Attention Common Cause, League Of Women Voters, and ACLU-MN

To:  Common Cause, the League of Women Voters, and the ACLU of Minnesota
From: Mitch Berg, mere peasant
Re: SCOM Decision

All,

Suck it.

That is all.

The hell it is.

Thus ends the Big-Money DFL Ministry Of Truth’s bid to stonewall the will of the people.  Both Constitutional Amendments – Marriage and Voter ID – will go to the ballot box this fall.

Voter ID will pass by a 2:1 majority, and if experience from other states holds up, voter turnouts will increase; the only documented (and documentable) “Vote Suppression” will be among the Dead-American, Duplicate-American and Nonexistent-American communities.

The Marriage Amendment will be a little tighter race – but unless the opponents come up with a better argument than “You are teh bigot”, and they have not, I think the odds of passage are getting better daily.

I’m willing to let both of those issues play out in the street where they belong; I’m a very strong supporter of Voter ID; I support the idea of both traditional “Marriage” and civil unions for the non-traditional. There is room for both, I think, although it’s in neither side’s interest to acknowledge that.

But the real winners today are the people of Minnesota who spent years, and tons of show leather, fighting for what they believed was right, and getting that agenda pushed into the very brink of law, just like we were all taught in Civics 101 in High School, and not having it all arbitrarily struck down by partisian judicial whim.

Look for the DFL to release a statement decrying “activist judges” forthwith.

5 thoughts on “Attention Common Cause, League Of Women Voters, and ACLU-MN

  1. “Look for the DFL to release a statement decrying “activist judges” forthwith.”

    You mean they haven’t already? I guess the Soros checks are late.

  2. Activist judges who go out of their way to read the law as precisely as possible.
    I’ve read the decision. The court clearly stated that the law and the constitution of the state of Minnesota in no way give the AG the power to rename proposed constitutional amendments as he sees fit.
    Sounds like you had a case of executive overreach correctly decided.

  3. Did I hear this right? Liberal Alan Page said that if you can rename an amendment, that you can re-instate proabition by calling it “repeal the income tax”?

    If you have lost Alan Page……..

  4. Ummm, nevermind. I just did a quick Yahoo search and Alan Page said something different. Or meant something different. I don’t know. All I know is that he got on the Supreme Court because he played for the Vikings at one time.

Leave a Reply

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