On this particular topic, I have to agree with GOP Deputy Chair Michael Brodkorb: “If you don’t want to be asked questions, if you don’t want to interact with the public, if you don’t want an opportunity to to get a tough question, uh, don’t run for office.”

The Dear John letter, after the jump.

Walz
Raised - $157,000
Cash on Hand - $111,000

Kline
Raised - $142,000
Cash on Hand - $103,000

Bachmann
Raised - $314,000
Cash on Hand - $224,000

That’s a pretty impressive quarter for Bachmann, and a so-so quarter for Walz and Kline.  All three of these Representatives could concievably face serious challenges in 2010, but the reality is that none of them are really in any danger at this point.

What you probably didn’t know is that the editorial board probably already had its mind made up. Instead of meeting with the full editorial board, Steve met with two retirees. These retirees are brought back in during high politcal season to “help” when it gets busy. No members of the editorial board were present for Steve’s screening.

Huh? They gave an endorsement to John Kline without screening any other candidates? Even then, the endorsement itself even said they might have given the endorsement to Steve Sarvi:

Kline’s challenger, Democrat Steve Sarvi, easily is one of the most outstanding political newcomers this year. A former mayor of Watertown and an Iraq veteran, Sarvi is a fresh face on the political scene. His service in Iraq gives him considerable depth as a candidate. In a televised debate with Kline, Sarvi held his own on foreign policy. He’s also passionate and well-informed on veterans’ issues.

If this were an open seat, Sarvi may well have garnered the Editorial Board’s endorsement. But Kline’s expertise, seniority and growing clout — he’s the ranking member on an influential Education and Labor subcommittee — make him the strongest contender.

Meanwhile, Kline’s single main position is to remove the power gained by that “seniority and growing clout.” Again, what a bizarre endorsement. There’s more: Eric Pusey goes into more detail on how backwards this endorsement is.

UPDATE: Sarvi releases his TV ad:

Still in Hiding, Paulsen Accepts Help from Embattled Republican Leader

Boehner raises money for Paulsen, Bachmann and Kline behind closed doors

St. Paul (October 14, 2008) — This evening, Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner is expected to appear at a fundraising event in downtown Minneapolis. Appearing with the embattled Republican leader will be Republican Third District Candidate Erik Paulsen and Republican Representatives Michele Bachmann and John Kline.

Minnesota DFL Associate Communications Director Eric Fought released this statement:

“Erik Paulsen has spent the past 14 years as a professional partisan politician, advancing the most radical tenets of his party’s platform and leading the charge in the Minnesota House.

“True to form, Paulsen and fellow Republicans will gladly accept help tonight from one of the most ardent champions of the failed policies of the Bush administration. And in the spirit of Paulsen’s stealth campaign for Congress, which he conducted by hiding from the public and press, Paulsen will accept Boehner’s help behind closed doors, away from public and media scrutiny.

“Erik Paulsen would have Minnesotans forget his long career of far right-wing Republican partisanship — which is why he’s refusing to meet with anyone except other partisan Republicans in private. It’s past time for Erik Paulsen — not to mention Michele Bachmann and John Kline — to level with the people of Minnesota how their ideas for the next two years are any different than the past eight.”

Anyone in the mood for a $1,000 steak dinner with Republicans not being public about how they’re Republicans tonight?

Let’s not talk about voting records, let’s not talk about veterans, let’s not talk about the bailout, and let’s not talk about that smirky grin Kline had when that woman made that offensive, ignorant race comment last Friday. Let’s talk about, um, congressional provisions:

Meanwhile, John Kline voted against the independent panel on ethics, voted against earmark reform in January 2007, and actually has been the beneficiary of earmarks many times before, as well as voting for earmarks that have nothing to do with Minnesotans. Now that Kline is an earmark, or congressional provisions protester, he refuses to support congressional provisions even if they help projects for the residents of Apple Valley, Lakeville and Eagan, for example.

Why is he talking so much about congressional provisions anyway? Does he not want to talk about his voting record with the Bush administration on the Iraq and the economy? I guess if I was John Kline, I wouldn’t.

Steve Sarvi is a solid, smart and  independent guy that’s fighting for the people in CD2 (which I must remind, got the endorsement of both the DFL and the Independence Party). I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if he pulled off winning this one but he needs support to compete against Kline’s machine.

Update: The UpTake will be broadcasting the Sarvi v Kline debate live at 1:30 today.

[Kline’s] excuse for short-changing veterans? According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, his spokesman says it is because he is fiscally conservative.

Really?

It is so-called fiscal conservatives like Kline who approved runaway spending in Iraq and the Bush tax cuts which have led to huge deficit spending and a $3 trillion growth in the federal debt. Meanwhile, Kline and this Administration have presided over the greatest growth of government in our history. That is not conservatism; it is profligacy pretending to be conservative.

Who pays? Veterans, seniors, the middle class and others who can least afford to. But people are figuring it out.

Read the whole piece here.

With record unemployment, real wages declining, and living expenses and fuel costs strangling budgets, more families than ever are relying on credit cards to make ends meet.  The average American family now has nearly $10,000 of credit card debt, and most of their interest rates already seem like highway robbery.  It just makes sense to ensure that consumers are protected from abusive rate increases and interest charges.

More analysis from Jeff Rosenberg.