Seriously.
Freshman Rep. Michele Bachmann, a former federal tax lawyer, voted against a bill approved Tuesday by the House that would give taxpayers more protections from identity theft and tax fraud.
The measure passed 407 to 7, with Bachmann one of seven Republicans voting against it. Her office had no immediate comment.
The Senate must approve the measure, and the president has to sign it, before it becomes law.
The bill, passed during the week in which American tax returns must be filed, requires the Internal Revenue Service to notify taxpayers if it has evidence of identity theft.
Stolen identity information can be used to illegally collect tax refunds. Undocumented workers sometimes use stolen identity information to gain employment.
The bill also would require the IRS to notify low-income workers that they qualify for a tax break known as the Earned Income Tax Credit.
I guessing that the real reason that Bachmann voted against the bill is in the last paragraph (we don’t know for sure because she isn’t talking to the media - is this her new communications plan?). Bachmann apparently doesn’t want poor people to know what their tax options are. I mean, they should just hire an expensive tax lawyer like, say, Michele Bachmann.
Attorney Mike Ciresi has officially launched his campaign for United States Senate today making him the second major Democratic candidate to get in. Ciresi has notably stated that he will abide by the endorsement and will not self-fund.
Details on Mike Ciresi and the pros/cons of his candidacy can be found in our in-depth analysis here and a back-log of stories can be found in our archives. His teaser site is now live.
We’ve seen Norm Coleman change his position on everything from the Iraq War to the DM&E railroad line, but this might be the first time he’s admitted to switching his position on reality:
Coleman spokesman Luke Friedrich said that he erred when he told the Star Tribune on April 10 that Paulose was not one of the two candidates Coleman recommended last year to replace Heffelfinger.
Paulose was one of those he nominated for the job, Friedrich said on Tuesday. The other person was Clayton Robinson Jr., a longtime friend of Coleman’s who works as an assistant director in the Ramsey County Attorney’s office.
Friedrich’s statements last week that Paulose’s nomination came from the Justice Department, not from Coleman, surprised Paulose. “That’s not what I was told,” she said in an interview. [Strib 4/17/07]
Alright, alright, so maybe this is just some internal mistake by staffers, but something seems a little fishy. I mean, how do you forget that you submitted someone for nomination!? Given that many people have said that Coleman didn’t want to submit her for nomination and merely submitted to the Bush Administration’s pressure, but still…
The Star Tribune
profiled some of the big Minnesota political donors and where they put their money but they left out one interesting fact: while Mike Ciresi maxed out to Hillary Clinton and John Edwards (which the article mentioned), he gave nothing to Barack Obama. Now, these big donations are often more reflective of who asked than who the donor consciously decided to give to; but with Ciresi poised to enter into the Political battle of his life tomorrow, it’s interesting to see how he’s hedging his bets.
The title of the
The New York Times article, “Conservatives to Bush: Fire Gonzales,” says enough, but here’s an excerpt to whet your appetite:
The letter concludes by saying, “Attorney General Gonzales has proven an unsuitable steward of the law and should resign for the good of the country… The President should accept the resignation, and set a standard to which the wise and honest might repair in nominating a successor…” It is the first public demand by a group of conservatives for Gonzales’ firing. Signatories to the letter include Bruce Fein, a former senior official in the Reagan Justice Department, who has worked frequently with current Administration and the Republican National Committee to promote Bush’s court nominees; David Keene, chairman of the influential American Conservative Union, one of the nation’s oldest and largest grassroots conservative groups; Richard Viguerie, a well-known G.O.P. direct mail expert and fundraiser; and Bob Barr, the former Republican Congressman from Georgia and free speech advocate, as well as John Whitehead, head of the Rutherford Institute, a conservative non-profit active in fighting for what it calls religious freedoms.
The Star Tribune should have a conservative columnist. In fact, given the liberal bent to their editorial board, they should probably have two. Conservatives deserve a counterpoint in Minnesota’s most significant media outlet.
Katherine Kersten, however, does not provide that counterpoint.
Her columns are poorly researched and her arguments often completely miss the mark, but her greatest sin is that she is a fear monger of the worst variety.
Look at her most recent column. I posted a rebuttal earlier today in which I tried to soberly address the issues that Kersten raises (and round out the half truths that fill her work), but I have to tell you that I am truly offended by the trash in her column.
Katherine Kersten is trying to scare Minnesotans into thinking that the Muslims are coming to get them - trying to transform our Judeo-Christian society into a Western version of Afghanistan pre-2001. Kersten’s shrill voice pounds at our ears: Sure, its starts off with little things. Muslim taxi drivers don’t want to carry alcohol. Muslim students want to be able to practice their religion at MCTC. But this is only the beginning.
Think this is all hyperbole on my part? Check out the title of her latest column:
Ritual-washing area for Muslims at MCTC may be only the beginning
Minnesota conservatives deserve better than this. Minnesotans deserve better than this. Her race baiting nonsense has no place in our public discussion.
MN Publius is going on record demanding the replacement of Katherine Kersten as a columnist for the Star Tribune.
What is it with Katherine Kersten?
The Star Tribune’s token conservative columnist has developed a nasty habit of inflating non-controversies into epic battles in the culture wars, particularly anything that has anything to do with Islam. She has been all-over the “Flying Imam” story (a moniker I personally find cartoonish and offensive) as well as the flare-up over the Muslim taxi drivers who refuse to transport alcohol.
Both of these stories took hold in the mainstream media before Kersten began to opine (or whine) about them. In her last two columns, however, Kersten has gone a step further and attempted to create a controversy where one didn’t exist before.
Kersten is apparently very upset because Minneapolis Community Technical College is
Words cannot even describe the
senseless tragedy that has occurred today at the Virginia Tech campus. Here I’ve been trapped in my own bubble blogging about stem-cell research and abstinence while 31 innocent lives were lost for absolutely no reason. I’m usually not one to be found at a loss for words, but this is beyond comprehension. Each day is a blessing.
Wow, I
totally didn’t see
this one coming! But, seriously, what a great use of $1 billion:
A survey of more than 2,000 teenagers carried out by a research company on behalf of Congress found that the half of the sample given abstinence-only education displayed exactly the same predilection for sex as those who had received conventional sex education in which contraception was discussed.
Mathematica Policy Research sampled teenagers with an average age of 16 from a cross-section of communities in Florida, Wisconsin, Mississippi and Virginia. Both control groups had the same breakdown of behaviour: 23% in both sets had had sex in the previous year and always used a condom, 17% had sex only sometimes using a condom; and 4% had sex never using one. About a quarter of each group had had sex with three or more partners.
So I guess the only difference between the two groups is that the abstinence only kids have a higher risk of STDs and unwanted pregnancy; now that’s progress! Just more evidence of how easy it is to waste money when you completely ignore reality.
This is from the Pew Center’s
Public Knowledge of Current Affairs Little Changed by News and Information Revolutions:
Although this proves a hunch I’ve had, it really is sad overall. For example, the survey also found that only 36% of people could name the President of Russia and, get this, only 69% could name who the current Vice-President is… wow. Although, people are much better at recognizing the correct answer; so, for example, 60% recognized Putin as the President of Russia when given a multiple choice list.
What’s the biggest indicator of someone’s knowledge level? Surprise, surprise: level of education. I guess it must just be all those liberal ivy-league elitist Professors mucking up the system…
People Are Shouting
RSS