of Syrian tanks, so far.

To be honest, an Israeli bombing raid would probably get Representative Ellison’s attention better than his constituents’ calls.

Fields (with emphasis added):

We live in a political age when, if you live in a politically one-sided congressional district or state, an administrative department can afford to ignore you. Why? Because if a member is from a “safe district,” voters cannot punish the congressman for his neglect.

But if we were one of those “hotly contested” congressional districts or “swing states,” we not only would have gotten federal assistance promptly, it probably would have come with a marching band and a presidential visit.

Behold the exposed id of liberalism, and of the DFL.  As with the gay marriage debate – where one week liberal pols solemnly intone “we don’t play politics with civil rights”, and the next week they whinge about the President’s politics of civil rights harming their poll numbers – government is all about doing what it takes to get and keep power.

As a 21-year combat veteran of the Marines, I know that our community needs a combination of focused leadership and policy changes.

And again to be fair:  Ellison’s leadership is focused – on keeping Keith Ellison in the national media:  posturing intently over the Middle East, furrowing his brow at “Occupy” meetings, seeing his mug on MSNBC.

Dear North Minneapolis:  Are you better off the you were two, four and six years ago?

Insanity is repeating the same thing over and over and over and expecting a different result – in this case, sending Keith Ellison to Washington.

Time to hope for some real change.

Off In Limbo

With all of the billionaire-pork-bill signing and job-creation-bill-vetoing of the last week of the legislative session, there is one curious omission,.

It’s HF 322, the bill to change Minnesota’s family court laws to provide a rebuttable presumption of joint physical custody in divorce cases.

That means that unless there is a clear, compelling reason not to – substance abuse, criminal record, gross inability to raise kids, record of abuse and so on – that the parents will be presumed competent to share custody of the children.

That is as opposed to the current system, where the presumption is that full custody will be awarded to the parent that ticks off the greatest number of evaluation criteria from a list of about a dozen that judges use; whichever parent “wins” the most of those criteria “wins” physical custody, and child support, and the whole nine yards.

If you’ve read my blog for any length of time, you’ll know it’s been a hot button topic of mine forever.  Raising kids is hard enough with a functional family. The number of social ills that trace back to the huge number of single-parent households is absolutely overwhelming.

The bill was presented to the Governor on May 11, with plenty of bipartisan support.

And it’s still sitting on his desk.

Of course, two key DFL constituencies – radical feminists and lawyers – oppose the bill.  The feminists dislike the loss of child support money and the fact that joint custody puts a legal hurdle over women taking “their” children and going anywhere they want to go regardless of the kids’ relationship to a father they deem unnecessary and seemingly (to look at their rhetoric on the issue) presume to be a drunk abuser anyway.

The lawyers’ line is “if a couple can’t agree on enough to stay married,  how are they going to agree on raising kids together”.  But the current system deliberately introduces the stress of a winner-takes-all system into the dissolution of the relationship – the prospect of “losing” ones’ children – which heaps piles of emotional stress (and the billable hours they bring!) onto an already awful situation.  Lawyers oppose the presumption of joint physical custody because it trims down the cash cow of divorce.

Why won’t the governor sign this bill?

The District

In a post in this space last week, I asked what was the role of the eight various Congressional Districts in the various campaigns within the various districts.

Beyond that, I asked the same question of people from seven of the eight Congressional Districts in the Minnesota GOP.

And notwithstanding that the Minnesota GOP Constitution is more or less silent on the issue – it literally says nothing – I got a lot of answers.

Congressional District committees throughout Minnesota…:

  • Help provide Congressional and Legislative campaigns with volunteers for phone banks, lit-dropping and other campaign-time activities.   This is especially important in districts where there is wide disparity in the number of Republicans – like, say, the Fifth, where some districts need a lot of help to carry out a credible campaign.
  • Assist legislative races with fund-raising expertise and contacts – very important, especially in a party that relies on so many young candidates who are not professional politicians.
  • Help Congressional campaigns put extra feet on the street; while campaigns tend to come and go, the Districts tend to have a certain continuity, including bodies of volunteers that have been working campaigns forever.
  • Provide training to new campaign teams at the legislative (and lower) level.  For example, say a candidate in District  68 is going for the Minnesota House, and needs a campaign manager, a communications director and a volunteer manager.  The candidate rounds up three motivated volunteers – who between them have never managed campaigns, directed communications or scheduled, trained and directed volunteers.  The Congressional District is, often as not, able to put those three newbies in touch with people in the District who’ve done the jobs before, and who are happy to help spread the knowledge.  If done properly and consistently, the Congressional District can build a hardy corps of “middle managers”, people who’ve got some background at running the blocking and tackling of campaigns – the “unsung hero” stuff well behind the scenes of a successful campaign.

That’s the feedback I got from people in theFirst District GOP.  And the Second, Third, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Eighth.

But in the Fourth CD, there seems to be a different answer, from at least one quarter.

Nothing.

Zip.  Bupkes.  Nada.  Zilch.

More at noon today.

NARN Live At The MNGOP State Convention

Join Mitch Berg, Brad Carlson and Ed Morrissey live on the Northern Alliance Radio Network at the Minnesota State GOP Convention in St. Cloud.

We’ll be talking with…:

  • Chris Fields, MNGOP candidate against Keith Ellison in CD5
  • Marianna Stebbins, architect of the Ron Paul surge that’s had such an impact on the MNGOP lately,
  • Michael Warren of the Weekly Standard
  • Former State Rep Laura Brod
  • Brandon Carnack, candidate for HD64A
  • Much much more as the day goes on.

Join us from 1-3PMO on AM1280, or on the webstream!

Heard In Passing

I got this via email early this morning:

Scuttlebutt from a trusted source who works inside AFSCME Minnesota Council 5 states that there are interesting developments in the Wisconsin AFSCME. Ever since passage and signing of the “right-to-work” laws in our neighboring state to the east, about 80% of those AFSCME members have “opted-out” of paying union dues.

This is from a source I trust on these things, who is – as noted above – relaying third-hand information.

So I’ll throw this out there; anyone else hearing anything from the Wisconsin unions?

The Most Wonderful Time Of The Year

It’s Syttende Mai – the 107th anniversary of the day that Norway declared its independence after a bloody war of independence, throwing off the shackles of onerous, brutal Swedish rule.

Norwegian forces had fought a long-shot, underground war against the evil Swedes – a battle which may have been the model for the “Rebellion” in the movie Star Wars – ragtag rebels fighting the Swedes and their Finnish and Danish mercenaries, eventually coalescing into a movement that was able to virtually wipe out the Swedes and drive to the very gates of Stockholm, dragging the Swedish monarchy to the negotiation table, leading to the…

…the…

…oh, I can’t go on.  It’s really just the date the Norwegian constitution was ratified.  Norwegians celebrate the event with childrens parades and the sort of stuff Americans do for, well, Arbor Day.

Anyway – happy Syttende Mai!

Here’s A Question For Minnesota Republicans

If you are a MNGOP activist, and you live in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th or 8th Congressional Districts, I have  a question for you.

What involvement does your district have with your district’s congressional andn legislative races?    How does your Congressional district assist your various campaigns at all levels?

Just looking for info, here.

Just leave me an answer in the comment section.

Thanks in advance!

UPDATE AND CLARIFICATION:  And while I do love hearing from all my friends here in the comment section, this post is not intended as a clearinghouse for reasons one is not an activist anymore.

We Can Still Shock The World

You want bipartisan action that actually benefits the taxpayer?

Here’s your chance.

There is one more chance to stop the Vikings Stadium and send the bill back to the Legislature; convince the Minneapolis City Council to vote against the larceny of their Convention Center budget.

There are two votes that are considered swing-y on this issue:

Ward 1 – Kevin Reich
(612) 673-2201
kevin.reich@minneapolismn.gov

Ward 10 – Meg Tuthill
Meg.Tuthill@minneapolismn.gov
(612) 673-2210

Call ’em.  Politely ask them to reconsider the organized pillaging of the state Constitution and the Minnepolis city charter by Zygi Wilf and his well-heeled friends.

If we can win this, then we can get this back to the Legislature…

…where we can then tell our GOP legislative leadership to grow some cojones and tie the tax reform bill to the stadium, or not bother coming back to work in February.

There is opportunity, here.  Let’s make the most of it.

Intellectual Snake Oil

Illuminating: See Andrew Ferguson’s The New Phrenology, in the Weekly Standard. It digs through the history (long), motivations (predictable) and methodology (laughable) of the constant dribble of “social science” that claims liberals are genetically/chemically/socially wired to be good-hearted, open-minded, whole human beings, while conservatives are clenched little demi-humans:

It is a principle of psychopunditry that the political differences between right and left—the differences, in Mooney’s scheme, between those who would fearfully deny reality and those who embrace it unafraid—originate in two personality types. As it happens, the liberal personality, as psychopunditry describes it, is a perfect representation of those traits that liberals say they most admire. Liberals are “more open, flexible, curious, nuanced.” Conservatives are “more closed, fixed, and certain in their views.” But don’t get the wrong idea: Mooney insists he is not saying “conservatives are somehow worse people than liberals.” That would be judgmental, and Science is clear: Liberals aren’t judgmental. “The groups are just different,” he goes on amiably. Indeed, he warns that the truths he reveals in his book “will discomfort both sides.” Fairness requires him to be evenhanded. On the one hand, conservatives won’t like the scientific fact that they tend to deny reality and treat their errors as dogma. On the other hand, liberals won’t like the scientific fact that all their well-meaning attempts to reason with conservatives are doomed.

Depressing:  Googling the list of psychopundits and setting how many leftybloggers take the word of the likes of Theodor Adorno seriously.  Or how many NYTimes columnists – Thomas Edsall in this case – cite the infamous ““Power, Distress, and Compassion: Turning a Blind Eye to the Suffering of Others” study as actual hard science.  Or the number of leftybloggers that think Chris Mooney is an actual scientist:

A young psychopundit called Chris Mooney has just published a book entitled The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science—and Reality, which seeks to explain the Republican “assault on reality.” He is a very earnest fellow, and an ambitious one. He glances over an array of conservative political beliefs and sets himself a goal: “to understand how these false claims (and rationalizations) could exist and persist in human minds.”

His list of false claims is instructive. Along with the usual hillbilly denials of evolution and global warming, they include these, to grab a quick sample: that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2009 will increase the deficit, cut Medicare benefits, and lead to the death panels that Sarah Palin hypothesized; that tax cuts increase revenue and that the president’s stimulus didn’t create jobs; that Congress banned incandescent light bulbs; and that the United States was founded as a “Christian nation.”

The list of errors is instructive because they aren’t properly considered errors, though the misattribution is in keeping with the modern ideologue’s custom of pretending that differences of opinion or interpretation are contests between truth and falsehood. It’s perfectly reasonable for conservatives to assume that offering health insurance to 43 million people will cost a lot of money, and thereby increase the deficit; and it’s perfectly reasonable to distrust notoriously mistaken budget forecasters who say it won’t. The act redirects vast sums away from Medicare, which should require cuts in service. Palin’s “death panel” was a bumper-sticker summary of a rational expectation—that the act will transfer the unavoidable rationing of health care from insurance companies, where most of it rests now, to the government, which will be forced to bureaucratically reshuffle the vast sums spent on end-of-life care. Mooney is right that Congress did not ban the incandescent light bulbs that most of us are used to; but it did ban their manufacture—a distinction without a difference. As for the Christian nation: The country was founded by Christians who nevertheless resolutely declined to create a Christian government. Mooney’s conflation of the American government with the American nation is an error that conservatives are less likely to make. Studies show.

It is a principle of psychopunditry that the political differences between right and left—the differences, in Mooney’s scheme, between those who would fearfully deny reality and those who embrace it unafraid—originate in two personality types.

Someone needs to do a “study” on why liberals are so insecure that they need to constantly puff up their own sense of intellectual entitlement with hack “science”.

But Let’s Be Honest Here

Over the past couple of days, I’ve been listing a few reasons conservatives should take some limited encouragement from the outcome of the stadium vote.  The “Tea Party” freshman class largely did the job they were sent to Saint Paul to do.

But there’s an (heh heh) elephant in the room.  Every Republican in MInnesota knows it.

While Republicans coming off of epic Tea Party-driven victories elsewhere in the country are fighting the battles that come from being ahead of the bad guys – Walker apparently beating back the recall, Republicans in Indiana,  dispensing with the past-his-shelf-date Dick Lugar and the ones in Utah perhaps on the edge of doing the same with Hatch, thinking about taking the House and the Senate, making some serious headway against the Democrat/Union machine in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania – the sorts of things you can do when you’re focused on expanding on the gains like we got in 2010.

But here in Minnesota?

I remember in the early days of this blog describing Minnesota Republicans as “battered spouses” – people who are used to being dominated, controlled and abused, but think if they just give a little moreˆ, work a little harder to be a better partner, maybe it’ll all be OK.

I, like all Minnesota conservatives, had hoped that that had changed.  But this session was a trip back to the future.

I’m not going to say that the  GOP leadership  in the House and Senate spent tthe session pining for the approval of Lori  Sturdevant, or blithely hoping that iif they just gave enough, the DFL would come along and act like responsiblee adults,, or believing that acting in good faith with the Governor Dayton would cause him to act as anything but an office temp for Alita  Messinnger and Elliot Seid…

…but if I try to answer the question “if they were doing all of that, how would  they have acted any differently?”, I don’t have much of an answer.

The DFL is calling the past session a “Do-nothing” legislature.  And it’s a sad fact that the  best we can say about it is that it really wasn’t; as I noted yesterday, they weren’t.

But they dropped the ball on “Right to Work” and “LIFO” – as if giving in to the unions’ threats would keep the unions from working tirelessly against them?

And they bobbled the tax bill, letting the governor veto it twice while caving in on the stadium, giving the Governor a trifecta of cheap victories almost, it seems to the outside viewer, without having to break a sweat.

I’ve heard a few conservatives – angry business people – say they may not support the GOP this cycle, hoping to “teach the party a lesson”.  I think that’s a huge mistake – this state can not deal with two years of absolute DFL hegemony.   And I think most businesspeople know that.

But I think the takeaways from this past few weeks are::

  1. The Tea Party class of freshmen – obstreporous and savvy, with no real desire to win the Lori Sturdevant/Keri Miller “Good Bipartisan Schnook” seal of approval – are what we need more of.  They are genuine conservatives, and provide a genuine alternative to the DFL.  Collegiality with the DFL comes in well behind doing what they were sent to Saint Paul to do.
  2. The leadership has to change.  If it doesn’t, there is no reason to give the GOP any credibility as conservatives if they can’t work like they have a majority – which, after this session, we will have to work like hell to  hold.

Just as the MNGOP administrative operation needs to overhaul its financial opperation, the GOP caucus in both chambers needs to change its approach, and act like a majority caucus.

The DFL War On Small Business: Communique From The St. Paul Front

Joe Doakes from Como Park writes:

After nearly killing Cupcake on Grand, the city is finally considering whether Mega-Mall-style parking lots are really necessary in St. Paul.

The City Council wants citizen input on the parking rule change, so a public hearing will be held at 5:30 in the Council Chambers in downtown St. Paul.

Because that’s a handy place for people to meet. Plenty of convenient parking. Easy to get to. Easy to find. Everybody knows where the council chambers are, and how to get there, and where to park, and how much it costs . . . during rush hour . . . right?

Look, if you want the public’s opinion, you ask the public at a time and place where the public is likely to show up, not just P&Z staffers. If you don’t actually want our opinion because you’re going to do whatever you want to do anyway, the cut out the nonsense and get on with it.

Businesses like Cupcake who plan to invest tens of thousands of dollars in St. Paul will roll with the punches or they’ll go somewhere else. And then you can have all your precious street parking for non-profit welfare agencies and low-income apartments.

Joe Doakes

Como Park

Manipulating public hearings is a DFL oldie but goodie.

My favorite example:  back in 1987, when then-Senator Alan Spears was proposing a ratcheting-up of gun control laws, they scheduled public hearings on the bill.

And then proceeded to move it, constantly, so that outstate human-rights supporters could come and testify against the orcs – or at least stand up against them and be counted.  The DFL counted, then as now, on being able to manipulate the system to keep as few dissenters as possible from attending.

Real Minnesotans still outnumbered the orcs 600-24 – but that was state-level Second Amendment legislation, not Saint Paul parking.

Plan on the City Council being able to say “The public told us they hate having enough affordable parking”.

Of Interest To Ocean-Front Property Owners On Grand Avenue

Joe Doakes of Como Park writes:

Mayor Chris Coleman once said in his State of the City Address that the greatest threat facing St. Paul was global warming; hence, the need to build refrigerated outdoor ice rinks.

Here’s an interview with an actual scientist talking, not a politician. It shows.

Joe Doakes

Como Park

Joe hasn’t gotten the memo; Libs only care about “science” that ridicules the GOP.

Good Thing I’m Usually In Such A Good Mood

Evolutionary news: scientists show facial hair makes guys look meaner:

…men (women, too) viewed bearded male faces as more threatening when the pictured males adopted an angry look.

Facial hair, the authors wrote “may intimidate rival males by increasing perceptions of the size of the jaw, overall length of the face, and by enhancing aggressive and threatening jaw-thrusting behaviors … . The current study is the first to show that the beard augments a threatening behavioral display as bearded men with angry facial expressions received significantly higher scores for aggressiveness compared with clean-shaven faces … . This suggests that the beard plays an important role in intermale signaling of threat and aggression.”

Do you feel lucky, punk?