Just in case there is a snow day tomorrow, I wanted to provide you with a couple of articles to read while you sit curled up someplace warm.
This article is about a “Christian” preacher who claims he is the anti-christ and has developed a following of some 100,000 people. Interesting.
Slightly more apropos to this blog is this article about Rudy Giuliani. Rudy has been trying to sell himself to the wingers by saying that he’d appoint “strict constructionists” (by which he means people who believe in all the Amendments except the ninth one). Turns out that’s something of a flip-flop.
While I’m on the subject of Rudy, I’d just like to remind everyone (particularly those in the party of family values) that Rudy told his second wife that he was leaving her during a press conference. Actually, that’s not fair. He didn’t tell her at a press conference. He told the press, and then someone else told her. Classy.
Finally, scientists have discovered concrete proof that America is ready for a Jewish President…we already had one.
Enjoy the snow.
Published by Matt 1 year, 2 months ago
in Bush.
until the Daily Show reminded me. This is Dick Cheney at the remembrance ceremony for the 60 year anniversary of Auschwitz with about 30 world leaders. Bet you can’t spot Cheney… oh, wait:
No real message, just a sad but poignant metaphor for the last 6 years.
I’m usually a huge fan of snow storms but not when they cancel flights… ugh.
I’ll admit it. Global warming scares me.
I’m one of these guys that likes the cold. I love the snow. Its not just skiing and throwing snowballs at Matt’s head, I just like to be cold. It makes me feel alive.
I also like trees. And if you check out these extremely depressing maps from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, you’ll see that there are going to be fewer trees when the whole climate change thing happens.
If you are really in the mood for some serious depression, go to this website. It’s Minnesota and Global Warming 101 prepared by the MPCA. You hear a lot about what climate change will do to small islands in the Pacific or Western Europe (hint: flood the former and freeze the latter) but not as much about what is going to happen here. A short synopsis:
- In Minneapolis, one study projects that a 3°F warming could triple heat-related deaths from 60 during a typical summer to about 180 (although increased air conditioning use may not have been fully accounted for). The elderly, particularly those living alone, are at greatest risk.
- Because evaporation is likely to increase with warmer climate, it could result in lower river flow and lower lake levels, particularly in the summer. In addition, more intense precipitation could increase flooding. If streamflow and lake levels drop, ground water - the primary source of drinking water in Minnesota - also could be reduced.
- The prairie potholes of Minnesota are the single most important breeding areas for North American waterfowl such as mallards, pintails, and blue-winged teals. The drying effects of climate change could reduce the size and number of prairie potholes, with damaging effects to the waterfowl.
- These changes could occur during the lifetimes of today’s children, particularly if they are accelerated by other stresses such as fire, pests, and diseases. Some of these stresses would themselves be worsened by a warmer and drier climate.
Damn. That is depressing. We really should do something about this.
1) On the show today we discussed some proposals to make it mandatory for restaurants to put the caloric value of menu items right there on the menu, next to the item. This isn’t something I’ve thought about that much before but I have to say that it makes tons of sense. The “Center for Science in the Public Interest” let loose a study yesterday showcasing how some restaurant chains are pushing menu items that weigh in at over 2,000 calories… that’s absurd. This isn’t about restricting businesses, it’s about increasing consumer choice and making it easier for Minnesotans to make healthy decisions for themselves–Hey, if you choose the 2000 calorie burger after seeing it’s 2000 calories, I have no problem. We need this legislation in Minnesota now.
2) This is important. It may seem nerdy or inconsequential but it really is important–the RIAA really stinks.
Careful around that title, I’m not sure how big they can get before caving in…
Republican insiders upset with Representative Jim Ramstad’s recent votes against the Bush administration still have plans in motion to put forth a challenger in the 3rd CD primary but it may no longer be David Gaither.
More on this story when I get time to post.
I don’t always agree with Mr. Eric Black over at the Star Tribune’s “Big Question” blog, but I have to say that his analysis of Michele Bachmann’s non-retraction statement is spot on.
The written statement that Bachmann issued late Friday, was a classic of the genre where you give the impression that you are retracting, apologizing and clarifying but actually do none of the above.
“I am sorry if my words have been misconstrued,” means that you said what you meant to say but some fool — in this case apparently me — misunderstood your earlier remarks (although everyone who listened to her Iran remarks at the end of the interview she gave to the St. Cloud Times agreed that her meaning was quite clear).
She still hasn’t clarified how she came to make the amazing claims to know about an Iranian deal — not just a possible intention, but a deal already struck with unnamed other parties, with a name already chosen for the new nation – to turn northwest Iraq into a terrorist haven-state.
Exactly correct. I’m not sure if Heidi Fredrickson (Bachmann’s spokeswoman) is just asleep at the helm or actually delusional, but for her to think that the written statement Bachmann issued would do anything but fan the flames is, well, absurd. The statement not only fails to address the most crucial aspect of Bachmann’s wildly incendiary claims, namely where the hell she got that info from, but she also fails to retract or apologize for anything! In fact, she more or less calls everyone stupid for having “misconstrued” her words but I’m still trying to wrap my head around how it’s even possible to do so when her words are taken verbatim from an audio recording of her talking!!!
Black ends on a lucid point:
If only for the sake of her own credibility, isn’t it important that Rep. Bachmann find some way to put the matter to rest? If she can back up her original statement, she should do so. It would be a matter of vital importance.
If she means to retract her original statement, she should do so clearly. And she can’t back up her original statement, she should say something so her constituents can understand how she came to make it.
If Iran really does have a plan that she knows of it is of obvious importance that she clarify and back up those claims. After all, I think this is something we should do something about if true. But, as multiple experts on the region seem to conclude, her plan is just smoke and mirrors, she owes a very serious apology to Americans nationwide and, more importantly, our troops in the Middle East.
This whole series of strange statements begs the question: Is Michele Bachmann ready for the spotlight?
Published by Matt 1 year, 2 months ago
in Blog.
This escaped my sight for a little while, and I hate having to post on it, but seeing as how it’s a matter of pride I had to say something. This appeared in a letter posted on MDE:
Minnesota Monitor - around 12000 http://www.minnesotamonitor.com/ magFront.do
Minnesota Campaign Report - around 6000 http://www.mncampaignreport.com/
MN Publius - around 6000 http://www.mnpublius.com/
These are, supposedly, the number of pageviews each of our sites gets each week bvut these numbers are staggeringly wrong. During the last week of the election cycle we had 46,205 pageviews and 21,966 unique visitors:
We dislike the practice of comparing stats over here at MN Publius because it seems rather irrelevant but the above estimates so greatly miss the reach of our humble site that we had to respond. Obviously the week of elections traffic was
much higher at Publius, but it does represent our potential reach. We are an election cycle blog and while our posting, and subsequently our traffic, is substantially less when an election isn’t imminent, neither sinks to the levels shown in the above information.
Note: The timestamp has been adjusted to keep this post below more important information.
From today’s Zogby International poll on who leads in the Presidential Party primaries:
| Democratic Primary Voters |
Republican Primary Voters |
| Clinton 33% |
Giuliani 29% |
| Obama 25% |
McCain 20% |
| Edwards 12% |
Romney 9% |
| Not sure 20% |
Not sure 19% |
This is very interesting on both sides of the aisles. First of all, Obama is gaining on Clinton at a not unremarkable pace. Clinton’s national prominence suggests that it will be more difficult for her to gain a larger piece of the pie than Obama because her name is already so well known that most voters have likely made their minds up about her. Obama, on the other hand, is enjoying increasingly wide exposure on the national stage and this is likely to narrow the margin with Clinton as the battle continues. Whether Obama can completely narrow that gap or even overtake Clinton remains to be seen.
The Republican numbers are even more interesting than the Democratic. The top two candidates are historically pro-choice (and I am forced to say “historically” due to McCain’s recent flip-flop on the issue and current ambiguity) and it remains to be seen if a candidate with that stance can be truly competitive among the GOP faithful primary voters. There is still no consensus on the right for a religious-conservative candidate but if one were to emerge this could pose a significant threat to both Guliani and McCain. I would suspect that as Republican Primary voters learn more about Guliani’s personal political stances and his own domestic history, some of the 9/11 shine will be dulled and his numbers will dip. Whether McCain’s continued tack to the right will translate into primary votes is still anyone’s guess.
Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the poll is the direct match-up combinations:
|
Giuliani 47%, Clinton 40%
|
Giuliani 40%, Obama 46%
|
Giuliani 46%, Edwards 40%
|
|
McCain 47%, Clinton 39%
|
McCain 40%, Obama 44%
|
McCain 47%, Edwards 38%
|
|
Romney 35%, Clinton 45%
|
Romney 29%, Obama 51%
|
Romney 32%, Edwards 47%
|
Obviously the most startling revelation produced is that Obama wins against everyone while Clinton goes down when pitted against everyone but Romney.
These two trends suggest some interesting things about Obama, Clinton, and the national mood. I would imagine that Obama’s success in these match-ups is due to his relatively weak name recognition compared to Guliani and McCain. With the national mood so strongly in favor of Democrats, I suspect that many people are going Obama just because he’s a Dem and they know little else about him. Surprisingly, that sentiment is enough to put him on top of the wildly popular Guliani.
On the flip-side of that argument, Clinton’s national profile is likely resulting in a large number of anti-Hillary votes. In the match-ups against Guliani and McCain, many voters are likely going for the Republican because they do not like Hillary. People simply have no idea who Mitt Romney is. The Guliani/Clinton and McCain/Clinton match-ups are the most interesting because all three candidates are so well known. Again, many are likely unfamiliar with the nuances of Guliani’s political stances and the affects of McCain’s attempts at hard-conservatism remain to be seen, but for the most part people should have some inkling of an opinion on all three persons. And with these formulated opinions comes two defeats for Hillary. Interesting…
On a related note, I get way too into this stuff and go on way too long…
Published by Zack 1 year, 2 months ago
in Blog.
Against all of my better judgment, I have decided to return to blogging at MN Publius.
Many of the people who are reading this now probably were not reading Publius back when I was a contributor, so some sort of introduction is definitely in order. Moreover, a strict standard of blogger disclosure seems to have evolved in my absence, so I’ll let this post serve as a thorough documentation of my previous political experience.
My name is Zack Stephenson, I am a lifelong Minnesotan and a 2006 graduate of Knox College. My political ‘career’ (if you can really call it that) began in 2004, when I was Melissa Hortman’s Campaign Manager in her successful run for the Minnesota House.
In the summer of 2005, I met Matt Martin and I started writing at MN Publius shortly after.
After I graduated in June of 2006, I accepted a position on Amy Klobuchar’s U.S. Senate campaign and quit MN Publius. I worked in the Klobuchar press shop though Election Day and the end of the campaign.
After the election, I skied Vail. It was great.
Just before Christmas, I accepted a position with the House DFL Caucus as a Communications Specialist. I intend to work for the Caucus through the end of the session, after which I will be attending law school at the University of Virginia.
Due to my continued employment by the House Caucus, I will not be writing about the Minnesota Legislature at all until the end of the session. I also will not be writing or posting while I’m at work. Matt was nice enough to add time stamps to the posts so Brodkorb can put together a little spreadsheet or something.
I’m willing to answer any questions you might have about my decision to return or the conditions that I’ve placed on my blogging, so feel free to ask in the comments below.
As Al Franken has begun traveling the state to spread the word that he is, indeed, running for United States Senate there has been a familiar sentiment following his every stop: “I wasn’t so sure about a comedian talk show host running, but then I heard him speak.” In almost every town Franken has stopped in there has been an editorial in the local paper the following morning citing that sentiment (seriously, look into it, it’s pretty remarkable).
And while today’s editorial in The Minnesota Daily doesn’t follow a campaign stop and stump, apparently Franken’s campaign announcement had a similar effect:
I just finished watching Franken’s announcement speech on YouTube and was actually quite impressed with much of what I saw. In particular, I thought that Franken made excellent use of his family’s personal narrative to make the case for effective progressive governance. He told the story of how his wife’s family was able to get by after her father’s death because of Social Security survivor benefits and how all the kids still got to go to college because of Pell Grants and military service. He spoke of how his mother-in-law was able to get a GI loan which she put toward a college education and how that very same loan was forgiven when she used her education to teach low-income Title One students.
But this editorialist doesn’t stop at the “wow” factor, he ends on a sage insight on Franken’s opponent, Senator Norm Coleman:
…the issue of Iraq is one of Sen. Coleman’s most vulnerable areas - namely because it is hard to know where he stands on the issue from day to day. One day he’s against escalating the war and the next day he’s for it - provided that the escalation goes only to certain areas of Iraq.
Franken could capitalize on this kind of flip-flopping (which characterizes Coleman’s entire political career) if he were as clear on Iraq and Iran as he is on domestic issues. That is the winning message for Franken, or another Democrat, to run with. I hope all of them recognize this as they move ahead.
While I’m not going to be the first in line to buy a stack of Wild tickets in order to resell them on the street once the ticket scalping ban is lifted, I do applaud the move. Free-markets are almost always the best way to regulate a commercial industry but for some reason Minnesota has artificially limited the accessibility to our ticket market for decades. That’s all about to change:
A bill to legalize a long-standing brisk trade in marked-up admissions to sporting events and other attractions is breezing through the Legislature with hardly a whimper of debate, and the 1913 law is likely to be stricken from the books as of Aug. 1.
“Adam Smith would be proud of us now,” state Rep. Phyllis Kahn, DFL-Minneapolis, said last week as a committee sent the measure to the House floor for a final vote that is expected within two weeks.[Star Tribune]
I think my long-standing opposition to anti-scalping bills dates back to my high school Econ text book that cited such laws as an example for artificial market control. I mean, if some guy’s willing to pay a $20 premium to get a ticket, why should we stop him? The supply and demand curves have to intersect somewhere and there’s no reason, this time, that the Government should tell us where.
The most interesting quote so far: “We’re going to be in Iraq for a very long time”
listen here
Published by Matt 1 year, 2 months ago
in Local.
Predatory lending is increasingly becoming a very important issue across the country. As mortgage houses have pushed into sub-prime lending markets in order to expand revenue, the number of people forced (read: conned) into situations where they default on their mortgages has been mysteriously increasing. All signs point to some very irresponsible lending practices which means that you and I have to be conscious of these practices. Which is why I was relieved this morning to open Minnesota Monitor to see the following:
Rep. Keith Ellison will be among the special guests speaking at tonight’s Predatory Lending Town Hall sponsored by ACORN and Jewish Community Action.
What: Town Hall Forum on predatory lending
When: Monday February 26th - 6:00 p.m.
Where: Jenny Lind Elementary School, 5025 Bryant Ave. N., Minneapolis
If you’re thinking about getting a mortgage, someone you know is thinking about getting a mortgage, you’re in the lending industry, you’re a community advocate, or you just want to hear some good speakers, you should head over.
The best part of the Oscars so far was that iPhone ad. I just want it SO badly…
As a reminder, MNpublius takes iPhone donations.
People are Shouting