Just So We’re Clear On Things

Dave Mindeman is one of the small group of Twin Cities leftybloggers who doesn’t deserve to be under police surveillance.

That’s actually pretty solid compliment, given the nature of Twin Cities leftybloggers.

But he obeys a bunch of the usual leftyblogger strictures – most notable among them the idea that conservatives, as they relate us, never, ever ask questions, broach issues, object to things, or any of the other ways civilized grown-ups communicate.

No.  According to this post, we deal in cliches, whining and too-convenient caricature:

Oh, yes.  And they’re mind-readers, too:

Like clockwork, the right wing bloggers get on their high horse and rip into large donations going to liberal PACs. Alida Messinger gave $500,000 to WIN Minnesota and the cries of “foul” go ringing through the righty blogosphere. Example: Mitch Berg at Shot In The Dark.

I wish they would make a factual clarification in their indignation… it is only liberal money that they object to.

Nonsense.

While I don’t expect that Mindeman has memorized the last ten years of this blog, I’ll drop a hint here; I’m one of those guys who thinks that everyone should be able to give everything they want to anyone they want – provided they disclose it.

The problem isn’t that Alida Messinger donates millions upon millions to the DFL.

The problem is that the DFL spends hundreds of thousands a year trying to cow conservatives out of doing it.

For years, they supported speech rationing – like McCain-Feingold with its strict limits on corporate and personal giving but oh-so-convenient exemptions for, mirabile dictu, the unions.

And for the past year or two, they – via their astroturf stealth PR group “Common Cause Minnesota” – have been working nonstop to demonize giving by anyone that opposes them. Target?  The Koch Brothers?  All of those are threats to democracy, naturally.

Alida Messinger and her plutodollars – well, that’s just a response!

Apparently, the progressive side of the ledger is supposed to unilaterally disarm in wake of Citizens United and give proper deference to the Koch Bros., the Freedom Fund, the Chamber of Commerce PAC, or Hubbard Broadcasting.

Except that lefty plutocrats have, for decades, now, ponied up far, far more nationwide than the whole assembled right-leaning money cartel.  
Example:  During the 2002 campaign, Paul Wellstone and Norm Coleman raised similar amounts of money – but Norm’s average donation was a fraction that of Wellstone’s.  His money came from big-money, largely out-of-state donors. 
But that’s not the only history – to say nothing of current events – the Dems want to rewrite:

Then there was the overreach that ended up hurting GOP donations when proper transparency was allowed. Namely, the Target donations to a group supporting Tom Emmer which has chilled Target’s involvement in partisan campaigns for 2012.

Well, it wasn’t an “overreach” so much as “the left finding a corporation that was socially and politically vulnerable to being bullied into compliance with the DFL’s the Alliance for a Better Minnesota’s agenda”.

Conservatives are continuously using the left’s dislike for money in politics to shame us from working to achieve similar dollar numbers.

No, Dave,

We’re using your (plural) craven, cynical hypocrisy on the issue to let the people know what a bunch of double-talking used-car-salesmen are setting the Democrat agenda.

There is a huge difference!

6 thoughts on “Just So We’re Clear On Things

  1. Norm’s average donation was a fraction that of Wellstone’s. His money came from big-money, largely out-of-state donors

    Edit suggestion for clarity. Replace His with either Wellstone’s or Paul’s.

  2. Any chance that he’ll read your response, Mitch? Or will he blindly and erroneously continue to blast this chanting point far and wide across the metro?

    *senses I’ve answered my own question*

  3. The idea that conservatives never ask questions comes about because, no matter how many questions I ask in his comments, he refuses to answer any of them, going off on some tangent or invective-laced response, if anything. Leftys don’t have answers, so they deny the existence of questions.

  4. For years, they supported speech rationing – like McCain-Feingold with its strict limits on corporate and personal giving but oh-so-convenient exemptions for, mirabile dictu, the unions.

    I’m not aware of any exemptions being made by McCain-Feingold for the amounts that unions can donate or spend relative to what individuals or corporations can spend. IIRC they were subject to the same restrictions.

  5. The Left has an intellectual problem they can’t solve, and that frustrates them no end.

    On one hand, individuals should be able to give unlimited money to Democrats(Messinger). Non-profits should lobby for higher taxes to support . . . non-profits (MPR). Corporations should instruct voters how to vote on social issues (General Mills on the marriage amendment).

    On the other hand, individuals should not give money to Republicans (Koch Brothers). Non-profits should not argue to reduce funding for non-profits (Citizens United is a non-profit). Corporations should not instruct voters how to vote on social issues (Target re: gays).

    Good people should support Good causes because the ends justify the means. Nobody should support Bad causes because, duh. If Conservatives are too stupid to see the logic in that, we’ll just have to pass a law to force them to comply even if they don’t understand why limiting their freedom is essential to preserving their freedom.

  6. The left has a dislike for money? I hadn’t noticed. I would say they have an obsession with money.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.