The Strib endroses Norm Coleman for Senate…
…for all the wrong reasons (emphases added):
Independent judgment, exercised on behalf of the best interests of the country and state, is what we hope to see from our U.S. senators. With that hope in mind, this newspaper recommends the reelection of Republican U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman.
The more independent, pragmatic Coleman emerged when he helped speed money to Minneapolis for a new Interstate 35W bridge; when he promoted tax credits for renewable energy investment; when he pushed for larger Pell Grants for needy college students; when he stood up to President Bush on extending publicly subsidized health insurance, including MinnesotaCare, to more poor children and their parents.
In other words, “we endorse Coleman over a plainly-unqualified Al Franken and vacuous irrelevancy Dean Barkley for reasons Lori Sturdevant would approve of”.
Endorsements don’t carry that much weight; with reasoning like this one, it’s no wonder.
Which doesn’t mean I don’t support Coleman: I do. He’s clearly the best man for the job.
Any port in a storm, I guess.
Having met and talked with both at some length, I don’t agree with the StarTribune.
Franken is clearly inexperienced, but as I recall, that’s supposed to be a good thing in Washington, not a bad thing.
Franken is extraordinarily bright, passionate, and sincerely committed to good policy, not perfect policy, but good policy if good policy can get done.
Coleman showed his true colors (and ineffectual nature) in the investigation of the UN Oil for Food program. Rep Gallway eviscerated him.
Finally, having talked with Coleman about Iraq, he said he didn’t ‘believe’ that locals, the Iraqi popluace, wanted us out, despite testimony from experts, that he had his own ‘polls’ which showed otherwise. My reaction, sounds like WMD intelligence, and of course, history subsequently has shown how decidedly wrong Coleman (and McCain) were. The choice to stay is the Iraqis, not ours, and anyone who failed to grasp that – especially somone who would tout their own ‘polls’, looks to be ready to repeat the same crimes of ambivalence that lead to repleat failures in Iraq in the first place.
ambilance=ambivalence. sorry
[in the interest of fairness…I fixed it for you…carry on-JR]
penigma said:
“Rep Gallway eviscerated him.”
George Galloway? George “Fidel Castro Handbook” Galloway? George “Sir, I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability (to Saddam Hussein)” Galloway?
Mister Galloway had his hide nailed to a wall, and in his defense he called people names and impugned their integrity. He’s your hero?
I was stunned. It’s almost as though the Strib editorial board thinks that a 60+ Democrat Senate would be a bad thing. (It would, but it’s amazing that they wouldn’t be in favor of it, and support any Democrat over any Republican.)
Peev, Galloway was taking bribes from Saddam. Norm was right to take him on.
Norm isn’t the best man for the job though. I would much prefer John Kline or Rod Grams over Norm. Given the choices we have though, Norm is the best of a very weak field.
Franken is clearly inexperienced, but as I recall, that’s supposed to be a good thing in Washington, not a bad thing.
Inexperience in Washington DC is only a bad thing if you are a conservative female from Alaska with a few years of executive ability in different levels of government. It’s just fine if you are a socialist male from Chicago with ZERO executive experience.
Coleman showed his true colors (and ineffectual nature) in the investigation of the UN Oil for Food program. Rep Gallway eviscerated him.
I read the transcripts from that hearing. Coleman was the one that did the eviscerating. Galloway was shown to be a corrupt fool.
What JP said.
And “Galloway” didn’t “eviscerate” Coleman so much as take a couple of swipes before Coleman (and Claudia Rosett) dropped the boom on him.
Wow.
Color me amazed (amused?) that Peevenigmouse would call Oil-for-Food investigation “ineffectual” and would think that Galloway won any part of those arguments – much less Norm Coleman’s blistering of him ….