Closed Circuit Question To Conservatives
By Mitch Berg
This post is for conservative Minnesota voters. People in other states, and Minnesotans in the “Fantasy-based community”, can skip down a notch.
Question for all of you: Representative King Banaian – not to mention the other three Republicans who voted “no” on the GOP budget bill in the House last week – is not talking to me at this exact moment, so I didn’t just ask him or anything – but do any of you actually believe that, had the votes not been there to pass the House GOP’s budget-slashing proposal without it, that Rep. Banaian wouldn’t have voted for it?
If so, why?
And before answering that, make sure you read HF2, which he introduced, a bill intended to bring genuine conservative fiscal common sense to government. And make sure you understand it.
Then bag on King’s conservative cred.
But you gotta go through me first.
January 31st, 2011 at 4:28 pm
That’s what I’ve been telling people. I’ve read HF2, it’s good shit Maynard. They love it now, but when HF2 passes this vote will have the moonbats crying hypocrisy later. probably.
I know, I know…who gives a flying leap what they think. Just sayin’
January 31st, 2011 at 4:34 pm
We’re on the same page, then.
January 31st, 2011 at 5:35 pm
I have no problem with King’s vote against the initial budget resolution. Any adult looking at the situation can easily see that King’s issue with the budget was that it doesn’t go FAR ENOUGH, not that it goes too far. The lefties doing their little happy dance (looking at you @wbgleason) that one of our own is a “RINO” will be the same people screaming bloody murder when a final budget that contains elements of HF2 makes its way over to Fauntelroy’s desk sometime in May (which he’ll sign, because he doesn’t have the stones to shut down the government).
January 31st, 2011 at 6:06 pm
Liberals and the media (pardon the redundancy) are making the assumption that King voted against the bill because it was too conservative, i.e. makes cuts in his district that will make it tough to get re-elected.
But when you compare the budget bill with King’s extensive writings on fiscal discipline, combined with his zero based budget proposal, the reason for voting no becomes clear-the budget bill is not nearly conservative enough.
I suspect this will become a common theme in the media-strong fiscal conservatives and/or Tea Party candidates who vote against ‘mainstream’ conservative legislation. Because the truth is we are far past the point where simple conservatism will get us out of the fiscal jam we are in.
January 31st, 2011 at 6:12 pm
One vote is one vote. If King starts abandoning conservative principles on a regular basis, then I’ll be the first to call him out for it. But I’ve met King and I’ve read his blog for years. Based on those experiences I’d be shocked if he goes squishy.
And what johnsq316 said about the endgame.
January 31st, 2011 at 6:26 pm
I disagree jonsq316, I think were going for a government shutdown. It will last 2 weeks and then Governor Moonshine will check in to Halzeden (sp?) and were going to have Governor Prettnor-Solon for 3 years.
January 31st, 2011 at 6:49 pm
Small pet peev, Ben. It’s “we’re” a contraction of we are.
I elect people to read and understand these bills, because I A) have little input and B) have less patience. That’s why this novel concept called “trust” is so important. I trust King, because I’ve talked with him, and he took exactly the same stand I did against the ELCA. I’ve read his writing and listened to his opinions. Like Mitch Berg, or Hinderaker, or St. Paul Ward or Chad the Elder, I have heard consistent, thoughtful opinion I TRUST. That is what I want in a legislator. There isn’t a DFLer in St. Paul I would loan a dime to. And Governor Dayton I would keep as far from my liquor cabinet as possible.
January 31st, 2011 at 6:56 pm
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by mitchpberg, Bill Gleason. Bill Gleason said: King’s issue with budget was that it doesn’t go FAR ENOUGH, not that it goes too far. http://bit.ly/hkfVHA that's not what he said #stribpol […]
January 31st, 2011 at 7:38 pm
For as much experience as he has, I was absolutely stunned by Bob Shipman’s (BillsandVotes.com) savage critic of Bananaman and the others for voting against this bill.
He came off incredibly naive and if hadn’t seen the source, I would have assumed it been written by some over-eager political noob that doesn’t understand the behind the scenes drama that is legislating.
January 31st, 2011 at 9:00 pm
Kermit, I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said, and I have met King on multiple occasions (at MOB parties) and like him and think we are both on the same page economically. The part of john’s comment I was “attacking” was this part
(which he’ll sign, because he doesn’t have the stones to shut down the government)
I don’t think he signs the bill, he is a stubborn SOB and will cave, but only after he is hammered as weak by the NEA, SEIU and every other union that funded his and ABM coffers this past election. I will be stunned, personally, if we still have a Governor Dayton come Halloween. It will be the most embaressing moment in Minnesota politically, which is really saying something considering we elected a wrestler Governor and a “comedian” Senator. Sorry about the possible confusion.
January 31st, 2011 at 9:12 pm
Ben, don’t sell Mark Dayton short. He’s a tremendous slouch. My prediction: he will spend all four years doing everything possible to f*** up Minnesota and then hop in his Bentley and ride off into the sunset. His early odds of reelection? -100%.
January 31st, 2011 at 9:44 pm
I think Dayton will veto any Republican endorsed Budget. Not because he has “stones”, but, because his handelers will remind Mad Mark of Clinton’s showdown with Gingrich and how with a compliant media championing the DFL cause he may very well win public support.
Idea for Mitch’s show or this blog and not related to this topic. Find an Egyptian Coptic Christian and ask them how the events in Egypt will affect the Church in Egypt.
January 31st, 2011 at 10:41 pm
Mark Dayton will absolutely veto anything the GOP legislature passes. He is a creature of habit, and devoid of anything remotely connected with reason or principle.
Anyone who actually voted for this creep should be first in line to reap the results of stupid governance.
February 1st, 2011 at 6:33 am
The only thing Bananaman should be condemned for at this point is his golf swing. U-G-L-Y.
February 1st, 2011 at 6:34 am
What? The mod queue again?
I think I’ve just been Swiftee’d.
February 1st, 2011 at 6:34 am
Oh, I see. What happened there.
February 1st, 2011 at 7:18 am
Even my true blue Senator cast one conservative vote last session. But nobody has or should question her liberal creds. Like Mr. D says, one vote is just one vote.
February 1st, 2011 at 9:06 am
King plays golf? Do they make clubs that short?
February 1st, 2011 at 9:48 am
Seeing as I think this post is somewhat directed at myself from a comment I left yesterday (and that I don’t uses da English very goodly), I will defend myself.
King’s logic in saying that the U of M system has not taken the cuts that MnSCU has is quite a stretch. Rule #1 of voting as an elected official is that you vote on the issue at hand. Using moral equivalency tests are for the intellectually lazy. Just because one party got/didn’t get something, doesn’t mean you reward/punish a different party. In this case, its two separate and independent higher ed systems.
So what King did was let non-germane issues impact his decision making. Is it one vote? Yes. But you have to be careful where the Dark Side of th Force leads you. As I stated in my own closed circuit comment to King: Don’t start thinkin’ you’re gonna win over those public employees at SCSU with a throw-away vote like you just did. They ain’t gonna vote for you much less give you the time of day, no matter HOW many times you throw them freebies and gimmies.
February 1st, 2011 at 10:07 am
I would further note, I did not “bag” on King’s conservative cred. It was more of a slap on a vote he too, early in his political career, and the rationale he used was more pandering to his SCSU cohorts versus doing-the-right-thing. He should expect praise when he does well, but he better be prepared when he screws-the-pooch.
February 1st, 2011 at 11:08 am
My question for you, MyGovIsNuts, is this:
Are you going to attack members of your party EVERY time Doug Grow prompts you to do so?
February 1st, 2011 at 11:46 am
Troy:
Answer: Yes. When glory-hound, camera-chasing idiots like Laura Brod proudly crow with pride over ramming the residents of Hennepin County for a stadium for a billionaire octogenarian and his handful of millionaire employees…Yes I Will. When a tribe of squishy “moderate” former elected officials (who claim to be Republican) defy the endorsing convention and the choice of the elected delegates to endorse and aid another party’s candidate (directly bringing us Mark Dayton)…Yes I Will.
I can go on and on and on. King deserves a little tap on the shoulder, not a rap on the knuckles. But defending his vote is not an option. Because it was lousy. And I didn’t need Dougie Grow to tell me that…
February 1st, 2011 at 12:27 pm
MyGovIsNuts:
“And I didn’t need Dougie Grow to tell me that…”
Well that’s exactly how it looks. Like “Dougie Grow”, you pretend to know exactly why Representative Banaian voted as he did, using words he didn’t seem to say:
“If you honestly think you have to keep funding Womyn’s study or diversity programs”
“Using moral equivalency tests”
“”thinkin’ you’re gonna win over those public employees”
All in the most respectful of terms:
“Listen up Bubba”
So, do you want to influence Representative Banaian’s opinion and future votes, or just helpfully remind him that he has some jerks in his party too?
February 1st, 2011 at 2:07 pm
Jerks in the MN GOP? Impossible!
February 1st, 2011 at 3:19 pm
Troy: Politics is a full-contact sport. The little added ‘spice’ I used in my comments is a WHOLE lot more tame than ANYTHING he will see in his eMail inbox. But thank you for continuing to divert from the subject and attacking syntax or words.
February 1st, 2011 at 3:43 pm
MyGovIsNuts: Politics is full of people excusing bad behavior for one reason or another. Let’s aim higher. And if you want to persuade, you may have to use persuasive words.
I do apologize for diverting attention from the subject at hand.
You think Representative Banaian voted no on this one bill to allow state government to waste money on useless MNSCU programs in order to pander to public employees. From where do you get that information?
February 1st, 2011 at 6:22 pm
In the immortal words of Sargeant Hulka: “Lighten up, Francis” This ain’t a Harvard debate. Your moaning reminds me of the Media Elite and DFL (sorry for the redundancy) over the Tucsan shooting…but feel free to cleanse our language to your heart’s content.
I will RE-issue my comments on King’s ‘conservative cred’. I have not ONCE impugned him.
However, when, in his OWN words, he indicated he was voting no on this was due to the U of M not experiencing the same length-and-breadth of cuts is not germane to the issue he was voting on. It also smells of a cop-out, on an issue, where he is employed within the MnSCU system, has a number of peers to which he has personal (and perhaps both professional and political) relationships.
And do I think MnSCU (and the U of M system) waste money on idiot (oh, I’m just so mean…using that word!) programs? YES. I GRADUATED FROM A MNSCU SCHOOL. I saw it. If you don’t believe me, go look at the program offerings or a catelog of classes.
But as Mitch writes, it was just easier to push the red button as he avoids trouble from his peers, but still gets the bill through. I hope this is the last time King wanders off the reservation into “Easy Vote” land.
February 1st, 2011 at 10:08 pm
MyGovIsNuts said:
“I hope this is the last time King wanders off the reservation into “Easy Vote” land.”
Yeah, it’s me who needs to “lighten up”. You just keep pretending you “know stuff” and than I am the one acting like Doug Grow. *shrug*