The following conversation is a “fake but accurate” synthesis of several conversations, emails and twitter threads.
Names were changed to protect the gullible.
DFLer: Target is radically anti-gay and anti-immigrant!
ME: Er, how do you figure? Target has been the most pro-gay corporation in town! They even sponsor the “pride” parade.
DFLer: Because they gave money to a radical extremist anti-gay and anti-immigrant political action committee!
ME: What, MNForward? Go and read their website; they are purely interested in business issues. Not only do they take absolutely no stands on social issues, but they’ve endorsed three DFL candidates who, supposedly, endorse their own party’s putatively gay-friendly [the term you want is “gay-exploitive” – Ed.] issues.
DFLer: Doesn’t matter. They support Tom Emmer.
ME: …and…?
DFLer: Tom Emmer is a radical extreme anti-gay politician.
ME: Um no. He’s said in as many words that his focus as governor is on jobs, the state economy, and re-engineering state government.
DFLer: But he’s an anti-gay extremist! He sponsored a measure against gay marriage!
ME: Can something be “extreme” when the vast majority of Minnesotans, even younger ones, support the traditional definition of marriage? Is that even logically possible? At all?
DFLer: Um…A HAH! Emmer is a big financial supporter of You Can Run But You Can Not Hide, a radical Christianist ministry that supports executing gays. He even had his picture taken with them! Even called them “nice guys”.
ME: Emmer’s “Donation” was buying a $250 seat at a fundraiser for a teen outreach; no politics were involved at all. And Emmer’s had pictures taken with pretty much every person in the state over the past year. And whether you like their theology or not, Brad Dean and Jake McMillan are, indeed, personable.
DFLer: Executing gays! Doyyyyy!
ME: The quote was wrenched far out of context. Dean was talking on the air, off the cuff, about different nations’ adherence to ultra-orthadox theology. Not grading moral correctness, and emphatically not issuing a call to action.
DFLer: Er…says you!
ME: Well, no – says Bradlee Dean. I called him and asked.
DFLer: But…they’re anti-immigrant!
ME: Why?
DFLer: Because they’re anti-gay!
ME: Um, we just showed they’re not. And, by the way, the traditional Catholicism of so many Latino immigrants is pretty explicit in its views on gays!
DFLer: So you’re saying Target is Catholic? Hahahahaha! I pwn3d you!
ME: Er…yeah. I know when I’ve met my match.
The trackers Dayton shirts got on channel 5 and the #4 today.
DFLer: Emmer hates women too! He made his poor wife bear seven children! He’s anti-choice!!!
I’ve been impressed by the comparative accuracy of Emmer vs Dayton and other ads. But I still dislike his proposed policies.
I don’t consider Target radical or anti-gay. I object to corporations making large, effectively unlimited political donations – to ANY political party, because it diminshes the impact of individual citizens who should be influencing government more than corporations. They have plenty of opportunity to influence politics through their lobbying, without having it directly influence elections by such donations.
Whether or not a majority thinks something doesn’t determine whether or not it is correct. We have seen a majority of people in other eras be for slavery and against women voting, and against anyone who was not a property owner voting, even against private ballots (no, we didn’t always have those). You claim a majority – which has been changing; I’m not even sure what the most recent polls show – and I don’t care.
Emmer is against full equality for people regardless of gender/orientation; he has favored votes which reflect his conservative position that one’s gender or affectional preference should matter to anyone else except the involved parties between two consenting adults.
As to the trackers — gee, what a shame that trackers won’t be sharing wiht anyone what Bachmann had to say at the Ammunition plant. Seems not even the people attending could record it.
WHY? So much for transparency. If you’re going to snark about Dayton and trackers while giving your darling Michele a free pass, then you are being a hypocrite. I haven’t seen any similar attempts to hide by Dayton. Either tracking is fair, and that kind of transparency is important – or it is not. Fair is fair.
DFLer: Emmer hates women too! He made his poor wife bear seven children! He’s anti-choice!!
That’s not all — if he hadn’t forced his wife to have that last kid, he wouldn’t have been at the kid’s First Communion and he would have made that green debate back in May. He’s anti-matter!
As to the trackers — gee, what a shame that trackers won’t be sharing wiht anyone what Bachmann had to say at the Ammunition plant.
Given the way the things Bachmann says make the heads of liberals explode, this was probably a matter of public safety, Mrs. Teasdale.
As to the trackers — gee, what a shame that trackers won’t be sharing wiht anyone what Bachmann had to say at the Ammunition plant. Seems not even the people attending could record it.
Which is hardly uncommon at campaign stops under a variety of circumstances. I’m not immediately familiar with conditions at the ammo plant speech; neither, I suspect, is DG.
WHY? So much for transparency.
Wait – you said “Bachmann is teh crazee”. How would you know that if there weren’t enough “transparency” that people could actually “know” this “fact?”
If you’re going to snark about Dayton and trackers while giving your darling Michele a free pass, then you are being a hypocrite.
I was afraid this was going to happen. You’ve adopted one of Pen’s worst habits; inappropriately ascribing contention to “Hypocrisy”. Hypocrisy means holding other people to a moral standard I’m unwilling to follow myself.
This is absurdly wrong.
When Bachmann gives public speeches on public property, the DFL has every right to track her. When on private property, the property owner can set conditions (so far). I have done interviews with Bachmann (and every other state and federal GOP candidate) with trackers in attendance; no biggie! You may expect that if she appears with the NARN at the Fair, there’ll be a tracker (unless the DFL has given up and switched to just making it all up as they go along – a distinct possibility).
And as Foot noted, the media is apparently there. And a good chunk of the media acts as de facto trackers (of Republicans; not so much of Betty McCollum or Keith Ellison or Tarryl Clark).
“Transparently” apparently isn’t sufficient for you; you want complete prostration before the left’s noise machine.
I haven’t seen any similar attempts to hide by Dayton.
That’s because you’re comparing apples and ammunition. Bachmann has never once complained that the DFL is watching her. Dayton is doing exactly that
Either tracking is fair, and that kind of transparency is important – or it is not. Fair is fair.
Well, then, mission accomplished! Other than (unspecified, vague and quite possible erroneous) claims about Bachmann’s speech at an ammunition plant, there’s no real difference…
…other than Dayton’s whinging.
(Perhaps you’re concatenating arguments here; the lefty “alt” media has had a chanting point for about three years now that Bachmann only does “conservative media”, avoiding the liberal media. It’s not a dumb plan on her part, actually – and, as I established three years ago, the likes of Ellison, Bachmann, Coleman, Franken, Klobuchar and McCollum avoid conservative media, too).
Dog Gone wrote:
I object to corporations making large, effectively unlimited political donations – to ANY political party, because it diminshes the impact of individual citizens who should be influencing government more than corporations.
I assume you mean any corporate entity that reflects the political interests of its stakeholders, i.e. for-profit corporations, non-profit corporations, labor unions, professional associations?
Dog Gone, how does your objection allow for free political speech?
Whether or not a majority thinks something doesn’t determine whether or not it is correct.
Then how do you determine if it is correct? What source of truth are you relying on? Is the “correctness” you would like to use as a measuring stick absolute or contingent?
DG;
You are such a typical hypocritical left wingnut and you have, once again, illustrated that you don’t have a clue.
As Terry has observed, under your standards and under the standards of 99.99% of liberals, you only object to it if it is conservative leaning organizations.
God, you can’t possibly be that ignorant and naive!
the comparative accuracy of Emmer vs Dayton
Yabbut, Dayton and ABM’s ads are famously inaccurate.
Whether or not a majority thinks something doesn’t determine whether or not it is correct
Perhaps. Perhaps not. And utterly irrelevant.
The question isn’t “is single sex marriage right or wrong”. It’s “is supporting a traditional-marriage amendment “extreme?”. If the vast majority of a population agrees, then it can logically not be “extreme”.
I object to teachers being forced to join left wing unions as a condition of their employment, then having money confisciated from their checks and sent to left wing organizations.
“Dayton and ABM’s ads are famously inaccurate.”
And that MAN wants to be governor!
As regards Dog, Mitch observed “I was afraid this was going to happen. You’ve adopted one of Pen’s worst habits; inappropriately ascribing contention to “Hypocrisy”“.
Another is the seeming inability to engage in a conversation. Proclamation, not conversation makes for a very dull Doggie.
Being a conservative, I am used to having my beliefs challenged all the time. Being a liberal, Dog Gone is not used to having her beliefs challenged at all. Hence Dog Gone’s proclamations that the mainstream, majority held belief in the traditional definition of marriage is “extreme”, and that her preferred, minority position is not extreme, it is “correct”.
Dog Gone wrote:
“Emmer is against full equality for people regardless of gender/orientation”
IOW, he is against same sex “marriage”.
Same sex “marriages” can never be equal to normal marriages. Same sex couples can *never* consummate a marriage and can *never* reproduce.
Chuck said:
“I object to teachers being forced to join left wing unions as a condition of their employment, then having money confisciated from their checks and sent to left wing organizations.”
I object to having a Teachers Union at all.
Are they “professionals” or not? They act like it when they want to exclude people from taking teacher jobs, but real pros don’t need union protection.